What's amazing about these lectures is that you can easily tell how old they are. Science is moving so quickly, contrary to popular belief. Here, he's speculating about gravity waves that *might* get detected at A-LIGO. Today, we know that that happened. A 10 year old lecture about extrasolar planets will mention a few hundred hot jupiters, but today we know of thousands of planets, including small, rocky ones. The higgs Boson... etc... etc... Science is amazing!
They do not escape , the only matter that escapes a black hole escapes before it even accretes to the dark star, the magnetic fields of dark stars let matter escape through what is known as fermi bubbles , this matter never reaches the dark star, DARK STARS DO NOT RADIATE ANYTHING NOT EVEN THERMAL RADIATION ESCAPSES
I enjoy Dr. Filippenko in the Universe series, I like his upbeat presentation that dispels the doom and gloom some people find in these kinds of discussions.
Why are people so ungrateful and unnecessarily critical in the comments on these videos? I’m disappointed to consistently find such stupid, rude comments on these lectures where you’d expect some class and intelligence.
At 1:24 finally someone explains how material "escapes" a Black hole. It never is actually inside a Black hole, but in an outside super heated membrane, fascinating. Im also glad he addressed the "While Hole" theory as well. When I first learned of BHs 40 years ago, I was waiting and waiting to hear someone announce the discovery of a white hole. Then as time went on hope faded. Now knowing much more about astronomy than I did back then, Im sure they would have found one by now. I think Michio Kaku does a disservice continuing to speculate on such ideas, without using a disclaimer as to the unlikelihood of it. Or as Dr. Flippenko said relaying the idea if they were possible we would probably of found them by now. I've always liked listening to Kaku, but I think he's become a victim of Hollywood's desire to dress things up for a more exciting narrative.
Its an interesting phenomenon that when we learn more we become even more lost to the universe because as our mind expands in terms of neuronal connections we become smarter therefore we are able to recognize that we really know not that much. A majority of society really doesn't know that much because they usually focus on their field of study rather than going outside of it, however, people that are deemed Renaissance Men/Renaissance Women try to find out a little bit about many subjects.By being perplexed is a common thing. I think Pill Box by you saying that the other person isn't smart enough is making an assumption because the person hasn't studied it before or the person could have just begun their journey by watching this video. Another issue is that if you read and understand a majority of Astrophysicists and also Cosmologists you need to realize that they have various viewpoints on black holes.
ok, so from our perspective nothing crosses the event horizon, but infalling matter does. Now throw a ball towards a black hole and watch until the hole explodes due to Hawking radiation. from the ball's perspective this also happens, but after it crossed the horizon. thus at explosion moment it was inside and outside as well ?
so black holes are compressed space-time and the space around the hole dont expand but rather are sucked in - or so Ive heard but dont make sense -so is it compressed in 1 dimension but the small size suggest all dimensions like 11.
@@JohnStopman we live in a hologram, hawkings radiation , non of which are true or close to fuckign science, hawkings was nut case that put a hand brake on science like religion did in the 16-17,00 s
@@ozdunstan8850 Hawking's contribution to Science was enormous and he was most definitely not a religious nutcase. I really don't understand what you are on about :-o
@@JohnStopman hawkings believed he was god , hawkings radiation, never existed and never will in the real world only bye his twisted god complex head. You don`t have to be religious to be a nutcase . look at donald trump. hawkings radiation turned out to be nothing but a god claim bye hawkings,no material is radiated or even ejected from a dark star, accreating mass escapes through magnetic fields ionization of matter, and then ejected bye the magnetic field, thus the Fermi bubbles i think they call them, hawking was fallacious and if you read the rubbish he was doing at the time of death you will understand why he has done so much damage. the universe is hologram, matrix and no evidence any where in his paper that gives weight to this claim. READ HIS LAST 2 PAPERS AND TELL ME HE WAS NOT A FUCKING NUTCASE.
With eternity being a very long time and infinity very far away, you apply the laws of probability that says almost every event no matter how absurd has some chance of occurring if given enough time, is there any theory that predicts how a near universal mass singularity would react when in contact of a singularity of similar size but consisting of Anti-matter?
Logic might say they would just blow up and annihilate each other, but these are incredibly large gravitational singularities with an almost infinite amount of power, "Blowing them up" would not be easy and maybe impossible.
Who knows... But who's to say a black hole consists of any matter or anti matter at all. Kip Thorn has said a black hole doesn't contain any matter.... That it's just a hole or distortion in space- time. If they were to collide the only collision between matter and anti matter would be in the matter contained in the outer membranes of the Black Holes.
* deep sigh * They don't get it. Even if a traveler into a singularity survived the spaghettification caused by the surrounding gravity field, said traveler would suffer the combination of being sand-blasted by the surround debris (traveling at near light speed) as well as being incinerated by the heat. The Event Horizon acts like (metaphorically speaking) a, "...flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to..." the singularity-proper. The traveler would be sub-atomic particles before the hit the singularity, there to rest until Hawking radiation disipated them.
Could a spinning black hole have a magnetic field? Could the field extend past the event horizon? When one looks at the future progression of galaxies, eventually all of the mass in orbit will be accreted onto the blackhole. When the local group of galaxies merge and all of their mass is deposited onto the merged blackholes. Would the gravity of the 1trillion solar mass blackhole and the others from other local groups warp spacetime enough to cancel the effects of dark energy, and after many tri/or/billions of years be able to merge with all of the other black holes. When the mass limit of the hypermassive blackhole is reached it creates another big bang. All of this is theoretical, im sure it has been thought of before in the big crunch scenarios, but it seems as if the current trend/consensus favors the freeze. I'm guessing this is because simulations and our current observations of the acceleration and further extrapolation of this trend. IS there a distance limit to gravities effect? probably not right, just that it decreases intensity at the square of its distance. So if the universe is accelerating and the only matter left is massive blackholes wont it be a matter of time before the force of gravity overcome the acceleration and they all merge? leading to the conditions/singularity that created the big bang? What are your thoughts?
+searchgoogleRDwolff Yes and they do. Spinning black holes are like disks with the center spewing out all sorts of particles an EM radiation (magnetism). Would it cancel dark energy.. only locally and only for a certain amount of time as dark energy is causing an acceleration that would overcome that in time
As we know today, 2018, nothing is more wrong than the statement that a black hole is the heart of darkness. The exact opposite is true. A black hole is the source of origin, not only of new matter, but the seed and the source of a new universe.
Err . . . there is no material, crushed into a tiny point, inside a black hole. Matter is converted into pure energy, a devastating puncture in space-time.
"from our frame of reference stuff that falling in to black hole never falls in to BH " this must be wrong because then we could see black hole, or at least we could see that material that is falling in to black hole but newer actually falls in. So if this is correct we should see black hole shining as 6 million suns.So this frame of reference stuff is clearly wrong or he didnt explain it properly. From our frame of reference material should just disappear.
so how then redshifting works with conservation of energy there must be then more photons or something (if you care to explain how reshifting work with conservation of enrgy in general )
do you know there is diferent kinds of redshifts there is due to motion, gravity expasion and as we all know it wavelengt = energy if you change wavelenght you must change number of photons to macth energy because speed of light must remain constant i dont know dude sumthing is fishy here
motion redshift is different then expansion redshift that is fact ... i didnt mean gravity expansion, gravity and expansion sry about that. i mean speed of light is constant but when object is moving that emits light its changes kinetic energy of light and because light cant go faster it changes frequency. that is motion redshit/blueshift but expansion redshift is different. and tell me this: can 2 observers be in same reference frame separeted by lets say 5 bilion lightyears away (they have same speed direction and all that shit) ? if they can then in same reference frame they will observe different wavelength of photon due to expansion redshift if one is closer to the light source.
+Oners82 you could kinda think about red shift in a sense in sound waves too take a pitch and turn it down until you can longer hear the pitch in a similar sense same thing with light and our eyes correct?
If you consider the nature of black holes and normal matter, you might wonder what occurs to that matter when it enters a black hole. It has been seen that nuclear particles that undergo high speed collisions in an accelerator are converted to subatomic particles such as quarks and bosons. I doubt if any mass that enters a black hole continues as "normal" matter. Whether sub-atomic particles can exist under those conditions is unknown. Do they break down into smaller particles? Do they recombine into particles that are stable under such extreme conditions? Perhaps they exist in a state of equilibrium as particles we have yet to discover. Maybe they exist as one "superparticle" that increases in energy as matter is drawn into it. If it exists as a superparticle, is it possible that it will reach a critical mass eventually and explode? Perhaps that is where Big Bangs come from. IDK. The amount of matter it would require to reach that stage would involve all the galaxies in our cosmos. I state this because, if matter can neither be created or destroyed, the Big Bang would have produced as much matter as it had absorbed. As it has been shown that the cosmos is expanding and is unlikely to collapse, then how would a Big Bang have ever occurred in the first place? I have a theory about that. There are 100s of billions of stars in our galaxy and 100s of billions of galaxies in our cosmos. Our cosmos has been shown to be about 14.5 billion years old. We exist in a relatively "young" cosmos. In a trillion years or so most of the matter in our cosmos will have been absorbed into black holes which will continue to spread out into the universe. The theory is that we are not the first cosmos to exist in the universe. Other big bangs have occurred over a time period that may be infinite and left behind the same kind of remnants of matter that our cosmos will evolve into. Eventually, enough of the matter from these expired cosmos will congregate into a black hole that is large enough to reach critical mass and form another big bang. This theory may also explain the "missing mass" or "dark matter" that scientists require to explain the expansion of our cosmos. If the theory is true then the universe is at least several orders of magnitude larger then what is currently believed. This would take us back to the "solid state" theory of creation. However, instead of expansion and contraction, the universe would create a random cosmos (big bang) every once in a while. This may be possible to prove if we can locate light sources that can be shown to exist outside our cosmos. Keep in mind that any of these sources of light would probably be 100s of trillions of light years distant, if not quadrillions of light years. This would mean we would be looking through the remnants of dead cosmos' that have been around for a very long time.
Nice type up. Im, not sure you account for Hawkin's Radiation. Black holes are not permanent, They evaporate. And space in between might be a lot bigger then you think.
I really respect Filippenko. As a Berkeley resident, I hope to someday encounter him doing mundane human things. But... he REALLY needs to either stay away from attempts at humor, or hire a professional comedy writer. Seven minutes of babbling limp attempts at jokes, before getting to the actual lecture, is not in his best interest. And Event Horizon is the name of the ship in the movie, not the theme of the film.
Ah yes, the expansion of the Uterus. That's very interesting. But, however, black holes are a figment of the imagination. No star can compress itself into the size of a baseball or a dime because it it would have to shed most of its material. Before that would occur, it would undergo a super nova event. I think.
+Steve Bergman Check out this video, "Black Holes Are a Myth!" on RUclips. This guy gives a new perspective of "Black Holes". It's a convincing argument that such celestial objects cannot exist because photons have no mass and therefore, do not comply with the laws of gravity.
@kip. Are you a scientist? It's just you're giving me the impression you're superior to everyone. Stop pushing your opinion on what you *THINK* the universe is unless you can tell us all about an amazingly awesome thesis you came up with all on your own without the help of the great scientists before you. Jeez man people like you really piss me off.
Michael Jones Your comment suggests that you previously did speak publicly. If you do not understand that introducing humour is a very good way to keep the interest of your audience, thus improving the reception of the information - then, with deep respect, that may explain why I have not heard any of your public speaking.Dr Filippenko is a much sought after speaker. A part of the attraction is his humour. If his delivery were poor, then he would not be so much in demand - and it hardly seems likely that he would have been voted the most popular professor at Berkley nine times (the introduction claims seven, but that was some years ago).
Andrew Murn Not everyone who has to speak in public is famous, but the burden is the same. I do know of introduced humor, I just found his humor _unfuny_ and delivered by a non-comedic personality in a non-humorus way. I love Dr. Fillipenko and respect his intelligence and the ease with which he explains, in easily understood layman's terms, the workings of the universe. But,... someone should help him out with his comedic timing and delivery. Science isn't _funy_. *Religion*, is _funy_!! ; )
That's fine if you can tell jokes. Filippenko cannot. It doesn't ruin the lecture because he's a good speaker and keeps the audience despite his jokes. Hence why he's still popular. It's not that bad in this one anyway. I tried to watch another of his lectures a few months ago and I had to switch off after 10 minutes. The jokes were painful. Sean Carroll is an example of a someone who's a great speaker and good at telling jokes.
Even in his explanation of Kaku's wormhole travel not being 'just around the corner' he comes across ridiculously condescending, arrogant and pompous. Do you actually think we believe you idiots have the capability for 'wormhole travel' to be 'just around the corner' - gee mister scientist, thanks for clearing that up. When most of the nonsense you come out with is almost 100% speculation, I think you'd have to be pretty gullible to believe anything you hypothesise is 'just around the corner'.... or will ever be possible, most of it won't be. Most of what scientists hypothesise about now may or may not happen in the distant future, never will be possible. Because scientific understanding changes, and when they make these observations or predictions they are based on scientific ideas that WILL change radically as time goes on. They are rarely right about ANYTHING even just a few decades in the future. Please do not put these guys on pedestals. They are no where NEAR as 'enlightened' as they believe they are.
ahhhhhhhhhha ... "black holes" , sorry , I must have typed it in wrong in the search engine , it's not quite what I was expecting ... my bad - lol , j/k ; )
Alex is such a great teacher of astronomy and Astro physics. He speaks in a way that people can understand. I enjoy all his lectures and video documentaries. I especially like Amy Menzer, I wanna make babies with that woman!!!
..it's a marvel, fer shur.... lol .. hey, have you checked out Eric Dollard? If this topic is you, you'll want to hear this feller, I was .. astonished, actually. :]s
Go back to cheap yank doco's that i can avoid flippin penko. Edit: Im 26mins in here, I think I should give this guy more credit then i have. Keep this guy away from history channel and give him a chance :P Edit#2: OMG, This guy some like a different person then the crap doco's he is in. I feel like the history channel tells him what to say. Im glad I watched this, Because this guy as far as I can tell made only 1 weird statement the whole 2 hours. Now thats not bad for someone that does history doco's. Im still fully against the shitty USA doco's, However from this day on I think this guy is pritty good at least.
Lol...I'm in the US but I have to agree. Which is why I was glad he said what he said about Kaku. He's an embarrassment with some of the stuff he says. If you want to hear a top American physist give a great talk on Black Holes check out Kip Thorn.
@@donvee2000 lol. That Kuku is self explanatory, KUKU KUKU... I have coined the term AmDoc to mean the documentry vomit that is currently spewing out of America. AmDoc is not a good thing.
Common sense, gravity is not a force that lives across all corners of the matrix, only is huge in relation to the MASS/CONCENTRATION to the space OBJECT! Thus gravity is the MASS ABYSS of a center in space, ALWAYS in presence of MASS/CONCENTRATION/COMPRESSION
pretentious, pompous, pampered, pertinent, pretentious, wait, isaid that already. Ahhhhh........ I do not....... care for the guy. There is something about his ............eyes$
that Kip is a clown 4 sure!.....no I'm NOT a physicist but I have done the math for simulation..... true SR is Not a factor in the GPS system. The SR effects are negligible....but the effects of GR are extremely significant & is why the system functions to the accuracy it does....that is, the satellites speeds are not relativistic(would only effect the 12th decimal or so of the final position calculation). But their distance from the earth produces consequential GR time dilation(a differential of literally miles/day in the final position calculations). Also there IS quite significant evidence that super massive black holes exist in the center of virtually all galaxies.....y do u expend so much time/energy spreading your nonsense ? I bet the earth is flat & we never landed on the moon either ?....jeez some ppl....there's 1 in every crowd !
Black holes do not exist , black is not apart of the electro magnetic spectrum and holes under current known laws of the natural world can never have mass thus cannot be any kind of gravitational attractive body . But this is the start of seti becoming Entertainment tonight of science fiction shows. Talk shitting on the shoulder`s of those who laid the path : John Michell (/ˈmɪtʃəl/; 25 December 1724 - 21 April 1793) was an English natural philosopher and clergyman who provided pioneering insights in a wide range of scientific fields, including astronomy, geology, optics, and gravitation. Considered "one of the greatest unsung scientists of all time",[1] he was the first person known to propose the existence of Dark Stars not black holes in publication, the first to suggest that earthquakes travel in waves, the first to explain how to manufacture artificial magnets, and the first to apply statistics to the study of the cosmos, recognizing that double stars were a product of mutual gravitation. He also invented an apparatus to measure the mass of the Earth. He has been called both the father of seismology and the father of magnetometry.
You’re so wrong yet somehow know a bit of history lol. Yes the guy proposed dark stars and he was basically right black holes exist. He proposed a star with so much mass and gravity light couldn’t escape. We’ve even got observational evidence and pictures of black holes. Their mass is confirmed by stars motions at the center of our galaxy.
@@alexburke1899 Show mw the applied physics for how a hole can mass, then show me the physics on how a hole can have enough mass to hold over 400 billion solar systems in its grip. Black is not part of the electromagnetic spectrum( stars radiate Quanta and heat no colours). Holes hole /həʊl/ Learn to pronounce See definitions in: All Golf Zoology Physics noun 1. a hollow place in a solid body or surface. "the dog had dug a hole in the ground" Similar: pit ditch trench cavity crater depression hollow well borehole excavation shaft mineshaft dugout cave cavern pothole chamber gorge chasm canyon ravine 2. a place or position that needs to be filled because someone or something is no longer there. "she is missed terribly and her death has left a hole in all our lives" Holes can never have mass, NEVER, thus the label given to dark stars bye a white ignorant christians and his uneducated student are no better a label than the big bang. Get an education outside of of modern pseudo science please. John Mitchell labelled them 200 years before Archibald wheelers dumb fucking student, yet to day when labelling a phenomenon you must first do research to make sure NO OTHER SCIENTIST HAS BEEN ON THE SUBJECT. John MITCHELL 200 years before that white ignorant chrsitan anti sceince piece of white shit Wheeler. QUOTE" We’ve even got observational evidence and pictures of black holes. Their mass is confirmed by stars motions at the center of our galaxy." You cannot observe or take images of objects that radiate no heat or light. The images from the EHT( Event Horizon Telescope) nothing BHI( Black Hole Imager), The telescope images the accretion disc to the EHT , NOT THE STAR ITSELF, so all that bullshit and you still know fucking nothing. I feel pity that you have been lied to like religion lies and instead of actually doing the science and research you believe lying pieces of shit, just looking for their next funding paycheck.
@@ossiedunstan4419 lol ironically since you first commented 2 years ago they’ve actually imaged a black hole, so yeah you’re conspiracy is now outdated and it’s back to the conspiracy drawing board.
+AMORPH CONCEPTZ...that's hilarious. You don't care for Filippenko or any of the other mathemagicians to "prove" their claims, yet you want proof of anyone who calls them out. There is PLENTY of proof that the Standard Model in Big Bang Religious Fantasy is wrong and the same with Quantum. You can close your mind and accept the fantasies. That's fine with me. But you could open your mind to real science and stop the rubber stamping and downright worship of a bunch of criminals with a science or physics degree who just sell funding for their boondoggles. It's up to you
I’m from the future… there are now pictures for you to look at to hopefully convince you. There’s also proof with video simulations of stars orbiting crazy fast at the center of our galaxy and around other black holes we’ve found.
36:00 i'm high as a kite, and when he apologizes to the podium i geeked the fuck out.
What's amazing about these lectures is that you can easily tell how old they are.
Science is moving so quickly, contrary to popular belief.
Here, he's speculating about gravity waves that *might* get detected at A-LIGO. Today, we know that that happened.
A 10 year old lecture about extrasolar planets will mention a few hundred hot jupiters, but today we know of thousands of planets, including small, rocky ones.
The higgs Boson... etc... etc...
Science is amazing!
The Higgs Boson was a fraud.... there is no evidence it was ever found
@@elastronaute1198 atlas.cern/updates/physics-briefing/new-atlas-measurement-higgs-boson-mass
@@JohnStopman Thank you
@@donaldsmith3926 Yw :-)
@50:17 wow finally someone explains this, I have always wondered how rays could escape the black hole =) love these lectures!
They do not escape , the only matter that escapes a black hole escapes before it even accretes to the dark star, the magnetic fields of dark stars let matter escape through what is known as fermi bubbles , this matter never reaches the dark star,
DARK STARS DO NOT RADIATE ANYTHING NOT EVEN THERMAL RADIATION ESCAPSES
his arrows joke at 21:45 always makes me laugh xD
I enjoy Dr. Filippenko in the Universe series, I like his upbeat presentation that dispels the doom and gloom some people find in these kinds of discussions.
Good call. And happy viewing!
1:02:20 Virtual particle pair can form anywhere.
Why are people so ungrateful and unnecessarily critical in the comments on these videos? I’m disappointed to consistently find such stupid, rude comments on these lectures where you’d expect some class and intelligence.
Agreed
Those people will always be present, no matter where you go or what videos you watch, unfortunately. Just try to ignore them.
Very interesting video excellent work sir
Great, superb and fantastic.
Wonderful! Thankyou for this.
At 1:24 finally someone explains how material "escapes" a Black hole.
It never is actually inside a Black hole, but in an outside super heated membrane, fascinating.
Im also glad he addressed the "While Hole" theory as well. When I first learned of BHs 40 years ago, I was waiting and waiting to hear someone announce the discovery of a white hole. Then as time went on hope faded. Now knowing much more about astronomy than I did back then, Im sure they would have found one by now. I think Michio Kaku does a disservice continuing to speculate on such ideas, without using a disclaimer as to the unlikelihood of it. Or as Dr. Flippenko said relaying the idea if they were possible we would probably of found them by now. I've always liked listening to Kaku, but I think he's become a victim of Hollywood's desire to dress things up for a more exciting narrative.
No he never explained he made assertion and then failed to supply the relevant evidence to support it.
Saying god is real does not make it so.
I really enjoyed that for many reasons. really thoughtful on many levels
Voted best prof lecturer ,I agree for explaining t
o novice science lovers. Love this guy
There's a microphone feed back on the video & I can't ignore it enough to continue watching just now. I will come back some other time, maybe.
Oners82 Thanks
I feel like I have learned significantly more about black holes which in some ways leaves me even more perplexed. :)
You must be new ?
You're not smart enough to understand black holes
Pill Box
I think I might, But im not convinced.
I dont think the people coming up with these ideas are completely convinced either.
Its an interesting phenomenon that when we learn more we become even more lost to the universe because as our mind expands in terms of neuronal connections we become smarter therefore we are able to recognize that we really know not that much. A majority of society really doesn't know that much because they usually focus on their field of study rather than going outside of it, however, people that are deemed Renaissance Men/Renaissance Women try to find out a little bit about many subjects.By being perplexed is a common thing. I think Pill Box by you saying that the other person isn't smart enough is making an assumption because the person hasn't studied it before or the person could have just begun their journey by watching this video. Another issue is that if you read and understand a majority of Astrophysicists and also Cosmologists you need to realize that they have various viewpoints on black holes.
Ryan Steffy
Well said !!
I came here looking for my missing grey sock ....
Eh, try the dryer... ;)
44:56 "NoT tHaT sIzE mAtTeRs"
I genuinely laughed at this 😆👍
Good lecture. Very entertaining and engaging.
The last answer, regarding The Meaning Of Science is very profound.
ok, so from our perspective nothing crosses the event horizon, but infalling matter does. Now throw a ball towards a black hole and watch until the hole explodes due to Hawking radiation. from the ball's perspective this also happens, but after it crossed the horizon. thus at explosion moment it was inside and outside as well ?
so black holes are compressed space-time and the space around the hole dont expand but rather are sucked in - or so Ive heard but dont make sense -so is it compressed in 1 dimension but the small size suggest all dimensions like 11.
I didn't know Ken Bone was a Physicist? ^.^
"But with my limited brain power..."
Talk about being humble... I must have the intellectual capacity of a newt then :\
But at least you're amphibious, amirite? ;-)
"To err is human, to really screw up requires a computer." Dr. Alex Filippenko
People love to blame the computer, but it is a slave, doing EXACTLY as it is told. It still takes a human to screw things up!
Dr Filippenko is a fantastic scientist. His failed attempts on humour and jokes make me laugh.
While watching this I learned Stephen Hawking died. RIP Stephen.
And Stephen hawking can no longer make religious claims and call it science, his death was the best thing to happen to science.
@@ozdunstan8850 Religious claims?
@@JohnStopman we live in a hologram, hawkings radiation , non of which are true or close to fuckign science, hawkings was nut case that put a hand brake on science like religion did in the 16-17,00 s
@@ozdunstan8850 Hawking's contribution to Science was enormous and he was most definitely not a religious nutcase. I really don't understand what you are on about :-o
@@JohnStopman hawkings believed he was god , hawkings radiation, never existed and never will in the real world only bye his twisted god complex head.
You don`t have to be religious to be a nutcase . look at donald trump.
hawkings radiation turned out to be nothing but a god claim bye hawkings,no material is radiated or even ejected from a dark star, accreating mass escapes through magnetic fields ionization of matter, and then ejected bye the magnetic field, thus the Fermi bubbles i think they call them,
hawking was fallacious and if you read the rubbish he was doing at the time of death you will understand why he has done so much damage.
the universe is hologram, matrix and no evidence any where in his paper that gives weight to this claim.
READ HIS LAST 2 PAPERS AND TELL ME HE WAS NOT A FUCKING NUTCASE.
With eternity being a very long time and infinity very far away, you apply the laws of probability that says almost every event no matter how absurd has some chance of occurring if given enough time, is there any theory that predicts how a near universal mass singularity would react when in contact of a singularity of similar size but consisting of Anti-matter?
Logic might say they would just blow up and annihilate each other, but these are incredibly large gravitational singularities with an almost infinite amount of power, "Blowing them up" would not be easy and maybe impossible.
Who knows... But who's to say a black hole consists of any matter or anti matter at all. Kip Thorn has said a black hole doesn't contain any matter.... That it's just a hole or distortion in space- time. If they were to collide the only collision between matter and anti matter would be in the matter contained in the outer membranes of the Black Holes.
Got to check that huge black hole in the New York Stock exchange. Don't distracted out there. IT DOESN'T WORK like that!
About size correlation between bulge of galaxies and black holes, it might be a question of dark matter or energy density. (cf 46th mn of video)
Note to Kip... Lasers just for starters
What if exploding black holes created dark matter?
+tubedude709 There's no such thin as "exploding" black holes. The whole point is that nothing can escape it.
In your cells you see robots that look a little like us: homo sapiens. Their Earth was annihilated. We may be next.
Alex has a unique way for demonstration
* deep sigh * They don't get it. Even if a traveler into a singularity survived the spaghettification caused by the surrounding gravity field, said traveler would suffer the combination of being sand-blasted by the surround debris (traveling at near light speed) as well as being incinerated by the heat. The Event Horizon acts like (metaphorically speaking) a, "...flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to..." the singularity-proper. The traveler would be sub-atomic particles before the hit the singularity, there to rest until Hawking radiation disipated them.
4:40
Could a spinning black hole have a magnetic field? Could the field extend past the event horizon? When one looks at the future progression of galaxies, eventually all of the mass in orbit will be accreted onto the blackhole. When the local group of galaxies merge and all of their mass is deposited onto the merged blackholes. Would the gravity of the 1trillion solar mass blackhole and the others from other local groups warp spacetime enough to cancel the effects of dark energy, and after many tri/or/billions of years be able to merge with all of the other black holes. When the mass limit of the hypermassive blackhole is reached it creates another big bang. All of this is theoretical, im sure it has been thought of before in the big crunch scenarios, but it seems as if the current trend/consensus favors the freeze. I'm guessing this is because simulations and our current observations of the acceleration and further extrapolation of this trend. IS there a distance limit to gravities effect? probably not right, just that it decreases intensity at the square of its distance. So if the universe is accelerating and the only matter left is massive blackholes wont it be a matter of time before the force of gravity overcome the acceleration and they all merge? leading to the conditions/singularity that created the big bang? What are your thoughts?
+searchgoogleRDwolff Yes and they do. Spinning black holes are like disks with the center spewing out all sorts of particles an EM radiation (magnetism). Would it cancel dark energy.. only locally and only for a certain amount of time as dark energy is causing an acceleration that would overcome that in time
As we know today, 2018, nothing is more wrong than the statement that
a black hole is the heart of darkness. The exact opposite is true.
A black hole is the source of origin, not only of new matter, but the
seed and the source of a new universe.
You dont know that
Would be hillarious to pitch his voice and make him sound like Fred.
Give him a break guys. Kip is from Alaska, he doesn't meet many people and therefore there are less people likely to call him on his BS.
Err . . . there is no material, crushed into a tiny point, inside a black hole. Matter is converted into pure energy, a devastating puncture in space-time.
"from our frame of reference stuff that falling in to black hole never falls in to BH " this must be wrong because then we could see black hole, or at least we could see that material that is falling in to black hole but newer actually falls in. So if this is correct we should see black hole shining as 6 million suns.So this frame of reference stuff is clearly wrong or he didnt explain it properly. From our frame of reference material should just disappear.
so how then redshifting works with conservation of energy there must be then more photons or something (if you care to explain how reshifting work with conservation of enrgy in general )
do you know there is diferent kinds of redshifts there is due to motion, gravity expasion and as we all know it wavelengt = energy if you change wavelenght you must change number of photons to macth energy because speed of light must remain constant i dont know dude sumthing is fishy here
motion redshift is different then expansion redshift that is fact ... i didnt mean gravity expansion, gravity and expansion sry about that. i mean speed of light is constant but when object is moving that emits light its changes kinetic energy of light and because light cant go faster it changes frequency. that is motion redshit/blueshift but expansion redshift is different. and tell me this: can 2 observers be in same reference frame separeted by lets say 5 bilion lightyears away (they have same speed direction and all that shit) ? if they can then in same reference frame they will observe different wavelength of photon due to expansion redshift if one is closer to the light source.
+Oners82 you could kinda think about red shift in a sense in sound waves too take a pitch and turn it down until you can longer hear the pitch in a similar sense same thing with light and our eyes correct?
My question has nothing tondo with black holes so I'm not asking it here
If you consider the nature of black holes and normal matter, you might wonder what occurs to that matter when it enters a black hole. It has been seen that nuclear particles that undergo high speed collisions in an accelerator are converted to subatomic particles such as quarks and bosons. I doubt if any mass that enters a black hole continues as "normal" matter. Whether sub-atomic particles can exist under those conditions is unknown. Do they break down into smaller particles? Do they recombine into particles that are stable under such extreme conditions? Perhaps they exist in a state of equilibrium as particles we have yet to discover. Maybe they exist as one "superparticle" that increases in energy as matter is drawn into it. If it exists as a superparticle, is it possible that it will reach a critical mass eventually and explode? Perhaps that is where Big Bangs come from. IDK. The amount of matter it would require to reach that stage would involve all the galaxies in our cosmos. I state this because, if matter can neither be created or destroyed, the Big Bang would have produced as much matter as it had absorbed. As it has been shown that the cosmos is expanding and is unlikely to collapse, then how would a Big Bang have ever occurred in the first place? I have a theory about that.
There are 100s of billions of stars in our galaxy and 100s of billions of galaxies in our cosmos. Our cosmos has been shown to be about 14.5 billion years old. We exist in a relatively "young" cosmos. In a trillion years or so most of the matter in our cosmos will have been absorbed into black holes which will continue to spread out into the universe. The theory is that we are not the first cosmos to exist in the universe. Other big bangs have occurred over a time period that may be infinite and left behind the same kind of remnants of matter that our cosmos will evolve into. Eventually, enough of the matter from these expired cosmos will congregate into a black hole that is large enough to reach critical mass and form another big bang. This theory may also explain the "missing mass" or "dark matter" that scientists require to explain the expansion of our cosmos. If the theory is true then the universe is at least several orders of magnitude larger then what is currently believed. This would take us back to the "solid state" theory of creation. However, instead of expansion and contraction, the universe would create a random cosmos (big bang) every once in a while. This may be possible to prove if we can locate light sources that can be shown to exist outside our cosmos. Keep in mind that any of these sources of light would probably be 100s of trillions of light years distant, if not quadrillions of light years. This would mean we would be looking through the remnants of dead cosmos' that have been around for a very long time.
Nice type up.
Im, not sure you account for Hawkin's Radiation. Black holes are not permanent, They evaporate. And space in between might be a lot bigger then you think.
soundguy you had one job :(
B.H. did not have a singularity.
Inside the so called singularity is antigravity.
W. Greiner
The first 5 minutes is some other dude with a push broom moustache lol totally skippable. 👍
Virtual particles with negative mass wouldn't fall into black holes. They would be repelled! LOL
This talk is over 9 years old. And now so quickly out of date!!!! What next!!!
That was pretty good except for the awfully bad Q and A and the end.
Starts at
04:36 , thx RzzRBladez. But tries too hard to be funny; and is a bit dated, now.
I really respect Filippenko. As a Berkeley resident, I hope to someday encounter him doing mundane human things. But... he REALLY needs to either stay away from attempts at humor, or hire a professional comedy writer. Seven minutes of babbling limp attempts at jokes, before getting to the actual lecture, is not in his best interest. And Event Horizon is the name of the ship in the movie, not the theme of the film.
We have 2 HUGE black holes in America. Oprah Winfrey and Stacy Abrams.
What about Obama?
Intro guy always blabs too much. Just start woth the speaker and don't waste our time with blabber mouth introductions.
I'm hot for you...That's not scientific i know.
hi
Ah yes, the expansion of the Uterus. That's very interesting. But, however, black holes are a figment of the imagination. No star can compress itself into the size of a baseball or a dime because it it would have to shed most of its material. Before that would occur, it would undergo a super nova event. I think.
+TheCobalt100 How about leaving that to the 1000's of scientists that know a lot more than yourself.. I think.
+TheCobalt100 Did you even watch the lecture?
genius
+Distant System What lecture?
+Steve Bergman Check out this video, "Black Holes Are a Myth!" on RUclips. This guy gives a new perspective of "Black Holes". It's a convincing argument that such celestial objects cannot exist because photons have no mass and therefore, do not comply with the laws of gravity.
Maybee black holes are new universes and dark matter and dark energy is maybee vakuum
American lecture. With actor Fillipenko. And the china kiko?
@kip. Are you a scientist? It's just you're giving me the impression you're superior to everyone. Stop pushing your opinion on what you *THINK* the universe is unless you can tell us all about an amazingly awesome thesis you came up with all on your own without the help of the great scientists before you. Jeez man people like you really piss me off.
Fracknoy
04:36 thank me later^^
Is 6 years late enough? Thank you
I could do without the failed _standup routine_. The lecture is fine without it.
Michael Jones You don't do much public speaking, do you.
Andrew Murn
Not any more. What's that got to do with his poor delivery?
Michael Jones Your comment suggests that you previously did speak publicly. If you do not understand that introducing humour is a very good way to keep the interest of your audience, thus improving the reception of the information - then, with deep respect, that may explain why I have not heard any of your public speaking.Dr Filippenko is a much sought after speaker. A part of the attraction is his humour. If his delivery were poor, then he would not be so much in demand - and it hardly seems likely that he would have been voted the most popular professor at Berkley nine times (the introduction claims seven, but that was some years ago).
Andrew Murn Not everyone who has to speak in public is famous, but the burden is the same. I do know of introduced humor, I just found his humor _unfuny_ and delivered by a non-comedic personality in a non-humorus way.
I love Dr. Fillipenko and respect his intelligence and the ease with which he explains, in easily understood layman's terms, the workings of the universe.
But,...
someone should help him out with his comedic timing and delivery.
Science isn't _funy_.
*Religion*, is _funy_!! ; )
That's fine if you can tell jokes. Filippenko cannot. It doesn't ruin the lecture because he's a good speaker and keeps the audience despite his jokes. Hence why he's still popular. It's not that bad in this one anyway. I tried to watch another of his lectures a few months ago and I had to switch off after 10 minutes. The jokes were painful. Sean Carroll is an example of a someone who's a great speaker and good at telling jokes.
🇺🇳1:33:59
Even in his explanation of Kaku's wormhole travel not being 'just around the corner' he comes across ridiculously condescending, arrogant and pompous. Do you actually think we believe you idiots have the capability for 'wormhole travel' to be 'just around the corner' - gee mister scientist, thanks for clearing that up. When most of the nonsense you come out with is almost 100% speculation, I think you'd have to be pretty gullible to believe anything you hypothesise is 'just around the corner'.... or will ever be possible, most of it won't be. Most of what scientists hypothesise about now may or may not happen in the distant future, never will be possible. Because scientific understanding changes, and when they make these observations or predictions they are based on scientific ideas that WILL change radically as time goes on. They are rarely right about ANYTHING even just a few decades in the future. Please do not put these guys on pedestals. They are no where NEAR as 'enlightened' as they believe they are.
ahhhhhhhhhha ... "black holes" , sorry , I must have typed it in wrong in the search engine , it's not quite what I was expecting ... my bad - lol , j/k ; )
Alex is such a great teacher of astronomy and Astro physics. He speaks in a way that people can understand. I enjoy all his lectures and video documentaries. I especially like Amy Menzer, I wanna make babies with that woman!!!
There is a cosmic vise: gravity! at specific mass/size ratios similar as the shells of the atomic structure
..it's a marvel, fer shur.... lol .. hey, have you checked out Eric Dollard?
If this topic is you, you'll want to hear this feller, I was .. astonished, actually.
:]s
Go back to cheap yank doco's that i can avoid flippin penko.
Edit: Im 26mins in here, I think I should give this guy more credit then i have. Keep this guy away from history channel and give him a chance :P
Edit#2: OMG, This guy some like a different person then the crap doco's he is in. I feel like the history channel tells him what to say. Im glad I watched this, Because this guy as far as I can tell made only 1 weird statement the whole 2 hours. Now thats not bad for someone that does history doco's.
Im still fully against the shitty USA doco's, However from this day on I think this guy is pritty good at least.
Lol...I'm in the US but I have to agree. Which is why I was glad he said what he said about Kaku. He's an embarrassment with some of the stuff he says. If you want to hear a top American physist give a great talk on Black Holes check out Kip Thorn.
@@donvee2000 lol. That Kuku is self explanatory, KUKU KUKU... I have coined the term AmDoc to mean the documentry vomit that is currently spewing out of America.
AmDoc is not a good thing.
Common sense, gravity is not a force that lives across all corners of the matrix, only is huge in relation to the MASS/CONCENTRATION to the space OBJECT!
Thus gravity is the MASS ABYSS of a center in space, ALWAYS in presence of MASS/CONCENTRATION/COMPRESSION
pretentious, pompous, pampered, pertinent, pretentious, wait, isaid that already. Ahhhhh........ I do not....... care for the guy. There is something about his ............eyes$
Boringggggggg...Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
that Kip is a clown 4 sure!.....no I'm NOT a physicist but I have done the math for simulation..... true SR is Not a factor in the GPS system. The SR effects are negligible....but the effects of GR are extremely significant & is why the system functions to the accuracy it does....that is, the satellites speeds are not relativistic(would only effect the 12th decimal or so of the final position calculation). But their distance from the earth produces consequential GR time dilation(a differential of literally miles/day in the final position calculations). Also there IS quite significant evidence that super massive black holes exist in the center of virtually all galaxies.....y do u expend so much time/energy spreading your nonsense ? I bet the earth is flat & we never landed on the moon either ?....jeez some ppl....there's 1 in every crowd !
Black holes do not exist , black is not apart of the electro magnetic spectrum and holes under current known laws of the natural world can never have mass thus cannot be any kind of gravitational attractive body . But this is the start of seti becoming Entertainment tonight of science fiction shows.
Talk shitting on the shoulder`s of those who laid the path :
John Michell (/ˈmɪtʃəl/; 25 December 1724 - 21 April 1793) was an English natural philosopher and clergyman who provided pioneering insights in a wide range of scientific fields, including astronomy, geology, optics, and gravitation. Considered "one of the greatest unsung scientists of all time",[1] he was the first person known to propose the existence of Dark Stars not black holes in publication, the first to suggest that earthquakes travel in waves, the first to explain how to manufacture artificial magnets, and the first to apply statistics to the study of the cosmos, recognizing that double stars were a product of mutual gravitation. He also invented an apparatus to measure the mass of the Earth. He has been called both the father of seismology and the father of magnetometry.
You’re so wrong yet somehow know a bit of history lol. Yes the guy proposed dark stars and he was basically right black holes exist. He proposed a star with so much mass and gravity light couldn’t escape. We’ve even got observational evidence and pictures of black holes. Their mass is confirmed by stars motions at the center of our galaxy.
@@alexburke1899 Show mw the applied physics for how a hole can mass, then show me the physics on how a hole can have enough mass to hold over 400 billion solar systems in its grip.
Black is not part of the electromagnetic spectrum( stars radiate Quanta and heat no colours).
Holes hole
/həʊl/
Learn to pronounce
See definitions in:
All
Golf
Zoology
Physics
noun
1.
a hollow place in a solid body or surface.
"the dog had dug a hole in the ground"
Similar:
pit
ditch
trench
cavity
crater
depression
hollow
well
borehole
excavation
shaft
mineshaft
dugout
cave
cavern
pothole
chamber
gorge
chasm
canyon
ravine
2.
a place or position that needs to be filled because someone or something is no longer there.
"she is missed terribly and her death has left a hole in all our lives"
Holes can never have mass, NEVER, thus the label given to dark stars bye a white ignorant christians and his uneducated student are no better a label than the big bang.
Get an education outside of of modern pseudo science please.
John Mitchell labelled them 200 years before Archibald wheelers dumb fucking student, yet to day when labelling a phenomenon you must first do research to make sure NO OTHER SCIENTIST HAS BEEN ON THE SUBJECT.
John MITCHELL 200 years before that white ignorant chrsitan anti sceince piece of white shit Wheeler.
QUOTE" We’ve even got observational evidence and pictures of black holes. Their mass is confirmed by stars motions at the center of our galaxy."
You cannot observe or take images of objects that radiate no heat or light.
The images from the EHT( Event Horizon Telescope) nothing BHI( Black Hole Imager),
The telescope images the accretion disc to the EHT , NOT THE STAR ITSELF, so all that bullshit and you still know fucking nothing.
I feel pity that you have been lied to like religion lies and instead of actually doing the science and research you believe lying pieces of shit, just looking for their next funding paycheck.
@@ossiedunstan4419 lol ironically since you first commented 2 years ago they’ve actually imaged a black hole, so yeah you’re conspiracy is now outdated and it’s back to the conspiracy drawing board.
Kaku is better than Filippenko, Filippenko is just an actor
Kaku is also an actor.
OK....and now, both of you have to PROVE your claim. (or are both of you just using ad homimen attacks because you lack real arguments?!)
AMORPH CONCEPTZ I didn't make an argument.
+AMORPH CONCEPTZ...that's hilarious. You don't care for Filippenko or any of the other mathemagicians to "prove" their claims, yet you want proof of anyone who calls them out. There is PLENTY of proof that the Standard Model in Big Bang Religious Fantasy is wrong and the same with Quantum. You can close your mind and accept the fantasies. That's fine with me. But you could open your mind to real science and stop the rubber stamping and downright worship of a bunch of criminals with a science or physics degree who just sell funding for their boondoggles. It's up to you
Better at what, precisely? Performing oral sex on your pet hamster?
Ahh, another sermon on black holes by Reverend Alex Filloutmechecko. Pass.
Don't tell me about black holes until you have proved their existence.
I’m from the future… there are now pictures for you to look at to hopefully convince you. There’s also proof with video simulations of stars orbiting crazy fast at the center of our galaxy and around other black holes we’ve found.
Alex Filippenko, stoner scientist.
Alex Filloutmechecko, stoner capitalist.
Jesus,is coming very soon..
Please,repent before its
too late.. God bless all
FUCK OFF !!!
+Anthony Mullen
God bless you(゜∇^d)!!
Do you want to get down on your knees and start pleasin Jesus? Do you want to feel his salvation all over your face?
FUNNY HOW HE HAS TO EXPLAIN ALL HIS JOKES... NERD!! OH YOU SEE WHAT I DID THERE? CALLED THE SCIENTIST A NERD? HUH? HUH?