Hank explains the science behind recent reports that physics great Stephen Hawking said "there are no black holes." There are. They're just super complicated.
Messages from our Subbable subscribers:
Happy Valentine's Day my beautiful panda. I love you.
I love you Steve- almost as much as Science.
Like SciShow? Want to help support us, and also get things to put on your walls, cover your torso and hold your liquids? Check out our awesome products over at DFTBA Records: http://dftba.com/artist/52/SciShow
Or help support us by subscribing to our page on Subbable: https://subbable.com/scishow
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?
Thanks Tank Tumblr: http://thankstank.tumblr.com
Could this make sense?
Black holes without singularity and systems below the Planck scales
Reference: An observer falling into a black hole observing something that is also falling into a black hole just before it:
If an outside observer never observes an in-falling observer ever fall into the black hole, any particle entering the black hole should feel nothing else to be inside the black hole but only itself; because just before it entered the black hole, everything that was about to enter the black before it froze at the event horizon, so there is nothing inside the black hole but just that particle. This would mean that there would be no singularity.
Second option-Now let’s say that it would feel everything to be normal-that is see its predecessors fall into the black hole and that only those outside observers accelerating away from the black hole see things freezing on the surface of the black hole. For that to happen, when the same observer is moving towards the black hole, observes things going in; but when accelerating away observes things clumping up on the horizon. If that were to happen, every time the observer went back and forth the clumping would freeze and unfreeze.
Third-Or if an outside observer maintaining a constant distance from the black hole is the one that observes the clumping. When the observer moved away, if the things unfroze, entering the black hole; relativistic predictions would be incorrect.
Inside the black hole:
I like to talk about the first interpretation-the violation of the extrapolation of the geometry inside the black hole-that there is no singularity. If we add some definitions to the idea, it looks familiar to a question, we’ve been asking and the incomprehensible answer we’ve been getting.
First, the observer sees no non-virtual particles. However, high energy virtual particles pop into and out of existence frequently. When one of such particle deforms space-time, it forms temporary gravitational influence on the “only one” non-virtual particle-“observer” before shortly ceasing to exist and no more influencing the non-virtual particle. Another virtual particle comes into existence somewhere inside the black hole and temporarily pulls the non-virtual particle in a different direction (could be the same) with different intensity depending on their relative positions. As many virtual particles pop into existence, the particle is pulled around and pulled in some other direction while some virtual particles cease to exist and some other new virtual particles come into existence. The non-virtual particle is pulled around inside the black hole in this field of virtual particles; never quite achieving the influence to escape the black hole. It could be helpful to imagine the idea as a yo-yo being pulled back and forth, allowing the movement in all directions and the intensities to be different.
The same idea can be described in a different way. The space-time inside the black hole is a high energy deformation in the portion of space-time where, as virtual particles pop into and out of existence, powerful gravitational waves move the non-virtual particle around, inside the black hole. The gravitational waves are the result of virtual particles coming into and out of existence, producing different patterns of gravitational strong fields.
Explaining a very similar answer; and amazing consequences
Length below the Planck length leads to answers that there should be black holes everywhere below the Planck length. While that might tell us that we don’t understand it so well, it could very well be telling us a different story this whole time. Maybe the reason systems below the Planck scales give rise to black hole scenarios is because what happens inside a black hole is very similar to what happens inside a Planck length-what happens to space-time.
Below the Planck scale, space-time is not empty and virtual particles coming into existence and going out of existence make up the vacuum energy field, as well accepted. Every point in space-time is stretched, as virtual particles come into existence as the vacuum energy field fluctuation. This is exactly like the first definition we established about what happens inside the black hole. The high energy virtual particles coming into and out of existence inside the black hole, cause gravitational influence because the gravitational waves are localized. Similarly, the virtual particles coming into an out of existence in vacuum field, stretch space-time at a lot of points (theoretically all points) and in a lot of all directions (theoretically all directions), creating the effect observed as Dark Energy. There is one more definition we need to add here. As, the virtual particles inside the black holes come into and out of the existence, the virtual particles coming into and out of existence that make up the vacuum energy field-do so at inside the Planck-scales, let’s say inside the Planck volume. Since, the two phenomenon are extremely similar, that is why we get an answer that there should be black holes below the Planck scales, when we compute the prediction of our theories. But more than being similar, the two phenomena could be two observations of a single phenomenon.
The Hawking Radiation and conservation of information
It could very well be the case that the matter eaten by black holes in our universe appear as virtual particles in space-time outside the black holes; and that explaining why “inside the Planck scale phenomenon” and “inside the black hole phenomenon” are the same thing. Now the way this model can elegantly describe the hawking radiation or quantum tunneling as the property of the particles inside the black holes to appear outside the black holes as quantum vacuum field fluctuations-(the reason such systems are described as quantized at the Planck scales can be better discussed by explaining the Schwarzschild radius); And this does not violate information conservation. And black holes turn out to be converting matter into vacuum energy diluting the energy in our universe.
An unanswered question: revisiting group splitting
All along this time, we did not answer why the particle inside the black hole observes no other non-virtual particle. This idea is described using the splitting of a group; the central idea in this discussion. A black hole has the following property. Before entering the black hole, some matter can interact with each other in space and are described as being in the same system in the “volume neighborhood” or less seriously-space. A black hole can split this system into many systems that cannot interact in the “volume neighborhood”. According to the idea of group reconfiguration, space-time is the geometry of group configurations while volume neighborhood or dimension is one such configuration. However, the particles may interact in “other dimensions or neighborhoods”, and hence appear as virtual particles to each other in the volume neighborhood, and are able to convey gravitational influence as they continue to have defined geometries of group configurations- or less seriously interactions with space-time. According to the evolving dynamics of group reconfiguration, the virtual particles come into existence and cease to exist.
But what happens when all black holes run out of food to eat?
The universe could be left with just vacuum energy field fluctuations with virtual particles popping into and out of existence. Our universe’s geometry to interact in volume-neighborhood could be gone while the energy of our universe (as particles) may continue to interact in other configurations and neighborhoods. Virtual particles may form real particles. The universe could split into different systems or combine with some other system. The universe could lose its quantization as black holes disappear taking away with them the vacuum energy fluctuation making the system continuous. The continuity could be disturbed when something else interacts with our system in a big bang.
What if the ejection from a black hole is actually a blast from a new big bang of a new universe being created? Eventually it closes itself off leaving nothing but cosmic radiation, which would be that universes dark ages (around 3800,000 years after the big bang). Some universes would make it. Maybe every black hole is a universe generator. Maybe I'm smoking too much.
I am submitting this question for the second time(first here). If you were to enter a black hole below the event horizon, could this possibly be a form of entering into a time warp/wormhole? May be a silly question which has no merit.
rule 1: there is a black hole
rule 2: everything goes in, nothing comes out
rule 3: it keeps sucking and sucking
rule 4: it will grow
if it kees growing - how big will it be in 1000 years, 2000 years
if it has been growing, how strong will the black hole be
and will this result in accelleration of the process..
if this was true.. why are we here.. and not sucked up.. by a blackhole ?
So, the blackhole must leak and fade .. in a curved morgage model
aka, it will be losing more and more mass in time.. slowing down the effect of
the "apparent" horizon.. and then.. will it become a star..or.. a scar ?
up,down, equal - it can grow due to added information
it can shrink by losing information
it can stay the same - but why ?
the escaped data.. is :
mangled data - not in the format as it wend in ?
from initial escape point the laws of physics apply ?
very elementary particles fuse to the next level of weight ?
new elements are created ?
is the escaped matter radio active ?
will it decay fast, moderate, slow ?
will it do fast, moderate and slow in some specific spread spectrum ?
will the escaped stream trigger the creation of stars ?
but if black holes lose matter and therefore mass over time, if after some million of years it has lost enough mass that it's gravity is no longer strong enough to absorb ALL light then wouldn't it slowly devolve into some sort of dead star matter that a future human can observe?
God says in the holy Quran what means [So verily, I swear by the stars that are veiled . And by the (sweeping ) stars that move swiftly and hide themselves. And by the night as it departs; And by the dawn as it brightens; Verily, this is the Word (this Qur'an brought by) a most honorable messenger [Jibril (Gabriel), from Allah to the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him)].] (chapter At-Takwir: verses 15-19)
It seems time is a man made up idea. Perhaps there are places where time does not exist, perhaps one could move or view time front to back, back to front. Hmmm, now that brings up a lot of questions. Gives me a head ache, and I am only an engineer person....Anyone have an Excedren!
As I understand it, black holes evaporate, which is where Hawking Radiation comes from. It’s basically “steam” from all that matter being compressed into a teeny point. Once the black hole has run out of fuel, it stops emitting Hawking Radiation, the event horizon dissipates, and all that is left is... we don’t know yet. Ash? A diamond-like particle of super compressed matter? But it’s not lost, only changed.
Basically, Hawking said that black holes are temporary, not eternal. They’re more like a forest fire that is deadly but not forever.
Greg Lives25 minutes ago.Since we live in virtual reality, huge forces are just data; universe is being run by super computers that convert data into our physical world & back to data, both at the event horizon. The event horizon is your 2D holographic medium. Physicists (Hawking) conjecture that things that fall into black hole are extinguished while data (info of the matter) is left on event horizon. Conjecture- event horizon is like holographic film A super dude is creating these holes with computer like device, but since he isn't IN the universe, he is using DATA( in a computer ) which create virtual forces, virtual matter & virtual beings (US) after passing through the event horizon. He is also removing/destroying things via black hole (which converts into computer code- 1s & 0s). Some info stored on event horizon, other info saved somewhere in superdudes computer. If you are creating a virtual reality, those 1,000,000 degrees of heat in suns in our reality has no intrinsic value to the maker other than code. At black hole code applied to event horizon= virtual creation; Matter/forces of our reality sucked in at event horizon are broken back into code. To superdude it is just numbers- ( furious winds in video games are just numbers in a computer. When you play video, are you ever effected by anything in the game like a video character is?- NO. No Thor Hammer or Panzer tank can touch you. Work this concept.
Here's a stumper. All people see everything their whole life in small area at the back of brain. What theorists are saying "the wave functions are collapsed by observing, which solidifies the object" in the outside world. But does it. Where do physicists make these measurements? Where is this "outside" world? In A building called university or are they all in their own little visual cortex where things aren't outside of anybody. Everyone collapses wave function in the brain, but you are tricked into believing it's outside your body.
Here is scenario- physicists all seem to be going to work; working projects, making measurements on experiments, but it's an illusion. No one leave a spot, because no spot actually exists- all illusion. So, observers aren't collapsing waves outside of them, but the waves inside their head which solidifies their "reality"; a reality which seems to be shared with other beings- connected visual cortex to visual cortex in some manner. Is there an outside world? Seems not. Everything can happen in each person's visual cortex which gives the illusion you are seeing outside yourself. `
1st, the idea that black holes have an infinitely small singularity of an infinite mass should had caused mass-puking in the schientific comunity from the early 60s. It starts from a finite ammount of mass (a star), gulps a bit more along the way and that‘s that. No infinity. Big, yes, not that big.
2nd, obviously there are no black holes. Because it would be a pleonasm and racist.
THERE IS SIMILARITY BETWEEN BLACK HOLE AND MATTER.
If a photon emerges when a positron and an electron collide, it means that the electron and the positron are formed by means of an "oscillation trap" which does not allow the photon to escape like a black hole. In this case, there is a functional similarity between an electron and a black hole. There may be a structural similarity between black hole and matter.
Why do not physicists think it? If the only thing that is not an antiparticle is photon, does not it mean that this photon is the most massive building stone? Everything be consist of different oscillation of photon. An interpretation of Einstain equation for E = m.c ^ 2 tells us that everything has come to light. In this caseIs matter acctually a formation of black hole in a sense?
So if hawking was proposing that the apparent horizon will evaporate when the black hole radiates out all of its energy. Wouldn't that leave the possibility that a very long time ago all black holes came together and when it radiated away the big bang happened?
I read a remarkably clever SF story, in "Analog" magazine I think, in which a future nuclear fusion power plant, using some ferocious heavy hydrogen compression mechanism, creates a small Black Hole. The reporter goes to the best qualified physics professor he knows, and they conclude that a Black Hole will eat its way to the center of the planet, and go on eating. It's the End of the World! The reporter files his story electronically, and remembers he didn't answer the question "When?"
He goes back the the professor, who has also been thinking about it, and this story having been written not very long after Hawking published his conclusions about the relationship between the mass and the lifetime of a Black Hole, it turns out that any Black Hole of the mass of the entire Earth would be very evanescent.
Should the reporter be consoled for the ignominy that his greatest story ever is false, by the fact that the End of the World actually hasn't arrived?
If a black hole condenses matter into an infinitely small point, wouldn't that be 1 dimensional? And we live in a 3 dimensional universe, which makes a 1 dimensional object, the black hole, physically impossible.
I'm no scientist, and would love if someone who actually knows what they're talking about to correct me.
Blackholes r just ultra dense & ultra hot things period. Just like base of oceans r ultra high pressure. Interestingly if u put solid objects at base of ocean their volumes indeed decrease ie their densities increse. Just extrapolate this phenomenon & u get blackholes. They r no mysteries.
The class of drugs that Levitra, Viagra, Stendra, and Cialis belong to are called PDE5 inhibitors. They work by relaxing tight blood vessels, allowing more blood to surge into the penis and cause an erection, says Gregory Bales, M.D., an associate professor of urology at the University of Chicago.
The little pills do the trick for more than two-thirds of men with Viagra protects the heart (ED). They also work for guys who simply need them for a short time to get their “confidence back,” says Michael Eisenberg, M.D., director of male reproductive medicine and surgery at Stanford University.