The “Crisis in Cosmology” EXPLAINED

In the last few years, astronomers have witnessed a growing problem emerge. As measurement precision has increased, the hope was that this problem would abate, but instead it has only exacerbated. Welcome to "The Crisis in Cosmology". But what exactly is the fuss all about, and how much should be believe the sensationalism?
Written and presented by Prof David Kipping, edited by Jorge Casas.
→ Support our research program: www.coolworldslab.com/support
→ Get Stash here! teespring.com/stores/cool-wor...
THANK-YOU to our supporters D. Smith, M. Sloan, C. Bottaccini, D. Daughaday, A. Jones, S. Brownlee, N. Kildal, Z. Star, E. West, T. Zajonc, C. Wolfred, L. Skov, G. Benson, A. De Vaal, M. Elliott, B. Daniluk, S. Vystoropskyi, S. Lee, Z. Danielson, C. Fitzgerald, C. Souter, M. Gillette, T. Jeffcoat, J. Rockett, D. Murphree, S. Hannum, T. Donkin, K. Myers, A. Schoen, K. Dabrowski, J. Black, R. Ramezankhani, J. Armstrong, K. Weber, S. Marks, L. Robinson, S. Roulier, B. Smith, G. Canterbury, J. Cassese, J. Kruger, S. Way, P. Finch, S. Applegate, L. Watson, E. Zahnle, N. Gebben, J. Bergman, E. Dessoi, J. Alexander, C. Macdonald, M. Hedlund, P. Kaup, C. Hays, W. Evans, D. Bansal, J. Curtin, J. Sturm, RAND Corp., M. Donovan, N. Corwin, M. Mangione, K. Howard, L. Deacon, G. Metts, G. Genova, R. Provost, B. Sigurjonsson, G. Fullwood, B. Walford, J. Boyd, N. De Haan, J. Gillmer, R. Williams, E. Garland, A. Leishman & A. Phan Le.
::Music::
Music licensed by SoundStripe.com (SS) [shorturl.at/ptBHI], Artlist.io, via Creative Commons (CC) Attribution License (creativecommons.org/licenses/..., or with permission from the artist
► 00:00 Sid Acharya - Sky Sailing
► 01:01 Chris Zabriskie - Cylinder Four
► 03:25 Hill - Loneliness [open.spotify.com/album/6vasPO...]
► 06:35 Chris Zabriskie - Cylinder Five
► 09:19 Hill - Detached [open.spotify.com/album/2Rsyjp...]
► 12:53 Hill - There Is but One Good [open.spotify.com/album/4pmiXc...]
► 19:08 Chris Zabriskie - Stories About the World That Once Was
► 21:49 Joachim Heinrich - Y
► 24:05 Indive - Halo Drive
::Chapters::
00:00 Introduction
01:16 Hubble's Constant
02:24 Using the CMB
04:34 The Local Universe
06:20 Cepheids
08:24 The Distance Ladder
10:38 The Hubble Tension
11:29 New Physics?
12:50 The Trouble with Cepheids
15:50 Red Giant Saviors
20:17 Giant Headaches
21:04 No Crisis?
22:37 Sensationalism
24:05 Outro and credits
#CrisisInCosmology #HubbleTension #JWST

[@CoolWorldsLab]

Thanks for watching all! We're honoured that Adam Riess who we mentioned in the video reached out today and I wanted to pass along what he wrote. Riess wanted to highlight that his team were careful to account for dust, noteably by working in near-infrared wavelengths, and believe their systematic error to be much smaller than the Hubble tension, as discussed in this paper arxiv.org/abs/2112.04510. For metallicity, they select 1st and 2nd distance ladder rung objects with similar metallicites to reduce its influence, and thus again believe this isn't the issue. So the tension is certainly not easy to understand in terms of systematics either. Thanks to Adam for reaching out and I hope his comments help shed some further light here. Ultimately, as I said in the video, we are all hoping to see multiple independent methods and analyses weigh in with refined upcoming data, either towards a genuine tension, or a convergence to a singular Hubble constant. What's exciting is that we should get clearer answers in the next year or so, but until let's all keep an open mind, even if like me we're secretly hoping for new physics ;-)

[@mydogsbutler]

Ancient Greek crystal sphere model could correctly predict planetary motions and even eclipses. While a minority of ancient Greek thinkers correctly argued the earth rotated under the sun and that the stars were actually other distant suns their theory was not widely accepted. Part of the problem is they lacked the technology to validate these claims. if we move forward in time to Galileo and Copernicus, the Heliocentric model was accepted but their concept of univserse was still limited by the power of their early telescopes. By the late 19th century the miliky way galaxy was still widely considered the universe. Then comes Hubble and not only discovered other galaxies but discovered red shift that suggusted an expanding universe. Once again our conceptualisation of what constitutes the universe changed. There is a pattern here. Our sense of our universe and its history is tightly coupled to the distance our technology can peer into it. Observation is critical to the scientific method. One can make assertions about specific aspects of the universe but there is a philosophical problem trying to use finite observations to make overly assertive claims about the entire universe. It may still turn out the universe is infinite in space and time. This is speculation of course but I'm no longer a fan of the big bang theory. I could be wrong but I lean towards it never happened or there is something off with the theory to make it seem that was the moment of creation rather than just a moment in time in infinite time.. What made me first start questioning it was the discovery of dark energy and dark matter. The lack of adjusting the age of the universe downward (the age actually became older since then) suggested the formulas were wrong but because few are qualified to look at the complicated physics the immediate irregularity was brushed aside. There are other irregularities like the rather arbitrary tacking on of inflation. While inflation can make the math work no one really has an answer for what it actually allegedly is. 13.8 billion years old sounds like a lot of time but to randomly come up with the conditions for life along with randomly arriving at intelligent life in that timeframe seems highly unlikely. Even just considering the nature of numbers its seems absurdly low number. Why isn't it the year 13.8 trillion? Or the year 13.8 trillion trillion? Or the year 13.8 trillion trillion trillion? And so on. It's not proof of course but from a statistics standpoint it seems very implausible humans showed up this early. For all we know dark energy flips in a 100 billion years and we end up with an oscillating universe that avoids both big bang and the big rip. Here is my prediction based on admittedly empirically flimsy a priori arguments. Either JWT or some next gen telescope that replaces it will find galaxies that are much older than predicted by Big Bang theory. The future wil mimick the past. As our ability to peer into the universe improves we will be forced to once again change our understanding of its size and age. I don't claim this as a fact (could be wrong) and I don't have the math to prove it, It's just a gut guess but my bet is the steady state universe model will one day make a comeback but one that incorporates redshift, dark energy, dark matter,, gravity, CBT, QM and possibly other phenomena.

[@travelmania209]

Fingers crossed Dr.Kipping:)

[@smeeself]

@@mydogsbutler What a lot of wasted words.

[@mydogsbutler]

@@smeeself I'm open to criticism but you'll need to be more specific or just come across as a troll.

[@peterwan9076]

I am sure we have new physics coming up after QM and GR have been with us for a century now. We have the unexplained dark matter and dark energy something that could occupy cosmology for another hundred years. We are waiting for another Einstein to be born. Imagine if Einstein is born a hundred years later, we would NOT be able to correctly understand the nature of time for a century and still be using Lorentz transformation with funky material science explanation that keeps Newtonian time in place.

[@martybaggenmusic]

As a barely average student in science and a slightly below average student in math, I am cursed with a love and fascination of cosmology and physics. It's sources like this channel that give me a hope of even the slightest understanding of it all and keeps me coming back for more.

[@richardleetbluesharmonicac7192]

If you wanna get ahead and science, stay away from pure peer groups , understand with subjectivity and objectivity really means

[@mlbh2os211]

🙋🏽‍♀❤

[@richardleetbluesharmonicac7192]

The Big Bang is a farce. The universe is not expanding

[@JRush374]

Watch Richard Feynman's QED and Character of Physical Law lectures. And read the books. Then read Quarks: The Stuff of Matter by Herald Fritsch.

[@dongately2817]

I feel your pain.

[@markholmes5695]

Well, that’s my bedtime pushed out 25 mins!

[@ungoyone]

Hope you finish it!

[@MCsCreations]

It's still 8pm here in Brazil, so I still have some time. 😬 Either way, sleep tight! 😊

[@leonig01]

Dang, just had the same thought when I saw a new CW video at 1:30 am, but there is no chance I won't watch it now

[@condealexandervonhasslerra5527]

Actually, this is my lullabie….

[@alekyanhovhannes]

Ave! Same))))

[@gregoryfilms9405]

Despite having no scientific background and often not understanding every explanation, I love this channel. It heightens my sense of wonder about our universe. Looking forwards to the next video.

[@paulwolf3302]

Honesty is an excellent character trait, nothing to apologize for.

[@stevencoardvenice]

You have to watch many of the videos more than once to understand. This stuff is all cutting edge and counterintuitive. Physics & astronomy is the hardest stuff in the world. It's all outside our daily experience as humans. Our brains aren't even designed or configured to understand it. It's remarkable that any humans have made such progress in science. It's a total accident that evolution required our brains to develop to such a degree for survival purposes, that an understanding of physics and astronomy became an accidental byproduct. And this understanding was only because civilization and agriculture recently enabled many of us to think all day, instead of hunting and surviving all day, as was the case for 100 thousand years

[@davidripley2916]

I'm 60 and was born in the middle of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Astronomy is now in a Golden Age, and I couldn't be happier. When I was a kid, the Apollo Moonshot was the world-changing paradigm, then we had Skylab, followed by ISS and the Shuttle SLS. Now, we got all these scopes out there plus tons of satellites, and various probes to other worlds . . . Golden Age! 🧠👀

[@darienwest4748]

Props to the editor for putting together these high-quality videos so frequently. Most people watch these videos for Mr Kipping's great explanations on these complex topics (and it can't be understated how great he does) but it wouldn't be the same without all the visuals.

[@CoolWorldsLab]

The Editor (Jorge) really appreciated your comment!

[@SirBlot]

@@CoolWorldsLab Zooper Dooper 108? If you want. Raven 16:02 two orange flavoured 107th gotta eat them with a gin now, lol. Do I have to look at the page I paused on in the 100 s2e1?

[@SirBlot]

Cool as lol

[@SirBlot]

H2O… 2 plus 8 dips in the sky on the art in mount weather map. I don’t want to do that all day, it is becoming familiar.

[@SirBlot]

Even cool was correct b4 I looked… blue sky.

[@n3ckrad]

I wish you were my high-school teacher...I don't think I would have dropped out if you were. Your compassion for teaching science excites my childhood curiosity, and I just want to thank you.

[@balwinderdosanjh1360]

I wish it was possible 2 clone Dr Kipping , and put him in EVERY skool ! There wouldn't B any bored students ... myself included 😭... tarra merry xmas

[@vicenzor3625]

@@balwinderdosanjh1360 the clones should definitely start with English/grammar based on many of these comments.

[@johncollier1405]

I too have been fascinated with physics and the universe never know it all after 50 years I'm still learning...

[@lionelmessisburner7393]

@@balwinderdosanjh1360 might be possible in the future

[@lionelmessisburner7393]

He’d be the Walter white of astronomy

[@InturnetHaetMachine]

One of the clearest and thorough explanation I've come across. Thank you for posting this.

[@seivaDsugnA]

Math rules!

[@Ottee2]

Definitely beautiful and interesting to this non-scientific mind.

[@huhuruz77]

Also : kzbin.info/www/bejne/o6XcYaaoorGbis0

[@davidkennedy8929]

I’m glad you thought it was clear! I must be thick as I found it difficult to keep up, but I find it all fascinating!

[@AdiusOmega]

What an eloquently spoken commentary on issues in cosmology. I've been noticing a lot of sensationalized videos on KZbin and it's good to have these more humble approaches to the topics. This is real science and unfortunately there's not many channels that portray these elements in this kind of way.

[@lloydlivsey6261]

B

[@StefanCreates]

@@lloydlivsey6261 True

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

Yeah people need to be more humble & stop saying they know what gravity is when in fact they have no explanation for why spacetime is curved near mass & energy.

[@louisrobertson9215]

I love real science. The science we have now will tell us the universe is flat without the caveat that if the universe were 400x the size we estimate, it wouldn't need to be flat.

[@adaptercrash]

Amalgamation of the cosmos and God, so they never get confused about it again.

[@martinconrad9260]

One small correction: I didn't click on the video because of the title; I clicked on the video because it's a Cool Worlds video and those are >always< fascinating and informative, regardless of the topic/content. Thanks for this channel and all you bring!

[@mandelbraught2728]

Dr. Kipping, some of us clicked on the video precisely because we knew that you would bring evidence, thoughtfulness, and nuance to the question. 😊 I always appreciate your videos and, more importantly, your commitment to science.

[@ryshow9118]

I saw this notification at work and got a text from my son about 5 minutes later. We're about to sit down and watch after supper and I can't thank you enough for you and your team giving him such a rush for learning.

[@frankelkjr8041]

Cool worlds never tell you what you WANT to hear or EXPECTING to hear; but it’s thought provoking brilliant all together

[@tinetannies4637]

Professor Kipping, and all the marvelous minds like his, are glimpses of what humanity can be, what humanity is capable of, what humanity as a whole will hopefully, someday, rise to become

[@nelus7276]

Hah. The only people currently expected to even sustain their population after 2100 are those of the Middle East and sub Saharan Africa. The rest will be in decline, with an ever increasing percentage of elderly, some, like China, even in total demographic collapse. These are solid predictions from scientific demography and nobody really has a clue about turning the tide. Good luck finding people like this man in the remaining stock and conditions. I'm pretty sure they'll be back to wood fires, draft animals and tribal warfare by 2150.

[@bryandraughn9830]

I cannot express how grateful I am that you're going into such detail on these subjects. There's an awful lot of videos out there that barely scratch the surface and leave it at that. Too many in fact.

[@stevewilson1841]

This channel is brilliant. Your narration is amazing.... And to me, You are the David Attenborough of KZbin. I always look forward to your new videos 🤘🏽

[@aroemaliuged4776]

I beg to differ The ultimate journey of our brother and sisters should be what when where and why

[@JTSnook]

holy shit dude, i mean its good but like David is the GOAT nobody compares

[@ugiswrong]

Simp harder

[@JM-wf2to]

I'll give you Richard, but not David.

[@hunterbidenparmesanimports5633]

He’s got the best voice out of almost all the other Utube Chanel’s

[@NastySeaweed]

Every crisis presents an opportunity to figure out something new ❤

[@marjankrebelj4007]

Exactly. It just means we are in parking distance for something revolutionary.

[@RobFeldkamp]

You sound like my prime minister...

[@RaikenXion]

@@PazLeBon The "answer" is it's already been found a while ago, only the "cure" can NEVER be officially revealed and given to the public because the "Pharmaceutical Industry" would lose billions in profit from "treating" it.

[@lionelmessisburner7393]

This isn’t really a crisis tho

[@markg3025]

I feel so smart as I follow Dr. Kipping through the various topics. Thank you Dr. Kipping for all of the patient and thoughtful detail in your presentation.

[@themightypen1530]

His presentation is hypnotic and I like the fact that he is the exact opposite of a sensationalist. Imagine being able to make statistics a fascinating subject. What a gift to the world.

[@rosemars8]

No, I didn't click on this video because of the title. I'll click on any video which is from this channel. That's how good this channel is.

[@FerShibli]

I love when there's a new Cool Worlds video! Because your speech tune is amazingly calm and optimistic! It's so easy to learn a lot from you (:

[@FadingFire]

I really love your channel but it’s a double edge sword watching your content. You present things in such a great and enjoyable way makes it hard for me to enjoy other space related channels.

[@Jm-wt1fs]

Facts

[@haroldnecmann7040]

Better than Mr beast channel

[@jrodowens]

@@haroldnecmann7040 Those guys that build those phoney water slides in the southeast asian jungle have a better channel than Mr. Beast...

[@NickPolak]

this is simply the best

[@bruceneeley1724]

I click on Cool Worlds because it's information & science that is thoughtful & reliable. I look forward to the podcast!! Have a great New Year...

[@dmsoundcollective6746]

i swear David .. you are so darn good at taking complicated subjects and explaining them in a way that is so easy to understand. I love what your doing man. Thanks you soooooo much !

[@FrankMurphy-xb1oe]

I regularly watch all of your videos, Professor Kipping. Don't stop!

[@rockjockchick]

This was really good. Thank you for the clear explanations and straightforward assessment.

[@yahccs1]

A new Cool Worlds video is always click-bait without having to be designed as click-bait! Always well-thought out, thought-provoking and very well illusatrated. Thank you. Looking forward to hearing about more discoveries of the universe and better explanations of why it is and why it appears the way it does! And of course any progress in exoplanet/exomoon research!!

[@andrewtackett7571]

Love your channel. Your narration on these exciting topics make for some awesome vids. Please just keep doing what you’re doing!

[@Jm-wt1fs]

You’re the fucking best dude thank you for putting out the best videos that are always firmly based on the principles of science and healthy skepticism. I love how you refuse to speculate without explicitly stating that you’re speculating and are okay with being unsure or agnostic about the answers to these grand questions

[@mikehopkins4040]

Why swear?

[@Jm-wt1fs]

@@mikehopkins4040 idk bc swearing is fucking lit dude. Really helps to drive home points of emphasis, especially when we only have text on screens to communicate with. And this channel deserves to be told emphatically how fucking good it is

[@davidparker4732]

David, your videos are remarkable. Your narrative inspires me to listen carefully, keeping a google window open to search up unfamiliar terms. It feels as though you are teaching a master course in astronomy. Encourages me to expand my understanding in this area. Brilliant!

[@axeman2638]

what's remarkable is the he can swallow this nonsense and think it's real

[@JRWhite]

I found your channel and I love it! Your voice is very soothing and seem to make subjects more understandable. As a lay person with no specialized training in your topics, your channel is very enjoyable and insightful. Thank you!

[@arannak3826]

Thanks for binging the facts without any clickbaits. I love your narration and calm explanation. Looking forward to learn more from you.

[@SMELLGOODER]

Always a fascinating day when THIS channel uploads!! 😎

[@peecon7]

I love when a new video notification from your channel shows up

[@joedaodragon3565]

Very impressive presentation. You have great explanations and rhetorical devices. I like the metaphors. Great story. Good visuals. Great production all around and love the topic. Finally, I love the lack of hype. Very measured. Just the right amount of restraint to keep it fun and interesting without drying out the topic nor going full on silly. liked. Subscribed. i am looking forward to your other pieces. thanks!

[@matthewghilarducci5033]

Dr. Kipling I wanted to take the time to tell you how much I love your videos and respect your insightful analysis. You and Sabine are my favorite science KZbin channels precisely because of your relaxed, non inflammatory insights.

[@xyzain_1827]

Thanks, this was the most comprehensive explanation of the crisis that I could actually understand!

[@Hunter-wl1dc]

Thank you for taking a minute to try and reinforce critical thinking and rational thought at the end of your video. The US needs it more than ever. Keep up the great work I love your videos even if some of them go over my head!

[@richardleetbluesharmonicac7192]

It’s called objectivity. In quantum physics objectivity is always right. Guaranteed after life. Subjectivity is always wrong. No after life.

[@Jm-wt1fs]

@@richardleetbluesharmonicac7192 subjectively isn’t really always wrong, it just by definition doesn’t have a right or wrong answer outside of the individual observer. Which I guess is sort of what you’re getting at, but I wouldn’t call it “wrong”

[@raulhasbani]

Still best channel on KZbin. You give meaning to life for so many, thank you, Dr. Kipping!

[@grumpypurplesloth7950]

Sober, well explained without sensationalism, detailed and enjoyable to listen to - even for a novice like myself. Cannot thank you enough for explaining this term and why I have heard it repeated constantly. Beyond happy that I clicked on this. Thank you.

[@jimmarshall1936]

I can only speak for myself but I don't click on coolworlds because of thumbnails. I click on coolworlds because I love science and space. Dr Kipping you're an amazing scientist and great at explaining to those of us who are not astrophysicist's. Thank you for sharing your universe with us! 🙏🏻

[@TeaRexInACup]

Thanks to you and the entire team, I’m in love with this channel. Although my profession has nothing to do with cosmology, I’ve always been fascinated with it and understanding what’s around us, and having this channel with its clear and digestible information in my arsenal of channels is amazing. Here’s to hoping for many more progresses in the years to come 🎉🎉

[@Tigs2]

Dr Kipping, of all the people I can think of that I would love to sit down with by a fire on a winters night with a good bottle of wine and time to talk ( or an afternoon in a British country pub) its you. A fan since your channel started, 62 yo retired combat pilot. Thank you for the message you deliver.

[@antmancan6408]

The quality of these videos is phenomenal. We are so lucky a scientist of Kipling's calibre has taken the time to reach out and teach us.

[@pirandello6968]

My goodness, this guy explains it in a way that a totally d.u.m.b person regarding that matter like myself can actually understand it clearly. No BS, just clear and precise explanation, with such usefull illustrations. Thank you so much!

[@veniqer]

A totally "d.u.m.b" person wouldn't watch this type of content 🙈❣️

[@ferociousmaliciousghost]

There are never any dumb people. There are only those who are willing to learn and those who aren't

[@johnnyboy1586]

I know I'm not dumb ,but where I get a bit lost are when certain scientific term are quoted that I have no idea what it means but I do get a little of what the overall talk is about

[@ironhorse492]

I had seen a few KZbin thumbnails on this topic, but didn't trust that they wouldn't be cluckbaity. When I saw you covering this topic I knew I would get a well considered, well thought out analysis. Keep up the great work!

[@R.o.Ro.]

Thank you for the sober analysis. Having read the SHOES paper earlier this year, I'm thankful for the way you put everything in perspective for everyone.

[@markusmencke8059]

I heard about this method. A wonderful result - to start resolving the issue sometime in the future. We are not there yet, but… “interesting times”, but in a positive way. Thank you for the explanation. 🙂

[@modalmixture]

The idea that there is a path dependency around which hypotheses are accepted/rejected is really fascinating to think about. And the implication that Cepheids aren’t actually very good standard candles, they’re just the first ones we figured out how to use, means we’ll have to re-write the astronomy textbooks.

[@kennethferland5579]

That's another way of saying confirmation bias, which is a HUGE issue in cosmology, were only even asking these questions because of a 'tension', if erroneous methods give us the expected result they don't get questioned, worse we then build new expectations on thouse faulty conclusions which go on to influence the next observations.

[@revwrite]

@@kennethferland5579 Agreed - especially on a basis of high variability within a base measurement standard. Reasons being due to environment local compositions, color shift, or distortions along with the object being measured having possible variation in it's frequency or possible brightness itself. Could absolutely see how confirmation bias appearing since data tracks on a perceived line or pattern. High variability should always be a red flag & propose further data to ensure viability of the standard itself.

[@MichaelJohnson-uo3ef]

Well I mean that’s how the state of gravity is now. In relativity the classic ball and paper explanation works but at the quantum level it doesn’t which means gravitational forces are something deeper or we got something wrong with relativity but it’s close enough to still make that model work. The amazing thing in science is we’re always so focused on pushing forward that we often forget to recheck our work over time to make sure it still holds up to current models.

[@michaelsenn68]

This was the most understandable explanation of the distance ladder I've ever encountered. It's like everything clicked for me finally. Kudos for presenting it in a way that non-astronomers can understand the evolving processes and their refinement. It's amazing we got as much knowledge from Cepheids as we did, and it's exciting to have a new, more reliable standard candle going forward. Absolutely astounding work. Next, I'm hoping someone can bring some new insight into the "Axis of Evil," as it's one of my favorite mysteries. Is it a coincidence? Is it evidence of the observer phenomenon and retro causality as human eyes scan the skies from Earth? Can't wait to learn more.

[@sgvincent100]

Same! A simple rubber band with marks drawn on it with a sharpie. This did more for my understanding than any visualization yet. And the description and visualization of parallax as well! Thank you thank you thank you! 🫡✌🏼✨

[@juliam7056]

It's amazing the clarity with which you explain complicated subjects . Thank you so much.

[@ianminto6315]

What an incredibly well produced video. Loved the ease with which I could understand this thanks to your breakdown. Subbed for life.

[@benjaminbeard3736]

Your channel has recalibrated the way I think about nearly everything. Thanks

[@martynkentfrancis]

As always we can rely on Cool Worlds to put aside the hyperbole and click bait chasing trends of our current era, to enlighten us in a non sensationalist, and as a result, a far more interesting search to discover the true nature of the universe around us! Thank you

[@hunterbidenparmesanimports5633]

Love your channel, not everyone can explain things in a way us normies can understand it , you do it well so thank you

[@rorykeegan1895]

Good lad, excellent video. Happy holidays and thanks for doing all this, its appreciated.

[@VictorMTaveras]

Thanks for this explanation. As an outsider looking in I always thought the distance ladder had more "points of failure" so I would have bet that the issue was on that side

[@tonytaskforce3465]

That's not so bad. Just a boffin-squabble over very small numbers: the Universe may be slightly bigger or smaller than we thought it was. That stuff about dust and Cephids was news to me though, and the new measurements using big old stars sound very promising. Thanks for clearing this up for us, Professor. 🤓

[@Kayfear]

The only thing that makes me really sad because of me dying someday, is that I will not be able to learn about all new discoveries in cosmology, physics. I wonder what our view on the world, Universe will be in hundred years. I'm not a scientist like you, professor, but astronomy, cosmology always captivated me and you are doing FANTASTIC job in making me (and millions of people around the world) to be able to learn new things. Thank you so much.

[@encyclopath]

Would it be more or less depressing to know that we may never be able to understand these things?

[@Kayfear]

@@encyclopath probably! But that is entirely different field going to philosophy. I believe that there is eventually some sort of barrier beyond which we will not be able to understand things. For me it is why current collection of atoms and molecules that form my body is able to recognize it and think about it. I think this ultimate question is unanswereable.

[@DeathValleyDazed]

The reason presented here is suspect if the Big Bang, black holes, and dark matter are erroneous. Time will tell eventually.

[@atiqrahman7289]

Yes, we mortals will eventually die ----- and will not be able to determine the ultimate in our existence of this COSMOS.

[@literallybiras]

Your style of making videos is so inspirational and unique, makes me wanna learn about the universe, only felt that with Sagan

[@Boomer08888]

Love this channel and videos, thank you for making them!

[@KingsMom831]

Thanks for the video!

[@nawtmyrealnamelol]

Thank you so much for staying away from the sensationalism and instead presenting reasonable scientific discussions. I love this channel!

[@jasonlines1358]

Professor, as always, your content is informing, clear, non-sensational, and accessible for your average person - how lucky are we to have such regular access to great scientists as yourself instead of clickbait nonsense.

[@doubtingthomas2157]

Thank you for these eloquent and digestible video essays. I have always wondered if the Hubble Tension was caused by a missed compensation for the higher gravity field of the early universe, but your video also brings into question the leaner metallicity of the earlier universe as another contributing error.

[@valerienoyes1756]

Another brilliant talk by Dr Kipping. I wish I'd have had such gifted science teachers while in school.

[@baivulcho]

You definitely gave me the answer I want to hear. A sober and straightforward analysis is what to me seems like the most appropriate and valuable approach, so thank you for that.

[@dementedfairy7373]

i have a b.s. in astronomy and it's always nice to find a channel that balances the technical and mathematical side of astronomy with the cool and exciting side that invokes curiosity in all of us

[@zwanz0r]

I clicked on this video, not for the tagline, instead, i clicked because it came from the cool worlds lab. Keep up the great work!

[@PeloquinDavid]

Thanks for this. I had assumed the "crisis" might end up being due to a mere measurement error, but your explanation helps show just how much the jury is still out on getting a proper corroborating (or definitively refuting) measurement. It's downright irritating that the new approach falls right between the two others, forcing us to continue refining our measurement tools for a while - just to find out if there really is a "crisis" requiring a rethink...

[@Timbo6669]

I still think that you’re right; as in the error might be in the measurement process and not with the standard model. Although with the _super inflation_ band-aid[sic] I am starting to question it as well.

[@ravenlord4]

I love it when a scientist has the courage and integrity to say "we just don't know, but we're still working on it".

[@Sniperboy5551]

This channel always provides the coolest stories, I love falling asleep pondering our existence here on Earth and the bizarre nature of our Universe. Stuff like this always gives me some amazing dreams, especially when narrated by this channel because his voice is just so relaxing.

[@kayinoue2497]

I cannot wait for that podcast episode! The Hubble Tension is definitely one of the things at the forefront of my mind. I definitely have to chuckle at the mention of issues in zeroing in on the metalicity of Cepheid variable stars considering even in doing surveys of galactic halo stars we're still struggling to find best fit models for metal content, luminosity, mass and age. We're getting better though! Honestly that's become a mental paper cut and thankfully there's a bunch of great papers recently on the subject that may help us to reevaluate that rung of the distance ladder. More science is always exciting.

[@sailingEV888]

The idea of the universe having a begining is a human contruct. It's like teaching a dog mathematics. It can't be done in time scales we think in.. The human brain is just wired to think of things through the lens of a begining and end.. There is no begining or end. The universe has always been here. Evolving on a globe means if you walk in one direction you always end up where you started (sortof) but you get the point it's built into our consciousness to think of things in a certain way..

[@wayneoneill5265]

Very good video as I've come to expect. I'd rather have sober reasonable analysis that admits there's more to learn than some clickbaity nonsense that doesn't even attempt to explain what is known so far.

[@yahccs1]

Well explained. I saw a similar one from Dr. Becky recently and thought this one would have more detail, and it did, thanks. My first thought was those error bars have probably been underestimated because every stage of the calculation has errors and they accumulate. Also glad you mentioned that Cepheids brightness depends on colour. It was not explained whether the standard luminosity is at the brightest or dimmest point in its cycle, or the difference between them, and whether it refers to visible or bolometric magnitude/luminosity. When I watched Dr Becky's video I also wondered about interstellar dust and gas that might be making some cepheids look dimmer than they are. Anyway I hope the parallax and other methods are improved to reduce error bars in distances to all sorts of objects. Judging parallax by eye is very inaccurate. We have a tower in town and I noticed the differing angle it appears at from two rooms in the house and wondered if I could calculate its distance, thinking probably about 1km, getting somewhere between 500m and 1500m away, if my angle measurement is to the nearest degree, that could make a huge difference in distance estimates. Maybe I narrowed it down to between 695 and 830m away being as accurate as I could, using a better method was by estimating the height of the tower from the number of storeys assuming the spacing between them was 2.5m so seeing what angle 10 storeys makes if that's 25m perhaps or between 22 and 25m?. Anyway my best calculation was fairly accurate between 750 and 800m away. On the map it's about 780m so I think that's good enough. (Also judging the distance to a chimney on a nearby house by how it moved relative to the tower, but that's measuring one parallax against another!) I just imagine how difficult parallax is to measure to arcseconds and fractions of arcseconds, but if there are distant enough objects like galaxies in view, and the size of the image in arcseconds is known accurately enough I can see how they can work out parallax for stars against the 'fixed' background of galaxies. If there are no background objects they are measuring all different parallaxes at once with nothing fixed to measure them against, I don't know how they work it out then. Everything's relative!

[@guard13007]

I've heard this talked about SO MUCH without anyone going into the details of why there might be errors in calculations. Thank you so much. I've been wanting to know why this discrepancy has shown up but all media sources are focused on the "hype" of physics is broken or physicists don't know what's going on rather than explain .. actually we're pretty sure we know what's going wrong and have to just take more measurements and refine our methods.

[@mistermoog]

So well written. I absolutely love The Sky at Night on the BBC, but the ideas explored and explained so well here (and PBS Spactime, Dr. Becky, and Anton Petrov) are so much more engaging and rewarding for me. Not to mention challenging. I’m holding on with my fingernails many times!

[@TuNguyen-vu1cg]

You forgot Launch Pad Astronomy man

[@anubhavkumarc]

It's so disappointing that James Webb didn't shoot the death rays at Proxima B's civilisation. I was hoping for some galactic war action. Jokes aside, it's honestly amazing new discoveries and breakthroughs like this are letting us understand our universe better, thanks for explaining this in simple terms for us common folk.

[@Gary-Seven-and-Isis-in-1968]

Thrilled as always top see the arrival of another Cool Worlds upload. Something to escape with and think about in distraction from everyday life.

[@aimeedomal6455]

Where were you when I was in college? At least this way, I get to enjoy learning without the stress of exams. Thank you, and I look forward to your next presentation.

[@KingBritish]

Notification gang 🤙

[@skaaaal]

please clarify

[@xploration1437]

Butter?

[@7ofspades7]

He says 2 seconds into a 25 minute video

[@skaaaal]

@@xploration1437 Onions

[@NickPolak]

this has to be my favorite channel about space, please keep on making this vids

[@100oje]

Wow !! Everything comes out so much clearer. Well done on explaining so much more clearly.

[@ChrisBrengel]

Thanks very much for the video! You explained the material very well. I have always thought the ladder of distances was a bit of a house of cards. I can't wait for the results of the James Webb space telescope!

[@longlostkryptonian5797]

Excellent job of explaining in clear terms a somewhat complex conundrum. 👍

[@KevinMurphy0403]

Excellent video in easy to understand language, thank you. Keep up the amazing work!

[@Mystikan]

What an insightful and articulate examination of a fascinating problem. I've known about the parallax method, Leavitt's Law, Type 1a supernovae, and the galactic redshift since high school in the early 80s. I've also known about the asymptotic giant branch, but I would never have made the connection that the masses and brightness of stars at the point of the helium flash actually have a common denominator, or that this could be used as a standard candle. My knowledge of the universe since childhood has been expanded today. Subbed.

[@jerlee620]

Just want to thank you for sparing us the clickbait, as you point out, and still being interesting. The ‘sober analysis’ is greatly appreciated. That’s Cool.

[@awuma]

Excellent review! And getting Wendy Freedman on really adds to the substance of this video. As a graduate student at the University of Toronto forty years ago, she was part of a small group which pioneered infrared observation of Cepheids, thereby greatly reducing errors due to dust and temperature variations when observing in the visible. That set her on her life's work.

[@psychachu]

Thank you. I really enjoy learning about space with you. Top video, mate.

[@tarmstrong9906]

Great video 😊. Astronomy is much harder when you guys explain and get into pacifics, I like those challenges. Thank you for sharing this video.

[@mmerritt521]

Great video, well explained and thought provoking! Thanks so much for producing this!

[@n8style]

Love your videos! Seriously underrated channel

[@universemaps]

Great and informative video!! Thanks for using our universe depiction at 8:16 Glad it's useful! Keep it up! ✌️✨

[@DangerDan]

Fantastic content and thank you for being honest and not too click baity. Cheers, Dan😊

[@jasnarmstrng]

A grounded and excellent presentation of a too often sensationalized subject. Thanks.

[@nickarbanas9361]

I love how your videos only speak in terms of numbers and science, not the typical fallacious argument for different hot buttons about cosmology and science, i feel like i can actually reference your videos and papers bc they are truly researched and vetted for validation

[@greenercreations9772]

I clicked on this precisely because it was less click-baity and sensationalist.. and was appropriately rewarded. Thanks for being straight with us!

[@munkyheed]

I have no idea how I understood such a complex topic (for me)... but I did. Well explained, sir. Great analysis.