This is what I love about the time we're living in! I am not an astrophysicist, but I can still get updated information about the behavior of bodies crossing the event horizon of a black hole :) These videos are great mini-lectures!
_Augusto Rudzinski "Actually, if you fall into a black hole, you will see your daughter's bedroom"_ *Nice :-)* _Grubiantoll Man "if Trump hears about this, he might just get nassa some extra funding so he could travel to a black hole"_ *But this is the winner because it's funny and true! LOL*
Well, actually, another interesting theory I heard was that Cooper was dying at that point, and his mind started hallucinating. Just like when Dr. Mann said that if you're close to dying, you see your loved ones flash before your eyes.
I would love to see a video on the ER = EPR conjecture that sprung from the paper discussed in this one. It blew my mind when I first learned about it!
I was listening to Michio Kaku on the radio one time, and he was explaining something very different from this. If i'm not mistaken, he was saying that you may actually be able to travel through a black hole, only the black hole needed to be rotating so that gravity could not collapse it to a point. He said these black holes could actually serve as a way for time travel, but in a much different way.
Its all good man, I am just a firm believer in progression of science, if people stop asking questions then, people will stop learning, science will stop evolving, and everyone will suffer as a result.
Someone falling in a black hole is never seen crossing the event horizon because gravity slows down time until it stops at the horizon itself. From the falling person's point of view, time accelerates as they approach the event horizon, the black hole evaporates faster and faster, the horizon recedes faster and faster in front of them and the black hole completely evaporates before they can reach it. Nothing can EVER cross the event horizon regardless of your point of view.
Here's a question that I've always wondered and this may sound stupid, what if you had a really long stick and you pushed it halfway through the event horizon? What would you see? Would half the stick just disappear from your perspective? And if so what would happen if you tried to pull the stick (assuming it doesn't just break)?
Read "Problem Sleuth". One of the detectives' female alter egos found a magic corset (it was also a sewing pipe) she loosened as she approached the black hole, countering the spaghettification forces. She then landed on the surface of the BH (which was also the Devil's tophat) and was so flat you would mistake her for the surface of the BH. Hope this helped.
I was saying this for a long time. It's so simple. If object x pauses at event horizon and then object y is dropped in and it meets up with it then there must be compression. Before you get stretched you are going to get compressed with all matter that ever went into that black hole.
Brady, you just gave me an idea: you should 'advertise' the graphics you need for videos, then allow (logged in) members to volunteer to do them for you...say, 2 or 3 volunteers per graphic/animation with 48 hours to complete, and the best gets used. Publish a standards specification and design guidelines together with a template or two, and voila! I'm sure there are many artistically skilled viewer (like myself) out there who'd love to contribute in such a way.
Just to add to this, you could say we live on a 4D equivalent of a torus, which is a donught and is different from a sphere because there is no polar distortion. There is no edge because the universe "warps" around itself and if you ran in a straight line for whatever the width of the universe happens to be, you would come back to your initial spot, therefore no edge or center
I think it's great that your coverage keeps us up to date. Don't be so impressed by the quote "big-gun," reputations. Anything out of California is held by the rest of the states, as having the "edge-of-fantasy land," in worthiness.
The center of a black hole is a latices of higs bosons. Suspended beneath the known fabric of space time in a tear drop shaped envelope. Only the small opening at the top is the point of gravitational interaction with the rest of the universal plane. Higs particles want to interact with each others fields (always having a congruent velocity) and the black hole is the ultimate example of that. All the other particles that usually interfere with that reaction are finally stripped away.
Leonard Susskind? His lectures are here on RUclips (basically a full introduction to physics from classical mechanics, over general relativity and quantum mechanics, to particle physics and string theory). I'd recommend anyone who is seriously interested in physics to go and watch them - they are very informative.
The description needs to be updated because the link to Suskind's paper is broken. I found the front page - arxiv.org/abs/1207.4090 - but it says "Comments: Withdrawn because the author no longer thinks it is correct"
also if I may also add (another) , light is not "kept" inside the black hole, (as if its is a container where you put things in) ... a black hole is what it is, a hole, a very very deep hole and at its end (bottom) is the singularity. the dense mass of this object warps space itself and pulls it down, dragging it. an example is a waterfall, you (a photon) are swimming away from the edge of the falls, but water (space) is dragging you (photon) towards it, faster than you (photon) can swim (speed)
i may be wrong on this, but as i understand it, hawking radiation occurs when a particle antiparticle pair come into existence near the event horizon moving in such a way that one particle enters the black hole and the other escapes. Because the particles came from the quantum foam, there is a net energy loss at the edge of the black hole. The particle that got away is the radiation.
Feels more like a black hole has a mass higher then anything else giving a gravitational pull so strong that even photones of light gets sucked in, and if you would get caught you would get drawn in and accelerate and implode in the process and sucked into a mass untill a unknown maximum size causes the mass/energy absorbed combine into a unstable element causing another big bang.
I would call crossing the Firewall "getting fizzled". Just like when, while crossing Emancipation Grids in Portal, every unauthorized object you carry with you gets destroyed, or "fizzled" as GLaDOS says.
But in my ignorance, I wonder, if light can't escape because of the gravity, does that mean that the event horizon is right where light orbits the black hole? In which case, it seems like besides the gravity, the border of the event horizon would be a super high EM energy bubble, which would be like the most intense imaginable laser hitting you if you went into it; so you're atoms, maybe even nuclei, would be stripped away at the speed of light or something along those lines.
Hey Brady, could you once do a video about dimensions? My physics teacher in the high school I'm learning at actually wrote a well published book about dimensions and geometrical shapes in them (named "Membranes And Other Extendons (“P-Branes”)"), yet she's never in a mood to actually answer my questions and prayers and teach me about the subject, in which I'm interested.
I think this is because that from time to time, a particle and an antiparticle can be generated just outside the horizon. It's possible that one can escape, and the other fall into the black hole - so it "appears" that particles are radiating out of the black hole. I guess someone from 60symbols might be able to confirm?
I imagine that the 'termination' is more to do with the spacetime that you carry with you as an event rather than the matter contained within it. So what it could mean is that your bubble of existence pops at some point and space and time stops for you, rather than the old concept of just being stretched to infinity. Makes me wonder what happens to the energy of your mass though..
What would you prefer? Being incinirated and wiped out of existince while crossing the event horizon or being turned into spaghetti while approaching a singularity. Just the fact that physicists are arguing about this makes theirs the best job ever.
The light stuck there would be going the wrong way, we tend to assume that the presence of light automatically equates to sight, forgetting that light has to move freely to bounce off what we're looking at and then into our eyes before it means anything to us. Light being sucked into the black hole is not moving freely and thus there's nothing to make contact with your eyes. You wouldn't be able to see it. Same reason black holes are black, we can't see them precisely BECAUSE they absorb light.
If I remember correctly it's because in a 'vacum' there are actually tiny opposing quanta that flit into existence in pairs and quickly attract and annihilate each other. This makes even empty space like the surface of simmering water rather than actually empty. When teo such particles appear on the event horizon of a black hole one can be sucked in (i.e. couldn't escape) where the other one was just the tiniest bit further away and able to escape. That is the observed radiation.
i'll teach you (usual physics exists beyond the event horizon, but ends in the singularity) . the black hole has a structure. the surface of the black hole is the event horizon - the point of no return - after that is the curvature of space dipping into the center of the black hole which is the "singularity." there are phases you will experience when you manage to fall into a black hole. until you reach the "singularity", after you have passed the event horizon, usual physics still exists.
The event horizon is only a point around the gravitational force of any gravity attraction . It's position is different for different weights of objects entering , combined with the gravitational size of the gravity . When you reach that point your only at the point of no return, so they say, but we've never tried escaping . Therefore along that scenario simple mechanics tells you,you'll start to speed up because your past the limit of return and as you rush to the event stretch.Where you disass
Actually, what I've heard several prominent quantum physicists say is that quantum mechanics follow the laws of logic in the sense that we can make accurate predictions, but that the "rules" are quite different from those encountered in everyday life, so we do not have an intuitive feel for how the world works on the quantum level. "Logic" in this sense does not mean "easily understood".
I seem to recall reading somewhere that our own universe may fit inside it's own Schwarzchild radius, which means that we technically live inside a black hole. If that's the case, then I'd suggest that it's pretty obvious that - from our perspective at least - time does not stop inside a black hole.
Susskind's paper was surprisingly lucid, but I couldn't interpret the one by Polchinski and company. Two questions: 1) How does the concentration of matter move from the center of the sphere to a spherical plane just beneath the event horizon? 2) If the diameter of matter barely too large to form a black hole is far smaller than the event horizon it would form (holographic principle) then how can a firewall almost as large as the event horizon curve spacetime enough to maintain a black hole?
The sink hole thing is only a dramatization of it's effect, but to answer your question... both, the black hole itself is a sphere, however, once you cross the event horizon, all 3d information gets laid out in 2 dimensions, without losing any of that information, by 'stretching out' all of the information, then emits it as hawking radiation.
"Nothing really happens around that point", assuming the hole is so massive the tidal "spaghettification" forces ramp up much closer to the object. For a small (in mass) hole, the tidal forces are way beyond the EH.
If I'm not mistaking, the event horizon is the point of no return, including light. Object with mass can't pass the speed of light. I assume that the object will lose his mass and shape, so there you have it "what the person will see after the event horizon...?" shall be replaced with "what person...."
12 лет назад
In 1978 I wrote an essay about time dilation near a black hole. I had clocks running backwards and then hurdling backwards. Not bad for a ten year old.
Fernando Abrantes He said horizon, not event horizon. Two completely different things. The firewall lies after the horizon and from my understanding is in of itself the event horizon.
Yes, you should get started on your model of counting every infinity because you are capable of challenging and changing math logic. I suggest you get going.
i believe the term burn up is quite adequate, since it seems, not all the atoms in your body gets "fried" at the same time... or you could just call it gradual termination...
Well yes, they say "you" for exemplification. The subject is the conditions of the space-time regions as you approach it. While you obviously know you die if you fall into a volcano, it's interesting to know, what gases you will encounter, the temperature layers, if you burn in midair, if the impact against the lava will kill you, or... if there are some rare conditions that allow you to live a little longer.
"Vibrating wave centres of matter can never catch up with their own expanding wave fronts C2. Therefore matter can never reach the light speed of a time reversing singularity. However light cannot escape the time reversing singularity from multiplying E2 the inward wave fronts equally balanced by opposite expansion at interchanging compression points forming the sinusoidal wave medium density (space) at each point of space into time dilating inertial ref-frames of opposed motion we call atoms."
if i fall into a black hole, wouldnt i just be stuck until the end of time? since time slows down to a halt (think of a graph that shows relation between velocity and time dilation, which has an asymptote at v=c), it would take infinite time for me to cross the horizon, so i would theoretically be able to see the end of the universe?
מירי חמו You theoretically would see the total evaporation of the black hole (due to Hawking radiation) in an asymptotically short time which is the firewall itself. May be if you would have some ultra shielded surfboard to bounce upon this ultimate radiation and survive the enormous explosion at the end of the black hole and also a supergood umbrella to cover from rain of stars falling into that hole you will get in a very distant future. If unlucky you would not have that stuff you'll get in the future as a set of some field quanta and elementary particles.
Kolas I have a big problem with this explanation, one of which being that you say there will be an explosion at the end of the black hole. I don't know enough to explain beyond that but your explanation just doesn't sit right...
From a perspective looking out at the universe I do not believe many things would change for you. You would still fall into the black hole in what felt like real time for you just everything else around you would "speed up." However, since light has this property where no matter how close to the speed of light you are traveling, a beam of light will always pass you at the speed of light I do not believe you would see the whole universe destroyed because you would receive the same amount of information about the universe as the person outside the black hole. I do believe that the person's movement (if they were close enough to the black hole) in the spacecraft would be sped up as if speeding up a video. But just in the same way as speeding up a video does not increase the speed of light, you would not get to see the whole universe flash before your eyes. This is very mind bending topic though and I am questioning my assumptions as I write this, but with my limited knowledge that seems to be the most plausible explanation in my eyes.
Stanford University‘s Continuing Studies program published eleven series of lectures by Leonard Susskind, covering the essential theoretical foundations of modern physics. They're available through Stanford’s RUclips Channel! I tried undertaking one on String Theory, but fast realized it'd be wise to learn some basic physics first... hahaha! It was like two full boards of equations, explained super casually, like it was all obvious.. that was first lesson! Think I lasted a whole 15 minutes.. lol
I can't seem to find the "send message" button in the new channel design, but if I may be so bold, I'd like to request a video topic: terminal velocity. I think I have a basic understanding of how it works on earth, but these videos are really good at proving I don't, so I'd like to see one. Is there a terminal velocity in space, around black holes, how does it work on Jupiter where it's pretty much all gas or liquid, could you "fall through" jupiter and slow down again, etc
Planck scale units are derived from quantum phenomena, and are more representative of particles than of space itself. Space is still often (though not always) viewed as continuous. That said, the infinities ARE a problem! ...And that's exactly why black holes have been so interesting to physicists. The singularity has been referred to as a place where "physics breaks down." You'll be glad to know that Susskind claims this new firewall phenomena may change the shape of the singularity itself.
For quite a while I've imagined black holes to be like this. The event horizon is the place where centrifugal force from the spin and the gravitational pull balances. Some things can get through (particles with more mass or less energy) and some things can't (higher energy or less massive particles). The energetic particles spiral up to the poles to be shot out in those jets. I know some of you will want to rip me another black hole for the mass=energy thing, I just can't decide which would make it through or not and it's just my way of seeing it. Anyway, when I heard fire wall I started thinking in terms of computers where a firewall lets some thing in and keeps other things out.
Well, theoretically since the Schwarzschild radius is directly proportional to the mass, while in a spherical object with uniform density the "phisycal" radius is proportional to the cube root of its mass (since the volume, proportional to the mass, is proportional to the cube of the radius) it' possible for a star to be contained inside its event horizon. I mean, black holes do not need singularities, that's only "the easiest way".
Let me see if I have this right... Even though the information available to the universe is nullified at the event horizon, the mass, energy and various quantum states have to be preserved through the infall. But, because the separation must be total - that is, entanglement cannot exist across the boundary - crossing the event horizon must be a discrete event for entanglable particles, randomizing them.
1) They are assuming that particles are entangled when Hawking radiation is created. This is why there is a build up over time of this firewall radiation. 2) So the observer doesn't see "it" fall in(some calculations DO have them falling in), but all the math shows that "it" as it falls sees no change in clock therefor normal action. "It" would see the firewall but an outside observer cannot. 3) This is still watercooler physics guys, be careful how you interpret things.
Weird, he starts talking about the classical view of the event horizon and suddenly says that, in the classical view, if a person falls into a black hole she would burn up and be emitted as Hawking radiation. As far as I know, this not the classical view. It's the firewall itself. In the classical view no one is burned up and the hawking radiation is not the matter that falls into the black hole. It's actually virtual particles that pop out of existence near to the event horizon and are separated.
Hawking radiation is when Quantum fluctuations that separate near the event horizon cause the mass of the black hole to decrease, really it's the Hawking photons being Emmited.
Surely you encounter problems very quickly regardless of whether there's a firewall or not on the inside! Not to mention that you'd probably be ripped to shreds by the immense tidal force even before you got to the horizon.
I think that it's actually the space/time what it's terminated, it's a singularity (4:50), so it destroys not just the atoms, but it rips the very tissue of space and time, so "destruction" is not what actually happens, it's more like "termination" of your information. The concept of "destruction" kinda fades when space and time don't exist anymore (in the event horizon). Just MO.
Black holes layer matter in a quantum shells from lightest particle to heaviest (of mass at the point of the firewall) from least energetic to most energetic quantum particle (inside the point of the firewall). This shells spin at the speed of light until all of the matter is stripped into its elementary particles. Essentially the firewall is the point at which all matter loses its' mass as the Higs-bosons are stripped by the shells and the particles are separated out like a quantum centrifuge.
yes, I absolutely pulled that out from nowhere, but I was trying to illustrate a black hole with the sink hole analogy. I know it is far from correct, and I see now, that I might have done a poor job illustrating my point. We have no 4th spacial dimension, so matter cannot be pulled into a 4th dimension. Matter is certainly warped in 4 dimensions around a a black hole though (3 spacial + 1 time).
Psst, they aren't really planning any manned missions to the center of a black hole (yet), they are just visualizing the new physical theories of black holes in a way that is easier on the mind.
i dont know if anyone has commented on this, but the susskind paper has already been withdrawn, since, according to the website, "the author no longer believes it is correct"... i still would have liked to read it... P.S.: i love your channels brady! :D
Maybe do a video explaining the 'page time' and the 'flass-grumbling time' (please correct me if the spelling is wrong)? I would like to understand this idea of different types of time.
When you approach the speed of light, time slows relative to an outside observer, but in your perspective, time flows normally, you wouldn't feel the slowing effect of time, only know that you will experience time dilation because you feel acceleration.
Two virtual particles come into existence on the event horizon. One is just inside the horizon and cannot escape, and the other is just outside and escapes. Usually these particles pop into existence in pairs and annihilate each other very quickly (hence the name virtual particles). But the black hole prevents them from meeting and so the one that escapes becomes a real photon, ergo radiation.
VSauce is a pop science channel aimed primarily at audiences with little or no scientific and mathematical background who are curious about astronomical anomalies that keep getting reported on in popular media sources; SixtySymbols takes a much more academic approach geared towards discussing and analyzing articles and theories that appear in journals and university publications. While both channels have meritorious goals, they shouldn't really be compared.
Mass is lost in the moment where the particle pair separates without annihilation. It came into existence out of vacuum energy but one particle moves away, reducing the local energy by half. Energy=mass, therefore continuing Hawking radiation radiates away all the mass of the black hole eventually.
Thank you, eventually one who gets my point. As to the photons, you are only partially right, you could still possibly see the light that's falling into the hole "behind you" (after you are already being sucked into it).
When I encounter physics like this I can help but to imagine the vast amount of math that is involved. Then I think how glad I am that other people are doing it.
I say its neither of the two "Burn up point" or "Termination point" it would seem fitting to call it the Absorption point. like a dry (but not so dry) sponge absorbing water increasing in mass, and eventually decreasing as evaporation occurs. The Sponge wall.
So the Cornell University Library website had the papers posted, but if you go to Leonard Susskind's paper now, it says; "This paper has been withdrawn because the author no longer believes the firewall argument is correct"
The waves do come into play in electron microscope pictures, particularly as you get close to the highest levels of magnification you will notice sort of 'bands' of distortion artifacts in in pictures of crystals or lattices that are actually caused by the wavelengths of the electron beams being similar to the sizes of some of the regular spaces in the lattices.
you need to normalize your volume. The guy kept getting louder as he approached the camera and quieter as he leaned away. I didn't enjoy adjusting my speakers.
visible light doesn't carry the same amount of energy as higher forms of electro-magnetic waves. Hence the gravitational pull is strong enough to bend light but not more energized waves on the spectrum.
I love how people keep trying to point out how this theory breaks conservation of mass laws. And then claim that the theory cant work. Science is what we believe is fact based on observation but because black holes by nature are a singular point of impossibility, our ability to gather facts is limited
Black holes cause mass to 'rotate' (fall towards the center while moving tangentially), so.... would this not happen for smaller and smaller masses? The smallest wouldn't be able to withstand the force. So as you move closer, wouldn't there end up being some point at which superfast quarks that haven't fallen in are effectively swirling around it? I would think this would be how you get ripped apart, having your larger particles flung out and the smaller ones pulled in closer.
Only if it isn't outside the event horizon moving away at the escape velocity. More specificly, the Hawking radiation refers to when particle pairs that come to exist and annihilate eachother almost instantly in just about anywhere in the universe all the time happens to come to exist at the even horizon with one of the particles in the pair getting sucked before it has time to interact with the other particle of the pair, the radiation is that particle that doesn't get annihilated and escapes.
This is completely over my head. If you terminate then how would the black hole gain any more mass? Is there a point when a black hole stops gobbling up matter but instead converts it straight to energy? He says something to the idea that if you go into one, the event horizon/firewall will shift ever so slightly... but if time and space end for you, how would your inclusion to the system be noticed? I don't even know enough to start thinking about it -___-
Hawking radiation is technically not an emission from the hole itself (i.e. stemming from behind the event horizon). It emerges out of spontaneous particle emissions that take place anywhere in space out of vacuum energy and normally leads to mutual annihilation again. Here it happens close enough to the event horizon that one particle vanishes into the black hole before annihilation, leaving the other particle existing and seemingly being emitted from the black hole. Best M.S.
I love that he didn't edit out the phone call...
oh god, just found this channel, now I got another 186 videos to watch, it will be a fun week :)
I bet it's Professor Poliakoff from periodicvideos - there is always some rivalry between the physics and chemistry channels at Nottingham!
I understood more about back holes before I clicked on this video ;.;
***** Yes mate!
ZachariahMusic ,
That means you never actually understood what you thought you understood.
The back holes
This is what I love about the time we're living in! I am not an astrophysicist, but I can still get updated information about the behavior of bodies crossing the event horizon of a black hole :) These videos are great mini-lectures!
I think it was Brendan Rodgers checking on his availability this season!?
thank you, from all my channels!!!!
I like how you intentionally left the phone call interruption in the video
Actually, if you fall into a black hole, you will see your daughter's bedroom
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology
Man if Trump hears about this, he might just get nassa some extra funding so he could travel to a black hole
_Augusto Rudzinski "Actually, if you fall into a black hole, you will see your daughter's bedroom"_
*Nice :-)*
_Grubiantoll Man "if Trump hears about this, he might just get nassa some extra funding so he could travel to a black hole"_
*But this is the winner because it's funny and true! LOL*
Well, actually, another interesting theory I heard was that Cooper was dying at that point, and his mind started hallucinating. Just like when Dr. Mann said that if you're close to dying, you see your loved ones flash before your eyes.
false.
4:23 "These are big guys" - For you
What's the next step in your master plan?
+origamigek Crashing this theory ... WITH NO SURVIVOURS!
+origamigek Buy a custom conversion van?
I would love to see a video on the ER = EPR conjecture that sprung from the paper discussed in this one. It blew my mind when I first learned about it!
You Sir have made my day and are now classed as a legend.
I was listening to Michio Kaku on the radio one time, and he was explaining something very different from this. If i'm not mistaken, he was saying that you may actually be able to travel through a black hole, only the black hole needed to be rotating so that gravity could not collapse it to a point. He said these black holes could actually serve as a way for time travel, but in a much different way.
Its all good man, I am just a firm believer in progression of science, if people stop asking questions then, people will stop learning, science will stop evolving, and everyone will suffer as a result.
Someone falling in a black hole is never seen crossing the event horizon because gravity slows down time until it stops at the horizon itself. From the falling person's point of view, time accelerates as they approach the event horizon, the black hole evaporates faster and faster, the horizon recedes faster and faster in front of them and the black hole completely evaporates before they can reach it. Nothing can EVER cross the event horizon regardless of your point of view.
Right as he said "Times stops for me" my video had to buffer... great visualization!
Here's a question that I've always wondered and this may sound stupid, what if you had a really long stick and you pushed it halfway through the event horizon? What would you see? Would half the stick just disappear from your perspective? And if so what would happen if you tried to pull the stick (assuming it doesn't just break)?
Does this mean that that you can get past a Black Hole Firewall with some kind of Trojan?
Interesting that Susskind has withdrawn his paper as he know longer has confidence in the firewall hypothesis.
Read "Problem Sleuth". One of the detectives' female alter egos found a magic corset (it was also a sewing pipe) she loosened as she approached the black hole, countering the spaghettification forces. She then landed on the surface of the BH (which was also the Devil's tophat) and was so flat you would mistake her for the surface of the BH. Hope this helped.
I was saying this for a long time. It's so simple. If object x pauses at event horizon and then object y is dropped in and it meets up with it then there must be compression. Before you get stretched you are going to get compressed with all matter that ever went into that black hole.
Brady, you just gave me an idea: you should 'advertise' the graphics you need for videos, then allow (logged in) members to volunteer to do them for you...say, 2 or 3 volunteers per graphic/animation with 48 hours to complete, and the best gets used. Publish a standards specification and design guidelines together with a template or two, and voila! I'm sure there are many artistically skilled viewer (like myself) out there who'd love to contribute in such a way.
Just to add to this, you could say we live on a 4D equivalent of a torus, which is a donught and is different from a sphere because there is no polar distortion. There is no edge because the universe "warps" around itself and if you ran in a straight line for whatever the width of the universe happens to be, you would come back to your initial spot, therefore no edge or center
I think it's great that your coverage keeps us up to date. Don't be so impressed by the quote "big-gun," reputations. Anything out of California is held by the rest of the states, as having the "edge-of-fantasy land," in worthiness.
the sheer force of the evaporation happening inside pushes it outside, and gamma rays are surprisingy good at ''dodging'' Black Holes
The center of a black hole is a latices of higs bosons. Suspended beneath the known fabric of space time in a tear drop shaped envelope. Only the small opening at the top is the point of gravitational interaction with the rest of the universal plane. Higs particles want to interact with each others fields (always having a congruent velocity) and the black hole is the ultimate example of that. All the other particles that usually interfere with that reaction are finally stripped away.
Leonard Susskind? His lectures are here on RUclips (basically a full introduction to physics from classical mechanics, over general relativity and quantum mechanics, to particle physics and string theory). I'd recommend anyone who is seriously interested in physics to go and watch them - they are very informative.
The description needs to be updated because the link to Suskind's paper is broken.
I found the front page - arxiv.org/abs/1207.4090 - but it says "Comments: Withdrawn because the author no longer thinks it is correct"
I think this is the first video of Nottingham Science I've had to watch twice to understand it's content.
also if I may also add (another) , light is not "kept" inside the black hole, (as if its is a container where you put things in) ... a black hole is what it is, a hole, a very very deep hole and at its end (bottom) is the singularity. the dense mass of this object warps space itself and pulls it down, dragging it. an example is a waterfall, you (a photon) are swimming away from the edge of the falls, but water (space) is dragging you (photon) towards it, faster than you (photon) can swim (speed)
My respect for this guy increases more than it already was thanks to his Liverpool shirt!
i may be wrong on this, but as i understand it, hawking radiation occurs when a particle antiparticle pair come into existence near the event horizon moving in such a way that one particle enters the black hole and the other escapes. Because the particles came from the quantum foam, there is a net energy loss at the edge of the black hole. The particle that got away is the radiation.
Feels more like a black hole has a mass higher then anything else giving a gravitational pull so strong that even photones of light gets sucked in, and if you would get caught you would get drawn in and accelerate and implode in the process and sucked into a mass untill a unknown maximum size causes the mass/energy absorbed combine into a unstable element causing another big bang.
I would call crossing the Firewall "getting fizzled". Just like when, while crossing Emancipation Grids in Portal, every unauthorized object you carry with you gets destroyed, or "fizzled" as GLaDOS says.
But in my ignorance, I wonder, if light can't escape because of the gravity, does that mean that the event horizon is right where light orbits the black hole? In which case, it seems like besides the gravity, the border of the event horizon would be a super high EM energy bubble, which would be like the most intense imaginable laser hitting you if you went into it; so you're atoms, maybe even nuclei, would be stripped away at the speed of light or something along those lines.
Hey Brady, could you once do a video about dimensions?
My physics teacher in the high school I'm learning at actually wrote a well published book about dimensions and geometrical shapes in them (named "Membranes And Other Extendons (“P-Branes”)"), yet she's never in a mood to actually answer my questions and prayers and teach me about the subject, in which I'm interested.
I think this is because that from time to time, a particle and an antiparticle can be generated just outside the horizon. It's possible that one can escape, and the other fall into the black hole - so it "appears" that particles are radiating out of the black hole. I guess someone from 60symbols might be able to confirm?
I imagine that the 'termination' is more to do with the spacetime that you carry with you as an event rather than the matter contained within it. So what it could mean is that your bubble of existence pops at some point and space and time stops for you, rather than the old concept of just being stretched to infinity. Makes me wonder what happens to the energy of your mass though..
What would you prefer? Being incinirated and wiped out of existince while crossing the event horizon or being turned into spaghetti while approaching a singularity. Just the fact that physicists are arguing about this makes theirs the best job ever.
The light stuck there would be going the wrong way, we tend to assume that the presence of light automatically equates to sight, forgetting that light has to move freely to bounce off what we're looking at and then into our eyes before it means anything to us. Light being sucked into the black hole is not moving freely and thus there's nothing to make contact with your eyes. You wouldn't be able to see it. Same reason black holes are black, we can't see them precisely BECAUSE they absorb light.
elfman901 is correct about the volume. when Brady does editing, he needs to "normalize" the sound track.
so? no speghettification?
If I remember correctly it's because in a 'vacum' there are actually tiny opposing quanta that flit into existence in pairs and quickly attract and annihilate each other. This makes even empty space like the surface of simmering water rather than actually empty.
When teo such particles appear on the event horizon of a black hole one can be sucked in (i.e. couldn't escape) where the other one was just the tiniest bit further away and able to escape. That is the observed radiation.
i'll teach you (usual physics exists beyond the event horizon, but ends in the singularity) . the black hole has a structure. the surface of the black hole is the event horizon - the point of no return - after that is the curvature of space dipping into the center of the black hole which is the "singularity." there are phases you will experience when you manage to fall into a black hole. until you reach the "singularity", after you have passed the event horizon, usual physics still exists.
The event horizon is only a point around the gravitational force of any gravity attraction . It's position is different for different weights of objects entering , combined with the gravitational size of the gravity . When you reach that point your only at the point of no return, so they say, but we've never tried escaping . Therefore along that scenario simple mechanics tells you,you'll start to speed up because your past the limit of return and as you rush to the event stretch.Where you disass
Actually, what I've heard several prominent quantum physicists say is that quantum mechanics follow the laws of logic in the sense that we can make accurate predictions, but that the "rules" are quite different from those encountered in everyday life, so we do not have an intuitive feel for how the world works on the quantum level.
"Logic" in this sense does not mean "easily understood".
I seem to recall reading somewhere that our own universe may fit inside it's own Schwarzchild radius, which means that we technically live inside a black hole. If that's the case, then I'd suggest that it's pretty obvious that - from our perspective at least - time does not stop inside a black hole.
Susskind's paper was surprisingly lucid, but I couldn't interpret the one by Polchinski and company. Two questions: 1) How does the concentration of matter move from the center of the sphere to a spherical plane just beneath the event horizon? 2) If the diameter of matter barely too large to form a black hole is far smaller than the event horizon it would form (holographic principle) then how can a firewall almost as large as the event horizon curve spacetime enough to maintain a black hole?
Thank you... what more can we ask!
The sink hole thing is only a dramatization of it's effect, but to answer your question... both, the black hole itself is a sphere, however, once you cross the event horizon, all 3d information gets laid out in 2 dimensions, without losing any of that information, by 'stretching out' all of the information, then emits it as hawking radiation.
"Nothing really happens around that point", assuming the hole is so massive the tidal "spaghettification" forces ramp up much closer to the object. For a small (in mass) hole, the tidal forces are way beyond the EH.
If I'm not mistaking, the event horizon is the point of no return, including light.
Object with mass can't pass the speed of light. I assume that the object will lose his mass and shape, so there you have it "what the person will see after the event horizon...?" shall be replaced with "what person...."
In 1978 I wrote an essay about time dilation near a black hole. I had clocks running backwards and then hurdling backwards. Not bad for a ten year old.
In 4:39 Tony says the infalling object finds the firewall after passing the event horizon, but the firewall is a layer just before the event horizon
Fernando Abrantes He said horizon, not event horizon. Two completely different things. The firewall lies after the horizon and from my understanding is in of itself the event horizon.
Yes, you should get started on your model of counting every infinity because you are capable of challenging and changing math logic. I suggest you get going.
Does time become zero, or does time approach zero as a limit?
i believe the term burn up is quite adequate, since it seems, not all the atoms in your body gets "fried" at the same time... or you could just call it gradual termination...
Well yes, they say "you" for exemplification. The subject is the conditions of the space-time regions as you approach it.
While you obviously know you die if you fall into a volcano, it's interesting to know, what gases you will encounter, the temperature layers, if you burn in midair, if the impact against the lava will kill you, or... if there are some rare conditions that allow you to live a little longer.
"Vibrating wave centres of matter can never catch up with their own expanding wave fronts C2.
Therefore matter can never reach the light speed of a time reversing singularity.
However light cannot escape the time reversing singularity from multiplying E2 the inward wave fronts equally balanced by opposite expansion at interchanging compression points forming the sinusoidal wave medium density (space) at each point of space into time dilating inertial ref-frames of opposed motion we call atoms."
if i fall into a black hole, wouldnt i just be stuck until the end of time? since time slows down to a halt (think of a graph that shows relation between velocity and time dilation, which has an asymptote at v=c), it would take infinite time for me to cross the horizon, so i would theoretically be able to see the end of the universe?
מירי חמו You theoretically would see the total evaporation of the black hole (due to Hawking radiation) in an asymptotically short time which is the firewall itself. May be if you would have some ultra shielded surfboard to bounce upon this ultimate radiation and survive the enormous explosion at the end of the black hole and also a supergood umbrella to cover from rain of stars falling into that hole you will get in a very distant future. If unlucky you would not have that stuff you'll get in the future as a set of some field quanta and elementary particles.
Kolas I have a big problem with this explanation, one of which being that you say there will be an explosion at the end of the black hole. I don't know enough to explain beyond that but your explanation just doesn't sit right...
From a perspective looking out at the universe I do not believe many things would change for you. You would still fall into the black hole in what felt like real time for you just everything else around you would "speed up." However, since light has this property where no matter how close to the speed of light you are traveling, a beam of light will always pass you at the speed of light I do not believe you would see the whole universe destroyed because you would receive the same amount of information about the universe as the person outside the black hole. I do believe that the person's movement (if they were close enough to the black hole) in the spacecraft would be sped up as if speeding up a video. But just in the same way as speeding up a video does not increase the speed of light, you would not get to see the whole universe flash before your eyes. This is very mind bending topic though and I am questioning my assumptions as I write this, but with my limited knowledge that seems to be the most plausible explanation in my eyes.
Stanford University‘s Continuing Studies program published eleven series of lectures by Leonard Susskind, covering the essential theoretical foundations of modern physics. They're available through Stanford’s RUclips Channel! I tried undertaking one on String Theory, but fast realized it'd be wise to learn some basic physics first... hahaha! It was like two full boards of equations, explained super casually, like it was all obvious.. that was first lesson! Think I lasted a whole 15 minutes.. lol
I can't seem to find the "send message" button in the new channel design, but if I may be so bold, I'd like to request a video topic: terminal velocity. I think I have a basic understanding of how it works on earth, but these videos are really good at proving I don't, so I'd like to see one. Is there a terminal velocity in space, around black holes, how does it work on Jupiter where it's pretty much all gas or liquid, could you "fall through" jupiter and slow down again, etc
Nice shirt! That completely stole all my attention!
Planck scale units are derived from quantum phenomena, and are more representative of particles than of space itself. Space is still often (though not always) viewed as continuous. That said, the infinities ARE a problem! ...And that's exactly why black holes have been so interesting to physicists. The singularity has been referred to as a place where "physics breaks down." You'll be glad to know that Susskind claims this new firewall phenomena may change the shape of the singularity itself.
For quite a while I've imagined black holes to be like this. The event horizon is the place where centrifugal force from the spin and the gravitational pull balances. Some things can get through (particles with more mass or less energy) and some things can't (higher energy or less massive particles). The energetic particles spiral up to the poles to be shot out in those jets. I know some of you will want to rip me another black hole for the mass=energy thing, I just can't decide which would make it through or not and it's just my way of seeing it. Anyway, when I heard fire wall I started thinking in terms of computers where a firewall lets some thing in and keeps other things out.
Well, theoretically since the Schwarzschild radius is directly proportional to the mass, while in a spherical object with uniform density the "phisycal" radius is proportional to the cube root of its mass (since the volume, proportional to the mass, is proportional to the cube of the radius) it' possible for a star to be contained inside its event horizon.
I mean, black holes do not need singularities, that's only "the easiest way".
Let me see if I have this right...
Even though the information available to the universe is nullified at the event horizon, the mass, energy and various quantum states have to be preserved through the infall.
But, because the separation must be total - that is, entanglement cannot exist across the boundary - crossing the event horizon must be a discrete event for entanglable particles, randomizing them.
1) They are assuming that particles are entangled when Hawking radiation is created. This is why there is a build up over time of this firewall radiation.
2) So the observer doesn't see "it" fall in(some calculations DO have them falling in), but all the math shows that "it" as it falls sees no change in clock therefor normal action. "It" would see the firewall but an outside observer cannot.
3) This is still watercooler physics guys, be careful how you interpret things.
Weird, he starts talking about the classical view of the event horizon and suddenly says that, in the classical view, if a person falls into a black hole she would burn up and be emitted as Hawking radiation. As far as I know, this not the classical view. It's the firewall itself. In the classical view no one is burned up and the hawking radiation is not the matter that falls into the black hole. It's actually virtual particles that pop out of existence near to the event horizon and are separated.
Hawking radiation is when Quantum fluctuations that separate near the event horizon cause the mass of the black hole to decrease, really it's the Hawking photons being Emmited.
"Don't let me leave, Murph!!"
Surely you encounter problems very quickly regardless of whether there's a firewall or not on the inside! Not to mention that you'd probably be ripped to shreds by the immense tidal force even before you got to the horizon.
Liverpool for life !
I think that it's actually the space/time what it's terminated, it's a singularity (4:50), so it destroys not just the atoms, but it rips the very tissue of space and time, so "destruction" is not what actually happens, it's more like "termination" of your information. The concept of "destruction" kinda fades when space and time don't exist anymore (in the event horizon). Just MO.
Black holes layer matter in a quantum shells from lightest particle to heaviest (of mass at the point of the firewall) from least energetic to most energetic quantum particle (inside the point of the firewall). This shells spin at the speed of light until all of the matter is stripped into its elementary particles. Essentially the firewall is the point at which all matter loses its' mass as the Higs-bosons are stripped by the shells and the particles are separated out like a quantum centrifuge.
yes, I absolutely pulled that out from nowhere, but I was trying to illustrate a black hole with the sink hole analogy. I know it is far from correct, and I see now, that I might have done a poor job illustrating my point. We have no 4th spacial dimension, so matter cannot be pulled into a 4th dimension. Matter is certainly warped in 4 dimensions around a a black hole though (3 spacial + 1 time).
Psst, they aren't really planning any manned missions to the center of a black hole (yet), they are just visualizing the new physical theories of black holes in a way that is easier on the mind.
i dont know if anyone has commented on this, but the susskind paper has already been withdrawn, since, according to the website, "the author no longer believes it is correct"... i still would have liked to read it... P.S.: i love your channels brady! :D
Maybe do a video explaining the 'page time' and the 'flass-grumbling time' (please correct me if the spelling is wrong)? I would like to understand this idea of different types of time.
When you approach the speed of light, time slows relative to an outside observer, but in your perspective, time flows normally, you wouldn't feel the slowing effect of time, only know that you will experience time dilation because you feel acceleration.
Two virtual particles come into existence on the event horizon. One is just inside the horizon and cannot escape, and the other is just outside and escapes. Usually these particles pop into existence in pairs and annihilate each other very quickly (hence the name virtual particles). But the black hole prevents them from meeting and so the one that escapes becomes a real photon, ergo radiation.
VSauce is a pop science channel aimed primarily at audiences with little or no scientific and mathematical background who are curious about astronomical anomalies that keep getting reported on in popular media sources; SixtySymbols takes a much more academic approach geared towards discussing and analyzing articles and theories that appear in journals and university publications. While both channels have meritorious goals, they shouldn't really be compared.
Susskind, Maldacena, t'Hooft did a great job along with the AMPS team.
So black holes that are not old enough still function the same way as we thought they would before those two papers were released?
*advanced Physics
I want to clarify this because people shouldn't be scared of Physics, it is actually quite intuitive and wonderful.
Mass is lost in the moment where the particle pair separates without annihilation. It came into existence out of vacuum energy but one particle moves away, reducing the local energy by half. Energy=mass, therefore continuing Hawking radiation radiates away all the mass of the black hole eventually.
Thank you, eventually one who gets my point.
As to the photons, you are only partially right, you could still possibly see the light that's falling into the hole "behind you" (after you are already being sucked into it).
When I encounter physics like this I can help but to imagine the vast amount of math that is involved. Then I think how glad I am that other people are doing it.
Brady you should do a video on the sound barrier!
I say its neither of the two "Burn up point" or "Termination point"
it would seem fitting to call it the Absorption point. like a dry (but not so dry) sponge absorbing water increasing in mass, and eventually decreasing as evaporation occurs. The Sponge wall.
So the Cornell University Library website had the papers posted, but if you go to Leonard Susskind's paper now, it says; "This paper has been withdrawn because the author no longer believes the firewall argument is correct"
The waves do come into play in electron microscope pictures, particularly as you get close to the highest levels of magnification you will notice sort of 'bands' of distortion artifacts in in pictures of crystals or lattices that are actually caused by the wavelengths of the electron beams being similar to the sizes of some of the regular spaces in the lattices.
you need to normalize your volume. The guy kept getting louder as he approached the camera and quieter as he leaned away. I didn't enjoy adjusting my speakers.
visible light doesn't carry the same amount of energy as higher forms of electro-magnetic waves. Hence the gravitational pull is strong enough to bend light but not more energized waves on the spectrum.
I love how people keep trying to point out how this theory breaks conservation of mass laws. And then claim that the theory cant work. Science is what we believe is fact based on observation but because black holes by nature are a singular point of impossibility, our ability to gather facts is limited
Black holes cause mass to 'rotate' (fall towards the center while moving tangentially), so.... would this not happen for smaller and smaller masses? The smallest wouldn't be able to withstand the force. So as you move closer, wouldn't there end up being some point at which superfast quarks that haven't fallen in are effectively swirling around it? I would think this would be how you get ripped apart, having your larger particles flung out and the smaller ones pulled in closer.
What is the chemical composition of a black hole?
Only if it isn't outside the event horizon moving away at the escape velocity.
More specificly, the Hawking radiation refers to when particle pairs that come to exist and annihilate eachother almost instantly in just about anywhere in the universe all the time happens to come to exist at the even horizon with one of the particles in the pair getting sucked before it has time to interact with the other particle of the pair, the radiation is that particle that doesn't get annihilated and escapes.
That's a really good question. have you PMd Brady about it? I think they should make a video about that
This is completely over my head. If you terminate then how would the black hole gain any more mass? Is there a point when a black hole stops gobbling up matter but instead converts it straight to energy?
He says something to the idea that if you go into one, the event horizon/firewall will shift ever so slightly... but if time and space end for you, how would your inclusion to the system be noticed?
I don't even know enough to start thinking about it -___-
Hawking radiation is technically not an emission from the hole itself (i.e. stemming from behind the event horizon). It emerges out of spontaneous particle emissions that take place anywhere in space out of vacuum energy and normally leads to mutual annihilation again. Here it happens close enough to the event horizon that one particle vanishes into the black hole before annihilation, leaving the other particle existing and seemingly being emitted from the black hole. Best M.S.