Sir Roger Penrose | Can Aeons Explain The Big Bang? | 2020 Nobel Prize winner

Sdílet
Vložit
  • čas přidán 28. 05. 2024
  • We should embrace a sequential universe model, rather than Big Bang model - according to Sir Roger Penrose.
    ** Subscribe to our channel: / iaitv
    ** Donate to the IAI: iai.tv/support-the-iai/donate
    ** Listen to our weekly podcast: / instituteofartandideas
    Renowned Oxford mathematician and philosopher of science, Sir Roger Penrose pioneered many groundbreaking ideas, for a long time together with Stephen Hawking. He has received numerous prizes and awards, including the Wolf Prize for physics and the 2020 Nobel Prize for physics.
    #rogerpenrose #iaitv #bigbang #multiverse #inflation #quantumphysics
    Roger's Argument:
    • The Big Bang theory is mistaken - there have been many universes and will be many more
    • Universes progress in sequence and only ever one at any time.
    • Evidence in the Cosmic Microwave Background support his theory (correlated circles present, rather than the uniform distribution that the standard model of cosmology produces)
    • Entropy is key. Whilst entropy tends to increase, black holes destroy information/entropy. In the distant future of the universe the entropy is reduced back down to zero as black holes have destroyed all entropy
    • Our universe began after the previous low entropy aeon (universe) transformed into our current one - this explains why there was low entropy at the start of the universe
    • Inflation didn’t happen after ‘The Big Bang’ (i.e. the start of our universe)
    The IAI offers a host of different platforms where you can watch and debate the big issues that matter:
    For debates and talks: iai.tv
    For articles: iai.tv/articles
    For courses: iai.tv/iai-academy/courses

Komentáře • 391

  • @Maria-ms8sr
    @Maria-ms8sr Před 4 lety +152

    I want Roger to live forever ;((

  • @katenicholls5301
    @katenicholls5301 Před 4 lety +106

    His generosity explaining this without using maths, so that someone like me could understand, it is mind-blowing. What a privilege to be able to spend 20 minutes in the presence of such a mind. Thank you, Professor Penrose.

    • @liloolo
      @liloolo Před 3 lety +1

      I wish I had a female friend like you!

  • @opioid01
    @opioid01 Před 5 lety +144

    87 years old and more coherent than me at 33. Go Penrose! You still have a lot in you!

    • @saiyaniam
      @saiyaniam Před 4 lety +2

      what?

    • @joops110
      @joops110 Před 4 lety +1

      Please rephrase

    • @robocu4
      @robocu4 Před 4 lety +7

      you don't at all need to rephrase, these kids are retarded if they can't make out your very legible comment

    • @roryclague5876
      @roryclague5876 Před 4 lety +4

      @@robocu4 Whoosh

    • @Trey4x4
      @Trey4x4 Před 4 lety +2

      Stay in school kids

  • @kentinspacetime5378
    @kentinspacetime5378 Před rokem +2

    Roger, I don’t know what you’re talking but I can listen to you endlessly.

  • @zlatanonkovic2424
    @zlatanonkovic2424 Před 4 lety +29

    Please give this man as much camera time as possible while we still have the opportunity.

    • @5Marchan
      @5Marchan Před rokem +1

      imagine if he reads the comments

  • @geoden
    @geoden Před 5 lety +58

    Of the many science books I've read "The Road To Reality" by Roger Penrose is up there among the best ever by a genuine genius.

    • @oo88oo
      @oo88oo Před 4 lety +1

      The whole thing???

    • @alphalunamare
      @alphalunamare Před 4 lety

      @@oo88oo that's what I thought to :-)

    • @davidwright8432
      @davidwright8432 Před 3 lety +1

      Agreed. I just wish it'd been published when I was in grad school doing this stuff! His explanations of mathematical physics are so clear.

  • @alexbarnett7375
    @alexbarnett7375 Před 5 lety +69

    This man is physic’s David Attenborough

    • @jamesdashper1316
      @jamesdashper1316 Před 3 lety +2

      He’s more than that. He’s not just an observer and presenter

    • @rubenanthonymartinez7034
      @rubenanthonymartinez7034 Před 3 lety

      @@jamesdashper1316 I see this the opposite; I see a old man with pathetic ideas!

  • @suecondon1685
    @suecondon1685 Před rokem +8

    Love this. It's not dark - it's invisible, and it's not energy either! Plus he's in a field at a fair... Absolute legend ❤

  • @ayanganguly4558
    @ayanganguly4558 Před 3 lety +16

    He is like Albert Einstein and Richard Feynman rolled into one. Next life I would aspire to be his student.

  • @katze97
    @katze97 Před 2 lety +3

    He was at Pembroke, my college. I sat in his lectures not long after The Emperor’s New Mind came out. So his interest then was machine learning and human mind which was my thesis topic then too. I got to asked him questions over a pint when he spoke at the Oxford Philosophers Club. Very nice and brilliant gentlemen

    • @Battlefox64_RL
      @Battlefox64_RL Před rokem

      Katze97 I have a question you might could answer....
      Is it possible that if the gravitational wave from the initial bang permeated into our aeon, that would be information traveling across time without space?
      Given this premise, how can waves travel to our observable universe given there was no space for the wave to traverse.
      Also, if the wave could/would emanate from a single point, wouldn't that point be well far outside of our observable universe given the current age of our solar system.

    • @katze97
      @katze97 Před rokem +1

      @@Battlefox64_RL they should not be any messenger particle field, whether it is gravity field or Higgs field, before there is space to contain it. I don't expect information transmitting across a field before there is space for it. However the uniformity of cosmic background radiation shows the early EMR field information is preserved throughout the universe.

  • @kameelfarag1981
    @kameelfarag1981 Před 5 lety +39

    I always admired Roger Penrose, and consider him the cosmologist per excellence.

  • @don17525
    @don17525 Před rokem +2

    But then the question is; what sparked the very 1st eon? Sir Roger is an absolute legend and at 90+ passionate about his thing like a 20 year old starting up.

    • @haxstir
      @haxstir Před rokem +2

      Why should there be a first?

  • @NerdyRodent
    @NerdyRodent Před 5 lety +29

    Awesome talk. Thanks for the upload!

  • @arlaban22
    @arlaban22 Před 4 lety +35

    Give this guy a " Nobel " prize RIGHT NOW !!
    He is like a God amongst men.

    • @barlart
      @barlart Před 4 lety +3

      @Roger Dodger He did discover a lot of things but they were mathematical in character. There is no Nobel prize for maths (The Fields medal is given to young mathematicians like Terry Tao)."What would you give him a Nobel Prize for? He has won just about every prize for Physics that anyone could but hasn't done anything to warrant a Nobel prize. He HAS got a Knighthood. That's pretty High in the UK. He also has the OM (Order of Merit) which is the personal gift of the Queen herself. No politician can tell the Queen who to give an OM to though many have tried. There are only a few at any given time. Sir David Attenborough also has an OM. It is the highest civilian award in Britain.

    • @taunteratwill1787
      @taunteratwill1787 Před 4 lety

      @Roger Dodger Not true, they gave me two of those.

    • @taunteratwill1787
      @taunteratwill1787 Před 4 lety +2

      @Roger Dodger I found out that 85% of all comments on CZcams are quite retarded and that the section 'Car Crashes' and the likes are jam packed with 'accidents' caused by these comment writers. The commission was very pleased to learn this. :-))

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas Před 4 lety +4

      only penrose is real. i just came from him chatting with william lane craig, where craig goes "so this must mean there is a higher intelligence" penrose replies, "maybe there is, but i don't see what use that is"

    • @jonsonator3576
      @jonsonator3576 Před 4 lety

      Oh come on man. I mean he is a cool guy but he is no Penrose :D

  • @robclark4626
    @robclark4626 Před 3 lety +3

    This is as good an answer as you're ever likely to get about where everything came from, and where it's going. Sir Roger Penrose is an absolute gem.

  • @leonreynolds77
    @leonreynolds77 Před 4 lety +4

    This is a truly brilliant man. Much respect for Dr. Penrose. I am toyally onboard with what he is saying here. I don't believe there was ever a "nothing". There was and always will be something. It's ignorant also to think that the only existence is of time and space. There could be some other form of existence that we can't comprehend because it is locked away from another aeon. This idea of the dark matter he suggested is just brilliant!

    • @timmbrockmann959
      @timmbrockmann959 Před 4 lety +1

      Yes, it´s the paradox of creation/eternity - that the human mind can not grasp. If you can explain what started the eons, you can ask what was before and how could it come from nothing. If you assume that the eons are there forever and have always been, then the human mind wants to create a beginning again.
      But personally, I would rather assume that the eons are there forever and have always been, with no beginning. I think existence itself is paradox, but it´s a logical consequence of nothingness, that you have something. Or the other way round; if you have somethign, then there also has to be Nothing. Duality seems to be fundamental. A medal can not have just one side, but always has to have the opposite site in order to exist. And since I think there is nothingness (it exists, but in it´s existence it doesn´t exist per definition), which doesn´t need a "beginning", you also have to have Something, which then also has no beginning.

  • @verapamil07
    @verapamil07 Před 3 lety +6

    This man is on a totally another level

  • @souravsahoo1582
    @souravsahoo1582 Před 3 lety +4

    Sir rodger penrose is a living legend and genius

  • @tonyschofield4489
    @tonyschofield4489 Před 4 lety +5

    I wish everyone was this well educated, the world's problems would be quashed. Mr Penrose is a Genius.

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas Před 4 lety +1

      i just came from him talking (it wasn't anywhere near a debate, WLC tended to cede to penrose superior knowledge) talking to william lane craig, and i said as much in comments, we all have this massive super computer behind our eyes and it's such a pity only two handsful of people on the planet can use them. penrose is a great ambassador for agnosticism, and atheism, in his own, quiet, logical, knowledgeable way, he tore WLC apart, my favourite line (paraphrasing) "well there might be a superior intelligence, but i don't see where that gets us".

  • @amidaleahmad1324
    @amidaleahmad1324 Před 2 lety +1

    When he was introduce in BBC tv at time of nobel prise that all his tools for this job was pencil and paper ! It was very promising and hope giving to me that even though I am mechanical Engineering I can be able to carry on to think for myself to understand physics so I am very thankful to him for his explanations , that courageous me .

  • @MatthewQuarneri
    @MatthewQuarneri Před 4 lety +2

    This model is elegant and beautiful. This idea means light knots up into mass and creates time but then temporal decay undoes the knot until big=small and hot=cold and light's time knot does not exist. But that non-existence equivalence then equates all light as one light as no light and you have another singularity "Big Bang".
    Bosonic string theory works well with this model since a tachyon field would be required to link all those universes together without the platform of time being there. The only issue then is determining how to get the asymetric half-integer spin fermions out of the set of symmetric bosons. It might be as simple as dividing a spin1 boson by a spin2 graviton to give you a half spin fermion but we won't know that till we smash electrons at high enough energy to see if we can get a gravitation out of them. That will happen at the CLC eventually; clic-study.web.cern.ch/

    • @MissionHomeowner
      @MissionHomeowner Před 3 lety

      At least we're in a universe with infinite pizza choices!

  • @patrickzhao7591
    @patrickzhao7591 Před 2 lety +2

    thanks Sir Penrose for sharing the immense light in this dark time of humanity.

  • @geoffreywright95
    @geoffreywright95 Před 5 lety +8

    Admirably clear explanation of complex ideas.

  • @dj_OVI_J_TIMIS
    @dj_OVI_J_TIMIS Před 5 lety +6

    Absolutely fascinating ideas!

  • @e.1220
    @e.1220 Před 3 lety +2

    It's a good idea. It's an honor to have listened to this.

  • @nutsbutdum
    @nutsbutdum Před 4 lety +9

    8:45 That's when it gets very interesting.

  • @MarkLucasProductions
    @MarkLucasProductions Před 5 lety +1

    As a lay person who has no ability with mathematics or physics and who only has his 'intuitions', I have never assumed my ideas could be anything but fanciful nonsense - like flatearthers etc. However so very much of what Penrose says seems amazingly in line with my decades of intuitive musings. Whenever he talks there are at least one or two moments when I exclaim "That's MY idea!" or "That's what I said!" It's actually a good experience.

  • @lrvogt1257
    @lrvogt1257 Před 2 lety +2

    I still don't get how the extremely low density becomes extremely high density that suddenly drives expansion again.

    • @schmetterling4477
      @schmetterling4477 Před 2 lety

      It's a rescaling. The idea is that nature does not care about absolute numerical values. The problem is that if nature does not care about absolute numerical values, at all, then there is no reason for anything to happen at _some_ value. That's the problem with all of these models: they are currently still too abstract to predict why things are happening, at all, in the universe. Penrose is ill-equipped to answer that question. He is a relativist, i.e. he knows next to nothing about concrete properties of matter and radiation. General relativity reduces all those details to a trivial stress-energy tensor in which all details are lost. In reality, however, it's the detailed properties of matter that drive the evolution of the universe at the early/late stages.

    • @jorgepeterbarton
      @jorgepeterbarton Před 2 lety

      I think in a sense its a fractal dimension. The previous is a singularity and the next is infinitely bigger. Entirely new matter and the relativity of spacetime size (irrelevant to photons perspective). And by new matter does he mean a kind of new form of it or just a scaling up i dont know. (Presume if it follows the same rules, and is fractally similar then its the same, or at least mostly the same with a little twist)
      What he has explained is not a crunch or collapse.

  • @J0hnC0ltrane
    @J0hnC0ltrane Před 2 měsíci

    Since mass and energy can't be destroyed the present eon contains all energy and mass from the previous eons. Hard to imagine. I'm thankful for people like Sir Roger Penrose.

  • @akumar7366
    @akumar7366 Před 4 lety +5

    Humanity at its greatest in thought and expression.

  • @zlatkodurmis8458
    @zlatkodurmis8458 Před 4 lety +7

    I'm glad to hear some alternative ideas to usual big bang from a great scientist.

  • @rikimitchell916
    @rikimitchell916 Před 3 lety +1

    Dr Penrose has produced many great works but I not certain this is among them

  • @phoule76
    @phoule76 Před 3 lety +1

    For our summer fair, I think my hick town managed to book 'N Sync or some such event one year.

  • @ahabkapitany
    @ahabkapitany Před 4 lety +9

    holy shit this was an amazing explanation

  • @davidwilkie9551
    @davidwilkie9551 Před 4 lety

    Professor Penrose has done a "bang up" job of explaining the empirical evidence from the Universal wave-package properties, in terms of standing waves, to which he has applied conventional nomenclature.., judgement of actual causes left suspended (?).
    I do not make comments that may be misinterpreted as criticism, so all I can add to this is that continuous creation connection is the temporal wording of CCC theory, ie both sides of the Spacetime penny, incomplete and needing new eyes and minds.
    My words are constantly changing to get the best approach to integration with "known physics", but everyone has to think about the mechanism of QM-TIMESPACE from their own metastable perch on the singularity navigation platform. (It's fun to imagine and headache material, simultaneously, of course)

  • @bloodyorphan
    @bloodyorphan Před rokem

    Maybe I should add Sir Roger to this one ...
    The super giant temperature force crystal we call the Big Bang is still there, because temperature time-dilation ...
    Universe Expansion
    As for expansion itself, there is a temperature based 2 directional tensor on every particle we have ever observed from plasma photons, up to any atomic weight we have encountered so far.
    If you consider a deeper weight particle lives at an interference point and is constantly being fed expressed heat from it's immediately (doubled depth and distance) deeper particle, or from ambient temperature at its' depth in the weight space. The deepest particle interferes a new weight and goes the summed interfered temperature C^3 or degree Celsius deeper in its' weight space, the internal "Cavendish" tensors from the particle depth SR monodimensional BB space, pulls the particle back "up" the temperature scale. The particle will shed two "half temperature" photons back up the atomic pipe causing interference in the half distance position of the atomic pipe and the same thing happens at that temperature scale, all the way back to the aperture of the atom and being expressed as a zero degree Celsius photon particle (No velocity at all).
    If you consider the temperature over distance equation, and add in the redshift of the exhibited photons you realise that the redshift of a "stable" atom by definition on the C^3 scale has to achieve a temperature of zero degrees Celsius as it finds its' position in the "visible space".
    So instead of the stacked atom we observe, we actually have a redshifted temperature pipet from the Big Bang , too our visible space, which is expressing a Big Bang instantaneous explosive energy at Zero Degrees Celsius and Zero Velocity!
    This is our visible aperture of space, and it (the Universe) simply started growing when the expression of the BB in its' GR'd observable frame of reference (i.e. expanding at C) , a C velocity time dilated by its' temperature and redshifted by the decreasing to zero degrees aperture space allowing zero degree Celsius photons to "simply appear" in our space, expanding our Universe one photon at a time multiplied the the "Skin Depth Aperture" of our observed universe.
    Atomic particle formation, is the other side of the BB energy cycle through our space, which means the atoms are slowly in comparison "swallowing" photons that are too hot for the zero degree space and their journey back to the Big Bang has started.
    When you consider the amount of matter that we observed versus the amount of empty space, it's easy to see why we are still expanding, and likely will continue to do so forever.
    I have read Stephen Hawkings' paper "Properties of an Expanding Universe" and everything he postulates and describes fits in to the above theory.
    (C) M.B.Eringa; S Hawking; G Dalton; Sir Roger Penrose 1989

  • @GregBierly
    @GregBierly Před 4 lety +1

    Penrose himself is evidence of the theory. A singularity of wisom from a different aeon, now forming his own new universe of thought; now existing in a new aeon after the galaxy of stars that opposed him have all been swallowed by the gravity of his mental prowess and his singular belief in himself.

  • @bengiakyuz8093
    @bengiakyuz8093 Před 4 lety

    Thank you!

  • @flashkraft
    @flashkraft Před 4 lety +12

    The big bang was just the last time the infinity stones were brought together.

  • @Esch_atton
    @Esch_atton Před 3 lety

    I needed this to come up in my feed. Been feeling like the universe is out to get me lately and this helps put things into perspective.

  • @jekomac
    @jekomac Před 5 lety +2

    time is frequency of light. We do not need to use literally 0-1 (empty full) meanings, cause they are just our "handles" for concepts. Let's play with concepts, but remembering what it means to loose sight.
    Energy/mass is not created or destroyed, just pushed or pulled from the horizons of scale.

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas Před 4 lety

      i don't understand a word of that, and not being able to spell lose doesn't help me to try to bother. loosely speaking. did you lose your dictionary?

  • @brendawilliams8062
    @brendawilliams8062 Před 3 lety

    Thank you.

  • @Metastate12
    @Metastate12 Před 3 lety

    Some fire the sound-man!

  • @christophercoulter7782
    @christophercoulter7782 Před 5 lety +2

    I think Dr Penrose has opened up some very interesting points about cosmology. However, as we have very little understanding about why and how there are extra dimensions and the full role of time, gravity, constants and an infinite amount of variables that are encompassed throughout the passage of everything. Then it would still be a little bit early to know everything about everything. Maybe we could invent Quantum nets without anchor points or summarise any given system without boundaries and be absolutely sure it's correct every time without taking into account the unknown. But as it is the unknown doesn't exist anymore if we have fully understood the ultimate foundations of Mathematics and Physics forever. I don't think it matters at all if God played dice or not we need to be 100% sure about everything before moving onto the next big step. I put it to everyone: What is the next big step? Never ending discovery perhaps??? Hahaha ... Now this is mind blowing.

  • @Nogill0
    @Nogill0 Před 3 lety +1

    Conformal geometry can work both ways, "mapping" the very large into the very small and vice-versa. A way for scale and dimension to be lost would be for some arbitrary region of a larger universe to be sufficiently isolated, or to reach a particular initial condition in the universe at large equivalent to such isolation. Exponential expansion could produce that for the universe at large but also for any number of small regions. Once you have that isolation "small" loses its meaning, and a "cold void" might be regarded as infinitely hot and energetic. See, I'd like for CCC to give us not just one cyclic universe, but an unbounded number. If that's the case then the hawking points are either statistical flukes or evidence of some other phenomenon, like collisions of bubble universes embarking on their own course of cyclic life.

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      Hey Rick, you sound like someone who might entertain a curiosity I have, which is inspired by Penrose's CCC proposal.
      Penrose puts the aeons in succession, so the start of the third aeon would be a whole aeon away from the end of the first, like segments on a bamboo. (I'm numbering them just for illustration.)
      My provocation is that it's not like a bamboo, but like a higher dimensional toroid: the end of an aeon loops back to the beginning.
      It seems self sustaining and elegant, and I wonder if it could be as mathematically valid as Penrose's bamboo version.
      I've spent time wondering about the relationship between successive iterations, and a sort of "thickening" or "deepening" of reality along the resulting degree of freedom, which is a sort of hypertime.

  • @mingonmongo1
    @mingonmongo1 Před 4 lety +2

    Have seen several of his explanations of CCC, and this is the best and clearest yet... thx for posting! Though still kinda unclear how we get from the end of an 'aeon' when all mass has virtually disappeared, to the next 'Big Bang', when it would seem the universe, and all matter is 'expanding' again (in other words, where's the next 'matter' come from, if it's all been dissipated in the previous aeon)?

    • @Tessali666
      @Tessali666 Před 4 lety +1

      Yeah, if You find his explanation on this, hit me up! He clearly states that all the matter is turned into radiation and that dark matter decays as well. Then the photons dispersed on unimaginably huge areas of space inflated into the next big bang.
      Naturally, the Standard Model suggests no 'matter' existed at the beginning, so it seems that answering this problem is obsolete. In both CCC (Penrose) and the SM (mainstream) the quarks could have emerged in the same way, from energy I suppose.

    • @mingonmongo1
      @mingonmongo1 Před 4 lety

      @@Tessali666 Can't recall, but yes, have seen some vague referral to 'branes' creating 'reversing' Dark Energy'.So basically what I'm understanding is the next universe eventually starts expanding again, spontaneously creating new matter and energy, with the old one becoming the new 'baseline' for time and space.

  • @N3G4T1V3_
    @N3G4T1V3_ Před 4 lety +2

    Infinity cannot be squashed down and made finite. Much of this "science" requires one to ignore reality in favor of "crazy ideas".

    • @trijezdci4588
      @trijezdci4588 Před 3 lety

      Penrose is a mathematician, and a very good one at that. He didn't just come up with crazy ideas, he did the math and the math tells the story. If there is one thing we have learned in scientific history it is that one should trust the math (unless there are evident errors in the math itself). The math he is using is conformal geometry, and there infinity does indeed have a finite boundary.

  • @HarryNicNicholas
    @HarryNicNicholas Před 3 lety +2

    i've watched this a couple of times and i cite it often, it is ineed a tidy way to avoid infinity is cosmology, but it just occurred to me - where does all the mass in the universe go? and at the start of the next aeon, where does the heat come from if there is no mass? i love this aeons idea, and that photons experience no time and therefore no distance and that means however "big" the univesre might be, to a photon it has neither size nor time, but it just struck me, where does the mass go? when "stuff" gets swallowed by black holes they increase in mass, if they are evaporating have they turned mass into photons? have to go google, back in a mo (lol).

    • @BorisFrank242995
      @BorisFrank242995 Před 3 lety +3

      I think that during evaporation, the mass turns into energy (e=mc2) . What I really don't get, and I am trying to find an answer in 5th Penrose's video, is how all the energy turns back into some mass in the beginning of the next eon. What forces the mass creation?

  • @iainpattison903
    @iainpattison903 Před rokem

    Very interesting.

  • @MikeGlanfield
    @MikeGlanfield Před rokem

    This explanation begs the question how many aeons were there before we came into existence.

  • @skalosz8
    @skalosz8 Před 3 lety

    11:10 "Space Odyssey 2001" Jupiter and beyond the infinite. Mind blowing.

  • @fredb2022
    @fredb2022 Před 2 lety

    Really appreciate Sir Roger: he follows Rule No. 1: have something to say and say it. And, he thinks beyond known physics. It shows that he does not bind himself to what is known and proven.

  • @afifakimih8823
    @afifakimih8823 Před 4 lety

    He is 87.and yet how smoothly he is talking about the universe.He is actually very unique kind of scientist...he has alwz new idea.he Doesn't bother about the conventional way of thinking.he has alwz unique thinking,new idea,crazy idea.!!

  • @vincentdeporter3140
    @vincentdeporter3140 Před 4 lety

    I love this!

  • @stephenjablonsky1941
    @stephenjablonsky1941 Před rokem

    You have to admit that human beings trying to get their heads around the birth and death of the universe is very amusing and even silly. But seems heroic in a Quixotic sort of way.

  • @ailblentyn
    @ailblentyn Před 5 lety +6

    Is it possible to interpret Penrose's idea as meaning that the death and birth of the universe can't be distinguished, rather than that there is a sequence of aeons?

    • @azulo6
      @azulo6 Před 5 lety +2

      Thats how i interpret it; reading Cycles of Time these days, and thats the core idea he is explaining, i think :)

    • @oo88oo
      @oo88oo Před 4 lety +3

      Yes. It seems very "reincarnation"-y to me. Aeons die, give birth to new aeons, which die, and bear new aeons, forever and ever.

    • @SahilP2648
      @SahilP2648 Před 3 lety +1

      I think he is talking about how black holes create a new universe inside and it's an endless cycle thereafter so no beginning and no end

    • @ailblentyn
      @ailblentyn Před 3 lety

      Sahil P I don't understand his theory in the mathematical details, but actually I'm pretty sure his isn't saying that.

  • @oo88oo
    @oo88oo Před 4 lety +3

    Escher made an unimaginably large contribution to science.

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas Před 4 lety +2

      we artists like to help visualise hard to grasp stuff. i've built the solar system more times than i can remember (i get a credit in four out of the six "the planets" series shown ooh, twenty years ago.

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      Hyperbolically large, by some accounts 🥁

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      @@HarryNicNicholas you might enjoy, or already know about, the famously intuitive math visualizations of 3blue1brown, also here on CZcams.

  • @YogiMcCaw
    @YogiMcCaw Před 5 lety +5

    It's a provocative hypothesis, but it's long way from being proven. In other lectures on the internet, Penrose himself admits that. It's a beautiful idea, but as the saying goes, many beautiful ideas are shot down by ugly facts. So we'll just have to see if ways to test this hypothesis emerge, and whether the hypothesis can weather those challenges.

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas Před 4 lety

      he also says that although a lot of people disagree with it, and that he's not entirely happy with it either, it works pretty well until someone comes up with something more concrete.

    • @akumar7366
      @akumar7366 Před 4 lety

      I wouldn't bet agaisnt the idea being right, time will tell.

    • @LarsRyeJeppesen
      @LarsRyeJeppesen Před 3 lety

      @@HarryNicNicholas it is not backed by observations

    • @eodico
      @eodico Před 3 lety

      It's just theory, there's no facts to back it up. It is mathematically sound so it's possible but not factual

    • @myles5158
      @myles5158 Před rokem

      @@eodico theory in science are supported by facts. You do believe you get sick from germs right. Germ theory. Theory of evolution, another OBSERVED fact. Theories in science are the highest accolade of knowledge. This isn’t the colloquial use of the word theory.

  • @parkamark
    @parkamark Před 4 lety +8

    I'm so disappointed - during the next aeon, we'll have to figure out this stuff all over again.

    • @captainhd9741
      @captainhd9741 Před 3 lety +1

      The Iguana They will have to learn how to interpret the symbols (letters) and people would get divided between whether it was intelligent design or just accident and then those who say it was accident would develop a theory to explain it which sounds plausible and so history kind of repeats. I mean if we are debating whether DNA or the recent discovery of the intricacies in the flagellum of a bacterium or the fine-tuned constants is intelligent design or not today then obviously the next generation who will see black holes arranged in a specific way will do the same as it is less complex than a nano-sized rotary system.

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      @The Iguana yours might be my favourite comment on CZcams 🏅

  • @melgross
    @melgross Před 4 lety +2

    It’s interesting that after more than a century, there was just one man that really changed everything. Responsible for relativity and the basis of quantum mechanics, Einstein still towers above all those who have come after.

    • @kostar500
      @kostar500 Před 4 lety

      Of course Einstein was that great

  • @KevTheImpaler
    @KevTheImpaler Před 4 lety

    He is very good at explaining difficult concepts to mere mortals.

  • @jockeb2651
    @jockeb2651 Před 4 lety +2

    Penrose is my hero

    • @richjmb5522
      @richjmb5522 Před 4 lety +1

      He's trying to simplify it way down so we can understand, must be a hel of a job but he's doing it very well!

    • @jockeb2651
      @jockeb2651 Před 4 lety +1

      @@richjmb5522 and he's fucking 88 years old

  • @Dyslexic-Artist-Theory-on-Time

    This is an invitation to see an artist theory on the nature of time as a physical process of energy exchange. In such a theory the wave particle duality of light and matter in the form of electrons is forming a blank canvas that we can interact with forming the possible into the actual.

    • @SelcraigClimbs
      @SelcraigClimbs Před 5 lety

      @FACE GALLON well I'd say consciousness in this sense would be something that collapses probability distribution of events. Something that interfaces with randomness to pull order from it. So yeah, I guess in some sense it would be a transient stabilizer of entropy.

  • @alphalunamare
    @alphalunamare Před 4 lety +3

    Any theory that needs not Inflation is a good theory!. I must admit though I didn't quite get how the transition between Aeons manifested itself geometrically.

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas Před 4 lety

      i didn't quite follow either, that's why i wanted to see this video (haven't started yet, still trolling comments :)) but i do like the idea that the universe has started and infinity of times, but each time was the first time...

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      Ditto. I keep watching Penrose interviews, waiting for him to somehow clarify in a way that *I can understand* how exactly that transition works. (I'd be glad to take it really slowly.)

  • @lanatrzczka
    @lanatrzczka Před 2 lety +1

    I'm letting my imagination run with what I think he said... If given long enough, the universe will decay into photons... or if given long enough, perhaps a single photon remaining.... The part I don't understand is what would ignite a photon into creating the next aeon?

  • @yqwpl
    @yqwpl Před 3 lety

    las skjaldmö aparecen también en ¨los godos¨, y las tribus de los cimbrios y marcomanos. wikPD: inspiración para las valquirias y J. R. R. Tolkien personaje Éowyn,: «shieldmaiden of Rohan» (expresión en la que shieldmaiden equivale a skjaldmö en inglés).2.​

  • @derekwillstard6567
    @derekwillstard6567 Před 3 lety +1

    Truly amazing mind

  • @SkyDarmos
    @SkyDarmos Před 5 lety

    Space particle dualism (SPD) also assumes a sequential universe model.

  • @tunnelsloth5948
    @tunnelsloth5948 Před 5 lety +3

    Really interesting ideas. I wonder what his thoughts are on how the very first aeon may have began, in this theory.

    • @caseywebb7818
      @caseywebb7818 Před 5 lety +4

      You should check out Skydivephil's Before the big bang documentary
      It's an 8 part doc. All highly respected physicists, Hawking, Penrose, Guth, rovelli, to name a few. If you have an interest in cosmology it's worth your while. It's b

    • @poondawg3244
      @poondawg3244 Před 5 lety +1

      Where does infinity begin?

  • @karthikeyanak9460
    @karthikeyanak9460 Před 4 lety

    I think this guy nailed it!

  • @SABaruj
    @SABaruj Před rokem

    interesting theory, im very exited for the future

  • @Eric06410
    @Eric06410 Před 3 lety

    Beast Mode. Ripples on the pond of our universe.

  • @reaganwiles_art
    @reaganwiles_art Před 2 lety

    the important point is these things don't need analysis or mathematics to explain, first they can be observed even by someone who has no mathematics observed first explained later but they can be observed extemporaneously

  • @reaganwiles_art
    @reaganwiles_art Před 2 lety

    I knew all of this and explained it to people years and years ago, but of course no one knew what I was talking about, sitting in Pizza Hut in King North Carolina explaining all of this stuff, no one at my University was interested either, I guess they thought it was just the ravings of the madman but they knew that I believed what I was saying. I had no math prove what I was saying only insights and verbal explanations which to me were not theories but observations. I am an artist and I don't try to make my artwork conform with all observations but ever since the understanding there has been a new order and all the artwork that I've made and this has been the case for the last two and a half decades

  • @luvr381
    @luvr381 Před 4 lety +8

    I need more LSD to understand this.

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      Funny, it's giving some of us flashbacks. Commenting for a friend.

  • @zachmcclure8814
    @zachmcclure8814 Před 4 lety +1

    So the cosmic microwave background could be explained by the time when in the previous aeon all remaining particles decayed away into pure energy, existing through the radiation in the cmb of our universe?

  • @gr33nDestiny
    @gr33nDestiny Před 3 lety

    I love this guy sort of thing

  • @thomastmc
    @thomastmc Před 3 lety +1

    He keeps saying that aeons are a "crazy idea", but it seems to be less crazy than the idea that previously there was simply nothing with no time, or the ideas that rely on non-linear time.

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      Apparently his wife asked him to keep it humble, so he does this.

  • @redd6914
    @redd6914 Před 3 lety

    What a mind! Amazing

  • @juergendengel1087
    @juergendengel1087 Před 4 lety

    i like to see free spirits among scientists who let their thoughts flow without some kind of obligation of “scientific correctness “
    Me also have some scetchy thoughts about the universe- first I begin with the mind and try to understand its structure of thought and limits- than I just find things that are falling in place when I see the time thing with photons and black holes that seem to hold a key for further understandings- as well as space curvature and the lense effect- now if there was a big bang it means, everywhere we look there is the same direction to a smallest point which is infinite and timeless- now the expansion of the universe could be also a falling into a black hole that curves in toward itself- the big bang is the boundary of space curvature so to say..hard to imagine this in geometrical terms - the lense effect of a space curvature could also have a deeper meaning in that thought.

    • @trijezdci4588
      @trijezdci4588 Před 3 lety

      I think you are gravely mistaken if you assume that Roger Penrose does not feel an obligation to scientific correctness. I think you have it exactly upside down and Penrose takes this obligation more serious than most other scientists do. And that is why he started to think out of the box. He noticed that conventional models aren't scientifically correct, so he tried to come up with one that is.

  • @HouseJawn
    @HouseJawn Před 4 lety

    What festival is this?

  • @jorgepeterbarton
    @jorgepeterbarton Před 2 lety

    So, is a previous universe infinitessimal in size and the next one bigger by an infinity, as such that to observe the past as singularity from outside?

  • @camberwellcarrot420
    @camberwellcarrot420 Před 5 lety +1

    Fascinating, even if I only grasped a fraction of it. I love that humans are so curious that our thinkers will spend a lifetime trying to add to our knowledge, knowing full well that in matters like space, they can only add to the collective knowledge, but never see the completed puzzle.

  • @micc6462
    @micc6462 Před 2 lety

    I was thinking exactly that yesterday sitting on the toilet crazy

  • @ScoriacTears
    @ScoriacTears Před 4 lety +7

    Are you saying "Universes are inverted black holes." (?).

    • @HarryNicNicholas
      @HarryNicNicholas Před 4 lety +2

      i think it's a bit more complicated than that.

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety +1

      No, but Sean Carroll and Leonard Susskind are on the record hinting at something like that. In their case it has to do with the event horizon created at the place which is exactly far enough away (edge of the observable universe) that cosmic expansion is moving away from us at the speed of light. That creates a boundary mathematically like a black hole horizon, except we are on the inside. With potentially some similar consequences.
      For example, I believe Carroll once said during a Q&A that due to ER=EPR and current ideas about Hawking radiation, in some sense that boundary may act as a sort of entanglement mirror, where multiple versions of the universe are held in superposition inside it. I suppose a mechanism in support of the Many Worlds interpretation.

    • @ScoriacTears
      @ScoriacTears Před 3 lety

      ​@@ivocanevo Just smears against the event horizon. . . damn it! I Knew timespace felt funny.

  • @diwitdharpatitripathi2282

    What really exists when nothing existed. And why it existed. From where it came and how.

  • @jon-boi
    @jon-boi Před 3 lety

    I‘m trying to understand the CCC model. Maybe someone can help me out. If in the distant future black holes will suck up all matter, and then start to evaporate over an incredibly long period of time, will the universe at the end of the respective aeon be filled merely with photons, which can be seen as equivalent to the incredibly hot and dense matter at the beginning of the next aeon? How does space fit into this model? Is it ever expanding irrespective of the aeons, or does it collapse before every new big bang?

  • @Anthony-ym6iz
    @Anthony-ym6iz Před 4 lety

    Was Roger talking at a festival? Anyone know which one?

    • @cjfarey
      @cjfarey Před 4 lety

      How the Light Gets in at Hay on Wye

  • @gww5385
    @gww5385 Před 3 lety

    Still my favourite theory.

  • @MichaelDurdenpants
    @MichaelDurdenpants Před 5 lety +1

    The audio quality is unfortunate

  • @richardfeynman7491
    @richardfeynman7491 Před 4 lety

    Ultimately nature is what nature is, whether we think it's the most 'common sense' explanation or not. The question is not whether or not part of (or all of) the current inflationary big bang model is wrong (elements of it most probably are at the least), but what to replace it with. If Penrose's model turns out to offer a seemingly identical explanation, there is no scientific way to determine which is the 'correct' model (however Occam's Razor suggests we should prefer the most falsifiable model). If however, when examined in great detail, one model offers a prediction that is different to the other, and that difference can be observed/tested, then it is possible to eliminate one of the models.

  • @diwitdharpatitripathi2282

    And the reason behind the all the reasons.

  • @seligseligabc123
    @seligseligabc123 Před 4 lety +2

    Was there a first Aeon? Will there be a last Aeon? Or is the concept of beginning & end even relevant to the Cosmos.

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      I like to think that the aeons loop back on one another, so they aren't in series but connect like a multidimensional toroid; a snake eating its tail.
      Then each aeon is the same as the next, and there is no first. Though maybe there is evolution - or variety - between the iterations, and one could speak of a starting point, somewhat like the center of a spiral. (I.e. it took many iterations to get to the current complexity, even though all the iterations coexist. Metaphor of a Russian doll.)
      Anyway, just musing. I find the elegance appealing.

  • @ladienarra9410
    @ladienarra9410 Před 3 lety

    Basicly existence is a transition between E and mc^2. At E= (big banginfinite boundary, no time, no dimenions). At mc^2 = expansinding univers as we know it, matter, black holes etc.
    BUT still what is that “Thing” that drives this transition??

    • @ivocanevo
      @ivocanevo Před 3 lety

      Clever, your E=mc² illustration!

  • @badroulbadour1
    @badroulbadour1 Před 3 lety

    Flemming Sørensen
    When this Universe eventually, finally becomes an indistinguishable 'soup' of indifference, will it forget about matter, size and time? And what will be the the entropy of this entity?

  • @nauj8316
    @nauj8316 Před 4 lety

    I'm trying to understand the idea.

  • @flatisland
    @flatisland Před 3 lety

    what about Baryon asymmetry?

  • @TheMilwaukeeProtocol
    @TheMilwaukeeProtocol Před 3 lety

    9:20 that's what I can't figure out. We've got things all around us that can "see" the entirety of time. Or at least, they can be existing trillions of years in the future even while they are coexisting with us.

  • @Yuyup7334
    @Yuyup7334 Před 3 lety

    Listening to Sir Roger Penrose explains his view, a question comes to my mind, that is, "Is photon eternal?" I ask this question because it is obvious to me that, in order for his view to work, photon then must be (or he must assume it to be) an eternal entity, otherwise his view will not work. Am I correct here in seeing it that way?

    • @YogiMcCaw
      @YogiMcCaw Před 3 lety

      The short answer is yes. The next to shortest answer is: photons have no mass, so they have no time. They are timeless in that sense. The real answer has math I can't do, so I'll have to settle for that, I suppose.

  • @Lerian_V
    @Lerian_V Před rokem

    2:46 "It's not really energy". Yes it is, Mr Penrose. But as you said, and rightly so, it's "a strange kind of energy."
    This "strange kind of energy" is called 'Actus Purus' (pure actuality, or pure act, or pure energy, or actuality unmixed with potentiality)
    This 'Actus Purus' is what classical Christianity - courtesy of medieval scholars such as St. Thomas Aquinas - call "God".
    Time doesn't affect photons in our universe because our universe was designed with the exact amount of [rationed] energy to make the speed of light (C)= 3x10^8m/s in our universe. If there's another universe with more energy, the speed of light could be for example (C)= 5x10^6 m/s or (C)= 2x10^3 m/s if less energy is rationed to that universe. Whatever amount of energy "Pure Energy" decides to ration to a new universe determines the speed of light (C) of that universe. 😎
    Most atheist scientists seem to find it difficult separating energy from matter. Their predicament is understandable - it's also difficult to separate mind and body - because all we know about energy in our universe is through matter. Energy activates matter; it gives matter life, so to speak. This is why learning philosophy is key to a better understanding of the sciences. As a great philosopher once said, "Philosophy is the art of making distinctions."
    "For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries." 😂 - Robert Jastrow, NASA Astrophysicist (God And The Astronomers)