51–60 of 166 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are in a black hole. The event horizon of the entire universe is on the same order as the observable universe. We are inside the black hole of the universe.
What?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizon#Cosmic_event_hor...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's something I've wondered about black holes, related to what's inside. Simplistically, there must be mass inside, i.e., every black hole has a mass that can somehow be measured, e.g., by orbital velocities of satellites. And the mass-energy has to equal the mass-energy that has fallen in. So far so good. But the stuff that falls in is not purely described by its mass. It also has angular momentum, electrical cha…
You have almost formulated the no-hair theorem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-hair_theorem
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNaEBbFbvcY This is mind blowing...shatters my misconception of blackholes....is there any more books on this?
It was interesting to watch, but the presenter presents everything as truth, but aren’t many of his explanations still theories? I’d like to see what other competing theories there are..
If I understand correctly competing theories disagree on more complicated descriptions, those that ask different questions or want to describe more details.
There is a fascinating PBS Space Time video[1] about black holes that questions the very existence of whatever is "inside" a black hole. They point out that as you approach a black hole, your proper time is advancing slower and slower when compared to an observer located far away from the black hole (like us, on Earth). That means that from the point of view of this far observer, nothing happens inside a black hole u…
That's the thing that never made sense to me about the black holes. The closer you are to the event horizon, the faster the time passes for the universe around you. So reaching the event horizon should take infinite amount of the "outside time", so right before you reach the horizon, you should see the whole future of the universe, including its end, if there's any. So how do black holes gain any mass then?
The answer is kinda easy if I can make up my own intrinsic definition. The mass is the mass of the stuff around the black hole. A black hole is a singular point, it can't have mass, don't be silly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine this as time asymptotically slowing as you approach the singularity so that the singularity is forever stuck at the time of the supernova explosion that gave birth to it. You can never reach it because you and your movements too, slow down the closer you get. Is that correct?
A traveler can reach it all right, but only from his own point of view. From the point of view of almost everyone else in the Universe, including us on Earth, it will never ever reach it. It's like the traveler has jumped into an other universe "located" in an infinitely distant future.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the thing that never made sense to me about the black holes. The closer you are to the event horizon, the faster the time passes for the universe around you. So reaching the event horizon should take infinite amount of the "outside time", so right before you reach the horizon, you should see the whole future of the universe, including its end, if there's any. So how do black holes gain any mass then?
Doesn't it mean that only the space around the black hole sees that "infinite amount of time" pass, and not the whole universe? So in that case, you wouldn't be seeing the "future of the universe" just the "future" (I guess) of the space around the black hole. I kind of see blackholes in space as vortexes in a lake. Anything that gets "trapped" in the vortex moves much faster, including the water (space-time) itself.…
I think you meant to say ether.
There is a fascinating PBS Space Time video[1] about black holes that questions the very existence of whatever is "inside" a black hole. They point out that as you approach a black hole, your proper time is advancing slower and slower when compared to an observer located far away from the black hole (like us, on Earth). That means that from the point of view of this far observer, nothing happens inside a black hole u…
There is a fascinating PBS Space Time video[1] about black holes that questions the very existence of whatever is "inside" a black hole. They point out that as you approach a black hole, your proper time is advancing slower and slower when compared to an observer located far away from the black hole (like us, on Earth). That means that from the point of view of this far observer, nothing happens inside a black hole u…
That's the thing that never made sense to me about the black holes. The closer you are to the event horizon, the faster the time passes for the universe around you. So reaching the event horizon should take infinite amount of the "outside time", so right before you reach the horizon, you should see the whole future of the universe, including its end, if there's any. So how do black holes gain any mass then?
There is a fascinating PBS Space Time video[1] about black holes that questions the very existence of whatever is "inside" a black hole. They point out that as you approach a black hole, your proper time is advancing slower and slower when compared to an observer located far away from the black hole (like us, on Earth). That means that from the point of view of this far observer, nothing happens inside a black hole u…
off-topic a bit: does anyone have suggestions for paths for the layperson toward being able to reason and intuit about this stuff at one level beyond pop physics claptrap? I have heard "the theoretical minimum" suggested in the past, but I haven't heard from anyone who has actually used it to go from zero to say, general relativity, only people who think it sounds good. It also seems like a steep investment -- I just…
https://aeon.co/ideas/what-i-learned-as-a-hired-consultant-f...