Our Expanding Universe | Compilation

[@Ntmoffi]

The universe and my waist line have a lot in common.

[@justyce_yt]

Thanks for the smile 😆

[@FrankSalman]

Lol A+

[@socrabe]

😅

[@trinityshelton3819]

🤣☝️my kinda people

[@madhatressadastra8267]

You are one with the Universe. Be at peace with your awesomeness. 👌🏾🕉️ Ooooooooooooooooooomh... 🕉️👌🏾

[@ivytarablair]

wooooo!!! I LOVE COMPILATIONS :D And with all the new pics from Webb, this is a perfect time! Now i shall sit down and see a whole playlist of awesome (without having to hunt each video down, and with a nice concise explanation between each ep!)

[@sam08090]

That balloon trick which plays the recording in reverse in an ingenious hack 😍

[@mitchodds]

OK, so hear me out... if you're looking up at the stars while on an escalator/elevator, you're actually on a time machine.

[@alifalfarras6522]

big if tru

[@TheRealSkeletor]

If you're looking up at the stars while on the Earth, you're actually on a time machine.

[@petergreen5337]

Thank you very much for this further clarification.

[@jmanj3917]

6:55, How is the mathematical expression of Special Relativity a "trick"?

[@kidmohair8151]

a thought that has been running around my brain recently is that if there was sentience at the beginning of the universe, given the compression of time *along* with the compression of space, would that sentience notice the compression...or would time seem to pass "normally"

[@TheRealSkeletor]

Time would seem to pass normally, but objects moving further away in the universe would appear to accelerate more as time "compressed". Almost like that's something we're still observing right now.

[@kidmohair8151]

@@TheRealSkeletor which is why that has been banging around in my simian brain...which leads to how we perceive what we do, and then perhaps why we are forever *never quite* reaching the brass ring that is the unified theory of....life, the universe etc

[@just_kos99]

I went to a lecture by Dr Robert L Forward ("Dragon's Egg") at a sci-fi/fantasy con, and he explained the expansion of the universe to me the same way, picturing a balloon. He was so patient with me & all of my questions, lol!

[@andrefarfan4372]

Great video.

[@tomnowlin9652]

Will JWST be able to see stars “disappear” beyond the visible edge?

[@TheRealSkeletor]

They'll redshift out of the visible spectrum before they'll be out of range.

[@robertt9342]

@@TheRealSkeletor ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ . I think the key word in the original post was “visible”, which you acknowledge in your response with “redshift out of the visible spectrum”. So the correct answer to the OP would be “Yes”, but it will be a galaxy instead of a star. I am not sure what range you are referring to in “before being out of range” when the question was about the visible edge? Now the question is whether we will be looking at a star (more likely galaxy) when this happens? Will it blink out or fade from our instruments?

[@Nirlep70]

Nice To See Reid after long !!!!

[@13minutestomidnight]

14:13 ?? If they're taking Cepheid variable measurements only from nearby galaxies in our local group (which is what you'd expect because Cepheid variables can only be seen in nearby space), then the galaxies they are studying would be highly affected by the gravity of the Milky Way, increasing the certainty value, not decreasing it.

[@nerdmelon3406]

Red shift is caused by light waves stretching, correct? Is there ever a point where it stretches so much that it is flat?

[@TheRealSkeletor]

Not quite, but it can stretch beyond our ability to observe it even with radio telescopes.

[@ipoddoctor]

Hi Just watch the video it was Great.... now I'm wondering though.... is it time for an update since the new data about the expanding universe has just come in from the James Web space telescope? Does that data align better with the cosmic Background Radiation? Was Hubble just off?

[@chinookvalley]

I still think our universe is but a speck of dust in an unending mind.

[@Kyleplaysgames567]

I just realized the universe technically does have a birthday, we just don't know exactly when. The Earth doesn't have a birthday because it takes millions of years for planets to form. There is no definitive moment in which it happens. But the very instant the Big Bang happened is when we can definitely say the universe was born.

[@gaming-pigeon1237]

I love hank Green

[@Nairod2]

So if the Observable universe far away from us is the past and we are in the now then the part beyond where we can see is the future. If we compare the big bang to blowing off a smoke ring, the smoke ring is a system flying in the air, its a self contained phenomena working in a open system so the smoke particles pull on each other keeping the shape of the ring flying in the air until the energy contained in the ring can't keeps the shape any longer and it collapses dissipating the smoke on the fabric of reality it self re-integrating into a bigger system beyond the limits of the smoke ring. If that is the case, what is outside the observable universe?

[@mastershooter64]

that is not the case, we don't know what causes the universe to expand, we've come up with something "dark energy" that causes our universe to expand, but it's just a name, we don't know what it is, or how it works or anything. have you ever done graphs of functions like f(x) = x or f(x) = x^2 or f(x) = 1/x or something? you graph the function on a 2D plane right? it's called the cartesian plane. Now to graph a function all you need is just that 2D plane, nothing more, nothing less. that 2D surface is all that there is. there's no "outside" of the 2D surface right? it's exactly like that, but a higher dimensional version of it. instead of 2D it's 4D (3D space and 1 dimension of time i.e 4D space-time) again think of a CGI 3D model of a duck or a something existing in a 3D space, all you have is that 3D space right? there's no "outside" of it, because that's literally all there is. extend that idea just one more dimension and you got our universe, there's no outside of our universe, or at least as far as we know our universe is all there is, there's no outside.

[@Nairod2]

@@mastershooter64 where is the evidence that proves the universe is a closed mechanism and not an open one?

[@martianmurray]

@@mastershooter64 the question was what’s outside the “observable” universe

[@Darkstar.....]

it could anomalies in space time creating the opposite effect to gravity. an upshift of gravity from another plain of existence or simply anti matter or theoretical particles with the opposite effect of gravity. or a weird side effect of universes bending space time creating a natural gravity drive.

[@benmcreynolds8581]

It's so interesting to me that we study so much but when we boil it down.. when it comes to space and the complexity of it's properties of "the space between everything" We really don't have a great understanding of "Space". I like to look at earth, where density layers separate things to create membrane layers like water and air and air and space. Then the things that can occur in those layers. Like positive negative charges, static charges, electromagnetism, temperature differences, high low pressure, etc. I'm just really curious what we are going to learn once we get past this wall in physics we have been stuck at ever since the dark matter dark energy concept came up. I just am curious about what we will discover and if we are going to see we perceived certain things slightly incorrectly and we find new ways to adjust and see things and then it opens doors into the next chapters in physics and space.. who knows?

[@robertt9342]

Maybe we misunderstand the fabric of spacetime functions and on our small local scale we can’t see the differences like we can vast distances between galaxies?

[@waverod9275]

Space is big, vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big. You may think it's a long way down to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.

[@charlesmarkgraf5265]

Our star has about 5 billion years left in its lifetime, so every sun like star, farther than 10 billion light years has long since burned out,. So we're just witnessing the light of long dead stars, that are just now hitting our eyes, I would say, any son like star that would be more than 10 billion light years away from us, would have long since burned out and is dead, Sorry folks, any son like Star past 10 billion light years have long since burned out_

[@Mizgrievoux]

sure this has been explained but if we put a few x's on a balloon representing galaxies and blew air into it then it would expand but still into a sphere, so the galaxies would still get farther and farther but the galaxies on the edges from your perspective would appear to be moving faster from the curved sphere nature wouldnt they?

[@Chrisiskewl100]

I've been wondering about this. If everything in the universe will eventually be taken over by dark energy, and everything will be spread out pretty much evenly... how is that not organized? My question is specifically about our concept of universal entropy. Its said that entropy will eventually make everything in the universe disorderly, but how is everything eventually being evenly spread by dark energy anything but ordered? Take this for example, if you have 10 apples you can put them in a triangular pyramid shape on a table and that would be very orderly and organized, but if you have no apples then the table would be clear, clean, and neat, thus the table would still be orderly and organized.

[@oswaldlong9044]

Dark Matter overcomes Dark Energy, on the smaller scales. Real expansion occurs on the scale of voids - the space between superclusters.

[@NewMessage]

I'm expanding too... mostly 'round the middle.

[@ADEpoch]

When I pull chewing gum apart it gets thinner. Is the fabric of the universe thinning at it stretches too?

[@j3ckl3r]

I think the problem is that people look at it too much from the perspective of physics. Look at it more like a biologist. The universe is a cell. I think "dark matter" is just subatomic particles that haven't formed particles. Maybe they can't because they can't find a match. In biology processes are carried out by reactions that happen from signaling that happens because of molecules entering certain conformations. They have to fit together properly, and then they have a series of things that happen like positive and negative feedback loops. Maybe dark matter is just a collection a single type of puzzle piece. Like a fire pyramid. You need 3 things to have a fire. Remove 1 and you prevent fire from forming. Can you make an atom from just Boson's? So maybe things like black holes are ripping atoms apart, but only keeping the largest puzzle pieces to form the black hole, and ejecting the smaller pieces out to space (Hawking's radiation). This would also make the universe look like it is expanding, like a balloon. Ripping large stars/planets apart to subatomic particles, sequestering puzzle pieces, and shooting the other puzzle pieces into space so the puzzle can't be put together properly. All those tiny subatomic particles will have a greater surface area and therefor take up more space than a single condensed star/planet. All those other little pieces are still going to take up space and push everything else out of the way (this is what could cause the "expansion", which is actually more like displacement). I think it has more to do with density. Just look at Earth, a little vacuole in space colonized by a bunch of organisms, much like a petri dish covered in bacteria, sitting near the mitochondria (sun) of our solar system. All the heaviest elements are at the core of the planet, and all the lighter gasses rise to the top layer. Like oil and water, or CO2 and the air we breathe. "Space" is likely not actually empty, but filled with a super-light sea of subatomic particles that can't find their match, or maybe they do but they can't hold it long enough to form stable particles. Sort of like a reverse reaction. This could make that "fabric" that holds things together. More like a glob I suppose. A globular galaxy, which is why the entire system moves as a single unit, or cell. I still wonder about the "Big Bang". It's sort of like an atomic bomb I would imagine. So does it have a critical mass? Was there only one singularity that caused the Big Bang, or were there multiple? Maybe when the universe formed from the big bang there were several explosions and multiple universes were created, or maybe just 2 formed inside each other causing the universe to form a tesseract and making it infinite, or it could just multiply and divide like a regular cell. What happens when you open a smoke bomb in space? Where does the smoke go? If space is a vacuum the smoke should vanish about as fast as it leaves the can, but it still has to go towards the source of the vacuum, unless it is close enough to something to be attracted to its gravity. Gravity aside, where does the smoke go?

[@TheRealSkeletor]

Biology is just applied physics. The universe is not a cell. It is far more complex.

[@charlesmarkgraf5265]

wait a minute, did she just say that the universe is expanding faster than the light can reach us, so the universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, I know Einstein said that nothing can move faster than the speed of light but I don't think he was talking about the fabric of SpaceTime itself.

[@imshadi]

And the Hubble Tension still is a problem.

[@MR2Davjohn]

What's a parsec?

[@sera_kath]

A unit of distance a bit more than 3.26 lightyears long.

[@timthompson7205]

Dark energy is the laziest explanation for space expansion. There’s no such thing. If there was how do you explain where it all keeps coming from? What keeps creating more dark energy/matter ? Oh right it’s a fictitious thing. WAIT! I know what dark energy is! It’s rapunzels hair. How did all these ever so intelligent and educated astronomers not see this before? It’s so obvious. This explains why some areas move faster than others. It’s when her hormones are going crazy and she’s growing extra pubic hair. Funny thing is that sounds more realistic than dark energy. Dark energy is what happens when you let the Comic-Con idiots tell us how space works.

[@FunnCubes]

If you take the inverse of the universe's expansion coefficient you get a number that is very close to the age of the universe.

[@DurokSubaka]

I actually expected a cameo from Eric idle

[@waitingforanalibi2224]

I swear he was about to say the R Kelly project until he finished that word!

[@gibranhenriquedesouza2843]

In the very far future a new kind of force will appear and will start the universe contraction.

[@ShawnHCorey]

Or the universe runs out of dark energy and starts collapsing on its own.

[@michaelmayhem350]

The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the expanding needs of the bureaucracy

[@ernestaguirre4300]

If we were capable of traveling to some far flung galaxy, what would we aim at? What we see now is no longer where we see it, so where is it?

[@The__Creeper]

Second star to the right and straight on till morning.

[@TheRealSkeletor]

We already can put probes in orbit around planets millions of miles away with our current understanding of physics. If we were aiming for a nearby galaxy, we'd calculate the trajectory to intercept it ahead of time, with incredible accuracy.

[@ZennExile]

What if expansion is just an ultra powerful gravitational wave rolling like a spacetime tsunami away from everything in all directions and what we observe is just the distortion from that contracting roll of reality as it propagates off into infinity?

[@electriclilies2642]

Well it’s expanding uniformly, there is no center

[@ZennExile]

@@electriclilies2642 according to a nearly 0% complete survey of the visible universe, which is only 5% of the total universe, and the center of the Universe isn't a place it's a time. It's technically everywhere.

[@rasheedgregory3459]

@@ZennExile thats something that has confused me ever since I first heard it. If space expanded from a singularity (the big bang) then how is that point from which everything expanded from not a where but a when? If a video of an explosion can be rewond back to find the point of its origin then why can't we take the information we have of the direction in which other galaxies are moving and rewind it back to find the place in which the big bang happened? Could it be that when 2 galaxies move pass each other that the gravitational forces alter their trajectories and concidering how much time has passed and the unknown amount of galaxies flinging each other of in different directions make it impossible to retrace them back to the big bang's point of origin? Keep in mind i don't know so I'm asking.

[@chrislarson9335]

@@rasheedgregory3459 The reason why the big bang doesn't point to the center of the universe is because it's everything. Everything was compressed into the single point. At that point, there is no reference frame as there are no spatial dimensions to measure. Without a reference frame, we can't point to a physical center. However, it is measurable as the start of forward progressing time. Without any spatial dimensions and only a temporal dimension, the big bang or center of the universe is a when, not a where.

[@thetobi583]

I have a small theory of my own, no math or science to back it up... So what if space objects that we're seeing that are "older than the universe" are actually on the other "side" of the big bang from us? In the balloon example, our observable universe would only cover the center of the balloon out to our half plus 1% or so of the universe on the other "side". Stuff that we observe that's older than the universe to us are a part of that 1% on the other side of the big bang. Just a fun theory.

[@ShawnHCorey]

The balloon is an analog and like all analogs, it should not be used to much. Doing so often leads to false conclusions. Sorry.

[@thetobi583]

@@ShawnHCorey right. I forgot that even if there was a "center" to the universe, it'd be impossible for us to tell where it is...with our current technology, anyway. Thank you for just now reminding me of that. Instead of idly disregarding someone, try backing it up with a bit of science instead of superficial, empty words.

[@dezmondbrooks6271]

Gravity slows time, pulls in more mass. 13 billion years of mass being collected, means time is moving slow relative to the early universe. Massive object move faster through time. if red shifting happens for 3 dimensions(x, y, z), shouldn't it happen for the 4th(time)? Say light peaks every second (time relative to the origin). Say time is moving slower now due to gravity, so a second today is like 2 seconds at the lights origin. To us the light is taking 2 second to peak rather than 1. Longer time between peaks, longer wavelength, the light looks red. The universe is contracting

[@robertt9342]

Do you compared to the times of inflation or do you mean when it was going through a more “normal” expansion? Would the larger amount of energy and mass being concentrated in a smaller area have a larger affect on time dilation then a planet/solar system/galaxy being formed?

[@dezmondbrooks6271]

@@robertt9342 I'm not to sure I understand your question, but I can clarify. I'm saying gravity causes time dilation. Say the universe is contracting, wouldn't we still see red shifting? If red shifting happens on (x,y,z) why not the t-axis?

[@dezmondbrooks6271]

Say a second then is like half a second in our frame of reference, wouldn't the peaks and troughs of the light take long. The speed of light is the same for all observers, but not the color.

[@andrewspohrer7183]

I feel like the dark energy theory leaves a big plot-hole in physics.

[@TheCosmicGuy0111]

Nice

[@roobscoob47]

Spank the Hank~

[@KaiseruSoze]

The universe is one universe across in the same sense that one meter or one foot or one femtometer is one unit long.

[@damonedwards1544]

Maybe we're just shrinking.

[@osmosisjones4912]

The ball reached escape velocity and less friction or maybe in to another gravity well

[@rasheedgregory3459]

I don't understand. If nothing moves faster than light how can galaxies be moving away from us faster than light? Is that not contradicting the whole nothing moves faster than light? Or is it that our galaxy and whatever galaxy they are looking at are moving away from each other in oposite directions???

[@dcfromthev]

If space can expand, then it can probably warp too.

[@DaveSomething]

oh, good, I thought I was getting fatter...

[@dulynoted2427]

Usually, if there's a bang or a boom, things fly apart. Why wouldn't the universe be expanding, from the bang?

[@Bxu021]

Wait… if the galaxies that we see are in the past and they are accelerating away, but it’s the past… this imagery is confusing 😂

[@Nomaken2]

Okay. So how about the entire universe is a white hole and that's what dark energy is. Dark matter is matter that fell into our black hole and it is inaccessible to us because it can never actually cross its event horizon, but its gravity can. Our matter are eddies in the surface of the blackhole/whitehole.

[@krishnapraneeth9977]

Hi

[@mehedihasansabbir5997]

"We built the universe with ˹great˺ might, and We are certainly expanding ˹it˺." - Al Quran, Surah 51, Verse 47

[@rasheedgregory3459]

I'm going to start of with "I'm not a religous person but I do like to learn as much as I can from all religous beliefs" but from what you posted it sound like there are multiple gods and not just one.

[@osmosisjones4912]

What if there was more then 1 big bang that overlapped as they expanded

[@deanlion6293]

I wrote about this 10 years ago... unlimited big bangs..😏

[@martianmurray]

Then we’d have a cosmic earthquake, or a cosmiquake.

[@martianmurray]

Oh we might even have a cosmic eruption like a whitehole

[@altortugas5979]

You may think it’s a long way down the road to the chemist, but that’s just peanuts to space.

[@jamesleatherwood5125]

So red shift vs standard candle measurements are flawed. I tried to express this to a group of scientist when I was 14. Gravity is everywhere, gravity warps space, light has no mass but follows to contours of space time. So. the further away a light source is, the more warped the apparently straight path of the light has become. So tri=ying to measure red shift at the VERY EDGE of observable space, the uncountable warbles in space time have lengthened the path the light had to take, in the same way that a car going through a tunnel on a flatter straighter path is going to end up on the othe side in less distance, and there fore less time, than a similar car traveling a similar speed but going up and over the mountain. that curved path is longer than the straight one. Since light is traveling the ever changing waprs that the moving massive objects and all the interactions between light source and light receiver..... just saying

[@homosapien5684]

So, all our measurements are based on the assumption that we are at the centre of the universe?

[@sammorrow8420]

Is space expanding or is time constricting... The further out in space away from any source of gravity the faster time passes. Just because it takes more time to get somewhere doesn't mean its expanding....

[@ShawnHCorey]

Time and space are connected together. If one changes, the other must too. This is the result of the speed of light (in a vacuum) be constant with respect to an observer.

[@sammorrow8420]

@@ShawnHCorey when light goes away from a gravitational source it red shifts. So the further away out into a void the more light red shifts. 🤔 Could we be mistaking that for a dopler effect?

[@ShawnHCorey]

@@sammorrow8420 Both red shifts happen because the two measurements are made in different internal frames. If a light source is moving away from you, its light is red shifted because its internal frame is moving away from you. With gravity, the deeper you go into a gravitational well, the more time is slowed down. Or to look at it the other way around, the further away you go, the faster time runs. This makes each point in our universe have its own unique internal frame. With a light source deep within a gravitational well, its internal frame is such that its light is red shifted. Gravitational red shift and Doppler red shift are only different in what causes the difference in the internal frames. They are very closely related.

[@sammorrow8420]

@@ShawnHCorey good, we are pretty much on the same book if not the same page. i love theoretical astrophysics 💖💯

[@ShawnHCorey]

@@sammorrow8420 I find the more I study relativity, the weirder it gets.

[@AmanDeep-gb4bs]

So we just assume we are the center?

[@ShawnHCorey]

No but we are in the centre of everything we can see. It's the limitation of light that gives the illusion of being in the centre.

[@RyanCoomer]

Im a beekeeper in minnosota. I trap 7 Monarch Butterflies in a jar. I then place jar in the middle of the Beehive. It then is a joy for me to watch the bees frenzied Sting the Butterflies til they Disintegrate. IT creates some of the best tasting Honey I have ever produced!!!

[@j.21]

you commented on a wrong video?

[@toottoot24]

Weirdest self-promo I’ve ever seen

[@RyanCoomer]

@@j.21 shhhhhhhh

[@osmosisjones4912]

Simulation what if so historically accurate it's recreation

[@roc4485]

Will we be in a black hole?

[@charlesmarkgraf5265]

If the universe is expanding, outward as far as our understanding is concerned, I'm guessing the Catholic Church was right, and as much as they said that, the Earth was the center of the universe, because if everything in the universe is expanding outwardly from a center, and we can measure that expansion, and it's moving out away from us in all directions, if we are not the center then we must be pretty damn close to it....

[@cybersteel8]

What if I told you that the universe is expanding in all directions, relative to everything in the universe? So if I was on Mars, or Neptune, I would ALSO observe that everything is moving away from me in the same way we're observing it on Earth? Then the question would be, is there a "center" if everything is moving away from everything? Is EVERYTHING the center, or is there no center at all?

[@LuiGuiShi]

If Dark Energy cause the expansion of the Universe, what cause the creation of dark energy? From the video, all you say is that dark energy create more space that contain more dark energy. Where is it coming from? My sci-fi brain like to think everything a black hole absorb is transformed into dark energy.

[@ShawnHCorey]

One possible source of dark energy is gravitational radiation. Every time a mass changes momentum, it releases a tiny, small, little, teeny bit of energy. And there's a lot of mass in out universe and it is always changing momentum.

[@LuiGuiShi]

@@ShawnHCorey Thanks mate for that informative answer!

[@ray1956]

We need another way of observing the Universe than light 💡 waves. The more we see, the more we understand, that we DON’T understand👨🏿‍⚕️🤓keep searching🔭👏🏿👏🏿🦠💉😷

[@thecrowdfunddeepdive7032]

Nah man...Time...Is a flat circle

[@j.21]

.

[@deanlion6293]

It's nice that the telescope shows us what it looked like a long time ago, but do these super powerful telescopes show us anything that exists today,outside our galaxy ? 😁

[@MagikoopaGames]

It’s all based on how fast light travels. Outside our galaxy is very far so unless the telescope is significantly closer to it than earth then it’s not gonna change much, in terms of the age of what we can see. Space is so vast that seeing things in real time is near impossible

[@gig2705]

LULULULULUL

[@j.21]

what

[@kangooroo1]

lt's one of the dumbest things in the universe, trying to measure/explain INFINITY.

[@Brandon_Watson]

BOOO COMPILATIONS

[@VGAstudent]

I HATE it when you get it WRONG. The universe USED TO BE EXPANDING A LOT QUICKER AT THE BEGINNING OF TIME, IT'S EXPANDING A LOT LESS NOW!!! As your video shows, you said the James Web Telescope was seeing further out, that means further back in time, not NOW like you misstated @5:46 minutes into your video. Stop lying to people about time, it's really simple to understand but you seem to be fudgeing it up a LOT! If you look at the rate of the universe expansion locally, it's a LOT slower than when you look OUT (therefore BACK) in spacetime called light-years, you can't say what it is doing NOW. You can only say what it was doing then. You really need to edit this video.