Added: 1 year ago
From: Best0fScience
Views: 21,267
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (271)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • The Big Bang was the conception and birth. Every star in the sky is the nucleus, and each of the bodies that orbit them are the protons and electrons. The universe is alive, and every living thing is a universe unto itself.

    You were conceived, and the cells exploded outward to assemble you. Now you are a mass of cells, each with a nucleus, protons and electrons orbiting them.

    You are a universe! The family dog is a universe...

    Our universe is "God" to us. Maybe just a houseplant?

  • THIS VIDOE IS SO FAEK LOOK THAT GUYS USING A GREN SCREEN YOU CAN TELLL

  • @Doreauxgard42

    You don't say... *Facepalm*

    Did you think he was in the fucking Matrix?

  • 253 dislikes ? People are so stupid these days?

  • Another "God did it" believer that can't spell... How can you be expected to understand complex ideas if you can't master simple communication.

  • @ciresieman your a non intellectual

  • I think I discovered something, the time we relay on, such as "clocks" is not the real time. But, is less confusing so we don't have much of a choice. Basically what I mean is time will speed up and slow down for internety. Time will vary in other time dementions, I think that is why there's black holes. Sort of messes up the universe, not really. Anyway, God made the universe, if he wants something to happen, he can make it happen. God can do anything .

  • Comment removed

  • @ArchaicWarlock777 "If light speed is as fast as it can get, what's faster?" no offense, but thats a pretty dumb question. thats like saying, "im the best person in the world!!! ya!!!" "so whos better than you?" "um... what did i just say??"

  • @carlsm95 No, no, no IF lol

  • Glad I don't have Cepheids!

  • My theory:

    At first there was a small black hole and the 4 forces were 1. This One unit energy decayed to Super dark energy (vacuum energy). After 100 doubles this "Super dark energy" decayed to dark energy, dark matter and matter, causing the universe to expand at much slower speed.

    Then after along time from now the space will expand too much causing all dark energy to decay to dark matter. Then slowly universe will slow down expansion and collapse. Then big bang will happen next again.

  • @sonnydey I fail to see why you postulate such an ending as we have not seen any decrease in the rate at which the known universe is expanding. If anything we are seeing a greater and greater rate of expansion which would speak more to the big rip than another big bang. Newtons first law of motion dictates that a body must remain in motion unless acted on by an outside force. What is your outside force?

  • @sonnydey Also, Newtons 1st Law works against your above hypothesis of "super dark energy" decaying which results in the universe expanding at a slower rate. The universe expands in a vaccum which means that even if the energy behind the first "round" of expansion were exhausted the universe would continue to expand at a uniform and constant velocity unless a new energy came about to counteract that first push.

  • @captwasabi but that's not what happen during the great inflation. During the great inflation the universe doubled in size 100 times in much less then a second. Which also broke the speed of light, cuz universe was expanding at much faster speed then speed of light. And if universe would not slow down we would have nothing left too.

    All the laws apply only to things that are in the universe and not to the fabric of space-time cuz they have different law that they follow, got that!!!

  • @sonnydey Yes, I understand the difference between motion and expansion. That said there still has to be a mechanism by which the expansion take place and to that end Newton's 1st law works well. You still need some form of energy to drive the contraction. Maybe vaccum energy does follow the process you laid out but I don't put much stock in dark matter as a whole as it was only postulated to account for errors in missing mass in the universe.

  • I just witnessed a big rip in my pants.

    The byproduct seems to be methane gas. I shall perform more experiments and report my findings!

  • haha NASA still kicks esa's ass. And esa is from all of europe

  • the big bang was not a titanic explosion

  • @Joeybugman it wasn't an explosion at all

  • @A11ex that's what I meant

  • I wish there was some way to make interstellar possible right now! So frustrating with all these limitations....

  • We saw a memory of our universe, that's really funny :))))

  • Talk about ending on a high note...

  • eesa

  • Beep Beep Boop Boop Beep, Im a robot....I run on corn!

  • ...with much greater precision than ever before.....around 14 billion years

  • I'm sad a big crunch with a rebound won't happen and I'm sad we won't re-exist someday. I'm sad the earth has become what it is. Seeing it like this makes me wish I had never existed at all.

  • @IAmTheCthulhu

    the big rip may indeed be yet another part of the cycle. never mind if there are other universes. we could be a bubble in a foam of universes.

    either way, neither of us will be alive when it occurs. chances are good earth will be long gone as well.

    still there are far too many questions to know how the universe will end/change.

  • @yellowdart137 whatever the answers may be, its a strange, wild ride while it lasts.

    its pretty bizzare too that this strange event called the universe became self aware, even if was only for a short time. it is looking upon itself, wondering how it came to to be.

    (i dont mean the universe has a supernatural mind, but we are apart of the universe, sub atomic particles that make up our body came from the same singularity. so when we are aware of the universe, the universe is aware of itself)

  • Amazzing!!

  • I believe all time is now. There's no such thing as "future" or "past", time doesn't exist as we perceive it.

    The universe "appears" to be expanding, but it's as true as any basic optical illusion book. What it appears to be, actually isn't.

  • @wavyinfinity

    What variety of pot do you smoke when these things pop into your head?

  • @kossmikham All time is now, because if you were to travel to the future, it would still be now, and if you were to travel to the past it would also be now. All this talk about how the "past" and "future" exists is nothing but a bitter illusion your brain constructs to make sense of what you experience, and to measure the differences.

  • @wavyinfinity well yeah you would think that if you were to look at it objectively lol

    by the way i am writing this right now, tell me when you read it whether its the future or if its still "now"

    im guessing you we reply in the present not the future

    just like this message was typed in the present and not in the past. lol

    all that will change is a whole lot of matter and particles we be in a different location in space

  • Search for "A Universe from Nothing" (Lawrence Krauss), best astrophysics video ever on YouTube.

  • The Big Rip. Is there a limit to the expansion rate of the universe? Is the speed of light as fast as the universe can expand or is there no limit? Genius answer required here! Thanks.

  • I believe there will be a rebound after the big crunch. :P

  • @IAmTheCthulhu

    Based on all available science, there will be nor can be a "big crunch". It's a one way trip to the eventual scattering of not just individual atoms, but their subatomic particles, throughout the vastness of the universe. Everything will be reduced to subatomic dust.

  • Did they find the Mass Relay yet? Just kiddin' hahaha

  • Nice vid. The space & universe fills me with awe

  • I always find the finite existence of our universe rather depressing.

    regardless of how little it actually effects me

  • yanno it always makes me want to ask a question i'm guessing any astronomer would call dumb. if the galaxies appear to be moving away from us faster the further they are, but the further away something is the "older" a version of it we're looking at, isn't it possible that the galaxies are moving away at a decreasing rate? like they moved away from us very quickly long ago when that light was broadcast, but now they're moving away at a speed matching closer galaxies?

  • @Error302 The light from the galaxies is shifted to the red in a spectrometer(I think that's what it's called), which means they are moving away at an increasing rate. Hope that helps. If you want to get a better understanding, read A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking. I need to pick it up again, myself.

  • I love these videos :) The visualizations are great!

    Can the jerks who vote this down because they think science is a conspiracy please stop using the science-made computers and medicine :)

  • 99 % of the scientific community do not believe in god

  • @iphone3guru

    99% of all statistic posted online are made up

  • @Lucromick13 good call its more like 98% lol no but really its kinda impossible to understand scientific fact and believe in any god

  • @iphone3guru I do see your point. Yet, there are scientist that believe in god. It really doesn't effect their career(Einstein believed in god). Now on the other hand.. you have people that believe in religion and dogma. Those are the true fools.

    For example I believe in god but I don't really care what exactly god is. God just means creator to me. The big bang could be my God and I would be fine with this.

  • @Lucromick13 Thats not a bad point of view but im not sure if calling it "God" agrees with me but w.e as long as you dont give your time and effort to the corrupt religious establishment your my friend =p

  • @Lucromick13

    Einstein did not believe in god. That is a popular misconception, and a wish perpetuated by the uninformed and feeble minded public. Einstein used the term "god" loosely to refer to the collective laws of physics and the order of the physical universe, not "god" as in Jesus or Yahwe or Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

  • Ooooh 7,777 views, I'll have to buy a lottery ticket today ^^

  • Too bad the Quran never tells you how magnets work...

  • sweet dreams are made of this i travel the world and the seven seas everybody is looking for something!

  • hello, i would like to share some information that i found during my cosmology research:

    Quran chapter 77, verse 7-13 "surely, what you are promised must come to pass. Then when the stars lose their lights, and when the sky is cleft asunder, and when the mountains are blown away [...] For what Day are these signs postponed? For the Day of Sorting. (the final day)"

    Quran ch.82 v.1-3:"When the sky is cleft asunder, and when the stars have fallen and scattered, and when the seas are burst forth."

  • @fi0sebil0allah Quran ch.81 v.1-11:"When the sun is wound around and its light is lost and is overthrown, and when the stars fall, and when the mountains are made to pass away [...] and when the seas become as boil over [...] and when the sky is stripped off and taken from its place"

  • @fi0sebil0allah These are few examples of the description of the last day in the Quran. Very accurate description of what will happen, this was predicted 1400 years ago. every religion has predicted the end but NEVER in such detail! and now we are finding out the truth, look at how similar (identical) the description of the big rip (by scientists) is compared to the Quran's description!!!

  • @fi0sebil0allah Why do you guys love to say this AFTER the fact. Go on predict something for a change

  • @shandorejunk

    Agreed

  • @fi0sebil0allah

    Anywhere in the Quran on how to achieve cold fusion? Or the unified theory of relativity? Let's go real basic: the formula for gunpowder? Come on! If the people that wrote the book new about the expansion of the universe they must have known about gunpowder! No? So STFU!

  • @franczazou et beh dis donc t'es en colere mon garcon, calmes toi un peu. si je trouve quoi que ce soit je te 'keep posted' pas besoin d'insultes, mias merci quand meme pour ton commentaire.

  • Would be awsome to have the same thing BestOfScience offers, But with carl sagan Explaining The hole thing

  • But I thought the big rip wasn't possible due to Einsteins Theory of Relativity?

  • fascinating, thats all i can say being amazed at what i learn and see here. thanks!

    kk

  • Comment removed

  • @schmutzgreiffer There is a very specific chronology to how the universe progressed from a tiny singularity to the present.  We don't have all of the answers, but we've managed to piece together a pretty coherent model. I suggest you subscribe to this channel (if you haven't already). Take some time and watch all of the uploaded video. This may answer some of your questions.

  • @evolve749 I can't believe I wrote that message. Must have been very drunk at the time. Apologies.

  • @schmutzgreiffer lol No worries.

  • @schmutzgreiffer lol No worries.

  • the big rip sounds like a type of stiching

  • Comment removed

  • whoever dislikes this is an ignorant idiot

  • The more I learn about the universe, the more I believe in pantheism. Nature can be very spiritual.

  • @HaleyMary can you explain pantheism to me no one ever does

  • @childofreletivity

    from what I understand about pantheism in layman terms, it's equating God with the physical universe.

  • @HaleyMary That is one definition of "pantheism"; however it can also mean worship of all gods indifferently - I suspect that's somewhat similar to the great "Kali Ma" belief system - that "Kali Ma" is the great, underlying principle of the universe - like time itself... [yes, philosophical, not scientific...] "Pantheism" can also mean tolerance of ALL deities worshipped...

  • @WWZenaDo

    Thanks. I learned something new today. I'll look up the Kali Ma belief system and see what else I can learn. If Pantheism can mean tolerance of all deities worshiped then can it also be a form of polytheism?

  • that man said "today we know the age of the universe to a much higher precision then ever before; around 14 billion years" with such a strait face! made me laugh hahahha

  • Concerning the vid, can someone help me figure this out? If the further we look back in space means we are also looking further back in time, and the redshift is greater the further out we go, doesn't that just mean that the universe started expanding fast early on and that it slowed down (observing stars/ galaxies that are closer)? What am I missing?

  • @Raptor302 Let's try this..... if you look at this illustration:1---2---3---4---5­---6---7---8, think of the space between 1 and 2 and think of this space stretching (expanding) at some rate, but if you think about it, the space between any two adjacent numbers would be expanding at this same rate. Now, here's the fun part - the distance of the space betwen 1 and 8 is growing at a much faster rate (your red shift in distant stars).

    Hope that helps.

  • @steveb0503 Thanks, it does a little. I know that the viewpoint I offered up is incorrect (since the astrophysicists much smarter than me would have thought of it already), I just want to know why it is incorrect. I'm still slightly confused on how we can tell if we are accelerating if we are looking back in time due to light lag.

  • @Raptor302 Redshift is greater the further out we look because there is more space between us than there is if we look closer. Since there is more space between us that means we are moving away from farther places faster.

  • To put it another way, I know that it is certain the universe is expanding, but I want to know the methodology of how we didn't attribute that to the conditions of the early universe (since the galaxies farthest away from us could have been traveling faster at the time of big bang and that is what we could be seeing) and instead attributed it to our present state.

  • @Raptor302

    Redshift is a cumulative effect: when a light beam travels from a distant galaxy to us, it gets redshifted more and more while it's underway, due to the expansion of space. So when we see a distant galaxy, its redshift gives us information about the entire (integrated) expansion while its light has been underway.

    By observing galaxies at different distances, we can then derive the specific expansion rates at various moments in time.

  • @Pulsar89 Thnx

  • AAAHH!!!

    WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!!!

  • The universe declares Your majesty, LORD God!

    God of wonders! Amazing stuff!

  • @Grillzor

    Only to reeeeeeelly stupid people.

  • @Grillzor shut up

  • That Bob Fosbury guy looks like Alex Lifeson from Rush

  • Dark matter in action.

  • A nice fact someone told me in the pub last night (correct me if it's wrong):

    If you were to go to the nearest star to the sun, the scale of the universe is such that view of the stars would look exactly the same as from earth, except for the fact that you can't see the star you're now at, and you can see our sun.

  • Excellent video!!!

    Gaby.

  • Why the fuck do they always say the Big Bang was an "explosion". It really pisses me off to no end.

  • @iDeist agree with you explosion is non-logical for one simple fact there would have been no friction as all should remember friction requires mass to be a friction

    big bang was not the begining (evidence against 1: galaxy's colliding 2: density of all hubble deep field images in any direction show no decrease in galaxy's Oops 3:an explosion has no apparent straight lines or flocking formation other than spirals in a non friction environment ! lol ) answer is simple universe had no beginning/end

  • @okuma0kuma

    @okuma0kuma

    Do you not understand that the big bang was not an explosion? 1. Galaxies colide because of gravity. Larger objects, such as galaxy super clusters, do not colide. 2 The hubble deep field clearly shows galaxies without distinguished patterns, unlike presant galaxies. The CMBR images (which show the universe at a far younger age than the deep field) contain no galaxies. 3. The premise is so far off from what cosmology says. You don't know what you're talking about.

  • @UniversumExNihilo well obvious im not a cosmologist but exactly explosion is non logical ,gravity is consistent of two poles as negative and positive charge of each body of mass,but why does the pole cause the vacuum or did the vacuum cause the pole ! attributes of pre-existing elements maybe !

    cosmic microwave background radiation is interesting what is the max and min limits to its measurement ? please explain why 3. is wrong so i can better understand ! i only have doubt on number 2. atm

  • @okuma0kuma

    Gravity has only one charge, and doesn't generate poles, electromagnetism does. What vacuum are you referring to? That which is outside of our atmosphere? If so, then the answer is the fact that gravity causes energy to increase in density, when in high enough quantity. When density increases, volume decreases, so several spots are left with no energy (i.e. a vacuum).

  • @UniversumExNihilo gravity one charge flushing of water through a funnel the wirl pool reverse direction dependent on which side of the equator you are standing on 0.o

  • @okuma0kuma

    That's actually a myth from what I understand. A whirlpool will form whichever way the water is being directed . Gravity just pulls it down, it doesn't effect the direction a whirl forms in. As a side note, the Coriolis effect causing this is also bunk.

  • @mrboo18 it not a myth good example search video "Water down a drain at the equator" the vortex really does reverse not only that but when between the equator there is no vortex at all

  • @mrboo18 Coriolis effect is not bunk.  Try flying an airplane without factoring it in and you will be way off course.

  • @Raptor302

    I'm not saying the Coriolis effect doesn't exist, just that it isn't strong enough to effect the direction that draining water flows. It does most definitely have an effect on some things(ex. high altitude wind patterns if I remember from college correctly)

  • @mrboo18 My mistake, I read your comment wrong.

  • @okuma0kuma

    3. is wrong because it assumes an explosion (an expansion of energy), during the big bang space expanded. The dynamics of space itself is studied in the field of general relativity. It would take hours to explain it. The best I can recommend is a lecture series on it. The first video is "Einstein's General Theory of Relativity | Lecture 1". I suggest watching it, if you have the time.

  • @UniversumExNihilo 3 was describing why it wasnt a explosion there is no disagreement here

  • @okuma0kuma

    The Hubble ultra deep field is a scan of the sky. It is a mapping of photons at wavelength of ~100nm-~1µm. The CMBR is the same thing, accept the photons mapped are at wavelength of ~1dm-~1mm. it is as accurate as any other photograph because it is a photograph. If you're skeptical about the CMBR, then you should be just as skeptical over the deep field images.

  • @UniversumExNihilo i meant that 2. you made me sceptical but now i mite be un-sceptical again ! cmbr is blocked by foreground objects like any other photograph but hubble can focus beyond and out side are visual spectrum correct !?

  • Not the best video, but interesting.

  • Always wonderful

    love this channel

    happy subscriber.

  • the universe blows my mind so hard

  • @Gwarismetal

    Agreed!

  • @AzzyTay ROFL. Heard of the only planet that has life? Well you're leaving here. Think about it. If the earth would be any closer to the sun we would burn to death. If we would be any further from the sun we would freeze to death. HERP HERP DE DERP

  • @Edward27871: The habitable zone of the Sun isn't that narrow contrary to popular belief. The habitable zone thickness isn't the diameter of the Earth with the Earth perfectly in the middle. It has the diameter of the orbit of Venus to the orbit of Mars. The Earth has plenty of room and it isn't even perfectly in the middle!

    Also, Earth, the only planet with life?! That's an unknown and I highly doubt that!

  • @AzzyTay

    Welcome aboard my friend.

  • @AzzyTay

    yep thats what I thought when I was in school.

    happy journey to self-discovery

  • @benshehzad So i can masterbate all i want? without it being a sin?

  • @AzzyTay

    I dont know man but I love it for sure.

    LOL

  • whats the reason for the antigravity to get stronger? is it some kind of chain reaction?

  • @VarykGerai

    It's not really antigravity. It's energy which is accelerating the expansion of space. It is not even known what form this energy takes, so it's called "dark energy". There is very little known about it, so your question can't be answered.

  • Gravity "weakening" over time? The universe slowing expansion then speeding up? Sounds like cosmology consensus is weakening over time and we're on the verge of theory "expansion"! I suspect observation from the new space scopes over the next ten years will only prove that we're a long way off from explaining what we think we're seeing.

  • Notice how this is all fact.

  • Don't worry people, all this is theory and no fundamental sure fire facts.

  • "now we know the age of the universe more precise than ever, around 14 billion years old", I would have expected a preciser answer than "around 14 billion"

  • I can make a big rip too lol

  • i thought the universe is finite....so where is the universe expanding into?

  • @idontgiveashit0930

    well, you solve that and you get your Nobel prize...

  • @idontgiveashit0930

    It is finite. Didn't you catch that part of the video? "The Big Rip", that would be the end. Finite=beginning and end

  • @drche420

    No. The "big rip" states that the objects within the universe will be torn into their constitute atoms as dark energy get's stronger. It is not an end to the universe, nor does it address idontgiveashit0930's question about universal expansion, as the big rip would not stop the universe from expanding.

  • @UniversumExNihilo

    It would be the end of all life. And unless the constituent atoms remaining due the "big rip" are able to coalesce, it would be the permanent end of life in the future for those atoms.

  • @idontgiveashit0930

    The universe contains an isolated geometry. It is space, and space need not space to expand into.

  • I wonder if we could slow down the universe?

  • So is this exponential expansion? If the universe is expanding in costant then shouldnt we still see the distant galaxies equal in proportion to our position no matter how much time has passed. Or the farther out you get the faster the galaxies travel away? That would suggest we our not as far out... Could we measure the expansion in 2 different angles and see which side has moree expansion to determine our position?

  • The universe isn't expanding from a single point. Wikipedia explains it okay.

  • Comment removed

  • @puncheex

    how can the hubble constant be increasing over time, and be constant?

    You don't make very much sense

  • @drche420: No; it is a case of semantics. It was considered to be a constant up until the last ten years when satellite instruments showed us that the universe is accelerating it's expansion. Therefore it must follow that Hubble's constant is a constant only at a given point in time. It is, for us, very nearly a constant; it will be millions of years before it changes in it's third or fourth decimal place. It is not a derived constant like Planck's constant, it is observational.

  • ...And, by the way, we don't even really know if Planck's constant is really a constant over time. It appears to be, be we don't know that with certainty. Like all science, it is only provisional.

  • @puncheex

    Oh, that makes sense now. Thanks.

  • @adulby

    Think of it like this... if you take a black marker and make 3 dots on an uninflated balloon and then blow it up... you will notice that all 3 dots move away from each other. The dots that are farther away move away quicker etc. As it is... it turns out that we're in a pretty shitty place in our galaxy... which is in a pretty average place in the universe. Nothing remarkable about it really.

  • @adulby

    I don't think you quite understand how universal expansion works.

    It's difficult to explain without visual aid, so, I'll tell you where to go. In the video "'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009", The lecturer explains this very thing at 10:03. I recommend you watch that tidbit.

    The video's code is 7ImvlS8PLIo

  • @adulby

    its accelerating the entire time. when delta v is not equal to zero, your statics equations fall apart

  • The big rip!?.. Well thats fuckin scary. Thats one theoretical scenario that I hope is wrong.

  • @ubersteigen : My money is on the Big Freeze while I bet the Big Rip is the less likely scenario!

  • @Ridleysama

    A "Big Freeze" would be a HIGHLY unstable and highly unlikely state for the universe. There is nothing nature hates more than acquiescence. The only thing constant in the universe is perpetual change.

    Putting "your money" on the Big Freeze is equivalent to walking into a casino, up to the roulette table, and betting on the ball landing on the metal ridge that separates "0" and "00". Though I'm sure the house will be more than happy to take your bet.

  • @kossmikham: Do you understand what the Big Freeze Theory is? The Big Freeze Theory is a Universal Death Theory that uses all of physics to predict the outcome of the Universe. The Big Freeze relies heavily on the Laws of Physics

    The Big Crunch relies on physics and gravity getting stronger

    The Big Rip relies heavily on the existence of Einstein's Cosmological Constant, renamed to Dark Energy, which there is no evidence for, getting stronger, and gravity getting weaker.

  • And how does Dark Energy get stronger? is it constantly getting created? The Big Rip is that Dark Energy will overcome the 4 Forces and "Rip" everything in the Universe apart. Basically, the Big Rip isn't supported by physics while the Big Freeze is entirely supported by physics, even alternate physics. This is why my money is on the Big Freeze.

    The Big Freeze is that physics will overcome the Universe and kill it, not instantly. Star formation stops, all the star die naturally...

  • ...some matter falls into the black holes or other bodies via orbital decay, other turn to balls of iron through cold fusion, which collapse into other heavy bodies such as more black holes, black holes eventually evaporate via hawking radiation and finally, the Universe is dead, filled with nothing but photons, flying away from each other at the speed of light with the Universe achieving Heat Death. That is the Big Freeze Theory, not the Universe instantly freezing.

  • Everyone loves baby pictures :)

  • My myth is better than your myth.

  • @blueghist We will leave our current orbit as soon as we see the sun disappear, assuming that gravitons exist and travel at the speed of light.

  • @TruthfulChristian Don't be ridiculous I have NEVER in my life seen an atheist claim to know everything. That is in direct violation of the definition of science. We are always testing theories to support or modify them, but we don't prove them. There will always be much to learn. In science we must always doubt, and requestion in order to get closer to the truth. In religion you must accept blindly without proof, and you cannot doubt. That is why religion cannot be supported by science.

  • @TruthfulChristian What are you even doing here anyway? You're obviosuly not here to learn anthing from the videos, then what is it? Are you just here to troll on comments? is that it?

  • @UniversumExNihilo Reject the strive to know everything...there are some stones better off unturned.

  • @adulby: Why?  What exactly do you think this prohibition should cover?