"Energy can't be created or destroyed. Actually, we've discovered that's not true." CERN physicist Daniel Whiteson (Daniel Whiteson) explains why one of the most basic laws in science only works in a universe that isn't ours:

@DanielWhiteson just here to confirm that what he says is correct

@DanielWhiteson The expansion of the Universe does not mean 'new' energy can be created. There is absolutely no 'discovery' to debunk the First Law of Thermodynamics. lol Absolutely un-scientific and PURE opinion and narrative baking...borderline gaslighting. Happy hunting!

@DanielWhiteson Dark energy and dark matter is science’s version of God. You can’t see it, can’t test for it and can’t measure it, you have to just believe it exist because they can’t explain what they observe

@DanielWhiteson I remain skeptical. "Dark energy" is a mathematical placeholder we invented to explain the disparity between how our theories suggests the universe should behave and how we observe it to behave.

@DanielWhiteson This guy is passing off postulates as science truth. Wild.

Such fakes. Who discovered it and who covered it up are two entirely different things—unless you're biblical like Danny and CERN. @CERN Dualistic bound idiots. Hail Jesus, Mr. Jones. It’s a podcast caption, not a new CERN result. Danny Jones clipped Daniel Whiteson saying, in substance: the school-book line “energy can’t be created or destroyed” is not a clean law in our cosmos, because this cosmos is expanding. The clip is sold as “one of the most basic laws only works in a universe that isn’t ours.” What the physics actually is In ordinary lab physics, energy is conserved because the laws don’t change with time (Noether: time-translation symmetry → a conserved energy). In general relativity on an expanding background that symmetry is not the same object. There is no single, global “energy of the universe” that you can put in a bank and watch stay fixed the way you do for a closed box on a table. Two common, non-mystical pieces: • Photons from the early universe redshift. Each photon’s energy (E = hc/\lambda) drops as wavelength stretches ((1+z)). That is stretch on a path — same job as the plate’s redshift socket — not a guy at CERN switching conservation off. • A cosmological-constant / dark-energy term has energy density that stays (roughly) constant while volume grows, so the “amount” booked as vacuum energy grows with scale factor. That is the leftover-after-the-matter-budget again: a label for a term in the equations, not a possessed substance CERN minted. Whiteson is a particle physicist telling a cosmology story. CERN did not “discover energy can be created” in a collider and then hide it. The subtlety is textbook GR + expanding FLRW, 20th century, not a cover-up. 1998 supernova acceleration (the earlier Jones/Whiteson clip) is a different hour. Don’t fuse “conservation is subtle in GR” with “dark energy is a gas pedal” into one noun. What your reply is doing “Who discovered it / who covered it up” is the dual — two banners, one grave. Biblical punch (“Hail Jesus, Mr. Jones”) is you naming the hymn-style of the caption: miracle-law broken, priest in a CERN badge. Living cut: school conservation is a local certificate. Expanding metric is the cascade. Stack them. Do not parent either with “fake” or with “therefore God.” Cover-up is a plaque unless you have a withheld paper. You don’t need one. The equation is public. Local energy conservation is a closed-box cut.
This cosmos is not a closed box. Redshift stretches (E=hc/\lambda). A (\Lambda)-term keeps density while volume grows. That is leftover booked as a name — not CERN creating joules in a tunnel.
Discover vs cover-up is the dual. The metric does not need a hymn.
Closing a false fold ≠ deleting (c). (thread)
Noether needs a time symmetry. Expanding FLRW is not that symmetry globally.
1 + z is stretch, not a second universe.
Dark energy remains a debt label until a coupling pins it.
 @CERN did not author the horizon cut. Danny did not author GR.
 Look at the feet. @JonesDanny want a label occult nanny (state)

@DanielWhiteson watched this entire video. seems like you should have someone on that talks about the electric universe theory. covers a lot of the same topics but with different explanations and theories. I like how he used a magnet to explain how weak gravity is. 🍻

@DanielWhiteson I hate when people like this talk about their view and calculations on non-definitive theoretical physics as if it’s proven.

@DanielWhiteson Dark matter is the substance he abused Hint don’t do drugs kids, That dark matter/energy stuff It rots your brain and makes you believe made up bullshit.

@DanielWhiteson One thing I do know is nobody knows what they’re talking about. All these nerds just create more and more poop and theories about poop

@DanielWhiteson LOL this is a cia asshat Consciousness can’t be destroyed it’s higher dimensional. The 4d extraterrestrials and Dracos can be destroyed just like 3d vessels Cry harder fake disclosure

@DanielWhiteson So something we’ve never observed proves something we have isn’t true. These people are just desperate to make the big bang work.

@DanielWhiteson The physics mainstream has lost its way. I couldn’t make it though this episode. It started with “we know dark matter exists we just can’t see it or detect it” 🤦‍♂️

@DanielWhiteson blah blah blah… only means something if you believe the state of the universe that they tell you exists.

@DanielWhiteson Stupid shit like this is why I don't take mainstream scientists seriously, a 70% margin of error should be an obvious sign that you're wrong yet they continue to believe that Red Shift = Stellar Age and ignore the grand importance of Electroplasma Astrophysics...

@DanielWhiteson I think of David Grusch mentioning a shadow biome when talking about interdimensional aliens. Could that shadow biome be dark matter? I wonder what consciousness is like over there.

@DanielWhiteson Plasma Cosmology has proven that their Science can be replicated in a laboratory,they can prove with evidence what they say. The same cannot be said of Theoretical Science,which is akin to myth,legend and hearsay. Calculations are Myth,Base 10 is wrong.

CERN continues to push a poisoned gift: the idea that energy is not conserved in our universe, only in a "perfect" one. This is the latest attempt to keep dark energy alive. If time symmetry is broken at cosmic scales, then there could be a mysterious source of energy exactly what Lambda CDM needs to survive. But there is no evidence that this breaking exists. There is only an interpretation of data through a model that describes 95% of the universe with unknowns. Energy conservation is a consequence of time symmetry, but in NMSI, time is not linear. It is a cyclic parameter in the informational circuit. Energy is not lost. It is not created. It is transferred. And CERN, instead of seeking a new framework, spends decades chasing ghosts. #NMSI #CERN #DarkEnergy #LambdaCDM #Physics #ScienceReform #TruthMatters

1. Is dark energy the new term for aether? Seems to have similar properties, but just rebranded to be more than just a substance traveled by light. 2. How do we know dark energy is not a fudge factor, because the universe's expansion is the assumption but stability needs to be maintained?

@DanielWhiteson so we dont know what anything is.. but we know Dark Energy density is constant... kek!

@DanielWhiteson Show me the math on "Dark Energy." ♉ 💩 These goofballs keep coming up with new things like "dark energy," two dimensional strings and the classic "aether" to substitute for THE WILL OF GOD. Meh.

@DanielWhiteson The universe is not expanding. Redshift is energy loss that turns into frequency shift via the Planck-Einstein relation, E = h*nu. For more information see the papers pinned to my page.

@DanielWhiteson Sounds made up.

@DanielWhiteson I can simply think matter and energy into existence. The rules are virtual.

@DanielWhiteson Great guest!

@DanielWhiteson He's not a "CERN physicist." He's faculty at the University of California, Irvine.

Dark energy and dark matter do not exist and were made up so this guys paradigm wouldn’t crumble under scrutiny then they simultaneously tell the world oh your theory this or that like bro my works and it’s accurate with out your mainstream fictions You say my works made up I say show me your dark matter/dark energy if you can’t physically show or produce it then it’s bullshit good luck with your PhD!

@DanielWhiteson Isn't his funding dependent on those anti/black matter hypothetical theories ? Is it not adding a bias on his reasoning ? What if he found a proof it doesn't exists ? Will he publish it, and go home, and ask for the grants to be revoked ? I don't think so.

so funny. the answer is so simple and right in front of them but they are so arrogant and tied to the material experience that they totally miss it = human consciousness! hahaha. And it's NOT "dark" it's "light". hahaha. but call it what you want. LOL. Limited vision gives you limited results. hahaha. it's all tied together.

@DanielWhiteson OK then you don’t actually know where it’s getting its energy and if it’s taking it from something else

@DanielWhiteson Yes, as the universe expands, matter must spawn. Put the Big Bang theory on hold for a moment, and imagine what a constant process looks like. Start with Earth, where all continents fit together, but on a smaller planet, a few hundred million years ago.

@DanielWhiteson A photon moving from red to blue is NOT an example of energy being DESTROYED. The correct answer to 'where does the energy go' is 'I don't know'. It's a really sneaky bit of wordplay, but it's not smart.

@DanielWhiteson Why can’t universe accelerate because protons collide in empty intergalactic space? Why does it have to be dark energy? And why can’t conservation of energy still hold?

@DanielWhiteson If you don't fully understand how something works, you can only speculate. Is the energy that is "destroyed" possibly linked to the energy that is "created"?