Three Mind-Blowing Facts about Magnetism - Ask a Spaceman!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- Full podcast episodes: www.askaspacema...
Support: / pmsutter
Follow: / paulmattsutter and / paulmattsutter
What’s the connection between motion and magnetism? How can something like a black hole have a magnetic field? What’s the connection to quantum mechanics? How did Einstein use magnetism to develop special relativity? I discuss these questions and more in today’s Ask a Spaceman!
Support the show: / pmsutter
All episodes: www.AskASpacema...
Follow on Twitter: / paulmattsutter
Like on Facebook: / paulmattsutter
Watch on UA-cam: / paulmsutter
Go on an adventure: www.AstroTours.co
Keep those questions about space, science, astronomy, astrophysics, physics, and cosmology coming to #AskASpaceman for COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE OF TIME AND SPACE!
Big thanks to my top Patreon supporters this month: Justin G., Kevin O., Chris C., Helge B., Tim R., Steve P., Khaled Al T., John W., Chris L., John F., Craig B., Mark R., George L., Dave L., Stephen M., David B., and Zero132132!
Music by Jason Grady and Nick Bain. Thanks to WCBE Radio for hosting the recording session, Greg Mobius for producing, and Cathy Rinella for editing.
Hosted by Paul M. Sutter, astrophysicist at The Ohio State University, Chief Scientist at COSI Science Center, and the one and only Agent to the Stars (www.pmsutter.com).
"you'd die horribly blah blah blah and it's all hilarious"
omg i died laughing
Rest in piece lol
How little we know. I found this presentation a “strap yourself in” journey with the host as he takes us on a great space adventure with no holds barred! No one survives in the end , or do we ? Just in another space time continuum? Ah ! the wonders of magnetic fields. Thank you so very much for a great show!!.
The BigBang-to-BlackHole sex-and-death cult does not understand physics or the nature of our universe.
There is no such thing as a FUNDAMENTAL magnetic field! All magnetic fields are derived from electric fields. The smallest magnetic field is generated by a spinning electron in an atom, by the right-hand rule.
Thank you Paul!! I'm slowly going through all your UA-cam vids & your Students are so fortunate to have such a charismatic and, frankly, hilarious Professor! I absolutely love Leonard Susskind - I can spend hours listening to his lectures, but you are an awesome educator! I'm 53 now and I've studied Black Holes since I was 9 years old. My parents took me to see the Disney movie The Black Hole in 1979 & I've been hooked since. I loved Computers more though & spent most of my career running the backbone of the internet & Cyber Security but I now work in Health Care, which I find so rewarding it's not true! Still I love Physics, QM & Cosmology - juries still out on String Theory, but I'm not hopeful in 2023!
I took my daughter to the Jodrell Bank Observatory in Cheshire, UK when she was about 10 years old and they put on a science show which included a really great example of quantum levitation, a liquid nitrogen chilled superconductor & a magnet, you know the one! The kids were sat in the front rows with the parents behind and were captivated. The excellent Presenter, a PHD student, asked the kids "Why they thought the magnet was levitating?" I bent over and whispered in my daughters ear to put her hand up & say "It's because of the Cooper Pairs, it's the Electrons!"
OMG the look on that PHD's face was a picture!!!
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Magnetism was one of my favourite topics at university...so simple on the surface but wonderfully complex in the details. The tying together of concepts like electro-magnetism, mass-energy and I would add wave-particle duality is something that has been on my mind for a looong time. Glad to know it's not just me =P
One part of your explination was confusing/wrong. You say that the observed mass/charge is because we still see the matter outside the black hole. The problem is that the initial contents of the black hole are already inside it at the moment it is created. I.e. it never crosses the event horizen. A simple application of this leads to the conclusion that all of the initial mass/charge just disappers from the universe. This leaves the initial black hole with no mass or charge. I am sure this is wrong. So can you clarify/explain this? Thanks.
I thought this problem of the moment of creation of the BH. My thinking: Just before it is enough mass is concentrated in the sphere (of the star), you still can see the mass, even if very distorted by the very distorted spacetime. Then the next moment the BH appears in the place of the sphere, replacing it instantenously. This seems as losing every information suddenly that was the sphere of mass before. But an outside observer sees this because the finite speed of information: From the closes point to the observer, on the surface of a sphere of mass, a tiny BH forms starting from 0 radius, and growing bigger by the speed of light, and enveloping the whole sphere, turning it into a black hole. I have a suspicion that this is still counts as objects (never) falling into the event horizon of the black hole.
You must first understand the relatively simple special relativity. Time is different inside vs outside black hole. From outside, infalling particles never form the black hole because it takes them forever to reach the speed of light. Thus, we always feel and see their effects.
As an aside, how then did we take a picture of a black hole? The infalling objects red-shifted into blackness and other objects fell in afterwards. We see those.
In other words, your assumption that there is something inside the black hole, while seemingly obvious, is actually incorrect. From an outside perspective, nothing ever travels inside the event horizon. Mind blowing, eh?
@@carywalker7662 black holes grow. Matter just outside the black hole doesn't appear to move outwards. Thus the bigger black hole will include the matter, even if it never "fell in". Thus, even from an outside perspective, it is possible for matter to enter.
@@johnbennett1465 Sure, but that light will not ever reach you; (As that light is in nflowing space at nearly the speed of light, and you are moving away from it in time at the speed of light (time-like direction).) So it will not ever catch up as it cannot exceed "c". You will see this like a still photograph from outside the Event Horizon as the speed of "c" is constant and equal.
All the effects of Black Hole (gravitational) are likely due to the extreme curvature of the event horizon. It just depends on which side you are on. Time on one side, space on the other. It's not an abrupt transition, but a gradient. You feel the effects from that local gradient, which is continuous from the "singularity" to the outside of the event horizon. Information flows only one way if you're beyond the event horizon, but two ways if you're before it. They still communicate however.
I would say the magnetic charge we 'feel' is from the accretion disc, not the Black Hole. Relativistic speeds of moving charges make a rather strong magnet. Not all Black Holes have the same charge, so this is not solely a function of having the "singularity"/ interior Black Hole itself. More spin and more material in the disc, the higher the magnetic field. Not every B.H. is a quasar, for example. It's the disc that provides this charge. And the disc is on "our" side of the Event Horizon.
at 1:25 "remember what happens when you fall into a blackhole?" I was like "yes, of course I remember. Happened to me many times... wait no!" :D
That whole sequence killed me. 😂
I remember it like it was yesterday. Cost me an eye. Tis why i wear this peg leg, argggh! Oh i mean eyepatch! Arrrrg
A 2002 Nobel Prize winner on ‘negative refraction meta material’ (NRMM). These materials are synthetically were found to refract a electromagnetic wave through a thin film that gain’s energy. These EM refractions have left-handed rotations. This is opposed to the natural materials that lose energy after reflection. This has a potential, at the quantum level, for a new source of energy.
7:15 “...it has an electric field, and you’re really bored.”
You have such great comedic timing. You make science extra fun and entertaining.
What happens to the magnetic field of a black hole while it's evaporating? Does it squeeze tighter and tighter, or does it escape and dissolve?
that energy has to go somewhere. imo Either carried away on Harking radiation or the BH explodes that energy away
Question, throw more water on it
problem solved ?
This guy is setting off my gaydar.
What science will eventually discover is this: There IS no "inside" of a black hole. Black holes have 2 "outsides," the one we see and the one we don't. The side we don't see is the other "outside" that could only be seen from the other universe to which that other outside belongs.
Each "side" of a black hole is a gateway to a completely different universe. Isn't existence strange?
🕳
1) Please, tell me what a field is?
2) Tell me what time is, since you keep speaking of space-time.
3) Tell me what gravity is, since you seem to know that it exists.
Here’s a little something you don’t know. There is no such thing as a field. Time does not exist in the three dimensional universe it is only a measure of perceived movement. Gravity and magnetism are not forces, those are attributes of a single source of energy that exists as a result of movement between the 3rd and 4th dimensions.
If you want to unify things all you need to do is look at the source point of all potential energy. Things pop in and out of it. It creates the attributes of gravity and electromagnetism. On its flip side (4D) is where time exists but space (as you perceive it) does not!
Fourth mind-blowing fact: Chester Gould had Dick Tracy say, "The nation that controls magnetism will control the universe." And he's right...
(I thought we stopped looking for the 'catalyst' decades ago. Are we still playing Monopol-y? I still hold it is all illusory in that all 'particles' are the illusion of persistence of the various string vibration modes. And that 'Now' is the cosmological horizon, the expanding edge of the Universe. I probably am wrong, but have seen nothing so far to change that position. (But I don't DO math, damn it, so I can't really argue my point.)
Something I think helps explain much of what Dr. Sutter is talking about:Our eyes can only see 15% of the Universe. That which falls into the physical light spectrum. 85% of the Universe we cannot perceive with our eyes.Which really negates the common phrase: "Seeing is believing".It truly is not for humans.And why we have 6 or 7 senses, and not just one: vision.
Don't you feel the mass because of the curvature of space? Mass itself isn't gravity, how it bends spacetime is.
If energy/mass, electricity/magnetism, and Space/ time are all different side of the same coin, would gravity also have a different side of its own coin?
And could that other force be dark energy?
@@kylejf2108 that would be very nice conclusion which leads to another argument; would dark energy has waves and ripples that cross through out the universe
@@wknajafi wow, I didn't think of this. If it would be the opposite of gravity, it might have that property.
Well, gravity is curvature of space-time, Dark energy is also a curvature of space-time (in the opposite direction), So ,... maybe?
Well gravity can not be destinguished from increase or decreace of motion. Depending on perspectiv it is all the same.
This channel ought to have way more than 40k subs
Really enjoyed this video. Well done and look forward to more of Dr. Sutter's work. Magnetism. Again, we cannot see "magnetism" only its effects on objects. See below.
Thank you, Paul, that was well done.
Now, allow me to amuse you with a Relativistic observation I obtained from talking to a Buddhist friend. He pointed out that as you approach the speed of light, time slows, etc., and thus, to a photon moving at literally the speed of light (Time stopped), the entire Universe is the same place.
And I blinked as I digested that, and said, "And so, to a photon, not only is the universe the same place, it's done in the blink of an eye. Poor photon."
Yeah, I ran into that 65 years ago in a physics class. When I challenged the Prof how a photon that has an almost infinitely short lifetime can cross billions of light years. He smiled and said, "Because for it, zero time has elapsed since it started out."
I thought about it and transferred to pre-med. That I could understand.
@@dennyoconnor8680 I stuck with Physics after I met Organic Chem.
Too darn many pre- and suffixes...
I really don’t get why you say that nothing escapes a blackhole, therefore the force of gravity shouldn’t escape either.
I was under the impression that according to Einstein’s relativity gravity is not a force. It’s just an effect caused by mass altering the geometry of space time. I don’t see the need to use the term “ghost” either. The star that formed the black hole has not “disappeared”. It has collapsed, which means it has become incredibly dense. Still there though, still bending the fabric of spacetime.
I appreciate the effort to make extremely complex physics equations accessible to the general public but I don’t feel this part was very successful.
Wish I understood this level of science. Extremely interesting !
When particles and waves are spinning at angular momentum and centrifugal forces accelerate them to the speed of light, the center of the black hole turns matter and energy into pure gravity. Yes, physicists are correct: "Not even light can escape a black hole." That's because the gravity is so strong that it literally smashes (fuses) photons together and won't let them escape. Once the photons are fused together, the radiation has nowhere else to go, and you get the "jets" of material which come out of quasars etc... When matter or energy are traveling at the speed of light, they *become* light. So that's what's happening at the center of the black hole. All that exists there are gravity and light.
Today is the day, all. Thanks to you, I completely understand this concept!!!..
Thank you!!
RE point 3, granted nothing is stationary but are you saying that if I walk past a person sitting in a chair, that person is moving as fast as I am (relatively) yet not expending the amount of energy as me. Walking past the charge makes it appear to have a magnetic field to you but not but not to a person standing next to it?
Question 1: Would that monopole would have existed in the early universe?
Question 2: Would it be possible to detect gravitational wave of this monopole?
I only ask this question because I've been reading a little about the connection and findings of CMB and Gravitational Waves....BICEP2 , I believed discovered something amazing of our earlier universe when it was about 300,000 years old...something about B-Modes ( whatever that is )
the monopole data comes from cosmic rays being absorbed by earths oceans and reemitted as microwaves that then interact with the hydrogen creating the monipole field. thats why it looks like we are in the center.. .. cause we are the source..
Wow, just wow!
Would really like to hear you talk about the interaction of the Sun and earth/solar system. And, how it directly effects us through weather. Thank you, BTW, just found your channel.
We can`t have THAT! Weather only happens, see, because of oil, see? Anything else is IMPOSSIBLE!
1:15 Aren't all magnetics fields expelled from the black Hole when the event horizon form? I always tought BH were solely determined by their charge, mass and spin. If you mesure a magnetic field around a black hole should'nt it come from the accretion disk instead?
A "Black Hole" is a magnet with a center null point that has no magnitude (No spatial volume). Quantum Mechanics is Flawed Physics based on mathematical theories. For insights on the topic Theoria Apophasis has numerous videos on this topic.
Material from stars have came back out of black holes
It's because of magnetic fields that we have rock n' roll, too; if i'm not mistaken. "Pickups" under the strings of electric instruments are magnetic; and there are magnets behind the speakers. Vibratory-> magnetic-> electric-> magnetic-> vibratory. An aspect of magnetism that can be directly 'mind-blowing'.
Correction: FOUR MIND-BLOWING FACTS
When you asked how we are able to feel gravity from a black hole, my mind was blown. But when the black hole is created, surely some of the nearby matter of the star must be inside the event horizon? If we were to measure the mass of a star before and after it became a black hole, would there be a difference in mass to account for everything inside the event horizon, which is invisible to us?
from whose perspective ?
@@MyKharli From a reference frame well outside the black hole's influence, presumably. I don't remember the full context since I watched and asked this four years ago.
There's no "mass", there's just a curvature of space that we interpret as mass because it's indistinguishable. Einstein got it right, but we interpreted it incorrectly. Energy is what contorts space into mass, so mass is not energy, but space.
Excellent I'm not sure what I heard or I took in but your delivery was excellent left me with a silly grin 😂
how cool! when i was a kid, i was much closer to understanding things. as i approach my dotage, i still enjoy the mental tickle.
So, is this the basis for entanglement?
Instead of a monopole, couldn't particles be more negative or more positive even though they each have two poles, but that would make them act relatively mono to each other?
...say like a Hallback array? One favoring positive, one negative?
When you're falling into the black hole, and time fasten up, basically crossing the event horizon while an eternity happens outside, would that mean that all photons that goes into the black hole during the life of the universe gets to you in a short period of time? so basically if you look backwards towards the universe, everything would brighten up, and galaxies would start moving really fast, colliding, then dying, disappearing?
As you approach the singularity, the flow of time relative to the outside universe rapidly approaches infinity. Meaning that you would "arrive" at the singularity (obviously assuming you could survive such tidal forces / radiation / nasty stuff etc etc) ... at the same moment as everything that ever has and everything that ever will enter the black hole.
All possible events in the blackholes history all merge into one singular point. Past, present, future are irrelevant. Dimensions no longer exist.
This in turn exactly describes the moment of the big bang.
I think I must watch this video twice, thrice or even four times in full. So that means this video too must be quantized. Obviously.
A comment nobody will probably read. The quantized energy of the electromagnetic field is proportional to the size of a proton. If we were to create a larger meta-proton, we would witness a larger quanta. I look forward to feed back in 12 years.
@@unnecessaryexprmnt some magnetic fields don't have any protons associated with them so I don't get why you say these EM fields. their strength's proportional to the amount of space that is taken by protons (elsewhere in the universe)
You are amazing Doc
I find it odd that a magnet on the side of the fridge doesn't lose energy , it is claimed, since it is not delivering work F because it's not moving. But it is fighting a vector downward from gravity??
I'm starting to think we need to preface science discussions and teaching with "this is what we think now" or "our best guess today is...." compliments of JWST.
Do you have a show with call in questions? Where's it at?
That first fact about the blackhole is nuts. Its almost unreal when you think about it. I see u just stop but you get spaggettified. Crazy
If at all we hav a magnetic monople, if there was an electric charge around why shud they rorate. A stationary charge doesn't experience a force in magnetic field. Can you explain more on this.
Aristotle was ahead of his time with the arrow never reaching it's target.
the electric charge also depends on perspective of the observer,electron is tiny magnet and two electrons can repulse and attract each other,they create pairs in atom the reason for this attraction is magnetic field of electron,so charge of electron depends on the magnetic pole you are looking at,electron is positron simultaneously,it has + and -,north and south pole,two electrons annihilate if they attract each other with their opposite magnetic poles
Random video came up, couldn't turn away so interesting but personally we have the wrong idea about black holes controversial
Just love this little lecture.
Awesome, thank you for a great piece
You should look into the
electric/magnetic universe theory.
1. Black holes become more dense as atoms are crushed this is why they have huge gravitational waves, they don't escape, they pull other matter toward it. 2. No matter how small you cut a magnet it retains a north and south pole, no monopole has been found in the universe. 3. If you call a quantum spin charge magnetism it would make them monopoles, but spins can be altered by collision or transfer (in many ways). This is the only interesting idea as particles with opposing spins do attract each other.
Thats like saying you want the front of a coin without the back. Everything that excists has an opposite. No inside a box without outside; Relying on enemies to defines friends, etc.
You are too proficient in the art of chopping things up
A Black Hole is not a 'hole' in space or matter at all. The Black Hole is an imaginary descriptor of a phenomenon that is not fully understood but represents a collapsed star whose mass mass exceeds the ability of anything having mass [i.e. affected by gravity] to escape its force and thus takes on the appearance of a hole. Magnetic force is not affected by gravity because it is not an elemental mass force but is rather a parameter of the phenomenon that causes the forces of mass and gravity to be manifest in the first place. When you cross the threshold of theoretical to the actual you are 'crossing' the event horizon and pass from the observable world of signs and wonders into the unknown that can only be perceived intuitively leaving us with ideas that are speculative at best.
Professor, it's now four years since you've made this video. Some here would be interested in your opinion about the latest regurgitation by some famous physicists that the universe may be one giant black hole. In his book, "The Black Hole War", Leonard Susskind said this was NOT the case. But that was a few years ago. It seems this topic never went away and is making a comeback. Do you have an opinion on this that you'd be willing to share? Hope all is well.
To this day we have no experiment that can determine with any degree of certainty that we are not living in a black hole. The ever increasing speed of falling to a singularity and the subsequent red shift that would occur would mimic the increasing expansion of the universe and its red shift. The heat death of runaway expansion or the heat death of time(motion) stopping, would seem the same at this point. I'm not sure what the holographic principle has to say about this, but I'm curious about the direct proportionality of information in a black hole to its event horizon surface area. I think the answer lies there somewhere.
@@Nusremmus Our Universe is in a Black Hole.
Our Universe HAS Black Holes.
It's -tortoises- Black Holes all the way down!
How can a black hole 'emanate gravity', you ask?
Let's say we're allowed to discuss gravity as a force.
A massive object becomes so dense that its undiminished 'emanated gravity' is concentrated in a small enough space that light attempting to pass it gets trapped.
Any light that the dense mass might itself be producing, is likewise constrained from escaping its gravity.
To an observer, its location is, therefor, visibly black.
What you see (don't see) is due to its 'emanated gravity'.
Who ever suggested that a black hole would be ingesting its own gravity?
It's actually pulling so severely that -- not only does it exert an attraction on all matter outside it -- it even gobbles up any light that strays too close, thus earning its name.
Is it even light, still, once it's 'inside'?
Is light then stretched and deconstructed?
Or is it frozen in place?
What's happening to TIME inside there?
Has it stopped?
If time has stopped, what becomes of the light's former energy?
Is energy 'frozen', compacted, and converted to mass?
Do any of these transformations have their beginnings even BEFORE the inward-bound masses or energies have slipped beyond the event horizon?...and does that precipitate some of the outward emissions detected?
Hey Paul, thanks for these videos!
Quick question about black holes if you have time - there’s always this rumour that if you drift into a black hole and look outward, you see the universe in fastforward to the end of time due to time dilation. Is that true?
wouldn't you see everyone frozen? that seems to be the way with time dilation. Everyone else gets frozen. E.g. Picard flies at light speed. Picard sees his crew running around like headless chickens in normal speed. Earth look through telescopes & sees the crew frozen or running very very slowwwwwwwwllllllyyyyyyyyyyyy
You would see everything sped up. Unlike in special relativity, the situation in general relativity is not symmetric; both observers agree that the clock deeper in the gravitational field is slower. This is a result of gravitational redshift and blueshift; light climbing out of a gravity well loses energy and thus becomes redder, while light falling in gains energy and becomes bluer. Both observers agree on the sign and magnitude of the changes in frequency and thus the rates of the respective clocks.
Blackholes/Counterspacial Sinks are Aether's Dielectric energy hyperboloid. Surrounded by Aether's Magnetic torus.
Scalable Aether Universe!
Mediated to center of everything is Counterspace. Blackholes are at the center of everything. Blackholes are not created when stars explode, Blackholes are released.
I assume that a black hole's mag field is actually the mag field generated by the disk of material orbiting the black hole. The disk is heavily ionized thus many electrons are orbiting the bl hole at near C, of course there will be an intense magnetic field orthogonal to the electric field. I believe Mr. Sutter is giving an alternate description of the same phenomenon. Both descriptions are accurate and describe the same thing. The measured effect will be subject to frame dragging of course.
With respect to gravity - the gravity itself is what keeps things from escaping the black hole. To state that the intense gravity also prevents the intense gravity from escaping is a self referential paradox. Of course it must escape! As far as the residual mag field or the progenitor star - yes it should be there theoretically (just as a tiny bit of that star's light should be there) but it should be deeply red shifted and nearly nonexistent, the majority of the magnetic field is from a time subsequent to the formation of the bl hole. As far as this goes I disagree with Mr Sutter, the fossil mag field of the star for all intents and purposes will not be detectable. The area just outside of the bl. hole does act as a window into the past due to the effect of the bl hole's gravitation upon space, but it is an exceedingly dim window (the light that may be released in a second by the star may eg be released over an extremely long period of time, assuming it had to crawl up from a region very close to the eh).
Great stuff as always
After understanding the Electric Universe theory I've never been able to go back to the Stand Model again and believe in black holes, dark matter, gravity waves, etc.
I have to admit! I've never fallen into a" black hole!" Nor do I ever intend to ever ! I'm straight!
so where's the electric part of permanent magnet? (when nothing moves)
Watched it three times now and had to look up an electric field quantization. The things you say and present them gives me more insight of many things. The saying of something being quantized isn’t what I thought it was. Keep these videos coming sir.
Because the path into a "black hole" is infinitely curved, you can't fall into a black hole, just spiral towards it for infinity.
We see an object freeze before it disappears into a black hole. So why can't we see everything that ever fell into a black hole,froze , cluttering up around the black holes.
Gravity is magnetic pressure, and there's no such thing as a black hole. It's a maghole.
A black hole is completely described by its spin, mass and charge.
This could be the answer to the final parsec problem. With a coating of matter forever falling into the event horizon, a nearby black hole would impose tides upon this matter; thus, robbing the angular momentum and allowing the two black holes to eventually merge.
If there is no observable monopoles why not , at down to the single atom is the nucleus is a monopoles. So the electrons will rotate around the nucleus!
Interesting view on black hole shell and time dilation. Mr. DeGrasse Tyson (or was it Sean) explained that when something other than a 'test'-particle (like a marco-scopic human) falls into a black hole, the infinite red-shifting never-falling-in-story doesn't work out.
when the star falls into a black hole, and it is glued on the surface, is this what we call the acceleration disk?
What you said about not seeing things cross the event horizon is not quite correct. as your falling towards the black hole you will be accelerated almost to the speed of light by the gravitational field, you will be red shifted so quickly that you will disappear almost instantly.
Ty very much
Agree with fascination comments. So my mind is an electro-magnet and one of us is moving.
Hmm, why do you look familiar? I think, perhaps, you appear on my favorite show, 'How The Universe Works' if i'm not mistaken?
The mystery of magnetism for me is that it also behaves like a fluid, and the Earth is the best example of that and it then surprise, surprise explains how we can know that a Polar Shift has happened on more that one occasion.
I would disagree with you on what "Black Holes" are and would happily share my theory on them. Whilst I am going to do that I would like to introduce to you what "White Holes" are as they to have their place. Despite not necessarily having been discovered yet.
So here is my theory on black holes and white holes, and logically they are sound. Imagine you are in a big high street store, and you walk in and you see a lift in one corner and escalators sign posting you to what is on each floor. Now simplistically take that analogy and apply it to the Universe or Multiverse and then what you have is probably a better understanding of both space time 4th Dimensional layering, so imagine in the same way you are holding an onion in the palm of your hand from the outside we see it for the shape that it is, but its not till we cut it in half that we learn how it is formed.
Space is probably far more convoluted and creatively put together than our Earthy onion I would like to think but it allows us to take a look at space different and it allows us to understand how we can move in these different planes or layers, if you are following my drift.
So let's say a Black Hole is no more than an escalator that takes you down one level, and a white hole allows you to bring you back up to that level you was at. It then gives credence to how space can be as described in the film "
Just for fun I'd argue that you can create a mono-pole magnetic field by taking a bunch of magnets, forming a sphere with all the positive sides facing inward and all the negative sides facing outward. Now you essentially have a negative sphere, and if you drop a bunch of them in a bucket, they won't ever touch each other, they'll all float except for the first layer resting otttttthe bottom of the bucket. To avoid confusion, it doesn't matter which polarity faces in or out, it could be all the positive sides facing outward, I just had to pick one.
As for magnetic vs electrical, I'd argue that they're one and the same, it's the observation which differs, like the fixed frequency of a sound or light which doesn't change and yet seems to shift according to changes in distance between the source and observer.
I'm no expert on such things, but I'm not convinced your plan to make a magnetic monopole works. If you truly made a sphere that could isolate all the N poles, it seems it would break the magnetic flux lines and the S poles would be.... no longer magnetic???
@@Rick_Cavallaro I'm fairly confident that it would work, and it would make a fun experiment, so when I have some free time this August I'll get lots of small neodymium magnets and glue them to ping-pong balls to test my theory.
@@VeniceInventors Do me a favor and please post your results here. I would love to hear how it turns out.
Lemme know the results, how does it react on the presence of another magnet?
PS -Hallback Arrays exhibit monopole characteristics.
Hey the gravity has to come from Black hole not from its parent star, coz the original star was never so massive and dense that it could trap even light from escaping it.
I'm having trouble accepting the possibility of a magnetic monopole. Doesn't "Del dot B equals zero" forbid any sort of isolated magnetic source? How would you integrate the existence of magnetic monopoles into Maxwell's equations?
I've alwaays considered the magnetic field of a black hole to be a consequence of its spinning charge (assuming it's spinning and has charge). I believe that a black hole with neither charge nor spin has no magnetic field. Am I wrong? I have to ponder it a bit more, but I suspect our explanations are equivalent.
If electromagnetic charge is negative (i.e., electrons), are magnetic monopoles then positive in order to orbit one another? Conversely is there any reason why there wouldn't be negative magnetic monopoles (i.e., south pole of magnets)?
I like the build up about the momopole, but i expected some minimal explanation about how it implies quantization of electric charge, rather than just the bare claim.
Light is neither magnetic nor electric in nature. Radio waves are. Light is not ACTUALLY part of the "Electro Magnetic Spectrum" that is a misnomer. Gravity and magnetism are also not the same so one does not effect the other. Magnetism has no mass. Magnetron stars are VERY magnetic and a small distance away from becoming a black hole. It only needs more mass. Maxwell studied electro magnetism and it has frequencies and light also has frequencies so he classed them together without proof that light is generated by magnetism or effected by it, it is not. A filiment makes light by heating up, not by it's magnetism or electricity but because of temperature. So light is not electromagnetic but I would appreciate an experiment that proves that they are.
Thanks, this helps to clarify a few things. I'm at the point where I almost "get" it.
#1 Fact about magnetic fields, every one is created by an electric current. The magnetic field around our planet for instance, to be as round and robust as it is it has to be created by a varying current flow into both poles. If that current were to increase, as it does for the sun, then that would result in a discharge across the surface, we see that discharge and the cooler darkness below it where there are sunspots. It would also cause a corona discharge some distance from the sun. #1 Fact about glowing coronas, they are created by electrical current. We have magnetism, we have a corona and a blind scientist. Tell us more about things beyond our vision as you ignore the world around you.
A black hole still has gravity because gravity has to do with the warping of spacetime in response to something with extreme amounts of mass per volume
1. What the hell !!! You made a good point (and there are many many others to be made) about the stupidity of all this nonsense because gravity is still "escaping" a black hole and then you created a completely nonsensical explanation 🙄. 2. No monopoles exist for the reason you mentioned. 3. Not only is electricity and magnetism integrally intertwined but I'm betting that full gravity (not just the residual stuff that we feel after it mostly cancels itself out) is the connective underpinning of all the "forces" that we feel. Angular momentum shows us that spin is involved (though actual spin is inconvenient for our current theories which is why it is denied) and that this can contribute to a directional force. But science doesn't consider that gravity can be the cause of this because it is relegated as the weakest force and science doesn't consider the rotational effect of gravity at the quantum level (even though we readily recognise this in general relativity as frame dragging). It may be that gravity is actually the strongest force but again with spin it largely cancels itself out. But science does things like you did ("ghost gravity" 🙄) and explains away things without any honest reason; the very things that would make things the same, just because it is inconvenient for our current theories.
Good reason why there are no isolated magnetic poles, magnetism does not exist as phenomena of it's own: it's a relativistic effect of electric field. Eg, you are in a river, the stream encounters a disturbance to it's flow and a whirl pool occurs. An object in the whirl sees fluid coming and going. You want it to just come, to just flow, created from nothing.
Black holes are no longer a thing - they’re all filled up with stuff I drop in my workshop that’s never seen again!
So do compasses stop working when you start jogging? Cause when you are jogging you see magnetic fields that weren't there before right?
so compasses are going to start pointing along these magnetic field lines that have suddenly appeared? Right? It's like "stop the car I want to use the compass"
Theoria Apophasis is a great source of information. Ken explains allot of this with facts.
what about scalar propagation of the electric field while suppressing or removing the magnetic field? As in scalar weapons.
Q.M.Telepathy I.S. Information System - 010 GPS - Gravitational Propulsion System.
Magnetic fields are not particles, so why would you expect gravity to collapse them into your black hole?
Arvins Ash, Science Asylum, PBS Spacetime and Sabine Hossenfelder explain this in a far better way, clearer and not in condescending tones.
If you cut a magnet in half, you get 2 magnets. So what is the middle of a magnet?
I'm certainly no physicist but you're making me think that there's positive and negatively charged things that would be affected by magnetic fields or electric fields but the epiphany and it's from no scientific perspective other than supposition that there must be a third state. A state that was more relevant when space time was a lot smaller and that the expansion of space time is actually diminishing.
Uh yeah, I'm currently at 4:40 in yer spiel, the Illusion require both pole for many things to be in this Dimension/Cosmos, but ok, we'll try the mono-pole concept; for one, there would be absolutely noconcept of "Down, or South, or even "going the opposite direction" because Everything would be pre-aligned to go in only One Direction
🤔 ?===> The Sun "might" rotate around you, or you around it, but that would be a natural indication of "Shape" and "Direction" (it which would eventually lead to Geometry and the obvious knowing the "up" isn't the only direction and if anyone there would be Consciously Cognitive enough to potentially question the why, and how come of their current mono-pole state of being.
The same way it has magnetic force to pull stuff in. It's not falling in it's being pulled in from what I've been lead to believe. Am I wrong?
As the monopole and positive charge rotate does not the +charge create another magnetic field and moving monopole make a charge?