What Physicists Got Wrong About Time #quantummechanics #science @ArvinAsh

Uploaded November 2024 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago

Detailed Explanation: youtu.be/L5QjS_grHh0 "Could Time Really Be An Illusion?"
This video discusses how events can occur in Quantum Mechanics without time passing. It has to be looked at like the frames of a movie.

What Physicists Got Wrong About Time #quantummechanics #science

How EVERYTHING in the Universe is a Spring, Mathematically anyway

Does Determinism in Physics Shatter Free Will?

Take a Journey INSIDE a Massive Black Hole!

Is There A HIDDEN Massive PLANET in Our Solar System?

$What Was There BEFORE the Big Bang? 3 Valid Hypotheses! Sign up for ESET Home internet security for FREE: https://www.eset.com/us/protecting-art-smart/ ESET is sponsoring the STARMUS festival in Bratislava, Slovakia May 12-17, 2024: https://www.starmus.com/ TALK TO ME on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/arvinash REFERENCES Video: A Universe from nothing: https://youtu.be/v8-oocxPwlM Video: Eternal Inflation: https://youtu.be/nziePav5OMg Multiverse Theory: https://tinyurl.com/2cv2qxbm Math proof universe can come from nothing: https://tinyurl.com/np2vrty Paper of above: https://tinyurl.com/223t86z6 What came before big bang: https://tinyurl.com/y7g4pgwp CHAPTERS 0:00 Big bang: Lamda-CDM model 3:09 Sponsor: ESET 4:22 Cyclic universe 5:33 How likely is cyclic model? 7:53 Multiverse: Eternal Inflation 11:27 Universe from nothing 15:23 Why cant we answer this question? SUMMARY What came before the Big Bang? what happened before the big bang? Since time is thought to have started at the big bang, asking what happened before is like asking what is North of the North pole? It may have no meaning. But there are three good theories. One is the idea of a cyclic or bouncing universe, where the Big Bang is just the latest of many beginnings, in an eternal series of cosmic expansions and contractions. The universe begins from an initial tiny state (a singularity?) in which all the matter and energy of the universe is contained in an infinitesimally small volume. The universe then expanded, and after 13.8 billion years is at its current state. It will keep expanding for perhaps billions more years, and then it will contract for another long period or time until it is tiny again. And then the cycle repeats itself over and over again for eternity. But the current rate of expansion of the universe is not slowing down. It would need to stop and reverse at some time in the future. But thats not what we observe. If the lambda cdm model is incomplete, then the cyclic model could be correct. Another hypothesis about what came before the Big Bang is a multiverse, where our universe is just one bubble in a frothy sea of universes, each with its own laws of physics. There are many types of multiverses, but this one stems from the theorized concept of eternal inflation. The idea is that there exists an infinite spacetime that is expanding faster than the speed of light. This is what we call inflation. Inflation is believed to have occurred in our universe shortly after the Big Bang for an extremely short period of time But in this short time, the universe expanded by a factor of 10^78 in size. Since quantum mechanics ensures that there will always be some randomness, it’s possible that inflation could last a bit longer or shorter than expected in different parts of the universe. In the 1980s, Paul Steinhardt, Andrei Linde and Alexander Vilenkin realized that the exponential expansion of cosmic inflation, although it stopped in our part of the universe, could continue in other unobservable parts of the universe. And if that’s the case, then the universe we are familiar with, may be a very small fraction of all that exists. It could have stoped in other parts of the universe, forming other bubble universes. This could go on for eternity. Our universe would be nothing but a very tiny part of an unimaginably larger whole. Another theory is that our universe could have come from nothing. At the subatomic level in empty space, particles are popping in and out of existence all the time. These are virtual particles. They borrow energy from the vacuum and give it right back so quickly that no conservation laws are violated. Energy is conserved. Cosmologists have speculated that even in a universe where no matter, space or time exists, as long as the laws of quantum mechanics exist, spacetime itself could have emerged in a quantum fluctuation, because in quantum mechanics, anything that is not forbidden by conservation laws necessarily happens with some finite probability. If we live in a closed universe, like a sphere is a closed universe, then all the positive energy of matter is perfectly balanced by gravity, which has negative energy. So, just like with virtual particles, no net energy is created. Just as virtual particles come in and out of existence without breaking any conservation laws, a small empty space could come into existence probabilistically due to quantum fluctuations. And since time is connected to space, time would follow in this nucleation. A scientific paper authored by 3 Chinese physicists, titled “spontaneous creation of the universe from nothing,” was published in 2014, which showed a mathematical proof of how this could happen. #bigbang #time Why can’t we turn the clock back just a little bit further and figure out what happened just a tiny fraction of a second before the Big Bang? because current understanding of physics breaks down at the singularity, the moment that predates the Big Bang.$

The Surprising Truth About the Higgs Boson Discovery at CERN

$5 Most Famous Science Theories - COMPLETELY WRONG! Click this link https://boot.dev/?promo=ARVINASH and use my code ARVINASH to get 25% off your first payment for boot.dev TALK TO ARVIN on PATREON https://www.patreon.com/arvinash REFERENCE VIDEOS How General Relativity works https://youtu.be/tzQC3uYL67U Newton, the Greatest Scientist who ever lived https://youtu.be/MApnf7L4g44 Quantum ElectroDynamics (QED) https://youtu.be/PutOOpAkjQ4 All Physics Explained in 15 mins https://youtu.be/TTHazQeM8v8 CHAPTERS 0:00 Science is littered with bad theories 0:56 Aristotles mechanics was really bad 2:25 The crazy heat fluid theory, Caloric 5:53 The Luminiferous Aether 7:53 Newtons failure: Corpuscular light 9:48 Newtons law of universal gravitation 12:05 How to spot when a theory is BAD SUMMARY Science is full of once-brilliant ideas that now seem absurd. They weren’t crazy when proposed—they were the best explanations available. Each was eventually replaced by a theory that explained more phenomena with fewer assumptions. Looking back at five major fallen theories reveals how science self-corrects and refines itself. For nearly two millennia, Aristotle’s view of motion dominated: objects required a push to keep moving; heavy things fell faster; fire rose to its natural place. The world seemed to confirm this—until Galileo realized that motion continues unless something interferes. Friction, not nature’s “desire for rest,” slows things down. Newton later formalized this in his first law of motion: an object in motion stays in motion unless acted on by a force. By uncovering hidden forces, science learned that nature’s rules are simpler than they appear. In the 18th century, scientists believed heat was a fluid called caloric that flowed from hot to cold. It explained everyday experiences, but experiments like boring cannon barrels producing endless heat challenged it. James Joule’s paddle-wheel experiments showed that mechanical work could generate heat, proving it wasn’t a substance but energy in motion. The kinetic theory of gases replaced caloric with molecular motion, leading to thermodynamics and the concept of entropy—energy’s natural tendency to spread out. Caloric theory fell because it violated energy conservation, though we still talk about “heat flow” today. #aether Nineteenth-century physicists also thought light must travel through a medium—the luminiferous aether. All waves, after all, needed something to ripple through. But the 1887 Michelson-Morley experiment found no difference in light speed regardless of direction, implying no aether wind. Einstein resolved this by asserting two principles: the laws of physics are the same for all observers moving at constant velocity, and the speed of light is constant for all of them. Space and time themselves adjust—lengths contract, clocks slow—removing the need for aether. Special relativity explained more with fewer assumptions. The concept of a universal “field,” however, survived in modern quantum field theory, where light is an excitation of the electromagnetic field filling spacetime. Even Newton, history’s most influential scientist, wasn’t always right. He pictured light as tiny particles or corpuscles, which explained reflection and refraction but not diffraction or interference. Those patterns showed light behaving like a wave. Yet the photoelectric effect revealed that light also behaves as particles—photons—whose energy depends on frequency, a discovery that earned Einstein his Nobel Prize. Modern quantum electrodynamics unifies both pictures: light is simultaneously wave and particle, depending on how it’s observed. Newton’s law of gravity—forces acting instantaneously between masses—worked flawlessly for centuries, until Mercury’s orbit deviated slightly from prediction. Einstein’s general relativity solved it by reimagining gravity as the curvature of spacetime itself. The theory explained Mercury’s precession, light bending near the Sun, time dilation, and gravitational waves, all later confirmed. Newton’s law remains a special case of Einstein’s, valid for weak gravity and low speeds. From Aristotle to caloric, aether, corpuscles, and Newton’s gravity, the same pattern repeats: old theories are absorbed into deeper, more unifying frameworks. Better theories expand scope, increase precision, unify phenomena, and recover what worked before. Science isn’t a fixed book of truths—it’s a constantly revised notebook. The losers weren’t foolish; they were necessary steps toward sharper understanding. Curiosity and skepticism remain the true engines of progress.$

The Two Mathematical Ways to Get an Expanding Universe! #darkenergy

If Neutrons Are UNSTABLE, Why isnt the Universe ONLY made of Protons?

How the Missing Mass Problem Leads to Dark Matter!