Is Our Universe ACTUALLY 26 Billion Years Old? The Joe Rogan Experience
Summary
TLDRThe video script discusses the debate over the age of the universe, with a claim that it might be 26 billion years old, challenging the widely accepted 13.8 billion years. It critiques the idea that advanced civilizations or the formation of galaxies could be used to determine the universe's age, emphasizing that such factors do not necessarily reflect the universe's true age. The speaker, an experimentalist, highlights the importance of testing and refining scientific models, suggesting that new technology like the Simons Observatory could provide deeper insights into galaxy formation and potentially reshape our understanding of the cosmos.
Takeaways
- 🌌 The claim of a 26 billion-year-old universe is questioned in the context of advanced civilizations existing on a 4.3 billion-year-old Earth, implying that the planet's age must be older to support such developments.
- 🔭 Gupta's argument suggests that the properties and distribution of galaxies indicate they could not have formed in a universe as young as 13 billion years, challenging the current understanding of the universe's age.
- 🤔 The speaker contemplates the difference between the universe's age being 13 billion versus 27 billion years, highlighting the importance of precision in scientific claims.
- 🧠 The speaker emphasizes that the structure of galaxies does not necessarily reflect the universe's age, but rather our models and simulations of galaxy formation.
- 🔬 The age of the universe is known with a certain degree of precision, akin to knowing a person's birth date within a week, not exact but close enough for scientific purposes.
- 🛠 The role of an experimentalist is to challenge and prove theories wrong, narrowing down possibilities to reveal the truth.
- 🌐 Isaac Asimov's quote is used to illustrate the importance of refining our understanding of the Earth's shape, and by extension, the universe's structure.
- 🌪 The unpredictability of complex systems, like climate, is compared to the challenges in accurately modeling galaxy formation.
- 🔮 The potential for new technology, like the Simons Observatory, to provide more information and refine our understanding of galaxy formation is acknowledged.
- 🚀 The speaker differentiates between the study of galaxy formation and the study of the universe's origins, noting that advancements in one do not necessarily impact the other.
- 🌟 The James Webb Space Telescope is mentioned as a tool for studying galaxy formations, stars, exoplanets, and potentially extraterrestrial civilizations, but not for understanding the Big Bang itself.
Q & A
What is the claim about the age of the universe that the speaker is discussing?
-The speaker is discussing a claim that the universe is 26 billion years old, which they find hard to reconcile with the current understanding that the universe is around 13.8 billion years old.
Why does the speaker find the 26 billion years claim problematic?
-The speaker finds the claim problematic because it contradicts the established scientific understanding of the universe's age and the development timeline of civilizations and galaxies.
What does the speaker suggest about the development of civilizations and technology?
-The speaker suggests that the development of advanced technology, such as electrified silicon and internet, on a planet that is supposedly only 4 billion years old is implausible according to their model of civilization development.
What is the speaker's view on the criticism of the Big Bang theory based on galaxy formation?
-The speaker believes that the criticism based on galaxy formation does not necessarily undermine the Big Bang theory. Instead, it might indicate flaws in our models of galaxy formation rather than the age of the universe.
What is the speaker's profession and how does it influence their perspective on scientific theories?
-The speaker identifies as an experimentalist, which means their job is to test and potentially disprove scientific theories, not to prove them right, aiming to refine and improve existing models.
What does the speaker mean when they say their job is to prove theories wrong?
-The speaker means that as a scientist, their role is to challenge and test the validity of existing theories, to find and correct any flaws, thereby contributing to a more accurate understanding of the truth.
What is the significance of the Simons Observatory in the context of the discussion?
-The Simons Observatory is significant as it aims to provide new insights into the early universe, potentially offering more information that could refine our understanding of galaxy formation and the universe's history.
What is the speaker's stance on the possibility of new technology changing our understanding of the universe?
-The speaker is open to the idea that new technology could reveal more information about the universe, potentially leading to a remapping of our current models and understanding.
What does the speaker compare the complexity of simulating Earth's climate to?
-The speaker compares the complexity of simulating Earth's climate to the need for another Earth, as there is no way to reduce the complexity of a physical system to less than the system itself.
How does the speaker view the process of scientific discovery and refinement?
-The speaker views scientific discovery as a process of finding flaws in existing paradigms, refining them, and improving our understanding through the discovery of new information and technologies.
What is the speaker's opinion on the possibility of advanced civilizations casting doubt on the universe's history?
-The speaker believes that even if a hyper-advanced civilization were discovered, it would not cause them to question the universe's history itself, but rather it would prompt a reevaluation of models of civilization development.
Outlines
🌌 The Improbability of Advanced Civilizations on a Young Planet
The speaker challenges the claim that the Earth is 26 billion years old by using an analogy of an advanced civilization on a 4 billion-year-old planet. They argue that such technological feats as electrified silicon communication, internet, and space flight could not have been achieved in such a short time according to their model of civilization development. The speaker then refutes the idea that the age of the universe can be questioned based on the early formation of galaxies and their distribution, emphasizing that these are separate issues from the universe's age. They stress the importance of distinguishing between the evidence for the Big Bang and the models used to understand galaxy formation, and highlight the precision with which astronomers estimate the universe's age, comparing it to the precision with which one might estimate a person's age.
🔬 The Quest for Truth in Scientific Models and the Potential of New Technology
The speaker discusses the role of a scientist, particularly an experimentalist, in seeking to prove theories wrong in order to refine and narrow down to the truth. They reference Isaac Asimov's quote about the Earth's shape to illustrate that it's better to be slightly wrong than completely wrong. The speaker then addresses the complexity of simulating the Earth's climate and the inherent challenges in understanding complex systems. They suggest that new technology, such as the Simons Observatory, could provide more information and potentially remap our understanding of galaxy formation, exoplanets, stars, and even extraterrestrial civilizations. The speaker concludes by emphasizing the excitement of discovering flaws in current models and the continuous pursuit of refining our understanding of the universe.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Electrified Silicon
💡Internet
💡Space Flight
💡Gupta's Argument
💡Big Bang
💡Galaxy Formation
💡Scientific Paradigms
💡Experimentalist
💡Complexity
💡Simons Observatory
💡Web Telescope
Highlights
The claim of 26 billion years is questioned in the context of Earth's capabilities and age.
A hypothetical scenario is presented where advanced civilizations on a young planet challenge traditional models of civilization development.
Gupta's argument about galaxy properties and their implications on the universe's age is critiqued.
The distinction between the formation and structure of galaxies in relation to the universe's age is clarified.
The importance of refining models and paradigms in scientific discovery is emphasized.
Isaac Asimov's quote about the Earth's shape illustrates the pursuit of truth in science.
The role of an experimentalist in proving theories wrong to narrow down to the truth is explained.
The idea that advanced civilizations would not affect the understanding of the universe's evolution is discussed.
The complexity of simulating Earth's climate as an example of the inherent complexity in physical systems.
The potential for new technology to provide more information and remap our understanding of the universe is considered.
The Simons Observatory's goal to enhance our detection capabilities in the study of the universe is mentioned.
The limitations of the Web Telescope in understanding the Big Bang or galaxy formation are highlighted.
The Web Telescope's potential to study galaxy formations, stars, exoplanets, and civilizations is outlined.
The pursuit of finding flaws in existing paradigms to refine our understanding of the universe is underscored.
The notion of complexity in scientific models and the challenge of reducing it to understand physical systems is discussed.
Transcripts
so this claim of 26 billion years is
that does it make any sense it can make
sense in the in the following context
imagine you see a planet and on that
planet there are people and they're
they're playing around with like these
electrified pieces of silicon and you'd
be like wait a second like that's really
weird like that planet's only four
billion years old how is it possible
that they're not only able to to talk on
electrified silicon but they're also
like having an internet and space flight
no no no it takes longer in my model of
how civilizations form it must have
taken 8 billion years for that to happen
so therefore there it's impossible to
reconcile with the Earth being 4.3
billion years old therefore the Earth
must be 8 billion years old what he said
this guy Gupta said there are properties
of galaxies they're rotating they're
appearing too early on the universe's
early history to have developed into the
spiral characteristics and the
population distribution of them is too
numerous to have occurred in a universe
that's only quote unquote 13 billion
years and you actually said that you
said like I always thought you know 13
billion is a pretty big number you know
now they're saying 27 so what's the
difference but there's a big difference
because implicit in that criticism is
that there are flaws and and
Imperfections in how we understand the
Big Bang okay when in reality at best he
could be correct about the formation of
galaxies but you see those are two
separate things right the formation and
the structure of a galaxy has no bearing
on how old the UN universe is
necessarily it tells you something about
your models of computer simulations is
what he's effectively criticizing not
criticizing the evidence that something
like a Big Bang occurred at a very
definite point in the universe's past
that we believe to about one to the we
have equivalent Precision for me to say
I know how old you are exactly but but
if you looked at a 50-year-old person
you could say you know the day they were
born plus or minus a week like that's
the Precision with which monitors
astronomers know the age of the universe
and one guy is coming up with this idea
that because there's certain galaxies
within it that have formed this I again
imagine if we found like a hyper
Advanced civilization that has warp
drives and you know does every type
three Dyson civilizations or whatever
they would not cast doubt on the
evolution and the history of the
universe
itself that would not cause me to
question that it would cause me to
question my models of how po people form
and Aliens form and stuff like that but
it wouldn't cause me to question the age
of the universe there's nothing related
to it when we are studying the age of
the universe and the vastness of space
is there potentially new technology that
would expose more than we currently can
view that would change your model in the
sense that we are JNS a scientist
especially me as an experimentalist in
contrast to people like Brian Cox um
Neil degrass Tyson Eric Weinstein Etc
my job is not to prove theories right my
job is actually to prove them wrong
that's really what I get paid to do is
to narrow and winnow out so much so that
what is left is the truth there's a
quote by Isaac azimov he said if you
think the Earth is flat you're wrong if
you think it's a perfect sphere you're
also wrong because it's not a perfect
sphere it actually bulges at the equator
it has properties you know because the
Earth is spinning and the way it forms a
little bit like a pair okay um so it's
also not but it's much less wrong to say
it's a sphere than to say it's flat our
job is to find the flaws in the existing
paradigms shatter those and refine those
and there's countless you know examples
of that throughout scientific history so
there are ways that I would be caused to
doubt the formation story of galaxies
absolutely I mean that's almost like
predicting hurricanes you know I just
came through a hurricane to see you
right there's a big hurricane in San
Diego this week and like it's like an
inch of rain okay you know how we drive
in Southern California right um so even
a slick of trace of rain causes us to go
into into total Terror um but uh but we
didn't know where was going to make
exact landfall cuz climate is an example
not of something that's merely
complicated it's complex the best way to
simulate the earth's climate is with
another Earth in other words there's no
irreducible way to reduce the amount of
complexity to describe a physical system
than the system itself that's a notion
of complexity that's a definition of
complexity so in the context of what you
said absolutely and people like Allison
and others Kat they definitely are would
be more thrilled than anybody to
discover well we didn't understand
there's something wrong with our model
of how the universe for not how the
universe formed but how galaxies form so
what I'm asking is with the levels of
detection that we have available how
significant is the change in what the
web is able to do and is it possible
that like when we're looking are is is
it whatever levels of detection whatever
methods of detection we have now is it
absolute that if you go to 13 whatever
billion years is it possible that with
new technology we would get more
information we'd be able to see more and
then you would remap this idea yes and
the good news is that's what the Simons
Observatory is trying to do the web
telescope has was never built for nor
can it say anything about the Big Bang
or what caused the big bang or it's just
Galaxy formations it's it's not just by
the way it's it's that's a pretty big
deal but it's Galaxy formation
properties the Stars exoplanets the
atmospheres the chemistry uh
civilizations on EXO it can do so much
cool stuff
Voir Plus de Vidéos Connexes
Hubble's Expanding Universe Red Shifts The Big Bang
The Big Bang, Cosmology part 1: Crash Course Astronomy #42
Five Theories About the Universe to Blow Your Mind
How Do We Know The Age Of The Universe?
Why We Should NOT Look For Aliens - The Dark Forest
How small are we in the scale of the universe? - Alex Hofeldt
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)