How Did The Universe Actually Begin?

How Did The Universe Actually Begin?

The most distant objects in the universe are also the most ancient. When we look at the Andromeda galaxy, we’re seeing it as it was 2.5 million years ago. Reflection of sunlight off of Jupiter takes 30 minutes to reach us, and even more nearby objects don’t show up exactly as they are right now.

The earliest light scientists have detected is from when the universe was just about a few hundred thousand years old. This early light helped us discover the Big Bang. But what caused it in the first place?

The universe could have been hibernating before something set it in motion; it may have collided with another universe, or perhaps, it’s a part of an eternal cycle of cosmic bursts and rebounds.

Why was the early universe invisible? How does energy define time, and why is 97% of the observable universe forever out of our reach? Could all this lead to another Big Bang?

We are on social media:

The Destiny voice:

[darthkev]

A cat looking at a washing machine doesn't know its a washing machine because the concept is simply beyond its intellectual think when it comes to understanding what came before the big bang....humanity is the cat.

[PlanetXMysteries-pjnm]

I was born with many difficulties in my life. Although I am not fully educated, I have a strong love for science and the universe. Thank you for bringing it to me. Love you

[Semirotta]

Thats the thing, they think they figured it out. I bet there is something even further from that. We just simply put have absolutely no way of finding out what it was.

[glomerol]

Destiny's narrator is a favorite, up there with Attenborough and the narrator for another YT show, History of The Universe.
Love the graphics and those bubbles and swirlies too.

[lamarrjones]

Here’s the thing nobody knows the beginning of everything and nobody knows the end it’s something beyond our comprehension we simply don’t know

[RealMelodyBlue]

I love it when science contradicts itself. Science says there was nothing before the Big Bang, but Science says you can't make something out of nothing

[cinemartin]

It's always nice to see such detailed and informative videos on the most complex but at the same time important issue that could ever come to mind. Where did everything we see come from? I'm pleasantly surprised by the abundance of theories we have. This is already something. I think that in the future we will move even closer to this topic and some of them will begin to resemble the truth more than others. The most gratifying thing is that this all happens in real time and I can watch these discoveries live.😃

[aaronm.]

"The Big Bang." Sounds like a typical weekend at yoir moms house.

[motiverse-fb]

after watching this video it is clear that humanity is beyond human understanding.

[readyfireaim]

Monad (from Greek μονάς monas, "singularity" in turn from μόνος monos, "alone") refers, in cosmogony, to the Supreme Being, divinity or the totality of all things.

The concept was reportedly conceived by the Pythagoreans and may refer variously to a single source acting alone, or to an indivisible origin, or to both.

The concept was later adopted by other philosophers, such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who referred to the Monad as an *elementary particle.*

It had a *geometric counterpart, * which was debated and discussed contemporaneously by the same groups of people.

[In this speculative scenario, let's consider Leibniz's *Monad, * from the philosophical work "The Monadology", as an abstract representation of *the zero-dimensional space that binds quarks together* using the strong nuclear force]:

1) Indivisibility and Unity: Monads, as indivisible entities, mirror the nature of quarks, which are deemed elementary and indivisible particles in our theoretical context. Just as monads possess unity and indivisibility, quarks are unified in their interactions through the strong force.

2) Interconnectedness: Leibniz's monads are interconnected, each reflecting the entire universe from its own perspective. In a parallel manner, the interconnectedness of quarks through the strong force could be metaphorically represented by the interplay of monads, forming a web that holds particles together.

3) Inherent Properties: Just as monads possess inherent perceptions and appetitions, quarks could be thought of as having intrinsic properties like color charge, reflecting the inherent qualities of monads and influencing their interactions.

4) Harmony: The concept of monads contributing to universal harmony resonates with the idea that the strong nuclear force maintains harmony within atomic nuclei by counteracting the electromagnetic repulsion between protons, allowing for the stability of matter.

5) Pre-established Harmony: Monads' pre-established harmony aligns with the idea that the strong force was pre-designed to ensure stable interactions among quarks, orchestrating their behavior in a way that parallels the harmony envisaged by Leibniz.

6) Non-Mechanical Interaction: Monads interact non-mechanically, mirroring the non-mechanical interactions of quarks through gluon exchange. This connection might be seen as a metaphorical reflection of the intricacies of quark-gluon dynamics.

7) Holism: The holistic perspective of monads could symbolize how quarks, like the monads' interconnections, contribute holistically to the structure and behavior of particles through the strong force interactions.

[cheeseman]

Obviously, anything that happened before the big bang is in a special category where time has no real meaning, however for me it seems more plausible that a death & rebirth situation happened instead of another universe just randomly bumping into ours, which just sounds ridiculous!.

[shawns]

There is an elephant in the room explanation for "dark matter". Most people don't know that Einstein said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light."
He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. This is illustrated in a common 2 axis dilation graph with velocity on the horizontal line and dilation on the vertical. Even mass that exists at 75% light speed is partially dilated.
General relativity does not predict singularities when you factor in dilation. Einstein is known to have repeatedly spoken about this. Nobody believed in black holes when he was alive for this reason.
Wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass, dilation will occur because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy.
It can be shown mathematically that dilation is occurring in our own galactic center. This means there is no valid XYZ coordinate we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. Or more precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid.
This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the missing mass is dilated mass.
According to Einstein's math, there would be no dilation in galaxies with very, very low mass because they do not have enough mass in their centers to achieve relativistic velocities.
It has recently been confirmed in 5 very, very low mass galaxies to show no signs of dark matter, in other words they have normal star rotation rates.

[timothy]

Wouldn't a big bang make a void in space where it blew outward? A collision of galaxies is more likely. How huge do galaxies grow?
Depending upon the attractions?

[maxshuty]

Hear me out… a lot of this is explained if we are in fact living in a simulation

[CharlesLechmere_the_Ripper]

The 'bouncing universe' seems to me like the most logical pattern. Knowing the Laniakea supercluster is pulled to the, so called, Great attractor and all. Who knows how long this cycle may take, if its even true.

[HB-ziog]

Lol. This sounds like an entry from 'The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy...' "This is clearly impossible." Love it.

[rogerthornton]

When the big bang is always illustrated it goes out in a cone shape like it was shot down the barrel of a shotgun. But wouldnt it explode in a spherical shape going out in all directions.

[bsmith]

Matter is held together by space within matter and when space is drawn out of matter its impossible to be held together and starts an expansion with the help of centrifugal force. This will happen when a black hole gets large enough. This is why the universe is flat and uniform throughout the universe. So you can see that actually the universe is like a galaxy of galaxies.

[jimwilson-klxs]

The universe never began, it was always there

[jameshotz]

The Universe is always full of energy.