These naked singularities are formed in the clothes dryer to disappear my socks

@johnwollenbecker1500

4 ай бұрын

They’re embarrassed by being called naked. So they steal your socks.

@JorgetePanete

4 ай бұрын

I like the idea that for every sock that enters a black hole, a tupperware lid exits a white hole

@EightBit72

4 ай бұрын

The socks have quantum tunnelled to an alternate universe and probably ain’t coming back.

@mfryer100

4 ай бұрын

People are always accusing the dryer but not the washer.

@shkotayd9749

4 ай бұрын

@@JorgetePaneteTWO lids for every one sock 😩

Singularities ...that' s a curious plural.

@chrismuir8403

4 ай бұрын

Like "Units".

@pervertt

3 ай бұрын

Or panties.

@RetroGameSpacko

3 ай бұрын

Unifications.

@DanielJones-wj7mm

3 ай бұрын

Think physics, not English language. 🤷‍♀

@BigZebraCom

3 ай бұрын

@@DanielJones-wj7mm 🦓

Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges wrote about a naked singularity in a short tale named The Aleph. It was located in a cellar, under the stairs in the house of a friend who was also a writer, and it was situated in such a way that if you put your head in a certain position, you could see everything. And everything as in EVERYTHING at once.

@rajanne2947

3 ай бұрын

Wouldn't your head disappear and be sucked into it FOR EVER? Wouldn't your cellar, house & all? Huh?

@nekosaiyajin8529

3 ай бұрын

Everything, what?

@arielperez797

3 ай бұрын

Sounds very interesting. I like how the story is named Aleph....the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet. Wonder why.

@boring7823

2 ай бұрын

@@arielperez797 I can't be sure of sarcasm, so: It's because ℵ is used by mathematics for infinity, with a subscript eg: ℵ₀ to indicate the type of infinity, where the Aleph-Zero (or Aleph-Null) is the normal (smallest) infinity often represented by "1,2,3 ...".

@arielperez797

2 ай бұрын

@@boring7823 No no sarcasm bro. I love Hebrew for some reason. I'm not even Jewish. And thanks for that! I did not know that about Aleph being infinity. They usually use Greek letters. Another interesting thing about the letter Aleph is that it is silent sometimes. If there isn't a vowel next to it....Aleph is silent.

I think Sabine's "Lumpy Hollandaise Model" of the universe explains everything. LHM for the win!

3 possibilities 1. Naked Singularities are observable, they just aren't that attractive. 2. Naked singularities are a source of depravity, which is like gravity, but dark. 3. Naked singularies cause consciousness. The theory is infinitely transparent, infinitely dense, and it collapses into itself. Nobel me.

@Thomas-gk42

4 ай бұрын

Noble prize, yep😂

@lwmarti

4 ай бұрын

This begs for an extension to the standard model in which singularities have a new quantum property that we'll call "gender." Naked female singularities will be attractive, and male ones will have depravity. Definitely fermions, since two females can't occupy the same place without causing trouble.

@gubx42

4 ай бұрын

@@lwmarti Femions?

@jedahn

4 ай бұрын

Absolute brilliance!

@RemotelySkilled

4 ай бұрын

I love the cynicism. Oh, the creativity they can come up with. And the lack of reason, that is swept under the carpet to make formulas work. I think, that many physicists should rather be artists or musicians. At least, I wouldn't feel so lonely in producing something nobody cares about, but is still recognised as time spent reasonably.

I'm sure the sauce is fine.

@ezraclark7904

4 ай бұрын

I like my hollandaise HOT

@iAmNothingness

4 ай бұрын

​@@ezraclark7904 Jail cell is waiting for you.

@stretchbatchelor

4 ай бұрын

Garlic is synonymous with naked singularity groove.

@davidallison5204

4 ай бұрын

An immersion blender is the solution to sauce where the density is not uniform. ❤

@TomTomicMic

4 ай бұрын

PHD in Science but only two GCSE's in Domestic Science, Roda!?!

Make sure that the butter you add to the egg yolks is just warm, not hot. This is what often causes the undesirable density fluctuations in hollandaise sauce. Also, removing the sauce from the double boiler or heat frequently when whisking to keep the yolks from cooking through also helps with a more evenly distributed density profile.

@matthewsmith4075

3 ай бұрын

I love that I now know why my sauce was messed up by reading a youtube comment about astro-level-physics

@DamnedSilly

26 күн бұрын

For most people I've observed the biggest problem is not having a whisk with a curve closely matched to the pan leaving lumps to build in places then be scraped off.

Thank you very much, Dr Hossenfelder (& team). Very interesting explanations. As always!

Naked singularities are too shy to be detected.

@Manuel_Bache

4 ай бұрын

They better not to be shy, they are naked🤭🤭

@JZsBFF

4 ай бұрын

Then why don't they just put on a horizon or something?

@gregkocher5352

4 ай бұрын

When on an interesting date and I get naked I suddenly become a singularity. And the event horizon gets infinitely large. There, I said it.

@Manuel_Bache

4 ай бұрын

@@JZsBFF Jajaja

@paulgoogol2652

4 ай бұрын

When they are detected they are blurry due to censorship rulings.

Of course there are singularities everywhere. We get reminded every valentine's day 😊

@alienspecies6872

3 ай бұрын

what?

@greenytoaster

3 ай бұрын

​@@alienspecies6872it's called humor

@alienspecies6872

3 ай бұрын

@@greenytoaster 💀

@DannyJoh

3 ай бұрын

Are you trying to say that all we single people are infinitely dense? 😅

@alienspecies6872

3 ай бұрын

@@DannyJoh bro stop roasting

I do love your tongue in cheek humor. Thx again interesting info.

I love her delivery. Very humble

My theory is that Sabine is learning how the algorithm works while staying true to science.

@diversionbob8482

4 ай бұрын

And then she'll publish a paper!

@wnkbp4897

4 ай бұрын

​@@diversionbob8482About the quantum properties of hollandaise sauce? 😋

@RemotelySkilled

4 ай бұрын

Maybe it was conscientiousness towards her audience, elicited by feedback... I'm just guessing...

@melaniecampbell7055

4 ай бұрын

IDK, her weather reports leave much to be desired but at least she doesn't report on ufos & ets like her goofball friend Brian. But hey she's got nearly 1.5 mm subscribers, so whatever she's cooking up in that cauldron she's doing something right.

@RemotelySkilled

4 ай бұрын

@@melaniecampbell7055 Brian Cox?

3:47 Sabine is my favorite German standup comic.

@quangobaud

4 ай бұрын

​@@brutusduran8592There's Henning Wehn and ... um ... um ... I'll get back to you.

@user-dialectic-scietist1

4 ай бұрын

Ha ha ha ha ha ha And Elon Mask!

@byrons1339

4 ай бұрын

I don't eat German sausages, because they are the wurst.

@ProPandaPlays

4 ай бұрын

Lol@@byrons1339

@davidrandell2224

4 ай бұрын

What do you call an angry German: sauerkraut.

Very COOL top, Sabine! And thank you for the detailed explanation.

You always make me smile, Sabine!

As a physicist that isn't currently working as a physicist, I just assumed that all other physicists already considered this as a possibility. I was chatting with my fellow students about this years ago. I think we have all considered this a possibility at some point.

@shawns0762

4 ай бұрын

General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear because matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light" He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. Sound familiar? This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the "missing mass" is dilated mass. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. To date, 6 very low mass galaxies (like NGC 1052-DF2) have been confirmed to show no signs of dark matter. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal.

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

it has zero scientific validity or evidence.. and just like most physics since the 1980,,s pointless

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

dark matter is air.. in space dark matter is helium and hydrogen.. no signs of dark matter doenst mean anything.. theres no sign of air on mt everest or 2 miles higher..but its there.. @@shawns0762

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

hawkings was wrong..admitted he was reong and disavowed most of his theories on blackholes before he died @@Nulli_Di

@nuklearboysymbiote

4 ай бұрын

Probably those who published the paper used to be someone like you: always considered it possible, but are now equipped to properly investigate!

Maybe black holes can’t completely evaporate through Hawking radiation. Maybe they become a naked singularity below a certain threshold of mass. Maybe the concept of „escape velocity“ becomes meaningless once you’re at the quantum scale

@1ApeinSpace

4 ай бұрын

Maybe, if frogs had wings they wouldn't bump there ash when they jump.

@rupertchappelle5303

4 ай бұрын

Nothing evaporates?!?!?!

@Unmannedair

4 ай бұрын

Hawking radiation does require a minimum gravitational curvature... With increasing improbability as the curvature decreases... So yes, kind of.

@jerramygipson6560

4 ай бұрын

Hawking radiation hasn't been observed, it is only a theory. It depends on an event horizon, but those also haven't been proven to exist.

@igorbednarski8048

4 ай бұрын

​@@jerramygipson6560 about Hawking radiation - true, but regarding event horizons we have literally taken pictures of two of those - well, technically pictures of their shadows, since it's not something you can see directly - so I'm not sure how much more evidence would you need to accept them as proven to exist.

I learn so much about science from Sabine. Great channel and she makes it entertaining as well

Good work scientists. thanks Dr. Lady. Sabine. great report.

@PASHKULI

3 ай бұрын

'Dark matter' is not dark, rather invisible, dark matter is an 'expansion substance' a property of the Aether\Ether (known descriptively as Space-Time by modern scientists), and this has the property that it also expands every solar system, every galaxy and the entire universe. Black matter is therefore an expanding matter, so to speak. note: Black holes can only form in the realm of matter (material structure of the Aether), because only in this realm are the necessary conditions available through which they can form. In the other matter-less universe realms (so called Dark matter and Fine\Energy state of 'matter') the formation of black holes is not possible. The Dark Matter in the entire universe is about seven (×7) times more in terms of mass than the total mass of all other forms of matter. 'Dark Matter' is an expanding substance or physical property of the Aether, but on the other hand only through 'Dark Matter' is gravity possible and can function. Dark matter is an interactive mass, which means that it has massive particles which - measured in the atomic range - have an enormous weight. These massive particles have an interaction that is related to both gravity and expansion force (repulsion force - the great force that causes the Universe to expand!), which is why dark matter is an expansion matter and 'gravity' matter. So without the dark matter there would be neither centrifugal force nor gravity. So without gravity no expansion substance can exist, and without expansion matter no gravity. Both factors, centrifugal force and gravity, are everywhere, but they are only perceptible and therefore also measurable, but not visible, because they radiate neither light nor darkness visible to the eye. All coarse material (matter) of all kinds renews itself, thus creating new galaxies, stars and planets etc. During this transformation, which takes place over a period of about 2 billion years, certain residues remain, which are also deposited in the transition zone and in the matter realm as dark energy and as particulate dark matter, which can be captured and measured using special techniques. This Dark Matter therefore has a much higher age than the actual coarse-matter of the visible matter (that reflects light) or the visible part of the universe, which erroneously is called the universe, although this matter realm only makes up a seventh (1/7th) part of the total structure of the universe. Dark matter also plays a certain role, especially with regard to the transport of the stars' "hot" energy (radiation), because without the influence of dark matter this would not be possible. 'Dark matter' and 'black holes' exist in almost incalculable numbers throughout the universe, and also in free space. Black holes contain vast amounts of 'dark matter'.

I looked at the paper. They are talking about collapse of a radially symmetric cloud of dust. The density is a function of the distance from the center only. Apparently some density distributions give you a naked singularity when it collapses. Previously the only stories with naked singularities I knew about had either high spin or high charge. This is not either of those. The dust is uncharged and, if it is radially symmetric, it is not spinning. In principle, we could build one. I see physics simulations crash with NaNs propagating through space often enough that I suspect maybe we shouldn't.

@shawns0762

4 ай бұрын

General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear because matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light" He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. Sound familiar? This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the "missing mass" is dilated mass. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. To date, 6 very low mass galaxies (like NGC 1052-DF2) have been confirmed to show no signs of dark matter. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal.

@Syphirioth

4 ай бұрын

​@@shawns0762 Whatever does exist is the elektron. A very valuable something.

@RemotelySkilled

4 ай бұрын

Not a Number... I have a demotivator pinned to my office wall behind me, showing a lake with an unexplainable void pulling all the water in, saying: "Undefined. You divided by zero, didn't you?"

@GrandActionPotential

4 ай бұрын

@@RemotelySkilled Modeling division using physical systems clearly shows as the divisor approaches zero (0) the quotient value approaches denominator value and the remainder approaches 0. eg 1/0=1

@tim57243

4 ай бұрын

@@shawns0762 Be aware that Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates do a fine job of describing a black hole except for the singularity in the middle. The event horizon is a singularity when you use Schwarzhchild coordinates, but it is a coordinate singularity, not a real one. For example, flat 2d space can be described with polar coordinates. This is a coordinate singularity when the radius is zero, but not a real singularity because you can also describe it with Cartesian coordinates. In contrast, if you are describing a cone, the singularity at the point is real.

Hey, that sounds like a copmletely edible _Hollandaise_ sauce

I'm not a physicist, but I do have a question: wouldn't these make traveling around the cosmos very dangerous? You could zip along in a spaceship and fly right into one of these, since they are not directly observable. Obviously, we are not there yet, and may never get there, but this certainly seems to put a damper on interstellar travel.

@madshorn5826

3 ай бұрын

The economy and the hostility of space puts a damper on interstellar travel more than anything. This would just be another hostile aspect. If we started to import meaningful amounts of metals and stuff from space we'd soon warm the atmosphere just as much as burning fossil fuels due to loss of potential energy in the gravity well. That leaves knowledge to import and that is not economically viable. Please read the essay "High frontier redux" by Charles Stross to appreciate the hostility of space, even before naked singularities should be a worry.

@thundersheild926

3 ай бұрын

No, they would be very weakly interacting, as they are effectively a point, so it's extremely difficult for any particle to actually encounter them in a meaningful way.

@larsnystrom6698

3 ай бұрын

If those naked singularities work as dark matter, they doesn't interact wit ordinary matter, except by gravity. So, no they aren't black holes making matter disappear. I assume!

@jpdemer5

3 ай бұрын

They're much too tiny to matter if you run into them - because you're mostly empty space. Like neutrinos, they'd pass right through you, and your spaceship.

@harounfarhani2138

3 ай бұрын

They don't have an event horizon, so they don't have a point of no return.

Love this explanation. Never heard this before. ❤

I seem to recall naked singularities being used in SF for everything from electricity generation to an ultra efficient spaceship drive. There was even a joke ad in Analog Magazine that advertised them as the perfect way to dispose of household garbage. I want one.

@bradysmith4405

4 ай бұрын

I keep hoping for some sort of physics breakthrough like that which would make deep space accessible. Warp drive, tachyons, negative mass, anything like that to make a mathematically sound loophole around light speed.

@madshorn5826

3 ай бұрын

​@@bradysmith4405 Good stories are a joy, but space is a hostile place and the economy doesn't check out. Even with a breakthrough there will "only" be knowledge to import. Don't get me wrong, that would be totally cool, but we are facing existential crises here on Earth. Dreaming about the equivalent of dragons and magic won't save us. Please read the essay "High frontier redux" by Charles Stross to get perspective on space travel.

@thundersheild926

3 ай бұрын

​@@bradysmith4405 I'm afraid i have some bad news then. Even if you had negative mass and were able to construct a warp drive of some kind, you still need to figure out a way to accelerate it to faster than the speed of light.

@bradysmith4405

3 ай бұрын

@@thundersheild926 doesn’t negative mass always travel above light speed, like a tachyon? Yes there would still probably be challenges in figuring things out. But then again we see the universe expanding at a rate effectively 3x faster than light so there’d have to be a way to replicate that

@bradysmith4405

3 ай бұрын

@@thundersheild926 plus even near light speed travel would allow travel to the nearest few stars

As a non-physicist, it seems more likely to me that our formulas for gravity are wrong rather than dark matter exists. On a planetary scale, Newtonian physics works, on a stellar scale, Einstein's physics works. But on a galactic scale,, gravity works on a different formula with some extra variable.

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

ahaha dark matter is AIR..it should be aslled clear matter.. dark/clear matter is helium and hydrogen in outerspace air... its thin but its there.. its more than all stars and bodies in the universe.. gravity works perfectly as designed.. if you take a single rod shaped cone of the universe from center to outer.. everything is FALLING to the outside.. in all directions.. it has reached its terminal velocity.. in all directions.. everything is falling in all directions.. it agrees with EVERY calculation of perfect gravity.. these fools waste their imaginations on star trekkie nothingnesses

@PenguinDT

4 ай бұрын

Before we even question Einstein's formulae, shouldn't we ask; how accurate are the mass calculations of galaxies to begin with? There's so much baryonic matter we can't detect. For example, we can barely detect exo-satellites - or extra-galactic planets for that matter. Heck, even the theoretical Oort cloud is yet to actually seen or measured - and if it exists, most systems likely have one of those, too. In other words - if it doesn't glow, we can detect it only by mere luck (i.e. it passing past a star).

@SpecialEDy

4 ай бұрын

@PenguinDT My understanding is that the problem is stars orbiting too fast on the outer edges of the galaxy, and too slow near the center. It seems obvious to me that if this is the case, that stars drag each other along in the disc. James Web is in a Legrange point where it is orbiting the sun too fast and the earth too slow, Saturn's rings are tidally locked to one other where outer material moves too fast and inner material moves too slow. A disc of stars would be gravitational bound to each other, not to the "core". A star in the core would have the mass of the galaxy pulling it equally in all directions and would be weightless, motionless. Stars orbit faster near the edge of the disc because there is more mass below them, stars nearer the center orbit slower because there is less mass below them, and all of the stars are tidally locked to their neighbors so the entire disc is partially locked together. I assume physicists know this, because it's obvious enough for me to figure it out, but I know that they can't simulate it because it is an "n-body simulation" problem. Computers cannot accurately model systems with more than two gravitationally significant bodies, and a galaxy has billions.

@bryanherman1035

3 ай бұрын

Not only gravity, but mass, distance, space-time, photons, and energy are not well understood on galactic scales. I have personally never believed that the 'expansion of the universe' is exponential, because that theory uses the redshift as it's metric, and our understanding of the properties of photons on those space-time scales is not great (IMO). As far as the supposed 'fact' that 74% of matter and 22% of energy are 'missing', I think that it boils down to "well, our theories say this, and we think they are right, so there must be some other explanation". It seems that they assume that 'empty space' is truly empty, not thinking that even, say, a grain of sand in every cubic kilometer of the universe could account for all that 'missing' mass and energy, and would have little to no observable effect on the surrounding matter or space. Or, perhaps, there is the all-mysterious black holes, which they assume follow the same laws of physics as everything else in the universe, even though, truly, we have no idea what they are or how they affect space, time, energy, mass, ect, ect. I'm probably wrong, but I don't think they are right either.

One of the reasons I love to watch Sabine's videos is to hear "...dark matter, if it exists. Which it may not."

Thank you for finally doing this story! Naked Singularities would also be called Planck Mass black holes, where their event horizon is the Planck Length.

Imagine a black hole with a charge so large and/or spin near the speed of light it cancel out it's own gravity that would be crazy

@ianstopher9111

4 ай бұрын

Extremal black holes (either charge or spin) I'm sure have been studied quite a lot, so that "canceling" doesn't work I'm afraid. Extremal black holes are used in various theories to argue for the weak gravity conjecture.

@nziom

4 ай бұрын

@@ianstopher9111 I thought this is where "naked" singularity hypothesis come from is it not?

@jimby812

4 ай бұрын

Aren’t these called kugelblitz or white holes? Or am I confusing it with something else?

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

its a theory.. nothing has been STUDIED @@ianstopher9111

@nziom

4 ай бұрын

@@jimby812 no white holes are the opposite they eject matter constantly

Once i saw a singularity in my bathroom im not kidding

@AMPProf

4 ай бұрын

poop jokes are fun

@Henyckma

3 ай бұрын

@@AMPProf Who thought of a toilet? No one did but you. If you search for "luxury bathroom" in Google images, none contains a toilet. Poop jokes are not fun. Poor minds have poor ideas.

@MadRat70

3 ай бұрын

You would only truly know if you stuck your head in it and looked out.

@ika5666

Ай бұрын

@@MadRat70 He maybe have put his test particles into it and saw them returning...

Thanks for alerting us to a new explanation. Maybe one of these ideas will provide some impetus to find better and newer data to lead to a new hypothesis even if the original purpose is not served.

This kind of content is the best content on your channel.

I'm just a scientific layman but I thought I had a fairly good grasp on modern scientific thinking. I'm going to have to do more research on these, "naked singularities." I can normally follow along with you but I got lost today.

@pidaras_pidarasina

4 ай бұрын

Probably became it's yet another fairy tale from theoretical physicists.

@charliedulin

4 ай бұрын

Just a black hole that has already sucked in anything close enough that had formed or could have formed an accretion disk. Like a planet that has cleared its orbit.

@MewPurPur

4 ай бұрын

@@charliedulin You described a dormant black hole, not a naked singularity.

@charliedulin

4 ай бұрын

@@MewPurPur could you describe the difference then for me and johnallen6945's

@charliedulin

4 ай бұрын

Ok so ive looked at the difference. If it doesnt have an event horizon then light etc can escape. So how would they be dark matter? We, in my understanding, should be able to see them easier than dormant black holes.

Well, I've pondered the idea that perhaps all matter is made from tiny black holes ever since I was a little kid and first heard of black holes, so if this is anything like that, maybe it's not so new. In case you're wondering, my childhood idea, which I still hold, was that the probability of a ray of light actually hitting the tiny central matter of the black hole and being absorbed was so low that it explained reflection and refraction. I've added a lot more ideas to that idea now, but I'm not a scientist.

@Orimanus

4 ай бұрын

The idea that electrons are tiny black holes does exist (look up Black Hole Electron) but it is currently incompatible with quantum mechanics. Physics does get weird at those scales though so you never know

@yahm0n

4 ай бұрын

I have had the same thought. The counter argument is that other forces are much stronger than gravity when talking about the normal matter that composes us. I find that the counter argument does not succeed in refuting the idea, however. The strength of the other forces maybe plays a role in preventing tiny singularities from consuming everything and growing into large black holes. If matter were composed of tiny singularities, it could explain some quantum behavior in a ways that are more simple to understand. When the energy in a naked singularity gets out of balance to where the repulsive forces become stronger than gravity, it would briefly or perhaps instantly decompose from being a singularity, release a fixed amount of mass/energy to stabilize, and then reestablish itself as a naked singularity. Perhaps the nakedness of the singularity is simply that it is right on the edge of decomposing, allowing it to have these types of interactions. I expect that when we finally do fully understand the experiments that quantum physics is based on, we will have explanations that are similarly simple to this idea.

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

that is 3 contradictory statements in one..all of which are not supported by any science..

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

weird is not a scientific term nor is it a scientific description.. scale has nothing to do with laws of the universe.. either its compatible with all other laws or is not.. its NOT..@@Orimanus

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

thats makes absolutely zero mathematical or physics sense..its a great star trekkie theory with ZERO scientific evidence @@yahm0n

Thanks Sabine! What credence do you give to sub-GeV DM particles? I think they’re just particles but lighter than WIMPs (they could be axions as well as ~eV particles)

How do you find these interesting papers ? Its amazing how you find interesting content everyday.

Love this channel. Keep it up and keep at that Hollandaise sauce! You'll get it eventually!

Primordial Singles? People that were single before social media, and still are.

@leonvanheerden9174

Ай бұрын

😂

has she made a video explaning in more details about naked singularities? if not it would be nice to see an explanation and some theories about it, i found naked singularities a very interesting topic that might be important in future discoveries so it would be nice a video about it

I, for one, am extremely interested in your follow-up on this topic. (After they write the next paper, of course). I have thought for a while that dark matter was just black holes. Is there anyone way at all, in all of science, that a black hole would not produce a lot of meaningful 'gravitational lensing'? I feel like I am right* if I could just explain this.

Huh, those naked singularities sound a lot like micro-singularities, which were brought up in the show Enterprise.

@Hentai-Semite

4 ай бұрын

They are the deus ex machina to protect another deus ex machina or How to explain the existence of unicorns with the use of Goblins. Just imagine the level of distortion this would create. btw I like your comment , as the show was most likely the inspiration for the theory.

About 04:57 _It must add up to 4 times that of the normal matter._ It's hilarious to call the minority of all matter in the universe "normal".

@yeroca

4 ай бұрын

Not everyone uses "normal" in the statistical sense. Normal in this context means, "The stuff that makes up all of the things we can see."

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

Technically it's called "baryonic" dark matter, but the word tends to raise more questions than it answers. It's "normal" in the sense that it's the stuff that we know.

@DR_1_1

4 ай бұрын

Astronomy is suddenly losing some panache, as an exact science... astrology even comes to mind.

@SkorjOlafsen

4 ай бұрын

I always say "familiar matter" for just this reason. Dark matter is the normal kind, we're made of the weird kind. Which should surprise no one.

@yeroca

4 ай бұрын

@@SkorjOlafsen😆

How about topping off these amazing videos with a 30 or 45 second blooper real at the end? You nail so much so fast, I am sure you have some do overs for each video. Or maybe you are able to do these in one take? Keep up the great work, it is very much appreciated.

Hi Sabine. I would love to hear more about naked singularities, specifically how would it be possible that they would not have an event horizon; it just does not make sense to me how they would not acquire an event horizon at after their formation. Not saying that I do not believe it is not a valid solution, I just really do not understand it and would love to learn this and how they might actually form

The problem I’ve always had with the idea of naked singularities is that how could they not have an event horizon? If the mass is sufficient for form a singularity, then again, just like a black hole, there will be a point where light can’t escape, and that’s the equivalent of a black hole. Actually, it is a black hole. I’ve never seen a good explanation otherwise. When I took physics back in the late 1960s to early 1970s, these questions were t really there as it was all so rarely discussed and speculative that even black holes were new enough so that not much was understood.

@danielh.9010

4 ай бұрын

I'll second that. I've just read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_singularity to get a better understanding, but it still eludes me. Seems to be a quite complex phenomenon.

@danielh.9010

4 ай бұрын

So I've found a video from another physics channel (PBS Space Time), that I regularly watch, to try to explain the concept: kzread.info/dash/bejne/Y45pyNCwhdC6g7w.html . However, it mostly explains by which ways a naked singularity can NOT form, so it's still somewhat elusive. But I hope you still find it interesting!

@challox3840

4 ай бұрын

For the example of a singularity with superextremal angular momentum, the frame dragging is sufficient that the inner and outer ergospheres pass through each other, which necessarily means that the event horizon disappears.

@paulkosmala2730

4 ай бұрын

regardless of how much mass you have, angular momentum pushes things away from center. when angular momentum is higher than that massive gravity pull, you can have a high enough mass to form a singularity, and yet have enough spin to spin things out, it might remove the event horizon (if it starts spinning fast enough, the 'mass of the singularity' would be pulled out to the stable state roughly in equilibrium with the previous event horizon radius)... in which case I would posit that interacting with singularity would be like interacting with an impossibly fast spinning neutron star. that's a layman's guess. but light not being able to escape, is a feature of black holes, not the definition, sufficiently collapsed mass is what a singularity is... but there are a few other forces at work than gravity in a black hole. charge and spin being the big other two. light being able to escape is not inherently impossible, just not easily understandable with what black hole physics we've readily observed.

@jameshart2622

4 ай бұрын

General Relativity, especially at the extremes, takes our intuition and just laughs. If the math says naked singularities are possible, I'm inclined to believe it. Of course, knowing what math that complex actually says is a challenge in its own right, so :shrug:.

Really glad scientists are talking about this, after all, I made it up in a novel I'm publishing later this year

@abebuckingham8198

3 ай бұрын

I also guessed invisible singularities since they have gravity and they're invisible. It's probably quantum hurricanes feeding on vacuum pressure just to mess with us though. Reality is contrarian.

Thank you for making science fun and interesting 🤔

This is similar to an idea we had over wine many years back at PI. It would be fun to read over this math.

Why do the naked singularities lack an event horizon? Are they spinning at the speed of light?

@jedahn

4 ай бұрын

We just make shit up. It's dumb. I'm pretty sure the religion that created peer review ended up tying itself in knots with its most agreed upon explanation too. It wasn't religion that was the problem, tho we pretend it is, it's actually just people. The two share the same 'problem'.

@shawns0762

4 ай бұрын

There is no singularities. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear because matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light" He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. Sound familiar? This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the "missing mass" is dilated mass. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. To date, 6 very low mass galaxies (like NGC 1052-DF2) have been confirmed to show no signs of dark matter. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal.

@UmbraHand

4 ай бұрын

@@jedahnImagine thinking Peer Review is a religion, instead of the associated societal problems that make poor quality peer reviews. It’s like claiming food as a religion for all the dietician bs out there.

@omargoodman2999

4 ай бұрын

The most obvious answer would be that the width of any Event Horizon is less than a Planck Length and, as such, too small to yield any "real" effect. In other words, it's not _really_ that it has "no" Event Horizon, it's that _light_ is *too big* to _enter_ the Event Horizon.

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

and youd be wrong..as usual.. again @@omargoodman2999

I'd be interested in an explanation of the different processes that yield either a black hole or a naked singularity. Why is there no horizon for such an extreme curvature?

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

Isn't it much odder that there *is* such a thing as a horizon? The horizon is not a matter of curvature. In fact the curvature at the horizon can be arbitrarily small. The horizon is the boundary of a region from which light cannot exit. Why does space-time create such a thing?

@howtoappearincompletely9739

4 ай бұрын

@@SabineHossenfelder Isn't it inferred from mere extrapolation of increasing escape velocity with increasing gravitational strength?

@mrpocock

4 ай бұрын

Black hole horizons have always weirdes me out. I find the idea that some essentially continuous distortion of spacetime as the black hole forms should introduce a discontinuity into the reachability of future space from some other space where no discontinuity existed before unsettlimg. I feel like the idea that in some sense there is a continuous change in spacetime that leads to an instantaneous event where the topology of what can be reached through spacetime changes.

@SiqueScarface

4 ай бұрын

@@SabineHossenfelder I find it still faszinating that you can easily calculate a Black Hole with a gravity field as strong as that on Earth's surface at its event horizon. It will be huge, but not impossibly large, compared with some galactic centers.

@almac4067

4 ай бұрын

@@SabineHossenfelder that the curvature can be arbitrarily small *at the horizon* is an interesting point. Is this a sum over all possible future paths of a photon question, like the double slit experiment maybe?

Funny and a brilliant science communicator, I wish I found her channel long ago!

Love all of your content, and that shirt is v sweet!

Roger Penrose called them timelike singularities because you can escape one by traveling along time-like (normal massive objects) world-lines.

My everyday logic: If the event horizon of a BH is made of nothing, how can exist an object without nothing or even can be differentiated from an object WITH nothing? To see the singularity, it has to send out light, what is impossible because of the gravitational field of the singularity. Phew, I think that´s beyond my mental horizon. Anyway, wonderful video again😊🌹

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

A black hole is not an object, it's just space. The horizon is the boundary of a region, the region from within which light cannot escape. A naked singularity has no horizon, so light can escape from nearby it.

@Thomas-gk42

4 ай бұрын

@@SabineHossenfelderIf light can escape nearby, the naked singularity has less mass than a primordial BH? but then it would be simply a very very tiny BH. The other possibility: it´s all about math. 🖖

@noelwass4738

4 ай бұрын

Perhaps I'm wrong but that is the way I had imagined a naked singularity, as the limiting case of a black hole. Add more mass and the event horizon would form and we would have a legitimate black hole.

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

@@noelwass4738 A naked singularity also has mass.

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

@@Thomas-gk42 Black holes and naked singularities can have any mass. I don't know what this has to do with the question whether light can escape from nearby, the latter is really just a question of the causal connectivity of space, it's nothing to do with the mass.

Keep us posted!

Thanks for this video.

I like the lack of sound effects

Yes. Implausible. Like many recent papers made into media articles thanks to overenthusiastic press releases.

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

To be fair, most of them are far less plausible than this one!

@alieninmybeverage

4 ай бұрын

@SabineHossenfelder does plausibility have a specific scientific meaning, and if so, can it survive into "foundational" thinking? It seems to me like math as a language has both flexible (consensus axioms, reimann spheres) and inflexible structures otherwise. With reliable observations defying our would-be natural axioms without those observations, what can be said about the plausibility of "the mathematical story" (looking for what's mathematically missing in a model) vs "the story of slight mathematician bias" (select those "well-behaved" axioms which allow more maths)? When the universe "misbehaves," I feel like we can't help but get a little sloppy ourselves.

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

@@alieninmybeverage I don't think it has a well-defined meaning, but loosely speaking I measure plausibility by the number of new assumptions that need to be made. In this case, it's very few. We know that the plasma in the early universe had fluctuations that could have produced black holes, it just seems that it didn't. We do not know of any reason why naked singularities should be impossible. So its possible they were formed in that early plasma. I'm not sure why no one asked that question earlier. You don't really need to assume anything new, it's rather that you throw out one assumption, which is that naked singularities for some unknown reason don't exist.

@Manuel_Bache

4 ай бұрын

​@@alieninmybeverageGödel (1931)

@alieninmybeverage

4 ай бұрын

@Manuel_Bache thank you. Do you have a particular sequence of his theories, proofs or definitions to recommend regarding plausibility? I'll go ahead and admit to the kind of hole I expect to find in formal logic and math: that the concept of sufficiency is poorly justified in light of modern biological/neurological consequences. That any resource/capacity agnostic theory will presume a formal role for sufficiency when "actual" sufficiency is, for the sake of brevity, "heuristical." The result, I anticipate and intend to investigate, might be that an "assumption" can be countable or of a counterfactual magnitude (proportional resistance for example), but never both without incurring a paradox. Too much to unpack in a comment, obviously!

Thank you

i actually commented that somewhere on a yt video about crunched spacetime being dark matter. Spacetime

Thank you for the video. Black holes do not contain a singularity.

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

How do you know?

@eonasjohn

4 ай бұрын

@@SabineHossenfelder there is no evidence that black holes contain a singularity.

@SabineHossenfelder

4 ай бұрын

@@eonasjohn That doesn't mean there isn't one ^^

@blijebij

4 ай бұрын

@@SabineHossenfelder Holographic information principle, planckscale/ 1 bit of information. Information introduces scale.

@shawns0762

4 ай бұрын

Black holes/singularities are based on a mathematical misconception. General Relativity predicts dilation, not singularities. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" Einstein wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters (star clusters) whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear because matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light" He was referring to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum. There is no place in the universe where mass is more concentrated than at the center of a galaxy. It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. In other words that mass is all around us. Sound familiar? This is the explanation for the abnormally high rotation rates of stars in spiral galaxies, the "missing mass" is dilated mass. Dilation does not occur in galaxies with low mass centers because they do not have enough mass to achieve relativistic velocities. To date, 6 very low mass galaxies (like NGC 1052-DF2) have been confirmed to show no signs of dark matter. This also explains why all planets and all binary stars have normal rotation rates, not 3 times normal.

You need to meet my wife , she is one hell of a singularity

more butter and a lot of mixing Sabine!

Thanx ,,,very relavent& exciting thought .Good insight.↩️↪️

I'm a 'crank' and I've been saying for years that naked singularities are everywhere. I believe the Higgs detection was a naked singularity and that naked singularities form when we smash two protons together. I also have this theory of electron densities being gravitational fields, that gravitational fields are formed of perpetually tunneling electrons. These electrons release photons giving rise to the Casimir force and the cosmological constant, because they're always tunneling, they're always interacting with photons; this phenomena of electrons always interacting with photons (or electrons interacting with photons roughly once every unit of the Planck time) gives rise to decoherence in nature and when the photons interacts with the background electron, the electron collapses into a naked singularity.

This is interesting , I hope that there is follow up.

I wonder if some environmental cause can be found between the black holes vs naked singularity, what about just time fluctuations (not space time)? Just spitballing here. Love your videos Sabine thanks

Literally arrived at this same conclusion on my own

Nice parallel with sauce reference. It was a bit refreshing to sample other forms of adjectives in lieu of commonly used types. 😅😅😅 This has sparked some primordial things in me with making any conversation that doesn't focus on me...

It'd be nice if you could make an explainer on naked singularities, because I'm having a lot of trouble wrapping my brain about how infinite density can exist and yet NOT form an event horizon.

Can you make a video explaining more about the difference between a black hole and a naked singularity? I don't quite understand the difference and how it works. If the singularity has enough mass that nearby particles cannot escape, then there has to be an event horizon? So are naked singularities just very small so that particles can still "get out"?

@johnnyllooddte3415

4 ай бұрын

ahahahhahaha neither do they..its made up THEORIES

Hi Sabine, what's the minimum mass a black hole must have to have an event horizon? And what's the minimum mass a black hole must have in order not to evaporate in a few billion years?

@fidacuca

3 ай бұрын

Minimum is 1.

Very interesting. Could you tell me more regarding naked singularities? Please.

Wow interesting. ive never thought of singularities that way.

I thank you Sabine. Keeping up with the new fashions in science, is not easy. I've seen so many technological changes in my life. Theoretical thinking by a human brain, at the vastness of the universe, and how it came to be, was realised by the ancient people of Australia. I've seen water turn into steam. I've seen water turn into ice. I had mated a life time ago, with a female who has 23 homologous chromosome pairs, while I the male, have 22. Two children were born. The reason our children are artistic and employed is due to the parents input. I failed many times, my children learnt. If my children failed, I would ask their mum for help, and together we would recover and improve. The universe is a word. I will give my life to save my children. So the beat may go on. Discovering, learning and exploiting are the things that even fungie do. In the scheme of life, my one purpose was to have off-spring that would survive me. I am a lucky man. Oops. Singularity is like 0 =1. It is empty, yet it is there. Empty. What is it empty of? I thank the people that kept the knowledge alive, while my ancestors migrated and found new homes. The universe is in my brain.

Sabine, I'm curious to know: the schwarzchild equations are only approximations. Do we have any estimate of the impact of our using approximations to solve the einstein equations? Is it possible there is a measurable difference on very large scales?

@brothermine2292

4 ай бұрын

If my recollection is correct, Schwarzchild calculated the simplest type of black hole, which has zero spin and zero charge. It makes sense to call that a special case, rather than an approximation.

It’s also worth noting that Hawking and Suskind collaborated on a version of the net zero energy universe hypothesis. Their model claimed gravitational energy was the negative energy required to counter the other energies released in the Big Bang. After the Hubble volume was determined to have a Gaussian curvature of zero, their model is no longer viable. But if these naked singularities exist they must also be coiling gravitational energy into the field and would work into any equation describing the zero net energy universe hypothesis.

Another great video, ... which we haven't seen...

Alles ist jetzt klar! Space is like Sabine' "attempts to make Hollandaise sauce!" Love the science blended with lumps of humor!

@deltalima6703

4 ай бұрын

"Love is the flour you've got to let grow" -John Lennon

I thought of this 10 years ago. I imagined if there are singularities or small black holes everywhere, they would be "pulling" space and time such that mass would be "missing" and also I thought maybe it would be responsible for the accelerating expansion of the universe in every direction. 😊

@schmetterling4477

3 ай бұрын

Your Nobel Prize is in the mail. I got one in size XL. I hope it will fit. ;-)

And THIS is why I subscribe to Sabine!

The IEEE 754 floating point format supports representations of positive and negative infinity. So computers *can* spout out infinities.

Sabine was very gentle with little Einstein today

What kind of sauce we were discussing here !

Now I imagine a new universe forming, whenever Sabine cooks.

In the image the sheet is shown to be stretched a lot, could the pull be so great with a really small object that the space time sheet just connects somewhere above the actual singularity?

The Rabbit Field Conjecture: Sabine's sauce pot is actually a telescope where the varying density of the Hollandaise maps the distribution of naked singularities in the universe.

Please discuss the observational evidence for the cosmological coupling of black holes and dark energy! Your insights on these topics are usually the best, and I have been eagerly waiting to hear your take on it. Thank you!!!

There comes a point where a wide angle lens combined with a mirror theoretically bends light in half hence a point of singularity exists in every digital camera.

You got me on Hollandaise sauce.😆

At 5:38, you say we haven’t seen “flashes”, but in fact we have seen them, unexplained gamma-ray bursts for which some models have been suggested but so far not confirmed. For (at least some of) these to be evaporations of primordial black holes (naked or otherwise) depends on the initial density fluctuation spectrum, which is also yet to be settled, e.g., with respect to how fully-formed galaxies and larger-scale black holes could have formed as early in the history of the universe as is being suggested by JWST observations. These depend on the details of the initial Higgs Field geometry if you believe in inflationary cosmology, but they could also arise in alternative cosmologies, as you seem to suggest later on. As for your Hollandaise sauce: I have always found that inhomogeneity and asymmetry are usually good things in cuisine (e.g., marble cake).

Happy spring equinox! at 8:06pm Pacific time zone

An analogy to get an intuition of a naked "singularity": consider a function like 1/sqrt(abs(x)) in a neighborhood of 0. Even if the function goes to infinite around 0, the area under its curve (integral) around 0, does not goes to infinite. So even if a potential goes to infinite (negative) in a point, the energy to get out of that point is not infinite, so things can escape the potential even if it goes to -infinite at that point (naked singularity). So even if energy density goes to infinite, it could generate a potential that goes or does not goes to infinite, and even if the potential goes to infinite it could or could not generate an event horizon. Of course, things are not so simple, because we are not taking into account space curvature, or the fact that there is a maximum speed and energy per gravitational mass etc. etc., but you can have an intuitive idea of how a continuous general relativity theory can lead to naked "singularities". Of course, all this is "theoretical" because space-time is NOT continuous, so, in reality, "naked" singularities do not exist, but neither "singularities" or "event horizons". Black holes only exist as a phenomenon we do not understand and approximate by an abstract concept that cannot be more than a very coarse approximation. None of these "fantasies" will solve the real problems of today "physics". Physicists are full of "fantasies", that is, things like this idea that does not imply true imagination (enyone with a grasp of the topic can "fantasize" with naked singularities, multiple dimensions, multiple universes, etc. etc.). What is needed is true imagination, that implies new ways of thinking, but not "free" imagination that is easy, need "imagination" without breaking the most basic logic, without magical thinking (Gods), without "wishful thinking" (wormholes, warp engines etc. etc.), without marketing or catastrophism, but with enough detail as to be testable and falsifiable.

0:21 When I see a thing like that, I say it's a Bose-Einstein Condensate.

you have excellent English Sabine

Hollandaise would be a very unique piece of merch for a physicist. I’d buy it!

@lancevance604

3 ай бұрын

Imagine grabbing it of the shelf,, reading on the package "recipe by a theoretical physicist" 🤷‍♀️

"That's knickers for the British audience". Always be on guard for these I've learned with her. Otherwise, you'll find yourself curled up on the ground in tears.

If naked singularities exist this may be evidence that the field itself is granular. This would be consistent with the quantum gravity theory. A naked singularity would have very large curvature but not infinite curvature of the field. Penrose’s singularity theory claims infinite curvature also but because space may be quantized it’s not possible. Also Penrose’s CCC theory breaks down with quantized space and a singularity according to his description is also impossible. The state he is referring to is the lack of scale. If space is quantized there is inherent scale built into the field itself.

As to the argument whether there is an actual singularity, you have to also consider the rotation of the black hole (Kerr metric).

That ball contains of all „dimensions“ up, down, north, south, west and x.