And we were just finishing off a calculation because we wanted to show you something, relate The end of the the end of the universe, Thio Dark energy as well.

A dark energy is the harbinger of this.

Do you and some guys with some pipes off and they were, like, what it clearly says, Do some calculation.

What are you doing?

We're just showing that the universe is get ahead.

That they were like, What is this?

We're gonna start off talking about something.

Probably 60 symbols people have heard about before.

Where do we go?

Here.

And because Much of constant problem.

So I want to sort of explain what it really is.

Is often sort of understated.

I'm not explained properly in lots of places, even within scientific seminars.

Well, essentially, you think about the vacuum Look in a vacuum and you say right, Have you got the energy?

You think Well, no, it's a vacuum.

Of course not.

But actually, that's not true, because quantum mechanically, what you find is that little particles essentially will pop in and out of existence, so you can think of them.

It's just popping in our existence and essentially, you know, literally infinite testable time and that that gives the vacuum and energy.

The question is how much on it Turns out it's an awful lot of your usual standard calculations.

To calculate how much this is you find.

It's a huge amount of energy.

In fact, it's so much energy that it would cause the universe to curve so much that it wouldn't even extend As far as the moon.

People have tried to come up with models that that sort of can suppress the amount of vacuum energy that you get out and none of them being particularly successful.

So then your sort of face a dilemma?

Well, how did the universe How is the universe so big then, Andi, Essentially, what you say is okay.

I've just got a number a quantity that can counsel off this vacuum energy, and it counts is it just counted it off very high.

Add hot matter managed to a huge degree of accuracy on that, you know, sort of the consolation that allows the universe to be to be much larger.

It is a dimension Forman, whether the thing that you throw in there is damn, it has dimension, hasn't mentioned four dimensions of masses is an energy density itself.

So you're thinking you throw in is an energy density on DSO It's that energy density you throw in just literally by hand that you'd use the council off the energy density of the vacuum to try and stop this this huge amount of curving of the universe where actually is a tiny because when you explain to me the vacuum energy, you told me what makes it I know where it comes from this it's particles popping in and out of existence.

There's energy.

Therefore, we've got these gravity.

These are all things that are kind of sort of understand.

I don't understand how you just throwing this cancellation number density.

Where is that coming?

Well, see, actually, this this happens all the time in physics actually assumes you started in quantum mechanics.

You can ask about the quantum corrections to do into something on that.

For example, the charge of the electron you can ask whether quantum corrections are in charge of the election.

You get all these infinities popping out and then you have to add what we call it a counter term to try and bring it back, drag it back to finite values.

And so this is a bit like that.

It's like the counter term that you have to.

But it seems like a cop out, like if I build my house on a dodgy foundation, started leaning to the side, I couldn't just say Okay, Number three and everything's better.

I would have to actually build stuff and fix things.

I would have to physically do something to fix the division's.

Well, I actually, that's very good.

Point Break ready is that this is act.

That's an excellent point of that.

It's always cooks, really to the true nature of the problem.

The problem isn't really that you do these cancellations.

It's that once you do the matter, be it that choice that you made should be repulsed against any change in your your description of nature if you like.

So So I just said that you miscalculate the charge, the electron, you canceling infinity.

So why are we worrying?

With the cosmos of Constant about canceling huge numbers?

It's not certainly no worse than counseling infinities, and that's where the point that is generally missed about the cosmos costume.

That's not really the problem.

The true nature, the cosmos.

A constant problem is something called Radius of Instability, which is this business where you know, let's suppose I calculate what the vacuum energy is.

Okay, so what's my description of nature?

Well, I take a description, it's valid down to the atomic scale, and I get one value for the vacuum energy, and I need counsel that.

So I choose this number to counsel that.

Now I change my description ater I go down to to the nuclear scale and I get a completely different answer.

Well, and I need to do the same consolation to the same degree of accuracy.

Then I go down to the sub nuclear scale and I get a different answer again.

And I need to do the same consolation to the same degree of accuracy on this is a completely unstable process.

But surely there was only one vacuum energy.

So just figure out which one you have to calculate and use that Stop calculating it in different ways.

Okay, so that this this really hits something quite deep about about nature.

Do we believe in something called effective field theories.

That's that you can literally trust.

You don't need to know all these details of these air physics.

So if you're thinking about stuff that's a super nuclear scales, you don't need to worry about the details below the sub nuclear scare.

So, for example, do I You know, Newton's constant?

The law of gravity is that near the value of new Wisconsin doesn't change whether I decided to cut my physics off at the atomic scale or the nuclear scale or whatever it stays.

It stays pretty, Rebus.

It's the same value.

The problem of the cosmos, Constance, is I'm changing that description.

I'm having to keep retuning this value, this value that is really applying on on the largest scales.

It shouldn't need to worry about what's going on it at the at the sub nuclear scale, and so on.

A zay move that description.

Once I made the choice, it should be robust, and it really isn't so.

Whenever this happens in nature, it signals it has always signaled a lack of understanding of what's going on.

We have the same problem with the mass of the Higgs.

Incidentally, it suffers from the same kind of problem that, you know, we keep having to reach you in reaching retuned.

In that case, supersymmetry sells it case because much of constant Well, it's a different story.

You know what?

What is going on?

But the second energy exists hasn't quantity.

Is it measured?

Or is it something that's just modeled by people like you?

Mathematically.

But we don't know what it actually what?

It's quantity is we just kind of coming up with models and guessing what it is.

So Okay, good question s o the vacuum.

And he does changes in a vacuum Energy have been measured.

Know what I mean by that?

Someone called the cashmere effect, where the value of documentary is sensitive to the boundary conditions of your teeth have two plates and you and you change the separation.

This cheat and you can measure the change in the vacuum energy as you as you change the boundary conditions.

That's not really the true vacuum energy, ground, state of the universe.

It's not really we were just talking about a localized that thing.

That and it really is, or what you actually measure is is that the effect of changing those boundary conditions.

In a sense, the vacuum energy, the thing that gives you that is also the same kind of thing that gives you what we'll call the vacuum energy of the universe.

The true ground state of the universe.

So candy, Yes, but not quite so then.

So now one asks.

So you asked about measuring this sort of thing.

So it's actually ask, How do you measure?

Because much of constant.

Ok, well, how'd you mentioned Vacuum energy?

Well, the truth documented.

How do you measure it?

Can I measure in this room?

You think I could measure in this room?

Well, no, it's from the construction, right.

Well, you can't, right?

All right.

So how about you try Mission?

You might try.

And one of the features obvious.

It's constant.

Okay, Askew, go through space.

It stays constant.

Now I'm well, I could look for something that's behaving constant in this room, but I don't know that when I open the door outside, that changes.

You just said it was constant.

So there isn't a vacuum energy industry in the same, isn't it?

Of course it is.

Yes, it absolutely is.

But but when I find the thing that something was constantly stream.

How did I know that?

That's the vacuum energy.

Why not?

Because it might stop being constant when I go outside the room or when I go outside the galaxy.

Whatever.

Right?

Oh, if I wait long enough, it might just change over time.

But I just You know, I have to wait long enough to see it.

See it change?

Absolutely.

You're not.

So then how do you make of activity can be measured in a room?

Clearly not Because you can't distinguish that scenario.

We'll copy.

Distinguishes that it could never be measured.

Well, right.

Okay.

So what?

So what is that?

Okay.

The only way to measure the vacuum unity true vacuum energy is to consider the entire universe overall.

Turn the only way.

It's the only way you can truly guarantee that what you're talking about is constant.

This'd observation.

This is this was due to, you know, the likes of Neiman a county hammered serviced a marvelous big guns of physically made this observation that you want to identify the vacuum energy, you have to scan all of space and all the time myself in a colleague of mine pneumonia way we took What name And Savas and friends had said and we used it.

We said, OK, the only way if the only way that you can air measure the vacuum energy is to take the whole of space and time as one, then the only way you can properly counsel off our humanity is on the same level.

So literally we're demanding that this consolation happens over the whole universe, that the universe knows about a number he needs to know.

OK, so we've managed to set up dynamics which echoes over the whole universe at once.

So what we thought is, we've we've got this number, which is the number, That's ah, you know, that you used to counsel we got another number which kinda knows about the masses of particles on on the level of the whole universe.

They talk to each other, and they do so.

So no matter how you calculate the vacuum energy, whether you work at the atomic scale with you working the whatever scale, those two will communicate in just the right way that l counsel And so the problem of this this issue we were talking about just goes away.

This paper you've written Have you solved the problem or have you just written down?

Hey, don't wear everyone the universe.

So what we've done is we've found a way to basically deal with.

The problem is it was first formulated that it and it's it's almost criminally simple.

It doesn't require any huge chain locally.

Physics just looks like, you know, Einstein's relativity, Einstein's general relativity.

There's no change there.

Why?

Because we're changing the way we change.

Einstein's theory on a global level is the universe is a whole right.

We don't play with it locally.

So locally we get a ll the great predictions of Einstein's theory but the changes down as a whole because it had to be done on that level.

Now the the funny thing is, because we're sort of a sense of describe, we've got this way of getting the number that you need to counsel this classical value of the cosmological constant on dhe, the particle masters were getting to communicate in a certain way.

Like I said, on the universe is all what that means.

It turns out of the particle masses are actually related to the space time volume of the universe.

And in fact, as you make the space time volume of the university of basically it's spatial size and how long exists for if you make that bigger as a whole, then the particle rashes go down on.

In fact, if you had an infinite, truly infinite universe with its existing for an infinite amount of time and over an infinite amount of space, then that would that would drive all the particle mass is 20 Now we know just by looking around us that the particle mass is in our universe and not zero, so that immediately tells us that evil model is correct.

Then, actually, the universe is going to end.

We predict Armageddon.

It's the main prediction of our of our theory that the universe inevitably has to act.

Otherwise, we wouldn't have a university particle masses, and we do so for the cancellation that Cosmos Constant is achieved through it has this knock on effect that the universe has to be finite.

It would predict that the universe grows from its initial singularity, grows out of it and then reaches a maximum size and then drives into a big crunch on literally at the big crunch.

Time and space completely ceases to exist, said time and exists for finite, finite, like time.