Thank you very much I've been trying to build a black hole since couple of months your tutorial was simple and clear and I managed to make one cheers!!!!
+20buckman12 You want 'mindbending'? go back to where the previous guy has 4 videos about relativity and spacetime! Holy Cow.. that's some intense stuff
Darth Chocolate Yea I watched them. This video I feel like I could wrap my mind around pretty well, those video we're a different story. There were some things I understood but at other times I was like WTF is this guy on about!
Spaceship broken? Parts needed? Try my cousin's RUclips how-to channel for all your rocket surgery DIY needs, and PBS Spacetime for all your theoretical needs.
I love this channel, but could you please add close captioning? It really helps me to understand what you're saying, and I'm sure other Hard of Hearing nerds like me would appreciate it!!!!
These episodes are so well produced and rich with information it just baffles me. Thank you guys! Keep up the good work! I wish all TV were like this...
"these guys' lifes are short just wait a few million years" me: alright UM aREA 51 I NEED A CLONE PLS AH YES ONE OF ME WHJEN IM AVAILABLE WELL um.......right now?
This is such a fantastic explanation. I've read and come across a good deal of information on black holes but this was concise and really distilled some fuzzy understandings I had.
+minimooster I'm in my first year of Physics and Astronomy at university and my very best advice is learn as much math as possible and keep watching videos like this one. Also you can watch lectures on any cool physics topic on youtube, Stanford has some very cool ones with Leonard Susskind.
I watched this video 8 years ago. Coming back again after a much better understanding of Quantum Mechanics, and I am blown away completely. I can't believe how well this video explains Neutron Stars. WOW! Thank you for posting superior quality content over the years! :)
Very well done. The position space vs. momentum space explanation is new to me, but makes perfect sense since I've been reading up on my quantum physics lately. If I had to do it all over again, I would definitely be an astrophysicist as the last 20 years have been a target-rich environment. Considering all of the new tech coming online in the next decade, and all of the unanswered questions, I think it will remain as rewarding for the next generation of scientists.
Although we know that black holes exist, we don't yet have a theory that successfully combines Quantum Mechanics with General Relativity. So, the details about what is actually happening during the formation of a black hole is, to a large extent, just speculations.
Don't we have theoretical models that illustrate the formation of black holes such as the work done by Oppenheimer? Isn't that as true as the theoretical models that prove black holes exist?
+electrocat1 The theory that predicted black holes is general relativity. We don't have a theory that explains the formation of black holes and since nothing can be observed beyond the Schwarzschild radius we can't simply wait and watch it happen. If we do manage do create a theory for black holes we can then make models for their formation.
Imagine two observers in space. One is, from a distance watching the other fall into the event horizon. According to relativity the first should see the second freeze in time at the boundary and never enter while to the second his clock should seem to work fine as he plunged in. Now suppose the falling one is observing outward at the first as he falls. Would he not observe the outside universe have it's time sped up to the point where it would seem the universe instantly went all the way to heat death with the black hole he w falling into as everything in the black hole including himself instantly radiating away?
Physics Videos by Eugene Khutoryansky Cool, bro. I bet you're real popular at parties, Saying shit everyone already knows just to sound smart. Go fuck yourself.
Great episode, thank you. I have a question: what happens if one of two entangled particles passes the event horizon while the other doesn't? Thank you again, and take care.
+Duarte Harris You can't really ever tell experimentally whether they remain entangled, because you only have one of the to measure. Other than that, there's nothing special that happens; sorry to give such a disappointing answer.
Not at all Natasha. I appreciate the effort. I figured that experimentally one could say nothing about it, at least for now. Mostly I was wandering on what the math says. I find it intriguing, as it acts as a compounded paradox of sorts. Take care,
7:12 - 7:28 I think I found a way to think about the process you described here. What the pauli exclusion principle says, is that the combined differences between fermions in all of the spaces (position space, momentum space etc) must be bigger than or equal to some minimum value. Gravity wants to decrease the differences in position space between the neutrons as much as possible, but eventually it will decrease those differences so much, that the differences between the neutrons in all of the spaces, will reach the minimum allowed value, and so the pauli exclusion principle will prevent a further decrease in the differences in position space between the neutrons. When you add another particle, because there are only a few locations it can be inside the neutron star, the certainty in its position is so high, that the uncertainty it implies in the momentum of the particle, is big enough to noticeably increase the differences in momentum space, between the neutrons, which means that now, the combined differences between the neutrons in all of the spaces are bigger than the minimum combined differences, that the pauli exclusion principle demands. This means that there is a net gain in the possible similarity between the spaces (other than momentum space) the neutrons occupy, and that similarity is spent on decreasing the differences between the neutrons in position space, or in other words, bring them closer together. Is this a valid way to interpret the pauli exclusion principle, and the process you described here?
Schwarzschild radius depends on a mass as power of 1, but a star radius as a power of -3. So, event horizon leaves a surface much earlier than quantum singularity “must” be created. Under an event horizon a “simple” neutron star exists. And it can grow in size as much as it’s needed, being made of quark matter.
If we could build a ship with an Alcubierre drive, could we fly it into a black hole and return? Also, what about making an "Alcubierre bomb" and launching it into a black hole to rip it apart from the inside out?
+Shrek Ogreton The curvature of the black hole has 'interesting' effects on your warp bubble. I think it may be possible to zip into a hole and out again if you did it right, but I'm not sure. You definitely can't destroy the hole or get too close to the center, at some point the gravity of the hole would just overwhelm you, no matter how powerful your drive.
+Shrek Ogreton I'm not sure that the standard Alcubierre metric would do you much good - the warp bubble has the same compressed "pulling" action in front, with positive curvature. However the rear of the bubble has the opposite effect, producing a negative curvature "pushing" action. If you could subject the event horizon to that negative curvature face then it should drive the event horizon backwards. But even if you could somehow surround your entire vessel in a negative curvature bubble and enter the bubble to protect yourself from the extreme curvature near the black hole, once fully inside the Schwartzchild radius I think the event horizon would reform behind you. Then it doesn't matter how "nice" your little patch of space is, you'd still fall to the singularity.
Dr. Matt this video is extraordinary. I have been searching for a subatomic discription of the proces of the birth of a black hole for quite some time now. Thank you! I know this is far fetched but why are scientist describe a black hole like an "infinitely" dense spot? It can be way denser than everything we know about but have a core, it doesn't have to be infinite until proven so. Thank you again!
I've had a question about black holes, particularly supermassive blackholes that I can't seem to get an answer around. If a singularity is infinitely small, and matter heading towards it accelerates continuously till it reaches it, it will never reach the singularity, yes? Which means that it accelerates infinitely, possibly beyond the speed of light. With time dilation, from an external observer, the singularity forms at a point infinitely in the future, yes? With objects within the black hole traveling faster than c, does it not make sense that the external observable universe, to them, appears to go backwards in time? And, if these objects traveling towards the singularity are traveling backwards in time, do they go backwards infinitely to the big bang? Is this where the theory of a "donut shaped universe" comes from? I guess what I'm driving at, is do tachyons exist?
+Punk Patriot The problem is that, as you approach the event horizon, all physical laws are still met. Nothing travels faster than c within the boundaries of the universe. But when you cross the event horizon, all bets are off. spacetime is so distorted, in ways we truly just can't understand yet, that what happens in there is impossible to say, and more importantly as mentioned in the video, nothing ever happens inside the event horizon of a black hole within our own frame of reference. Nothing inside the black hole can ever see anything outside of it. The black hole itself distorts time so much that, to the effect, if you could survive entering a blackhole, the entirety of all events that unfold on the outside universe would happen instantly. If you could enter a black hole and somehow exit it, which is impossible but speaking purely hypothetically, you'd exit into a universe infinitely into the future. If the universe has an infinite lifespan.. I'm not even sure what that means. Infinite minus infinite?
+Punk Patriot The easy answer is that objects aren't going to be going faster than speed of light once they pass the event horizon. If an object fell from an infinite distance toward Earth, it would be traveling about 11,190 m/s, which is also the escape velocity of Earth. So in terms of a black hole, IF an object were able to fall towards a black hole from an infinite distance, when it reached the singularity it would be going c. But in reality nothing falls from an infinite distance. As for the beginning of your question, yes black holes are infinitely small, yes matter continuously accelerates when falling, but it will meet the singularity. If tachyons did exist, we would expect to see them being emitted from black holes, and we don't observe that. Hope that helped :)
+UnknownXV black holes evaporate in less than an infinite amount of time. So as soon as you enter the EV from your point of view the black hole would evaporate instantly. I guess you would too.
***** Thing is, they wouldn't, because from the black hole's frame of reference, time passes normally. It's a contradictions of sorts, because to the black hole, the outside universe doesn't exist (all of time has passed). Hard to wrap your mind around.
i cannot express how brilliant this video is, such clean precise simple explanations of really complex stuff. honestly thank you so much for uploading! Subscribe!
My theorem is a B.H. Is anti-matter of various elements thats what makes it weird. My new theorem is that anti matter iron gives a B.H. its major pull and anti elements like it.
i love how you guys keep up to date with pop culture. from web comic, to manga, to anime, and now being referenced on a educational channel, Saitama can enter the big leagues of Saiyans and Super man.
The event horizon still exists prior to black hole formation, it's just below the surface of the neutron star, right? Is there a fundamental disconnect between the physics inside and outside of this boundary? I mean, is the outer portion of the neutron star causally disconnected from it's own core?
+Shawn Pitman I don't think so; if I understand correctly the event horizon doesn't exist while it would be inside the star. A black hole only exists if some ball of matter has a radius smaller than its Schwarzschild radius, and the "event horizon" we see in the animation is just a representation of this critical radius. For example, our Sun itself has a Schwarzschild radius of about 3 km, but intuitively we know that there is nothing special about this ball.
Joey Beauvais-Feisthauer In principle, I'm okay with this answer. There's so much mass outside the sun's Schwarzchild radius that it seems geodesics in this area wouldn't follow a purely inward path. However, in the case of a neutron star the possibility exists for the Schwarzchild radius to be a nanometer smaller than the radius of the neutron star itself. Surely this isn't an trivial case.
Shawn Pitman It may feel conceptually different, but mathematically the theory can only distinguish between "smaller than" and "bigger than", no matter how close the radii are. Though it is true that the behavior of a neutron star this close to the LOV limit (the mass at which a black hole forms) would be similar in some respects to the behavior of a black hole. Example: Consider a photon emitted radially out from the surface. If the mass is relatively low the light will escape with minor redshifting, but as the mass becomes near-critical the redshift grows asymptotically, and only becomes infinite when the radius is exactly the Schwarzschild one. So visually a neutron star with growing mass would become more and more infrared then microwave then radiowave, but only pure black when the threshold is crossed. So I guess the object you describe could be called a near-black hole :P
+Shawn Pitman Things do get weird when close to the limit. For example, light can orbit the star above its surface in a 'photon sphere'. Neutrons may break down into 'quark-gluon plasma' and so on.
Can 6D space describe different phenomena with similar mathematics? For instance, can one phase space account for three dimensions of position and three dimensions of momentum while another accounts for three dimensions of space and three dimensions of time? The latter refers to Everett’s Many World’s interpretation of quantum mechanics.
@David Rosner Absolutely. In math, a dimension is simply an independent variable. One that can be changed without affecting the others. Many dating sites use data structures known as inverse vector maps (or inverse vector fields) to describe people’s profiles, thus allowing them to match people with similar interests by slightly fuzzy versions of simple vector math (dot and cross products). Each one of those profiles can be considered a 1000 or 5000 dimensional construct, depending on how many things they track and infer about each person.
One thing really bugs me. If events inside the black hole don't happen from our perspective, but in it everything the hole experiences kind of happens at the same 'time', then what about the hole evaporating due to Hawking-radiation? How would that manifest from an inside perspective?
+T. Markus Gellert They are the point at which space ceases to make sense. This does not depend on how curved the space is, so they should be limits even in the blackest of holes.
So the Planck length is actually defined using black holes. It is approximately the length of the smallest black hole possible, the point where a bit of mass's event horizon is equal to its quantum wavelength.
So if a neutron star, when turning into a black hole, "suddenly disappears", does that mean, a black hole, that - by hawking radiation - is loosing particles might suddenly " transform" to an object as we know? So would it be possible a new blob of matter gets suddenly visible where we had a black hole just a few moments ago? Or would the black hole just shrink until it disappears completely?
I find black holes interesting but very confusing. Can black holes be theoretically destroyed by being pried apart from their dense state by other nearby matter? For example if there is a black hole, and it orbited by many black holes or even many, many dense stars, then would the other black holes or stars combined gravity impact on the inner black hole and (providing can be made to remain stable in orbit) reverse the state of the black hole being a black hole?
@ PBS Space Time here's a question for you, what would it take to have not just a ring around planet, but a "sphere" that is all around. And why is it, that none of the planets have this? Is it because planets rotate and the centrifugal force is what makes the asteroids form in a ring and not in a sphere?
+Frank Sang Finish high-school math, plus four years of undergrad, plus, say, a year of grad school until you get to full-blown quantum field theory. If you'll settle for undergrad quantum mechanics, then you'll just need calculus, linear algebra, and differential equations.
is it possible that black holes form because the neutron star gets so dense, all given space is so full there literally is no alternate location for a particle. It could therefore violate the uncertainty principle? So it gets shrouded by the event horizon where it can't be observed?
Michael Durkin srsly now it doesn't violate the uncertainty principle it uses the uncertainty principle The more matter is added each neutron has less room to move around but as the uncertainty principle states each neutron has more and more momentum after a certain limit is reached the space-time itself fails and everything inside that region is no longer part of this reality or this is what i understood from this vid... guess i have to watch it again
+Michael Durkin No, in degenrate matter all physical space is already taken up. The possible momentum space is near-infinite, so the heavier the star gets the faster its particles whizz about. Because of spacetime curvature the particles begin whizzing more and more towards the center, even as they get more and more energy and thus speed. At some point they can no longer whizz outward and you have yourself a black hole.
Gareth Dean the momentum space has an upper limit or to be more precise above that limit the known physics breaks down for a single particle is the Plank energy limit and for a collection of particles is the Schwarzschild limit
If we could crack FTL travel with the Alcubierre Drive, would it be theoretically possible to cross a Black Hole's Event Horizon and come back? If the answer's yes... "when" would the spaceship come out of it? That question just blows my mind
+Angelo Brillante from ur perspective u'll cross the event horizon and u'll see the universe fast forwarding in time to infinity exiting is impossible because the thing about infinity is that it never ends
+Angelo Brillante Maybe but probably no.The problem is your drive uses warped space... and the hole is warped space. It's like taking a candle into a forest fire. The hole can overcome your little warp bubble and destroy it, and then, in short succession, you.
+Angelo Brillante I think you forgot that radially outward is not a possible direction inside the black hole... so any direction you to come out of the black hole you be going only inwards.
i have no idea what being talked about in the video, but it was very interesting none the less. Thanks you! please do an episode on magnetars, theres isnt a whole pile of videos about them on youtube.
After watching you videos I feel finally like internet has reached a point of maturity from an evolutionary stand point. Where it is cocking grey matter in people's heads. Great work guys. Thanks a lot
So every black hole in the universe has just been born, in our timeline, if there is infinite time dilation in a black hole? Then how can a singularity exist? Also how can a quasar stop being active if time dilation is so extreme close to the event horizon? Shouldn't every galaxy core have a quasar then. Or does that mean that a quasar never existed in our galaxy?
I'm really trying to understand this, but no video about black holes seem to explain this. Should't quasars outlive red dwarfs in the future, since they experience close to infinite time dilation. Maybe I should read a book about it instead of expecting answers on youtube ;)
+Sigurd Torvaldsson u let me explain. This infinite time dilation only occurs beyond the horizon. Just outside the horizon however the curvature is still so intense that the gases spiraling around it approach the speed of light. The friction of these events are so extreme, the fermions decompose into high energy electromagnetic energy (gamma rays) which navigate to the poles of the black hole and are subsequently ejected into space. Furthermore there is such ferocious energy released that the matter around the black hole is also pushed back beyond that of the decaying orbit that created this incomprehensible accretion disk. All of this occurs outside the event horizon this can be observed as actual events in our timeline.
+Sigurd Torvaldsson I also wanted to comment on your misrepresentation of time dilation. Time and space are relevant. The extreme curvature of space makes your inertial frame of reference vastly less than an object in a "straighter" region of space time. Events them selves are not altered in a way you describe. A photon accelerating away from just outside the photosphere will still move away at the speed of light. It might be red shifted a little bit but if you are 1 light year from the even horizon, a phone just outside will reach you in 1 year. Likewise the events of the quasar will happen in real time, and it will conclude as I described. Time dials ruin doesn't magically slow down the actual events.
If you'd fly around the Earth at light speed you would wrap around the earth 7 times per second. Now visualize that for a second. It will be quite forceful to move even appreciably that fast. Now increase the mass of the Earth to four or so times the sun. That means about 1.3 million earths. Now if you orbit the sun you NEED to move almost the speed of light at about 15000 kilometers NOT to fall in. Imagine going that fast. Imagine gas going around the black hole that fast. Imagine all that material rubbing up against all other atoms. It will create friction. A LOT OF FRICTION. Much like your kitchen blender will also get hot. Super-massive black holes are really really big and exert a lot of pull. So around one of those a lot of material can form a discrete ring around it. But as the ring forms, matter on the inner edge will become retarded in terms of time flow. That means it will pile up in a collision. Material on the outside wants to fall in, because of all the friction, but it can't because material closer to the black hole is experiencing some level of time dillation because (a) it moves to goddamn fast and (b) it is fairly close to the black hole. Fairly close as in about the diameter of the black hole. Also because it's all so hot there radiation will push outward against matter inside this "cauldron". Matter will be kept at bay by the most powerful explosive that is known in the current universe. HEnce it will pile up even more and overflow the ring system in to an ever thicker donut. Eventually the black hole will become entirely obscured (embedded) in a tube-like structure, and the only opening where some light may escape would be along the polar axis. That';s why you get a donut of the most extreme temperatures in the universe, much hotter than theoretically possible. earthsky.org/space/the-extremely-hot-heart-of-quasar-3c273 You have to realize thse orbiting ring systems would be very large - if a small black hole would have an active accretion disk the ring would extend out tens of millions of kilometers. Compare that size with the size of the black hole. Tens of millions of kilometers versus ten kilometer. I.e. the black hole is a million or so times smaller than its accretion disk. All the really violent stuff happens in a region only a few tenthousand kilometers around the black hole, i.e. you can't even properly see the black hole at those scales. There is a very very small needle point in there at the center (when feeding), but it's mostly obscured by a 24/7/365 nuclear detonation.
+PMW3 Basically they form at the center of galaxies at the dawn of the stellar age, where the most modest of holes has enough time and food to grow into a behemoth.
If physical space (volume) becomes zero shouldn't momentum space become infinite, effectively giving you an infinitely large event horizon? I'm really not clear on why the event horizon grows as more mass is added. How does an infinitely dense point get more dense?
+Matt “Mazriel” Gibson I think in the video it says that all the geodesics point to the singularity (middle). So any "expansion" of the momentum space also occurs towards the singularity?
+Jan-Michael Cabrera So are we saying that its expanding both internally and externally at the same time? Or is it that the space expands but turns in on itself at the event horizon? I think im having a hard time understanding the concept of "momentum space" haha
+Matt “Mazriel” Gibson I don't fully grasp the stuff about the momentum space, but I think of 3-D space as being like the fabric of a sponge, and the momentum space as being the dimensions that 3-D space can expand/contract into. No matter how the sponge is manipulated, the total distance of the fibers of the sponge remains the same, but the size of the sponge can get bigger, smaller, and be manipulated into other shapes. So if that's how to think about it, the momentum space "expands" inwards towards the singularity, like squishing the sponge down into a little ball.
This guy is just awesome in so many ways. He doesn't make it out to be a strange thing if you enjoy the wonder of physics, rather you can tell he loves what he does. At XYZ CUNY school, people make you out to be a nerd or geek if you're a pre-med that enjoyed and did well in these classes... This is the stuff that governs our very existence, soak it in people!
+PBS Space Time So prior to its collapse beyond the event horizon or after that point does a Neutron star behave in anyway ways similar to a bose-einstein-condensate where all the neutrons behave as if they were one single quantum mechanical wave function?
+Twilord it's ironic because, from the frame of reference of anything inside the black hole, history runs out in a blink of an eye... so yeah, istantly.
+Twilord Because the rate a hole leaks depends on how big it is. The bigger it is the less it leaks. Any hole bigger than about the moon's mass will actually get heavier by absorbing the cosmic microwave background radiation faster than it can leak stuff.
Whow!! Just finally caught up with all the AWESOME video's of PBS-Spacetime. Funny it is also episode 42. Is space-time the answer to life, the universe and everything?
If you guys have the time, or are interested, I'd love to see an episode that helps explain the double slit experiment in detail, and what it means. How micro particles can travel as both a wave and a solid, depending upon weather or not its being observed.
+Raimar Lunardi It only stops from the perspective of an outside observer. Holes canmerge because the difference between 'two holes really close' and 'one big hole' becomes infinitely small as they merge until you can't tell the difference.
+Ciroluiro every black hole that forms from collapsing neutron star. There are other ways to create black hole. For example, you can theoretically create a black hole by passing narrow high-power lasers trough very narrow volume of space, creating a kugelblitz - microscopic black hole.
+Ciroluiro If the iron core of the collapsing star is a higher than 3 solar masses then it will make a more massive black hole. In fact such a star it only passes through the neutron star phase very briefly during its collapse. By the time the supernova is done then all you have is a black hole.
thanks, this was the simplest tutorial i found on the internet. now i have my own mini-blackhole in my room, i can finally get rid of trash without having to worry about a thing!
How does momentum space relate to what the particle is actually doing? Does it mean the tighter the particles are contained in space the more velocity they will have? Or is it the more uncertain their velocities will be? And what the heck is phase space?
I'm sorry for my English (I'm Russian), but I have a question. What will happen if four dimensional object cross event horizont. Can it cross it back through four dimension.
Afro Russian If so, the question itself would be meaningless (since that has already been covered in the video). Here (in the comment), the word dimension means length components only (like traditional definition and not including time). I wrote that reply because all we can do about the question was speculation since there is no real evidence for 4th spatial dimension yet. Please try to understand the context before answering.
Ну да. И нет. Объекты пространства-времени не "попадают" в черную дыру, они уже там заканчиваются. Или берут начало из сингулярности, смотря с какой стороны посмотреть. Но движения в нашем обычном пространственно-временном континууме четырехмерные объекты не испытывают, они просто в нём находятся, как и полагается им быть в четырёхмерном пространстве.
Thank you very much I've been trying to build a black hole since couple of months your tutorial was simple and clear and I managed to make one cheers!!!!
Explain yourself, what you mean by typical black guy response?
too many black with holes are around me too.
Yeah a sun ok
Remember to wear gloves. I've heard black holes might be dangerous
You mean you've been getting fatter?
"we need to think in 6 dimensions" yeah, sure. no problem.
Marty, you're just not thinking 4th dimensionally!
But it takes time to think in 4 dimensions.
That’s easy; all you have to do is to put on two pairs of 3D glasses, one in front of the other, and you’ll see 6D through them! 😂😂😂
@@Larstig81
This comment is sadly missing a lot of likes.
You must be stupid if you can't do that
Wow, this stuff is mindbending... I love it.
+20buckman12 ha. 'bending', curved space-time.......No? Alright.
+20buckman12 You want 'mindbending'? go back to where the previous guy has 4 videos about relativity and spacetime! Holy Cow.. that's some intense stuff
Darth Chocolate Yea I watched them. This video I feel like I could wrap my mind around pretty well, those video we're a different story. There were some things I understood but at other times I was like WTF is this guy on about!
Harrison Harris :D Exactly
Been watching all day. Mind blown. Head sore. Need rest.
Spaceship broken? Parts needed? Try my cousin's RUclips how-to channel for all your rocket surgery DIY needs, and PBS Spacetime for all your theoretical needs.
Itchy. Tasty.
i keep repeating it ...to comprehend some things
This channel never fails to produce awesome videos, buy this one is so massively awesome that it dipped under its own event horizon.
I love this channel, but could you please add close captioning? It really helps me to understand what you're saying, and I'm sure other Hard of Hearing nerds like me would appreciate it!!!!
Do you have hearing problems ir just prefer subtitles?
Five years later: press C on your keyboard. If they aren't embedded, they're auto-generated. Isn't it great when updates are actually useful?
Can't help but wonder what is wrong with the subtitles? I don't see the benefit of closed captions vs subtitles in such a video.
The graphics in this video is absolutely amazing. If the creator(s) are reading this, par your selves on the back!
+Edvin Zigmanovic They team is always on point, it makes it a much better learning experience.
Suddenly, beard. :)
Joe Scott 🤣
Wow only one reply! Love your vids!
Beard horizon irreversibly crossed
But a blackhole has no hair..
he is breaking causality with his stubble
These episodes are so well produced and rich with information it just baffles me. Thank you guys! Keep up the good work! I wish all TV were like this...
Wait a few million years for the supernova. Here's one I made earlier!
"these guys' lifes are short just wait a few million years"
me: alright UM aREA 51 I NEED A CLONE PLS AH YES ONE OF ME WHJEN IM AVAILABLE WELL um.......right now?
Huh?😂😂
This is such a fantastic explanation. I've read and come across a good deal of information on black holes but this was concise and really distilled some fuzzy understandings I had.
"Russian doll shells"
They're called matryoshka dolls, and I hate them. They're so full of themselves.
RolandMoone *facepalm*
CLAP.
Best comment ever
Well done you!
This stuff is why astrophysicist is on my list of potential professions
I'm hoping to take an astrophysics class sometime at the next few years as well
+TheStaticUnit Im 13, so I don't know how I'd be able to find classes before university but we'll see...
+minimooster
Good luck on your endeavor, but mostly, have fun ;)
+minimooster Do enough math and you can do anything. Good luck
+minimooster I'm in my first year of Physics and Astronomy at university and my very best advice is learn as much math as possible and keep watching videos like this one. Also you can watch lectures on any cool physics topic on youtube, Stanford has some very cool ones with Leonard Susskind.
I watched this video 8 years ago. Coming back again after a much better understanding of Quantum Mechanics, and I am blown away completely. I can't believe how well this video explains Neutron Stars. WOW! Thank you for posting superior quality content over the years! :)
Thanks for the information! I'm building a black whole in my backyard for my project
Your RUclips channel enforced my motivation to study theoretical physics to become an astrophysicist.
So... How is it going?
Very well done. The position space vs. momentum space explanation is new to me, but makes perfect sense since I've been reading up on my quantum physics lately. If I had to do it all over again, I would definitely be an astrophysicist as the last 20 years have been a target-rich environment. Considering all of the new tech coming online in the next decade, and all of the unanswered questions, I think it will remain as rewarding for the next generation of scientists.
This is an insane concept! Thank you for making this, I am so much more interested in going deeper into this.
I am really loooking forward to your videos when I see them in my inbox
thanks a lot, you brighten my day
I absolutely loved this, this is motivating me to go back into my original major
Although we know that black holes exist, we don't yet have a theory that successfully combines Quantum Mechanics with General Relativity. So, the details about what is actually happening during the formation of a black hole is, to a large extent, just speculations.
Don't we have theoretical models that illustrate the formation of black holes such as the work done by Oppenheimer? Isn't that as true as the theoretical models that prove black holes exist?
+electrocat1 The theory that predicted black holes is general relativity. We don't have a theory that explains the formation of black holes and since nothing can be observed beyond the Schwarzschild radius we can't simply wait and watch it happen. If we do manage do create a theory for black holes we can then make models for their formation.
Joonha Shcal I know. But Oppenheimer's work in relativistic cosmology was focused on black hole formation I thought.
Imagine two observers in space. One is, from a distance watching the other fall into the event horizon. According to relativity the first should see the second freeze in time at the boundary and never enter while to the second his clock should seem to work fine as he plunged in. Now suppose the falling one is observing outward at the first as he falls. Would he not observe the outside universe have it's time sped up to the point where it would seem the universe instantly went all the way to heat death with the black hole he w falling into as everything in the black hole including himself instantly radiating away?
Physics Videos by Eugene Khutoryansky Cool, bro. I bet you're real popular at parties, Saying shit everyone already knows just to sound smart. Go fuck yourself.
Great episode, thank you.
I have a question: what happens if one of two entangled particles passes the event horizon while the other doesn't?
Thank you again, and take care.
+Duarte Harris You can't really ever tell experimentally whether they remain entangled, because you only have one of the to measure. Other than that, there's nothing special that happens; sorry to give such a disappointing answer.
Not at all Natasha. I appreciate the effort. I figured that experimentally one could say nothing about it, at least for now. Mostly I was wandering on what the math says. I find it intriguing, as it acts as a compounded paradox of sorts.
Take care,
mate it blows up
7:12 - 7:28 I think I found a way to think about the process you described here.
What the pauli exclusion principle says, is that the combined differences between fermions in all of the spaces (position space, momentum space etc) must be bigger than or equal to some minimum value. Gravity wants to decrease the differences in position space between the neutrons as much as possible, but eventually it will decrease those differences so much, that the differences between the neutrons in all of the spaces, will reach the minimum allowed value, and so the pauli exclusion principle will prevent a further decrease in the differences in position space between the neutrons. When you add another particle, because there are only a few locations it can be inside the neutron star, the certainty in its position is so high, that the uncertainty it implies in the momentum of the particle, is big enough to noticeably increase the differences in momentum space, between the neutrons, which means that now, the combined differences between the neutrons in all of the spaces are bigger than the minimum combined differences, that the pauli exclusion principle demands. This means that there is a net gain in the possible similarity between the spaces (other than momentum space) the neutrons occupy, and that similarity is spent on decreasing the differences between the neutrons in position space, or in other words, bring them closer together.
Is this a valid way to interpret the pauli exclusion principle, and the process you described here?
Schwarzschild radius depends on a mass as power of 1, but a star radius as a power of -3. So, event horizon leaves a surface much earlier than quantum singularity “must” be created. Under an event horizon a “simple” neutron star exists. And it can grow in size as much as it’s needed, being made of quark matter.
I subscribe to many channels here, but this is one of my favorites, and perhaps the only one where I make it a point to watch every video.
For some weird reason, I just love the super nova explosion sound :O. I keep rewinding to listen to it again and again
i laughed so much at the last joke!!!
Thanks, now I’m on the intergalactic FBI watchlist
If we could build a ship with an Alcubierre drive, could we fly it into a black hole and return? Also, what about making an "Alcubierre bomb" and launching it into a black hole to rip it apart from the inside out?
That's be cool. "oh nose a black hole is approaching a colony world" "Nah it's good mate, we blew it up."
+Shrek Ogreton Since the space inside a black hole event horizon does not have any direction of either space or time to get out, no.
I think.
+Shrek Ogreton The curvature of the black hole has 'interesting' effects on your warp bubble. I think it may be possible to zip into a hole and out again if you did it right, but I'm not sure. You definitely can't destroy the hole or get too close to the center, at some point the gravity of the hole would just overwhelm you, no matter how powerful your drive.
+Shrek Ogreton I'm not sure that the standard Alcubierre metric would do you much good - the warp bubble has the same compressed "pulling" action in front, with positive curvature. However the rear of the bubble has the opposite effect, producing a negative curvature "pushing" action. If you could subject the event horizon to that negative curvature face then it should drive the event horizon backwards. But even if you could somehow surround your entire vessel in a negative curvature bubble and enter the bubble to protect yourself from the extreme curvature near the black hole, once fully inside the Schwartzchild radius I think the event horizon would reform behind you. Then it doesn't matter how "nice" your little patch of space is, you'd still fall to the singularity.
PBS Space Time Thanks!
Excellent video, as usual. I'm sure I'm not the only one who would appreciate hearing more about quantum mechanics. Quite fascinating!
I had never seen anyone explaining stellar collapse in this way. I finally understand BHs! Thanks, PBS!
The way he explains things is so effective that I can still understand how everything works, despite not having watched their black hole video.
"Do you wanna build a black hole?
Come on let's go out to space."
Do you want to end space time? do you want to die?
Noooo!
I have to watch 12 videos before this one to get things right :(
+tocaia 12 videos which could teach you something, so nothing wrong with that! It all depends on how you look at things.
aw mom!
Jks, I'll just enjoy it later ;)
+tocaia u'll have to watch each vid 12 times
+tocaia Just think, I had to wait 12 weeks just to see the next episode. You get to binge watch them all.
This is my favourite channel on RUclips, and you just covered my favourite subject in science. Soo happy.
"This much handsome stubble" had me laughing in my office at 1am. I've been making similar remarks since freshman year of high school. Classic!
It only took me twenty years of my high school career to find the smart kids' table.
Dr. Matt this video is extraordinary. I have been searching for a subatomic discription of the proces of the birth of a black hole for quite some time now. Thank you! I know this is far fetched but why are scientist describe a black hole like an "infinitely" dense spot? It can be way denser than everything we know about but have a core, it doesn't have to be infinite until proven so. Thank you again!
1:10 My guy just said "Let him cook" in 2015, 8 years ahead of the memes
I knew someone was going to say that so I check timed lol
5:31 Notice anything ;] Terrific video / explanation man!! Me and Amber are planning to start on our black hole this week.
Im amazed on how well can you explain this.
this is actually a tutorial for a super advanced civilization high school student.
i dont know why my 8 year old niece understands this then
care for another bong?
"Are black holes real?"
*People after the picture of the black hole:* ye
I've had a question about black holes, particularly supermassive blackholes that I can't seem to get an answer around.
If a singularity is infinitely small, and matter heading towards it accelerates continuously till it reaches it, it will never reach the singularity, yes?
Which means that it accelerates infinitely, possibly beyond the speed of light.
With time dilation, from an external observer, the singularity forms at a point infinitely in the future, yes?
With objects within the black hole traveling faster than c, does it not make sense that the external observable universe, to them, appears to go backwards in time?
And, if these objects traveling towards the singularity are traveling backwards in time, do they go backwards infinitely to the big bang? Is this where the theory of a "donut shaped universe" comes from?
I guess what I'm driving at, is do tachyons exist?
+Punk Patriot My head just exploded
+Punk Patriot The problem is that, as you approach the event horizon, all physical laws are still met. Nothing travels faster than c within the boundaries of the universe. But when you cross the event horizon, all bets are off. spacetime is so distorted, in ways we truly just can't understand yet, that what happens in there is impossible to say, and more importantly as mentioned in the video, nothing ever happens inside the event horizon of a black hole within our own frame of reference.
Nothing inside the black hole can ever see anything outside of it. The black hole itself distorts time so much that, to the effect, if you could survive entering a blackhole, the entirety of all events that unfold on the outside universe would happen instantly.
If you could enter a black hole and somehow exit it, which is impossible but speaking purely hypothetically, you'd exit into a universe infinitely into the future.
If the universe has an infinite lifespan.. I'm not even sure what that means. Infinite minus infinite?
+Punk Patriot
The easy answer is that objects aren't going to be going faster than speed of light once they pass the event horizon.
If an object fell from an infinite distance toward Earth, it would be traveling about 11,190 m/s, which is also the escape velocity of Earth. So in terms of a black hole, IF an object were able to fall towards a black hole from an infinite distance, when it reached the singularity it would be going c. But in reality nothing falls from an infinite distance.
As for the beginning of your question, yes black holes are infinitely small, yes matter continuously accelerates when falling, but it will meet the singularity.
If tachyons did exist, we would expect to see them being emitted from black holes, and we don't observe that.
Hope that helped :)
+UnknownXV black holes evaporate in less than an infinite amount of time. So as soon as you enter the EV from your point of view the black hole would evaporate instantly. I guess you would too.
***** Thing is, they wouldn't, because from the black hole's frame of reference, time passes normally. It's a contradictions of sorts, because to the black hole, the outside universe doesn't exist (all of time has passed). Hard to wrap your mind around.
i cannot express how brilliant this video is, such clean precise simple explanations of really complex stuff. honestly thank you so much for uploading! Subscribe!
I have no idea what you all are talking about, but you make it interesting to listen to. I can't stop watching. Thanks for these videos.
I like Matt's face for unknown reasons.
+DED He looks like a Who from Whoville!
+DED Hes hunky? :3
+Serah Wint Just....no.
cuz you gay
+Serah Wint Got to admit... that jaw line is pretty epic.
You need to link referenced videos in the description because mobile devices can't click thumbnails in the video.
+Emmett Turner There's an icon in the corner of your screen.
+Emmett Turner Assuming you're on iOS
+MuppetsSh0w Not getting it but probably because RUclips ++ blocks it like an ad
Just another ordinary how to..
But for a basic how to, it lacks a lot of egg smashing
I'm going to start building mine with this awesome tutorial
My theorem is a B.H. Is anti-matter of various elements thats what makes it weird. My new theorem is that anti matter iron gives a B.H. its major pull and anti elements like it.
I got an orange squeezer in my kitchen. I'm going to use it to squeeze an orange into a black hole
i love how you guys keep up to date with pop culture. from web comic, to manga, to anime, and now being referenced on a educational channel, Saitama can enter the big leagues of Saiyans and Super man.
No
You made it absolutely easy to understand. Thank you!
i realy liked the 6 dimension bit best ive ever visualized more than 4Dimensions
The event horizon still exists prior to black hole formation, it's just below the surface of the neutron star, right? Is there a fundamental disconnect between the physics inside and outside of this boundary? I mean, is the outer portion of the neutron star causally disconnected from it's own core?
YES, excellent question! Let's hope he'll notice your comment.
+Shawn Pitman I don't think so; if I understand correctly the event horizon doesn't exist while it would be inside the star. A black hole only exists if some ball of matter has a radius smaller than its Schwarzschild radius, and the "event horizon" we see in the animation is just a representation of this critical radius. For example, our Sun itself has a Schwarzschild radius of about 3 km, but intuitively we know that there is nothing special about this ball.
Joey Beauvais-Feisthauer In principle, I'm okay with this answer. There's so much mass outside the sun's Schwarzchild radius that it seems geodesics in this area wouldn't follow a purely inward path.
However, in the case of a neutron star the possibility exists for the Schwarzchild radius to be a nanometer smaller than the radius of the neutron star itself. Surely this isn't an trivial case.
Shawn Pitman It may feel conceptually different, but mathematically the theory can only distinguish between "smaller than" and "bigger than", no matter how close the radii are. Though it is true that the behavior of a neutron star this close to the LOV limit (the mass at which a black hole forms) would be similar in some respects to the behavior of a black hole.
Example: Consider a photon emitted radially out from the surface. If the mass is relatively low the light will escape with minor redshifting, but as the mass becomes near-critical the redshift grows asymptotically, and only becomes infinite when the radius is exactly the Schwarzschild one. So visually a neutron star with growing mass would become more and more infrared then microwave then radiowave, but only pure black when the threshold is crossed. So I guess the object you describe could be called a near-black hole :P
+Shawn Pitman Things do get weird when close to the limit. For example, light can orbit the star above its surface in a 'photon sphere'. Neutrons may break down into 'quark-gluon plasma' and so on.
8:38 What happens to the star when it slips below its event horizon?
I'd love to see an entire video on just that.
I think the physics term for what happens is:
*squish*
holy shit this just made my night. incredibly interesting AND there was a random One Punch Man reference. rewatching now!
instructions unclear , made a banana
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in blender
Instructions unclear, dick spaghettified
instructions unclear already, moms spaghetti
Instructions unclead, made a T-34 tank.
I'm stuck with this neutron star, it won't swallow more mass
Can you dedicate a video to 6D space?
Can 6D space describe different phenomena with similar mathematics? For instance, can one phase space account for three dimensions of position and three dimensions of momentum while another accounts for three dimensions of space and three dimensions of time? The latter refers to Everett’s Many World’s interpretation of quantum mechanics.
@David Rosner Absolutely. In math, a dimension is simply an independent variable. One that can be changed without affecting the others. Many dating sites use data structures known as inverse vector maps (or inverse vector fields) to describe people’s profiles, thus allowing them to match people with similar interests by slightly fuzzy versions of simple vector math (dot and cross products). Each one of those profiles can be considered a 1000 or 5000 dimensional construct, depending on how many things they track and infer about each person.
One Puuuuunch!
omg the reference 😂😂😂😂 fucking saitama
+Franklin Missark I heard he cheated..!
One thing really bugs me. If events inside the black hole don't happen from our perspective, but in it everything the hole experiences kind of happens at the same 'time', then what about the hole evaporating due to Hawking-radiation? How would that manifest from an inside perspective?
this guy is a friggen genius. I've watched about 20 of his videos so I know what I'm talking about.
this is an incredible video, I absolutely love it! More quantum mechanics would be great in the future, aswell as superstrings.
Are the Planck length and the Planck time even valid boundaries anymore under the conditions of a black hole?
+T. Markus Gellert They are the point at which space ceases to make sense. This does not depend on how curved the space is, so they should be limits even in the blackest of holes.
So the Planck length is actually defined using black holes. It is approximately the length of the smallest black hole possible, the point where a bit of mass's event horizon is equal to its quantum wavelength.
Yes they are
The star "slipping" beneath the event horizon makes it seem like the black hole was at the center of the star the entire time...
“Black holes are one of the strangest objects in the universe” so is his unshaved chin I wasn’t ready for that
You mean SHAVED chin? Because it's shaved here.
He was younger at this time
bully
So if a neutron star, when turning into a black hole, "suddenly disappears", does that mean, a black hole, that - by hawking radiation - is loosing particles might suddenly " transform" to an object as we know? So would it be possible a new blob of matter gets suddenly visible where we had a black hole just a few moments ago? Or would the black hole just shrink until it disappears completely?
i wouldn't watch a normal channel with audio this bad but this channel i would still binge
I want to change my microwave oven into a gravitational wave oven, that way I can heat stars instead of coffe!!
Saitama is the man. Haha
Awesome episode, I love the theory behind black holes.
I find black holes interesting but very confusing.
Can black holes be theoretically destroyed by being pried apart from their dense state by other nearby matter?
For example if there is a black hole, and it orbited by many black holes or even many, many dense stars, then would the other black holes or stars combined gravity impact on the inner black hole and (providing can be made to remain stable in orbit) reverse the state of the black hole being a black hole?
Greatest series ever don't stop making these!
@ PBS Space Time here's a question for you, what would it take to have not just a ring around planet, but a "sphere" that is all around.
And why is it, that none of the planets have this? Is it because planets rotate and the centrifugal force is what makes the asteroids form in a ring and not in a sphere?
Umm if I'm struggling in algebra how long will it take me to learn the mathematics of quantum mechanics? I do watch one punch though.
+Frank Sang
Finish high-school math, plus four years of undergrad, plus, say, a year of grad school until you get to full-blown quantum field theory.
If you'll settle for undergrad quantum mechanics, then you'll just need calculus, linear algebra, and differential equations.
Familiarity with complex variables and the theory of distributions (generalized functions) would also be beneficial.
is it possible that black holes form because the neutron star gets so dense, all given space is so full there literally is no alternate location for a particle. It could therefore violate the uncertainty principle? So it gets shrouded by the event horizon where it can't be observed?
+Michael Durkin it does that out of shame for breaking Pauli's law
+viermidebutura nice
Michael Durkin srsly now
it doesn't violate the uncertainty principle it uses the uncertainty principle
The more matter is added each neutron has less room to move around but as the uncertainty principle states each neutron has more and more momentum after a certain limit is reached the space-time itself fails and everything inside that region is no longer part of this reality
or this is what i understood from this vid...
guess i have to watch it again
+Michael Durkin No, in degenrate matter all physical space is already taken up. The possible momentum space is near-infinite, so the heavier the star gets the faster its particles whizz about.
Because of spacetime curvature the particles begin whizzing more and more towards the center, even as they get more and more energy and thus speed. At some point they can no longer whizz outward and you have yourself a black hole.
Gareth Dean the momentum space has an upper limit or to be more precise above that limit the known physics breaks down
for a single particle is the Plank energy limit and for a collection of particles is the Schwarzschild limit
iron nuclei... I think I just found the name for my rock and roll band
Even better: exothermic fusion
@@harry_page even better: going nowhere in life.
@@dingdong475 Heh, tell me about it. I have crippling depression!
Love the One Punch Man reference at the end, really made my day. Keep up the good work!
Amazing video. VFX, as always, were on point. :)
cant believe you guys pulled in Saitama in the end scene !!!!
If we could crack FTL travel with the Alcubierre Drive, would it be theoretically possible to cross a Black Hole's Event Horizon and come back? If the answer's yes... "when" would the spaceship come out of it? That question just blows my mind
+Angelo Brillante from ur perspective u'll cross the event horizon and u'll see the universe fast forwarding in time to infinity
exiting is impossible because the thing about infinity is that it never ends
You'd basically freeze inside, and if you came out it would be in the distant future, like, a couple billion centuries from now
+Angelo Brillante Maybe but probably no.The problem is your drive uses warped space... and the hole is warped space. It's like taking a candle into a forest fire. The hole can overcome your little warp bubble and destroy it, and then, in short succession, you.
+Angelo Brillante
I think you forgot that radially outward is not a possible direction inside the black hole... so any direction you to come out of the black hole you be going only inwards.
+viermidebutura I know that, this is why I find it so mindblowing!
Disclaimer: Don't try this at home
Yeah, whatever you create with a mass of a coffee mug would evaporate with hawking radiation and explode instantly at the atomic bomb scale.
i have no idea what being talked about in the video, but it was very interesting none the less. Thanks you! please do an episode on magnetars, theres isnt a whole pile of videos about them on youtube.
After watching you videos I feel finally like internet has reached a point of maturity from an evolutionary stand point. Where it is cocking grey matter in people's heads.
Great work guys. Thanks a lot
So every black hole in the universe has just been born, in our timeline, if there is infinite time dilation in a black hole? Then how can a singularity exist? Also how can a quasar stop being active if time dilation is so extreme close to the event horizon? Shouldn't every galaxy core have a quasar then. Or does that mean that a quasar never existed in our galaxy?
Good point! that means either singularity does not exist or time dilation is not as we think!
I'm really trying to understand this, but no video about black holes seem to explain this. Should't quasars outlive red dwarfs in the future, since they experience close to infinite time dilation. Maybe I should read a book about it instead of expecting answers on youtube ;)
+Sigurd Torvaldsson u let me explain. This infinite time dilation only occurs beyond the horizon. Just outside the horizon however the curvature is still so intense that the gases spiraling around it approach the speed of light. The friction of these events are so extreme, the fermions decompose into high energy electromagnetic energy (gamma rays) which navigate to the poles of the black hole and are subsequently ejected into space. Furthermore there is such ferocious energy released that the matter around the black hole is also pushed back beyond that of the decaying orbit that created this incomprehensible accretion disk. All of this occurs outside the event horizon this can be observed as actual events in our timeline.
+Sigurd Torvaldsson I also wanted to comment on your misrepresentation of time dilation. Time and space are relevant. The extreme curvature of space makes your inertial frame of reference vastly less than an object in a "straighter" region of space time. Events them selves are not altered in a way you describe. A photon accelerating away from just outside the photosphere will still move away at the speed of light. It might be red shifted a little bit but if you are 1 light year from the even horizon, a phone just outside will reach you in 1 year. Likewise the events of the quasar will happen in real time, and it will conclude as I described. Time dials ruin doesn't magically slow down the actual events.
If you'd fly around the Earth at light speed you would wrap around the earth 7 times per second. Now visualize that for a second. It will be quite forceful to move even appreciably that fast.
Now increase the mass of the Earth to four or so times the sun. That means about 1.3 million earths. Now if you orbit the sun you NEED to move almost the speed of light at about 15000 kilometers NOT to fall in. Imagine going that fast. Imagine gas going around the black hole that fast. Imagine all that material rubbing up against all other atoms. It will create friction. A LOT OF FRICTION. Much like your kitchen blender will also get hot.
Super-massive black holes are really really big and exert a lot of pull. So around one of those a lot of material can form a discrete ring around it. But as the ring forms, matter on the inner edge will become retarded in terms of time flow. That means it will pile up in a collision. Material on the outside wants to fall in, because of all the friction, but it can't because material closer to the black hole is experiencing some level of time dillation because (a) it moves to goddamn fast and (b) it is fairly close to the black hole. Fairly close as in about the diameter of the black hole. Also because it's all so hot there radiation will push outward against matter inside this "cauldron". Matter will be kept at bay by the most powerful explosive that is known in the current universe. HEnce it will pile up even more and overflow the ring system in to an ever thicker donut. Eventually the black hole will become entirely obscured (embedded) in a tube-like structure, and the only opening where some light may escape would be along the polar axis.
That';s why you get a donut of the most extreme temperatures in the universe, much hotter than theoretically possible.
earthsky.org/space/the-extremely-hot-heart-of-quasar-3c273
You have to realize thse orbiting ring systems would be very large - if a small black hole would have an active accretion disk the ring would extend out tens of millions of kilometers. Compare that size with the size of the black hole. Tens of millions of kilometers versus ten kilometer. I.e. the black hole is a million or so times smaller than its accretion disk. All the really violent stuff happens in a region only a few tenthousand kilometers around the black hole, i.e. you can't even properly see the black hole at those scales. There is a very very small needle point in there at the center (when feeding), but it's mostly obscured by a 24/7/365 nuclear detonation.
how about a supermassive black hole, do we know how those are made?
+PMW3 yeah, add more mass.
+PMW3 add more mass or more black holes
+viermidebutura Black holes eating black holes? Yes please!
black holes merging together i think
+PMW3 Basically they form at the center of galaxies at the dawn of the stellar age, where the most modest of holes has enough time and food to grow into a behemoth.
If physical space (volume) becomes zero shouldn't momentum space become infinite, effectively giving you an infinitely large event horizon? I'm really not clear on why the event horizon grows as more mass is added. How does an infinitely dense point get more dense?
+Matt “Mazriel” Gibson I think in the video it says that all the geodesics point to the singularity (middle). So any "expansion" of the momentum space also occurs towards the singularity?
+Jan-Michael Cabrera that makes more sense than what's going on in my head. Hopefully he might address it.
+Jan-Michael Cabrera So are we saying that its expanding both internally and externally at the same time? Or is it that the space expands but turns in on itself at the event horizon? I think im having a hard time understanding the concept of "momentum space" haha
+Matt “Mazriel” Gibson I don't fully grasp the stuff about the momentum space, but I think of 3-D space as being like the fabric of a sponge, and the momentum space as being the dimensions that 3-D space can expand/contract into. No matter how the sponge is manipulated, the total distance of the fibers of the sponge remains the same, but the size of the sponge can get bigger, smaller, and be manipulated into other shapes.
So if that's how to think about it, the momentum space "expands" inwards towards the singularity, like squishing the sponge down into a little ball.
+Punk Patriot Momentum space is like "potential" 3-D space, I think.
Yes! Thank you! Now that I finally know how to build a black hole, I can make one in my backyard. I just hope my neighbors don't mind.
This guy is just awesome in so many ways. He doesn't make it out to be a strange thing if you enjoy the wonder of physics, rather you can tell he loves what he does. At XYZ CUNY school, people make you out to be a nerd or geek if you're a pre-med that enjoyed and did well in these classes... This is the stuff that governs our very existence, soak it in people!
+PBS Space Time So prior to its collapse beyond the event horizon or after that point does a Neutron star behave in anyway ways similar to a bose-einstein-condensate where all the neutrons behave as if they were one single quantum mechanical wave function?
If these materials become a boson then yes, if not no.
If black holes leak in our space-time, why don't they instantly evaporate in their own?
+Twilord Maybe they do.
+Twilord it's ironic because, from the frame of reference of anything inside the black hole, history runs out in a blink of an eye... so yeah, istantly.
+Twilord Because the rate a hole leaks depends on how big it is. The bigger it is the less it leaks. Any hole bigger than about the moon's mass will actually get heavier by absorbing the cosmic microwave background radiation faster than it can leak stuff.
+Gareth Dean "sucking" is a bad word to blackholes
F8LDragon2
This is true, they suck at sucking,. Oh well, can't change it now.
Suddenly 10:50 beard
Whow!! Just finally caught up with all the AWESOME video's of PBS-Spacetime. Funny it is also episode 42. Is space-time the answer to life, the universe and everything?
If you guys have the time, or are interested, I'd love to see an episode that helps explain the double slit experiment in detail, and what it means. How micro particles can travel as both a wave and a solid, depending upon weather or not its being observed.
If in the event horizon "time stops", how can 2 black holes merge????
+Raimar Lunardi It only stops from the perspective of an outside observer. Holes canmerge because the difference between 'two holes really close' and 'one big hole' becomes infinitely small as they merge until you can't tell the difference.
Why need of fuels instead we could use someone like Saitama
so every black hole in the universe started as a 3 solar mass black hole?
+Ciroluiro or more.
+Ciroluiro The andromeda Galaxy hole has a 150 million solar mass black hole in the middle.
EDIT: I didn't read the second comment before commenting
+Ciroluiro every black hole that forms from collapsing neutron star. There are other ways to create black hole. For example, you can theoretically create a black hole by passing narrow high-power lasers trough very narrow volume of space, creating a kugelblitz - microscopic black hole.
+Ciroluiro If the iron core of the collapsing star is a higher than 3 solar masses then it will make a more massive black hole. In fact such a star it only passes through the neutron star phase very briefly during its collapse. By the time the supernova is done then all you have is a black hole.
+PBS Space Time oh I see then. So a more appropriate statement would be that every black hole in the universe started as a neutron star, right?
thanks, this was the simplest tutorial i found on the internet. now i have my own mini-blackhole in my room, i can finally get rid of trash without having to worry about a thing!
How does momentum space relate to what the particle is actually doing? Does it mean the tighter the particles are contained in space the more velocity they will have? Or is it the more uncertain their velocities will be? And what the heck is phase space?
instant beard in 3...2...1... 10:47
a 1.4 solar mass black hole vs 1 trillion wasps, who would win?
I'm sorry for my English (I'm Russian), but I have a question. What will happen if four dimensional object cross event horizont. Can it cross it back through four dimension.
how many 4d objects have you seen? ?
Karthikeyan T everything you can see or feel is a four dimensional object
Afro Russian If so, the question itself would be meaningless (since that has already been covered in the video). Here (in the comment), the word dimension means length components only (like traditional definition and not including time).
I wrote that reply because all we can do about the question was speculation since there is no real evidence for 4th spatial dimension yet. Please try to understand the context before answering.
Ну да. И нет. Объекты пространства-времени не "попадают" в черную дыру, они уже там заканчиваются. Или берут начало из сингулярности, смотря с какой стороны посмотреть. Но движения в нашем обычном пространственно-временном континууме четырехмерные объекты не испытывают, они просто в нём находятся, как и полагается им быть в четырёхмерном пространстве.
There are no objects with 4th dimensions. It's all speculation and fantasy.
Higher dimensions only make sense in mathematics.
Thanks for the tutorial, I was just considering building one in my garden
This is the most interesting thing I have ever seen in my 43 year!!!! Thanks