How did the Universe form - out of nothing?

[@MOHNAKHAN]

Mathematically, How you say that Gravity act as -ve Energy? Kindly Explain.

[@ArvinAsh]

Great question! Several questions on this below, so I will pin this up top. There are two ways to understand this concept of gravity having negative energy. 1) Since it takes positive energy to separate two massive objects that are gravitationally attracted to each other, gravity must have negative energy to keep them together. 2) Two massive objects that are far apart will be attracted to each other due to gravity. This will increase both of their kinetic energies as they start falling toward each other. Where does all this kinetic energy come from? The law of conservation of energy says that the total energy inside any system must remain the same. Thus, gravitational energy must be negative to offset the increase in positive kinetic energy to keep the total energy of the system zero.

[@johnzachry4355]

Arvin Ash h

[@dinsel9691]

@@ArvinAsh I can't help but think all this play on words like "gravity is negative energy" is a way of saying... see it all equals 0, and therefore NO GOD. OKAYYY?

[@chrisallum9044]

@@dinsel9691 use energy to pull two magnets apart instead of two planets. to hold them apart you have to continuously expend energy. where does that energy go? not identical to gravity but similar enough for an analogy.

[@dinsel9691]

@@chrisallum9044 It is a play on words... there is no such thing as "Negative Energy".. There is no "loss of energy" happening..

[@justinwall5249]

Ok maybe I’m missing something here, but when we’re talking about the universe forming out of nothing, we’re not just talking about the matter forming within the universe’s space. We’re talking about where did even the SPACE come from? The universe is all space, time, matter, and energy all put together. Space is not nothing. Space is something. So how did space form out of (true) nothing?

[@kingsj7662]

Exactly, they literally try to use different words and spin what they are saying when it’s every simple. The theory makes no sense

[@KingLoDaTruth]

Nice

[@kingsj7662]

@@titan_777 the lies make my brain hurt

[@KingLoDaTruth]

@@titan_777 didn’t they says it’s particles in nothing ?

[@Nischal.shetty02]

Ig you can explain the creation of space(as a platform) in the same manner as he said nothing (0)can be made but two opposite or anti platforms(1+(-1)) So it still conserves energy 0=1+(-1) Or maybe us thinking of space as a platform is the wrong assumption maybe matter being created IS itself the space if there is mass then it's affected by time and occupies space. Then again this is all assumptions ig we can keep imagining

[@oldschool7207]

Gravity does not account for ALL the negative energy. That’s why we have politicians.

[@ArvinAsh]

Lol.

[@eugeniag37]

Lol

[@futhark3899]

Brilliant

[@stevenb501]

Lol, you mean dark matter! lol just a joke!

[@ShadowLink-np8rt]

So true though! I love this!

[@TommyReckx]

Here I am, middle of the night asking questions about the existence of life

[@danteowens7260]

Yep same

[@joethekinghawk7514]

It always amazes me how people try to honestly convince themselves and everyone else that everything came from nothing or some infinitesimal dot* went boom 💥💥💥 and allegedly expanded 14 billion years and expanded into nothing. Anything will do other Than God did it. No wonder the bible say they no longer want to retain God in their knowledge (Roman's chapter 1 kjv). Pathetic.

[@joethekinghawk7514]

And the Lord Jesus Christ has answers. (John 14 vs 7 kjv).

[@jscar6238]

@@joethekinghawk7514 that would also bring up the question of where did god come from, I think its all just above humans understanding, idk though.

[@joethekinghawk7514]

@@jscar6238 God is outside time, space, and matter we are trapped inside this continuum , God always existed he superced the laws of the cosmos because he's the author of them.

[@oantseba]

"nothing is something" - aight imma head out

[@christopherestrada2474]

Think about it. If 0 was nothing then the Mayans would have never developed it’s concept. But since they saw value in “nothingness” they developed the concept. Don’t overthink it, just the very FACT that we even speak of “0” and “nothing” tells us that we are talking about “something”. Right?

[@christopherestrada2474]

@@payn9564 I never said it sounds cool. -3,-2,1,0,1,2,3 Just because 0 has a value of zero doesn’t mean it’s not part of a bigger picture. So you can’t be so sure as to say 0+0=0 is the answer and immediately cancel out 0=1000+(-1000). You can’t be so sure it’s not that. Otherwise Algebra would be useless. yet Algebra serves real world functions. Why not 0=1000+(-1000) serve a real world function for our universe? It’s possible.

[@baconcool5834]

*visible confusion*

[@chingchenghanjisuperidol9933]

@@christopherestrada2474 that actually makes a lot of sense

[@HardKore5250]

Like a cloaking device

[@jh3142]

..... But where did the energy come from to start with? 🥴 Honestly, my brain just can't stop asking questions!

[@eddieroyal2020]

Law of conservation of energy : Energy can neither be created nor be destroyed, it can only be transferred from one medium to another.

[@jh3142]

@@eddieroyal2020... So where was it transferred from? 🤔

[@parkerroscoe4665]

@@jh3142 it’s crazy to think about

[@eddieroyal2020]

@@jh3142 The energy always existed in one form or the other. Now there are several forms of energy but the 6 forms of energy that we study in needham are Sound, Chemical, Radiant, Electric, Atomic and Mechanical.

[@jh3142]

@@eddieroyal2020 one theory is that energy was created from nothing. But what if it WAS created from something? Is there a theory that proves that it could not be created from something? It sounds absurd to say that something is just there... just because the alternative theory would be that an external source created it? My brain 🙈🤯

[@ArvinAsh]

One caveat I want to add is that what I am discussing in the video is theoretical. It has not been proven...yet. Also, even if the spontaneous-expansion-from-quantum-fluctuation theory is proven, a big question will still remain: What was the catalyst that caused the fluctuation to result in the Universe? If you have any ideas, please comment below. Also, since I did not explain this in the video very well, here's a quick explanation of "negative energy" from Stephen Hawking, "Two pieces of matter that are close to each other have less [positive] energy than the same two pieces a long way apart, because you have to expend energy to separate them against the gravitational force that is pulling them together."

[@GhostFlashDrew]

research crop circles please kzbin.info/door/u13MNNOLhyRV-YtlYWV4twvideos

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks Andrew. It is on my list.

[@GhostFlashDrew]

Arvin Ash your thumbnail could be 'decoding crop circles' or 'who are the makers of crop circles'. To be honest i want both video's 😊. Take care and thanks

[@ArvinAsh]

Nice...I like "who are the makers of crop circles" -- I remember seeing a British Documentary on this a few years ago. coming soon from me.

[@GhostFlashDrew]

Arvin Ash can't wait for this, plus it is long overdue a 2018 documentary of crop circles, everyone has forgotten about them but the crop circles haven't stopped forming 😎. Also for more views try to get in touch with secureteam10 they have 1.6m subs. They will like this type of video. kzbin.info but don't worry you will have me spamming the comments when this video is out lol. Also you need links Arvin to your other accounts like facebook, twitter and your patreon should be in your description. Something like this, see below instead of the script you write out. Check out my best mate @Dre_xmusic. He is can do it all, check him out. www.rapstarvidz.com/dre-x-aint-lyin/ soundcloud.com/dre_xmusic www.patreon.com/Dre_XMusic/overview instagram.com/dre_xmusic/?hl=en kzbin.info/www/bejne/rmGXiHirZdhjZ5o facebook.com/DRE-X-MUSIC-159138680790296/ twitter.com/Dre_XMusic kzbin.info/door/ssTEMp2Saa0FILtob9rHJQ If you made it this far check out Shireen Valentina =) kzbin.info/door/JK3LR73EgIAojVMKBcqfwQvideos kzbin.info/www/bejne/nWLceZqslNdljNE instagram.com/shireenvalentina/?hl=en twitter.com/svalentinaaaa

[@ays2013boss]

This question keeps me up at night like what was there before the universe and if there was nothing how does that even make sense. It's just so mind bloggling to think think of this. It makes the universe and what we think is reality like magic. Maybe there are possibility possibilities we can't fathom maybe there is after life if we have a universe that was created from nothing then why can't that be true

[@djgroopz4952]

Space and time are products of the universe itself. They were probably created as the universe expanded. So there is no "before the universe" really, or at least as far as we can tell.

[@spookyaction]

this is a great unknown, also blows my mind, i cant even imagine nothing, there shouldn't have been something, on the other hand, there shouldn't have been nothing either...

[@akshay-jr1qz]

@@spookyaction maybe god

[@user-fg6ro]

@@akshay-jr1qz Not maybe, definitely God. The real question is Who is God, and what is our relationship with God?

[@akshay-jr1qz]

@@user-fg6ro god forgot ourself we are left to die here

[@heathersuebranham8061]

Where did it all come from? What made all the empty space for everything to exist?

[@ArvinAsh]

Good questions. This video may help answer some aspects of it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rGmQoKKZrbWqoq8

[@stompthedragon4010]

@@benjaminhon86 so what was before no space? Don' t tell me nothing. Nothing is incomprehensible, and I don' t care about mathmatical equations.

[@bob69927]

@@stompthedragon4010 he won’t respond

[@jakovpralas5696]

It's God. 😄

[@LumieX]

@@stompthedragon4010 God was before. The first thing to exist and himself having always existed.

[@IanAtkinson555]

There is such thing as a free lunch - so long as there's a free negative lunch.

[@ArvinAsh]

Good one Ian -- as funny as that sounds, that is actually not far from the truth. The quantum world is not at all intuitive. In fact, Stephen Hawking's big claim to fame is using the concept of "negative" mass particles to show how black holes lose mass over time.

[@baconcool5834]

I know this is a joke but will treat this as an example

[@ipeeinmysinkimafraidtocome7127]

or mafia

[@BenjaminMilekowsky]

Hi mr. Bean

[@jackferguson9758]

it’s so annoying to have questions that will never be answered because it’s not within our capabilities to understand. it’s almost like draining to constantly be thinking about the universe and questioning reality. i’m envious of people who never get into deep rabbit holes like this lol

[@itapinfomaps6233]

Here let me help you out a little: Romans 1:19-20: Because what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. 20 For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable.

[@lesliesimon7491]

+1000000 + (-1000000) =Zero, Nada, Zilch nothing

[@maryamsalah135]

As Muslims, we believe that the Creator of the universe is an All-powerful, all-knowing being, who is a God, whom we call Allah. Here's surah Al-Ikhlas from the Quran: قُلْ هُوَ ٱللَّهُ أَحَدٌ (١) ٱللَّهُ ٱلصَّمَدُ (٢) لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ (٣) وَلَمْ يَكُن لَّهُۥۤ كُفُوًا أَحَدٌ (٤) Interpretation of the surah in English: Say, "He is Allah, [Who is] One, Allah, the Eternal Refuge. He neither begets nor is born, Nor is there to Him any equivalent."

[@omarredani5580]

I believe that the human mind cannot imagine "nothing" and for this reason they thought that an empty space is "Nothing".

[@ambassadorsoflight2655]

WHERE DID THE PARTICLES COME FROM

[@lawrencestanley8989]

Yeah, this is basically Edward Tryon's quantum fluctuation nonsense that Hawking then parroted in his book "The Grand Design." In his book, he said something like "Because there is a law of gravity, the universe can and will create itself out of nothing.” In this one statement, we find multiple levels of self-contradiction (at least three): Firstly, since he says that the creation of the universe is dependent upon the pre-existence of the law of gravity, and gravity is not nothing, then the universe was not actually created out of nothing, but something, and no one anywhere has ever even attempted to explain the origin of the laws of nature, or what it is that determines the constants that underlie those laws of nature, or managed to explain why, if evolution is true, why it is that the laws of nature do not evolve? And if the laws of nature do not evolve, why is it that everything else supposedly does? So Hawking’s explanation only creates many more questions than it supposedly answers. For instance, where does the mechanism of the laws of nature come from that govern the behavior of all things, especially since we know that the laws of nature are not consistent with the laws of the quantum particles themselves that make up all that we observe as real? And for that matter, where do the laws come from that govern the behavior of quantum particles? Are quantum particles made up of even smaller particles with their own kinds of forces and laws that are in turn made up of even smaller particles, and so on to infinity? But we know that this cannot be true because infinite causal chains are impossible. What is it that determines the physical constants that underlie all natural laws? If the laws of nature predate nature itself (according to S. Hawking, L. Krauss, and E. Tryon), then how could they arise naturally? If the laws of nature are merely descriptions of how matter and energy seem to interact, then is it possible for any interaction to defy the laws of nature? Can fire burn water? If not, then why not? One must account for why all things must conform to certain patterns of behavior without exception. If this universe is but the result of unintentional actions by impersonal forces where time and chance act on matter in a strictly materialistic universe consisting only of matter and the random results of matter in motion, then the results of all interactions could only ever be absolutely random and ateleological. This world is not random however, nor is it without purpose; interactions between matter and energy are quite predictable given their unshakable adherence to very specific patterns of behavior. So, what is it that prescribes order and intelligibility in this universe if it is but the result of unintentional actions by impersonal forces? To try to explain the existence of natural laws by strictly natural means is a viciously circular argument, so, sorry, try again. Next, he posits that the universe created itself. Now, if I say that “X” creates “Y” then I am presupposing the existence of “X” in order to explain the existence of “Y,” and this makes perfect logical sense. If however, I say that “X” creates “X” then I must presuppose the existence of “X” in order to account for the existence of “X.” This is obviously self-contradictory; to presuppose the existence of the universe in order to account for the existence of the universe sounds like the magical thinking of a child’s fairy tale, not a conclusion derived from serious science, but, maybe Hawking decorates his house with Disney princesses, who knows… If Stephen Hawking actually believes his own writing, then he is not intelligent, he is insane. Thirdly, the notion that the law of gravity - a law of nature - explains the existence of the universe is self-contradictory since according to the scientific definition of a law of nature as a description of the behavior of the natural universe, a law of nature must then depend for its own existence on the prior existence of the nature that it purports to describe, so his statement is impossible by definition. In other words, gravity cannot exist without space, time, and matter, but those are the very things that he is suggesting that gravity created. To suggest that gravity created space, time, and matter is akin to claiming that you are your own father. When are people going to realize that the emperor has no clothes?

[@davidreinhart2508]

Thank you for bringing sanctity back into focus. This kind of bullshit is soaked up by the masses who can’t reason their way out of a paper bag. Our education system is on the whole a moron factory.

[@danielbenton7235]

I dont think anyone is suggesting to have any clear belief on how the universe came to be, but merely suggesting propositions. Surely it is inherently impossible to create an explanation for the existence of nature if you believe everything must have a separate cause predating it. There is therfore no explanation for the existence of the universe that could stand up to ur current logic and thus the existence of the universe is a disproof of ur current logic.

[@ttecnotut]

Love this video. Zero is nothing, but it’s also something: a number!

[@Degarth]

You totally missed the point. Like there is no way you really understood the subject matter level missed the point. If there is no such thing as nothing then the universe didn't come from nothing. Because again....there isn't a nothing for it to arise from. But they aren't talking about pre-big bang. When physicists say the universe came from nothing what they mean is....there is no nothing and the universe as we observe it is a scaling up of that condition, of quantum fluctuations that were writ cosmically large due to spacetime expansion. But it isn't pre-big bang it is all post. None of the universe from nothing talk addresses what started the expansion of spacetime we refer to as the big bang. That is a different and maybe unanswerable question. But, I highly doubt that the religious legacy that fought the notion of a heliocentric solar system, a non-static universe, refused not to burn women for being witches, locked up Galileo for literally telling the truth and generally impeded or halted so many more developments that now are accepted scientific fact, will be the ones to champion the pursuit of those pre-big bang discoveries. If you were doing job interviews to hire someone to discover something new would you really hire someone who claimed his primary research tool was going to be a heavily rewritten and imperfectly translated book that is nearly as old as civilization? Only someone with poor decision making skills would hire that person. And your aside about how fundamental laws not evolving somehow, I don't know how because it is nonsense, disproves evolution is such a powerfully dumb statement it is a wonder you didn't pull a muscle thinking it up. It's like saying, "Evolution can't be true because if it were evolution would have evolved away."

[@Degarth]

@KLJF how are scientists saying they know everything? If anything it is the opposite. Scientists are overflowing with I Don't Knows. Atheism at its core is anti-scientific method. But, most scientists that claim to be atheists will admit that they just feel it is a small leap from agnosticism to atheism and so hey why not. But, back to the video. It is unquestionably not attempting to know everything it is working off what many people have collectively learned to be true and all that knowledge can be tested and examined. Even by you. Nothing is factually incorrect BASED ON what science currently believes to be factual. That is the key. Scientists generally are reluctant to give up pet theories and they can absolutely be dogmatic, stubborn and even unethical, but science is not scientists....science demonstrably has moved toward more truth, more accuracy and more understanding of and regarding the physical universe. That simply can not be said of religion. That statement does NOT devalue religion. So while you get humans and the foibles of human beings in both science and religion only science has really helped to explain the universe we observe and given that track record I think it is fair to look to science over religion of any stripe. It is perfectly in keeping with science to question the conclusion of scientists, but those questions should have a factual basis and the questioner should have a basic understanding of the subject. Simply dismissing a notion one doesn't fully understand isn't a valid exchange. It's on the same plane as trolling or saying, "Oh yeah well bite me."

[@RBRB-hb4mu]

Based on this video how does the universe keep expanding and accelerating that expansion due to dark energy if the total energy is zero?

[@IncyzionEdits]

He didn't actually say anything of substance. Just makes an assumption that there is some anti-particle destroying everything, yet somehow everything is still here.

[@TomTom-du5qv]

There is one theory that our Universe was created from a singularity from within a black hole. If that's the case, maybe..as the black hole evaporates through Hawking radiation, our universe's expansion accelerates until it is "destroyed" as the black hole completely dissipates. A lot of these dark matter and dark energy theories are based on the approach that our Universe is a closed system, which is fair. After all these are all just educated guesses.

[@quasimobius]

The total energy isn't zero, it's just extremely balanced. He's talking trash.

[@patmartin7072]

RB12 RB12 when you put two zeros on a bike or car they move that's how it is my man zero zero you get zero so that zero is now something ok

[@RBRB-hb4mu]

Pat Martin that makes no sense at all. Try to reconfigure your explanation thanks

[@amanuelhaile9898]

Firstly, you introduced gravity early on. Where did gravity come from, since gravity is the curvature or deformation of spacetime due to mass? Secondly, the virtual particles that come in and out of existence, do so in the fabric of spacetime. And where did the platform (spacetime) upon which existence is defined, come from?

[@ArvinAsh]

Great question! Check out my video on Quantum Creation for a potential answer, and let me have your comments: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rGmQoKKZrbWqoq8

[@MMAGUY13]

That’s what I wrote in my comment he tried to do the Lawrence Krauss garbage the universe came from empty space there was no empty space there’s a mountain of evidence that universe came from nothing and I mean not anything you can imagine nothing and there’s no evidence universe came from something pre-existing stuff that existed forever

[@greatestclips6428]

@@MMAGUY13 how is it logical for you that we came from nothing then to believe that something more powerful that is outside of TIME and SPACE( Therefore exists forever, just because we don’t understand it doesn’t mean it can’t exist, science explains that infinite is what was before the Big Bang.) created us.

[@MMAGUY13]

@@greatestclips6428 I don’t know what you’re saying you know I’m a theist right

[@Crazytesseract]

@@greatestclips6428 That something is The Supreme Personality of Godhead: principal name: Krishna.

[@halden3014]

the title of this video assumes that it came from nothing, which we don't know is true

[@baconcool5834]

If it came from nothing then- wait no what????

[@christaime9812]

P1 = There was nothing before the Universe. P2 = Nothing is Something. P3 = "Nothing" cannot cause the Something (the phylosophical definition of nothing) C1 = Something Caused the Universe. C2 = There was something before the Universe. (and that something is not "Nothing")

[@thebest-lp8sj]

The answer is god and if you think that this is not scientific then think about it something has to be illogical if things came from nothing that's also not scientific also if the universe never began that's also not scientific

[@trueorfalse6347]

I went to a bank for a loan. The banker asked me what I had for collateral. I said nothing. I left the bank without a loan because I had nothing to begin with. The universe started the same way, except it got the loan. Now, I wonder who the banker was and where the banker came from!!!!

[@anshulgarg4381]

*Visible confusion*

[@kennethyakovac6071]

The banker obviously came from the fractional reserve galaxy.

[@dalvijaved]

Now I understand the term "NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE"

[@naveenrajg1002]

goosebumps to me...everyone said conservation of energy, but no one said total energy of the universe is zero

[@joethekinghawk7514]

It always amazes me how people try to honestly convince themselves and everyone else that everything came from nothing or some infinitesimal dot* went boom 💥💥💥 and allegedly expanded 14 billion years and expanded into nothing. Anything will do other Than God did it. No wonder the bible say they no longer want to retain God in their knowledge (Roman's chapter 1 kjv). Pathetic.

[@unknownwarrior5672]

@@joethekinghawk7514 how many times are you going to copy paste and spam this comment?

[@ambassadorsoflight2655]

Nothing 0=(something) 1+(-1) (something) So there was something not nothing and where did those something that form the nothing come from??????

[@gurupai629]

Actually these scientists dont know anything. Only BS theories.

[@ms.e6279]

@@gurupai629 excatly

[@aaronwarner1257]

GVP 33 exactly I’m sure they make stuff up to sound clever or justify the massive grants they get , let’s come up with something that’s so complicated and far fetched no one will ever be able to prove us wrong and take away our grant money

[@gurupai629]

@@aaronwarner1257 calculating the properties of the whole universe by studying sample size of the universe is just like asking who is Lionel Messi in Europe and south america and saying he is very popular and famous ignoring the fact that there are several people in other countries who dont even know who the fuck Lionel Messi is. Same way ascertaining properties of the universe by taking only small part into consideration is none other than BS. If u dont know the whole universe then dont make Bullshit theories. Same thing goes to Religion. If u dont know god then dont give the unknown a known form that is human form.

[@gurupai629]

@Abram Ashes Dude first understand what i m saying. Theories need not to be always correct. What else these scientists know???. What i was complaining is taking a sample size of the universe to study the entire universe. After studying the sample size these scientists apply those properties of that sample size to the whole universe. Then where is the accuracy??? What is the accuracy. Nothing but a bullshit. These scientists mention the length and width even mass of our milky way galaxy. Problem is there is no original picture of our entire galaxy. Coz we live in this galaxy. We cant take the whole picture of our galaxy. Scientists make many theories about gravity without knowing what gravity really is... Even ur so called big bang theory has many flaws. If u want explanation contact me.

[@jcush5441]

If the universe contains subatomic particles popping into and out of existence that's not actually nothing

[@BangMaster96]

Our Brains simply can not comprehend or make sense of the concepts of Nothing, or Eternity/Infinity/Forgiveness. Our Finite Mental & Physical limits prohibit us from certain Realities. It just is what it is.

[@itapinfomaps6233]

Romans 1:19-20: Because what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. 20 For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable.

[@wpp6267]

Please explain what created empty space, nothing?

[@ArvinAsh]

That's a great question. We don't know. It's possible that pure nothingness witn no time, no space, no energy - can't exist.

[@wpp6267]

@@ArvinAsh Some will say the most high, the creator, god created all this. I tend to agree, only because I feel it within me. But I could be wrong... I stumbled upon your video and liked it a bunch. I look forward to checking out your play list.

[@wpp6267]

@@ArvinAsh I just subscribed.🙂

[@wpp6267]

@@ArvinAsh Please check out the channel "Archaix" he puts out some thought provoking videos. I think you would appreciate his work.

[@RapsReels]

If this is true, why don’t we see more random pop-ups of mass and an intensifying of gravity (or just more gravity if that makes sense). Also, since “negative energy” (gravity) and “positive energy” (mass/matter) interact on an infinite time basis, why don’t we see the cancelation of some gravity and some mass? Last question, if gravity acts to cancel out mass on a large scale, why is our universe expanding rather than condensing into single areas of dense gravity and dense matter, somewhat like black holes (why aren’t out planets and stars colliding and will they ever?)?

[@curtbarnes4294]

that is beautiful. thank you! no one else I found on KZbin has explained this.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. check out my video called "Quantum Creation" where I go further, and get into the mechanics of how the universe could have come from nothing.

[@spridle]

Look up Lawrence Krauss. He's done tons of lectures on this exact thing, and his audiobook Something From Nothing is also on here. His specialty is exactly that.

[@misteragb7558]

I very much disagree with this THEORY. To me, nothing is nothing, the lack of any system including quantum mechanics, the lack of anything.

[@u235u235u235]

you know what he meant. he's saying our use of the word nothing to describe lack of matter/energy/radiation is inaccurate because particles will randomly pop into existence.

[@user-fg6ro]

@@u235u235u235 why do you assume that particles can*randomly* pop into existence?

[@Muhammed_Furqan]

⁠​⁠@@u235u235u235Listen, I know what u are trying to say about quantum fluctuations where particules pop in and out of existence, but that doesn’t mean popping out of nothingness. These are quantum particles and the only one to trigger them is god. they can exist for a fraction of a second which means they are *SOMETHING*. and if u are reading this, *I CHALLENGE YOU TO IMAGINE NOTHINGNESS, And if u did so describe what it looks like.*

[@ColorlessQuarky]

​@@user-fg6roDue to experimental evidence suggesting virtual particles do indeed exist based on the casimir effect. Virtual particles cannot be directly detected but their existance can be inferred based on their influence on physical systems.

[@arhamkhalid5990]

What caused the division of *nothing*???

[@ArvinAsh]

Excellent question Arham . At the quantum level, many and possibly all particles appear to have a negative version of themselves, for example, electron-positron, proton-antiproton, matter-antimatter, etc. Stephen Hawking even hypothesized mass-antimass particles near a black hole. We have to understand that "nothing" is a man-made concept. "Nothing" in nature appears to always be a combination of positive and negative particles. Even in "empty" space, positive and negative pairs of particles are constantly appearing and disappearing. It is thought that the "Nothing" at the beginning of time, similarly was always a combination of negative and positive energy. But for reasons we do not yet understand, the negative and positive states of energy have endured for a substantial amount of time rather than annihilate each other instantly. Or possibly, the negative and positive states of matter are really in the process of annihilating each other right now "instantly," but time only appears for us to be a long time.

[@Lj_Buck]

Arvin Ash yeah but how could there be positive and negative energy. Where is all of this happening if actual space and time wasn’t a thing yet

[@kekorules3241]

@@Lj_Buck that's explained here. kzbin.info/www/bejne/sGWvpoR8ophjbas

[@Lj_Buck]

Keko Rules god?

[@kekorules3241]

@@Lj_Buckmight be

[@TheodoreFrankACS]

Question ? as far as the gravity force (Energy) is concerned it has been proven it does not exist , that force or called planetary kinetic energy is actually a space curve by any object in universe and depends on size ..is this proves that black hole is an object with massive dent in space ? and is the black hole become the negative part of the equation to make up the 0 ? if you can shed some light on the subject with thanks

[@ArvinAsh]

Theodore Frank Correct that mass causes the bending of space time. In the case of black holes, the bending is extreme. This bending of space time can be thought of as negative energy.

[@kamel3d]

You just talking nonsense, what even negative energy is?

[@anaccounti_guess6706]

Well it's anti-matter which destroys normal matter and itself at the same time when it collides

[@sodiumsalt]

@@anaccounti_guess6706 Wrong.

[@mimirmagnvs658]

Imagine calling something nonsense just bcz u didn't understand it

[@NinjaPlayer005]

@@waylonwalker1457 just because you can't explain something you just say hey it's magic or god. Like in ancient times if you had asked why do we fall down? You would've been told it's magic. But there was guy named newton who cleared this out. So don't just say magic or god just give science it's time. Btw if god created everything who created god? And you know where it goes.... You dumb.

[@ju8_hiugo]

Your stupidity is stronger than mine

[@moses777exodus]

The concept of "Nothing" represented by the number "0" (zero) did not exist in the beginning. The number "0" (zero) is a relatively recent human innovation in mathematics. But, there has always been "1" (one). The fact that one (1) exists and can generate the position/concept of "nothing" (0) shows that there first exists one (1). Thus, nothing (0) does not truly exist alone: One (1) must first exist that can generate the position/concept of nothing (0). Mathematically, Absolute nothing "could be" expressed as 0 to the power of 0, which can equal 1. "Nothing" IS "Something"; because, it comes from "Something". Moreover, since Nothing (perceived) is not Nothing (actual), then it is possible for Something to come from Nothing (actual). Because, Something (1) is inherently pre-existing within Nothing (actual), hence, 0 to the power of 0 can equal 1. Simply put, Something (1) exists before Nothing (0) can exist. In the beginning, there was Singularity (1).

[@bjrunson]

Nice math.

[@shadysif6220]

There's a difference between scientific or mathematical 0, or nothing, verses the semantical nothing, which is based on absolute reality, as opposed to hypothetical intellectual dishonesty. Feel free to use that same logic with a house or car payment.

[@ambassadorsoflight2655]

THE FUNNY THING ABOUT EVERY EXPLANATION IS THAT THEY WILL ALWAYS START FROM SOMETHING LIKE ENERGY OR PARTICLES OR WHATEVER TO TRY TO EXPLAIN EVERYTHING BUT MAKE NO EFFORT TO EXPLAIN THE PARTICLES OR THE ENRGY...

[@christianoutsidernetwork9239]

Forgot to mention that we actually have a surplus of positive energy which physicist have yet to explain, recreate in the lab or fully understand because it should be equal (as you stated it was here) if this theory is correct. Love your videos though, keep up the good work.

[@bdub8442]

yeah but where does the neagtive and postive come from sure energy postive gravity is negative but where did those two "essences" come from to balance out to nothing?

[@mikey--mike]

The Universe and consciousness didn't come from anything at all, it always exists and never goes away. To say the universe came from some where, or was created or started in a Big Bang is a violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The Second Law of Thermodynamics will never be overthrown. The fact that random probability always exists and preceeds all things is the most remarkable thing.

[@cristian99143]

Nothing means not only the absence of matter, but also the absence of spacetime itself. Everything has to have a beginning, including those quantum fluctuations. Nice try though, but your video is wrong from the start.

[@louscannon1335]

I agree. Nothing is Nothing. Something is Something. No matter what this video or the likes of Lawrence Krauss has to say.

[@spacesciencelab]

@@louscannon1335 but the universe is under no obligation for humans to understand it. It could be highly plausible that us humans have created the word nothing and the meaning of it. Outside our little arrogant minds there is no such thing as nothing. Nothing does not exist. We can imagine it but that's not how it is in the universe. Yes, its quite hard to grasp. Nothing is a man made meaning. Even removing the quantum fluctuations nothing does not exist. Nothing does not exist.

[@cristian99143]

@@spacesciencelab but Einstein's general relativity proved that matter, space and time had a beginning, the Big Bang theory itself says the same, which means that the absence of these primordial elements could mean only one thing: sheer NOTHINGNESS. Oh, you might say "what about the quantum fluctuations?". Well, those also mean MATTER as well, as long as they are nothing else but particles.

[@cristian99143]

@@spacesciencelab and another good question: how the bloody hell can you have quantum fluctuations without time and space??? Time and space had a beginning according to Einstein and the Big Bang theory which we all agree on.

[@spacesciencelab]

@@cristian99143 How quantum fluctuations happen if there is no space and time? There is a fascinating theory that quantum mechanics actually will exist even if there is nothing. Makes no sense but as I said the universe is under no obligation to make sense to you. An analogy would be that even though 2+2=5 doesn't really exist it is still here in the universe even though that doesn't exist. The laws of quantum mechanics somehow exist even if there is absolutely nothing. There is no cause in QM it is merely probabilities. Time and space I agree did indeed have a beginning. But QM doesn't need a cause. QM is weird. In the quantum realm there are no particles just probabilities of energy. I'd recommend watching this m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/rGmQoKKZrbWqoq8

[@michaelcascio6346]

Not quite the explanation of the start or the reason.

[@negvey]

Do you have a video explaining how the Universe is flat? I hear this all the time and it's hard for me to understand that, Like if you look "up" from the north pole or better yet travel from space you will encounter other stars etc... How is the Universe flat when it's actually 3D

[@earlaweese]

*The universe isn’t flat- this guy is trolling. Literally, look up the cosmic web (it isn’t flat to say the least). The universe is eternal in all directions and it always has been and always will be. He’s right about something not being able to come out of nothing, though.*

[@Masher2025]

Flat Universers.

[@daophilac]

Hi Arvin Ash. This is not the first time I hear the theory of the Universe popped in to existence from nothing. But it always confuses me greatly. I can understand the part about Nothing = (+1B) + (-1B). However, it is so strange that I saw no one asking where did those (+1B) or (-1B) come from. Do they also come from Nothing? I can imagine that particles and virtual particles pop in from nothing in empty space and annihilate each other, leaving empty space as it is again. But why? Why do they have to do that? What drives them to appear from out of nothing? This is my struggle to understand why there are stuff in the universe instead of nothing. Days by days, I started to doubt myself if my question is a valid question in the first place. That is, why do I have to think that everything must have a cause. Even if we knew what is the cause that drives the universe from its non-existent to its dynamic time today, we wouldn't know what is the cause of that cause. So, there would be no root cause for everything at all. I might have to accept that everything was just... there, and it made our universe as we know it today.

[@ArvinAsh]

They come from the vacuum of space. Check out my video called, "Quantum creation" for a more detailed treatment of this subject.

[@user-fg6ro]

You have to understand the object which is the cause of all causes, but itself has no other cause. The object exists eternally and is independent of everything else. It has to be the ultimate Absolute; the Absolute Truth. What is it's nature? This would be a basic definition of "God".

[@ulicadluga]

The main question is: how did matter and antimatter stay apart. A blip in the direction of time (which logically has to become recursive - like the needle of a "stuck" record) would do that. The same pair of matter/antimatter popping between the last occurrence, and thus energetically pushing the last instance further apart. This single process, repeated constantly would quickly lead to the basic mass, all particles struggling to return to their partner and annihilate, but to far, and further pressed to get there, creates the quasi-philosophical negative pressure of gravitation. When the total negative pressure reaches a threshold, the matter antimatter/matter "globe" cracks and implodes non-uniformly (symmetry is broken and more matter remains, whilst the original time recursiveness continues creating ever more separated matter. Through the recurring loss of symmetry (originally a pure coincidence that is also a recurring result, due to the original displacement). Thus, matter + negative force gravitation end up recycling into an ever larger mass, cracking, reforming larger than before, antimatter lost, until the matter "ball" is so large that all the inherent resistance (solidity) of this matter crystalinely splinters, recombining and adding to the internal pressure leading to a substantial first explosion which flings much of the matter far away, to slowly return to the cluster origin, where, meanwhile the "cloning" and cracking and crystalisation process has continued. Thus the ever growing mass takes on the characteristics of an over pressured neutron star and eventually, after many iterations, breaks up (big bangs) into an explosion where each particle is flung outwards with sufficient energy to overcome gravity and enter into a equilibrium speed, expanding the universe, eventually forever (flat universe). But, bearing in mind that the original "creation anomaly" is still in effect locally, matter is constantly added from the inside origin of the "biggest bang". Thus acceleration of that last of many "bangs" is occuring through a mixture of the flat expansion and the spontaneous generation of matter. It's a bit of a "big bang" and "Hoyle" universe mixed together.

[@briansimons9472]

Mathematical magic which has little to do with reality. We used to say theology was 'hocus poocus'. This sounds a lot like it. Very conjectural

[@Daniel-yo5es]

just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it's magic.....

[@Crazytesseract]

Theology is not hocus pocus. Why is a child born in a poor family and another born in a very wealthy family on the same day at the same time? Why this apparent injustice. The answer is: the law of karma. You can have no other logical explanation. And the law of karma is under the supervision of God, for God is the absolute basis for morality.

[@u235u235u235]

@@Crazytesseract God has one main flaw. you can't prove God exists in a repeatable way. I could claim goblins created the universe.

[@user-fg6ro]

@@u235u235u235 If I could prove that God exists using logic, mathematics, physics etc. it would mean logic, mathematics etc. are superior to God. God is beyond logic, mathematics, physics, chemistry, philosophy... So, yes you cannot prove (nor disprove) God's existence. But you can come close to understanding. Only God could reveal to you about God's existence!

[@u235u235u235]

@@user-fg6ro God doesn't exist it's just fairy tales for adults from a time of ignorance and confusion when stars in the sky weren't understood. you can't disprove something that's made up. it's the claimant's job to prove what they claim not the opposite. i could say goblins made the universe! disprove it! if you make the claim, then you have to prove it. if you claim God is real then prove it. that's how it works. otherwise anyone could claim some kind of made up BS and say disprove it! you can't because there's nothing to even examine or observe. keep believing your fairy tale if it makes you feel good. just don't expect others to value your fantasy beliefs.

[@sabiak4506]

Where did the nothing come from ?

[@jilliansmith7123]

I LOVE how you don't waste my time. You get right to the point and make your case, explain as clearly as possible, and I sometimes don't get it. But if I'd have listened to an hour it wouldn't have helped. I'd need a whole course in things like string theory or dark matter/energy to really understand...and I might not then, either. This gives a great, quick overview so I can go on to other topics I also won't know much about.

[@rilist23]

Jillian Smith agreed..I love this stuff

[@caryd67]

So true! Never click bait bulls**t, always real science. I truly love Alvin. I wish he could’ve been my teacher when I was in school!!!

[@muhammadusmannaseem4277]

@1:31 spontaneously divided? but how? This raises more questions that it answers. like without anything external why was such immense energy devided into positive and negative? and why it didn't happen after that moment?

[@theholytrinity6352]

We first have to define “nothing”, which we will define as that which has no characteristics at all, not even ability or potentiality. This seems to me to be a good definition for nothing, because if nothing had some characteristic, then we really cannot call it nothing, but rather something with that particular characteristic. Since "nothing" has no characteristic, it does not exist. We can only conceive of it in our mind. Empty space is not nothing, since space itself has the characteristic of 3 dimensions. Laws of nature, like the conservation of energy, are not nothing because they have characteristics (rules) that act. We will first prove that our universe could not have come from nothing on its own. Proof by Contradiction: Assume that our universe, came from nothing, on its own. So, in the beginning there was nothing and from this nothing came forth our universe on its own. However, if our universe came from nothing, (without the help of anything or anyone else), then this nothing must have had the ability or the potential to become our universe on its own, otherwise it could not have become our universe on its own. However, this is a contradiction because by definition, nothing, cannot have any characteristics at all, including ability or potentiality. Hence, this so called nothing had to have been something, and this is a contradiction, because we at first assumed it was nothing and now, we have shown it had to have been something. Therefore, our universe could not have come from nothing on its own. End Of Proof Since our universe obviously exists, and since our universe had to have come from something as we just proved, then this something either was in turn created by something else or always existed. In any case, in the end, this proves that something must have always existed from all eternity. Since the universe including humans came from this "something that always existed" then this "something" must be at least as intelligent as a human since we came from it. Since we call ourselves beings, then this "something" should at least be called a being, and in fact a very great Being, since everything has come from it. This does not prove that this Being that always existed is not made of matter like the earth, but the next proof will prove that this Being is outside of space and time. Time can either progress infinitely fast, finite, or stop. There are only these three cases. If time would have progressed infinitely fast at any time in the past, then we would not be here today discussing this, because all events would have already occurred in a single instant of time. On the other hand, if time would have stopped, then no events would have occurred, unless time would have started up again. In any case, in conclusion, time has always progressed (so far) at a finite rate. Therefore, if time would have begun an infinite time ago, since it only progressed at a finite rate, it could not ever have progressed over an infinite period of time and therefore could never have reached our present time, and this is a simple mathematical fact that any mathematician can prove. Therefore, time could not have started an infinite time ago, but instead, had to have started a finite time ago. Since Einstein has proved that space and time are one entity called the space-time continuum, then space along with time both came into existence a finite time ago. Since all matter, energy, and everything in our universe is contained in space and time, then our universe was created a finite time ago. Since we previously proved that there is a Being that always existed from all eternity, then this Being must exist outside of space and time and therefore is the cause and hence, created space, time and all matter and energy in our universe. We call this Being God, the Almighty!

[@katiesmith5837]

If i'm understanding this correctly (I've never been through a physics class so I might sound ignorant), nothing is both something AND nothing at the same time. I compared this to magnets (the ones you would play with as kids), when you line up two negatives together, they would repel each other, the space between the two magnets filled with some kind of electric charge (if i'm wrong, I apologize for my stupidity). So technically, negative plus negative doesn't make a positive (depending on the situation), but it does have some kind of energy behind it. I know im wrong somewhere, please feel free to correct me where i'm wrong. I like learning :)

[@ArvinAsh]

Charge as in magnets is not quite the same as energy. You can have positive and negative energy that cancel each other out.

[@anthonybroussard1102]

Thanos wants to know your location. 😎 Positive Energy plus Negative Energy = 0. "In perfect balance as all things should be."

[@deezynar]

How does anything start to happen without time? And just because you MIGHT be able to balance energy to zero net total value, that does not factor in the information needed to organize and govern everything. The laws, and settings need to be defined from the outset. Ultimately, the video deals with conjecture that is beyond the ability of science to observe.

[@coffeeperson1461]

You are talking about nothing as in something or emptiness. What about no space and no time? Rather than there is nothing in this box, I want to know why the inside of the box exists. Time and space, infinite or not being there doesn't seem possible but it's there. Why?

[@pippastin]

We do not have any tools of calculating and theorizing the nothing before the something. So the question remains - what turned nothing into something? We're left with a few options. An outside force (I call it God) was able to bring energy to this dimension, so that qvarks, time, space, all that could've happened. Maybe the scientists talk about the quantum field(?), but then we're back to the same question. Where did the quantum field come from? There has to be energy, no matter how tightly compacted into a singularity, for ANYTHING to happen. We could say that the quantum field is eternal, but still, how is the field's existence in etermity possible, if the field fluctuates (aka there is some time)? Eternity means outside of time. So that logic doesn't add up. There must be something beyond us and beyond the field, for the field to appear and then create us. How can anyone think, that they could reveal that 'outside thing' by using calculations, theories or even tests with the things that exist in our universe Okay, there is Cern. But then again, WE give it energy and manipulate the particles (and possibly create something dangerous). That can only reveal things, that are detectable in our dimension, however weird they'd be. And it can perhaps create things, that explain the fine details of the big bamg. Maybe we can even find answers as to what needs to be done to energy for the field to come into existance. But where did energy in the first place come? What mechanism created it? How are we supposed to study that? "Came out of nothing" is not an answer, since we can't prove that and that would wipe out the purpose of studying any of this in the first place.

[@0x64azana]

lost me at "the universe is flat"

[@Shahzaada]

hahaha True.... Angels be Like: Flat Universer LOL.

[@bigbangtheory1185]

Curvature mate.

[@inayatkabu6442]

Universe is Linear as flat in uniformity it is quran and but science is yet to prove the uniformity however the later is proved

[@adamcolejones]

Okay but saying these particles pop out of nowhere brings us back to the same question? Why are these particles coming from nothing? You answered the question by going further down the rabbit hole and in the end avoided the question altogether.

[@ernestk522]

there's got to be someone or people behind this that created everything cause if nothing was nothing it would simply stay nothing that's like saying you got a bowl of cereal and the milk is next to the bowl the only way it could have life is if someone pours milk in the bowl the milk isn't just going to float up and pour it's self in i'm not saying god is real maybe he is but it could be anyone

[@adamcolejones]

@@ernestk522 Hey friend. Isaiah 53, the most convincing passage of scripture for Jesus being God. The book was written 700 years before Jesus walked the Earth. Look up fulfilled prophecies of Jesus on KZbin and see the other prophecies only the God of the Universe could fulfill. He is Lord over all!

[@ColorlessQuarky]

According to quantum mechanics, there is no casuality nor previous causes leading up to the brief existance on virtual particle pairs, there's merely a non-zero probability describing events based on the heisenberg's uncertainty principle. The vaccum of space is bubbling with energy coming in and out of existance, there is no cause for that, it merely is.

[@TegukiSix]

I really like your use of music.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks brother! I try to make it reflect the mood of the video.

[@factchecker9358]

Could we start a petition to ban the use of the word nothing in physics? It would help the viewers and the profession.

[@Scuba451]

What creates the zero? Name one thing that’s not created by another thing I’m waiting?

[@itapinfomaps6233]

Lol! So true. The Bible’s answer God exercises unsurpassed force throughout the universe. Regarding the way he created the countless billions of stars, the Bible says: “Raise your eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he [God] calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them is missing.”-Isaiah 40:25, 26.

[@OpenTheMindExperiences]

Just discover your channel, really nice content! Keep on

[@aloodunayo1427]

Did he just say the universe is flat?

[@nacc7240]

You explain physics like a philosopher. God's creation is truly elegant.

[@canlib]

God is created from people's imagination few thousand years ago. It's bs.

[@OpenTheMindExperiences]

Haha here we have two Gods argueing in youtube

[@nacc7240]

Faith is a gift. I'm sorry that you don't have any, and that you feel the need to mock someone who does.

[@jilliansmith7123]

NaC C: reality is the gift. Sorry you choose to reject it in favor of unfounded myths.

[@nacc7240]

Reality is an illusion based on our limited physiological perception. To invoke "reality" as the ultimate barometer is a philosophically weak position... sophistry that fools itself.

[@williamhenry5944]

Seems all based on the concept of “energy can neither be created nor destroyed “. We know this is wrong since as space expands,for the vacuum energy to remain constant, energy must “ appear”, which has never been explained . If we know this is wrong can we postulate all this based on?

[@Rahul_singh_je]

Sir I have a question . Like Energy of our universe 0=10^69+(-10^69) Similarly at the time of creation of our universe 0=1+(-1),2+(-2),3+(-3),......10^69+(-10^69),.....~+(-~) Probability of creation of many universe that is parallel universe Existing in different energy state .

[@firefly7076]

Um, gravity isn't negative matter, that's antimatter, and there isn't enough antimatter in the observable universe to cancel out all matter. So scientists don't really know how that antimatter just went away. Also, the virtual particles aren't forgiven because they exist for so little time, it's because they come in as two particles, an antiparticle and a regular particle, which nearly instantly cancel out. Look into Hawking Radiation and Quantum fluctuations to learn more about virtual particles.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks for your comment. I stated that gravity has negative ENERGY, not negative matter. There is a big difference. Stephen Hawking had a simple explanation of why gravity has negative energy: "Two pieces of matter that are close to each other have less [positive] energy than the same two pieces a long way apart, because you have to expend energy to separate them against the gravitational force that is pulling them together."

[@ArvinAsh]

Firefly, regarding your second statement of matter-antimatter annihilation, yes, this occurs too. But I am referring to a different phenomenon in Quantum Mechanics which requires particles to temporarily violate conservation of energy laws - one particle can become a pair of heavier virtual particles. These are the "ghost" particles I was referring to. More info here in case you want to read further: "Quantum mechanics allows, and indeed requires, temporary violations of conservation of energy, so one particle can become a pair of heavier particles (the so-called virtual particles), which quickly rejoin into the original particle as if they had never been there. (see Scientific American, Oct 9 2006, www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-virtual-particles-rea/)"

[@firefly7076]

Arvin Ash Stephen Hawking was probably referring to the fact that they have less potential energy.

[@firefly7076]

Arvin Ash also, as you pointed out, energy and mass are equivalent, so I thought that you would understand. And, I was also too lazy to change it.

[@firefly7076]

Arvin Ash also, to correct myself, exotic matter has negative mass, not antimatter, which has a negative charge, but positive mass.

[@danielbrown9352]

Nothing can't exist it may just be so faint or complicated we can't understand.

[@ArvinAsh]

Correct. What we call "nothing" has virtual particles, for example, matter/antimatter pairs that annihilate each other in less than planck time. How do we know this happens? We can detect it as the Casimir effect.

[@danielbrown9352]

@@ArvinAsh nice I enjoy planets potential life and space.

[@mosog8829]

Because God spoke it into being. That's how something can come from nothing.

[@jilliansmith7123]

Momoh Nyaley: Right, with a conjuring spell.

[@quasimobius]

Sound is frequency and can affect matter. BTW, the bible never says anywhere in it that Everything was created from Nothing. Let there be Light! kzbin.info/www/bejne/hWqlZKmwqL-mqJY

[@koolaidklankillers]

Who created God? And who created the person that created god? It goes on endlessly. Maybe our gods don't exist but there's a universal god that exists, thst lives in a higher plane of existence.

[@mosog8829]

@@koolaidklankillers Am glad you said maybe. Am willing to believe that you do not exist that to believe God doesn't exist. Because I have more evidence in favor of God's existence that of your existence.

[@JonMcG]

Ill tell you why I just subscribed ..... Never I heard/read/learnt a better way explaining the Big Bang than this . Congrats man .

[@tekay44]

you left Theory from Big Bang. it's all theory. i'm not saying they are wrong at all. But theory nonetheless.

[@karanfamily099]

If gravity is negative energy and the mass is a form of positive energy(E=mC²) then why annihilation of energy is not happening to collapse it again into 0?

[@ArvinAsh]

That is a great question! The simplistic answer is that these energies are in a form (matter and gravity) that do not allow them to destroy each other. For example, large amounts of matter do not spontaneously turn into energy, except in the special case of nuclear fission. And even then only a tiny fraction (0.1%) turns into energy. However, this answer is incomplete in my opinion. There is probably some physics missing here which we don't yet understand. Like matter and antimatter annihilate each other instantly, could matter and gravity be in the process of annihilating each other, and reverting back to zero, but over a timescale that is enormous by our human standards? Our perception of time is relative to our own perspective, after all.

[@rdblues5]

So.... where did the virtual particles come from?

[@quasimobius]

lol, you're being played by yahoos that want the public to trust their word on science. profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/

[@daledelatte9607]

Just replace words like virtual particles, dark matter, quantum fluid, etc. With ether. Einstein invented nothing and stole his famous equation, it's why they had to give him the Nobel for something else. Tesla referred to him as an idiot. Everything in the modern world is a result of men like Tesla, Steinmetz, Heaviside, Thomson, etc... and they all referred to the "ether". Ask yourself why the atomists don't want you to know that?

[@ominous-omnipresent-they]

​@@daledelatte9607 Tesla or not, it doesn't change the fact that Einstein's work accurately predicts the influences of gravity. What quarrels and disagreements these men had back then are completely irrelevant. Also, Tesla wasn't a physicist nor was Einstein an inventor.

[@daledelatte9607]

@@ominous-omnipresent-they no, his predictions on gravity fail on a colossal scale. One only has to look at any spiral galaxy to see that. There is far to much space between bodies for the mass to hold them together at the speeds observed if one uses Einstein's equations

[@shaccooper]

I love science fiction and how you talk so matter of factly about things that have know scientific basis, but cool story broke.

[@itsdeep5342]

Thank you sir you made me think logically.

[@vijay1700]

How did virtual particles, quantum fluctuations, ability/property of empty space popping virtual particles in and out of existence, etc., originate? How did Singularity originate without any space, as the space itself was created by inflation and Big Bang?

[@itapinfomaps6233]

Excellent questions, that is why this scripture is starting to make more sense: Because what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. 20 For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable.

[@malcolmrobertson8941]

To explain something coming from nothing, we have simply redefined nothing as something. This solves nothing. Well, actually, it doesn't.

[@entoythedragon8463]

I see 32 creationist watched this video.

[@ArvinAsh]

If we got 32 creationists to watch this video, we have succeeded!

[@chrisallum9044]

@KLJF If someone is ignorant, educate them. Do not belittle them. We will wait till you catch up to that. Perhaps then progress can be made instead.

[@jilliansmith7123]

Chris Allum: A good point. But people can only be educated if they agree to cooperate. Otherwise it's what my dad called "an exercise in futility" to try to force information on them. Those who don't want to learn cannot be educated until--and if--they are ready.

[@reclavea]

Ridiculous lol! A total desperate attempt to negate the all powerful creator God and his revelation in Genesis 1:1 of the creation of the world and the cosmos. Absolute nothing ...has zero potential! 🙄 lol😂👎🏻 Otherwise...go to your bank account that has “nothing” and withdraw $100 Trillion! 😂👎🏻🤥...🤷🏻‍♂️ Genesis 1:1 😊👍🏻

[@emilekestens7846]

@@reclavea did you see the video? In your case you need to withdraw +100 trillion and -100 trillion at the exact same time. Kinda different then your story. And why is it, when somebody try to explain something you see it as an attack on G'd or something. Now we know for example how to cure diseases is that also a desperate attempt to negate to the all powerfull creator G'd?

[@bjm6275]

Thank you Arvin for covering this complex topic. I have a different concept then how you presented this subject. Nothing seems to be just that nothing. True nothingness would not have anything, no energy and no particles. I believe true absolute nothingness exists outside the entire universe. True nothingness is a perfect vacuum, an absolute vacuum. Although, I do agree that the physical universe is a type of nothing, just not absolute. Space is an imperfect vacuum. Hence, imperfectly nothing. Since energy can neither be created nor destroyed that implies that the universe came from some sort of primordial energy, not nothing. About the so-called ghost particles or virtual particles. They seem to be real and actual particles. They just suddenly become detectable and just as suddenly become undetectable. Usually they are describe as having popped into existence and out of existence. That cannot be true if energy cannot be created nor destroyed. They must come from somewhere and go somewhere though undetected and unobserved. But from and to where? Space has extra dimensions, some of which are parallel to the fabric of space. Particles actually come from those extra dimensions. How so? Particles leave 4D space into macroscopic black holes into extra dimensions. Then, particles also come back into 4D space from extra dimensions through sub-quantum black holes, which many theorize to be white holes. These miniscule, yet undetectable black holes exist imbedded all throughout space fabric like pores in skin or like spaces between interwoven threads of fabric. So, these "virtual" particles do not come from nothing nor just pop into existence. They come from extra dimensions through black holes too small for detection. Energy and information is conserved. Again about absolute nothing and vacuum compared to the universe as imperfect nothing and vacuum Nothing: 0 (there is no + because absolute zero or nothing has absolutely no point or capacity of being a catalyst for anything) Universe as nothing: 0 = (+1) + (-1) True nothing has no such values to begin with.

[@RapsReels]

Interesting take on the topic. I am a Christian and do think that the only way matter and gravity can coexist together and be called “something” is due to God’s creation of the entire universe from the outside of it inward, but I would have to say that I agree with your explanation a lot more than his. The one thing I would ask is this: are dimensions “something” or “nothing”? 1st, 2nd, and 4th dimensions are technically speculation, but a 3rd dimension has been proven to exist. Idk if you get what I’m trying to say, but it seems as if dimensions 1,2, and 4 are “nonexistent” and dimension 3 is “existent”. Last thing that popped into my head. How can gravity and mass coexist with a 4th dimension and a 3rd dimension at the same time? It seems like both work in correlation to the 3rd dimension but both the 4th at the same time.

[@marpintado]

0 = Infinity + (-Infinity) Makes sense, thank you!

[@quasimobius]

You're easy.

[@rhisavbora2975]

No that's indeterminant form..limits is necessary 😂

[@lovepeaceisneverguaranteed7385]

But why tho?

[@zel506]

But then, its not actually nothing, is it.

[@larryevans2806]

I agree with comments below. WHAT IS THE UNIVERSE IN!! Where did it all come from (energy, particles, etc) I'm an old senior who has wondered about this since I was ten! And if there are multiverses WHAT ARE THEY CONTAINED IN! Pandoras Box!

[@WolframtheBlessed3499]

Damn Arvin, you just went above my Intelligence Quotient. For the first time I had to replay the video to understand. You lost me after 1000000 + (-1000000) = 0.

[@ShadowLink-np8rt]

Well, tbh, it's just 1000000 - 1000000 = 0. If you think about it logically that is...

[@billchitwood1385]

Wow! Just want to say thanks. Have been needing information on science that is precise and to the point. Great idea. Just what an uneducated person can benefit from. You are the photon in my dark matter LOL.

[@ArvinAsh]

Hahah "the photon in my dark matter" - I love it! Thank you.

[@adamrspears1981]

Arvin Ash, himself, recommended me to watch this! Thank You Mr. Arvin Ash! Yes, now it makes more sense to me. So I guess you can scratch out that theory of mine that I ran by you, lol....I see the flaw in my thinking......or maybe in a parallel universe, my theory is correct?...lol. Thanks for teaching me none-the-less!!

[@briansimons9472]

This simply pushes back the problem and is no answer at all.

[@itapinfomaps6233]

That is all they can do, the mental gymnastics some of these scientist do to avoid the obvious conclusion is amazing. I always like this scriptures: Romans 1:19-20: Because what may be known about God is clearly evident among them, for God made it clear to them. 20 For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable.

[@DarkLord-mf7oi]

Didn't a recent study showed that universe is not flat but closed? pls answer me i am confused!!

[@mohammedhanif6780]

This is a joke, right? Nothing is when there is no spacetime. If I have £100 in the bank but owe someone £100, do I have nothing in the bank? Along with your expertise in physics, learn some metaphysics.

[@a7r7s38]

You forgot God on this equation.

[@colinhenderson6020]

Absolute garbage to try to explain something that is completely beyond our comprehension.

[@ArvinAsh]

Why is it beyond comprehension?

[@rpetresco]

The good part of this is that now if I totally don’t matter I can still be an important gravitational effect.

[@greatestclips6428]

What did I just hear? Nothing is NOTHING, not something, or a little bit maybe something, it’s NOTHING, no existence, no substance, nor matter, NOTHING AT ALL. So where did all of this come from? We may never know, it makes me happy and scared at the same time, that if there truly is a creature of all this. - it’s just makes me speculate how powerful it could be, and why it’s reasons for creating such a complex universe! Because we all know deep down that something must have created this, and even though we don’t know what is out there we believe. It’s like we jumped in the middle of a movie, like a bullet was fired( I.e black whole ) and we know something fired it, we just don’t know who, or what!

[@itapinfomaps6233]

Isaiah 45:18 For this is what Jehovah says, The Creator of the heavens, the true God, The One who formed the earth, its Maker who firmly established it, Who did not create it simply for nothing, but formed it to be inhabited: “I am Jehovah, and there is no one else. Isaiah 40:26 “Lift up your eyes to heaven and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who brings out their army by number; He calls them all by name. Because of his vast dynamic energy and his awe-inspiring power, Not one of them is missing. Numbers 15:15

[@jimjohnson682]

There are a few basic questions about the source of the universe, for example, A. Is the concept of abstract reality rational? B. Could there be different universal rules or laws of physics, many universes (multiverse)? C. Is spacetime finite or infinite? D. Is the source of energy from a quantum field or a cyclic universe? E. And did something “just exist” or was it created? This video, kzbin.info/www/bejne/e57JZ5tugNx0mq8, provides a framework for a logical discussion of these “philosophical” issues. It defines what precedes the big bang in terms of nothing plus four somethings (universal rules, laws of physics, spacetime, and energy). This description provides a reference point for philosophical questions related to the four somethings (8 minute video).

[@billylandrum2309]

I love this explanation. I thoroughly enjoy your videos. You have a most excellent presentation of physics. The combination of animated illustrations and your explanations of the mathematics is very enjoyable. In addition, I sense that you're not afraid of uncertainty and mystery. Keep it up, Arvin. You're doing a great service to me and the rest of humanity. I am now a physics geek. 😀

[@KOSMIKFEADRECORDS]

this channel is the big bang!

[@dalvijaved]

🤓👍😆😆

[@krishnakamble9698]

This was very insightful.

[@RafaSol-z4j]

If you say nothing is something then we are not referring to the same notion of nothingness

[@hajashereefp]

Bubbles in empty space is nothing???? All the these things are something bro

[@MogenSpeigelei-TGWC]

Why did the universe exist Whats life purpose? to know the universe secret? does the man or a organism who made the universe somehow need our help? How did prton exist? How did energy exist? How did GRAVITY exist? How did heat/cold/room temperature exist? How / why / who?

[@itapinfomaps6233]

The Bible’s answer God exercises unsurpassed force throughout the universe. Regarding the way he created the countless billions of stars, the Bible says: “Raise your eyes high up and see. Who has created these things? It is the One who is bringing forth the army of them even by number, all of whom he [God] calls even by name. Due to the abundance of dynamic energy, he also being vigorous in power, not one of them is missing.”-Isaiah 40:25, 26.

[@yoniraziel9242]

Dear Arvin - Is not the suggestion of the balancing act between + & - energy in order to attempt to explain "something from nothing" simply an accounting trick? After all, this extremely difficult conundrum is far more awesome than this slightly trite answer. I IOVE your channel

[@ArvinAsh]

You could look at it that way, but it is not without a scientific basis. Presuming quantum mechanics existed, borrowing energy from the vacuum to create positive and negative energy is possible.

[@akjhaenglishclasses1434]

SIR,, what about LIGHT !!! is it a negative energy or positive one????

[@ArvinAsh]

Light has positive energy.

[@Scuba451]

I don’t know what came from where but it’s either believe nothing came from nothing or believe in my God that gave me this beautiful life, I can’t see my conscious but It’s there

[@itapinfomaps6233]

Good point. Romans 1:20 For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable. 21 For although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their senseless hearts became darkened. 22 Although claiming they were wise, they became foolish

[@subashacharya152]

At 1:04 according to you empty space also has mass. Then to make nothing in empty space there is also gravity in empty space😃😃

[@wpp6267]

I just subscribed.😊

[@freshapplenews5076]

suppose we consider the universe is existing in a room, and if we remove all the universe's matter from the room, there will be still the empty room, so my question is that, where and how did the empty room come from?

[@ArvinAsh]

Great question! I get into depth on this question in my follow-up video, called Quantum Creation. Check it out here, and please post your questions after viewing it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rGmQoKKZrbWqoq8

[@JuliohBermudez]

Arvin: I answer that in the next 5 minutes. The video legnth : 3:24

[@tiberioantunes1668]

what you're saying violates the entropy principle, does it not?

[@ArvinAsh]

The universe, if is presumed, began at the lowest entropy state possible, so I am not sure how it would violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics.