thank you for posting this! "Nobody holds a monopoly on knowledge". There might not be an overabundance in views, but the people who have watched this are REALLY interested and want to know. You don't know how hard it was to find your channel. It took multiple searches. It was buried under the mass of superficial studio edits from companies with millions of subs, making shorts for mass consumption. There was no real information in them and they were unsatisfying. Thanks for this!
There is a question at 49:00 about white holes and the Cosmic censorship hypothesis. C.C. has to do with timelike singularities, not spacelike ( like the ones inside Schwartzschild white holes, or the initial Big Bang singularities etc.), so the possible existence of white holes is not a violation of Penrose's hypothesis. White holes are considered, classically, unphysical though, because of the second law of thermodynamics and due to some instabilities. In quantum gravity their status may be different, as C. Rovelli says in this very interesting and fascinating lecture.
thank you for posting this! "Nobody holds a monopoly on knowledge". There might not be an overabundance in views, but the people who have watched this are REALLY interested and want to know. You don't know how hard it was to find your channel. It took multiple searches. It was buried under the mass of superficial studio edits from companies with millions of subs, making shorts for mass consumption. There was no real information in them and they were unsatisfying. Thanks for this!
Fascinating lecture.
11:20 : mPL>MBH>10^47mPL, signs should be reversed, i.e. mPL
There is a question at 49:00 about white holes and the Cosmic censorship hypothesis. C.C. has to do with timelike singularities, not spacelike ( like the ones inside Schwartzschild white holes, or the initial Big Bang singularities etc.), so the possible existence of white holes is not a violation of Penrose's hypothesis.
White holes are considered, classically, unphysical though, because of the second law of thermodynamics and due to some instabilities.
In quantum gravity their status may be different, as C. Rovelli says in this very interesting and fascinating lecture.
Can you define light cones as a cylinder?