We usually think of space-time as a physical "fabric" or a stage where things happen, and quantum entanglement as a weird connection between particles across that stage.

But a profound frontier theory proposed by physicists Juan Maldacena and Leonard Susskind—known as ER=EPR—suggests we have it completely backward. Space-time doesn't contain entanglement; entanglement is what creates space-time.

The Mechanics:

• ER stands for Einstein-Rosen bridges (the mathematical name for wormholes).

• EPR stands for Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen (the mathematical framework for quantum entanglement).

The theory states that ER = EPR. This means that whenever two subatomic particles become quantumly entangled, they are not just "connected" across space. They are literally connected by a microscopic, subatomic wormhole.

If you took every single piece of quantum entanglement out of the universe, space-time would instantly collapse. There would be no "here," no "there," no distance, and no geometry. The smooth, three-dimensional reality we walk through every day is just a macroscopic illusion generated by a giant network of quantum pixels hooked together by wormholes.

What's the thought?

PS - pic for representation purposes only.

Observable universe (diameter ≈ 93 billion light-years) scaled down to Earth’s diameter 12,742

One light year would be 0.137 mm

Voyager 1 which has travelled 17km/s since 1977 is 0.000374 mm away from earth.

Closest star (Proxima Centauri, is 0.582 mm away.

Your naked eye sees about 2% of the 200000 stars located within 6cm from earth.

The Milkyway Galaxy is 13.7 meters in diameter and 13.7cm thick disk.

The galaxy ic 1101 is 233 meters in diameter (not a thin disk like Milkyway.)

Andromeda galaxy which is on crash course to Milky way is 343 meters away.

Boötes Void which is massive near empty region of space is 55 kilometers in diameter.

Cosmological event horizon is 2192km away, ligh speed travel would never allow us to reach further than that.

Thoughts?

Hi, everyone, I had a great conversation with Geraint F. Lewis, a Welsh astrophysicist and Professor at the University of Sydney, about some of the biggest questions in cosmology, physics, and our understanding of the world.

We explore what the Big Bang theory tells us about the beginning of the universe, why our current understanding of physics reaches limits when we try to look further back in time, and how neutrinos could reveal secrets about the cosmos — including why matter exists at all. We also mention the 2026 Nobel Prize in Physics, awarded to Francis Halzen for his work on the IceCube Neutrino Observatory.

Professor Lewis also explores what sparked the Scientific Revolution, how modern science transformed our understanding of the world, and why Einstein challenged aspects of quantum mechanics.

Professor Lewis's latest book, The Shortest History of Reality: From Plato’s Cave to the Mind-Bending Discoveries of Modern Physics — The Human Quest to Explain the World, traces humanity’s changing understanding of reality, from everyday intuition and ancient philosophy to the discoveries of modern physics. It explores the ideas that reshaped our view of existence, from Newton’s universe to the strange probabilities of quantum physics and beyond.

If you're interested in these subjects, you can check out our conversation: https://youtu.be/38rUHEeAVHw

Hi! I'm new to studying the universe and discovered the MAST site for visualizing JWST data, but when I was observing this galaxy I noticed this large barrier where it changes hue. Is this just a weird compiling thing?

Last photo is some fun I had trying to colour one of the images of the galaxy.

I understand that gravity is the reason planets and stars form and what not. I'm just curious why gravity causes things to attract and not repel or do neither?

Seems like an arbitrary feature of our universe's laws.

So it makes me wonder if gravity could have worked differently if our universe happened to have different laws.

Meteor: a small body of matter from outer space that enters the earth's atmosphere, becoming incandescent as a result of friction and appearing as a streak of light.

Meteoroid: a small body moving in the solar system that would become a meteor if it entered the earth's atmosphere.

My gripe is with the word meteoroid itself. The suffix -oid means "resembling" or "having the form of,". Asteroids on the other hand I am all good with, since it was understandable that early telescopes showed them as a tiny point of light, hence Star-like.

Meteoroid on the other hand means meteor-like, yet it refers to the object that produces a meteor and it is neither a luminous streak of light nor an atmospheric phenomenon while in space.

Don’t ask for a rebate, debate, quarrel or anything other than answers.

What do you think this is?

Why universe love us so much? Like see we are conscious and have intelligence and everything can kill us in a second but it doesn't everything in this planet or solar system it protect us and let us get more intelligent. Why only us?

Our universe is vast enough to hold billions of galaxies
but still, are we the only civilization to be advanced enough to explore the beauty of cosmos