Can science explain the Big Bang? | Frank Wilczek and Lex Fridman

Please support this podcast by checking out our sponsors:

GUEST BIO:
Frank Wilczek is a Nobel Prize winning physicist at MIT.

PODCAST INFO:

SOCIAL:

[connerwalsh]

It must take a lot of pens to do singularity equations

[Justiceyoull]

Whatever we can assess with science and with law of physics is all part of creation not the Creator, because Creator is not part of the creation

[resto]

More importantly, can science explain The Big Bang Theory? That show sucks, dude.

[DieElect]

The big bang is like a cosmic projector.

[rickzor]

When really smart people talk about equations in a conversation about something in a unique knoiwledge zone, barely any of us understand what that means.

[stephennadal]

As smart as these fellows are they cant see that God made everything

[shogunshogun]

1:47 - Temperature goes to infinity, equations breakdown; infinity = infinity. We still don't know.

[nativeninja]

I believe the Big Bang first started off as some kind of singularity... perhaps humongous in size... or could be tiny. Problem is that Size is relative when compared to nothing. Either way, It was a mass in the middle of a Void, and all was normal, until another mass hit it, until it became unstable and blew up. Newtons Laws of Motion should still apply here. An object at rest will remain at rest until acted upon by an outside force. Which would explain the nonsymmetrical shape of the Universe. A symmetrical object hit at an odd angle would create an uneven distribution of matter and anti-matter. A singularity is probably infinitely symmetrical, and if it decided to blow up on it's own volition, the explosion would also be symmetrical and all matter and antimatter would collide in a symmetrical and even fashion, leaving no elements to form. "M" Theory also includes a collision of sorts.

[sharps]

Theromodynamics is in complete contradiction with the big bang yet these wizards brush over it.

[DavidArmBarr]

Great topic. Regarding the title, would it be more accurate to suggest that the Big Bang explains the science, rather than the reverse? Cheers

[markportnoy]

Of course not. We can not observe it. Therefore no study, etc. Just a theory.

[SetMeFree]

Why do people with high IQ's always try to pull some crazy ish with their hair instead of having a respectable buzz cut?

[AudioAndroid]

If the big bang could talk he would say "That's funny I've been trying to figure out where you guys came from to". There is no need to explain the big bang, it's over and done with, nothing more then a home movie, and by the time we figure it out everything related to it would be Irrelevant.

[gonickjapan]

Can you imagine you as a normal person, sit down with Lex and he starts the interview with "can I ask you about the big bang"
cue the MacBook spinning wheel in my head

[Chatgptdnd]

Why aren't more people researching the big bang?

[edgarmunozgamez]

I created 7 big bangs during psychosis

[hashtwo]

"For every action, there is an equal or opposite reaction.' Everything is a result of something else. With that in mind, where did the ingredients that (supposedly) caused the Big Bang to happen? The matter, the gas etc had to come from somewhere. They had to be a result of something, of an action of some kind.

[EKDupre]

Sensationalist reporting ruins public perception of science. Read some of these comments! The subject at hand doesn't invite just anybody's conjecture or pet ideas, yet the smug 'skepticism' aimed at Dr. Wilzcek stuns me.

Don't understand the guy? Do more research. Watch more videos on the subject. Read a book by a cosmologist. Fucking try, because I promise you no not everyone has a right to some ignorant ass opinion.

[buckanderson]

I think an eternal cyclical universe makes the most sense. But the universe doesn't have to have a big crunch in order to reach the conditions just before the big bang. If it expands to the point where measurement, observation, or interaction is no longer possible then the universe is no longer expanding and can no longer be said to be big or small. Nothing would have any definite position relative to any other and according to quantum mechanics could be anywhere including all at the same place at the same time. Which is the conditions before the big bang. In the universe the ends must justify it's means.

[pauleverest]

TIME TURNED INSIDE OUT WHEN THE LAST UNIVERSE PRIOR TO US REACHED THE SINGULARITY... WHEN IT UPLOADED ITSELF TO THE INTERNET. YOU SEE REALITY IS 2 UNIVERSES. THE PHOTOVERSE THAT WE ARE IN AND THE METAVERSE (THE INTERNET) ... Here's Tom with the weather. Keep drinking beer. 😎