Why is our universe fine-tuned for life? | Brian Greene

Why is our universe fine-tuned for life? | Brian Greene


Translator: Jenny Zurawell
A few months ago
the Nobel Prize in physics
was awarded to two teams of astronomers
for a discovery that has been hailed
as one of the most important
astronomical observations ever.
And today, after briefly describing what they found,
I’m going to tell you about a highly controversial framework
for explaining their discovery,
namely the possibility
that way beyond the Earth,
the Milky Way and other distant galaxies,
we may find that our universe
is not the only universe,
but is instead
part of a vast complex of universes
that we call the multiverse.
Now the idea of a multiverse is a strange one.
I mean, most of us were raised to believe
that the word “universe” means everything.
And I say most of us with forethought,
as my four-year-old daughter has heard me speak of these ideas since she was born.
And last year I was holding her
and I said, “Sophia,
I love you more than anything in the universe.”
And she turned to me and said, “Daddy,
universe or multiverse?”
(Laughter)
But barring such an anomalous upbringing,
it is strange to imagine
other realms separate from ours,
most with fundamentally different features,
that would rightly be called universes of their own.
And yet,
speculative though the idea surely is,
I aim to convince you
that there’s reason for taking it seriously,
as it just might be right.
I’m going to tell the story of the multiverse in three parts.
In part one,
I’m going to describe those Nobel Prize-winning results
and to highlight a profound mystery
which those results revealed.
In part two,
I’ll offer a solution to that mystery.
It’s based on an approach called string theory,
and that’s where the idea of the multiverse
will come into the story.
Finally, in part three,
I’m going to describe a cosmological theory
called inflation,
which will pull all the pieces of the story together.
Okay, part one starts back in 1929
when the great astronomer Edwin Hubble
realized that the distant galaxies
were all rushing away from us,
establishing that space itself is stretching,
it’s expanding.
Now this was revolutionary.
The prevailing wisdom was that on the largest of scales
the universe was static.
But even so,
there was one thing that everyone was certain of:
The expansion must be slowing down.
That, much as the gravitational pull of the Earth
slows the ascent of an apple tossed upward,
the gravitational pull
of each galaxy on every other
must be slowing
the expansion of space.
Now let’s fast-forward to the 1990s
when those two teams of astronomers
I mentioned at the outset
were inspired by this reasoning
to measure the rate
at which the expansion has been slowing.
And they did this
by painstaking observations
of numerous distant galaxies,
allowing them to chart
how the expansion rate has changed over time.
Here’s the surprise:
They found that the expansion is not slowing down.
Instead they found that it’s speeding up,
going faster and faster.
That’s like tossing an apple upward
and it goes up faster and faster.
Now if you saw an apple do that,
you’d want to know why.
What’s pushing on it?
Similarly, the astronomers’ results
are surely well-deserving of the Nobel Prize,
but they raised an analogous question.
What force is driving all galaxies
to rush away from every other
at an ever-quickening speed?
Well the most promising answer
comes from an old idea of Einstein’s.
You see, we are all used to gravity
being a force that does one thing,
pulls objects together.
But in Einstein’s theory of gravity,
his general theory of relativity,
gravity can also push things apart.
How? Well according to Einstein’s math,
if space is uniformly filled
with an invisible energy,
sort of like a uniform, invisible mist,
then the gravity generated by that mist
would be repulsive,
repulsive gravity,
which is just what we need to explain the observations.
Because the repulsive gravity
of an invisible energy in space —
we now call it dark energy,
but I’ve made it smokey white here so you can see it —
its repulsive gravity
would cause each galaxy to push against every other,
driving expansion to speed up,
not slow down.
And this explanation
represents great progress.
But I promised you a mystery
here in part one.
Here it is.
When the astronomers worked out
how much of this dark energy
must be infusing space
to account for the cosmic speed up,
look at what they found.
This number is small.
Expressed in the relevant unit,
it is spectacularly small.
And the mystery is to explain this peculiar number.
We want this number
to emerge from the laws of physics,
but so far no one has found a way to do that.
Now you might wonder,
should you care?
Maybe explaining this number
is just a technical issue,
a technical detail of interest to experts,
but of no relevance to anybody else.
Well it surely is a technical detail,
but some details really matter.
Some details provide
windows into uncharted realms of reality,
and this peculiar number may be doing just that,
as the only approach that’s so far made headway to explain it
invokes the possibility of other universes —
an idea that naturally emerges from string theory,
which takes me to part two: string theory.
So hold the mystery of the dark energy
in the back of your mind
as I now go on to tell you
three key things about string theory.
First off, what is it?
Well it’s an approach to realize Einstein’s dream
of a unified theory of physics,
a single overarching framework
that would be able to describe
all the forces at work in the universe.
And the central idea of string theory
is quite straightforward.
It says that if you examine
any piece of matter ever more finely,
at first you’ll find molecules
and then you’ll find atoms and subatomic particles.
But the theory says that if you could probe smaller,
much smaller than we can with existing technology,
you’d find something else inside these particles —
a little tiny vibrating filament of energy,
a little tiny vibrating string.
And just like the strings on a violin,
they can vibrate in different patterns
producing different musical notes.
These little fundamental strings,
when they vibrate in different patterns,
they produce different kinds of particles —
so electrons, quarks, neutrinos, photons,
all other particles
would be united into a single framework,
as they would all arise from vibrating strings.
It’s a compelling picture,
a kind of cosmic symphony,
where all the richness
that we see in the world around us
emerges from the music
that these little, tiny strings can play.
But there’s a cost
to this elegant unification,
because years of research
have shown that the math of string theory doesn’t quite work.
It has internal inconsistencies,
unless we allow
for something wholly unfamiliar —
extra dimensions of space.
That is, we all know about the usual three dimensions of space.
And you can think about those
as height, width and depth.
But string theory says that, on fantastically small scales,
there are additional dimensions
crumpled to a tiny size so small
that we have not detected them.
But even though the dimensions are hidden,
they would have an impact on things that we can observe
because the shape of the extra dimensions
constrains how the strings can vibrate.
And in string theory,
vibration determines everything.
So particle masses, the strengths of forces,
and most importantly, the amount of dark energy
would be determined
by the shape of the extra dimensions.
So if we knew the shape of the extra dimensions,
we should be able to calculate these features,
calculate the amount of dark energy.
The challenge
is we don’t know
the shape of the extra dimensions.
All we have
is a list of candidate shapes
allowed by the math.
Now when these ideas were first developed,
there were only about five different candidate shapes,
so you can imagine
analyzing them one-by-one
to determine if any yield
the physical features we observe.
But over time the list grew
as researchers found other candidate shapes.
From five, the number grew into the hundreds and then the thousands —
A large, but still manageable, collection to analyze,
since after all,
graduate students need something to do.
But then the list continued to grow
into the millions and the billions, until today.
The list of candidate shapes
has soared to about 10 to the 500.
So, what to do?
Well some researchers lost heart,
concluding that was so many candidate shapes for the extra dimensions,
each giving rise to different physical features,
string theory would never make
definitive, testable predictions.
But others turned this issue on its head,
taking us to the possibility of a multiverse.
Here’s the idea.
Maybe each of these shapes is on an equal footing with every other.
Each is as real as every other,
in the sense
that there are many universes,
each with a different shape, for the extra dimensions.
And this radical proposal
has a profound impact on this mystery:
the amount of dark energy revealed by the Nobel Prize-winning results.
Because you see,
if there are other universes,
and if those universes
each have, say, a different shape for the extra dimensions,
then the physical features of each universe will be different,
and in particular,
the amount of dark energy in each universe
will be different.
Which means that the mystery
of explaining the amount of dark energy we’ve now measured
would take on a wholly different character.
In this context,
the laws of physics can’t explain one number for the dark energy
because there isn’t just one number,
there are many numbers.
Which means
we have been asking the wrong question.
It’s that the right question to ask is,
why do we humans find ourselves in a universe
with a particular amount of dark energy we’ve measured
instead of any of the other possibilities
that are out there?
And that’s a question on which we can make headway.
Because those universes
that have much more dark energy than ours,
whenever matter tries to clump into galaxies,
the repulsive push of the dark energy is so strong
that it blows the clump apart
and galaxies don’t form.
And in those universes that have much less dark energy,
well they collapse back on themselves so quickly
that, again, galaxies don’t form.
And without galaxies, there are no stars, no planets
and no chance
for our form of life
to exist in those other universes.
So we find ourselves in a universe
with the particular amount of dark energy we’ve measured
simply because our universe has conditions
hospitable to our form of life.
And that would be that.
Mystery solved,
multiverse found.
Now some find this explanation unsatisfying.
We’re used to physics
giving us definitive explanations for the features we observe.
But the point is,
if the feature you’re observing
can and does take on
a wide variety of different values
across the wider landscape of reality,
then thinking one explanation
for a particular value
is simply misguided.
An early example
comes from the great astronomer Johannes Kepler
who was obsessed with understanding
a different number —
why the Sun is 93 million miles away from the Earth.
And he worked for decades trying to explain this number,
but he never succeeded, and we know why.
Kepler was asking
the wrong question.
We now know that there are many planets
at a wide variety of different distances from their host stars.
So hoping that the laws of physics
will explain one particular number, 93 million miles,
well that is simply wrongheaded.
Instead the right question to ask is,
why do we humans find ourselves on a planet
at this particular distance,
instead of any of the other possibilities?
And again, that’s a question we can answer.
Those planets which are much closer to a star like the Sun
would be so hot
that our form of life wouldn’t exist.
And those planets that are much farther away from the star,
well they’re so cold
that, again, our form of life would not take hold.
So we find ourselves
on a planet at this particular distance
simply because it yields conditions
vital to our form of life.
And when it comes to planets and their distances,
this clearly is the right kind of reasoning.
The point is,
when it comes to universes and the dark energy that they contain,
it may also be the right kind of reasoning.
One key difference, of course,
is we know that there are other planets out there,
but so far I’ve only speculated on the possibility
that there might be other universes.
So to pull it all together,
we need a mechanism
that can actually generate other universes.
And that takes me to my final part, part three.
Because such a mechanism has been found
by cosmologists trying to understand the Big Bang.
You see, when we speak of the Big Bang,
we often have an image
of a kind of cosmic explosion
that created our universe
and set space rushing outward.
But there’s a little secret.
The Big Bang leaves out something pretty important,
the Bang.
It tells us how the universe evolved after the Bang,
but gives us no insight
into what would have powered the Bang itself.
And this gap was finally filled
by an enhanced version of the Big Bang theory.
It’s called inflationary cosmology,
which identified a particular kind of fuel
that would naturally generate
an outward rush of space.
The fuel is based on something called a quantum field,
but the only detail that matters for us
is that this fuel proves to be so efficient
that it’s virtually impossible
to use it all up,
which means in the inflationary theory,
the Big Bang giving rise to our universe
is likely not a one-time event.
Instead the fuel not only generated our Big Bang,
but it would also generate countless other Big Bangs,
each giving rise to its own separate universe
with our universe becoming but one bubble
in a grand cosmic bubble bath of universes.
And now, when we meld this with string theory,
here’s the picture we’re led to.
Each of these universes has extra dimensions.
The extra dimensions take on a wide variety of different shapes.
The different shapes yield different physical features.
And we find ourselves in one universe instead of another
simply because it’s only in our universe
that the physical features, like the amount of dark energy,
are right for our form of life to take hold.
And this is the compelling but highly controversial picture
of the wider cosmos
that cutting-edge observation and theory
have now led us to seriously consider.
One big remaining question, of course, is,
could we ever confirm
the existence of other universes?
Well let me describe
one way that might one day happen.
The inflationary theory
already has strong observational support.
Because the theory predicts
that the Big Bang would have been so intense
that as space rapidly expanded,
tiny quantum jitters from the micro world
would have been stretched out to the macro world,
yielding a distinctive fingerprint,
a pattern of slightly hotter spots and slightly colder spots,
across space,
which powerful telescopes have now observed.
Going further, if there are other universes,
the theory predicts that every so often
those universes can collide.
And if our universe got hit by another,
that collision
would generate an additional subtle pattern
of temperature variations across space
that we might one day
be able to detect.
And so exotic as this picture is,
it may one day be grounded
in observations,
establishing the existence of other universes.
I’ll conclude
with a striking implication
of all these ideas
for the very far future.
You see, we learned
that our universe is not static,
that space is expanding,
that that expansion is speeding up
and that there might be other universes
all by carefully examining
faint pinpoints of starlight
coming to us from distant galaxies.
But because the expansion is speeding up,
in the very far future,
those galaxies will rush away so far and so fast
that we won’t be able to see them —
not because of technological limitations,
but because of the laws of physics.
The light those galaxies emit,
even traveling at the fastest speed, the speed of light,
will not be able to overcome
the ever-widening gulf between us.
So astronomers in the far future
looking out into deep space
will see nothing but an endless stretch
of static, inky, black stillness.
And they will conclude
that the universe is static and unchanging
and populated by a single central oasis of matter
that they inhabit —
a picture of the cosmos
that we definitively know to be wrong.
Now maybe those future astronomers will have records
handed down from an earlier era,
like ours,
attesting to an expanding cosmos
teeming with galaxies.
But would those future astronomers
believe such ancient knowledge?
Or would they believe
in the black, static empty universe
that their own state-of-the-art observations reveal?
I suspect the latter.
Which means that we are living
through a remarkably privileged era
when certain deep truths about the cosmos
are still within reach
of the human spirit of exploration.
It appears that it may not always be that way.
Because today’s astronomers,
by turning powerful telescopes to the sky,
have captured a handful of starkly informative photons —
a kind of cosmic telegram
billions of years in transit.
and the message echoing across the ages is clear.
Sometimes nature guards her secrets
with the unbreakable grip
of physical law.
Sometimes the true nature of reality beckons
from just beyond the horizon.
Thank you very much.
(Applause)
Chris Anderson: Brian, thank you.
The range of ideas you’ve just spoken about
are dizzying, exhilarating, incredible.
How do you think
of where cosmology is now,
in a sort of historical side?
Are we in the middle of something unusual historically in your opinion?
BG: Well it’s hard to say.
When we learn that astronomers of the far future
may not have enough information to figure things out,
the natural question is, maybe we’re already in that position
and certain deep, critical features of the universe
already have escaped our ability to understand
because of how cosmology evolves.
So from that perspective,
maybe we will always be asking questions
and never be able to fully answer them.
On the other hand, we now can understand
how old the universe is.
We can understand
how to understand the data from the microwave background radiation
that was set down 13.72 billion years ago —
and yet, we can do calculations today to predict how it will look
and it matches.
Holy cow! That’s just amazing.
So on the one hand, it’s just incredible where we’ve gotten,
but who knows what sort of blocks we may find in the future.
CA: You’re going to be around for the next few days.
Maybe some of these conversations can continue.
Thank you. Thank you, Brian. (BG: My pleasure.)
(Applause)

100 thoughts to “Why is our universe fine-tuned for life? | Brian Greene”

  1. I haven't heard such pretentious bafflegab since the last time Ted Cruz lectured someone on humility. "Ifffff all these unsusubstantiated things I'm speaking so spookily about were true, Ifffffff, then the universe would be an even more magical place . . . " Poppycock.

  2. I'm not a science person but in fact I fell in love with just the introduction and I understood everything Brian said. Thanks so much Brian.

  3. for now, an unprovable idea to try and get away from the uncomfortableness of implying that a creator might have made everything. That is what the multi universe hypothesis is.

    To be fair a multi-universe may be possible but that wouldn't take away from anything

  4. Another 7 years without proof. If You can´t prove a theory it´s not science. Even he has to admit that and stop tell the story of the dead cow called string theory.

  5. Everything we see and experience in these meat suits is made from Light, pure conscious love, so advanced that the only way we can understand is to have the mind of a child.

  6. There are 122 zeros in that "Peculiar" number, followed by "138".
    Well, there are 122 Anthropic Constants & a 10^138 chance that any other planet in the observable universe contains life.
    This number is important cause it may prove intelligent design.

  7. I'll keep this simple. You can"t prove the existence of a God no more than you can prove a big bang theory until you prove what created that God or how there can be nothing to begin with and a big bang formed from nothing. So please, we are beings who barely existed 200,000 years on one planet where we never left except for one trip to our moon, trying to act like we have the answers. There is an entire area deep in our own oceans we haven't even explored and still discovering new life, yet we think we can answer the existence of the universe and other universes through a telescope. Please, take all your brain power and try to develop technology to leave the planet and explore. Not stand on stage with a microphone headset making a living babbling on and on about theories. Again, we are an infant being on this planet alone where we haven't been around as long as the now extinct dinosaurs had existed. Stop trying to intellect each other like you been around the " 'hood" for a long time educating others.

  8. when finally the unifying theory is found, would hate on earth will disappear? If not, then its worthless.

  9. The postulation of a multiverse is just an admission that the theory is wrong. String Theory is not just wrong, it is not even wrong.

  10. Every explosion speeds up until it starts losing energy,then slows down..We are living during the early stage of the Big Bang

  11. In our universe there are set laws of physics. How do we know that something crashing into our universe with different laws would have said effects

  12. here is why….

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlRI8-EQKyo&feature=push-sd&attr_tag=uQjYJ_MEqTTewSG2%3A6

  13. I liken string theory to alchemy or the aether. We WANT it to be true and look for ways to MAKE it true. We have 0 proof for extra dimensions. It would be cool if there were extra dimensions but there's just no proof for it. It's wishful thinking, and until somebody can present concrete evidence ill continue to write it off as a dead theory.

  14. What was before the big bang?

    Pure energy was before the universe as we know it and after. Pure energy is timeless and infinite, a quantum fluctuation of this energy requires no antecedent cause and collapses a portion of it into a big bang, matter, space and time begin for that universe, totally independant of any other, no before or after any other universe.

    Entropy drives any given universe back to its original state of pure energy, timeless and infinte.

  15. my theory is life exists because the universe is a living thing and evolved intelligent life as a survival mechanism… it knew it would die one day but of all the life in the universe hopefully one species is intelligent enough to keep its home from dying.

  16. Other universes are not out there!!! !they are in our head! The universe we see is a hologram, to pacify our unique minds and keep us settled.

  17. Multiverse theory can never be scientific because we can never observe beyond our universe.
    Just goes to show anti-theists are as ignorant about science as they are about religion.

  18. he lost me when he said his 4yr old asked 'universe or multi-verse'…contrived joke, unauthentic. makes me think the rest of the presentation is just well written for wit.

  19. Me: God made it! Scientists: Prove it and I'll believe it! .(Sometime later) Scientists: The multiverse explains it! Me: Prove it and I'll believe it! Scientist: It's unprovable and that's ok! Me: But you said… Scientists: You're just too dumb to understand. Me: Hey LORD did you hear? Apparently, I'm too dumb to understand a fool. God: Even if you pound fools to powder like grain in a bowl, you will never force the foolishness out of them.

  20. Read this book (now on amazon) – The Theory of Evolution is a Result of Erroneous Extrapolation.  It destroys evolution using Mathematics.  It strengthens your faith in God.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UnDNoIddnz

  21. What BS, hahahaha. The fact that astronomy cant accept electrical berkland currents in space means we just going further back into theories that touch fantasy. The forces are basic electron magnetism

  22. If the extra dimensions take on shape, this means there is something there to take that shape… so where does that stuff come from? /Why/ is reality made of "strings?" That's the real question

  23. Give it up for Mr Greene. This is the best primer for the multiverse and string theory that I’ve seen!

  24. Consciousness is a fractal (independent of scale). There are many layers to consciousness, in many different forms. We are giants made out of trillions of conscious cells. Every vessel of water is a vessel of Consciousness. The cycle of water is the cycle of the Soul. https://youtu.be/YYnZ5ng4az8

  25. A well-known scientist, a very decorated scientist named Herbert Spencer, died in 1903.  In his scientific career he had become noted for one great discovery; it was a categorical contribution that he made.  He discovered that all reality, all reality, all that exists in the universe can be contained in five categories: time, force, action, space and matter.  Herbert Spencer said everything that exists, exists in one of those categories: time, force, action, space and matter.  Nothing exists outside of those categories. That was a very astute discovery and didn't come until the nineteenth century.  Now think about that.  Spencer even listed them in that order: time, force, action, space and matter.  That is a logical sequence.  And then with that in your mind, listen to Genesis 1:1.  "In the beginning," that's time.  "God," that's force. "Created," that's action.  "The heavens," that's space. "And the earth," that's matter.  In the first verse of the Bible God said plainly what man didn't catalog until the nineteenth century.  Everything that could be said about everything that exists is said in that first verse.

  26. Well I love string theory but the ever expanding universe creeps me out. The future generation looking out into space seeing nothing but black empty space is depressing 😞😞😞

  27. When the time comes that everything moves so far away that everything is black and empty, would there even be any astronomers around to observe it? Wouldn't the end of all life, (as we now know it) happen first?

  28. Multiverse theory I think is not actual..how would you be able to tell another universe from the one we occupy now?..AND by stating that there is multiple universes..that would have to mean that the universe we're in now would have some kind of "end"..right? or am I off base?…theres 1 universe folks..the observable one we're in now….and dont forget that UNI = 1

  29. the universe is not fine tuned as Man can evaluate by any measure. SO far Man and this world is all the life we know. To suggest fine tuning is very simplistic.

  30. The point about planets being cold and hot, that's been proven wrong with the the findings of voyager on Pluto, and moons of Saturn. The problem with science is with more discoveries, the theories that fit the human understanding get proven wrong and we go back to the drawing board again.

  31. God created everything…he created us to enjoy his creations. Lets not try to find Gods work yet lets try to work to find God. Everything this man has explained is in physical . Can you imagine what God has created for us in the Spirit.

  32. My oh my, In 1929 even other universes were pulling out due to the stock market crash. Now I know why it caused the great depression. Gravity at its best

  33. In all his talks, Greene dangerously skirts around the fallacy of teleological thinking: that the Universe (or, Multiverse) has to be the way it is because we exist. Or that the Universe HAS to exist, otherwise we wouldn't be here. If we change the cosmological constants just a little bit, the Universe might not exist. And we might not exist. This underestimates the human bias. Somewhat ironically, this bias also predicts that there must be other instances of intelligent life. Giving that we exist, and that the Universe is so large, there must be other forms of intelligent life out there. This also is human bias. The fact is just that we do exist. That's all. Drawing any causal relations between the physical state of the Universe and ourselves is always a dubious undertaking. Of course, our mind is conditioned to pursue this kind of thinking. Evolution has conditioned us this way. In every Greene talk, he reaches this conundrum, but instead of pursuing it, his Physics-trained mind sets in and says: "We have to explain this." No, we don't. We have an innate desire to understand, it's just the way our brain works. But by the very way of "understanding" things, we tend to misunderstand them. This is not an anti-scientific, let alone religious reply. Mr. Greene is a stellar scientist, and an even more stellar popularizer of science. But the desire to explain — to understand — often leads us astray. *Edited for grammar.

  34. The answer of all is here on earth . There is were we need to focus in order to transcend to other and better universes – Fernando Elizondo Bond

  35. I thought they calculated that like 60% of all energy must be dark energy or something. Where does this tiny number come from?

  36. 18:16
    Quran (81:2) And when the stars darken, – By: Shakir
    Quran (77:8) So when the stars are put out, – By: M. M. Pickthall

    A man in the desert of Arabia 1440+ years ago knew this ..

  37. Is there any end to the space ?
    No… when there is no end to the space, there is infinite possibility that there are infinite number of universes with infinite number of planets having life. .or you may say that there are people living like us on infinite number of planets. .Or going to be more hypothetical, I may say that I am living on this earth and at the same time living somewhere else on some other planet. Moreover, I may say that everything in the space is floating in the space and making a continuous travel while stars, planets and everything is maintaing equal distance between them. .

  38. okay, so we have a theory, but the math doesn't support it.  So we'll come up with another theory to explain why the math doesn't work…?  Does that make sense?  Nice try nerd, leave the multiverse to Spiderman.

  39. Chapter 41 verse 53 in QURAN

    We shall show them Our portents on the horizons and within themselves until it will be manifest unto them that it is the Truth. Doth not thy Lord suffice, since He is Witness over all things?

  40. String theories are just as good as those fairy tales except that they are written in mathematics, it's no science unless empirically established.

  41. Bah … if 10 dimensions are native to our universe and Hawking was explaining how space and time are confined to our universe, the only possible way for other universes to have impact on our universe is, if time (and possibly some other dimensions) are supra-universal and not part of only this universe. This would also mean that the original idea how "there was no time before big bang" is wrong, and that there exists some suprauniversal version of time so dimension that prevents all multiverses from happening all at the same time inside a 0-dimensional space.

    God is the answer to all your questions.

  42. Ted talk? So here prof Brian Greene thought "hey i can do this" And greated world science festival.

  43. And I say there is an almighty entity that exists outside the dimension that the multiverses exist in, and that entity created all of the multiverses….but didn not create humans

  44. One of the dimensions is a spirit dimension, were the energy of our souls and consciousness come from..

  45. This is first time I am listening to his lecture/talk. He has superb communication skills and clear super scientific mind.

  46. Also known as the puddle theory. Still doesn't explain why we are here. Everywhere we look outside our solar system, it's chaos. Every single earth-like system always has one or more things that prevent life. Based on everywhere else we look, the fact that we are here is a miracle.

    It's called using your imagination to try and figure out a way it could have all came to be without God.

    I don't know why people can't see it. The Bible said that God stretched out the heavens way before we ever figured out it was expanding. So the real question you need to ask yourself is, if the ancient writers of the Bible knew about this thousands of years ago, why did it take us so long?

  47. It's quite simple actually. When any observer looks out at their world, what they will always see will be the same – a causal structure that lead right up to their own existence. First they will see their parents, perhaps they discover evolution, and the further back they go – it will all be exactly perfect to rationalize their existence. The universe is infinite, so if an observer can exist, it will, and when it does, it will be able to look around and see how it exists. Given how infinitely rare an observer would likely be – we would probably look around and see a fairly empty universe, aside from our own species which is part of the minimal necessary complexity to produce the observer – you.

  48. I guess, the waves should be also be made of something relatively smaller that we cannot see now.

    If the time goes faster for huge objects and slower for tiny objects. Until our universe is colliding with another one in someones else dimention's collider, for us our lifetime are decades, for the other side its shorter then a blink of an eye. If its similar for the other side, then its infinite. I don' think there is a solid wall at the end of the universe. Since the universe seems to work by string theory, i don' think there will be a solid answer on what its all about. And yoga being all inclusiveness, should be the only methodology that can expand our perception. 🙂

  49. The multiverse is a rescue device for a failing and crumbling materialist view of the universe. The fine tuning of the universe is best explained by an intelligent designer. Once it was scientifically confirmed that the universe had a beginning it became clear that there isn’t enough time for a blind unguided materialistic process to produce the ordered and perfectly fine tuned universe we have. So what’s the solution? You postulate an infinite number of parallel universes so that there’s a probability that one of those results in this phenomenal fine tuning that allows for life. The problem is that there is literally no evidence for this. It’s not scientific, it’s sci-fi. In order to maintain this purely naturalistic paradigm and keep an intelligent designer shut out they have abandoned real science and are now propagating fiction. It’s sad.

  50. What would happen if we went towards a Galaxy that was "Furthest Away" but we knew it was moving this way, then because it is moving, possibly faster then our galaxy, then wouldn't it be like "catching the bus" or "jumping on the train/trolley"

  51. What made that bang happen?and what was there before the bang?and what was made off? and what made those things which made that thing that made a big bang? And and and and and…..eish

  52. SORRY SIR BUT I'M LATE AND ATTEND YOUR LECTURE TODAY . 😅 so what I want to ask or say is that = as you say sir , that the universe is expanding with the speed of light and noble prize winners also predict the same , so isn't it like if due to dark energy the other galaxies are going far from us , so isn't our galaxy is also get pushed away by this same dark energy and we probably following the other galaxies which are going far away from us , like the Tom & Jerry cartoon 😄 that they are always after each other .! ( sorry my english is not good enough , but yet please try to get my point and please say something on this ) .

  53. Personally I believe that our Universe is just a part of a much larger Universe. I don't really see the need for multiple dimensions. Our Universe is probably expanding into a larger space, and there are maybe many other Universes expanding into this space. Which puts the "Universe from nothing" hypothesis to rest. Of course, I have no evidence for this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *