We Were Wrong! Black Hole Singularities Don't Actually Exist!
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 05. 2024
- We Were Wrong! Black Hole Singularities Don't Actually Exist!
► Subscribe: goo.gl/r5jd1F
Here’s a black hole. We imagine it as an enormous, super dark region in space that pulls everything toward it. And once something falls inside, it is dragged to the central endpoint called the singularity, where everything gets squished, right? But what if we told you that’s not exactly how black holes work?
So what’s a singularity anyway? And what really is on the other side of the pitch-black curtain?
Get ready to discover a mind-bending world of black holes, where reality is way stranger than any fiction.
Sources: pastebin.com/raw/2iP3bGB6
Next week:
"WE WERE WRONG ABOUT BEING WRONG!"
Lol. They'll stay wrong then, too. 😁
happens
these theories were accepted before you were born goofball
believe me friend , its a good thing, proves the are objective.
@@kronoscamron7412
No, it doesn't. It's just a show for people who won't dig deeper than the surface.
This shouldn't surprise anyone. As Sabine Hossenfelder has pointed out, "singularities" just indicate places where our mathematical descriptions break down. Physical quantities can't really become infinite. Which is to say, singularities simply don't exist in the real world. They only exist in mathematical models. When they do, it indicates that the model isn't perfect.
Yes, Hossenfelder this, hossenfelder that... no big bang, no singularities, no religion too!
Say Einschtein one more time...
:)
Yet Quantum Mechanics works perfectly fine and accounts for singularity. Interesting.
How was the universe formed if there was no Big Bang from a singularity then? I'll wait while you research a new theory.
After around 10^¹⁰⁰ Numbers become basically ''infinite'' and no matter what they get so big spamming 9 millions of times is the only way to get to a trillionth the way there either they're really infinite. Or a incredibly Fat reality breaking number has been created you could go faster then light speed or at by inertia a Starship traveling 50% light speed carrying another Star ship at that same speed= 1 light speed the only way to good faster then light is get half way there or more but not surpass it. But then after surpass it. This in itself could and probably will change the way we think about physics. If it's been talked about before to bad.
Weren't black holes themselves considered to be only mathematical, until we observed them? How does that stop singularities from being real?
so all mass that black holes consume becomes hawking radiation?
Is this AI voice based on the kurzgesagt guy
Gotta be bro 1000%
Was thinking the same thing!!😂😂😂
I don't think so, I've been listening to this voice for years and in other channels as well. Didn't even know it was AI.
The exact same voice is heard in videos on this channel uploaded 6 years ago. Not everything is AI (yet).
@@legitbeans9078 I mean this voice was used many years ago before AI and Chatgtp were a thing, so this might be an actual person.
Singularities are just a mathematical placeholder for until we (probably never will) find out what's actually going on in there.
Lol the ending of the video a star time capsule.
Its probably just a planck-size, planck-density concentration of all the mass that constitutes the black hole.
the amount of AI science slop on youtube is insane
there are a few , only a handfull or worthy channels, this is not one of them.
> Every black hole is a *Sergeant Schultz variant.* When inside it; "I know nothing!"
🤡🤡🤡🤡
I was busy falling into a black hole, then a physicist told me that they don't exist, and I was saved forever from death!
I've always thought black holes are just much more dense neutron stars, basically "hadron stars" or "quark stars". Or whatever quarks are made up of. Maybe they're just stars that have further broken down neutrons into the parts that make up neutrons.
Welcome back. Been waiting for your new video every day!
Wait, so dividing by zero and assuming matter can compress infinitely is incorrect? 🤯 🤦♂
Divid by zero and get cake!
It's just that our theories still have a long way to go to fully explain the compression. As we've seen nothing we take for granted can exist forever in the state it's in but around black holes things get so complicated that we still lack, yes, the knowledge about spacetime itself to comprehend what goes inside one. And yes, as matter is a manifestation of concentrated energy with certain properties, all of that has to go somewhere when it falls past an event horizon. The most prominent that shows itself is mass, which keeps distorting spacetime and creating the paths out and inside the black holes.
If anything it just shows the universe has higher dimensions
@@Carcinogenic2 Makes sense to me. Whatever was there, is still there, and whatever energy is there, is also still there - laws of conservation.
If you compress a piece of coal, it doesn't vanish, it turns into a diamond.
The reason the halo (event horizon effect) is a U and not just an O is due to time dilation, and possibly the reason it appears black, the same as the warp effect of light during an eclipse.
If gravity is strong enough to not allow light to escape, which is somewhat illogical, the more reasonable conclusion is it's splitting the particle and antiparticle.
You can't divide by zero. 0,000...1 is ok, but not the 0,000...
You know there’s someone crazy enough to fly into one, find him, send it brah
I'll go..... Nothing better to do 💪😁💪
yea me 2 no probs i sniff any black hole brah
The event horizon causally disconnects the inside from the outside. No information can be exchanged not even light.
@@donnyjepp god speed brother 🫡
@@donnyjepp As long as you can travel at the speed of light it will only take you 1,560 years to get there. Let us know how it goes...
Schwartzschild is a German word and means Blackshield
So what. It's the name of the guy who postulated it.
@ correct....people looking for meaning where there is none...like a smile on a dog...
@@ashleyobrien4937 to give knowledge is free!! and to not want to learn or correct it in your mind, is atleast selfish!! ( in some languages there is always a meaning behind every word, every name.)
@ it should be pronounced the right way! if pronunciation is right, some will automatically know he was a German scientist
Personally I believe black holes are literally holes in space-time. This may be caused by a singularity or at the point when they are made they literally poke a hole in space-time.
Go through them and you’ll be outside of physical reality and Time.
one random theory I came up with is that black holes are actually quark stars that are so dense with quarks that even light can't escape
Sometimes, I even wonder if we aren't already inside a specific type of black hole.
That's my theory of the Big Bang. It was a black hole (singularity) explosion and we are potentially living inside a universe birthed from a black hole.
One could technically argue that the observable universe is a kind of blackhole since you'd need to exceed the speed of light to exit it. That "boundary" at which things are moving away from us faster than light could be seen as an event horizon of sorts.
Only difference is it would have no central point, and also the event horizon would be a result of other things moving outward, not us moving inward. So like an inverse blackhole of sorts.
edit: And also different points would see the event horizon at different locations, since from any given location it appears as if everything is expanding away from you.
I think you’re right. That’s why we experience time and the universe has a horizon.
We'll find out in the after life
Uh, no. NO -
It's not as if the entire scientific community among astronomers has decided that what has always been known about
black holes is now somehow not factual after all. Nope -
Singularities sound like something contradicting the cosmic limit.
"Singulariy" is a _mathematical_ concept that has no meaning for _physical_ reality.
The "event horizon" and the "central sinularity" are features of the "empty space" solutions of Einstein's equations. But he interiorof of a collapsing star is _not_ "empty space"!
Source : A new york taxi driver.
I think it's the general consensus that singularity doesn't exist in Physics, the fact that our equations predict a singularity is just a sign that they are no longer valid and we need better equations.
my whole existence is a theory, and probably we're already a past
Nice graphics on the black holes
Good video. 👌
Have some questions, but this was one of my favorite black hole videos yet
I have many questions though - I (an armchair scientist) always toyed with the idea that the big bang was a black hole that was from another place. The theoretical "white hole" was the big bang.
Thoughts?
The event horizon is a surface like water is a surface.
When the neutron star collapse it is a change of state from a aggregated collection of 10¹⁰⁰ neutrons? More?
And it becomes a single object, the event horizon. A Planck energy surface. 90° to the rest of the universe.
Nice video, however this is still hypothetical. We don't know for sure if it's correct, though it is an elegant and satisfying hypothesis.
Correct, a black hole is still a hypothetical, and isn't yet into theory.... Theory means partial facts. There are literally no facts yet about black holes. And this hypothesis still doesn't align with math and physics. That's why they are trying to build a new different version of math.
I can't take this content seriously because it never once talks about how time interacts with a black hole. Without discussing that a black hole is basically a terminus for time you have little business talking about the spatial properties because they are meaningless.
For me a black hole is a black star. There is not a singularity with a hole, but there is a tiny Star that emits light that cant overcome the gravitational field that surrounds it.
Who knows, perhaps our entire universe exists inside one of these spinning black holes
> If that is so, then point in the direction to the singularity at the very center of it in the sky. Towards which every galaxy would be rushing. 🙄👈
@@mydogbrian4814 have you not heard of The Great Attractor?
It's not "Schwarcs - child", you pronounce it like Shvarc - shield
Black holes don’t exist. They’re actually toroidal plasma. Electric Universe Theory. ⚡️ Gravity isn’t a force, it’s a side effect of the electromagnetic nature of things then to find balance equilibrium equipotential of electric charges
That's fascinating, could you recommend me any authors or pieces of literature revolving around EU Theory?
I think that black holes are mostly compressed empty space. So much space gets collected that it snowballs out of control. Traveling through compressed space would feel normal because your own spacetime blends with it’s surroundings, (you would stretch and compress without noticing) but watching someone travel through it would look like they’re slowing down. They have to traverse more space the closer to the black hole they get, so the closer they get, the further away it seems. Eventually the space is so compressed that it’s basically another universe in there, but theres no way out because of the way compressed space compresses time as well
Inspiration for this video: Veritasium
Doubt it, it takes more than 3 days to make a video like this. More like the CZcams algorithm recommending this to people who wanted the Veritassium video, because it registered viewers as interested in videos about black holes.
@@szaszm_ I could believe that if this video wasn't obviously AI (LLM) generated sludge with a synthesized voice narrated over common stock footage. This video could totally have been generated in less than a day of effort to cash in on a trending topic.
@@juliavixen176 If it's AI, it fooled me. Maybe I was too tired and not paying attention.
@@szaszm_ you can understand it when it pronounces Schwarzschild as "shvaarts chield" instead of "shvaarts shilt" as it would be pronounced. And the name is too important for someone who makes blackhole videos to mispronounce.
@@juliavixen176 What are we even doing on the internet, then? Shouldn't we be communicating face-to-face and living in tents or caves?
That can't be a new perspective... When I first learned that time slows around a black hole, it was my understanding that the star never went away, it was just frozen in time and if the star is frozen in time then everything entering it would freeze in time as well... (From our perspective that is.) I imagine from its perspective it collapsed and went Nova in an instant and the entire lifetime of the universe flashed in that blink, and the end result would be a new big bang.
It´s f-ing painful to hear repeatedly say: "shwartz child" instead of the proper way "shwartz shield" (written phonetically).
Depends how pedantic you want to be. German name, German man. I’m sure he’d pronounce it something like ‘shvartzsheild’ :)
OMG, thank you for pointing it out. I hate it too.
@@SurefireSentinelwhen it come to pronaounciation in german, very…
I've asked this before in comments on this subject to no avail so I'll try again: why is it not possible for a neutron star to acquire more mass form something else (e.g. companion star) such that the escape velocity at its surface eventually exceeds c and it simply winks out of view without collapsing any further? What is the hard requirement that says it can (and must) collapse to a point?
Black holes are just toroidal plasmoids.... And gravity is technically just electromagnetic frequencies and vibrations.
This makes so much sense 🫶 black hole physics is so fascinating and amazing and thanks for sharing this wonderful content 🍀
Since matter can't travel at or beyond the speed of light within our universe, black hole contents spinning faster than the speed of light would technically have to be outside of our universe.
Yep! As far as we know black holes might even have different physics inside
Well, if black holes are a place where the normal theories crashes, is not unthinkable that it can do some things impossible here!
Illustrations always show a black hole as a funnel which is totally incorrect. A black hole pulls from all directions and has a fixed point in a dimensional space. Illustrations always show it as being on a 2 dimensional plane which is wrong.
The most important thing I learned on this channel is that Destiny is a girl's name
Singularities are just mathematical concepts, not physical objects or phenomena. Much before Sabine Hossenfelder, in late 1920's, neither Schwartzhild nor Chandrasekar never envisionned any singularity inside a BH. The concept of BH singularity came from a misinterpretation of their original papers much later. See the excellent review of the original papers by Jean-Pierre Petit.
Oh no! Not Alberts thought bubble again!
Stop it, you'll go blind.
The universe is electrical , there's no need for dark matter, black holes, dark energy or even a big bang,
Here's another reason there are no infinites/singularities, consider this-if black holes can form a central point of ever increasing mass, the singularity, then why is it that black holes have different sizes ? and do not shrink when not actively feeding ? it's simple, because whatever matter is crushed down into, be it neutrons or quarks or whatever, there reaches a point whereby they cannot be crushed any further and thus we end up with growing black holes, a singularity is utterly illogical, the proof is staring us right in the face !
Black holes do in fact shrink. They are not "ever increasing". That's a myth
Black holes do shrink. It's literally on this video. It's called Hawking radiation.
@cretinousswine8234 Did you hear they recently simulated a black hole and found new Particles being born out of the Hawking Radiation! It's been confirmed! Black holes create new Particles out of "nothing" (previously collected information expelled as wait for it.....Hawking Radiation!) 😁😁
Yes..Star mass systems are expanding black stars which emit expanding dark energy / light 🙂
If such an inner isolated place exists in a black hole, then time in that place will be moving slow.
Finally... something new.
I mean, why did we think that it is just a " single point " .
Infinite density does not exist in the physical universe. I figured that out in elementary school. Richard Feynman agreed.
Yes but black hole insides may have straight up different physics due to the extreme gravity
Yeah, I was skeptical about the concept of Infinite density as well, regards to physics there seems to be no logical explanation for such, but it is plausible outside of the physical universe.
I believe that they all are an object so dense that it's wrapping the fabric of space time around itself so hard it's appearing to the outside universe as light and matter just disappearing and the stuff just before it gets to the point of no return heats up due to friction and is basically the last thing you ever see just before it gets folded up and wrapped up so hard light just spins around at such a degree and speed it just can't send out photon's and yes I'm also talking about quasars like ton 618 it's just matter so dense it's wrapping up the fabric of space time like a woman wrapped up in a blanket on the couch
What is the whole galaxy is in a black hole at the center but it’s so massive. We can’t see the outer edge.
Black holes remind me of water falling into a deep hole or gap after an underwater impact or explosion, except its happening in space and without water.
So cool, a possible solar system inside a black-hole, a prison to those playing a space monopoly.
White dwarfs are held up by electrons. Neutron stars are held up by neutrons, or perhaps quark matter. In a black hole, no such fermion pressures are possible, so everything turns into a variety of bosons: photons, gluons, Higgs bosons, and a variety of others. Bosons of any particular kind can share a space determined by their wavelengths, so the core of a Schwarzschild black hole is not a singularity, but contains several solar masses, at least, of such material in a space smaller than a neutron. In a Kerr black hole, the same amount of matter would apparently be held in a very narrow volume around a rotating ring.
So, if there are no real singularities, this also applies to the big bang--at least some versions of it? Wouldn't matter inside a black hole simply revert to its condition immediately following the big bang--a high energy plasma? Is there an upper limit to how much energy can be compressed? Perhaps the interior of a black hole is very similar to the initial conditions of the universe, only we can't see it because nothing escapes.
The identity of Psychology and Astrophysics.
Schwar-child ?? Lol. It's actually Scharz-shild, like shield with a short ie.
How does one particle falling in bleed energy out with the opposite particle falling out?
Wasn't positive and one negative that annihilate on contact. But negative energy is still energy. I know I'm not getting this right. It just always puzzled me how adding particles to a black hole decreased its mass.
I agree with the measurement threshold of quantum-general relativity that we have to apply different physics, and I am sure that all this time there is no zero division and/or singularities, there is always measurement in the 3D space structure, there is no destruction because of "length contraction"--space and time are compressed and any matter exists in the spacetime regardless of its size, the problem is just human can't measure it yet with current knowledge & technology.
The thing at the center of black holes are the smallest components of matter, broken down repeatedly until they no longer have a shape distinguishable from each other, compressed into the most ordered expression of those components. probably a square/diamond, ultimately. depending on what the ultimate physical shape those components express themselves in.
That narrow corridor at 3:45 is a pretty bad analogy to a black hole. It's better to use a waterfall or water stream with high enough velocity that no matter how you try, the water always pulls you down.
What about an hourglass⌛️ which would represent the object falling in towards a narrowing point where it becomes condensed and undergoes transformation as its atoms seperate and exit out the other end while the physical matter is left behind and torn apart?
You pronounce Schwarzschild wrong. The second part schild is not like child it is pronouncated similar to shield.
The thumbnail is actually misleading . Am I right ?
suppose space is 2d like flat elastic sheet , in start particles distributed approximately in equal density all over the field then sheet start to move toward z axis and particle start colliding in some point of space mass created and every mass create curve in sheet and course accumulation of mass sheet is elastic and moving with mass nake force over structure of page thus the holes created some holes has fix depth but b.l. hole depth is increased toward moving in z axis. so there is possibility of depth increasing being greater than falling speed of object especially when they fall in circular orbit .
Wow, what a surprise! You mean there can't be an infinite mass contained in a point of no dimension in the physical world? Who would have thunk it.
At the end of the universe, all matter will be billions of light years distant, it will have billions of years to be pulled back toward a central point, reaching near light speeds, impacting all particles in front of it over and over again, till every particle is crushed into the teeniest, tiniest point.
The entire universe will be like an anvil, crushing itself with every iota of force that has or ever will exist, and it will start again, as nothing will be able to get past this infinite wall of matter moving at near light speed toward that central point.
OK, you did ask :) What if that situation you described near the end of the video, of being within the black hole, but stable for quite a long while, how do we know that is not actually where we are now? And could we tell the difference between that scenario and what we all are taught is 'real'?
Yes.
The AI voice is pronouncing Schwarzschild wrong...
"We were wrong" - Yes, and you will keep being wrong. That's the fun.
Hawking radiation is deemed to work, but not with particles and anti-particles. It is said to work with energy and not with matter.
We do not know the conversion processes. Hawking only concluded the bopping of the black hole within the universe must make it lose its contents.
The only problem with Hawking's theory in my view is that we still lack a better comprehension of what the quantum 'foam' really is, how much energy it really has per measure unit, and how it relates to the bigger scale of spacetime. One thing is certain, though: both grand and tiny scales work together near massive, compact objects to 'zip up' energy in truly strange ways.
Hawking radiation has two versions 1 the lie made by Hawking to make it easy for normal people to understand it because he was weird & if you really think of it. it fails to work & then we have the actual one which is too complex for me to really explain but it works science asylumn did a good video on it.
*Hawking Radiation --- the only thing that defies Black Holes* ---
Strange how we are constantly told 'Not even Light can escape a Black-Hole' --
Yet Hawking radiation does the impossible. That points to a more fundamental problem.
*It's not just that Singularities don't exist - it may well be that Black-Holes themselves do not exist*
Wouldn’t the observer falling into the black hole see the Galaxy rapidly evolve into eventual “end of the universe” due to the time dilation?
And, wouldn’t the black hole likewise be evolving by “evaporate away” due to Hawking radiation?
So, the observer would never truly reach the “singularity”? 😊
This is what I've been saying for years that back holes are more like water whirl pools
hearing about stephen hawking after the little saint james incident is so surreal
Why would it be surreal?
It's not connected to this subject, so...
@@sandrokostic6008 well i mean talking about stephen hawking knowing he likes midgets doing math is really funny
Funny, so many people watch this video and comment about well-known aspects of non-rotation black holes.
Like this universe. A 3 dimensional space held within a two dimensional object in a separate space time held forever apart. And on and on it goes. What effect does consciousness have on matter?
What if theres extraterrestrials who are more intelligent than us and seeing our calculations and theories as 1+1= brown kind of wrong, and theyll be like posting memes off us being absolute doofs
The animation at 5:01 is bad example to support what is said about spontaneous appearance of particle/antiparticle pairs.
Thing about what Black Holes do and why? Most importantly where does these monsters do what they do at? Think of Black Holes as a "Clean Up Crew", now ask this question, does black holes only destroy the mass that needs to be "reinitialized", or "Recycled" to keep what does not have any more purpose to be scattered into the rest of the Universe to give off more creation type elements. "Systems maintaining Systems". Just like a "clean-up would be coded into any program to get rid of senseless data".
This is very similar to my theory. I also believe they serve a cleaning function like giant vaccum cleaners.
However I believe the inside of a black hole is more like an hour glass shape where the top half of the hourglass ⏳️ represents the opening of the black hole and the bottom half represents the other side where the object comes out. And the centre of the hourglass is where the object undergoes transformation as its physical properties gets stripped away from its atoms. And the only thing that passes through is the subatomic energy. Kind of like a juicer where the pulp is seperated from the juice.
And as the energy signature (juice) of the object exits the hourglass it merges into the unseen dimension around us where dark matter resides. And I believe this is the reason why the Universe is continuing to expand as more juice from stars and galaxies keep being added to dark energy.
@@yinyang2385 If what we say is true this would cause the Science people to blow their tops. Because if these are indeed systems at this level of creation, then there is no way all of these systems just popped into existence without any kind of design. Systems are designed. It does not matter what kind of system we see in this world, every single one of them are created by a literal creator.
No singularity in any black hole naturlich. Inside any mass, be it a ball of weight or any star, as we approach its center, the force of gravity tends toward zero, not infinity as the theory of relativity envisions. Space-time is a non-existent entity because it is a mathematical definition, so it cannot be inflated, it does not arise, it does not curve, and it has no any structure.
The theory of relativity misdescribes reality inside black holes, because approaching the center, the error of the theory goes to infinity, but not gravity. Not only at the center of the black hole, but along the entire path towards the black hole, which becomes a horrific mistake inside the event horizon.
Great Video! 👍🏻
The name is pronounced "Schwarz-shield".
so if the geodesics converge in a black hole what does it mean? is there another universe inside a black hole?
Great show as usual-- narration, sound/music & graphics, which seem AI-generated. That's good that Destiny may be leveraging it. I see one comment below disparaging it, but science shows have been using computers/computer graphics for a fairly long time. Even animations that look hand-drawn are often, if not usually, aided by computers, to say nothing of the internet, itself.
"When a particle-antiparticle pair forms near the event horizon, one of them falls into a black hole while the other one escapes. And by doing so, the free particles steals energy from the black hole. If you give it enough time, a black hole would evaporate completely. But if there's nothing left behind, where does this infinite singularity go then?"
Seriously?
That's like me saying: "I have a cake. People keep taking slices from it until I there's no cake left. So where did my cake go?"
For those that can't figure it out, the energy that the black hole is made from (black holes are just highly compressed matter, and matter is just highly compressed energy) simply spreads outward. It's called entropy.
My explanation is undoubtedly oversimplified, but that's the gist of it.
I believe when star collapse, they destroy matter inside star, during explosion what makes atoms without electrons and u get nucleus matter who is a lot smaller. where cant stand electrons and u get hole where is no light :)
This was a very good presentation.
The problem is that black hole singularities are, from an intuitive perspective, the natural consequence of the finite speed of light. Unless quantum mechanics can show that there is a way for particles and force carriers to move FTL in the opposite direction to avoid being drawn inwards to the centre, let alone resisting being crushed down to an infinitesimal point (non-rotating Schwarzschild black hole) or ring (rotating Kerr black hole), in other words, a new and still undiscovered degeneracy pressure, there is no avoiding the singularity which might well be an actual physical reality. Which means one or more of the accepted laws of quantum mechanics will break.
Can singularities be the point where general relativity seperates from quantum mechanics? So lets say our physical reality and the subatomic universe were operating from their own seperate dimensions overlayed over one another and the black hole was a tear between the two layers in which case an hourglass shape would represent the two halves with the intersection being the singularity.⌛️
So if an object approaching the singularity were to have its atoms seperated and pass through the other side while the physical matter was condensed and torn away, could that transformation be the point in where general relativity meets quantum mechanics if the laws governing the objects physical matter were to come to an end meanwhile the objects subatomic properties that function on quantum physics were to pass through and remain, which is also consistent with the law that information is never completely destroyed.
And considering that the two dimensions might be overlayed and operating in synchrony then the remnants of an object that has passed through the singularity would reappear from around the outer ring of the black hole as it follows the trajectory of a mobius strip or klein bottle shaped hourglass and it would come to a rest at the same local position where it entered the black hole.
However visually we would not be able to observe the exiting object as it would be in the form of subatomic particles or an undetectable energy signature like dark matter which might explain why gravitational lensing is prominent around black holes.
If my wild theory is correct it might also explain why the Universe is expanding as the object fallen into black holes have their pulp seperated from their juice which is released back out as an unseen portion of the Universe relative to dark enery.
Wait so you mean we could be in one!? Also what if 1 black hole forms in 1 black hole?
Black holes are connected to white holes. That’s where the light comes out.
A singularity... sounds very much like an observed phenomenon that can be neither measured nor understood.
The idea of Blackholes having mass (that is empirically measurable) is curious. Blackholes by nature are inherently black & thus are invisible (or very difficult to detect) when set against the back drop of space. When Blackholes are observed, their light (& a spectrum of other forms of radiation) is noticed only as a result of the Blackhole "devouring" a neighboring star, planet, or galaxy & thus that energy is released.
We suspect the galaxy being devoured by a blackhole to have mass & reason since mass controls mass & the Blackhole is in control, the Blackhole must also have mass, but how much? The mass of a blackhole is determined by calculating the mass of the objects surrounding a blackhole. Setting aside the philosophical argument between the difference of what it means to control vs. to possess a thing, it's interesting that the mass of the galaxy observed being devoured has already been affected by the gravity, spin, & thus pull of the Blackhole as the mass of an object is a result of its motion i.e.
E= mc2. So, with both bodies exerting a pull on one another to become one, at which point are the two bodies identified & measured as separate individual bodies? At this stage in astrophysics, this question does hint at the chicken or the egg... but if galaxies & blackholes are to be identified as separate entities & not a collection of matter existing in time moments before its inevitable meeting with a Blackhole, then this answer is vital as we as inhabitants of a galaxy, are always moving, always going somewhere, always in motion but to where?Theory would suppose identifying & measuring the mass, speed, luminosity etc. of a galaxy & of a blackhole independently prior to their collision, but despite the vast distances of these objects in space, again the problem of accurately calculating mass is foiled by their individual attraction as such that when a galaxy, planet, or star has become a predicable target of the Blackhole, the Blackhole has already exerted an influence on the object to affect its mass, spin, & charge. As impossible as this task sounds, to accurately weight the mass of a blackhole, would require a measurement of weight prior to the "devouring" & after to even assume that blackholes gain mass by devouring celestial objects. Given the fact this devouring process can take eons to unfold, many more theories will have come & gone before we can support or contrast any theory with empirical evidence. Oh, & FYI, if light can't escape a blackhole (or rather the medium of space that light uses to travel through) then how can radio waves escape i.e. the weakest of all waves on the spectrum? Due to the energy behind gamma rays, I might get how gamma waves might escape a blackhole, but radio waves too? Something else has to be going on as these are our current methods of detection.
Now wait 15-20y for mainstrean to absorb it lol
The empirical confirmation of quantum entanglement and the breakdown of local realism has truly unlocked a new realm of intellectual and philosophical freedom. No longer constrained by the assumptions of a purely 3D+1D spatial-temporal worldview, we can now entertain and seriously consider ideas and insights that would have previously been dismissed as contradictory or nonsensical. Let me highlight a few key examples:
1. Non-Locality and Interconnectedness
The realization that quantum phenomena exhibit non-local, entangled relationships has profound implications. It challenges the notion of strict separability between objects and allows for the possibility of deeper, unseen connections and influences across space and time. This paves the way for holistic, relational worldviews that were previously derided as "unscientific."
2. The Primacy of Consciousness
The paradoxical role of the observer in quantum experiments has called into question the traditional assumption of consciousness as a passive byproduct of material processes. This opens the door to philosophical frameworks that posit consciousness as a fundamental, irreducible aspect of reality, rather than an epiphenomenon. Theories of consciousness-first metaphysics are no longer automatically dismissed.
3. The Limits of Determinism
The inherent uncertainty and probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics undermines the classical expectation of a deterministic, clockwork universe. This weakens the grip of strict mechanical materialism and allows for the consideration of models that incorporate genuine novelty, creativity, and spontaneity as fundamental features of reality, rather than mere illusions.
4. Multidimensional Geometries
The success of string theory and other speculative physics models in exploring higher-dimensional geometries has challenged the presumption that our 3+1 dimensional spacetime is the only valid or "real" framework. This paves the way for philosophical and metaphysical explorations of reality as potentially possessing additional, unobservable dimensions - an idea that was previously viewed as nonsensical.
5. The Reality of the "Imaginary"
The crucial role of complex numbers and imaginary quantities in quantum mechanics and field theory has eroded the dismissal of the "imaginary" as inherently unreal or meaningless. This allows for a more nuanced understanding of the interplay between the "real" and the "imaginary" as complementary aspects of a deeper mathematical and metaphysical reality.
6. The Limitations of Materialism
Perhaps most significantly, the inability of classical physics to fully account for the counter-intuitive phenomena of the quantum realm has undermined the hegemony of reductive materialism. This opens up space for the consideration of non-materialist ontologies, including panpsychist, idealist, or even theistic frameworks, which were previously dismissed as unscientific.
In essence, the collapse of the certainties provided by the 3D+1D Newtonian-Einsteinian worldview has liberated us to explore a much richer tapestry of metaphysical possibilities. Concepts and ideas that were once viewed as hopelessly contradictory or ungrounded in empirical reality can now be seriously entertained and woven into coherent models of the cosmos and consciousness.
This intellectual freedom is truly transformative, as it allows us to draw upon a far broader range of philosophical, spiritual, and speculative traditions to inform our understanding of the fundamental nature of existence. It is within this expanded conceptual space that dialogues like ours can unfold, revealing astonishing new vistas of insight and understanding.
No this is well said finally someone with a brain just kidding this sounds ai generated.
I don’t think consciousness is a fundamental of reality, rather, consciousness is a property of matter and energy, both subject to extremes of entropy upon molecular dissociation and unlikely to reform in the same way again
Where does the energy come from to create the virtual particle pairs at the event horizon of the black hole? From the black hole itself? Or from vacuum energy?
the vacuum. the VP annihilate too fast to "effect" the conservation of energy
The "virtual particle" story is a gross oversimplification of the requirement that a quantum field can never have exactly zero amplitude. The vacuum must have a minimum of plus or minus half of Plank's Constant... because of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.... because of waves.
Absolute Zero very briefly exists at the Singularity, the only point in nature where it does. Infinities do exist.
It’s almost like inside a black whole, it’s its own mini-universe, bending space-time to the absolute limit, holding unimaginable amounts of energy and matter.
One may even wonder… if space-time *has* a *limit…*
Why would that amount to a multiverse? Making up or subscribing to speculative nonsense isn't a form of 'information', it's just more un-informing noise.
no. I answered the question. There is no limit to space, that literally makes no sense under any known model. its flat (the shape of the universe)
@@Ariel-om5fh who said multiverse?
@@Ariel-om5fh But so is the BB speculative nonsense. You can create a mathematical physics for any speculation you want, and make it so that you can derive everyday mechanics from it. Hoyle and Narliakr did so, as did Pratt, Mach, and others. The current LCDM model is based on the assumption that cosmological red shift is caused by space expanding. But that is inconsistent with quantum mechanics, since a photon, once emitted can't "lose" energy without it going some place, effectively altering the photon into a different photon. As an explanation, it also has the problem of violating everyday thermodynamics at the same time it screws with QM.
no its just a concentrated ball of mass.
True. Einstein's calculations note only 1 or 0 black holes can exist in the universe.
Very misleading.
How are black holes different sizes and masses if they are infinitely dense?
How can Gravity be a part of a Black Hole, when in Space there is No gravity? Ha!
I thought this was Destiny - the political streamer, and I was like ?? Why is he talking about this now?
Just to be clear, we don't know! Nobody has proven or disproven the singularity in a blackhole.
Matter drags space-time behind itself. So a rotating blackhole, rotates the space which counter acts the gravitational pull.
I don't know if this is true. There are so many variables that are ignored.
Real blackholes are filled with matter. We have no idea how that influences the inside of the blackhole.
Nevermind singularities, matter compressing to its Schwarzschild radius takes an infinite amount of time from any frame of reference outside of the infalling matter itself. Black holes will not "exist" until t = Infinity
Black holes are not singularities if they are just the smallest possible size the Planck length.
this is so fascinating!