Frank Wilczek - How Did Matter Form in the Early Universe?

[@johnlewis5330]

6:32 Man is strangled by the Invisible Man! Fascinating

[@timfahey7127]

Frank is a pleasure to watch. He seems so happy to be talking to us. Thank you!!! Also...is Frank not the "cutest" thing you've seen in a while? Ha.

[@gr33nDestiny]

I’m trying to think of ways this can be represented with fractal like diagrams, is it possible

[@anxious_robot]

Why was there the asymmetry in the beginning?

[@longcastle4863]

A few antimatter particles were held back as hostages?

[@mikehoman7351]

They just didn't want to call it magic

[@johnzientek735]

Standard model is an incorrect explanation that happens to work a lot of the time.

[@fluentpiffle]

Matter is formed from the wave motions of infinite space. There is no such thing as an 'early universe'.. spaceandmotion

[@mikehoman7351]

Sabine hossenfelder referred to that as a Provisional Theory - Seems to mean a theory that doesn't reflect knowledge of actual structure

[@fred_2021]

We are told - by those who actually make use of it - that it's supremely effective at proving to be correct. At the same time, it's now known to be slightly less correct. Which is a bit of pig - I paid good money for my wall chart :)

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

(1:00) *FW: **_"Now, that was five against four; the reality is more like a billion and one against a billion."_* ... Interesting how Existence, from the very start, tossed out a superfluous amount of matter and antimatter to discover what can survive the battle. Then Existence tosses out a superfluous amount of planets to discover how many will end up supporting life or end up desolate. Then Existence tosses out a superfluous amount of sentience on the small number of these life-friendly planets to discover which types of life can survive. Then Existence takes the most advanced, yet highly contentious species on one of these planets and tosses out eight billion more of them to see how many can survive. As we continue to internally divide our species into two opposing factions, humanity will inevitably recreate the battle that took place during the quark epoch. ... _How ironic!_

[@danielogwara3984]

I find this comment quite interesting! Thank you.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@danielogwara3984 Thank you!

[@michaelspears4488]

What a foolish statement, The God of the Bible is the only logical answer to creation.

[@spacesciencelab]

Interesting!!!

[@5tyyu]

@@michaelspears4488 i think Bible God is for earth only..in saturn, pluto, andromedia etc. there is r different Gods

[@ZahraLowzley]

I really wish there was more to "anti" than the human fanatical assignment of arbitrary dichotomies, what do you think that mechanisms looks like? Oh right neural habitation eradicated the need for intermediation . There's 4 types of mechanism , none are "opposites" , only two components, that's it. Is this just habituation? Or stand-up routine?

[@noelwass4738]

This is a wonderful short discussion, and it does explain why the universe for the most part consists of quarks rather than antiquarks and matter rather than antimatter. It does solve that particular problem. There are still lots of questions. Before the quarks and antiquarks annihilated each other why were the quarks and antiquarks together there in the first place in this hot dense state? That I don't believe we have an answer to. What happened to the resulting energy released? How did the early universe come to have a very rapid stage of expansion?

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Could something happen to anti-quarks and equations that are not observed, such as a different dimension or process?

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Unbeliveble Frank. How him believes quarks are in begining universal? Cern are showing it up so far. However in Frank minds it are true evidence . Problems are Frank Not proof it though honest model phich. In this way frank are liar.

[@markstipulkoski1389]

At the big bang, the matter heading in the negative time direction is antimatter. At the big bang, time and space were created. Our 3 spatial dimensions have both positive and negative directions, up/down, left/right, forward/backward. Symmetry demands that the time dimension does also. Physicist Julian Barbour discusses this on CTT and he calls events like the bing bang "Janus Points."

[@projectmalus]

like magnetic poles flipping?

[@alpetterson9452]

It'd be far more interesting to discuss how something came from nothing. Where did energy come from.

[@Alwaysdoubt100]

Must be because "nothing" doesn't exist, it is a physical impossibility. The question should be "how something came from something" and that easy to answer.

[@fatmaramadan6928]

Al Peterson+ The only people that believe something came from nothing are theists. Their explanation, an all powerful, perfect magic god that always existed in no space and no time. That decided it's perfect existence was missing something.

[@rosieokelly]

​@@fatmaramadan6928well the scientists stumble at quantum mechanics and measuring particles that cant be measured because of heisenberg. Checkmate

[@ConnoisseurOfExistence]

Matter/antimatter imbalance has been observed experimentally? I thought it's an open question where is the antimatter..

[@Nissan370_z]

their are many universe's and from what iv learned from near death experience videos is that their was never a point in witch everything started universe always been here their is no start time or stop. never ending and tineless

[@rajendratayya8400]

Matter in the early universe did not form incrementally over a course of time. It is spontaneous phenomenon and equally well be created all at once.

[@miguelito2860]

What a bunch of gibberish

[@Kong3287]

Rajendra Tayya ...can you provide any citation, theory, thesis or any experiment to prove your statement......pls back ur statement with evidence and proof .. 😂😂

[@fred_2021]

Rajendra Tayya - Oh wow! Maybe you're just having a bad day.

[@waldwassermann]

Matter is not an emergent property of the early universe. The universe and matter are one and the same in reality.

[@davietnamese]

Agree, and as the saying goes, "Nothing is created or lost, everything only transforms." In other words, for matter to emerges, it must be "created" out of other materials. You can't created something out of nothing, without a material of some kind. So, to me, all the matter was always there but not necessarily in the same composition at the same time.

[@waldwassermann]

@@davietnamese Absolutely correct. Very impressed with your knowledge. Blessings.

[@fred_2021]

@@davietnamese Yes, conservation of energy and all that. So erm...where does all the extra space come from, in the accelerating expansion? And isn't that extra space full of virtual particles and fields?

[@davietnamese]

@@fred_2021 First, let’s define "empty" space. I don’t know what your definition of empty space is, and I don’t have a clear opinion about mine. I would rather say that empty space is a complete void that has no matter of any kind. Because, if space is made of actual matter, what you call virtual particles, then what is the outside of the universe made of, if there is no such thing as empty space? It has to either be completely empty so that the universe has room to expand into, or it is made of virtual particles too. But if it’s made of particles too, then it’s just the extension and the normal continuation of the universe. On the same note, if space, time and the universe are one and the same thing, how could the big bang even explode, if space didn’t exist prior to the universe? There would be no room for the explosion to occur, let alone the expansion. But if space is inherent to the universe, then what should we call the space prior to its expansion? Complete void? That being said, even if you look at particles, like an electron, it rotates around a core, but there is an actual void that is defined by the distance between them. And so, if you apply that to the expanding universe, then it’s just the distance in between all the objects that increases, and not new matter being created in order to give birth to new "space".

[@fred_2021]

@@davietnamese That's all quite interesting. My understanding on one or two points differs from yours. Bohr's 1915 model of the atom was so intuitively simple, but failed to survive the advent of quantum mechanics. Since then, it seems that fields have become the fundamental basis of everything. It's unfortunate that we can't chat about this in a bar or something. These impersonal text comments aren't conducive to extended conversation. While there's no way to deeply understand today's physics without years of formal study and a very good grounding in math's - and the requisite grey cell potential - it's fun to talk about :)

[@ronaldkemp3952]

If particles are constantly emerging everywhere throughout space in the universe then that's where matter comes from. E=mc² ~ m=E/c². Matter emerges when energy comes to a halt relative to the speed of light². Matter at rest is equal to Energy times the speed of light². When energy radiating from stars or radioactive planets comes to a halt particles pop into existence. This is called pair production theory. In order for energy to come to a halt it has to strike something. So when energy strikes something the energy converts into matter. This occurs throughout the universe it's no wonder the expansion of space is so slow between galaxies but reaches faster than the speed of light at great distances.

[@dave1370]

Talk about a religion 🤦‍♂️

[@3rdrock]

Great explanation. Judging by the comments section, the god botherers seem to love watching this kind of stuff. Are they attracted by the possibility of a credible explanation for existence or is it just a baiting ground for atheists?

[@fred_2021]

Some of them probably have a hard time carrying the weight of religious BS on their backs - here, they can let off steam at criminally burden-free infidels.

[@haroonaverroes6537]

it is impossible to make any real scientific progress without deeper understanding of the basics, it seems simple equations that is why they go further but that is not true at all, still a lot of work to do before going forward "needs solid base before being able to make any real scientific progress". they do not understand: space, time, gravity, speed, .....

[@ALtheDoctorWho]

Spin somewhere in here c];-)

[@JungleJargon]

Anti matter is probably on its way here.

[@LuciFeric137]

Clicked on Dr. Wilczek

[@pauldavis5282]

It doesn't matter lol

[@fluentpiffle]

Matter is formed from the wave motions of infinite space. There is no such thing as an 'early universe'.. spaceandmotion

[@codywhite1427]

Space is possibility.

[@fluentpiffle]

@@codywhite1427 Exactly..

[@fred_2021]

@@codywhite1427 Yeah, my spacebar is a bit iffy. Possibly it will work, and possibly it won't.

[@JungleJargon]

It’s this “little bit of matter” that dilating time and space… holding our universe together. 👀😳😁

[@සිංහයෝ-ස2ර]

What is matter exactly we made it we think it’s right but do we know exactly it’s right no still experiment it like time there is no such a thing called time we made it up

[@fred_2021]

I'd like to reply but I don't have time. Never mind, it doesn't matter.

[@sonnycorbi4316]

The right question should be how did consciousness/cognition come into being

[@the_druid0066]

Essentially , It all boils down to 1 & 0 doesn't it

[@fred_2021]

That's a relief - it explains my school grades.

[@FernandoW910]

Wow

[@physicstheoryofmetinaridasir]

Good discussion. I remind Chien Wu's experiment in 1956, the ancestor of asymmetry in physics. According to my theory, there is no matter-antimatter distinction. From greek philosophy 2500 years before EX NIHILO NIHIL FIT, according to me, there is ALWAYS MATTER, before your "big bang", and according to me, there is NO NIHIL. We, subjective reality had been occurred then, that capable of sense occurred.

[@davietnamese]

I don’t know much about physics and everything, but from a purely logical perspective, I don’t understand what physicists are saying. Indeed, how could matters have possibly existed in their current composition at the beginning of the big bang? And by current composition, I mean that they were already composed of quarks, atoms and electrons, at least from what I understood. Because prior to the big bang, all the matter was condensed into a singularity, and so it wouldn’t have been able to fit inside that infinitesimally small dot with their current shape. So, based on the model of the big bang, the only possible explanation I can find is that while matters already existed at the beginning, they however weren't composed or constructed in the same way as the current ones are. Which means all of the quarks, protons, neutrons and electrons were formed after the big bang and therefore, existed after it. But then, the question becomes, how did they form? How did all the remnants of the fragments from the explosion pull back together in order to form matter in their current composition? Because matters by definition are dead and inert, and so they can’t flow or maneuver by themselves to form quarks and all that. And so, the only explanation is either there is an actual Creator to manipulate all the matter in order to give it its composition, or there are laws that caused that to happen. But even if we look at the laws, such laws not only must have already existed, but mostly, they had to be external to the big bang and the universe. In other words, they control the operation of the universe, but their existence is completely separated. Then, another question arises, who created all of the laws? Because laws by nature don’t possess any consciousness, intentions or free will to make choices and decisions by their own, but rather obey the ones of the laws maker by operating within a certain framework. And for all the remnant fragments to pull back together in order to constitute quarks, atoms and electrons without something manipulating and maneuvering them in that direction or state is just impossible.

[@waldwassermann]

Most excellent. You are very very close...

[@Healing556]

He talks unsure..😂

[@fred_2021]

I think he's treading carefully. If a scientist who thinks he knows all the answers and has stopped questioning, then he's no longer a scientist :)

[@Healing556]

@@fred_2021 not careful, he is just not so sure.

[@longcastle4863]

So the idea that Inflation blew some of the matter antimatter pairs so far apart they became out of reach of each other doesn't work? So that, for example, if we are a matter universe, that an antimatter universe might also exist? Or that there might be pockets of seperate matter and antimatter "universes" dotted throughout the one big Universe?

[@danielogwara3984]

I think the first line of this comment is more probable. That there may be an anti matter universe exactly opposite to this matter universe we exist in. I imagine time and everything else in such a universe to work backwards compared to how they work in our universe.

[@markstipulkoski1389]

@@danielogwara3984 That was my comment. Richard Feynman has stated that positrons, aka anti-electrons, can be interpreted as electrons moving backwards in time. The antimatter universe would behave just like ours to its antimatter inhabitants. They are heading away from the same big bang as ours. It blows my mind, with all their discussion of symmetry, they don't consider the negative time direction. Spatial dimensions have both a positive and negative direction, so why wouldn't you expect the time dimension to be the same? And Wilczak, on a previous episode, incorporates retrocausality into a hypothesis about the future creating its past. So why he doesn't consider the possibility that the missing antimatter headed in the other time direction at the big bang baffles me.

[@Boogieplex]

The more i study the universe, the more im convinced there might be a process of “cosmic natural selection” happening,and our universe is the way it is over aeons of evolution from immeasurable numbers of previous universes. *Edit- For more on this theory watch the Lex Fridman’s podcast on KZbin with jeffery Shainline, or look up Lee Smolin’s cosmic natural selection. Thanks

[@20july1944]

Why would you think that?

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@20july1944 *"Why would you think that?"* ... Because he's right (except for the "previous universes" part).

[@ingvarhallstrom2306]

There must have been an eternity of previous iterations of the universe, otherwise the goldilock's state doesn't make sense. But it isn't a mystery if there had been countless examples of universes that didn't work out and that weren't goldilock scenarios. We just happen to find it extraordinary because this particular universe happens to be the one that we live in. I also think there has to be some kind of positive feedback loop, saving information between transitions, perhaps some sort of steady state field or brane.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@ingvarhallstrom2306 *"There must have been an eternity of previous iterations of the universe, otherwise the goldilock's state doesn't make sense."* ... There is no mandate or necessity for any previous universe(s). Arguing that previous universes existed invokes infinite regression and special pleading. *"We just happen to find it extraordinary because this particular universe happens to be the one that we live in"* ... And this single universe happens to be the only universe known to exist. Not because it's "extraordinary," but because it's the only universe known to exist. Simply show proof of a previous universe and you'll be golden. Until that day comes, Ockham's razor rules! *" also think there has to be some kind of positive feedback loop, saving information between transitions, perhaps some sort of steady state field or brane."* ... I DO agree that all information produced within the universe is permanently stored, but do not agree that multiple universe are in play nor are even required to extract a satisfactory amount of data.

[@20july1944]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC If you agree with him that there must be a process of "cosmic natural selection", what would universes be selected for?

[@JungleJargon]

Matter forming requires energy that cannot make or order itself.

[@20july1944]

I didn't know you visited this channel -- good on you!

[@JungleJargon]

@@20july1944 They actually have a lot of good discussions on this channel. 👍

[@kos-mos1127]

Energy is a property of matter that we perceive as mass.

[@JungleJargon]

@@kos-mos1127 The mass of matter is what dilates limited measurable time and distance.

[@fred_2021]

So, I have no energy because I'm putting on weight, right?

[@michaelspears4488]

This man is not rational. The God of the Bible created all things out of nothing. The fool says in his heart there is no God.

[@kos-mos1127]

There is no God. God is a man made concept created to give man comfort in an indifferent world.

[@michaelspears4488]

@@kos-mos1127 You know there is a God you deny Him. Wake up

[@kos-mos1127]

@@michaelspears4488 Wake up God was invented by man to provide comfort during life's difficulties. He is no more real than the Tooth Fairy or Santa Clause.

[@WrinkleRelease]

@@michaelspears4488 🤣 Great proselytizing there, buckaroo. Keep it up. Keep it right up.

[@fatmaramadan6928]

@@michaelspears4488 The fool says in his heart there is a god. Unfortunately the fool can present no evidence for his claim.

[@danielogwara3984]

Why is it a big surprise that complex numbers are real and they do exist, which is what caused or equals to the asymmetry being discussed here as the reason why matter was formed? If there are positive numbers, negative number, positive and negative imaginary numbers, then there naturally will be complex numbers, which is a combination of all or some of these numbers.

[@johnnyreggae969]

There’s is no such thing as numbers there is only patterns

[@danielogwara3984]

@@johnnyreggae969 if there are waves then there are frequencies, if there are frequencies then there are numbers.

[@johnnyreggae969]

@@danielogwara3984 Sorry my friend, we humans are trying to make sense of everything and maths fits neatly over the patterns we see it can predict the relationship between fields but when we try to find out what’s behind the patterns numbers will not help

[@danielogwara3984]

@@johnnyreggae969 Waves are behind the pattern, the patterns and the numbers they communicate are one and the same things. Sine and Cosine waves are what generates the patterns. Minds/Souls are the containers of these Sine and Cosine waves. How could they exist? They can exist because their net value = 0. Nothing can create it or annihilate it.

[@johnnyreggae969]

@@danielogwara3984 Mathematics is an invention by man to explore patterns and try to understand how they behave, But it has limits ! If we are going to attempt an explanation of the structure behind the waves it’s going to take a great leap in logical thinking , maybe we are never going to be able to crack that puzzle

[@S3RAVA3LM]

Space is the negative image of magnetism if I recall correctly, matter is high density light which hydrogen likely arises into the equation which is the quantum of mayerial, light is a sound wave in the Aether, and the Aether is electromagnetism and all the purturbations are the modalities which is the Aether itself; now matter comes into the picture but is formless and unlimited, what brings form to matter is the Soul which has in it the forms from the higher intelligible realities -- in other words, a mirror receives the form of a person, but it is not the mirror that caused the form , and the form in the mirror is not properly the form itself, but only an image of it. Now matter is the receptacle of the form the Soul brings to it, like a mirror, only holding or retention the image but is not the actual form. I have no clue what the man in the video is going on about, I do however like baloney with my eggs, so thank you.

[@dare-er7sw]

Haha

[@nicholash8021]

So a rock is the receptacle of... ?

[@S3RAVA3LM]

@@nicholash8021 of a form that is less than a plant, animal and human. The form of the rock is of only one element, and take only that shape in that element, where's a human body is biological and consists of the 4 elements and the being that is in human is rational,opposed to an animal, therefor capable of the Intellect.

[@WrinkleRelease]

Amen.

[@juliuscaesar3346]

💚💚👍👍

[@20july1944]

Despite my deep appreciation of both of their intellectually honesty, unlike some of the guests on this show, I don't think this gets us much "closer to truth" because Wilczek and Kuhn start with an UNEXPLAINED and UNSTABLE singularity of various kinds of energy, some of which "cooled" into matter while the rest remained energy.

[@maxwellsimoes238]

He concept concern quarks are far away from honest concept in phich because he speculation are baseless falacies. Honestly he are so nerd arrogant

[@5tyyu]

Wtf is a quark? Wht is anti matter? Can smone explain?

[@mhughes1160]

Biggest bunch of nonsense I’ve ever heard . LoL 🤣😂🤣😂

[@20july1944]

What part is nonsense?

[@WrinkleRelease]

@@20july1944 scientist: “Well, we don’t really know much more than what our mathematic, theoretical models tell us.” @MHughes: “Nonsense! Pure nonsense!”

[@fred_2021]

I guess you never went to Sunday School

[@mhughes1160]

@@fred_2021 God created with a plan and purpose. vs 13.5 billion years ago there was nothing and it blew up and you crawled out of the goo , a big cosmic accident A fool says in his heart there is no God

[@fred_2021]

@@mhughes1160 OK, but don't let it spoil your day.

[@junevandermark952]

If, as Stephen Hawking believed, that the universe always existed, maybe matter also always existed.

[@Pyriold]

In the beginning it was all energy, for matter to exist the temperature first had to go down, which happened when the universe expanded.

[@junevandermark952]

@@Pyriold If there wasn't any "beginning" to the universe, then energy always existed. Stephen Hawking and the No Boundary Proposal. "I still believe the universe has a beginning in real time, at the big bang. But there's another kind of time, imaginary time, at right angles to real time, in which the universe has no beginning or end." -Stephen Hawking Black Holes and Baby Universes

[@junevandermark952]

@@Pyriold These men of ancient times, agreed with Stephen Hawking's theory ... . From the book … 2000 Years of Disbelief … author … James A. Haugt … “None of the gods has formed the world, nor has any man; it has always been.”-Empedocles (495-435 B.C.E.), Greek philosopher and statesman (Noyes) … “The universe has been made neither by gods nor by men, but it has been, and is, and will be eternally.”-Heraclitus (Noyes) ... “The nature of the universe has by no means been made through divine power, seeing how great are the flaws that mar it”-Lucretius, ibid.

[@Pyriold]

@@junevandermark952 I hope you are aware that there are literally dozens of theories about the time before the big bang, practically every big phyicist has his/her own pet theory. It's all fascinating but so far none of them has good evidence... though some may get that in the future (penroses theory for example).

[@junevandermark952]

@@Pyriold If you don't believe that a god created the universe, or the other theory that the universe always existed ... what is your theory?.

[@සිංහයෝ-ස2ර]

No offence I don’t believe there was a Big Bang I m thinking there was a countless big bangs still in this very moment bangs r happening if there was a bang there is no way andromeda galaxy can collide with us energy from the blast and the force of it should move those objects to the opposite direction just my thoughts 😂😂😂😂😂 dont hate me you aienstiens

[@eternalme6077]

Thank God NO FUCKING COMMERCIAL'S!!! Ican simply enjoy this program without these INANE Interruptions! 🎸

[@B.S...]

A banana is a good source of fiber, vitamins and positrons, the antimatter counterpart of electrons.

[@fred_2021]

So, erm...think of all the bananas that went to waste in the Big Bang. No wonder we took nearly 14bn yrs to evolve :)

[@B.S...]

@@fred_2021 _“The average banana (rich in potassium) produces a positron roughly once every 75 minutes.”_ - Symmetry magazine. So add a banana to your cornflakes every morning and have a positron day!

[@fred_2021]

@@B.S... But is it safe? Have they tested positronic bananas at CERN? And if they do, maybe it will blow up the world.

[@B.S...]

@@fred_2021 The annihilation of one or two electron/positron pairs will make your day. Trust me, bananas are very popular at the LHC.

[@fred_2021]

@@B.S... Hey, maybe Elon Musk can build a banana rocket.

[@20july1944]

As usual, Bob Kuhn is asking the right question.

[@fluentpiffle]

Not. Matter is formed from the wave motions of infinite space ('energy'). There is no such thing as an 'early universe'.. spaceandmotion

[@20july1944]

@@fluentpiffle what does space consist of, that can have "wave motion"?

[@kos-mos1127]

@@20july1944 Space is the unlimited expanse where everything in the Cosmos has their relative position and time.

[@mikel4879]

This is the perfect example of the fact that the human mind has the capacity to imagine and logically explain even the phantasmagoric imagination that has absolutely nothing to do with real world at all.

[@lukaradojevic7195]

Well,this is what we humans do..it make us feel good...

[@longcastle4863]

Your comment seems to suggest you have some idea what the real world is...?

[@esorse]

A model of the universe apparently based upon Newton's third law : for any action there is an equal but opposite reaction, constitutes a singularity - something which is it's opposite - , violating the law of non-contradiction : nothing is both x and not-x, even though annihilation asymmetry is inconsistent with the third law, implying that the means to an intelligible world for us is God.

[@matterasmachine]

There was no big bang. Red shift is caused by thermal radiation of photon.

[@maxwellsimoes238]

Believes big bang are fallacies is POSSIBLE though speculation. However where are YOU phich evidence concern arent big gang ?

[@matterasmachine]

@@maxwellsimoes238 the only evidence for Big Bang is red shift. Photon consists of matter therefore it should radiate as any matter would. And if it radiates - it looses energy and that explains red shift.

[@holgerjrgensen2166]

The title all ready tells that Mr. Kuhn believes in the 'Big Believe', and as soon as he opens his mouth, he fully confirm this old superstition. Walter Russell, explain the Stuff-side of Life, in a Eternal Perspective.

[@20july1944]

Do you know basic astrophysics/cosmology, Holger?

[@WrinkleRelease]

@@20july1944 he doesn’t know basic English. Go easy on him.

[@statinskill]

Thoth spoke?