Did Time Start at the Big Bang?

Komentar

  1. Ernesto Carlos Rodríguez Argüello

    Ernesto Carlos Rodríguez ArgüelloJam Yang lalu

    Its my third time a watch it... still lost ...going for 4

  2. TeaParty1776

    TeaParty17769 jam yang lalu

    A hundred years ago we discovered that using a false metaphysics to understand math produces a pseudo-scientific restatement of the ancient religious claim that that God created the universe. Pythagoras said that justice is seven. He also warned against beans because they cause farting. One out of two is not bad.

  3. TeaParty1776

    TeaParty17769 jam yang lalu

    Space and time, as Aristotle discovered w/philosophy, are relationships among things in the universe.

  4. TeaParty1776

    TeaParty17769 jam yang lalu

    With philosophy, Aristotle identified the eternity of the universe. Some facts are too big for mere science.

  5. Phillip Otey

    Phillip OteyHari Yang lalu

    What if particles are just shrinking because they're losing energy?

  6. Empathy is only human

    Empathy is only humanHari Yang lalu

    Is there exigent a theory for something akin to a black hole or singularity nova? To explain this we need to make the following assumptions. One, the 'center' of a black hole is not a mathematical singularity but rather something very similar to a neutron star. Indeed, under this model the smallest of black holes that form naturally would be simply a normal neutron star that has grown to a point where light can no longer escape it's gravitational pull. As this object continues to grow, though some mechanism that will not be addressed here, this object would then transition into a smaller object where in the neutrons consist not of up and down quarks, but of charm and strange quarks. Similarly at some much larger mass a transition would occur converting our object into one comprised of top/bottom neutrons. So why would there be a transition? At minimum/maximum curvature of spacetime the higher energy level quarks would become manifest due to overtaking their lower energy counterparts in terms of stability. During such a transition, volume would be greatly reduced while maintaining mass. Eventually however the mass of our object would reach a critical level. A point where top/bottom quarks begin to again destabilize but lack a higher energy counterpart into which to transition. At this point the amount of spacetime curvature would be so extreme that gravity would be approximately equal to the forces produced at the point of impact in a particle accelerator. As we approach this point small variations in the outward pressure exerted by it's constituent quarks would allow some neutrons to naturally superimpose. Thus triggering premature matter degeneration. To put this another way all mass in this twinned particle overlap would then be expressed as energy. And due to the nature of the local environment the type of energy expressed most I think would be heat. These transitions would slow our objects progression toward it's ultimate critical mass. But inflict an escalating level heat at and around the core. Allow this process to continue long enough and another type of critical level might be reached. The core may reach a temperature so hot that matter can no longer exist. At this point all bets are off as our tragically doom object collapses at an incredible rate carrying everything down to the smallest of possible measurements. A sphere with a one plank diameter. A true singularity comprised of only energy with no mass. Well what would happen then? First given the volume of this all temperature would be equalized. Space would suddenly no longer feel the pull of mass that had so severely warped its shape into so small a point. Space would be carried outward pulled by the adjoining space as it attempts to equalize its own internal pressures. The heat and other types of manifest energy is carried outward with this sudden expansion. And so we have the event we call the big bang. This is an interesting idea that I've been thinking on for many years now. It offers us not only a possible mechanism for how the big bang might have formed. But also an answer to what dark energy is comprised. Imagine if you will, that spacetime is expanding far faster than the effects we measure from the motion of galaxies moving away from one another. As spacetime washes over each galaxy it's is compressed and then decompresses as it moves through. This then giving rise to a kind of drag on spacetime that we can observe via the acceleration in the universal expansion. The inflationary period via this model is also very easily explained. Unhindered by the presence of mass, spacetime seems to explode outwards at far greater than the speed of light, carrying all that energy with it. Not in a kind of soap bubble but rather more akin to a sponge that is no longer compressed. Inflation stops once matter begins to form at the point where space is cool enough to allow it's coagulation. Thus a renewed compression/spacetime curvature became exigent. This would bring us to the natural question of, well why didn't everything just recollapse right then? And I think the most likely candidate to answer this would be spatial inertia. Additionally since matter/antimatter is being formed and systematically destroyed in it's creation cycle the amount of mass in any such system would necessarily be lower than the amount a mass in the original object. After all you have to account for all the heat and light that exists during this time. We can see the end result of this in what we call the universal microwave background radiation map. Lastly we come to the only scientific point of which I am aware that would counteract this model which is Stephen Hawking's calculations that point to time beginning at the big bang. What if, all the calculations are correct, but it means something that is subtly different than what we think it means? What if instead of the big bang being the beginning of time itself, the big bang was instead the beginning of the arrow of time. This leads into another idea of mine. What if the arrow of time acts in a way very similarly to that of the electromagnetic force. Move a conductive wire inside a magnetic field and you produce an electric field. Similarly what if the flow of spacetime past celestial bodies above, at, or near to the speed of light produces an effect akin to electricity flow. That being the monodirectional expression of time. Could someone either explain why this model is wrong, or point me to literature that can show the same. If that is not possible then I ask why don't we think that this is what happend?

  7. TeaParty1776

    TeaParty17769 jam yang lalu

    > exigent Wow! You must read a lot of books.

  8. EASYTIGER10

    EASYTIGER10Hari Yang lalu

    I'm still not clear why it is assumed that BOTH matter and SPACE were concentrated in this infinitesimal space. Why could it not simply be that all matter expanded into a pre-existing void?

  9. HowdeeTMM

    HowdeeTMMHari Yang lalu

    I hit play that's when time started.

  10. Paulkeith Charlesworth

    Paulkeith Charlesworth2 hari yang lalu

    But it is a theory and a fucking good one

  11. dom crocitto

    dom crocitto2 hari yang lalu

    Time started with God

  12. Gerard Miller

    Gerard Miller2 hari yang lalu

    No no; the universe was always hear. This world was once a piece of the sun. The big bang was a solar flare. An explosion in the sun ejected this rock, we call home. And way back a billion years ago. When this rock was ejected, it was still molten lava. As it cooled, as it traveled triugh space. It cooled off. And eventually water waper was formed. In a few million years after this rock was ejected from the sun it slowly turned and water waper formed. Water waper cooled the cracks, and eventually water became lakes. In time water became oceans as this world slowly stopped. That's how you hot this world. Eventually life was creating around. In the water. And the word was extremely hot still . Water wapor cooled things down.

  13. Lumpag

    Lumpag2 hari yang lalu

    This shit is so deep I can already see the 14 year olds in the comments.

  14. SandBoy Null

    SandBoy Null2 hari yang lalu

    I’m gonna have a panic attack.

  15. Paul Swensen

    Paul Swensen2 hari yang lalu

    What is the music playing at the end of the episode and where can I get it?

  16. Wilfred Torres

    Wilfred Torres4 hari yang lalu

    idreporter.net/v/video-JiMqzN_YSXU.html there was no big bang

  17. Marlo H

    Marlo H4 hari yang lalu

    THE UNIVERSE IS FLAT! NASA USES LAZER BEAMS TO MAKE IT LOOK ROUND!!

  18. Life's truths

    Life's truths4 hari yang lalu

    I was just given to know this. The Universe is not infinite because of the true nature of reality. Still it's potential is Infinite.

  19. Steve Magruder

    Steve Magruder5 hari yang lalu

    This is purely in the realm of hypothesis, but I imagine our universe is the result of the long death of another one. The inexplicable physics of that universe formed an unimaginably large black hole, and the beginning of ours started from the end of its gravity well (that infinitesimally small point). It had a gravity so intense it not only ate light, it ate a lot of its spacetime as well (since as we know, mass warps spacetime). Then, the Big Bang is kind of a cosmic "appendix bursting" of that black hole, again via inexplicable physics.

  20. Chris Ziga

    Chris Ziga5 hari yang lalu

    Nah time is always constant you can not control time or fast foward it

  21. James Oconnor

    James Oconnor5 hari yang lalu

    The year O = 0 "No matter" who ? idreporter.net/v/video-0d5eP0wWLQY.html

  22. Rell-J

    Rell-J5 hari yang lalu

    Something came from nothing. Which means that nothing is actually something. Now what is it? Humans don’t know, can’t know ,and won’t ever know. With that being said the Big Bang just doesn’t haven’t without something already being present therefor time already existed obviously

  23. necromancer

    necromancer7 hari yang lalu

    I'm still not able to conclude whether time started with big bang or not.

  24. lostbuffalo

    lostbuffalo8 hari yang lalu

    Speed of light We have a measured speed of light of approximately 186 thousand miles per second We also have two other speeds of light you are not aware of. They are beyond measure yet they have value zero and the speed of now All that exists at the moment of the big bang is light+space and the absolute void the singularity exists within. The singularity at the big bang is light at speed zero, light does not move beyond the point of A The point of B does not exist as a point the ether is also a creation of the big bang. An ether expanding within an absolute void At the singularity were both light and space existing both within a single point and neither having any speed of movement the energy of the light was contained by the impedance of space otherwise light would have moved at instantaneous speed across the void and nothing would exist... All things being created from the interaction between space and light The speed of light through space from point A to point B is 186k miles per second The ultimate speed of light is now, it moves from point a to point b instantly With three speeds for light 2 intuited and 1 observed, you can calculate the impedance of space on light. knowing the impedance of space on light you can create new matter, consume matter for energy or extract energy from space itself. You could even move between 2 points faster than the speed of light. Unfortunately you cannot time travel because time does not actually exist

  25. lostbuffalo

    lostbuffalo8 hari yang lalu

    Infinity is a word that means not measurable, or beyond measure. it is also used to say something is without value or beyond having a value to measure something you need to correlate it with something you know, like how you hold a ruler to line to measure the line. singularity is infinite in there not being a way to measure it But it is not infinite in the sense of having value Singularity is a value in itself just as zero has value on a number line.

  26. lostbuffalo

    lostbuffalo8 hari yang lalu

    Time is merely a mental construct the mind employs to differentiate between memory (past) experience (present) and intuition (future) There is no evidence that time exists as a force of nature Your mental construct is correlated with the world outside your mind creating the illusion of time. Modelling change, or cause and effect moving through time is a useful way of organizing your observations but it is an illusory mental crutch. cause and effect or change do not actually move through time your perception of change moves through your concept of time within your mind Time does not actually exist. The scientific error here is a rational inability to discern between reality and concept.

  27. vince pie

    vince pie8 hari yang lalu

    No, there were surely causal sequences of events before hand that resulted in the big bang, we just have no idea for sure what any of it was or could be.

  28. Jack251190

    Jack2511909 hari yang lalu

    Time started when matter or rather energy came into existence. Why? Think about how we measure time. It is the change of state or location of matter. Without matter, time means nothing.

  29. Buttmaster Flex 69

    Buttmaster Flex 699 hari yang lalu

    gourd mad duh univarse n duh urf iz flatt, stoopid afiests

  30. Mark R

    Mark R11 hari yang lalu

    how do you measure and track a point in space in time? like, how can you compare the distance of two points in this moment and then the next moment? what even is a point? a quark? or the 'fabric' that the quark exists on? if comparison requires delineation, what is being compared?

  31. Timothy Truitt

    Timothy Truitt11 hari yang lalu

    "In the beginning.... God".

  32. Kevin Castillo

    Kevin Castillo12 hari yang lalu

    COPENHAGEN INTERPRETATION PROPER. I HAVE BECOME.

  33. Kevin Castillo

    Kevin Castillo12 hari yang lalu

    THE MORE INFORMATION I INTAKE, THE MORE IDEAS I FIND FROM THE PAST TO BE CORRECT WITHOUT A DOUBT.

  34. Kevin Castillo

    Kevin Castillo12 hari yang lalu

    ITS DO TO THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH THAT NEEDS TO BE ACCEPTED. ALL OF YOUR PRESENTED QUESTIONS AND IDEAS ARE BOTH CORRECT AND THEN INCORRECT. EINSTEIN HAS NEVER BEEN INCORRECT, JUST NOT ENTIRELY UNDERSTOOD. STRING THEORY IS ALSO ONTO SOMETHING. *HUGH EVERETT*!!! CORRECT. REALISM PHYSICS CORRECT. LOCALITY COMPLETE. ASPECT, DALIBARD & ROGER ARE CORRECT. I AM PROOF. DISCOVER WHAT I HAVE BECOME.

  35. ccall48

    ccall4812 hari yang lalu

    Does time really exist if you're not mortal?

  36. NoShaleGastly

    NoShaleGastly13 hari yang lalu

    The background noise in this was annoying as fuuck

  37. LaTerry Dorsey

    LaTerry Dorsey14 hari yang lalu

    Would the Big Bang be equivalent to the first time a sentient mind forms a thought? Could the " Speed" of said thought be somewhat equivalent to the speed of light? Quantum mechanics says Thought creates matter, correct?

  38. ONNIE TALONE

    ONNIE TALONE15 hari yang lalu

    wow a PBS video one can comment on, about time? time is so hard to understand, as did not begin, so has no end but has no middle, so what time is it, simple question, cannot be answered when asked about something that does not exist, Bend time, ripple time, but how can time have no real value in the Universe!

  39. A Tothetop

    A Tothetop15 hari yang lalu

    Gawd didit

  40. waterborne

    waterborne16 hari yang lalu

    Spacetime is just an emergent construct from quantum fields. As such time as we know it is not fundamental and is just an emergent property from the energy and information that forms the quantum fields.

  41. neil u

    neil u16 hari yang lalu

    Very cool episode. M-Theory, 2 branes clapping together seems sensible. No?