Live data from Hacker News

The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

nobelprize.org

91–100 of 153 posts

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#91
post #64

Such a joy to see Sir Roger Penrose awarded with this honor. One of my favorite contemporary intellectuals. If anyone hasn't seen it, I recommend his recent appearance on the Lex Fridman podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orMtwOz6Db0

I somehow always had the impression that Roger Penrose was a numerical computation guy (Moore-Penrose pseudoinverse). I did not realize he had this vast of scope of a contributions in physics. Certainly quite impressive.

penrose tilings is a contributions to pure mathematics, too

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily, a supermassive black hole can have quite bearable gravity at the event horizon (as the event horizon radius depends linearly on the mass and the gravity declines quadratically with distance). You still wouldn't be able to communicate your experiences though.

Doesn't an event horizon imply a gravitational pull so strong not even light can escape? Isn't the effect of gravity the same at the event horizon for all sizes of a black hole? I thought the size only affected the "acceleration" of the gravitational pull based on the distance from the singularity? A supermassive black hole means you will take longer to be spaghettified, but it will still happen and it will happen be…

In some sense, there is no such thing as a gravitational pull. What there is is a curvature of space-time that causes an apparent force in some coordinate systems [0]. For a sufficiently large black hole, gravity is effectively constant in the vicinity of the event horizon; which means there exists a coordinate system where the space around (a small region of) the event horizon is essentially flat space. From the perspective of an outside observer, you would appear to flatten as you approach the event horizon, but this is a consequence of the coordinate system. You don't feel any effect at that point.

The reason light cannot escape from past the event horizon is that that is the point where space-time is so warped that what you consider a perfectly normal time axis is, from the perspective of an outside observer, now pointing in a spatial dimension directly towards the center of the black hole.

In contrast, regardless of how small you are, there is some point where you do experience tidal forces and feel yourself getting spaghetti. For a small black hole, this is before you pass the horizon, for a large black hole, it is after.

[0] The distinguishing feature between a real force like gravity, and a truly fictitious force like the centrifugal force, is that for the later, you can construct a coordinate system where the force disappears at all locations. For a real force, you can construct a coordinate system where the force goes away at any given point; but there will always be some point with an apparent force.

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#93
post #59

Congrats! Am so happy that Penrose lived long enough to be able to see an actual movie of a black hole ;) Monitoring the Morphology of M87* in 2009-2017 with the Event Horizon Telescope https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.11842 And when all is said and done I believe his insights into the Quantum Correlates of Human Consciousness may end up being the most fruitful Consciousness in the Universe: Neuroscience, Quantum Space-Tim…

Or lived long enough to receive the prize at all - 1965 was 55 years ago!

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#94
post #39

What is more poetic than a mathematical model of a black hole? Look at this A "finished" black hole (The end state of the gravitational collapse) doesn't have a volume or any density. This is the mathematical solution first obtained by Schwarzschild in 1916. So standard mathematical solutions of the black holes are vacuum solutions. There is "nothingness" inside the event horizon. The outside observer would see a col…

You shouldn't forget that, since the mathematical equations have a singularity at the center of a black hole, we can be reasonably sure that they are in fact incomplete and can't accurately describe the internal structure of a black hole.

So, take any such description with a grain of salt. It's much more correct to say that our current models can't accurately predict what is happening past the event horizon of a black hole.

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#95

Such a joy to see Sir Roger Penrose awarded with this honor. One of my favorite contemporary intellectuals. If anyone hasn't seen it, I recommend his recent appearance on the Lex Fridman podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orMtwOz6Db0

Yes so exciting to see this. His book the Road to Reality is revolutionary to me and I have not even finished it (still digesting). Every time I hear him speak it seems I learn some new perspective on the universe that fundamentally changes my thinking, really inspiring person.

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#96
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok that explains how space becomes timelike. But I never hear anyone address how time becomes spacelike. In what sense does it become spacelike? Can one move back and forth in time inside the event horizon?

The radial direction of the inside of the Schwarzschild Black Hole is timelike. This means that; inside the event horizon, the inevitable passage of time becomes the inevitable move towards the singularity at the center of the Black Hole. To answer your question in clear terms: No, you cannot move freely in the radial direction. Only towards the center, in the same way you cannot move freely forward or backwards in t…

Considering a point particle, what constrains it from orbiting [which is what I'm assuming we're meaning here as all matter has to move radially to cross the event horizon]? If it had a tangential component to its momentum prior to meeting the event horizon (EH) wouldn't it continue to orbit past the EH?

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#98
post #9
post #2

The press release has a popular science background - https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2020/10/popular-physicspr... Highly recommend the illustrations on the press release for a quick overview Cross section of a black hole (pdf) - https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2020/10/fig2-phy-en-cross... The Milky Way - https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2020/10/fig3-phy-en-milky... Stars closest to the centre of the Milky Way…

An illustration in the press release contains this phrase: "When a massive star collapses under its own gravity, it forms a black hole that is so heavy that it captures everything that passes its event horizon. Not even light can escape. At the event horizon, time replaces space and points only forward. The flow of time carries everything towards a singularity furthest inside the black hole, where density is infinite…

I cannot but disagree with you on Eliot. It is a christian image and he is talking about God’s view of History.

The waste land is at times gibberish, though, in his own words.

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#99
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An illustration in the press release contains this phrase: "When a massive star collapses under its own gravity, it forms a black hole that is so heavy that it captures everything that passes its event horizon. Not even light can escape. At the event horizon, time replaces space and points only forward. The flow of time carries everything towards a singularity furthest inside the black hole, where density is infinite…

I’m a Physicist (Not Astrophysicist, but still. ) I can assure you that this is also gibberish to me. These kind of popular science translations are like one-way hash functions. If you really understand the science, you can probably recognize where they are coming from. But by themselves they contain 0 information.

Not only that, but in this case, given that we don't have a theory of Quantum Gravity yet, the notion of "what happens" at the singularity is inevitably mystical.

The press release is glibly going from "science mode" to "mystical mode" and acting like it's all known by physics, which it's not. (I'm not really complaining ... it's a press release, after all.)

Re: The Nobel Prize in Physics 2020

#100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non poetic but hopefully bit more understandable explanation of what it tries to say: After crossing the event horizon the radial direction becomes like time. And what used to be time becomes like space. What this means that you will inevitably travel to the center, just in the same way as you travel into the future in normal life. Inside the event horizon the center is not at any place that you can see, instead it i…

Ok that explains how space becomes timelike. But I never hear anyone address how time becomes spacelike. In what sense does it become spacelike? Can one move back and forth in time inside the event horizon?

>But I never hear anyone address how time becomes spacelike. Take a region of space, let everything that could exist absorb heat. Take the same region of space, and emit enough heat to create a voltage in anything that could look at it.

Fall of the cliff of all things nature that want heat. Don't just have a parachute to slow your fall to non-existence, but a jetpack to absorb some heat of your own. Absorbing heat, you can now emit heat. Something asks "anything exists here?" you now have an answer.

Nature has no internal mind, no distinction between time and space. Heat transfers through mating conductive surfaces, flowing convective mediums, or the nothingness of electromagnetic radiation, like sunlight going through the vacuum of space to warm the Earth. Special relativity provides a medium. It's easier to slow down the ticks of your own clock, move, and speed up your own clock again than it is to just move.

At best, nature sees the photoelectric effect, brightness converting to internal voltage, which we see as "clock speed locality" and volumes of voltages. At worst, nature doesn't even make that distinction. It's easier still to have wiggle rooms in your answer. I slow down my clock when you say I'm going to move. I move when you say I'm going to slow down my clock. Looking back, both are true, whatever is in my advantage, because I hold the cards, and I make that potential a medium in of itself.

The way I reason about black holes is that they tell more about what's around it than what's there. Everything that could exist is in agreement that we all dump heat there. I'm really interested in seeing if we can point a telescope at a black hole, and cause something elsewhere. Or point a telescope at everything, and see if the black hole does something, like pair production.

Gravity and massless photons are such loaded terms promoting mysticism. Newton's idea of gravity, a cannon on top of a mountain shooting a ball that falls down as equally as it transverses lengths is a good place to start. No absolute position, everything is relative motion, and sum up yourself to all relative motion you are accelerating. Then move onto fields and Maxwell. Ticking clocks slow down and speed up for advantage. Before you get brighter, you need to charge up some internal energy. That's Planck, and Einstein brought the photon by relating that to relative time creating a voltage.

Post reply on HN