"The human brain is the smartest on the planet" - The Human Brain

I just want to be alive to witness how much humanity will progress and how many new things we will learn about space

I love how one half of these is "okay I know time travel isn't real, but wouldn't it be crazy if it was?" and the other half is just quantum mechanics

Apparently the human brain is a wee bit narcissistic

Here’s a fun fact: if time travel ever exists, than it already and always has existed.

What always bugs me is just because a planet isn't habitable for life on earth doesn't mean other kind of life froms can't or don't exist on them

The aliens saw us and were like 'Nah bro don't get out of the ship' and then they left

Time is merely an idea which happens to be very useful as a form of measurement and it’s not even consistent across the universe but it helps us keep track and organize so many things.

As something of a scientist myself, i can confirm this paradoxes keeps me awake at night, so i sleep tight during the day

Space genuinely has to be one of the most interesting and fascinating things we can possibly learn about as a species

I recall an old Star Trek episode that had a sentient creature called the Horta. It was a silicone based rock creature that did not show up on their scanners. Basically a living rock with intelligence, protecting her eggs. Made me think at the time of all the possibilities in the cosmos. Growing up in the 60's and 70's, this was mind blowing.

“Problems that remain persistently insoluble should always be suspected as questions asked in the wrong way” - Alan Watts

Destiny: " These paradoxes keep scientists awake at night" my brain: "You know, I'm something of a scientist myself "

0:38 Fermi Paradox 2:53 The Bootstrap Paradox 3:50 The Grandfather Paradox 4:46 Taking Out Hitler Paradox 5:34 Polchinski’s Paradox 6:37 Observer’s Paradox 7:48 The Double-Slit Experiment 9:13 The Black Hole Information Paradox

The problem with that fancy new telescope too is that even if we can look at the surface of a planet on the other side of the milky way for example, that light or image we see is technically that planet in the past because it took so long for the light to reach us. Depending on how far away the planet is it could be 100s of thousands of years in the past and maybe life is blooming on that planet, we just can't see it yet.

The fact that we’re only basing potential life off of planets with conditions like ours. Who’s to say all other life forms IN THE ENGIRE UNIVERSE need oxygen and water?

The reason why we keep failing at finding life outside earth is because we're only looking for it in planets with conditions similar to ours

I think it’s interesting that we always look at possible alien forms as “head, torso, 2 legs and 2 arms”. Nose, big eyes and mouth. If the universe is so big, the ways forms of life could present itself is also numerous. The chances of extraterrestrial life looking familiar is slim.

Whenever i get very sad or depressed about my life i always think about the space and the universe ….my problems would become non existent instantly

A couple of these, I feel, could be solved if the time traveler is willing to stay in the past and start their life over.

I have always had a big problem with the concept of time travel. And it isn’t the traveling part that’s an issue. Let’s say it’s a given that we can now travel through time. The real problem isn’t WHEN we “land”, it’s WHERE we “land”. In movies, they always assume the point that you’re standing on the earth is the constant. But in order to successfully time travel, you need to calculate exactly what point in the UNIVERSE you will re-appear. Considering the earth is rotating at something like 1600 km/hour at the equator, and rotating around the sun at 107,000km/hour,and the solar system is moving about 700,000km/hour. Plus the galaxy is shooting through space. In order to do a simple time jump of, say, 10 minutes into the future, you’ll need to calculate the exact point in the universe where your feet will be 10 minutes from now. And it’s not a straight line, it’s a complex, spiraling, corkscrew path through space. And suppose your math is off by a few feet/a meter, you could arrive half buried in the ground, or floating in the air, or inside a tree, or any number of other gruesome possibilities. The calculations would be all but impossible. Unless you are time traveling by magic. Then I have no argument.

“The human brain is one of the smartest on the planet” Observe a four-way stop for about five minutes and you’ll immediately lose all hope in humanity.

I'm gonna have to watch this again and most likely still not quite understand it all, I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

This by far has been one of the better videos made. I hope eventually some one makes a video explaining each one of these to a t so that people that haven't researched these can understand what this person is talking about in each paradox situation

So excited for James Webb telescope to launch.

I'm 50 years old and remember being in school was told about the universe and the big bang and figured we as humans were approaching the end of the line in science and human technology. Little did I know we're not even scratching the surface of knowledge there is to know... now it turns out, the universe is accelerating its expansion, there's some dark matter and energy we can't measure or describe. The universe of the small seems to be getting smaller by the minute, and nanotechnology is not even completely understood, neither the true nature of our surroundings... We humans are stubbornly destined for nonstop surprises in our quest to find out what is this thing we call the universe

I’ve heard it said that time doesn’t really exist, it’s something we invented to give us familiar reference points. But then how do you explain aging? Everything gets older. So time must then exist? But what time is it in the void of space? So time only exists on planets, and only on planets with intelligent life? But that supports the idea that time is only an arbitrary reference point that doesn’t really exist. And how would this affect “time travel?” How could we “go back in time” if it doesn’t really exist? And where is/was the starting point of time? If there’s no universally agreed upon starting point, how do we calibrate it for time travel? And whose clock do we use and how/when was it calibrated and is it completely accurate over multiple millennia? And what about “leap year,” times zones and daylight savings time? I need these answers by tomorrow.

This video was incredibly informative, I'm impressed!

I am a physicist and I wish I hadn't found this video. This is the classic example of why physicists HATE media who is just bothered about making things sound fancy without even a shred of proper interpretation in them. Each and every one of the paradoxes mentioned here is so badly represented and I feel like killing the creator for murdering physics. Not to mention some of these are not even paradoxes, they're just laws which the person didn't bother to read.

The scariest part is dolphins can wreak havoc day and night without sleeping. A recent study found that dolphins could stay awake for five days straight with no loss of mental acuity. The dolphins didn’t even need to make up sleep at the end of the study, though the scientists sure did.

0:39 when you said “a lot of you might be familiar with the Fermi paradox” I ask people that same question and not one of them knew or heard about it

There may be a flaw with schrodinger's cat paradox. The scientists are assuming that the cat won't interfere with anything inside the box. The cat is unpredictable.

For the longest time, I've had a problem with the Schrodingers cat experiment. It seems to me to just be a tautology -- you don't know something until you know it. Of course the cat is not both alive and dead just because you don't know which it is. I'm writing this either at my kitchen table or the desk in my office. Since you don't know which, does that mean I'm in both places?

We haven’t been contacted by aliens for one of several reasons. 1. Any civilization who is advanced enough for interstellar travel has also developed technology of mass destruction and destroyed itself (like we will) 2. Any civilization advanced enough for interstellar travel recognizes that humans lack the intelligence and foresight to be a multi planetary society. 3. They simply haven’t discovered we exist yet and will find us eventually 4. There are other civilizations but they are actually less evolved than ours and have yet to develop space travel 5. The most horrifying of the options. We actually are alone and intelligent life has yet to evolve elsewhere.

The observer's paradox has completed f*cked my life up. So many different sets of eyes are basically ripping my reality apart. There's so many alternate versions of my life. I wish people could understand how NOT normal it is just sitting around watching any given individual.

What we used to learn in schools makes us think that the universe is just as simple as a note written on a paper but it's just so so so complicated

The problem with time travel is that you have to go back to the exact location of earth in space at the date and time you wish to travel to. Seeing how the gallery is moving and your solar system is moving with in that and the earth with in that. Pin pointing the exact location and getting to the location in space is just a challenging as figuring out how to go back in time once you get there.

There are things we can’t even comprehend as they are so complicated that they are outside of our bubble of thinking

I Love How the Thumbnails Never Have Anything to Do with the Video

This Video Turned To Be More Fascinating Than I Expected Thx For The Vid

"Travel back in time before things get out of control" *travels back to 1940, already a year into the war*

Huge shoutout to the mastering engineer, video is loud and clear . Love it.

There is a time travel paradox that it seems no one ever covers. It begs the question ... Can you travel into the future and meet your older self? You know that unless you die, you will become older at some future date, and if time travel should be possible it seems to be a reasonable thing to do. But what if you decide to never return to your initial time of travel? How can you ever become the age you expect to meet at that future time? Yes, you can go back (if this sort of travel ever exists) but you don't have to.

I'm higher secondary student and studied about light and it connects to schordingers theory . Light can be Ray , Wave or partical as you observe it . Normally light appear as a ray like it reflect and refract . In YDSE ( Young's double slit Experiment ) it behave like wave , show interference by fringes . And in Photoelectric effect the classical wave theory fails and give rise to it's partical nature and also give idea to dual nature of matter

Most of the times when we talk about extraterrestrial life we tend to focus on planets which have similar living conditions as that of earth but that will only stand when we are looking for extraterrestrial life that is similar to ours. There could be other life forms which could function normally in a sulphur rich atmosphere or with winds at 5.4k mph and in that case even bacteria found in another planet are actually aliens.

I think when it comes to intelligent life in the Galaxy it's more about when instead of where. I have a feeling that advanced civilizations flicker in and out of existence...

I love when people make definitive comments about things like black holes, things that only theoretically exist. The question that I want to ask is, how is this any different than making a definitive comment about God. In both cases we cannot observe or prove the definitive comment that we are making. What scientists fail to realize is science actually has a greater number of gods than Christianity does. In Christianity there's always just one explanation. Science has multiple gods, the Big bang, dark matter, dark energy, black holes, multiple dimensions, alternate universes. These are just sciencey words that show faith in something that cannot be proven.

The Drake Equation , is like asking squirrels to calculate your taxes.

I love to see the story of Dr. Wudi. He observed timelapse of all Universes. He holds a very different view. He has an unusual Theory of Everything. He has been observing in silence since 2017. If you make a video about him, I think it would be a truly fascinating story.

I lived in a rural neighborhood in the forest in northern AZ as a teen and went on many hikes in the forest. To find artifacts left over from the native or wild west cowboy camps I would have to dig down to find them because they were buried from time passing. Trees dropping pine needles, wind blowing dirt, rain burying things in mud, etc.. I would clear rocks off the area before digging down to find the artifacts. If the artifacts are from the past 150 years or so, why are rocks that are millions of years old sitting on top of the ground above them? Many too big to have been blown there by the wind. Shouldn't the rocks have long been buried in time? I would find large and small chunks of petrified wood sitting openly on the forest floor, even though it's surrounded by pine trees. Shouldn't it have been buried under pine needles and everything, given how old it is? Some you would think someone just put there a week ago. How are so many rocks that are millions of years old sitting openly on the top of the ground, above things that nature buried in the past 100 or so years? Not really a paradox but something I used to wonder as a teenager.

at 0:42 the paradoxes begin: There's a photo of Enrico Fermi "Italian Physicist" with the Eiffel Tower in the background... As Spock might have said, "I fail to see the logic in that, Captain."

4:15 Imagine you do this and your not erased. Might be a hint your adopted 🤣

it brings me comfort knowing there is still so many fundamental concepts we as a species have no answer to or understanding of

0:42 "Italian physicist" - shows Eiffel tower -_-

You also have to consider that reversing in time is impossible as a solution, and the only way around it is to enter a near perfect copy of your universe before times progresses to the point you want to enter. It is far more logical to assume the system we exist in lacks the ability to properly rewind, going forward has already been proven to exist but not backwards. Also this idea is supported by thermodynamics, the reversal of the system would violate the common laws we know to exist.

For bootstrap paradox the possible answer will be creating branch in the timeline, when you give the book to the past man you are creating a branch timeline. Same applies to grandfather paradox.

A paradox is usually an indicator that the underlying argument (or observation) is faulty. For example: 1. Time Travel paradoxes (Grandfather, bootstrap, etc.) are all based on the assumption that we can travel backwards in time in the same space/time continuum. This is false simply because light cannot move backwards through space/time (a la Christopher Nolan's Tenet). You can travel (theoretically) to a parallel universe where the time is different (say a parallel universe where 1951 is the current year), but you cannot travel back to 1951 in this universe. This is theoretically possible if you were a 5th-dimensional being, or managed to build a machine that can travel through the 5th dimension to another, parallel 4th-dimensional timeline where it is 1951 and another version of your grandparents lived. So if you killed that grandfather in that parallel 1951, it would have no bearing on your existence in your original timeline, where the current year is 2021. 2. The Fermi Paradox is more of an argument from arrogance that assumes that all extraterrestrial life will have the same dimensions, evolutionary history, communication style, morphology, or even recognizability as life as we know it. We only recognize carbon based life forms, but wouldn't know how to recognize life from other sources. The universe is big enough for a silicon based lifeform to exist, for example. The Fermi Paradox is just as silly as an ant assuming that no higher order intelligence exists because it is too small to detect the existence of humans, or even larger animals that live in the ocean like blue whales. Alien life more than likely exists. However, perhaps they are much more primitive than us (maybe they're in their stone age as we speak) or perhaps exist in such a higher order of reality that we are as inconsequential as bacteria to them. In the latter case, they've probably been here so often, that we might live in an intergalactic zoo and not even realize it. 3. Theoretical paradoxes (Polchinski, Schrödinger/Observer, Black Hole Information) are not based on observable phenomena, but rather serve as thought experiments to elucidate flaws in our mathematical models of the universe. They are a way of saying "our math is wrong, because it also suggests that this silly thing (i.e. the paradox) is possible". Schrödinger's paradox is a way of showing that our understanding of quantum physics is incomplete. Polchinski's paradox shows that we don't understand the physics inside a singularity. The black hole information paradox showed that Stephen Hawking's mathematical model of black holes (at the time) was incomplete (see "Hawking Radiation"). Whenever you run into a paradox, always remember that it's not an indicator that there's something wrong with the universe. Rather, it's an indicator that there's something wrong with OUR understanding of the universe.

Paradox: Creatures that call themselves "the smartest on the planet" destroy the very and only planet that gave them life.

The paradox is much more basic: Suppose you went back to meet your younger self. Now there are 2 persons standing in front of each other. Which one is you?? After all, one is you and the other is another person. Which one is you, and who is the other one??? Can your conscience exist in 2 places looking on the other body as a different person???

The Hitler Paradox can be solved in this way: Your knowledge of something is not dependent on its actuality i.e. just because something is in your head doesn't mean it necessarily happened. On this basis, killing Hitler would erase the reason to do so in history but it wouldn't erase the reason in your mind. The notion that changing history changes your mind, assumes that you only have historically accurate things in your mind, which we know is false because we have all believed in things that are not true before. Basically, you would know the reason even if you eliminated the justification of that reason.

I literally try to comprehend and think about the paradoxes and my brain just gets clustered up and i can’t think anymore 😭😭

Countering the Fermi paradox, if you look at the time line of the earth's existence and specificaly the total period of time that human life has existed on earth, it is a tiny blip in time over the time line of the existence of our universe. So potentially we may have came to existence after other intelligent life ceased to ocupy our local area of the universe, or other intelligent life may not be evolved yet locally to us, given how big the period of time the universe has existed so far and likely to continue.

The solution the observer paradox is that when observed photon interacts with the photon received by our eyes changing its behaviour , this is also the reason for the wave function collapse and heisenberg,s uncertainity principle .. Now , where's my noble prize ?

There is no doubt about Parallel universes. If you decide one thing on the other, you get to see a different universe from your POV. For humans, there is always a choice.

The fermi paradox is based on the assumption that other "advanced civilizations" would also be willing to expolit and destroy thier planets to build the technology we are looking for to prove thier existence. There is absolutely no logical reason for this assumption. Not every creature is as short sighted as the human species.

“ you can’t know if something exists unless you see it” that’s debatable

I think the reason why aliens havent visited us is for 3 reasons 1. They cannot get to us, most of these inhabitable planets are millions of lightyears away and it is impossible for an object to go lightspeed or faster without using an infinite amount of energy so it could simply be that they cannot reach us. 2. They simply have no need, id imagine they have inner politics and a currency system and itd be expensive to travel to another planet millions of lightyears away however if they did theres a big chance since there a millions of planets just like ours theyd have no need to, we would be labeled as not advanced enough to even be worth bothering. We havent even past out galaxy or solar system or even to mars, what good does it serve intelligent life to visit a planet with non-intelligent life when there are millions of others just like ours. 3. They arent advanced enough, the universe is only 14 billion years old and it took earth 4.5 billion years just to put a rover on mars not even a human so if we arent having much luck going to other planets most likely these other planets arent either and you have to take into account our brains grew rapidly in the span of 3 million years, like faster than any other species had ever grown, what if we’re the most intelligent life on the universe, what if every alien is just about on the same stage as us or maybe they just got past the solar system, its interesting to think about

I never understood how matter could just be “erased” like that. you’d more than likely end up in an alternate timeline where you never happened rather than in or original time

Today I learned about the Astley paradox! If you ask Rick Astley for his copy of the movie UP, he cannot give it to you as he will never give you up. However, in doing so, he lets you down. Thus creating the Astley Paradox.

You just got my like and subscribed and you didn't even had to mention this to me. Just science and stick on the subject. Well done Sir, I am your newest fan!

300 MILLION potential Earth-like planets in this galaxy alone... i cant even begin to comprehend this figure.

For some bizarre reason, it says what the Schrödinger's cat/Observer Effect is but does not explain at all why it is or how a cat can be alive and dead at the same time.

Technologically advanced, capable of space travel, aware of other habitable planets, on the search for one to invade... What if we're the aliens 👽

When it comes to paradoxes in time, i have seen it done beautifully in one series so far "Steinsgate" How to save someone life without creating a paradox in time? Lets assume that we travel into the past (lets say 5 years) so save someones life that died 5 years ago. How can you save that persons life without creating a paradox in time? Stupid as it may sound, its very simple: Save that persons life, without letting anyone know that they didnt die. The events traveling their death have to transpire the same way, and the person has to remain "dead" until you reach the point in time you travelled back from. After that the person can reveal themselves as everything hence forth wouldn't create a paradox anymore, because you never reached that point in time before travelling back in time and up until then, everything had remained the same as you have known. you could either simply bring the person "back to the future" which would be the most failsafe way of doing things without creating a paradox, or make sure they dont effect the timeline in any way during the time of their supposed death. As long as the records stay the same up until the moment of time traveled back from, nothing changes. this sounds logical to me anyway. However, there is one good counter argument though: Time is not owned by humans, meaning, just because we dont know about something happening or not, doesn't mean the universe isn't aware (as stupid as it may sound) The person that died in the original timeline did not disappear from the universe. the particles the person was made of still remain in the original timeline and in one way or another effect the original timeline, as minuscule as it may be. and the absence of that effect of the timeline may cause a paradox in itself. ... or not, who knows. this shit is so complicated, ill go watch some mark wahlberg movie

Crazy to think, in another dimension, there could be 2 planets with completely different civilizations that co-exist out there

Dont know whats better: The Fact that there really exists a "Kill-Hitler-paradox" or the pronounciaton of " Der Führer"😂😂

These paradoxes keep scientists up at night , however I watch them to go to sleep at night. Funny how that works out.

"The human brain is the smartest on the planet" My brain: "lets forget how to function while you're talking to hot girls"

The very act of going back in time ensures that while you may be able to reach a real previous point in time, you will never be able to return to your original timeline. Its very simple.

Ok so the first one is simply addressed by the needle in the haystack principal: where the sheer number of planets out there drastically reduces the odds of ours being found by other life forms. That coupled with the fact that even at faster than light speed travel even if our planet was chosen for an expedition it would take a very long time for them to reach us. So the odds are significantly in favor of us not being visited by alien life. Now time travel is by no means remotely possible even theoretically so if the core idea is not possible then there can be no paradoxes concerning time travel because the core logic points are not possible. If one cannot travel through time in the first place then item’s can’t be taken through time nor can events in the past be changed. From a strictly scientific view point the past simply does not exist therefore cannot be traveled to nor does the future exist so it cannot be traveled to. The only point in time that exists is the present which is constantly changing. Wormholes fall within the same field of speculation as time travel because the core concept is far from a reality. Without time travel a black hole is simply a chunk of super dense material making the paradox null and void as the ball simply becomes part of the mass. As for the cat in the box I can’t believe that anyone would consider themselves scientists believing that observation has any relevance to the state of anything. The universe would still be there if our entire planet did not exist and there was no one there to view it. The notion that a viewer must be present for something to exist or change state is simply ridiculous and delusional. As for the double slit experiment the answer is that photons do not behave like balls being shot through the slits but more like the slits being immersed in water where the photons are water molecules the ones initially displaced are not traveling through the slot to the target but are bumping adjacent photons creating a wave pattern and a movement of the particles themselves. The more the system is interfered with the less chance of recording a readable result this is a problem with the setup of the experiment not taking into account the true nature of the photon. Thus the experiment is flawed and it’s results are flawed as a result. As for information loss in a black hole there are a few possibilities: one is that the information is still present inside in a compressed form and the second is that the leaking radiation contains even smaller currently undetectable information patterns.

“Named after *italian* physicist” *shows the Eiffel Tower*

You know it's weird to me that people are so willing to examine the Fermi paradox before we even have a full replicable understanding of how cellular life forms from basic elements. Resolving the latter confusion is irrevocably essential to resolving the former confusion.

I was watching this today which just happens to be the anniversary of my wife's great grandfathers death. The part talking about going back in time to kill your grandfather was poorly timed, unexpected, and now my wife is mad at me!

The human brain ain't that clever when he pollutes his own fish tank

There really is no such thing as a Paradox, the universe is logically consistent and anything else is either a fabricated "what if scenario" or lack of clarity.

One problem with communication over interstellar distances is just that. The time it takes for radio signals to travel from one star to even the nearest makes it very impractical. Also, the ability to detect signals that have dispersed through space and over the inference in space makes it exceptionally difficult. Look at the Viking probes. If we didn't know they were there and exactly where to point our radio dishes it would be virtually impossible to detect their weak signals. Most civilizations out there probably use some focused beam tech to communicate which would make it almost impossible to intercept unless you happen to pass through the beam. So unless they come to our planet, it's unlikely we could ever find them by looking for random radio signals.

7:30 The cats dead because he has nothing to eat/drink. Simple 🤣🤣

9:11 i think that by observing which slit the light passes through changes the outcome of which has already happened. Because in order for someone to see or observe anything with your eyes light has to bounce off this object and you then see the outcome of whatever. But when you set up a photo/observing device close to the slit the light (particles and waves) has to not just go through the slit but also the observation device. Therefore adding another obstacle and completely changing said events that where supposed to occur.

Many of these are the exact same paradox expressed with different stories/scenarios to explain the elements. The root of the paradox is "just how does time work" to which much of science is preoccupied with figuring out, breeding hundreds of thousands of interesting questions.

Says one scientist to another, "How do you [ possibly ] know the timeline has not been altered?"

What I find most interesting out of all the paradoxes is that something as small as the human brain has the ability to recognize, study and eventually solve all of them. Its the master key 🔑 that was designed to open all doors. All we have to do is look to self to see that we are the most intelligent design. And understand that we are made in our creators image, not appearance, image... Here's a theory. What if we stopped looking at us being the most intelligent species on earth and started to realize that were the most intelligent design in the entire universe. Then wouldn't we be the aliens that we are looking for? And when figure out the mysteries of the universe wouldn't that make us God like?

Here’s one that stumps me: quite a few people think the band Queen is actually good and worth listening to. Why? WHY?

Great video. Did you guys now that, according to Maccone, the *closest alien civilization* could be 1,933 light years away

The double slit experiment has some misconceptions. This used to fascinate me before I learned the true nature of the experiment. When they say “observing” changes the result, they really mean when the particle is being sensed by our equipment. They fail to clarify that the equipment used to “observe” actually has some Interference with the experiment.

What I find fascinating is that we know less about our oceans than we do space, two similar environment's.

when people say observe in the quantum sense it doesn't mean observation by a conscious being but rather ANY interaction with the system at all by anything outside the system.

Here's something that seems like a paradox to me, but could probably be explained by a physicist: Imagine a totally dark room with a lamp. You switch on the lamp and now you can see all the room. You can see because the photons bounce off (reflect) all the surfaces in the room. Now turn off the lamp and it instantly gets dark. What happens to all those photons bouncing around in there? Why do they just instantly disappear? Probably a stupid question, but it bugs me.

Robert A. Heinlein wrote two of the best time-travel stories - "-All You Zombies-" and "The Door Into Summer". Carl Sagan listed "-All You Zombies-" as an example of how science fiction "can convey bits and pieces, hints and phrases, of knowledge unknown or inaccessible to the reader".

for your information it was Sir Ramanujan who gave the string theory

""named after Italian physicist" and yet Eiffel tower in background - LOL