Your animations are really good. I was amazed by the past light cone at about 2 minutes. Hats off to you sir :)
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
Thanks! The galaxies expanding was SO HARD to make accurate. The farther they are, the faster they're moving. It was really important to me that it behave like that in the animation.
@ericklopes4046
7 жыл бұрын
He has such a hard work with his videos, great videos, they don't get the amount of views they deserve thought. So, if Universe is flat, then it must be infinite. But, as our most accurate telescope has an error margin of 0.4%, according to the current explanatory models and available evidence, is it correct to say that the chance of the universe being finite is 0.4% (not taking into account the soccer ball hypothesis)?
@vijeykrishnaa2230
6 жыл бұрын
The Science Asylum Minutephysics was right! Pedantic!
@zoltankurti
6 жыл бұрын
The Science Asylum you didn't get it accurate tho. It gets the point accross, and I guess it is what you wanted. But in space-time diagramms, galaxies don't go sideways. :D That would mean rewritten pasts and all kind of crazy things. Rather their world lines would curve outwards.
@wasoncethr7565
5 жыл бұрын
@@ericklopes4046 you need bayes theorem for some perspective in regarding to the error logic you applied
@ScienceAsylum
5 жыл бұрын
Correction: The torus at 5:15 only has positive curvature on the outside half. The inside half has negative curvature. (I thought I had posted this correction ages ago, but based on recent comments I realized I had forgotten.)
@Fiercesoulking
2 жыл бұрын
I want to point out that having the "universe" finite from a mathematical standpoint is actually really hard . There is also a solution with higher dimensions for a " finite" "universe" both come with problems . The one with curved space the problem is you define an inside by doing so you define an outside so existence continue outside. From a physic standpoint this might be enough since nothing interact with it but the outside continue infinite so 100% chance there is an another universe. Same goes when you use higher dimension to squeeze in a 3D universe each of them is basically a line which go mathematically from negative and positive infinity. There is a solution to make the universe finite but this one is really weird one and broken from a math perspective. Coming from the philosophic implication where everything happens which can happens and that infinity times in an infinite universe. Is to say everything which can happen happens only max once. From there on things get really weird because the universe fold then in a non linear way .... well kinda like quantum entanglement. There is also some weirdness going when you have exhaust all possibilities. Would that means when you watch further it would force the universe to create completely new possibilities? It is certainly a headache.
@youareacoward8459
2 жыл бұрын
The answer is, no, it's not.
@Fiercesoulking
2 жыл бұрын
@@youareacoward8459 ???
@DTG01134
7 жыл бұрын
This is a really, really high quality video, it's a shame you don't have a ton of subscribers. Wish you the best!
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@daffidavit
7 жыл бұрын
He will, work spreads fast in KZitem.
@ChompNom
6 жыл бұрын
The spacetime diagram was amazing, I can see a lot effort put into that few seconds of animation
@ScienceAsylum
6 жыл бұрын
For real! That few seconds took hours.
@ekrem_dincel
4 жыл бұрын
@@ScienceAsylum wow you can just use some scaling and layer things for that. Did you draw it?
@srpilha
7 жыл бұрын
Looking Glass Universe brought me here, and I'm glad it did! Excellent video, I'm gonna have to binge-watch all the rest now. :P
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
Welcome!
@frysause934
6 жыл бұрын
First video of yours I have watched, 6 min in I realized your are not just some crazy hack, but a legitimate crazy scientific hack. Subscribed.
@steeveedee4307
3 жыл бұрын
This channel should be mandatory viewing to schools.
@jaybee6701
4 жыл бұрын
Crazy Science tickles my neurons and makes me happy! I love this channel!!!!
@adityachk2002
4 жыл бұрын
It is a mark of credibility that some combination of atoms can answer such questions on basis of sheer perseverance .....kudos to humanity
@filipebcs8
5 жыл бұрын
Great videos, man! I just watched a whole bunch of them and a lot of things I didn’t quite understand seem a lot clearer to me now! Keep up the excellent work! Thank you!
@ScienceAsylum
5 жыл бұрын
You're very welcome! I'm glad they were helpful.
@chrismcgarry3160
3 жыл бұрын
4:25 SpaceTime Curvature Equation (FLRW Metric) : it's actually beautiful when slightly simplified! 6:15 That was exactly my reaction when I learned the Universe seems flat, even with our finest measurements! Grrrrr!!! I mean, we just need an infinitesimal deviation from 180°-triangles with significant confidence, and voilà, curvature! But probably not confirmed anytime soon!
@datboy038
2 жыл бұрын
“Why must you be this way” Universe: *psychotic laughter*
@Davideos
7 жыл бұрын
Incredible video, like aways!! I just didn't understand one thing... You said that if the universe had positive curvature, then it could be shaped like a donut. I understand this if the triangle was drawn on the outer side of the donut (on the outer surface). However, if the triangle was drawn in the inner surface, it would have less than 180º because it would be just like making a triangle in a hyperboloid, which has a negative curvature. With this in mind, I searched and saw that in topology a donut can have zero gaussian curvature (like said in Wikipedia, in the 'Flat torus' section: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torus). So I don't understand why an universe with positive curvature could be shaped like a donut. I would really appreciate if you could clarify this doubt I had. Keep up the good work ;)
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
You do have a point here, but before I answer, let's clarify a few things: 1) A "flat torus" is a special kind that has zero curvature, so that doesn't really apply to the torus that I had in the graphic. 2) I didn't say the universe was shaped like a torus... more like that it has torus slices (or cross-sections). Ok, now back to the point you have. You are correct that the torus (doughnut shape) has positive curvature some places, zero curvature some places, and negative curvature other places. Here's a better discussion than wikipedia has to offer: math.stackexchange.com/questions/495232/are-there-any-surfaces-that-contain-both-positive-and-negative-gaussian-curvatur However, the point I was trying to make is that a universe with torus slices could be finite based on the curvature... but I can see now how that part could come across (a bit) misleading.
@Davideos
7 жыл бұрын
Nice answer! Thanks!!
@SSNReactorOperator
3 жыл бұрын
“We’re the universe trying to understand itself.”
@PrometheusZandski
2 жыл бұрын
Really love your work. I could watch you 24/7. The comment at 1:18 "What you are looking at is the formation of the first ever hydrogen atoms" is not true. They are the first atoms to become visible (H, He, Li and Be) but the first atomic nuclei were formed about 3 minutes after T0. Between 10^-12 and 10^-6 seconds, quarks and electrons started forming. At 10^-6 seconds, the universe was cold enough for protons and neutrons to form. At 3 minutes, things were stable enough for H and He nuclei to form. At this point, electrons would bind and then be ripped from the nuclei. Only after 380,000 years were there enough neutral atoms to allow the universe to become transparent, and that is when we see the CMB for the first time.
@bobm4378
8 ай бұрын
check your post! "the first atoms to become visible (H, He, Li and Be)" H stands for Hydrogen atoms....
@PrometheusZandski
8 ай бұрын
@@bobm4378 I'm sorry, I don't understand your comment. Could you please elaborate? Did I misstate something?
@bobm4378
8 ай бұрын
@@PrometheusZandski you said The comment at 1:18 "What you are looking at is the formation of the first ever Hydrogen atoms" is not true." you said "They are the first atoms to become visible (H, He, Li and Be) but the first atomic nuclei were formed about 3 minutes after T0" --- what does H stand for?? Dunno where you get 'minutes' ?? --- SpaceDOTcom says 380,000 years after the Big Bang, the universe was cool enough that Hydrogen could form.
@kabir09999
4 жыл бұрын
Amazing content!! We were able to get our hands upon the basics only during our high school let alone understand in such details. Kids would be served so much better with your videos. I have a little kid I’ll show your videos to.
@al1383
5 жыл бұрын
I finally understand what “flat universe” is referring to! U da man
@michaelsmith935
5 жыл бұрын
Great animations, simple explanations, use of humor = fantastic videos
@Michael500ca
6 жыл бұрын
This is one of the best explanations I have seen. Good job.
@geobean4092
5 жыл бұрын
Dear Nick; comments below assure me that having you cloned will be the best solution to our lousy educational system. Your clone enthusiast and your biggest fan in Houston.
@SanPendro
7 жыл бұрын
Super fun to see the somewhat normopathic science speak colliding with the philosophy of infinitude. Instantly subscribed to your awesome channel! This video feels like calculating the amount of diapers needed for an incoming infinitely large shitload, taking into account the shape, fluidity and general direction the shit is going to take. While mentally improving the math of replacing saturated diapers with empty ones not letting slip the conservation of poop, nor the quantum of whole number diapers. In the end I was exchanging diapers so instantaneously fast, I could've just as well let the shit hit the fan and have less of a hassle cleaning up the now perfectly dispersed speckles of, well, lust? I mean, didn’t Einstein tell us that time and space are basically projected properties of energy, each other, vice versa and round about? How can we successfully define a finite structure, topology even, in a relativistic environment; let alone the universe (all of it)? From an epistemological viewpoint infinity can neither be proven nor disproven; it simply cannot be denied. Imagine flying at the very outskirts of the universe, leaning your hand towards the outer limit, faster than the relativistic expansion rate of your surroundings. Would your hand fall off? No, you would’ve just impacted the topology (ever so slightly) of the “expansion”, as the particles in your hand project their very own frame of space-time, they don’t need a space to move into. Why should we invent a different set of laws of nature just because we’re talking about projected spacial boundaries? When there is no falsifiable wall we could ever run into the whole question changes from “is there an end” to “I might have to think about relativity a little longer”. Whereas expansion is a reeeeaaaaal stretch for me, from everything I can observe it makes more sense to assume it is in fact collapsing, conflating, creating space as it falls into itself, stacking resonances, upending into its respective “inside”, effectively shrinking. It would not only create exactly that effect of “drifting apart galaxies” and could explain why the cosmic microwave background anomalies look astonishingly like earths own hemispheres, it also coincides with our concepts of gravity, space-time and the formation of dark matter. Watching your videos is a real mind-bending experience, thank you!
@peckelhaze6934
5 жыл бұрын
Stumbled across your site and find it excellent. I have now subscribed.
@ki4dbk
2 жыл бұрын
Ok. Its awesome that you addressed the Language distinction first. Nice
@eiriklade93
7 жыл бұрын
Love this video. This channel is a gem
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
Thanks! Glad you like it.
@DavidMaurand
4 жыл бұрын
that's a killer chart at 2:00
@IoDavide1
6 жыл бұрын
Short answer: We don't know. End...
@thejasonknightfiascoband5099
5 жыл бұрын
Of course but you're human so You'll probably know where I'm getting at here... somewhere embedded deeply into our DNA is this ego that makes us feel so good & important if we pretend we know every god damn thing.
@jurusco
4 жыл бұрын
@Hellstormkj64 999 "believe me" why? i strong believe in it, so believe me.
@brianmiller4466
3 жыл бұрын
Ookla and Princess Ariel were wondering will the fractured pieces of their moon stay put? ROTFL Love the toons references, sometimes it helps the swelling go down. Keep up the awesome vids. pppppleease Eddy! lol
@gumunduringigumundsson9344
5 жыл бұрын
Not infinite but big enough to fit both of us.. well done 1.
@ambershah5741
3 жыл бұрын
this is the kind of question I would ask my parents as a kid but never get answered in a satisfying manner
@alonzopatton7663
7 жыл бұрын
thankyou for this article, it is thought inspiring and also humorious, thus memorable.. is that not the basis of learning? stay crazy..
@PaulJohnsonM
4 жыл бұрын
The music was pretty jammin' in this one.
@LoveAndPeaceOccurs
4 жыл бұрын
Thank You .... so much ... You explain this Far better than anyone else.
@samuelowens000
5 жыл бұрын
I just got the side note thing! 😆
@tjsogmc
2 жыл бұрын
So if an observer was at the edge of what we can see, would they see the same bubble as us with themselves at the center? That is to say, would they see nothing in one direction and everything in the other? Or would we appear to be on the edge of their universe with themselves at the center of their own observable universe? Is the "center " always relative to the observer?
@a9c
2 жыл бұрын
They would see galaxies we cannot see due to the speed of light and expansion of the universe, but their view would be exactly like ours: no center, no edge. We can only see light that has had time to reach us. The universe could fold back in on itself somehow (finite universe). If the universe is infinite it was also infinite before the Big Bang. Infinity expanding into infinity. Crazy stuff to think about!
@seanspartan2023
6 жыл бұрын
We're gonna need a bigger triangle!
@dougg1075
5 жыл бұрын
This show is so well done it’s CRAZY
@gustavelchapo2919
6 жыл бұрын
you should advertise this channel sir , this is brain matter gold mine...i feel like a genius everytime i visit this page !!
@illusionz9053
7 жыл бұрын
I love Looking Glass Universe. Her videos on quantum mechanics are amazing. Plus she always sounds like she's going to laugh which is oddly enjoyable.
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
I agree. She's great. It was wonderful to work with her on this project.
@StuffIwannaRemember
6 жыл бұрын
Yes! Question sufficiently answered sir! The proof is beautiful
@alexandertownsend3291
3 жыл бұрын
What was proven?
@stefanoiaconissi2727
5 жыл бұрын
3:55 ... ""It's called the Flint Lockwood Diatonic Super Mutating Dynamic Food Replicator. Or for short: The FLYMSYVDFER!!!!"" "Lmnendvser?" "FLINSEVDFAR" "Omaneverdvrvr?" "FL! SUH! FDFEFR!!"" (Quotes)
@Etothe2iPi
7 жыл бұрын
1:37 what do you mean by "the edge"? Great video, great channel, subscribed.
@manikdas1429
6 жыл бұрын
U r awesome
@benjaminsharef6589
7 жыл бұрын
Another wonderful video! Hope to see more soon--keep up the great work! :)
@cormacb2326
6 жыл бұрын
The universe can't be infinite and thinking it is infinite is ridiculous, the universe started at the big bang and has been expanding since then, we know that space does not expand infinitely fast, or else atoms could not possibly hold themselves toghether. So, using the most basic logic we can determine that the universe is finite in size. However, I suppose a couterpoint to my point could be that the universe was still infinite in size at the big bang, it was just that all of the infinite parts of space where just infinitly close to one another and the space in between those parts increased as time went on, creating the illusion of the universes expansion. However, even if you do assume this, the idea of the universe being infinite is still immpossible because of the converation of energy/mass. You cannot create new mass unless you convert engery into mass, likewise you cannot create new energy unless you convert mass into energy. The reason this is because you cannot increase the amount of energy/mass in the universe, however, if the universe infinte in size it will have infinte mass/energy, meaning you can not increase the energy/mass of the universe because it is at infinte. If this is true it means that you can create energy/mass out of nothing, meaning you could give something infinite energy and thus travel faster than light and travel through time. However this is simply not possible, if it was than space travel would be incredibly easy. Also, why does the most simple hypothiesis have to be correct, most of the time it is, but it doesn't have to be.
@garrethcampbell6134
6 жыл бұрын
I love all of you're videos! Even if I don't understand some of them haha keep up the good work
@Jano2
7 жыл бұрын
Man this video was just ...hard im not sure if i understood the part with the curvature
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
Cosmology is brain-melting stuff. It took me years to finally understand it. These kinds of ideas take more than one video ;-)
@jaycorby
7 жыл бұрын
The Hindus of India in ancient times developed an elaborate theology on the cyclical universe idea...birth, rebirth, death, birth, rebirth, death and on and on...into infinity. How could they have 'known' this thousands of years ago when up until the 1920s it was believed that the entire universe consisted only of the Milky Way?
@ahappyimago
5 жыл бұрын
Jay Corby Hindus didn’t know about topology lol
@richardsleep2045
2 жыл бұрын
Mathematicians talked to me about "unbounded" rather than infinite. Anyway, thanks as always :)
@quarksgluons
7 жыл бұрын
Follow up question: If the universe is infinite, does that mean that there is matter everywhere or do we reach a point where there is "empty space" and no matter?
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
We don't know... but it's standard procedure to assume our corner of the universe isn't special, so I would say the matter/energy density across the entire universe matches what it is here in our observable universe.
@UltimateBargains
7 жыл бұрын
From any point in the observable universe, everything is moving way from the observer. Farther objects appear to move faster than nearer objects. This implies an infinite universe, because every point sees uniformly distributed galaxies in every direction and distance. On other hand, cosmic inflation implies that reality is similar to the surface of an inflating sphere. The sphere surface is sprinkled with dots representing galaxies. As the sphere inflates at a constant rate, all dots move away from all other dots at speeds increasing with distance, which is what we see. Galaxies appear to accelerate faster at farther distances, but the real cosmos is inflating at a constant rate in a higher dimension from the dimensions we can see.
@ralphyfabri4435
7 жыл бұрын
Why doesn't this channel Have 1,000,000 subscribers ? 🤔🤔🤔
@shrikant8446
7 жыл бұрын
according to 1st law of thermodynamic energy neither be created nor be destroyed but the energy is formed in the universe that's why we use it
@Brick2buddies
2 жыл бұрын
If the universe is infinite earth is the center. So is Mars, and so is the center of the Andromeda Galaxy. Because there's an infinite amount of distance in any location 7 has just as many numbers greater than it as smaller numbers. Therefore 7 can be considered the center of the number line. In the same way, there is the same amount of space in any direction, so any point can be considered the center. So the next time someone says "the universe doesn't revolve around you" you can correct them
@Charismatic_Nerd
3 жыл бұрын
Underrated channel 👍🏻
@bmwolgas
2 жыл бұрын
Seems to me an infinite universe would require that it has existed for an infinite amount of time as you can't transition from a finite universe to an infinite one. And in that case, we should have either already reached our heat death an infinite time ago OR an infinite series of big bangs can happen even after heat death.
@nullbeyondo
2 жыл бұрын
The universe and the observable universe aren't the same. The universe can easily have always existed, but the observable universe in which we belong is not. For example, our `observable` universe might have just been a bunch of matter that was concentrated into a planck-sized black hole then exploded. It has nothing to do with the actual universe.
@alejandrozarzuelo5535
7 жыл бұрын
I still bet for a finite universe
@alejandrozarzuelo5535
7 жыл бұрын
and I think you cannot pick infinite small pieces of space-time I HATE INFINITES
@garetclaborn
7 жыл бұрын
if you take an inch and subdivide into 2 half inches, then subdivide to 4 quarter inches, 8 eighth inches, etc etc there wont be a point where you arrive at 'infinity infinitieths inches' but you are able to understand that the process could continue infinitely and the ratio would be maintained. ie you always have "x elements of 1/x length" so *as that approaches infinity* you can say, there are certain properties that apply to all elements in this length no matter how subdivided they are or how many. these properties must also exist at infinity. but THEN you get into a real tricky thing. that infinity is special, it's the infinity reached by subdividing an inch repeatedly. it "reaches" infinity at a different rate than say, cutting the elements by 4 every time instead of 2. to know how to continue past that, there's is a concept called 'aleph-naught' which is like the "first" infinity reached by the natural numbers. since i cant type the symbol for aleph, i'll call it N (it looks like an N). so if I were to say 2 times N, both N and 2N are infinity, but the set of all even numbers approaches 2N at the same "rate" as the set of all natural numbers approach 1N. that's not really technically the right way to say but its a fairly accurate way to conceptualize it. just like you can have infinite conceptual points in an inch, you can then say i have 2 *of this particular infinity* in 2 inches i like to think of infinities as a range with an undeterminate count of elements inside it. well underterminate, fractally increasing or tessellated usually. but the idea is that it's easier to treat infinities as a special type of range.
@ObjectsInMotion
7 жыл бұрын
Too bad the Universe doesnt care about what you think.
@garetclaborn
7 жыл бұрын
if care for X is defined as as applying work toward creating, maintaining, persisting or achieving X, then the universe must certainly care about what i think simply because the result of the universe contains me thinking ;)
@mikejones-vd3fg
6 жыл бұрын
only time will tell...
@madamsloth
3 жыл бұрын
Plz come back to this! I can’t wrap my mind around a flat universe
@Hythloday71
7 жыл бұрын
Whether 'average' has physical meaning is context dependent. In many circumstances the notion of average contains quite accurately the idea of a typical value. But in many other circumstances it is not, so we choose other metrics.
@andycopeland7051
3 жыл бұрын
Cool shirt. Hope anyone who liked the films reads the books.
@bigkirbyhj666
2 жыл бұрын
With current understanding standings of mathematics and physics yes* but we have no practical way to test it (yet).
@ffggddss
7 жыл бұрын
5:45 ".. a sphere and a donut [torus] have the same type of curvature - positive curvature." . . . Sphere? Yes! Constant positive curvature, κ = 1/R² . . . Torus? No! It has positive curvature in some (outer) parts, negative curvature in other (inner) parts; in such a way that its *total* curvature is exactly 0. (See Gauss-Bonet Theorem.) 6:07 "And if the curvature is positive, we know the universe is finite, regardless of its topology." Well in the case of 2-D manifolds, what about the hyperboloid of revolution? Or even a paraboloid? Say, y = √(x² + 1), or y = x² + 1, each revolved about the y-axis. Both have κ > 0 everywhere; yet are infinite in extent. I've treaded this ground before, but memory fails me on this point. Do the Einstein Field Equations constrain our 4D spacetime manifold into being finite when its curvature is positive?
@rodaross
5 жыл бұрын
I hate to mention this, the surface of a donuts is a flat manifold, in the sense that their Riemann tensor is null. In terms of the angles you mentioned the sum of the internal angles is exactly 180. Donuts have extrinsic curvature, which is an extrinsic property, and therefore we can measure by us, but not by someone living on the donut That make them donuts and not sheets of paper
@ScienceAsylum
5 жыл бұрын
See pinned comment.
@Sultan_A
8 ай бұрын
Very Very Good, Keep It Up! ❤
@ScienceAsylum
8 ай бұрын
Thank you! 🙂
@WideCuriosity
2 жыл бұрын
Can't imagine that anyone say "universe" and only means "observable universe" One would be specific if meaning the latter. Suspect curvature it unlikely to help. There is a practical limit to measurement. You can't tell the difference between flat and too large to detect.
@zodiacfml
7 жыл бұрын
Quite a difficult question because we truly don't know what CMB means for the universe. This is the reason why scientists don't stop at getting an accurate temperature/frequency of the CMB. I'm also not comfortable with Hubble's discovery. While it is true that galaxies are measured to be red shifting at accelerated pace, it doesn't immediately mean that the universe is expanding.
@thelobster6556
6 жыл бұрын
Nice jurassic park t-shirt. Impossible to miss
@gobyg-major2057
5 жыл бұрын
Fun fact about majora’s moon: it took 3 in game days to crash into termina, and according to game theory (the channel, not the concept), it’s 208 ft wide, 134,000 cubic meters in volume, 3346 kg/cubic meters in density and weighs 450 million kg. It travels 27 ft over the course of those 3 days with a speed of 1.6 mph and has an energy of only 36 joules. Not enough energy as it would take 2.25 x 10^32 joules of energy to destroy a planet like earth and anything with the density of earth’s moon would be ripped apart if it got within 12,000 km of the surface. The same would be true for termina
@ScienceAsylum
5 жыл бұрын
Yes, I saw the episode. He was very thorough.
@1OutOf8Billion
6 жыл бұрын
Big Crunch and heat death are merely some of the reasons why the universe is NOT infinite. Also the dark energy that is fueling this rapid expansion is also eventually going to create such large gaps between galaxies that we will never be able to contact other advanced civilizations and thus the Fermi paradox will become more difficult to determine.
@benmcreynolds8581
2 жыл бұрын
I get inspired by bubbles and oil in water and how fluid dynamics and wind/temperature variations behave. Densities, pressure, static/electromagnetic charges. Can't help but be curious about Multiverse possibly?
@DizzzyWiz
7 жыл бұрын
The word universe emplies a verse, like to a song, but containing all data and all data combinations, like a song that never ends.
@nathanbryan8655
7 жыл бұрын
Yep! always constantly changing, and replacing and over lapping space and time.
@The268170
5 жыл бұрын
"...and what's up with this mole on my shirt?" 0:10
@marciabarlow4704
7 жыл бұрын
Wish I had better audio. This is really interesting, but I have so much echo I can't discern all of what is being said.
@edrosenberger6947
6 жыл бұрын
The "observable universe" is our "Local universe", and is one of many Local universes. Local universes were huge patches of hydrogen that by gravity, fell toward the center of that patch resulting in a huge ball that became the Big Bang. If one could stand back far enough and have excellent vision, they could see what we now see when looking up at night. The "stars" would be the light from the Local universes that live in the main universe or "the Void". The Void has no boundaries. If you say the boundary stops at any point, one must ask what is beyond that point.....there can be no ending to the Void in any direction. If one says where did the Void come from....it always was, and if you remove it, there would still be an empty space in its place.
@coopergates9680
6 жыл бұрын
I think the average Gaussian curvature of the doughnut is zero - it's negative on the surface near the hole. Topologically, you can take a rectangle and glue opposing edges to make a cylinder without the disks at the ends. Then bend this tube and mend the ends together. The doughnut can be tiled with four quadrilaterals to a vertex just as a flat sheet of paper can. There is a more exotic figure known as a Clifford torus that has zero Gaussian curvature everywhere and fits in a 3-sphere (one dimension higher than spheres we're used to).
@louisadriaens764
7 жыл бұрын
Great video Science Asylum, I really enjoy the longer content videos. And as always very good explained. But I'm gonna go a little off topic here: I still have a question about gravity. I've watched your videos about gravity being a fictitious force, and I understand that, as an example, the ISS is moving in a straight line but it looks like it isn't due to bending of space-time. And I also understand that it isn't accelerating, it's got its kinetic energy from itself and it's not de accelerating because there is no air in space;so no friction. But I don't get how, as an example, if you drop an apple, it falls. Where does the kinetic energy - the force - come from if gravity isn't a force? You don't throw the apple to the ground, it just falls on its own. In other words I don't get the case where the object is in freefal. Please help me because I do not understand this. Also, I recently found your channel and I think it has great content and i think you deserve a lot more subscribers, so I also shared your videos about gravity with some people I know. I hope you can help me out with this problem and sorry about going off topic but I wanted to be sure you would see my comment so I posted this on your most recent video.
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
Hi Louis, thanks for sharing the videos. It helps the channel for sure! As for free fall, general relativity is tricky because you have to think in 4 dimensions. Most gravity, like the gravity on Earth, is the result of TIME curvature, no space curvature. When you let go of an apple without /throwing/ it downward, you get this impression that it started from rest... which it did, but only in space. EVERYHIHNG is in motion in time. Once the apple is released, the straightest line it can travel in time includes motion in space (because the Earth curves time into space). I hope that helps.
@louisadriaens764
7 жыл бұрын
The Science Asylum Thank you so much! This really helped me out, I forgot you had to think as space and time as - sort of - the same thing. ☺️
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
Also, I wanted to say that I really enjoy making longer content. It's sad that I don't have the time to do it for every single video.
@louisadriaens764
7 жыл бұрын
The Science Asylum Well, I really wouldn't mind having to wait a little bit longer for each video if they would be longer anyway.
@SSMLivingPictures
Жыл бұрын
When deducing a 'radius' of the universe, does that not assume that we are in the 'center'
@TheBenenene10
7 жыл бұрын
Aaaaaand subscribed!
@seemabahir1646
6 жыл бұрын
Can u make a video explaining 1plus2plus3....is -1/12
@ScienceAsylum
6 жыл бұрын
That's a little too much math for this channel.
@davidfenton3910
6 жыл бұрын
The amount of matter in the universe is finite. Each bit of matter has an exact finite amount. When we add two bits the total is an exact finite amount. All the matter that exists adds to an exact finite amount. No more, no less. A quality of the universe is specific exactness. Of course this is not very substantial knowledge for living on earth and neither is speculation about the amount of space. The consistent qualities of reality seem to be infinite in that they exist exactly the same. i.e. eternally the same, and hence reliable and trustworthy to think and live by. These qualities are useful knowledge.
@kyzercube
7 жыл бұрын
oohh Kepler's nested solids fantasm on the table at 2:20 :p
@ScienceAsylum
7 жыл бұрын
My artsy friend made it for my birthday one year. It's the same friend that designed my channel logo.
@Ionianverse
3 жыл бұрын
Can you make videos on future technology.
@hoggif
4 жыл бұрын
I'm still unsure how we know space expands but time is constant. If time shrinks and space is constant, it would seem space "expands" (assuming we measure it related to speed, say light speed). Oh, on another channel there was a mention of a publication suggesting space is may be curved and finite. Only a 3.5 sigma reliability though if my memory serves well.
@ScienceAsylum
4 жыл бұрын
When we say "space expands," we just mean that in the past there was less space and in the future there will be more space. It's not actually measured as a speed. It's measured as a speed over a distance: km/s/Mpc.
@pairot01
2 жыл бұрын
How can we measure the other angles in the big cosmic triangle? It seems impossible to know the angle between two very distant stars unless we assume the curvature has a certain value and calculate from there.
@TimeHandler
10 ай бұрын
I'm starting to think that the universe is just curling in on itself and we're just travelling toward the big bang, but will never actually get there unless infinite time passes. Like a causal loop. I bloody need an asylum at this point, so i guess i'll sub lol.
@SyDatNguyen-r4j
23 күн бұрын
For the universe to be has positive curvature, it has to be a hypersphere, which is a shape we can’t comprehend. So i give up with the hyperspherical universe
@aurelienb3984
6 жыл бұрын
But a torus has a flat topology, as it is made of a cylinder connected at both edges, itself mad of a plane, of which you connect two borders, so the sum of the angles of a triangle remains 180° on a torus
@rebeccalopez2997
6 жыл бұрын
I really enjoy these videos after I take my meds.
@hoggif
5 жыл бұрын
How do we know why space is expanding but time is not? What makes time so special in space time? That could make a good future episode perhaps. ..or if time is flat or not (to increase difficulty of easy explaning).
@ScienceAsylum
5 жыл бұрын
I agree that this should be a future video topic :-)
@mander40101
Жыл бұрын
If the universe is finite but expanding, what is it expanding in to? If the universe is infinite AND expanding, what is it expanding in to?
@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself
4 жыл бұрын
When someone starts spouting that woo-woo nonsense, I say, "Occam's razor is about to cut a bitch."
@Doones51
5 жыл бұрын
I subscribed, but i will never be able to keep up with him. great stuff, as usual
@abhaysharma3394
6 жыл бұрын
You are far better than my physics teacher.
@jesusk1358
5 жыл бұрын
I bet your physics teacher teaches you exactly what you need to know and no guesses.
@michaelzoran
2 жыл бұрын
QUESTION: The girl at the end sounded like Nicole Kidman. Was that her in some movie?
@raulcoronado6024
3 жыл бұрын
Thank you👍👌😆
@jadedrakerider
2 жыл бұрын
Flat just means Euclidean? That has been bugging me for years! Thanks!
@ScienceAsylum
2 жыл бұрын
Yep! (Technically, spacetime is never euclidean because of the negative on the time component... but it's _analogously_ Euclidean.)
@mrp8488
5 жыл бұрын
What I'm confused about is if you can only see 13.8 billion light years, how did you come up with 46.5, and not 57, or 75, etc?
@ScienceAsylum
5 жыл бұрын
So, you know that stuff we see at 13.8 billion light-years away? Well, it was at that distance 13.8 billion _years ago._ In that time, it must have traveled more, so we project that motion forward in time and _predict_ that stuff is _now_ 46.5 billion light-years away.
@noob-sniper1131
7 жыл бұрын
Can you please explain the clock behind you?
@a9c
2 жыл бұрын
6:30 wait a minute. How do you know the length of the sides? Using trig would assume it is a 180 degree triangle since law of cosines implies 180degrees.
@dookins2081
4 жыл бұрын
Or even ‘fabric of the universe’ I understand, but where does ‘time’ even come into play?! Sorry I left a thousand questions. And thank you for piping up randomly on my feed during the late hours of quarantine. :)
@ScienceAsylum
4 жыл бұрын
I'm working on some general relativity videos right now. There should be one on time coming soon. If you can't wait, here's a short one I made a while ago: kzitem.info/news/bejne/ln6BrmWQo3mmp3Y
@clintanderson4591
4 жыл бұрын
@3:20 The box graphics...I just went into the matrix! Everything went into 3D. You don't even need glasses for it.
@randallkelley3599
6 жыл бұрын
I think the U. has wave properties, like electrons, photons, etc. The U. is giving us a hint of its true design, oh ya!
Пікірлер: 1 М.