The idea of Isaac exasperating his professors with countless unanswerable questions seems so in character.

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

I'm not sure anyone other than him ever got exasperated, I learned to dial it back a bit after that first experience, but I was a very enthusiastic 16 year old coming out of home schooling for the last 6 years before and didn't really have a great filter for when to ask questions or not.

@telumatramenti7250

Жыл бұрын

@@isaacarthurSFIA I did that too. But my questions were more often something like: "how many kilonewtons of force would it take to ignite the Sulphur on the ends of regular (non strike-anywhere) matches, if one hits it with a hard surface, and is it even doable?" Which is why now I don't have a KZread science or scifi channel. Or a physics degree for that matter 😝

@atashgallagher5139

Жыл бұрын

@Isaac Arthur I did the exact same thing after being homeschooled since the end of kindergarten. I knew a lot and wanted to learn a lot more.

"Homer, your theory of a donut shaped universe intrigues me. I'll have to steal it for my own."

@andrewwhite1576

Жыл бұрын

Small world

@TGBurgerGaming

Жыл бұрын

"Simpsons did it!"

@thecondescendinggoomba5552

Жыл бұрын

Even the interdimensional cosmic beings simulating our universe are ripping off the simpsons, smh originality is dead

@jamesamos6565

Жыл бұрын

An ironic hell only works if you can understand it.

@kingdomofbird8174

Жыл бұрын

Haha Z A W A R U D O

I really appreciate that every single one of your videos has subtitles, because it increases accessibility and helps those of us who either have trouble processing or perceiving auditory information.

@UpliftedCapybara

Жыл бұрын

Me too. Even if I don’t need them, I find a lot of times in other channels a word or phrase gets muffled and you can’t figure out what they’re trying to say.

@Zurround

Жыл бұрын

I keep falling asleep so the subtitles don't help me much.

@puddles5501

Жыл бұрын

i also appreciate he doesn't always mention the "speech difference" (ie, accent?) as much anymore either, I've been following for half a decade and i can't recall missing a single word. (if you read this Issac , you speak English far more clearly than most ppl in my country... keep reminding people to grab a snack and a water to drink though, its very wholesome, and relevant given how hefty you missives are)

@magichobo

Жыл бұрын

Gotta be deaf to enjoy this content

@thesesillkids7911

8 ай бұрын

@@puddles5501 I'm pretty sure is some of his earlier videos, he calls it a speech impediment.

My first Hawking's book was Ultimate Theory of Time. It was also in 1997, and I was 18years old. I understood much less of it than what I thought I did at the time, and I imagine I still understand much less of it than I think I do now.

@muninrob

Жыл бұрын

I understand Hawking's works, but working the proofs is WAAAAY beyond me. (Kind of like how I can explain how your car engine works, while being completely lost under the hood)

@telumatramenti7250

Жыл бұрын

@@muninrob You know, at one point 3 books of mathematical proofs were published to justify the basic notion that 1+1=2 (among a few other things). I understand that 1+1=2, however poorly, but some of these proofs were way beyond me so I sort of decided to take their word for it. Which sort of sucked because I always had good marks in all my university math related courses. But hey I learned that it takes courage to throw in the towel sometimes 😂

@qwadratix

Жыл бұрын

@@telumatramenti7250 The world is full of knowledge and skills that you simply cannot master. It literally takes a human lifetime to master any one of them. No matter how much you know about one tiny aspect of even say Physics or Mathematics or Anthropology, or Medicine or Archaeology or Music or... there will always be more to learn. I've spent 76 years (so far) learning everything I could about literally everything I come across and I've hardly scratched the surface. Just enjoy the ride.

@telumatramenti7250

Жыл бұрын

@@qwadratix You know, there are plenty of skills that don't take a lifetime to master. My background is Cogitive/Behavioural Sciences and IT. The first leads to a lifetime of learning, but is the least likely to give you the financial rewards you need to live with minimal comforts. You're up against the odds that make winning a lottery look less daunting. The second does as well, but, for the time being, it contains plenty of narrower fields, one of which you can not only master in your lifetime - but derive a more or less an OK income from. And use your remaining spare time to learn about everything else that sparks your curiosity. Which is what I picked after some deliberation. The ride is great. It's the destination that sucks.

@TotalyRandomUsername

Жыл бұрын

There is a wonderful series about physics on YT. Starts with the ancient greeks up to modern physics. Goes from things you understand, to things you thought you understood but did not, up to things you never will understand. :)

This is one of those things I thought of decades ago and felt all clever like I came up with something new. Then I looked in to it and discovered that other people had already thought the same and felt less special.

@robertmiller9735

Жыл бұрын

Fred Pohl for one-have you read the Heechee books?

@TheWareek

Жыл бұрын

Hey dont feel to bad, YOU did come up with it by yourself, no one told you so bravo to you.

@muninrob

Жыл бұрын

You're not alone, when I asked my professor he handed me a box of photocopied journal pages and told me "If it's not one of these, it might earn you a Nobel". He had a box for students that "found dark matter", and another for those of us who "figured out dark energy" - I guess a lot of bright 1st year students re-invent the same wheels year after year. I've also gotten the equally crushing "That's covered in the third year block" on a couple of my "brilliant" "discoveries". P.S. I for one don't feel all that bad when I find out I was not only right, but also that Schwartzchild beat me to the math by several decades.

@NurmYokai

Жыл бұрын

"The Collapsing Universe: The Story of the Black Holes" (1977) by Isaac Asimov (1920-1992). "It is quite possible, then, that the entire universe is itself a black hole (as has been suggested by the physicist Kip Thorne)." Kip Thorne (1940 - ) "theoretical physicist known for his contributions in gravitational physics and astrophysics" Nobel Prize in Physics (2017) Special Breakthrough Prize in Fundamental Physics (2016) Gruber Prize in Cosmology (2016) Albert Einstein Medal (2009) Karl Schwarzschild Medal (1996) To name a few ... And then, APS (American Physical Society) News: November 27, 1783: John Michell anticipates black holes "We think of black holes as a 20th century invention, dating back to 1916, when Albert Einstein first published his theory of general relativity and fellow physicist Karl Schwarzschild used those equations to envision a spherical section of spacetime so badly warped around a concentrated mass that it is invisible to the outside world. But the true “father” of the black hole concept was a humble 18th century English rector named John Michell-a man so far ahead of his scientific contemporaries that his ideas languished in obscurity, until they were re-invented more than a century later." John Michell (1724 - 1793) "Every time I see one of those things I expect to spot some guy dressed in red with horns and a pitchfork." Lieutenant Charles Pizer, The Black Hole (1979).

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

I know that feeling, I bet a lot of folks here do too. It happens a lot, some idea we think is clever but is either easily disprovable or was indeed clever but someone got it before we were even born. I've stopped even claiming any of mine these days from all the times its turned out some obscure space-thinker published a version of it before I could even read :)

If the universe expands at a constant rate (not exponential) and we’re falling into a black hole, the universe would age in fast forward, giving the appearance of a universe expanding faster and faster.

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

Interesting point actually.

@js70371

Жыл бұрын

Great thought. Care to further elaborate?

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

@@js70371 As you get close to a dense object, time passes slower. So as you get close to an even horizon, you'll find one second passing for you is a year outside, then a bit later one second for you is a century outside, then you see the stars dying of old age...

@Immashift

Жыл бұрын

I do think there are several issues with the universe is a black hole theory, not the least of which is time and space getting sort of screwy, though I'm not sure if that's going to affect your subjective frame of reference. Who knows, maybe in a few billion years as we sink deeper causality will start getting wonky on us. One day you'll come home before driving to work, find a baby in your house, then your wife tells you she's pregnant, and then you'll both meet for the first time, shortly before you're born. Reality is all probability wave expressions bouncing around quantum fields, maaaan. If we truly are in a black hole, all we have to do is wait. According to everything I've learned, then the heat death of the universe becomes a point in the distant future we will *never* reach as our time to reach the singularity takes on infinite values. It'll just be runaway expansion followed by all encompassing colder and colder black for eternity, shortly before the black hole either evaporates and reality fades away or it dumps us all into a new universe courtesy of a white hole which we currently have a hard time trying to find, if they're even a thing. Personally, I like the elegance of the toroid, universe is a donut explanation, with time and space mapped to the outside surface. That nicely explains runaway inflation, eventual plateau, then accelerating compression into a new big bang. Cyclical cosmology is just cool. It's probably all wrong, just like all our perceptions of reality, but hey at least it has donuts. Monkey brains weren't built to handle why gravity go down. Yet here we are smashing quarks together a quarter million years later.

What a cool concept! The idea of building a black hole without a singularity (via something like a Klemperer rosette) is prime scifi speculation fuel.

@SkorjOlafsen

Жыл бұрын

"Singularity" in a black hole is often misunderstood. The singularity within a black hole is a point in time, not (necessarily) in space. You could e.g. form a black hole from a gas of uniform density, but there would still be a singularity. From the perspective of an outside observer, space inside a black hole contracts over time until it's zero size (much like out own universe in reverse), From the perspective of an inside observer, who knows?

@Robustacap

Жыл бұрын

@@SkorjOlafsen Thank you for bringing me the Penrose, he has many similar ideas, why I referred to him. I thought this episode to be very different. Cosmology rather than outsides of black holes.

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

No, Penrose proved that there _must_ be a singularity.

@sulljoh1

Жыл бұрын

@@JohnDlugosz Did Penrose show that you must have a singularity in every black hole?

@SkorjOlafsen

Жыл бұрын

@@sulljoh1 Yes. However, the singularity is not a point in space, any more than the big bang occurred at some specific point in space. It's a contraction of space itself over time. That being said, any statements about what happen in the reference frame of an observer inside the event horizon are pure speculation, The math shows what happens from the reference frame of a distant observer down to an observer at the event horizon, Beyond that we don't know if the model still works, or quite how to interpret it if it does.

A black hole is the only known thing that can light can't escape from. Ironically the expansion of the universe moves faster than light. 👀

@jasoncourson8112

Жыл бұрын

True... But when people typically here that they confuse a few things... One.. the speed of light ONLY applies to things that move though space-time... NOT space-time itself. Which is why all galaxies ( approximately 2 Trillion galaxies in the observable universe ) that are not bound to us by local gravity ( like Andromeda which is on a collision course with our own ) are receding away from us faster than the speed of light... Soon they will fade from view and we'll have no clue or evidence that there were this many galaxies at one time... Also there are in mathematical theory which again is different from I have a theory there exist a particle or something that we call a tachyon. Which can not go slower than the speed of light that's the slowest they can go is light speed otherwise they move faster than light.

@jamisonreynolds9949

Жыл бұрын

That isn’t ironic.

@kingmasterlord

Жыл бұрын

imagine spraying a water gun backwards out the window of a car, that is like light working against the expansion of the universe. now imagine spraying it forwards, that is light fighting against a black hole.

@Dark_Jaguar

Жыл бұрын

Light also can't escape an opaque closed box. There's a lot of things light can't escape from.

@jamisonreynolds9949

Жыл бұрын

@@Dark_Jaguar There’s a difference in light not escaping a solid box and light not escaping a gravitational pull.

This episode was fantastic Isaac. Really enjoyed your take on what is a becoming such a relevant and prescient topic for contemporary physics. I’d like to take an opportunity to say thank you for all the hard work and effort you put into this channel and the amazing community of followers that you’ve built. A great example of what the internet is truly meant for. Happy Holidays to you and your family, and wishing y’all peace, love, happiness and health in the coming New Year. Can’t wait to see what SFIA has in store for 2023. Many cheers from Canada brother!! 🎄☮️❤️💫🙏🇨🇦🍻

The idea of building a black hole without a singularity is such a nutty concept that if I heard of it anywhere else I would have scoffed and ignored who suggested it. But it's seemingly par for the course on SFIA so I don't even blink in surprise. Another wonderful and informative episode.

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

You should have scoffed, as Roger Penrose did in 1965. He ended up winning the Nobel Prize for that work in 2020. Short answer: There _must_ be a singularity.

I always wondered this.... ever since I learned of black holes

@thingsiplay

Жыл бұрын

Some speculate the "other side" of a black hole is the opposite, a white hole. Maybe, just a maybe, a black hole takes everything and spits it out as a white hole on the other side. Which would basically spawn a new universe and could be a big bang. Just wanted to add another thing you can wonder about. :D Have a good day!

One thing I love about this channel is that the content is *never* clickbait. It's not like other channels *cough..Riddle...cough* that have a flashy thumbnail and clickbait title and then proceed to talk about anything but the topic in the title. I see video from Isaac, it's gonna be exactly what it says on the tin, with zero artificial or trans-hype. I'm so happy one of my days off got switched to Thursdays.

This was a “add to playlist” kinda episode I listen to when I’m outside working…loved it. Marry Christmas and happy holidays everyone.

This channel is one of the best things on youtube, I often download these channel videos so I can listen to them offline when I'm cleaning my apartment or doing the cooking. The videos from this channel often blow my mind with it's concepts about the future humanity and the universe. Have a very lovely Christmas Issac.

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

you too Stephen

9:35 our big bang and our observable universe could be a tiny and common occurrence in a much larger region filled with spacetime bubbles

Since energy can neither be destroyed nor escape a black hole, wouldn't the interior of a black hole be extremely hot and blindingly bright?

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

Things _are_ destroyed! That is the singularity. You find the world lines simply terminate, which is not normally possible.

@boring7823

Жыл бұрын

The energy density of a black hole could be flat (without a singularity) as long as it's high enough to get the speed of light escape velocity. In that case it's contents could be warm or very very cold depending on how big it is. The problem with black holes is the maths starts to fall apart at the event horizon. At that surface some results start to look wrong, so much so that people didn't believe they could exist until matching observations were found. Even now exactly how you can get infinite time dilation at the event horizon doesn't make sense; however, that maths can be made to work at the event horizon and inside it. It's only when you get to the centre of the simplest solution (all the mass falls into a point like singularity) that the maths completely breaks. If something keeps the matter larger than a point (ie: plank length effects) then the maths isn't completely broken. You just crash into that weird lump of solid spacetime. OTOH: If you take the time dilation at face value all matter and energy stops at the event horizon and that surface does indeed get hotter and hotter as the mass-energy approaches that infinity thin surface causing the energy density to approach infinity. With this idea the event horizon would "start" at a point in spacetime and end up "sweeping" the entire contents of the space enclosed by the event horizon into that surface so the "inside" of the black hole not longer exists.

Perfect timing for my holiday insomnia! Thanks Isaac

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

Happy holidays!

Oh man, I've been waiting for this episode with bated breath. I love your channel, Isaac. Been enjoying your high quality content for years.

If the big bang was a white hole, the the dark energy expansion could just be the rate at which our parent black hole is feeding.

@petevenuti7355

Жыл бұрын

But because time starts at an event horizon and stops at the beginning of time it all happened at once

@pyne1976

Жыл бұрын

@@petevenuti7355 Infinity is weird like that😉

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

No, the blackhole-creates-a-new-universe theory has it that the newly created expanding spacetime becomes *detached* from the parent universe. Not only is the space not connected, but the _time_ is a new distinct thing, not lined up in any way with the parent universe's time. So for something happening the parent black hole to be making corresponding changes to our universe just doesn't work.

@petevenuti7355

Жыл бұрын

@@JohnDlugosz yes, I believe, the event horizon is literally point 0 in time (beginning and end of time) a shell in one frame of reference and a point in another. There's no reason that there can't be more than one theory! We can't prove anything yet. The beginning of time inside of black hole can be the beginning of time in our own universe just as validly as the beginning of time in a new universe. Who are we to think we know?

@JRichardson711

Жыл бұрын

I come to grips with the re sizing of space and time of a baby universe in a black hole by conserving conformity. Basically the scale of space and time are adjusted to much smaller increments, and viola, vast and maybe infinite distances can be confined in a finite area.

Another tour dè force by Isaac Arthur. Amazing just barely begins to describe this channel.

I prefer the terms, the suggestions of physics, the suggestions of thermodynamics, and the speed of light is more like the suggested speed limit.

The universe is a giant fishbowl

@rossemklyn401

Жыл бұрын

With a sea of stars in

@InnocuousRemark

Жыл бұрын

The giant fishbowl is a universe

@j2corpse763

Жыл бұрын

420 man

@TheGreenKnight500

Жыл бұрын

It's actually a ten gallon fish tank

an alien species living inside a sub-universe located inside a black hole in our universe and them realizing that their universe is shrinking via hawking radiation and desperately trying to stop or reverse it sounds like quite the book

Happy holidays Isaac. Looking forward to next year's amazing content!

Merry Christmas and thank you for this wonderful ‘what if’ that I’ve wondered about myself. Cheers, friend!

Thanks for another great video. I love the idea of Plank Stars as an alternative to the singularity at the centre of Black Holes and the problems this causes.

I don't get the benefit of living around a black hole - sure, time slows down, but relatively we still live the same length of time! The only difference would be we see time accelerating massively in the rest of the Universe.

@nasfoda_gamerbrbigproducti5375

Жыл бұрын

Civilizations would be capacle of surviving longer.

@SkorjOlafsen

Жыл бұрын

If the universe is dying (or local space becoming uninhabitable at some future time), then slowing down time is a big win. You extend the deadline for your civilization. You also become rather hard to aim weapons at from outside.

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

@@SkorjOlafsen No, you slow down _your_ time, so you have less subjective time to spend in the dying universe.

I only recently discovered your channel, this is my first new video of yours. so stoked!

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

Welcome aboard!

@demounit

Жыл бұрын

thanks man, happy to be here. happy holidays and thanks for the cosmic pondering sessions!

@FrnnkEducation

Жыл бұрын

@demo you gotta go deep in thr archives. This guy's beyong omega level genius

@demounit

Жыл бұрын

@@FrnnkEducation haha don't worry I have been working my way through! still so so much to go!

Always enjoy your videos. Great content and excellent delivery!

woah, isn't this concept about the 'multiple dense object' black hole presented in "the abyss beyond dreams"?

What if time in a black hole is experienced backwards? We are watching material fall into a singularity in reverse. We experience entropy increasing, but from the outside it is decreasing. While for an ourside viewer it might seem reasonable that we can see them. For us it would mean that we have to look into the future. So both sides of the event horizon are sepparated.

19:40 oh man... this reminds me of when i was a kid. My physics teacher wasn't exasperated, but she was really amused whenever my hand shot up.

Personal thoughts on this. From within a black hole looking out, we'd probably still see space moving away from us even before the cosmic horizon, as its expanding its distance from us due to our being closer to the singularity and moving at a faster speed away from the cosmic horizon, which might give an illusion of expansion. This could make it seem like its behaving differently to how a black hole behaves for an inside observer while all the mathematics are actually the same. I feel that this fits better when thinking universe is falling internally from every point into a space that is not the one it currently occupies allowing for motion through time. Just some personal and amateur ideas on this. Great video and thanks for sharing.

Yet again my friend you and family 💖 well done and happy XMASS 🎅

Around 11 minutes. Space isn't expanding everywhere, its not expanding inside gravitationally bound objects like the Local Group and its certainly not expanding inside our bodies. It expands faster in large voids.

So it doesn't sound like there's any strong reason to believe we're living in a lock hole, that civilizations could live in a black hole, that if they could, we know anything about them. But we're learning more as we go. Much of what we already know doesn't make any sense, even to most cosmologist. But it's not completely impossible for someone to kind of sort of safely live in one version of a black hole that probably doesn't exist anywhere.

Issac do you think cyclic big bangs could be caused by increasing expansion?. If separating quarks produces more, what happens when the expansion is so great locally that it overcomes the quark coupling strength? That would generate a quark soup, just like the beginning.

Thank you for explaining some of these details i didn't understand before. Like why the rate of expansion increases with distance

Good stuff as always, Isaac

Do an episode about quark stars. It's an interesting concept with little good content about it.

Thanks Isaac! This is an AWESOME episode!!!

Hey Isaac! Can you please enable the subtitles? They are disabled and it would really help people who have hearing problems

I wish I could find an audio version I accidentally wrote this on a reply but I love this and everything about it especially the fact that the perceived questions of the 15th dimensional chess that he's playing are instantly answered it is a highly intelligent gift that is not dictated through the lack of proper speech and I appreciate how your brain is wired I had a very profound speech impediment growing up and it just reinforces my beliefs that just because you might sound a little different or your perception is a little skewed from others does not mean that there's a lack of intelligence it could be the exact opposite very easily and I believe in most cases it is thank you Isaac I love listening to you at night every night I really appreciate you in my life

If we did live in a blackhole, would that be the reason we feel the flow of time?

Humanity should be glad we are not on a star cast out into intergalactic space between galaxies . .alone.

My favorite theory might be the idea that dark energy and dark matter are actually just programming bugs in our simulation and we weren't supposed to notice them.

@JM-zg2jg

Жыл бұрын

Programming bugs??? Those parameters whatever their actual cause, are fundamental to the functioning of the universe as it exists. So if we are a simulation, meant to simulate the Universe as it currently is. Then it follows that they had to be intentional. Also, us being in a simulation doesn’t mean that we are the reason for the simulation. They could just have a really advanced simulation of a galaxy, with us as irrelevant NPCs that don’t even get examined. So what we notice doesn’t even matter.

@eric212234

Жыл бұрын

Or the programmers weren't clever enough to come up with a stable system without them ;p

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

@@eric212234 That's more like it. DM is _necessary_ for the structure of our universe. Imagine the programming interns assigned the job not being able to get it to work, and the manager says to just hack in the right result.

@itheuserfirst3186

Жыл бұрын

Well of course. The universe is all because of us.

@eric212234

Жыл бұрын

@@itheuserfirst3186 He did say his 'favorite', not the one he thought most probable.

Ooooh yeah! New SFIA with black holes!

If we can entangle particles and have a set with us and drop the rest in a black hole could we get data out via the spins?

it seems like a lot of really specific niche fields like the hypothetical cosmology on this channel or (in my personal experience) certain very Niche subsets of manufacturing, can really only be learned by self study through just using the internet. There are some subjects that are so niche and that so few people know about that you have like 10000 to 1 odds or less of even being able to find an expert in it.

If the black hole is like a server that breaks down everything to pure information or if it punches a hole into a seperate universe it can bypass most of the counter arguments quite easily

I've thought that we could live on the edge of the accretion disc of a black hole. That would explain things like paranormal things. We would never know as time would flow extremely slow (normal to us) and fast from a distance out. Just a thought

I've always wondered that since Space:1999 and TOS amoeba episode. The other being the Universe inside a dark Oort Cloud.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you all

1:18 I could have SWORN you mentioned "a bag of DMT" at this point, and promptly spat soda all over my keyboard.

Happy Aurthursday

Merry Winter Solstice Holidays!

I guess Kripe from Bing Bang theory found a new career doing KZread videos. Good for you! You were my favowite character💙

I love what you do. My tiny brain has major problems with black holes, dark matter, and the cosmos. I believe that the electrical/magnetic positive/negative properties of solar "systems" to be more likely.

Happy Anniversary JWST

Great video on a very complicated idea!

23:38 "beat thermodynamics and entropy" has this already been covered in another episode? if not I'm requesting it

One of the most profound things I know now is that if the Sun vanished, we literally could not know for 8 minutes.

At 15:41 you mention that after a merge of black holes, the new event horizon would have a diameter the same as different black holes combined. That is wrong. That would mean that the volume inside the event horizon was increased 8 times if two black holes of equal mass combined.

None of the black hole models consider dark energy or rapidly expanding space within the black hole as would have been the case in the inflationary period of the universe.

No Latest Santa Tech Episode?

Hey, your advertisement for Nord VPN is incorrect. A VPN only encrypts your data after it reaches their server, so it would not protect you from a man-in-the-middle attack like the one you described. Furthermore, VPNs don't really offer protection from hackers anyway, but are there to ensure privacy.

You can't put a bag of holding inside another, but you can materialise a TARDIS inside another TARDIS. Time Lord science is just better.

People often mistakenly only refer to a Black Holes influence on space (and matter), but space is in fact spacetime...and thus it affects time porportionally to the space its affecting.

6:00 I'm surprised you didn't talk about schwarzschild radius here.

I guess I'm going to be watching this episode hungry and thirsty

When the universe was “opaque”, photons interactions would be on a time scale of once per thousand years. 6:24

That probably explains why we haven’t been able to discover other life and why the universe is expanding.

lol i been commenting about this for 2 years, so glad you made a episode about this theory. it does explain a whole lot

@corygriffiths4394

Жыл бұрын

Probably explains why we haven’t been able to discover other life outside of our universe

I can usually follow along pretty well, but today I think I'm the one who's "...dense enough to be a black hole." ! I guess you lost me fairly early on when you said that inside the event horizon of the black hole it might be fairly rarified. I don't get that. I thought gravity was so strong meaning everything was squished down insanely bigly (like my scientific language?) so much so, in fact, that even light couldn't get away from being squished. What am I getting wrong? I wrote that about a third of the way in, but persevered to the end, and managed to understand one or two things. Glad you mentioned that even the pros find it confusing! Happy New Year all!

It could provide an intresting explanation for the observable expansion.

You could totally leave a neutron star ring. If you could move the stars in the first place then you could conceivably dissolve the singularity by moving the ring out wider. The inverse square law still works. This is probably the only way to enter and exit an event horizon. You could store loads of energy and mass this way conceivably fighting off entropy. For a late universe species this would be awesome. You have time dialation working in your favor. You can manufacture your mega projects in what seems like no time at all. you can run supercomputers coming up with new ways to recycle and maintain Energy reserves. Neutron stars last a really long time.

I haven't watched this yet, but as soon as I saw the Penrosian topic I went singularly YESSS!! Finally! Scale this current cosmos far enough and you have a singularity!

@Robustacap

Жыл бұрын

Scratch that "Penrosian".. there was talk of Black Holes but not much of the insides (which yeah, is a mystery).

It's black holes all the way down man. Recursive reality?

I had wondered this question at one point because there are aspects of our universe that correspond to aspects of a black hole in some analogous way. Like dark energy increasing over time corresponding to how larger and larger black holes are able to absorb more and more matter which makes the hole larger and less dense the way dark energy is making our universe larger and less dense. But then again, we have a lot of aspects of nature that take on analogous structures. e.g. the atom is the solar system is the galaxy in terms of density in the center vs the edges.

@Dragrath1

Жыл бұрын

Its not talked about nearly enough but work on studying the behavior of the general unconstrained and unsimplified Einstein field equations such as work by Matthew Kleban and Leonardo Senatore JCAP10 2016 show that the appearance of irreducible off diagonal terms which grow nonlinearly with distance amplifying any initial anisotropies in an expanding universe will naturally reproduce all the effects attributed to dark energy purely as a consequence of gravity and conservation of information.

Given that when a black hole finally explodes at the end of it's life then could that be when in another part of space/time a white hole/big bang is about to happen?

Interesting, I was under the impression that we all live in a yellow submarine 🤔😅

Regarding General Relativity one issue that hasn't really received enough attention is the underlying assumptions in our models we use to simplify the mathematics of the Einstein field equations. In particular work "Inhomogeneous and anisotropic cosmology" by Matthew Kleban and Leonardo Senatore JCAP10 2016 they showed through a proof by self contradiction that in the case for a sufficiently large (i.e. limit as the size approaches infinity) initially expanding 3 space + 1 time dimensional manifold that is to some degree inhomogeneous and anisotropic can never support the conditions needed for there to be a maximum spatial volume as it would require two mutually self contradictory properties within the metric tensor. The crux of this is that the existence of this proof shows that the Einstein field equations as we generally have considered them are not internally self consistent or rather put another way the violate the conservation of information. It isn't too hard to show that the crux of this problem comes down to the assumption that the rate of expansion is able to be the same everywhere since this turns out to require the deletion of information on the Universes initial conditions in all possible frames of reference. Its important to note that in information theory information is the deviations from symmetry needed to fully describe a system which means that our so called standard model of cosmology is fundamentally at odds with the conservation of information. This cosmological model builds off of assuming we can use perturbation theory to describe our universe as a small deviation from the Friedmann Lemaitre Robertson Walker metric. I.e. within the unconstrained Einstein field equations the only way for a universe to expand at a constant rate is if and only if there is no information content to the Universe because otherwise the nature of gravitational attraction will always not only conserve any initial anisotropies but cause them to be amplified as there will always be more underdensities than over densities over time in such an expanding universe. These terms represented in the asymmetries within the between is will notably always result in a net acceleration of expansion as the net expansion rate vectors at every point averaged out at large scales will always grow without bound. This is because these off diagonal element terms do not drop off with distance and instead are additive thus while they may be small locally where the diagonal elements are large as the diagonal terms become smaller these terms will continue to grow nonlinearly as volume is a function of distance cubed. This contribution notably looks exactly like "dark energy" in terms of mathematical formalism under the conventional assumptions cosmologist make, a.k.a. the so called cosmological principal, and thus it suggests we can completely drop dark energy and thus simplify the underlying model considerably by eliminating independent variables at the cost that you can not simplify the Einstein field equations outside the trivial empty set solution. A.k.a. there are no valid nontrivial solutions to the Einstein field equations which are linearizable as the off diagonal elements of the metric tensor will always grow to dominate large scale behavior for any initially expanding universe. I must emphasize that if you account for this you get a lot of stuff emerging automatically from the mathematics for free for one this includes the irreversible arrow of time, and the laws of thermodynamics purely as a consequence of information being conserved within any and all possible time-slices of spacetime. (You also aren't really breaking energy conservation anymore as energy and the past interactions of the light cone become both constrained by the conservation of information) More importantly however is you get a direct connection between local properties of the metric and the total entropy of space within that time-slice. This means that so long as the Einstein field equations are not artificially constrained to "simplify" their mathematical behavior they will always become a non local hidden variable theory where the hidden variables are the initial conditions. This means that Bell's inequality will always be satisfied in effect because the rate of expansion everywhere will be uniquely defined by the interactions within that region's past light cone. The cost of course is that the rate of expansion will always be a higher rank tensor or at least rank 2. However there is an even more interesting potential revelation I have noticed which needs further verification but there are some strong similarities with these unconstrained Einstein field equations and the solutions to the Schrodinger equations for harmonic oscillators that suggest there may be a natural quantization of the metric with a nonzero ground state. In this case there will always be a nonzero, non local contribution for every bit of information in the universe within each element of the metric, if this is the case then if we assume an initial distribution that is for all intents and purposes random then the larger the universe the more significant the nonlocal contributions to the diagonal terms of the metric tensor will be, taking a limit analysis this then allows us to derive empirically the general formalism of MOND as a proportional ratio between the background nonlocal gravity elements and the more localized conventional gravitational terms. Now we have a reason for why MOND fails in galaxy clusters but works well for relatively isolated galaxies and we have an explanation for why all efforts to detect "dark matter" have utterly failed and the only thing we have done is to simplify our initial model and enforce information conservation over all time steps of the computational model of the Einstein field equations. This also looks to be able to resolve the information paradox because the off diagonal terms of the metric tensor are a sum of symmetric terms in superposition which is what mathematically in quantum mechanics leads to the derivation of the Pauli exclusion principal. This naturally implies that the metric itself behaves like Dirac spinors and thus implies that if GR is to be quantized then its likely the only valid way to do so is for the metric to be defined uniquely at every "quanta" of spacetime. If this is the case as it appears to be then at some small scales this should result in the metric itself fighting against further gravitational collapse as the off diagonal terms weaken the magnitude of gravity as one approaches the scale of quantization. If this is the case then one observational implication is that there should be no hard transition from Neutron star to black hole as the escape velocity could only asymptotically approach the speed of light with increasing mass and likewise as mass increases the gravitational redshifted would grow larger and larger until the spectrum becomes redshifted towards the Hawking limit. Then you would expect Super Massive Black holes to be in close approximation to the conventional Schwarzschild/Kerr limits. Such a soft transition might help naturally explain some of the peculiarities related to the GW170817 and GRB 170817A Neutron star binary merger which suggested energetic emissions from the resulting compact object even though by all accounts it should have become a black hole. Simpler model, less assumptions and quite possibly resolves all known cosmological and quantum gravity related paradoxes? Occam's razor seems to be strongly pointing in this direction especially given the work of Nathan Secrest et al APJl 2021 which largely falsifies the so called cosmological principal within the observable universe by showing that there is a 4.9 sigma discrepancy (only a 1 in 2 million chance of results being a statistical fluke) between the CMB dipole and a dipole of cosmologically distant quasars taken from the WISE extended mission catalog meaning that there must be a significant cosmological contribution to the CMB dipole. This notably also neatly resolves the axis of evil crisis in cosmology as a cosmological dipole should naturally align with the higher multipoles unlike a kinematic dipole, in fact the best fit suggests that the dipole is primarily cosmological! Based on this there isn't really any grounds to stand on that don't suggest we need to dive into the full inhomogeneous and anisotropic Einstein field equations in the large scale limit. In that context it is frankly absurd to me that this hasn't gotten noticed yet by the mainstream cosmological and to a lesser extent quantum gravity communities as the obvious implication of the No big Crunch theorem is that the core assumption of Lambda CDM, that the contributions of asymmetries can cancel out is fundamentally and irreconcilably flawed with the criteria for any manifold to be a valid solution to the Einstein field equations. And yes this proof is only applicable in the large scale limit i.e. for a universe that is locally approximately flat but given that is exactly what we observe in the CMB its damn well applicable to our observable universe based on wok such as Nathan Secrest et al pretty handily kills the argument for the standard dipole interpretation. And as any and all valid solutions will always be nonlinear this has the consequence that we will likely never be able to know the far future evolution of the universe as spacetime will be just as chaotic and unpredictable as any other system of multivariate partial differential equations. However as we can eliminate the need for unobserved quantities like dark energy dark matter that appear only from fitting observations to models and quite probably ditch at least some component of dark matter Occam's razor seems to be screaming at me that this needs more attention even if it would be computationally inconvenient.

It’s black holes all the way down-Issac at some point, probably

If black holes on the scale of lightyears could have issues with dark energy, would that come into play in building a Birch planet?

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

Birch Planets are upperedned at aroung one galactic mass to keep them at a radius that has Earthlike gravity outside the event horizon, so around a lgiht year max size, we're really talking even bigger for dark energy messups, not tha tit wouldn't be a minor factor at least.

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

No, because the Dark Energy (as we understand it) won't affect a massive object. Look up Friedman Equations. The rescaling effect is inverse (to some power I don't recall) to mass. That is, it happens in the galactic voids, *not* in or around a huge mass! If D.E. is "something else" that comes into play uniformly everywhere, then it would affect our measurement of G based on distance. In any case, the effect is very small on the scale of light years.

Somebody gotta make a video where the Vine drama bass drops every time he says trillion

I made a dnd adventure based on the idea. My excuse was it sucked up enough materials. The lands was just below the surface, and when it ate it rained, when someone tries too leave they re-enter the other side and straight into the ground.

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

Might have been easier to make it a Torus shaped demiplane, I think Ravenloft and various spelljammer settings played with that, but sounds an interesting bit of worldbuilding either way.

Everybody seems to agree on, that the universe started as an increadible small thingy. I wonder what lead to that conclusion, especially that it does not make much sense.

If you think of the "Rubber Sheet" model of gravity (simplistic as it is) a weight placed upon a suspended rubber sheet produces a dimple that (disregarding friction) simulates the warping of spacetime, bigger weight=bigger dimple and smaller weights will "orbit" it. A black hole is where the curve of the sheet becomes a parabola and the sides of the curve become a tube extending "down" away from the nominally 2 dimensional surface of the sheet. That's how you get an infinite space (sort of, the lifespan of the universe is limited and even with space expanding faster than light speed the tube never has time to grow to infinity) inside of a finite one and the new universe is on the sides of the tube and the mouth of the tube where it goes parallel is the event horizon. The tube initially expanded at a speed much greater than the speed of light and the early universe wasn't transparent which is why you can't see out. If new light or materiel fell in it would appear so scattered as to be undetectable from the inside.

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

I don't think that's right.

@phookadude

Жыл бұрын

@@JohnDlugosz What do you think is wrong with it, aside from trying to simplify things so that most can understand it?

8:07 - Now we need an episode about whether or not we are inside a white hole.

Hey Isaac, have you heard of the physics model quantised inertia? Its main point is hawking radiation being emitted inwards from the hubble horizon called unrah radiation causes inertia!

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

I know of it, it was an interesting concept and I always love alternatives to the main models as they always feel clunky to me these days, but I don't think its held up too well to critical review

@Hugh345678

Жыл бұрын

@@isaacarthurSFIA you should have another look. Some other physicists have gotten ahold of the model and expanded on it in recent years, it's far from a dead model. It may debatably have experimental proof to it now!

@Hugh345678

Жыл бұрын

@@isaacarthurSFIA it may even be the cause of gravity! A Casimir like effect between objects and the hubble horizon!

Can a blackhole be ripped apart? If so, I wonder if our big bang might not have been a singularity that was ripped apart or erupted in a much larger universe.

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

possibly by dark energy, it gets contemplated in Big Rip scenarios

Another fascinating video

@isaacarthurSFIA

Жыл бұрын

Glad you enjoyed it

🎶 Black hole sun please come and was away the rain. 🎶

My imagination takes off when I hear Author speak

I don't think things started as a singularity. Instead I think it's in the false vacuum collapses at the end of one universe and creates a new energy scale for the next universe. And when the false vacuum collapses and the new lower energy scale is established everything is nearly absolutely hot. Which causes rapid expansion. And the reason it seems like the was a period of expansion faster than light is the previous universe. And the super massive black holes are the remain from the previous universe. And I think the vacuum collapses when the vacuum energy density is high enough that virtual photons and such start forming on their own. Which causes the entire universe to become absolute hot before matter is formed bringing down the vacuum density.

@SkorjOlafsen

Жыл бұрын

A singularity in a model just tells us that there's a point where the model stops working, not that we'll encounter actual infinities. Just as cosmology has moved beyond the idea of the universe expanding from an infinitely dense point, it's a bit of nonsense to say that a collapsing star would fall into an infinitely dense point. All we know is: to look that closely we'll need a new model.

@theFLCLguy

Жыл бұрын

@@SkorjOlafsen yes, anything that involves infinity or nothingness is just a place holder for something we don't understand.

07:40 Wouldn't the singularity be in all directions around you once you cross the event horizon due to the space-time distortion inside a blackhole, and everything is accelerating away from us since we can only see things that are closer to the singularity as we are accelerating towards it faster than the light from the outside is falling towards us from "above" and so outside light can never catch up?

Wow. I've never been this early. Just decided to see if there was new content and there was only minutes ago.

Would gravitational waves from inside the event horizon of a large black hole radiate out past the event horizon? If so could information and communication from inside be possible that way using artificial gravitational waves?

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

No. You can think of an EH as space falling in like a river flowing; as it's faster than light, signals can't propagate upstream.

Can he say "The sheriff is nearer." ?

An ice skater can pull her limbs in tight to spin faster, or extend them out to spin slower. Could a black-hole-scale megastructure do the same thing to turn an event horizon 'on or off'? Massive civilizations deep in interstellar space could tell their structure to contract by a few percent to form an event horizon, and then expand by a few percent now and then to reduce the escape velocity enough to let them send out probes.

@JohnDlugosz

Жыл бұрын

Nope, there's no going back.