Have We Finally Found the Source of Dark Energy?
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 05. 2024
- Dark energy, gravastars, and black holes. Go to betterhelp.com/astrum for 10% off your first month of therapy with BetterHelp and get matched with a therapist who will listen and help (ad).
Astrum Podcast: www.buzzsprout.com/2250635/share
Displate Posters: displate.com/promo/astrum?art...
Astrum Merch! astrum-shop.fourthwall.com/
Join us on the Astrum discord: / discord
SUBSCRIBE for more videos about our other planets.
Subscribe! goo.gl/WX4iMN
Facebook! goo.gl/uaOlWW
Twitter! goo.gl/VCfejs
Astrum Spanish: / astrum español
Astrum Portuguese: / @astrumbrasil
Donate!
Patreon: goo.gl/GGA5xT
Ethereum Wallet: 0x5F8cf793962ae8Df4Cba017E7A6159a104744038
Become a Patron today and support my channel! Donate link above. I can't do it without you. Thanks to those who have supported so far!
#astrum #astronomy #space #astrophysics #darkenergy #stars
Thanks for these videos! I’m a 74y/o retired MD, with a lifelong love of math, physics, and esp. astrophysics, and never enough time or energy to study then being general college courses, until now. Your videos inspire and inform me❤❤
One of the few astronomy channels I watch on a daily basis
Keep up the good work
same from here!
Yup, I miss SciShow Space as well
his content is intriguing, but sometimes his calming voice does soothe me to sleep
No wonderful people here?
I love history of the universe, aswell as antonpetrov
If I had known that Astronomy classes were lectured the way you do in your episodes, I would have chosen astronomy as a career..
Beautiful work.
Wow 😮😊
No, they are not Astrum episodes. At the undergraduate level you get a physics degree. At the PhD level you can become an astronomer or cosmologist, and these are difficult degrees. After that you are a post-doc, and the whipping boy of whatever university you get your grant from. Now you have The opportunity to work yourself day and night to discover something of importance, maybe a dark energy star, so you become noticed and can get a tenured position. After reaching the big time you can still moonlight for a Japanese telescope company to make ends meet, especially if you work close to a major telescope such as the Keck in Hawaii. It’s a rat race.
@@gsmollin2
Yes, the road to becoming an astronomer might be long and narrow but being a good science communicator like Carl Sagan -or Alex in this particular case- is so important to lure young people to choose a scientific path for their future careers I believe. And statistically for sure, a few of them will be good scientists.
It's mostly math. Calculating distances, luminosity, etc. So unless you're into that...
Same could be said for mathematics, chemistry and philosohy; but sadly, they aren't lectured this way...
Always felt like astronomy pages overhype stuff but this one feels just right. Love that it’s trustworthy too just absolutely amazing
If u think astronomy pages 'overhype' stuff- it's cuz you don't understand how insane it really is. (It's not their fault you can't grasp it, and doesn't make them 'overhype'. It's a YOU problem 😂)
Teeny tiny smooth brain 🙃 It's OK buddy
@@laynedoe3455 what
@@laynedoe3455I feel your insecurities through my screen
@@laynedoe3455What's wrong with you?
Yes-"feelings" are what matter in the world.
I'm going to have to watch this one a few times to let things sink in! Cheers Alex :)
You won't be the only one, for sure.
i love how the more we find out about deep space the more questions it raises and the more we realize how little we know
It’s a metaphorical hydra.
Speculation of alternative explanations are always good. We haven't made any real progress in cosmology for a long time, so we need all the speculation we can find and let the ideas compete with one another and compare them with observations.
What? When I was born, pluto was a planet, black holes hadn’t been photographed, and we didn’t have compelling evidence that we had a black hole in the center of our galaxy
@@Red_TwizzlerAstronomy is the testbed for cosmology, and that's my main interest. But you're right. We have made great progress in astronomy, and within the next five years we will have several magnificent new telescopes: Magellan, ELT, Roman, LSST and several other.
no progress since lead poisoning dropped the worlds IQ by 15 points....
Wow. Fabulous video. Probably one of the most mind stimulating productions I have seen. Dark energy is the pressure which expands our universe, so I assume that black holes are definitely connected. No one wants to say we may be living in the equilibrium of a gravastar. Amazing concepts.
One more interesting thing that you forgot to mention about Neutron Stars (which almost no one ever makes clear) is that they are almost pure neutrons - hence the name... but where did all the electrons and protons go that were in the star? Well once they get squeezed close enough to each other they combine and become more neutrons.
There has been so much new info coming out about black holes recently. It's a super exciting time to be intrested in this stuff. And From what I have heard other science channels say, James Webb is just getting started. the last year has been fine tuning it, and now we can get some very intresting data from it!
Consider there is a new massive telescope in Hawaii and another telescope being planned for launch as well that is even bigger. We will start generating 3d maps of the galaxy and universe with new telescopes and another one will be able to be pointed to a planet to detect life better than JWST.
Fascinating!
Thank you, Alex! 🌟
Alex, you are one of the most precious things in the Universe: An Educator. Thank you for all your work. 🙂
Dear Alex, I do appreciate your show and the enormous amount of work that you put into each episode. There is one criticism of today’s dialogue when about 1/3rd the way through you talked about “Heat coming from the sun”.
Heat is the progression of the vibration of molecules within gas, liquids or solids. The sun lives in a bath of vacuum and therefore heat cannot be emitted from the Sun’s surface. Radiation {eg Infrared EMR} can travel through a vacuum and in turn heats up gases, liquids and solids when it interacts with them on Earth. This is how heating of Earth happens but it is an indirect rather than a direct process. Cheers.
Man that music at the beginning, the one with the bells, is haunting and beautiful
Awesome videos with great quality as always say 🌍🌟
This video is absolutely fantastic!
I don't know why but I was thinking that every information you said just in the first 30 seconds of the video took Millennia to be discovered and making an astrophisicis of just 100 years ago or less listening to this 30 seconds would completelly blow his mind...
That is either a duck or an extremely dense object mimicking a duck.
Everything's funnier when you replace it with a duck, especially a rubber duck wearing a top hat.
duck energy duck
@@billynomates920 dense duck energy 🤣
Like a black goose wearing a derby mimicking a duck??!
For I moment I read 'extremely fast' and thought of that video with the alien bird.
kerzazagt viewer?
Man.. glad you posted today. My phone malfunctioned and i lost multiple hours of work yesterday
Yes. Expanding black stars which emit expanding dark energy / pushing force❤
Love ASTRUM. For non-scientists; I’ve read it take a million years for a photon to radiate outward from the sun’s center til we see it. If there is some truth, please explain. Thanks. Tom. Poulsbo, Washington
Individual photons bump into individual particles due to pressure, density, and heat, and sometimes they are absorbed, and then re-emitted. the sun is a huge ball, and this can take a very very long time due to all the chaos.
Yes, the photons bounce around in the sun like small pinballs, though for the photon, no time has passed, because of time dilation they don’t experience time at all, space is truly wierd and wonderful.
@@ewilgreen5148 Thank you. Astrum, IMHO, is the best overall layman’s channel.
@@ewilgreen5148Photoms are non-sentient and have no idea of time or anything else.
It's the pressure of the gasses it's burning ; lager stars the grater the pressure & longer it takes for htons to be seen .
The explanation given by Alex , in the first 3-4 minuets , , followed by the nature of white dwarfs and neutron- stars .
Red giants , are more prone to going to nebula stage - a big bang .
The rest , including black holes , and smaller objects , was included , while typing this up . Hope it helps , as what's n the post is part of my own aquired knowledge .
I'm leaning toward 1 more kind of star, the quark dwarf. (Not necessarily different externally from black hole, but different internally.) Only works if there is quark-degeneracy pressure, and probably only works with neutrons stars close to the neutron-degeneracy limit. Pre-quark neutron star vacuums up gas (interstellar medium) until second collapse. Then quark degeneracy takes over for interior. (An extension of _____'s book, "The Dragon's Egg", where a crustquake and collapse caused a size reduction.) If a collapse is gentle enough, and quark degeneracy exceeds neutron degeneracy, a quarkstar is possible. Still could be invisible, but not nigh-singularity.
Just conjecture, though. While I've read of same-quark resistance to touching, I haven't read how close top and bottom quarks get in protons and neutrons.
Great video 💪
Thanks!
I once saw a video about someone referring to this theorie, to suggest our universe is inside a black hole. With the edge of the observable universe being the event horizon. Matching the expansion. Pretty cool thought imo
Here's something I've always figured to probably be way more plausible for black holes than most would reckon, which is... The fact that although they appear infinitely dense due to the fact that they are almost a true singularity, which would be infinitely dense and whatnot, They are not. In fact a rather interesting thing is... that black holes, if you could reach their surface safely without being ripped apart the moment you even got close to the event horizon in the slightest, would be immeasurable bright because of light's inability to escape. Which would also simultaneously make black holes the hottest objects in our universe because of the inability for light to radiate off like a star or stellar remnant.
Furthermore, your retinas, would be fried on the spot the moment you even looked up out of the blackhole if they weren't fried the moment you saw the surface of the black hole.
Furthermore, a theoretical star that has no real gravity that can be interacted with... although mathematically possible, I'd... reckon in terms of the real world, would be unlikely to ever see. Though on the other hand if we do encounter exotic stars. One such one that although would be more likely possible in an artificial format rather than natural... is a quantum energy star of sorts. A star whose existence is solely attached to quantum mechanics. And whose core would be a black hole potentially, that would also not only be fed by the star, but also feed the star too in the process. Relying on the potential unknowns of quantum mechanics to grow exponentially if not properly contained. Of course it'd be unlikely to see such a star, let alone one with a black hole at it's core in terms of natural ones.
Not just your retinas, but your entire body would be vaporized in a femtosecond or something, no?
@@Jason75913If your protection against the gravity doesn't protect against the sheer ungodly heat within. Yeah. it would.
@@timteecvhn but I mean, the heat is irrelevant if the light is allowed to touch you, that alone would vaporize you, so either you are protected from the light and continue to only see absolute black or you get vaporized by the extreme dosage of photons
@Jason75913 all radiation is photons
Rhubarb
Love the format but references would be nice
A GRAVISTAR??? Ouch! I think you just bent my brain.
Superb video Alex! 10/10!
Great video, very informative and much appreciated
~ There shouldn't be any confusion about grav. blackholes, e.m. jet streams, or wormholes, because the balance of light energy & gravitational matter determines whether cosmic objects become strictly gravitational black holes, or e.m. jet streams (stars), & anything in between.
Along with wormholes which are a equal density balance between both, as well as bound with their corresponding balanced & equilibrated strong & weak forces.
~ The blackhole/jetstream in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy is the e.m./grav. finite & mortal signature of our Milky Way Galaxy, which is also bound by it's correspective Strong & Weak Forces as well.
~ In conclusion: The balance & equilibrium of Strong & Weak Forces determine the color, shape, size, & spatial qualities of a grav. blackhole, e.m. jet stream, or a wormhole, in both space & time.
Anything denser than a neutron star will still affect light the same way as a black hole. Or is there a type of particle that can escape?
Theoretically, if it exists then the Graviton must escape from black holes, but it's not quite explained in the theory.
This abnormality is why it probably doesn't exist. But this abnormality might just mean they got the polarity wrong, perhaps Gravitons work into the direction of no Graviton pressure just like fluids/gases do, but this raises the question... is it a virtual particle or a wave, or real particle?
33% chance that when it exists it doesn't inhibit its own movement, much like a photon is its own antiparticle. Also 66% chance it raises more issues than fixes.
@@Yezpahr but would you be able to tell if the graviton came past or from the event horizon?
Every time another Astrum video comes out, I just gravitate to it. This is another excellently presented, mind expanding topic. Astrophysics is getting weirder by the " - - -day, week, month or even year - - -". Are gravistars the universal version of antigravity generators?
Great video 10/10
you wrote this comment on a 17 minute video only one minute after release, you haven't watched it when you wrote the comment.
@@shanathered5910 I have watched the entire video
The video was posted 25 minutes ago, and your comment was posted 23 minutes ago, so no, you had not watched it all when you posted your comment.
@@castleanthrax1833early access 🤷♂️
Called out
The knowledge we get from physics is actual astonishing. I’ll wait for more information before commenting on this
13:40 I'm failing to parse this sentence, can anyone help me please? ‘So far ... the radius of the black hole candidates we _see_ ... is at least approximately equal to their Schwarzschild radius: in some cases, that’s just a rough estimate, _but in others, we’ve calculated that radius to within 40 decimal places.’_ (emph. mine). If I read it as ‘the radius of the black hole candidates we _observe_ in some cases [the "others" in the original sentence] was calculated [based on these observations] to 40 decimals’, it becomes sheer nonsense: nothing has been ever measured to 40 _or more_ decimal accuracy (the 'calculation' implies other inputs, with their own uncertainties), and unlikely will in the next 200 years if at all.
The most precise experimental measurement ever made has been the electron's gyromagnetic anomaly _g−2,_ calculated to 10 decimals from a measurement done to whopping 13 decimals. That's in the lab experiment, and all astrophysical observations I'm aware of are a far cry from these. 40, 30, 20, 10, 7 decimals spell nonsense in this context. Additionally, a high-precision measurement consistently yielding the _Schwarzschild_ radius, not Kerr (rotating), even if made to 3 decimals, not 40, would mean that these candidates, if really BHs, are (nearly) non-rotating. We know that newborn neutron stars spin like crazy, exactly what we expect from the law of angular momentum conservation, and there is no reason to believe that a collapse to a BH instead of a NS would not result in the high angular momentum of the BH. We know the Milky Way's SBMH approximate spin, too, and it's definitely non-zero beyond counting any sigmas, despite low accuracy/precision. More to this, GW signatures match rotating BH mergers, where certainty is high enough. None were _definitely_ non-spinning; there were only spinning and "maybe". I wouldn't have missed such a revolutionary discovery paper; it would turn our understanding of a lot of physics on its head, up to questioning the very angular momentum conservation validity.
I obviously misreading the sentence, but I cannot understand in any other way, whichever linguistic contortions I try; it's pretty straightforward. Obviously, you can calculate an imaginary, theoretical case to an arbitrary precision, but the statement is clearly about calculations from observational data: 'the radius of the black hole candidates we _see_ ... we’ve calculated ... to within 40 decimal places'. Any help out there translating that for me, please?
Very interesting, so, if we follow the naming convention for neutron stars, could a white dwarf then be called an electron star since it's balancing on the electron degeneracy pressure limit?
I love your videos
When I learned about the large explosions in space that are, seemingly, from nowhere.... and wondered if it could be a dark matter/energy star or maybe a star made of antimatter... going supernova.
I don't know enough, however, to know just how ridiculous of an idea that is. 😂
Enjoying Astrum Sleep Space but can never sleep as I’m left wanting more science.
Please consider an audio book on astronomy/astrophysics A Walk Through the Universe with Alex McColgan
So the pressure values falls along a vertical asymptote through ever increasing magnitude negatives to a point of infinity or POI, where infinity and negative infinity are one and the same. The pressure then falls through the POI and down through lower magnitude positives.
As a mathematician, I played around with replacing the x and y axes of the Cartesian grid with real projective lines. This replaces the infinite 2D plane with a torus.
The outermost ring is y = 0.
The central interior ring is y = POI
The front most vertical ring is x = 0
The back most vertical ring is x = POI
The graph of y = 1/x around x = 0 shows the behavior described above perfectly.
While I just thought that this would be fun to play around with, going through a POI and wrapping around bridging positives and negatives was never a feature I thought could be part anything that truly exist. But it would be fascinating to be proven wrong about that.
I really hope we get more follow up on this. I think that this being a potential answer to dark energy is a very compelling proposal.
I'm curious how neutron degeneracy pressure is affected/counteracted by centrifugal force generated by the star's spin. If the star at the absolute minimal mass to be a neutron star and was spinning so fast that its surface was moving very quickly, let's say 50% the speed of light, would that reduce the neutron degeneracy pressure enough to "break" it out of being a neutron star?
I don't know the answer to the argument, but I do think gravity stars would make an excellent environment location for Souls between lives as living matter object like us human beings, to exist within. Perhaps Heven exists within a gravity star. I like that idea. That would mean spooky action at a distance would transport the soul between both locations.
Not even two minutes in and i already got an ad man
A member of my astronomy club is an astrophysicist at New Mexico State University here in Las Cruces. He talked about it to me and a couple of other members and said some people just cannot say I do not know, they _have_ fill it in with something. I'm a retired bio/engineer and stayed out of it, we have our own dogmatists with the same problem. It's just funny to me now.
I want to see this channel break 2M subscribers this year!! 💫🙏
We have direct radio waves images (let's call them photos) of at least two black holes from the event horizon telescope though. So at least these two have to be real black holes?
I think there's a lot to consider when talking about this, I also think we always look at the basic system we know to explain what we don't, EG: cold is the absence of heat, dark is the absence of light, vacuum is the absence of matter....... Or is it? is there more to this, and the base values are just not measurable in our 3dimensional plane. obviously this will offer so much more debate, and we really done have the space on here to do it? or do we?
I have often wondered if dark energy isn't some sort of pulling at the threads of spacetime. Like, what if instead of dark energy pushing at everything to cause it to expand, if instead spacetime was a threadbear sweater, with large sources of gravity pulling at the fabric, causing it to expand and stretch out, giving the appearance that things are being pushed farther away, when instead, space is just being pulled "thinner"
Never thought about it. That way I feel like that makes perfect sense, for real, not being sarcastic good point! lol
@@LordLotmanNot as mathematically convenient as the fixed speed of light, expanding space model though.
I’ve been trying to get some science coverage of the infrared star in dune 2 because for the life of me I don’t understand how that would work or if it’s even possible for light to sap the colour of things that way. Would love a video on the various questions about the giedi prime star.
i would like to know what is the definition of a star... if a neutron star is a star then a black hole should be a type of star as well
Could possibly both versions of extremely dense objects exist in our universe? I am rather fantasising than speculating now, since I have no background in astrophysics: Could that be an explanation for the observed gap in the size of black holes, like: Stellar black holes are "real" black holes, whereas super massive black holes are of the even more exotic type?
Fantastic 🙏
An interesting vid idea, since you decided to talk about unrealistic stars, is different colors. I understand why we probably wouldn't be able to see them because blue/red shift, but could they exist? Like a green star for example. When you burn certain elements they can flare up in many colors, so could the same be true for a star that contains an ample amount of differing elements, or would it just cause problems or a collapse?
Astrum : Dark Energy
Me : Ah....My type of star....
Quick note, betterhelp has done some shady stuff in the past, and I would recommend avoiding them in the future.
Love the content here, keep it up!
Why are if not surprised
👁️‼️👁️
What did they do?
A quick check says that they like selling customer data.@@juandiegoprado
@@juandiegoprado if I recall correctly, something about selling private data which they did not disclose. I will admit I do not know much about the situation, so take that with a grain of salt.
@@MemeAnt Ahhh didn't know. Thanks for the info
I'm not sure from this, it seems to say there are Back holes AND there are Gravastars. Both can look similar but have very different interiors? Of Gravastars form from collapsing stars and negative energy matter (never heard of that before more detail required), then how do black holes get created?
black holes could be everywhere including where in this video, and be opposite of what we make of them. They could be dense enough that they "gravitate" to a larger dimension size than our own observation... like the view from inside an atom to the concept of a distant molecule. Attraction can be inside and out and beyond this even, getting larger and yet smaller infinitely. It boggles the mind to think bigger or smaller than we do right now, but it has to be possible, it's there even if it isn't. Gr8! Peace ☮💜
I like this video for the layman. But man. Each sentence it feels deserves its own video
I think it’s possible all of these celestial objects exist simultaneously. I think it’s possible objects like Grav-stars can exist, and I think that there could be a variety of different types of what we would consider to be black holes; both the traditional gravitational singularities, and these newer hypothesized “troves of dark energy”. I theorize that it’s due to the lack of precision and advancement with our instruments that makes it difficult to tell what is objectively true or not for certain
I’ve always wanted to see a green star be discovered. I know it’s a very thing wavelength to achieve but I’m sure there has to be at least one in the universe
It would have to be a boron star or something.
So they saying that they have separated a black light sun and a black hole, nice. Because I've wondered about that with some black holes giving off invisible light or gas but they are supposed to only absorb theoretically
Hey Mr. Astrum, what would happen if a large asteroid hit the Moon? I was watching one of your videos on the Moon and all the pockmarks made me wonder what kind of chaos that would cause.
well... black holes do slowly emit radiation and over time diminish in size and weight and density. Last time i heard and checked we have proved hawking radiation but we havent actually detected it. so if every black hole is emitting a form of radiation that we know exists but we havent detected yet, is that not a form of dark energy?
My personal challengeable belief is that singularities only exist mathematically.
I agree, though I am woefully underqualified to really even have an opinion on the matter. On a side related note: what would a naked singularity look like?
I agree as well. I believe when the math shows zero volume it is correct but referring to zero volume of space within the "object" that is within the event horizon not zero volume within our spacetime js
Great content, commenting for the algorithm
Idk, the way you described gravistars would make them seem quite rare, as you would need extraordinary circumstances to balance the gravity and pressure like that. By just the amount of dark energy there is supposed to be in the universe (it is supposed to comprise up to 70% of everything) I don't think it is plausible that gravistars would make up the bulk of dark energy. Maybe a small portion of it, but certainly not all of it.
Well, I would think that if a gravistar exerts no gravitational force no matter how close or far you are from it (maybe even touching it or sticking your finger in it), then it can't be a black hole, because black holes exert gravitational force.
Fascinating - I’ve heard of gravastars in the past but I didn’t know the slightest about them.
If this is true, that they exert exactly zero gravitational pressure, is that *only* at its’ surface, and gravitational pressure exists perhaps further out from the surface of its’ radius?
Meaning like any other star, an object would be drawn in by outlying waves of gravity exerted by the system, but *at the surface* the gravitational pressure equalizes?
If so, one might think that it would create something that for all intents and purposes APPEARS to be a singularity - (no visible object PASSES the surface) when in actuality these objects become trapped within this “vacuum space”, where their motion is functionally neutralized?
Maybe I’m confused by the mechanics at play here
Your videos are my bed time stories
If you crush neutrons into their subatomic particles (quarks) you end up with energy. If that energy had a negative charge at the core with a band further out where some neutrons might still hold their form or a combination of positively charged substances it sounds like a magnet. So what would cause the neutron (quark) star to have an opposite spin in different layers? the part I could see wrong in your video would be floating in such a star. The magnetic field would shred our atomic structure. Sorry, just thinking in place.
Wait, isn’t this similar to the Alcubierre metric and drive equations? What are the exact equations behind these gravity stars again?
Planck Stars. These are nature's last-ditch effort to avoid singularities. They get their name from their size: Subatomic.
How do they avoid becoming singularities?
The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.
How wonderful is it to hover at the edge of knowledge
15:02 basically sounds like a load of hoopla then. They don't even know what to actually know by the sounds of it
Electron degeneracy pressure. A new term for me but I love it, thank you
Things get complicated when new things are introduced in the world of physics.
What is the music playing around 3' ?
A plausible model of The Great Attractor(s)!
The great attractor is a giant group of galaxies. We can already see it.
My theory agree similarly
i don't support the notion of it with dark energy, but dark matter, maybe. black holes typically are the center points of galaxies, with the proposed dark matter being responsible for the stars positioning in the galaxy. since the stars are wrapped around black holes, it is logical to think of it as having great influence with DM, sort of like flags being anchored to a pole. the thought of it being a distribution hub for dark matter becomes more realistic when that is accounted for.
Plot twist, The universe is contained inside of a gravistar
WTF!.... Prove It!!
What?! A vacuum star? If u think here of vacuum as it describes, then how something, that "absolutely devoid of matter" can form a star which is "celestial body of great mass"? It sounds like a theory of those flatearthers
If you watched the video, this theoretical star has mass. It's just mass with strange properties where the pressure from the inside and the gravity cancel each other out. It's "vacuum" because its effect on their surroundings is the same as being in a vacuum.
@@saxor96 watch it again, there's not a word about a mass of a gravistar. all these goofy theories is just a proof that our physics is way of from how the universe works
Vacuum energy is still filled with many particles and antiparticles. So even vacuum is not truly empty.
I’ve been thinking that black holes are just exotic stars (sort of) for years and years, but humans don’t like things that have opposite effects and we can’t wrap our heads around things like this easily.
What is the track on the background in the beginning?
I don't know what happens to matter or energy that crosses the event horizon of any object. Black holes, gravistars, or the ingress-end of wormholes are likely not something we can distinguish between through observation alone.
Here's a thought... not necessarily scientific or plausible, but maybe...
Dark energy is not energy but an emergent property of the universe.
As the universe inflates, the contents necessarily occupy a larger volume, so on average the distance between clusters of mass will increase. The filaments that define the structures along which the galaxies and intergalactic gas flow are stretched and the voids defined by where those filaments aren't will continue to expand. The "early" universe was probably comparable to a dense foam with bubbles of higher density around low density pockets. As the the bubbles expanded, the boundaries stretched thin and the low density centers became voids. As the bubbles tore and the voids joined it resembled a sponge. As the inflation continued, the density decreased and now it's more like a luffa, and if the expansion continues accelerating, the filaments will snap and tear. More voids will open up, and this will keep happening, splitting up the remaining lumps until the heat death of the universe.
Similarly, on the topic of gravastars - if they DO exert a net zero gravitational pull on their environment *entirely* (without the presence of “gravitational zones” as I mentioned in my other comment -
This makes me wonder about the likelihood that these gravastars would functionally be an anomaly within the universe, being acted-upon by the forces around them that first sent them careening through space (think big bang and similar catastrophically powerful events) while *NOT* exerting a force in *opposition*. (Think tidal opposition between the moon and the earth.)
Clearly I am no quantum physicist, but this seems bizarre to me (though I think we can all agree that this is the case for much of quantum mechanics 😅). It seems like we would find it far more noteworthy to encounter objects that (functionally) don’t follow Newton’s second law on a larger scale. One would imagine that these object are simply careening through space, much like enormous asteroids, literally vacuuming up all the material in its’ path. 🤔
Sounds like a more compelling argument for dark energy than “it just comes from nowhere” to me. Certainly worth more investigation.
Good thing literally no one says something that stupid.
B-b-but wait a sec, the dark energy still comes from “nowhere” (if solutions of the Einstein Field Equation for the cosmological model is "nowhere"-everything else comes out of these same equations, after all; dark energy is not an outlier), only not spread uniformly in the whole spacetime but instead collects into the hypothetical gravistar blobs. What's so compelling about it? It's still the same dark energy in new packaging. But yeah, interesting to ponder indeed.
“Certainly worth more investigation”-sure it is. Keep in mind that we publish papers because we like to toy with theories and models. Papers are how scientists communicate their ideas to other scientists, and most often aren't reports of a big discovery, or any discovery at all. That's simply our big Facebook where we post stuff that seems like an interesting idea, like, what if... There were over 5 million scientific papers published in 2023 alone. (And poor blokes in academia have to publish or perish, no matter what they publish, quantity over quality, but that's entirely a different issue.)
Another theory pertaining to what dark energy might be is parallel universes bumping into each other and being absorbed. Thus the continued acceleration observed in the expansion of the universe…apparently 🤷♂️
I bet both my testicles that these stars do not exist or never have existed in our universe.
Wow, I have no juevos to risk but I'd like to be there when this bet is called.
I'm still confused..... why wouldn't sufficiently dense/massive objects have an event horizon? Wouldn't the resulting gravitational effects be strong enough to prevent light from being emitted/escaping if the light is close enough to the object? Wouldn't the distance be an event horizon?
honestly sometimes i just look at the stars, or i’ll watch a video about the cosmos and i just think “man, what the HELL is going on out there” LMAO
You seemed to define the first star you were talking about was our sun, but stated it would just take a few million years to use up all the Hydrogen but it will actually take about 5 Billion years, at which point it would start expanding as the balance of gravity vs outward pressure would cause the corona to expand to close to the obit size of Mars, so you need to either correct that or define its either another type of star or not our Sun at the very least, but it is rare for any star to just collapse into a Neutron star as it would still have a small nova as it blows off any lighter gas as it does its final period of rapid contraction, as it collapses into a neutron star or a dwarf star.
He clearly said 5 billion - 3:10
its not a black hole, or event horizon, think of it like a point where space twists on itself so hard that even a beam of light gets refracted in any direction but your target, there is no way to shine a laser on the event horizon itself.. you cant see it, touch it, or feel it past the gravitational influences it left behind as it disappeared from our observable universe.
its easier to visualise on a tv screen as the old line and the weight of an object pulls it down like a fabric, pull on the ball but twist it so the ball is enclosed in a pocket of spacetime, thats what the black hole would look like, from the inside of the terminal point, but that choke point is just where ordinary matter is kicked out at the poles by tidal forces in the twisting of spacetime, stripped down to x-rays and energy, only a black hole which is outside of our spacetime can merge with another black hole, everything else getting close is obliterated by the spacetime being stretched and distorted, a square cube frame made in the earths spacetime will look different if you unfold it in the void of space, and even different around a singularity
The observable universe we see is a big bang of a supermassive black hole, or maybe just a regular one, if the fundamental forces condense out at a different rate in compressed spacetime then we could be in a Russian nesting doll type multiverse, black holes inside black holes, all time dilated from eachother with the distances of nothing but a universe between them, all expanding at the speed of light but never able to expand out of our bubbles as even tho it went boom if the info cant travel faster than light then the choke point in space will never know anything happened, so all the gravity in the singularity could get traded for so much energy it expands spacetime infinitely inside its own little bubble that was just a slither around a point in space, the entire observable universe pulled into an area the size of a pinhead. Light taking but a moment to go one side to the other, the universes tick rate would be different, time dilation with that much energy and condensed spacetime means trillions of years can happen in moments, the universe could be expanding at a constant rate its just that C is changing as space expands and light has further to propagate those tick rates are slower, any information passing from one point to the other takes infinitely longer but its time and space that are the ones changing, not so much the expansion rate of the universe.. to us now looking back and taking measurements it might seem like it rapidly expanded and is accelerating but it could be an illusion of space time and light and our understanding of spatial and time dimensions. We are kind of limited, I'm getting a headache just thinking about it while i type it out lol
The cause of the correlation between the expansion of the universe and blackhole growth is pretty obvious. Our universe is just a black hole in another universe. This explains the early rapid cosmic inflation as the period of time where stellar matter was rapidly collapsing during a supernova event. Also the fact that blackhole growth rates matches the growth of the universe tells us that the properties of both our universe and our parent universe are similar. this also means that blackholes convert matter into space but in a different dimension(made of 4 dimensions) where the space inside is way bigger than the space outside like some kind of bag of holding where you can't take anything out. lol
Is a vacuum star Hoover or Electrolux?
Black holes are a never ending source of fascination for me. I sometimes wonder if they're behind the creation of the universe in general. Maybe we're inside one right now.
early Sunday morning here
It’s Saturday evening for me
bro casually explained gojos cursed technique