WSU: The Accelerating Universe with Adam Riess

[@parralox]

Enjoyed the lecture, but why….WHY… do you flash the highly detailed PowerPoint Presentations on screen for only a few seconds, but force the viewer to study Adam Reiss (with his Blue & White check shirt, both lapels buttoned down, short sleeves, black belt with battery packs holstered on the left and right and black digital watch, not to mention his 3/4 full bottle of water) for extended periods of time?

[@mscir]

Good lecture, thank you.

[@davecarsley8773]

Seeing the email exchanges amongst the team when the non-zero constant came out of the data was very interesting. I really like Alex Philipanko's messages. Basically saying, _"Hey, if we get proven wrong, then so be it, but we did solid science here, and we need to trust ourselves enough to put our conclusions out there for others to scrutinize!"_ I've seen a lot of Alex on TV/internet, and although I don't know him at all personally, he always seems like such an upbeat, positive scientist who is truly excited about the wonders of the universe. I really like seeing these private emails as they seem to provide a small indication that the very likeable public persona he portrays on TV might actually align with who he is in real life.

[@tonyl4264]

Just finished that part. So cool!

[@rguimatorres]

This new idea of using parallax is certainly promising. Nice presentation, by the way.

[@frankxiang1025]

A very interesting presentation and inspiring.

[@brianlund1760]

I love letting my inner "geekdom" come out now and then. I find these videos informative and brain stirring. Keep up the good work.

[@jfrenzen3084]

Outstanding! Adam Riess himself should serve a ‘standard candle’ for lecturers in most disciplines.

[@mdaniels6311]

As a school teacher I appreciate other people who are excellent teachers. He is an excellent teacher. He makes simple comparisons that anyone can understand. The trick to making people understand complex things, is compare it to simple things in their life they understand. Knowing how to make those comparisons is an art.

[@mscir]

Is space, independent of the matter within it, expanding, or is the matter-space continuum expanding?

[@injunsun]

Spacetime is itself expanding, without regard to the four known forces. Eventually, it will be expanded enough that molecules won't be able to hold together, and then later, atoms will themselves be unable to hold together, then major particles will lose the ability as well. It will end in quarks in spacetime, as evenly distributed as spacetime can accomplish via osmosis, seeking the highest Entropy.

[@toddjoseph2412]

@@injunsun My question would be why does anyone think that it stops at quarks, why wouldn't the expansion also tear quarks apart?

[@injunsun]

@@toddjoseph2412 Because quarks seem to be the fundamental particle from which all else is constructed. If they themselves have something lower, then that would become the base.

[@toddjoseph2412]

@@injunsun My understanding of it says that the amount of energy it takes to break a quark, you would basically just create another quark. So the question really is what happens when it happens all the time and every quark. Another big bang maybe?

[@injunsun]

@@toddjoseph2412 Okay, now that's an intriguing question. Presumably, the vacuum energy of Spacetime, if it's not infinite, could fill up with enough particles to again form higher particles. I can't envision this soupy material gaining enough energy to draw back Spacetime, but if pockets of Spacetime existed, such as in black holes, it is thought they may pop out into pocket universes, perhaps existing along side our own in a higher dimension, like bubbles in a time-forward stream. I also wonder, if the expansion stops, because energy has reached maximum Entropy, would the force of whatever our universe exists within try to recompact it? I mean, if it's expanding within another dimension, because of energy within, but pushing against say, a 5th dimension, would that dimension then push it back into a singularity? I am just guessing, totally. I hope the "Many Universes" theory is right. I want parallels, where other mes are happy, because nobody I ever loved ever died before me. Or something like that. Somewhere, somewhen, I am an X-Man, with amazing abilities. 😊 Some version of me slips between Universes, collecting powers.

[@JimboJitsu]

great class thanks! I had caught the "chat" with Brian Greene and loved the blue screen background... anyways I appreciate the extra information here; good job!

[@pb4520]

Thankyou excellent!

[@michaelconley2793]

How do we know the objects we observed just aren't the objects that were moving the fastest and are so far from everything else there is nothing to act on the them to slow them? So the universe isn't accelerating, it's just the only things to be that far away we're moving faster and that's how they got there? In other words, don't farthest away objects have to be the fastest moving, so when we measure the red shift of the farthest super nova, they have to be the fastest moving as well?

[@jonmo111]

great teacher

[@jorgearango6108]

Thank you!

[@taraprzybyl264]

If we can only see into the past- do we know if the universe is expanding right now, in our present day?

[@jimjackson4256]

If the velocity of galaxies is proportional to their distance then of necessity aren’t they accelerating?

[@alec2726]

Is the escape velocity a pull? How do you, or I explain that? What is pulling?

[@stevesastrohowardkings2245]

Is the universe expanding or is it just being or Adding on too also where and when ?

[@swagdivgamer7247]

No nothing is adding it's just expanding

[@higreentj]

We need a deeper understanding of the Higgs quantum scalar field.

[@adumberfling9959]

We need you to get in that.... Stat

[@adumberfling9959]

*on that.... My bad, unless you have to like Ant-Man yourself into the quantum realm to get a deeper understanding of said HQSF...

[@pieterswart497]

What about the firmament

[@bsiix1576]

Best of the 20+ Ive recently watched

[@mdaniels6311]

Just a thought I had recently.. but when we fall we accelerate into the ground. But, from our POV, we don't experience an acceleration (we only experience it when we oppose this motion). Doesn't this imply that space is accelerating outwards from massive objects like the Earth? When we sit down, we experience an aceleration (gravity). So surely, that means space is rushing past us at all times. What if mass creates new spact in real time, and that's what causes the expansion and acceleration of the universe? That would mean there is no dark matter or dark energy. Has anyone looked into this? I dont know the math detiail, but intuitively this makes sense to me.

[@hn5460]

U did try, but it was all messed up. "when we fall we accelerate into the ground. But, from our POV, we don't experience an acceleration (we only experience it when we oppose this motion). Doesn't this imply that space is accelerating outwards from massive objects like the Earth?" Okay, u fall, and feel nothing! That is so obvious, bc every molecule in your body is just happily going together with the same acceleration. Nothing happened to the relationship between them, then how on Earth they can cause any trouble (feeling) for your body? Now back to your interpretation: space is accelerating outwards...: No, space does not accelerate, it is curved by the mass of the Earth and your body just moves through those curved lines of space-time pointing toward the Earth, where it is curved the most. This has nothing to do with the expansion of the space. The space is expanding and that is the truth, so we have to find an explanation for it, and the best explanation atm that fits most of the other observations is the existence of dark energy that does the expansion job.

[@h.edwardrivera3411]

A real Brain he is!

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

Yeah sounds like everywhere we look its different speed of expansion. So it's not isotropic perhaps . On a funny note pur ancestors was creepy about space being a fermanant substance we like to call it dark matter with dark energy. That its so plyabale its gravity wells and manifolds lol

[@guyfonck904]

When talking about the expanding universe, it would be fair enough to mention Georges Lemaître, the belgian priest/astronomer who was the first human brain ever to propose the expanding universe. It's astonishing to talk about Hubble's law and constant without even mentioning the person who predicted this theory long before the observations of Mr. Hubble himself. Other than this patriotic aberration, clear presentation

[@JimboJitsu]

lol

[@mrgonzalez-colon4815]

I agree. The priest who expressed his faith about the creation of the universe in scientific terms. Not a coincidence that a theory on the primeval atom and the belief that there is a beginning (Genesis 1:1) found harmony in the brain of the Catholic priest Georges Lemaitre. This is why Hubble's law is also known as Hubble-Lemaitre's law.

[@Seekthetruth3000]

One million years from now, will anybody know who Einstein was?

[@teodordl]

probably not and that’s a beautifully nihilistic thought

[@spotshortmanipulators4721]

One Million Years From Now Will Anybody Know Who Jesus Was ??

[@jimjackson4256]

Ask your rabbi ! What the hell would he know except if he took astrophysics.

[@mrgonzalez-colon4815]

My hypothesis: In the same way that one universe may lead to many other universes (multiverse), a single black hole in space can lead to many other ones, a multi-black hole. This similarity between a black hole and the universe might be plausible based on the Penrose-Hawking singularity theorem. What applies to the universe as a whole can also be applied to a black hole. Therefore, those many black holes that are the product of a single black hole are scattered throughout space and the continuous effect of black holes reproducing themselves is what powers the acceleration of the universe. Ultimately, black holes might be the reason of dark energy.

[@keithshemeley612]

Sarkar's paper seems to be ignored.

[@ChargerX4u]

At 8:40 I didn't think he did such a good job explaining "how" he knows that space is expanding and that it's not simply, that galaxies are accelerating ever faster away from everything else. I will watch this entire video again when I get time but, I'm not buying the existence of either dark energy or dark matter either and nothing I've seen over the past 15 or more years has convinced me that either is true. Have you heard the craziest theories yet? Now "scientists" are saying we exist in a multi-verse! They're getting their ideas out of comic books now. WTF!? All of this, dark matter/energy, expanding space, multi-verse and the newest thing is that now they're trying to bring back "the aether" they got rid of 70 years ago, all of this is to try and explain creation and nature without God. That's the bottom line. Like I said I will watch this video again and see if he can explain how the redshift indicates that space is expanding and NOT that galaxies are simply just accelerating faster away from us as he wants us to just assume, as with his people mover analogy, that "space expanding" is an additional "tool" or "means" to explain things. What he should have said is we don't know if space is expanding or better, "we can't prove it".

[@VagabondiOfficialTV]

Fog Horns ..I was born and raised by the ocean but I never know the existence 🤔

[@adumberfling9959]

Ships have horns and shores have houses so I thought was my past reality! Gasp! Has the Mandela effect struck again!?

[@dadsonworldwide3238]

Everything is moving and spinning redshirt is to limited and full of error. We have 5 or 6 ways ti try and measure they all give us massively different expansion speeds. 65 to 72 is there range this is extremely huge speed differences. Its not like a few mph lol We simply might live in a weider universe thats no isotropic meaning photon decay is different depending on location and time . In other words life if star very different depending on location time. This would mean every field we study is wrong outside of earth or galaxy so this osnt gonna get talked about much . In fact it scares physics to death. Theu can't get passed it yet.

[@abdullahsalah917]

Man when i saw the thumbnail i thought he was elon musk lol

[@injunsun]

More intelligent, tho, and slightly better looking.

[@adumberfling9959]

@@injunsun I smell some salty jelly belly

[@adumberfling9959]

You feeling ok tho? ya should probably get your face balls looked at all awkward like just to be safe

[@ASLUHLUHC3]

@@adumberfling9959 Butthurt fanboy spotted

[@adumberfling9959]

@@ASLUHLUHC3 butthurt hater alert haha

[@curiouscat8396]

Very entertaining, very entertaining, but/t not very informative. At the end, of it, all, I am still none the wiser! I feel like Costello in the "Who's on first, base" comedy sketch/routine: . I know that SP, AR and BS are really smart/sharp, guys, but/t I have read a few articles in the SA by SP and AR, and watched a few 1 hr long videos in (the) YT by AR and BS, and AR is a great talker and BS is very entertaining, if not very informative, but they never explain the problem! They complain that the theorists won’t do their jub and explain it, away, to them, but why don’t they do their jub and explain the problem, to us, first!? . Now, I don’t actually have a problem with the AE and DE. My model predicts them. It says that the Universe has to be either expanding or contracting, unless it’s on a cusp, and the expansion has to be either accelerating or decelerating… but I still don’t understand how they came to the conclusion that it is accelerating!? . What do they mean by “The distant type Ia SNS are fainter, and therefore further, away, than expected”? Relative to what? Their z and D=v/H0=cz/H0? OK, so why not just say that H0 is decreasing, rather than that the expansion is accelerating? And, they do say that H0 IS decreasing!? . So what do they actually mean by the accelerating expansion? That the rate of expansion is increasing? Meaning what, exactly? That distances are increasing? And yet they say that velocities are decreasing!? I don’t know. “Third base! AH'”!