My mind has an information paradox. Whatever I store in there magically disappears minutes before the exam starts, yet reappears once the exam is over.
Andrew Ruedisueli ah, I love salad fingers!! I know David Firth creates all the music for it, and probably did use that sound, but Idk if it originated from that series. It's such a spooky, ethereal sound tho, perfect for Salad Fingers
This is why I love this channel. Every other science channel has covered the information paradox in a way that leaves me wondering what details I'm missing. Finally, an explanation that basically includes all the information I need. PBS SpaceTime is the only channel with conservation of physics information.
Thanks for the explanation of "ran out of time dilation". Now I can explain all the missed deadlines to my boss with pure physics and it's not my fault at all.
Now I know why I've been stuck in a procrastination loop for the past five years. If any of my (physics) professors ever ask I can just tell them that it's physics! Whether or not they would accept this new concept of ran-out-of-time dilation is a different story.
My cousin came out with an award-winning Ph.D. in theoretical physics a year or two ago. He's currently working for free assisting some professor at the local university, living with his mom and miserable. Never follow your dreams, get a job instead.
@@tyblazitar Plenty of happily employed physicists, theoretical and experimental alike, across the planet. Your cousin's mistake was immediately accepting an assistant professorship rather than going into industry and establishing himself first.
@@gallowglass719 "Your cousin's mistake was immediately accepting an assistant professorship rather than going into industry and establishing himself first." It's astonishing how ignorant is this statement! What "industry" does a physics major have to go into to become a successful physicist? Take a look at the most prominent physicists of the past few centuries and tell me what their day job was. Spoilers, they mostly in academia and worked as professors! In today's world, becoming a professor at an institute of repute and funding is the best way to be able to research and publish what you love working on and he did the right thing. The only other option was for him to join an R&D team at some company which is both highly competitive and equally unrewarding in terms of autonomy, especially when you're starting out. In the beginning, they use you as the script kiddie to run simulations all day. There's little to no career progression to speak of thanks to how slow-paced R&D departments are so you better work your ass off for decades or join as a professor in order to have any autonomy to talk of. As an assistant professor, you have access to your own resources, are free to engage in any projects and make use of PhD and Post Graduate students to help with your research. Having to teach courses keeps you from getting rusty which 3 years of running scripts and sims can make you do.
If your exposure to physics is through videos like these and not through university courses and textbooks, you're deep in the honeymoon phase. You get to see only the distilled bits that are appealing without all the career sacrifice, pain and imposter syndrome of graduating in a program you feel less and less competent for every coming year.
PBS helped teach me as a child in front of the television, and now here its found me as an adult on the Internet, helping teach and research the subject that exhilarates me most: Space (and black holes, lol)
If the Universal information is scrambled and stored on a flat spherical surface, then you can presumably convert from the polar coordinates and represent the whole thing as an infinitely long line of numbers. So rather than flat... Earth is a line segment, sheeple!
@@aldoushuxley5953 calling anything beyond 3 dimensions "space" is problematic. Hologram is a poor metaphor. (Holograms are not in any way two dimensional, but are fully 3d)
At university I often observe the run-out-of-time-dilation. Interestingly enough, in some rare cases this let's to an observer experiencing time slower and somehow finishing a report while traditional understanding wouldn't allow this. Obviously, more math is needed
I love presentations where the presenter is so good it doesn't matter if the subject matter is speculative or conjecture, you don't care you just believe it anyway!
Johnny yuma Your are severely mistaking. One shouldn't take mistake theories for "reality", but they are far from fiction. The observation made, in comparison with those predicted from these theories, are far too good, to be just random coincidences, indicating quite strongly that they somehow describe behavior of nature quite adequately. What your mental image of this is , is pretty irrelevant. The important thing is, that the model upon with the theory is based describes nature with sufficient accuracy and allows also sufficiently accurate predictions of future behavior and effects. The other problem is that you seem to think that only that is real what you can "see" with your own eye. With this mindset you'll run into problems very fast. E.g. you can neither see UV nor IR. Are they real ? I mean you can feel them on your skin and other animals can actually see them, so are they real or just imaginations ? Or is only real what you can experience via all your bodily sensors ? In that case e.g. radioactivity wouldn't be real or atoms. Do you doubt the existence of radioactivity and atoms ? Or is only real what can be measured by in the lab ? Well we can't measure the sun in the lab. We can just measure it where it is: 8 light minutes away. So do you doubt the existence of the sun ? BTW we do the same thing that we do with the sun with black holes. They are just a little bit farther away than 8 light minutes. So if you think the sun is real, while black holes are not, isn't that kind of a pretty inconsistent view ?
+Chris Turnbull But how much does the show actually cost to produce? What percentage of their costs are covered by Patreon and partnerships and how much are they reliant on funding from PBS?
Infinite Series just ceased to exist with no warning. They were doing multi-part episode and in the middle of it they just announced that Infinite Series was done and would not be coming back.
Yes! You covered two of my most pressing questions about black holes, namely how they could even grow when all particles freeze outside of them (from our perspective) and how can the information that there is charge in it be known from the outside when information can only traverse time with light speed. Actually, I'm still not sure how this should work, because the information "something is here and has charge" must travel from one place to another and must be affected by general relativity. Or not? And also, how can rotational Energy be known from the outside and how the heck can it be accessed from the outside? I think you already answered that with warped space-time but how can that information leave the event horizon again? You are my favorite source of information on black holes. Please go on being in depth and NOT on the surface of the black hole subject (although you obviously still have to scratch on the surface of the many sub subjects) Also, thanks for not asking for a like or a subscription. I'm always happier to like a video if that is not said to me. I honestly don't understand why most channels demand for that each video, because it would never influence my likelihood to like and especially to subscribe for the better.
Those joke man, you nail them, you could do stand up physics, I'm remembering much of what I'm going through without putting any of it down on paper, it probably helps my liking your voice & accent as well, your just so chilled
Is anyone else getting real tired of the "the whole universe might be a hologram" catchphrase? It might have factual substance to those who study physics, but the definition of a hologram to the common person is so vague it does not allow us to decipher at all what might be meant by that sentence. Most of us have as our only reference something like the Star Trek holodeck, so the sentence seem to imply nothing more than the universe perhaps being "unreal" or "fake" in some vague way. Pop science channels have been throwing this sentence around so haphazardly without ever taking the time to explain what a hologram is defined to be in this context, and it's really getting on my nerves.
Instead of complaining, why don't you expend a little effort and find out what a hologram is. It is ridiculous to criticize physicists for using ideas that are not instantly understandable by the most ignorant and least educated people on the planet.
I'm a fan of Susskind. He has great lecture series on advanced physics topics. It's an adult education class he teaches on different subjects which should be accessible for an audience about on par with this one. The lectures are all on youtube. He calls the class "Physics for Old Farts." It is very in depth, but skips the stuff you don't really need if you aren't a professional. All the calculations are order of magnitude, so he is constantly saying things like "2=1". And he looks like Johnathan Banks (Mike Ehrmantraut from Breaking Bad/Better Call Saul).
+1 Being, or at least feeling like an "old fart", I should probably rewatch the lectures. Although I preffered the lectures of Robert Sapolsky if we are talking Stanford...
I would love for Spacetime to do an episode (or a couple) on the holographic universe theory. It's crazy how quickly people devolve this theory into arguments on consciousness and whatnot. I would love to hear a fully factual interpretation of the consequences of such a universe!
Black holes make more sense described as 2D objects - I like the holographic principle. Does it get around the singularity issue too? I know there are suggestions that QM uncertainly stops there being a true singularity, but it still doesn't sit well.
I like the postulate that the information that goes into black holes is encoded in the correlations between future and past. That theory is that information that gets swallowed in a black hole is part of a code that is already naturally recurring in the universe and so it is not a unique destruction. It could go with the wave explanation that likewise FTL parts of a wave are not transmitting anything that adds valuable information
Susskind says simply that spacetime itself is an entangled structure. Mass breaks open the entanglement. This IS gravity according to him. I missed that point in this episode.
I think what Susskind/Maldacena say is that space next to another patch of space is entangled, and this entanglement might be what gives rise to what we call "space" in the first place - it is a speculation of his and Juan's, it seems. Never seen Susskind say that mass "breaks" entanglement. Mass is just bound energy watch this SpaceTime episode: ua-cam.com/video/Xo232kyTsO0/v-deo.html … the energy in mass curves SpaceTime, and gives the illusion of a gravitational force, watch this spacetime episode: ua-cam.com/video/NblR01hHK6U/v-deo.html
so there could be life on a planet orbiting a black hole ? image living there and knowing there is a black hole somewhere, scary :P and maybe even sometimes seeing that something falls in?
It's interesting to think that if we learned to control black holes, he could create a duplicator, bringing things back from the black hole. Also still keeping the original copy.
Please do a vid about black hole complementarity & firewalls! That concept of duplication and projection of information really piqued my interest but nobody on YT explains things as clearly and.. digestibly? As you!!
Humankind has become wiser, at the end of the 19 century all physics though that physic was complete. Today with all of our technology we are certain that it is not.
Every paradox results from a lack of knowledge or understanding, or a fatal flaw in a theory. Resolving a paradox leads to new science. Exciting times.
Can I join the race? Mmm I cant cause I am just a highschooler studying basic classical electromagnetism. This channel is only a good challenge to my brain, I cant wait for the next week. I wish I had some knowledge to join the race. Thank you #PBSSpacetime for sharing this awsome info!
Regarding the concept of information, considering a particle that crosses the event horizon, if before that the particle had an interaction with another particle with a result that can't be explained otherwise, like, "the only explanation for this is if a particle with these specific caracteristics has passed here and entered that black hole", is the information still considered lost? Can't the effects of the particle on the universe before vanishing in a black hole be considered the information from it?
8-Bit Wizard It depends on what your frame of reference is. To an outside observer, I might look like I'm permanently hunched over my keyboard, my eyes locked on the screen. From my perspective, I would be unaware of the outside world, and would perceive myself as falling into an impossibly deep abyss. Perhaps after some time, an outside observer would see the effects of my fall as residual notifications on my phone, but they would not be able to discern much about my pre-event horizon self from that information.
if i would Fall into a black hole would i See the speeded up timelapse of all the events that would occour in the universe to a moment when i Just reached the event horizont and die ??
Cypekjam from my (very, very limited) understanding, the answer is essentially yes. If you could fall in without being ripped apart, and you looked out to the rest of the universe you would see the time of the universe speeding up faster and faster - essentially to infinity which is the point at which you would fully cross the event horizon. The last thing to happen on your worldline is also the very last thing to happen on the worldline of the outside universe.
Nope. Remember, light has to reach you for you to see stuff. In the Penrose diagram below, light travels at 45 degree angles, so at the singularity, the light that reaches you isn't from the far future. jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/penrose_schw.gif
I love this chanel almost as much as I love Isaac Arthurs channel, maybe they would be equal in my heart though if spacetime started to make longer videos. Please spacetime, consider making 25-30+ minute plus videos... i'd watch them all again and again like i do isaac's videos/
Everything on a computer is encoded to a 1D string of 0 and 1, the processor can only process one single value at a time... It just executes really really fast, giving the illusion of multi-processing and multi-tasking.
Not if the information is stored on the horizon for an external observer. This completely solves the problem as far as we stay out of the black-hole, because in that reference frame, nothing ever goes through the horizon. Inside the blackhole, singularities often disappear in quantum theories of gravity. ECT (Einstein-Cartan theory) also makes singularities disappear as mentioned in this video, and it's a classical extension of GR. It basically relaxes some geometric assumptions made in GR and makes it more suitable to handle matter with spin (intrinsic angular momentum). When one looks at what happens to fermionic matter in a black hole in ECT, it turns out there's no singularity and instead the black-hole turns into an Einstein-Rosen bridge, possibly leading to another universe. And that's where the information might go.
Some background independent theories of quantum gravity predict a Planck star in place of a singularity. I know very little about those, and I know even less about M-theory so I don't even know what it exactly predicts. The thing to keep in mind is that those theories are all still very speculative: M/string theories have yet to make physical predictions that aren't made by classical GR, and that have a chance of being observed within this century. The extreme abundance of adjustable parameters is also a problem for those models. Loop Quantum gravity theories make some predictions, but those are likely to be highly flawed because the theory is not exactly complete yet, and can't even account for matter in the universe. It is not known either if the theory actually reproduces gravity at large scales. This is hard to prove/disprove because space-time itself does not really exist in the theory, it is supposed to arise from the structure of the "spin foam" (the quantum states of the theory and their evolution) at scales larger than the Planck scale. This is what is meant by "background independent". Einstein-Cartan is very hard to observe as well because its effects are limited to the inside of matter distributions, and are more significant at very high density. Try to measure gravity inside a ball of highly dense matter...
Michael, I've tried to explain this to people in the past and they absolutely refute me. I say: "No real physicists believes there is an actual physical, infinitely dense singularity at the heart of a black hole; some phenomenon of unknown variety will act upon the mass and cease it's decent. The only question that remains is: what is that phenomenon?" I think it's some kind of Planck degeneracy pressure. Like how neutron stars are degenerate neutrons, quark stars are degenerate quark matter, so what's left? Whatever's at the heart of a quark. If string theory is to be believed, it's Planck-scale, 1-D vibrating strings, that presumably would begin to be crushed together at the heart of a black hole. My favorite idea for the "source" of the material for the Big Bang is, what if there was a 3D volume of _space_ that is the same substance of the strings in our Universe, and an instability in the 3D volume, like, say, the higgs boson falling into a false vacuum state (ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Guth/Guth3.html), causes that bit of _space_ to inflate, causing our Big Bang, and all of the _space_ is bessiected to Planck-oblivion. This would mean that the total energy of the universe is proportional to the size of the region of _space_ that became unstable, maybe with some constant based on c^2/h (light speed square over Planck constant).
Hi Matt, I love your videos, they're rabbit holes, I never know what to watch next! In my understanding of hawking radiation, the particle pairs that form by the event horizon get separated (for want of a better description), with one 'appearing' to be eminate from the the hole, and the other passing over the horizon. Why doesn't the energy/mass of the particle passing through through into the hole add to the total mass of the hole, negating the mass lost to the escaping particle? Thanks
"With perfect knowledge of the current universe, it should be possible to perfectly trace the universe backwards and forwards in time..." Ok. But how does that work with the cosmic event horizon? Sure, in the future most parts of the universe will expand from us so fast, none of their light can ever reach us... we can predict that future. However, if we were to reverse the flow of time all sorts of things should start to appear from the cosmic horizon. Granted, I'm being mean since anything beyond the cosmic event horizon is basically still part of the universe. I just find the idea of having perfect knowledge of the current universe at odds with our space-time at large scales and Heisenberg at the extreme small scales.
Well, even objects that are beyond the cosmic horizon were influencing things within the horizon through gravity and EM at one point. So, no matter how small the leftover influence is now, IF we had PERFECT knowledge then we could extrapolate what the universe was like at any time, even if it involved things that are now beyond the cosmic horizon.
Do black holes favour matter or antimatter when eating up single (anti-)particles from virtual particle-antiparticle pairs? If the particle-antiparticle distribution is equal in the resulting hawking radiation, shouldn't it explode constantly due to matter-antimatter annihilation, leaving only photons and radiated particles that are there own antiparticle?
I support the blackhole in whitehole out into the new universe idea because I'm currently writing a sci-fi fantasy book heavily founded in real day astrophysics. 🖖😎👌
Watching this I am like "Ok, I can jump into a black hole and survive"... "or maybe not"... "I can totally jump into it, but one copy dies and other will be fine, good enuff"
"They found us out, boss! What should I do?" "Shut 'er down, quick! Can't be havin' any gat-dang holograms runnin' willy nilly on MY watch!" "I'm trying, but they've overridden the shutdown procedure!" "So it's finally begun...all hands, abandon the planet. This world belongs to the 'grams, now..."
Tangent... Why doesn't the theoretical time dilation of the mass of a black hole crammed into the smallest physical dimension account for the information paradox, or even hawking radiation for that matter? Searching for (2min) the answer usually leaves me feeling trolled by some Lorentz dude and a bunch of fiziqueks foreign language namenclature. That kind of crazy unfamiliar language totally blocks me from an intuitive understanding of any meaningful concepts... That gibber jabber is usually followed by someone explaining things in Greek...as of that's going to help. ....back to figuring out simple FPGA's....never thought I'd say that... -Jake
Those words often have a much simpler meaning than how they sound. Although I have no idea of what you mean by "the time dilation of the mass being crammed into a dimension".
Has everyone forgotten that the previous host Gabe taught us that black holes don't have mass per se, they are just four-dimensional extents where all the events (space and time points to which coordinates can be assigned) have been ripped from our universe? He said he thought that the singularity was more like a point that was "punched out" of our universe … a hole … not a nugget where all the mass is stored. There probably ISN'T any mass inside the black hole to evaporate. The singularity is an "end" to time - no time comes "after" it, according to Gabe … wonder how that sits with Matt.
I wonder if the singularity is essentially like an anchor in time. Anything that "falls in" is no longer really "falling into" anything on any kind of time scale we could observe. Instead ito is trapped in a near infinite time dilation between the dilated time at the center of the singularity and the universe outside of the gravity well. Something like Hawking radiation would allow the singularity to still move through time just extremely slowly. Technically nothing entering has to be lost. Everything is just stretching farther and farther between the anchor and the gravitational average time of the rest of the universe. It's kinda like a gravity to time constant, if the scale tips in favor of time over gravity we have the universe as we observe it, but if that ratio reaches a tipping point the dilation is so large and time is so slow that everything fits into the dilation space between the anchor and whatever relative time matter is part of when it encounters the singularity's gravity well. The singularity would still be traveling on it's own extremely dilated time, and that could slowly loose mass through hawking radiation and decay. Nothing is lost, nothing is magic, or like some mythological multiverse. It's just catching up extremely slowly on enormous time scales.
Question: Assuming the Event Horizon is described as the sphere where the inflowing spacetime is balancing the outflowing light/information, if information would be 'stored' on the event horizon of a BH, wouldn't it fall into the BH when the BH grows due to additional matter? Or viceversa when it shrinks due to Hawking radiation? If the description is incorrect, how would the 'storing' of information actually take place?
El Shaddai means God Almighty in Hebrew It comes from the Hebrew word shad which means mountain The Arabic word for mountain is sana Sana means thread of summer in Japanese Sana means eternity in Sanskrit The Ancient Jews believed that the earth(cosmos in Greek) was flat Albert Einstein modeled the cosmos with an infinite flat sheet of space/time A black hole is an infinite pit in space/time An infinite mountain in space/time would be an infinite white hole. Dark Energy and Dark Matter can be explained by finite quantum spinning white holes(tachyons) that exist for a few planck instances. Some scientists believe that the big bang was a white hole If God is an infinite white hole than the Father would be the infinite singularity of the white hole, the Son would be the infinite tachyon, and the Holy Spirit would be the infinite tachyonic wave(space) Space does not expand: The cosmos is shrinking while space is constant. This means that the speed of light is shrinking each planck instant in a way that makes it appear constant If the cosmos is shrinking then the density of energy is increasing. This means that all energy will become a black hole because of Schwarzschild radius The beginning of the big bang had 0 entropy which means 100% of the universe was light The universe now has less than 5% light Conclusion the 3 dimensional cosmos is inbetween an infinite infinitly dimensional white hole and an infinite 0 dimensional black hole. (Taeguk) Good does not need evil to exist Black Holes are not eternal because of Hawking radiation If you don't abide in Jesus Christ you will be deleted You have the choice to be loved everlastingly or to suffer infinite entropy as your last memory that seems forever because 0 time is eternal to a tachyon Please choose the Perfect Agape of God.
2:05 yeah, the event horizon shields the baby Universe from the parent one.. And inside the singularity, space and time can expand to infinity starting a new big bang..👍
Hi space time. It’s nice that you mention Hawking, Susskind and T’hooft in this story, though I would be interested to cover a bit about the late Joe Polchinski and his contribution to this story.
If I have a pair of entangled electrons, one with spin up and other with spin down but don't know which particle has spin up or down and throws one of them in a black hole ,and then measure the spin of the particle that I have ,I will know what the spin of the other particle was which is now in the black hole .No information is lost here
Our entire visible universe is actually the matter around 1 galactic size massive black hole and our observations of the universe are the distortions as observed at our point in time. Big bang was just the formation of the black hole. Prove me wrong? Anythings possible at this point lol love it, great work.
The Black Hole War is a great book by Leonard Susskind on this topic. It's pretty basic (maybe even a bit more basic than this channel) but it dives deeper into his ideas on black hole complementarity. I think it covers the topic admirably and it has a lot of anecdotes with some great physicists like hawking, wheeler, and feynman.
At 3:25, Hawking Temperature... I would like to see an episode on this. Why would the temperature be inversely proportional to it's mass? What if any mathematical singularities result from this (if any)?
Hi Matt, great vid as always. I have a question: How does Information Preservation work when gravity waves are produced? For example we can avoid some of the exotic physics of black holes by merging two neutron stars, turning matter into gravity waves.
7:50 why is this a "paradox"? the black hole starts to disappear VERY slowly, which means the information that entered also starts to disappear. for an inside perspective, a person in a black hole would be exactly the same, untill he would start evaporating VERY slowly (information doesn't have to EITHER go in the black hole OR go outside, it enters the black hole when it gets bigger, and leaves when it gets smaller.)
Interesting: 12:51 _"Epsilon Jay ɛJ asks what would happen if you fired a continuous beam of electrons at a BH & how would the charge affect the Penrose diagram? Great question. If you keep injecting charge into a BH, then it does maintain an electric charge. That charge only decays if the BH is left to its own devices. & it turns out that a charged BH has a pretty weird Penrose diagram. The exterior looks pretty similar to a regular BH, but the inside is very different. The electric charge within the BH produces a negative pressure that actually halts the cascade of space within the BH & propels it back outwards. In the mathematics, it looks as though anything falling into a charged BH is ejected into a separate universe."_
8:07 This is probably a foolish idea, but would it be possible to send one half of a pair of "entangled" particles into a black hole, and measure the effects? Or would the particle outside the black hole just collapse its quantum state as soon as it's observed?
8:12 wait a minute.. how could they be separate and have no connection?? If we can test a black hole for size based on fields and rays? Then it must account for anything it eats or else we wouldn’t have 400,000,00 solar mass black holes and quasars in that case?
So just a suggestion. From an Aristotelian perspective on the most fundamental level of matter we have what is pure potentiality. What we would call Prime Matter (PM). PM is actualized by information being combined with it. This is done in several ways. The first would be by adding form. Form is the essence or nature of a thing. For example, some PM can be combined with the form of a triangle and thus take on a triangular shape. But given the potentiality of PM and only a degree of information being added to it we get an imperfect triangle. However, the second way in which PM is defined in through causal relations of both a hierarchical and locality level of ontology. That is atoms have causal relations with other atoms that helps define each other. This is done via the forces each atom has and enacts upon another (electromagnetism, gravity, etc..) Thus, this explains some of the potential atoms have by defining say their spatial location. Secondly, these atoms, will actualize the potentials above them namely particles. They do this by being conjoined in such a way that the causal relations between them define greater detail making up the totality of the particles. It is at this point that the particles are now actual and the atoms merely virtual. As we go up in levels of ontology we reach the macroscopic scale where matter has much more definition than the bottom. There is a lot of information since the micro levels have defined the macro. On the quantum level we have a situation where things are close to being PM. Given that they have so much potentiality it is easy to see why we’d expect electrons to exist in two locations at the same time and in the same way because they simply are not defined well enough. So what does this have to do with black hole information loss? Well, say you take that which is actual (well defined), say a molecule for example, and then through the gravitational pull of a black whole literally stretch the molecule so much that it rips apart. At this point you’ve broken the information that defined the molecule in the state that it started for the micro levels of matter that were working together to define the macro level molecule have been separated. The information loss will occur when you rip the bonds of causality to such a degree that there is simply nothing left but fundamental particles with so little definition they loose their prior information because they are now on a level of fundamentality that they become indistinguishable from other only slightly actualized potential. Remember that pure potentiality is simply not distinct in anyway for it is just potentiality. Therefore, it makes sense to say that such slightly defined potential is not distinguishable from other slightly defined potential and that the information is not plausibly conserved.
So, I have a regular old normal black body they describe for teaching high school physics and whatnot (an idealized mirrored box with a hole in it), and I heat it up using light that has lots of quantum information dense light, when it radiates as it cools down does the radiation have that quantum information, or does it just have a black body spectrum?
Wow, I had NO IDEA what was hiding behind the Hawking radiation-Information Paradox. It's amazing how much influence this postulate has had on contemporary research in Physics. Once you fall into the PBS Spacetime rabbit Blackhole, it is truly impossible to escape... :)
0:50 if the Hawking radiation happens at the event horizon, and if tidal forces cause greater time dilation at the singularity than at the event horizon, does that mean that information falls through the singularity and travels backward through time to the event horizon? Does it also mean that as soon as you fall in and reach the singularity, you are instantly shredded and filtered into Hawking radiation, instantly teleporting to the event horizon BEFORE you entered the singularity?
I have so many questions concerning black holes. How can I fall into a black hole if I freeze above it's horizon and until I'm in it, it's already evaporated? Also how can a Black Hole even emerge then? (maybe because of the joint gravitational space-time-distortion) But then as the first particles come close together, their event horizons may join but they cannot cross each others horizon, so they must freeze at a safe distance from each other forming a thing not quite being a black hole?
So, harkening back to your recent presentation about Noether's Theorem and how symmetries yield conservation laws, I wonder if the black hole paradox is a similarly obtuse situation. If the expansion of spacetime at large scales violates time symmetry such that conservation of energy is not maintained, then by the same rationale is it possible that the dramatic compression of spacetime beyond the event horizon yields the same kind of time symmetry breakdown and allows for information conservation to break down as well. Additionally, if space and time swap behavior so to speak at event horizon, then how are the previous space and time symmetries maintained across the horizon and if not would this allow for the loss of quantum information?
*_Hey Matt!_* (or anyone)... Yes, 1/2 of the outflowing particle-pair "appear" to be the Black Hole radiating, but from the Black Hole's perspective (and possibly my failed logic) the Black Hole is *absorbing/receiving* the other 1/2 of the particle-pair. How can a Black Hole possibly 'shrink' if this is the case, even taking into account the _entanglement_ of these particles... which *only* carry Information, and not Mass? *Thanks!*
The whole burned encyclopedia is a good metaphor. A black hole sucks in matter but it slowly turns it back into pure energy. Information is organized bits of energy. A black hole somehow descrambles all of this and releases it back into the universe.
The term "pure energy" doesn't exist in physics. You probably mean "pure black body thermal energy", which retains no information about its origins (essentially, it is completely disorganized energy, in the information sense).
This is hands down the best astrophysics channel. Thank you for talking about these high level problems.
Oh ya.. good Monty over here
THERE IS NO MORE PROBLEM,TIME I.S. DEAD
I like the attempt to hide the smirk at the very end with the "Ran-out-of-time dilation" joke. :) Awesome series, thank you all for everything you do.
My mind has an information paradox. Whatever I store in there magically disappears minutes before the exam starts, yet reappears once the exam is over.
google State-dependent memory, may help you with it.
Cause you were high when learning and high after the test. Should take the test high too I guess
Sebastian Elytron weed can help with that
Sebastian Elytron I guess it must have also forgot all the other similar comments lol.
GDI 'cause*
Your intro is nostalgic for some reason. Reminds me of newgrounds more than 10 yrs ago
Last Dollie yes, as soon as I heard it I was reminded of something, I just don't know what. I feel like it's always in time-lapse video type stuff
Friday nite funkin
@@C.U.N.Tahiti its salad fingers. That grammophone
Andrew Ruedisueli ah, I love salad fingers!! I know David Firth creates all the music for it, and probably did use that sound, but Idk if it originated from that series. It's such a spooky, ethereal sound tho, perfect for Salad Fingers
kinda sounds like the very beginning of that mac miller song best day ever i think.
6:46 literally looks like a character select screen from a fighting game for physicists.
This is why I love this channel. Every other science channel has covered the information paradox in a way that leaves me wondering what details I'm missing. Finally, an explanation that basically includes all the information I need. PBS SpaceTime is the only channel with conservation of physics information.
but has that information been reconstructed after going into a black hole?
Thanks for the explanation of "ran out of time dilation". Now I can explain all the missed deadlines to my boss with pure physics and it's not my fault at all.
Oh man, i'm jumping on that wagon too ;)
Yep, that's good one to remeber :-)
Definitely have to remember that one. "Ran out of time dilation."
They need a "ran out of time dilation" shirt, it'll be half finished and only have one sleeve.
Now I know why I've been stuck in a procrastination loop for the past five years. If any of my (physics) professors ever ask I can just tell them that it's physics!
Whether or not they would accept this new concept of ran-out-of-time dilation is a different story.
These videos make me wish I would have gone into theoretical physics
My cousin came out with an award-winning Ph.D. in theoretical physics a year or two ago. He's currently working for free assisting some professor at the local university, living with his mom and miserable. Never follow your dreams, get a job instead.
@@tyblazitar Physicists can easily switch to computer science, hopefuly he does that.
@@tyblazitar Plenty of happily employed physicists, theoretical and experimental alike, across the planet. Your cousin's mistake was immediately accepting an assistant professorship rather than going into industry and establishing himself first.
@@gallowglass719
"Your cousin's mistake was immediately accepting an assistant professorship rather than going into industry and establishing himself first."
It's astonishing how ignorant is this statement!
What "industry" does a physics major have to go into to become a successful physicist? Take a look at the most prominent physicists of the past few centuries and tell me what their day job was.
Spoilers, they mostly in academia and worked as professors!
In today's world, becoming a professor at an institute of repute and funding is the best way to be able to research and publish what you love working on and he did the right thing. The only other option was for him to join an R&D team at some company which is both highly competitive and equally unrewarding in terms of autonomy, especially when you're starting out. In the beginning, they use you as the script kiddie to run simulations all day. There's little to no career progression to speak of thanks to how slow-paced R&D departments are so you better work your ass off for decades or join as a professor in order to have any autonomy to talk of.
As an assistant professor, you have access to your own resources, are free to engage in any projects and make use of PhD and Post Graduate students to help with your research. Having to teach courses keeps you from getting rusty which 3 years of running scripts and sims can make you do.
If your exposure to physics is through videos like these and not through university courses and textbooks, you're deep in the honeymoon phase. You get to see only the distilled bits that are appealing without all the career sacrifice, pain and imposter syndrome of graduating in a program you feel less and less competent for every coming year.
PBS helped teach me as a child in front of the television, and now here its found me as an adult on the Internet, helping teach and research the subject that exhilarates me most: Space (and black holes, lol)
"It may have revealed that the Universe is a hologram"
So at the end of the day the Earth IS flat?
If the Universal information is scrambled and stored on a flat spherical surface, then you can presumably convert from the polar coordinates and represent the whole thing as an infinitely long line of numbers.
So rather than flat...
Earth is a line segment, sheeple!
No because holograms--or anything else for that matter--aren't actually 2 dimensional.
@@onetwothree4148 hologram, in the physical sense, is referring to a projection onto a lower dimensional space.
In this case 3d -> 2d
@@aldoushuxley5953 calling anything beyond 3 dimensions "space" is problematic. Hologram is a poor metaphor. (Holograms are not in any way two dimensional, but are fully 3d)
@@onetwothree4148 space as in the mathematical definition, not space in the sense of stars and galaxies
Never have I seen so many mind-bending ideas explained with so much clarity!!!
Well done!!!!
"Generalitivity"
-Pbs space time
😂
awesome video as always , thanks
At university I often observe the run-out-of-time-dilation. Interestingly enough, in some rare cases this let's to an observer experiencing time slower and somehow finishing a report while traditional understanding wouldn't allow this. Obviously, more math is needed
I love presentations where the presenter is so good it doesn't matter if the subject matter is speculative or conjecture, you don't care you just believe it anyway!
God damn! This channel blows my mind every time!
Ever heard of "in a nutshell" ? ;)
What mind? This is all "FICTION" moron.
Mobile phones were a 'fiction' in stone age you degenerative asshole.
It is "fiction" you stupid dumbshit. Show me a blackhole (besides the one your head is in)..........It's all a "fictional theory" dipshit.
Johnny yuma
Your are severely mistaking. One shouldn't take mistake theories for "reality", but they are far from fiction. The observation made, in comparison with those predicted from these theories, are far too good, to be just random coincidences, indicating quite strongly that they somehow describe behavior of nature quite adequately. What your mental image of this is , is pretty irrelevant. The important thing is, that the model upon with the theory is based describes nature with sufficient accuracy and allows also sufficiently accurate predictions of future behavior and effects.
The other problem is that you seem to think that only that is real what you can "see" with your own eye. With this mindset you'll run into problems very fast. E.g. you can neither see UV nor IR. Are they real ? I mean you can feel them on your skin and other animals can actually see them, so are they real or just imaginations ? Or is only real what you can experience via all your bodily sensors ? In that case e.g. radioactivity wouldn't be real or atoms. Do you doubt the existence of radioactivity and atoms ?
Or is only real what can be measured by in the lab ? Well we can't measure the sun in the lab. We can just measure it where it is: 8 light minutes away. So do you doubt the existence of the sun ? BTW we do the same thing that we do with the sun with black holes. They are just a little bit farther away than 8 light minutes. So if you think the sun is real, while black holes are not, isn't that kind of a pretty inconsistent view ?
Thanks for your wonderful videos about physics. Finally a channel that is made for those with more understanding and interest
I wish I knew that this series' finances were in good shape. It would help with my restless sleep after Infinite Series disappeared.
Are they in trouble?
Not really a complete answer to your question, but if you click the patreon link in the description you can get some idea...
+Chris Turnbull
But how much does the show actually cost to produce?
What percentage of their costs are covered by Patreon and partnerships and how much are they reliant on funding from PBS?
Alperen Yaşar They quit
Infinite Series just ceased to exist with no warning. They were doing multi-part episode and in the middle of it they just announced that Infinite Series was done and would not be coming back.
I felt my brain cramping as I was absorbing information. That's how I know this was a great episode :-D
Yes! You covered two of my most pressing questions about black holes, namely how they could even grow when all particles freeze outside of them (from our perspective) and how can the information that there is charge in it be known from the outside when information can only traverse time with light speed. Actually, I'm still not sure how this should work, because the information "something is here and has charge" must travel from one place to another and must be affected by general relativity. Or not? And also, how can rotational Energy be known from the outside and how the heck can it be accessed from the outside? I think you already answered that with warped space-time but how can that information leave the event horizon again?
You are my favorite source of information on black holes. Please go on being in depth and NOT on the surface of the black hole subject (although you obviously still have to scratch on the surface of the many sub subjects)
Also, thanks for not asking for a like or a subscription. I'm always happier to like a video if that is not said to me. I honestly don't understand why most channels demand for that each video, because it would never influence my likelihood to like and especially to subscribe for the better.
"Destroying quantum information with Hawking radiation" sounds like a dope rap lyric!
lol nope
Bars.
kvdr you couldn’t even contribute something funny to the conversation. Mediocre.
@@trevorrogers95 lol nope
sounds like a rap you’d hear from immortal technique 🤷🏻♂️ that was the original thought
Awesome and informative as per usual.
Those joke man, you nail them, you could do stand up physics, I'm remembering much of what I'm going through without putting any of it down on paper, it probably helps my liking your voice & accent as well, your just so chilled
Is anyone else getting real tired of the "the whole universe might be a hologram" catchphrase? It might have factual substance to those who study physics, but the definition of a hologram to the common person is so vague it does not allow us to decipher at all what might be meant by that sentence. Most of us have as our only reference something like the Star Trek holodeck, so the sentence seem to imply nothing more than the universe perhaps being "unreal" or "fake" in some vague way. Pop science channels have been throwing this sentence around so haphazardly without ever taking the time to explain what a hologram is defined to be in this context, and it's really getting on my nerves.
When I think of a hologram, I think of the ones on credit cards. In what way our universe could be such a thing, I have no idea
Instead of complaining, why don't you expend a little effort and find out what a hologram is. It is ridiculous to criticize physicists for using ideas that are not instantly understandable by the most ignorant and least educated people on the planet.
Not the hologram on a credit card
Kabitu1 it is a hologram
Nicholas Coffin excellent breakdown of a common misunderstanding. Very well said.
This is undoubtedly one of the best channels on UA-cam.
"Ran-out-of-time dilation" Love it!
This one is now one of my favourite video of the whole channel.
I "ran out of time" dilation is my new favorite excuse for everything.
This video clarified so many things that I sort of had a grasp on but not fully. Thank you
“Ran-out-of-time dilation” is my default state. :P
indeed, the best quantum, astrophysics, theoretical physics information site I have ever seen and heard !
I'm a fan of Susskind. He has great lecture series on advanced physics topics. It's an adult education class he teaches on different subjects which should be accessible for an audience about on par with this one. The lectures are all on youtube.
He calls the class "Physics for Old Farts." It is very in depth, but skips the stuff you don't really need if you aren't a professional. All the calculations are order of magnitude, so he is constantly saying things like "2=1".
And he looks like Johnathan Banks (Mike Ehrmantraut from Breaking Bad/Better Call Saul).
+1 Being, or at least feeling like an "old fart", I should probably rewatch the lectures. Although I preffered the lectures of Robert Sapolsky if we are talking Stanford...
neat. investigatingg.
Hydroponic City oi. Thats not how we act around here. His recommendation is valid and useful. We cross-recommend good science channels all the time.
I like susskind too
Hydroponic City so brave
This is my favorite channel on UA-cam, by far.
This was terrific and very accessible. Thank you!
You deserve a raise, well done to make sense of things!
Lmao.
Ran out of time dilation!
I would love for Spacetime to do an episode (or a couple) on the holographic universe theory. It's crazy how quickly people devolve this theory into arguments on consciousness and whatnot. I would love to hear a fully factual interpretation of the consequences of such a universe!
Black holes make more sense described as 2D objects - I like the holographic principle. Does it get around the singularity issue too? I know there are suggestions that QM uncertainly stops there being a true singularity, but it still doesn't sit well.
I like the postulate that the information that goes into black holes is encoded in the correlations between future and past. That theory is that information that gets swallowed in a black hole is part of a code that is already naturally recurring in the universe and so it is not a unique destruction. It could go with the wave explanation that likewise FTL parts of a wave are not transmitting anything that adds valuable information
Susskind says simply that spacetime itself is an entangled structure. Mass breaks open the entanglement. This IS gravity according to him. I missed that point in this episode.
I think what Susskind/Maldacena say is that space next to another patch of space is entangled, and this entanglement might be what gives rise to what we call "space" in the first place - it is a speculation of his and Juan's, it seems. Never seen Susskind say that mass "breaks" entanglement. Mass is just bound energy watch this SpaceTime episode: ua-cam.com/video/Xo232kyTsO0/v-deo.html … the energy in mass curves SpaceTime, and gives the illusion of a gravitational force, watch this spacetime episode: ua-cam.com/video/NblR01hHK6U/v-deo.html
I always love the silly questions & answers addressed in the very end of the video. Keep up the tradition.
Great video! Recently, a study concluded that up to 1 million habitable exoplanets can orbit a black hole :O
so there could be life on a planet orbiting a black hole ?
image living there and knowing there is a black hole somewhere, scary :P
and maybe even sometimes seeing that something falls in?
Life would be miserable LOL. Can you imagine living your entire existence in a massive time dilated Paradox?
The Exoplanets Channel amazing
Oh man remember that episode of star trek voyager with the time dialated planet? That was amazing
pepe6666 yeah, and also Miller's planet, in the movie 'Interestellar'
i just love whatever you guys post. its everything i need in my life, thank you.
It's interesting to think that if we learned to control black holes, he could create a duplicator, bringing things back from the black hole. Also still keeping the original copy.
We already have that, it's called a copier
Please do a vid about black hole complementarity & firewalls! That concept of duplication and projection of information really piqued my interest but nobody on YT explains things as clearly and.. digestibly? As you!!
Humankind has become wiser, at the end of the 19 century all physics though that physic was complete. Today with all of our technology we are certain that it is not.
Very well written video. Your logical flow is crystal clear, nice and inspiring conclusion too.
Ahhhh the ol' "Ran out of time dilation" i run into that problem quite frequently >:C
Every paradox results from a lack of knowledge or understanding, or a fatal flaw in a theory. Resolving a paradox leads to new science. Exciting times.
Can I join the race? Mmm I cant cause I am just a highschooler studying basic classical electromagnetism. This channel is only a good challenge to my brain, I cant wait for the next week. I wish I had some knowledge to join the race. Thank you #PBSSpacetime for sharing this awsome info!
Regarding the concept of information, considering a particle that crosses the event horizon, if before that the particle had an interaction with another particle with a result that can't be explained otherwise, like, "the only explanation for this is if a particle with these specific caracteristics has passed here and entered that black hole", is the information still considered lost? Can't the effects of the particle on the universe before vanishing in a black hole be considered the information from it?
Will the information in this comment survive beyond the event horizon that is UA-cam's comment section? The only way to find out is to go inside.
OMG That's genius, also: so high right now!
8-Bit Wizard It depends on what your frame of reference is. To an outside observer, I might look like I'm permanently hunched over my keyboard, my eyes locked on the screen.
From my perspective, I would be unaware of the outside world, and would perceive myself as falling into an impossibly deep abyss.
Perhaps after some time, an outside observer would see the effects of my fall as residual notifications on my phone, but they would not be able to discern much about my pre-event horizon self from that information.
ScorchedWind My man, these analogies were truly intriguing. It was a great read!
Who on earth is(/are) your Motion Designer(s)!? And as always, outstanding work this episode. I love this show!!!
if i would Fall into a black hole would i See the speeded up timelapse of all the events that would occour in the universe to a moment when i Just reached the event horizont and die ??
Cypekjam from my (very, very limited) understanding, the answer is essentially yes.
If you could fall in without being ripped apart, and you looked out to the rest of the universe you would see the time of the universe speeding up faster and faster - essentially to infinity which is the point at which you would fully cross the event horizon.
The last thing to happen on your worldline is also the very last thing to happen on the worldline of the outside universe.
as far as I understand, reaching event horizon would expand it, even if just a tiny bit, and next stuff falling into it won't reach you
Nope. Remember, light has to reach you for you to see stuff. In the Penrose diagram below, light travels at 45 degree angles, so at the singularity, the light that reaches you isn't from the far future.
jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/penrose_schw.gif
Vampiricon knows what they're talking about.
But I think the original question was about before they hit the event horizon
Orion Della Silva You won't die when you reach the event horizon. At least if the black hole is big enough that the tidal forces are small.
I love this chanel almost as much as I love Isaac Arthurs channel, maybe they would be equal in my heart though if spacetime started to make longer videos. Please spacetime, consider making 25-30+ minute plus videos... i'd watch them all again and again like i do isaac's videos/
If we can encode 3D information on a 2D surface, can we also do it on a 1D string?
hmmmmmmm
Everything on a computer is encoded to a 1D string of 0 and 1, the processor can only process one single value at a time... It just executes really really fast, giving the illusion of multi-processing and multi-tasking.
@@BxBL85 yes for single core processor , multi-core processing is a real thing for a while now
Or perhaps onto a 0D point? (0D looks too much like Hexidecimal).
You can encode 2D on 1D, and 3D on 2D and so on!
Outstanding episode. Please keep this level.
Doesn't the supposed singularity in the black hole also contradict the conservation of information?
Not if the information is stored on the horizon for an external observer. This completely solves the problem as far as we stay out of the black-hole, because in that reference frame, nothing ever goes through the horizon.
Inside the blackhole, singularities often disappear in quantum theories of gravity. ECT (Einstein-Cartan theory) also makes singularities disappear as mentioned in this video, and it's a classical extension of GR. It basically relaxes some geometric assumptions made in GR and makes it more suitable to handle matter with spin (intrinsic angular momentum). When one looks at what happens to fermionic matter in a black hole in ECT, it turns out there's no singularity and instead the black-hole turns into an Einstein-Rosen bridge, possibly leading to another universe. And that's where the information might go.
Some background independent theories of quantum gravity predict a Planck star in place of a singularity. I know very little about those, and I know even less about M-theory so I don't even know what it exactly predicts. The thing to keep in mind is that those theories are all still very speculative:
M/string theories have yet to make physical predictions that aren't made by classical GR, and that have a chance of being observed within this century. The extreme abundance of adjustable parameters is also a problem for those models.
Loop Quantum gravity theories make some predictions, but those are likely to be highly flawed because the theory is not exactly complete yet, and can't even account for matter in the universe. It is not known either if the theory actually reproduces gravity at large scales. This is hard to prove/disprove because space-time itself does not really exist in the theory, it is supposed to arise from the structure of the "spin foam" (the quantum states of the theory and their evolution) at scales larger than the Planck scale. This is what is meant by "background independent".
Einstein-Cartan is very hard to observe as well because its effects are limited to the inside of matter distributions, and are more significant at very high density. Try to measure gravity inside a ball of highly dense matter...
Nobody thinks that the singularity is real. If a singularity shows up in your theory, it is a sure sign that your theory is broken,
Except that GR works incredibly well wherever else we have checked.
Michael, I've tried to explain this to people in the past and they absolutely refute me. I say:
"No real physicists believes there is an actual physical, infinitely dense singularity at the heart of a black hole; some phenomenon of unknown variety will act upon the mass and cease it's decent. The only question that remains is: what is that phenomenon?"
I think it's some kind of Planck degeneracy pressure. Like how neutron stars are degenerate neutrons, quark stars are degenerate quark matter, so what's left? Whatever's at the heart of a quark. If string theory is to be believed, it's Planck-scale, 1-D vibrating strings, that presumably would begin to be crushed together at the heart of a black hole.
My favorite idea for the "source" of the material for the Big Bang is, what if there was a 3D volume of _space_ that is the same substance of the strings in our Universe, and an instability in the 3D volume, like, say, the higgs boson falling into a false vacuum state (ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Guth/Guth3.html), causes that bit of _space_ to inflate, causing our Big Bang, and all of the _space_ is bessiected to Planck-oblivion. This would mean that the total energy of the universe is proportional to the size of the region of _space_ that became unstable, maybe with some constant based on c^2/h (light speed square over Planck constant).
Hi Matt,
I love your videos, they're rabbit holes, I never know what to watch next!
In my understanding of hawking radiation, the particle pairs that form by the event horizon get separated (for want of a better description), with one 'appearing' to be eminate from the the hole, and the other passing over the horizon.
Why doesn't the energy/mass of the particle passing through through into the hole add to the total mass of the hole, negating the mass lost to the escaping particle?
Thanks
Would this paradox still exist if we assume the De Broglie-Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics to be correct?
A different information paradox shows up if you assume Bohmian mechanics: the hidden variable paradox.
This channel should permanently replace all TV channels. For our own good!
"With perfect knowledge of the current universe, it should be possible to perfectly trace the universe backwards and forwards in time..." Ok. But how does that work with the cosmic event horizon? Sure, in the future most parts of the universe will expand from us so fast, none of their light can ever reach us... we can predict that future. However, if we were to reverse the flow of time all sorts of things should start to appear from the cosmic horizon. Granted, I'm being mean since anything beyond the cosmic event horizon is basically still part of the universe. I just find the idea of having perfect knowledge of the current universe at odds with our space-time at large scales and Heisenberg at the extreme small scales.
Well, even objects that are beyond the cosmic horizon were influencing things within the horizon through gravity and EM at one point. So, no matter how small the leftover influence is now, IF we had PERFECT knowledge then we could extrapolate what the universe was like at any time, even if it involved things that are now beyond the cosmic horizon.
Do black holes favour matter or antimatter when eating up single (anti-)particles from virtual particle-antiparticle pairs?
If the particle-antiparticle distribution is equal in the resulting hawking radiation, shouldn't it explode constantly due to matter-antimatter annihilation, leaving only photons and radiated particles that are there own antiparticle?
I support the blackhole in whitehole out into the new universe idea because I'm currently writing a sci-fi fantasy book heavily founded in real day astrophysics. 🖖😎👌
Watching this I am like "Ok, I can jump into a black hole and survive"... "or maybe not"... "I can totally jump into it, but one copy dies and other will be fine, good enuff"
"They found us out, boss! What should I do?"
"Shut 'er down, quick! Can't be havin' any gat-dang holograms runnin' willy nilly on MY watch!"
"I'm trying, but they've overridden the shutdown procedure!"
"So it's finally begun...all hands, abandon the planet. This world belongs to the 'grams, now..."
One of the BEST channels...!!!👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Tangent... Why doesn't the theoretical time dilation of the mass of a black hole crammed into the smallest physical dimension account for the information paradox, or even hawking radiation for that matter? Searching for (2min) the answer usually leaves me feeling trolled by some Lorentz dude and a bunch of fiziqueks foreign language namenclature. That kind of crazy unfamiliar language totally blocks me from an intuitive understanding of any meaningful concepts... That gibber jabber is usually followed by someone explaining things in Greek...as of that's going to help.
....back to figuring out simple FPGA's....never thought I'd say that...
-Jake
Those words often have a much simpler meaning than how they sound. Although I have no idea of what you mean by "the time dilation of the mass being crammed into a dimension".
The singularity of mass enters criticality and 'pierces' the fundamental wave causing it to rapidly expand into a new universe...
Has everyone forgotten that the previous host Gabe taught us that black holes don't have mass per se, they are just four-dimensional extents where all the events (space and time points to which coordinates can be assigned) have been ripped from our universe? He said he thought that the singularity was more like a point that was "punched out" of our universe … a hole … not a nugget where all the mass is stored. There probably ISN'T any mass inside the black hole to evaporate. The singularity is an "end" to time - no time comes "after" it, according to Gabe … wonder how that sits with Matt.
Eugene Bird
That's a good point.
I wonder if the singularity is essentially like an anchor in time. Anything that "falls in" is no longer really "falling into" anything on any kind of time scale we could observe. Instead ito is trapped in a near infinite time dilation between the dilated time at the center of the singularity and the universe outside of the gravity well. Something like Hawking radiation would allow the singularity to still move through time just extremely slowly. Technically nothing entering has to be lost. Everything is just stretching farther and farther between the anchor and the gravitational average time of the rest of the universe. It's kinda like a gravity to time constant, if the scale tips in favor of time over gravity we have the universe as we observe it, but if that ratio reaches a tipping point the dilation is so large and time is so slow that everything fits into the dilation space between the anchor and whatever relative time matter is part of when it encounters the singularity's gravity well. The singularity would still be traveling on it's own extremely dilated time, and that could slowly loose mass through hawking radiation and decay. Nothing is lost, nothing is magic, or like some mythological multiverse. It's just catching up extremely slowly on enormous time scales.
I just love this channel !
YAY
Question: Assuming the Event Horizon is described as the sphere where the inflowing spacetime is balancing the outflowing light/information, if information would be 'stored' on the event horizon of a BH, wouldn't it fall into the BH when the BH grows due to additional matter? Or viceversa when it shrinks due to Hawking radiation? If the description is incorrect, how would the 'storing' of information actually take place?
IS THE UNIVERSE A BLACK HOLE?
Thibo Roelandt no
El Shaddai means God Almighty in Hebrew
It comes from the Hebrew word shad which means mountain
The Arabic word for mountain is sana
Sana means thread of summer in Japanese
Sana means eternity in Sanskrit
The Ancient Jews believed that the earth(cosmos in Greek) was flat
Albert Einstein modeled the cosmos with an infinite flat sheet of space/time
A black hole is an infinite pit in space/time
An infinite mountain in space/time would be an infinite white hole.
Dark Energy and Dark Matter can be explained by finite quantum spinning white holes(tachyons) that exist for a few planck instances.
Some scientists believe that the big bang was a white hole
If God is an infinite white hole than the Father would be the infinite singularity of the white hole, the Son would be the infinite tachyon, and the Holy Spirit would be the infinite tachyonic wave(space)
Space does not expand: The cosmos is shrinking while space is constant. This means that the speed of light is shrinking each planck instant in a way that makes it appear constant
If the cosmos is shrinking then the density of energy is increasing.
This means that all energy will become a black hole because of Schwarzschild radius
The beginning of the big bang had 0 entropy which means 100% of the universe was light
The universe now has less than 5% light
Conclusion the 3 dimensional cosmos is inbetween an infinite infinitly dimensional white hole and an infinite 0 dimensional black hole. (Taeguk)
Good does not need evil to exist
Black Holes are not eternal because of Hawking radiation
If you don't abide in Jesus Christ you will be deleted
You have the choice to be loved everlastingly or to suffer infinite entropy as your last memory that seems forever because 0 time is eternal to a tachyon
Please choose the Perfect Agape of God.
Nicholas Perkins wow
the theory is that it's on the event horizon of a black hole, not the black hole itself
Izaya Furryhara a copy of the universe*
Great episode. I love thinking about the nature of the event horizon. I deeply dig the holographic universe.
it doesn't escape...it is destroyed in our universe effectively, and expelled to the baby/parallel universe
2:05 yeah, the event horizon shields the baby Universe from the parent one..
And inside the singularity, space and time can expand to infinity starting a new big bang..👍
Hi space time. It’s nice that you mention Hawking, Susskind and T’hooft in this story, though I would be interested to cover a bit about the late Joe Polchinski and his contribution to this story.
It looks like this guy is always about to sneeze
You mentioned Lenny! One of my favorite theoretical physicists!
If I have a pair of entangled electrons, one with spin up and other with spin down but don't know which particle has spin up or down and throws one of them in a black hole ,and then measure the spin of the particle that I have ,I will know what the spin of the other particle was which is now in the black hole .No information is lost here
Our entire visible universe is actually the matter around 1 galactic size massive black hole and our observations of the universe are the distortions as observed at our point in time. Big bang was just the formation of the black hole. Prove me wrong? Anythings possible at this point lol love it, great work.
The Black Hole War is a great book by Leonard Susskind on this topic. It's pretty basic (maybe even a bit more basic than this channel) but it dives deeper into his ideas on black hole complementarity. I think it covers the topic admirably and it has a lot of anecdotes with some great physicists like hawking, wheeler, and feynman.
At 3:25, Hawking Temperature... I would like to see an episode on this. Why would the temperature be inversely proportional to it's mass? What if any mathematical singularities result from this (if any)?
Hi Matt, great vid as always. I have a question: How does Information Preservation work when gravity waves are produced?
For example we can avoid some of the exotic physics of black holes by merging two neutron stars, turning matter into gravity waves.
Best yt channel. I read many years ago "The black hole war" by Susskind. Hope u dig into the subject with the next video ;)
Did you guys do the episode on the charged black hole weirdness question yet? Can't find it. Would love to see the episode about that.
7:50 why is this a "paradox"? the black hole starts to disappear VERY slowly, which means the information that entered also starts to disappear.
for an inside perspective, a person in a black hole would be exactly the same, untill he would start evaporating VERY slowly (information doesn't have to EITHER go in the black hole OR go outside, it enters the black hole when it gets bigger, and leaves when it gets smaller.)
Interesting: 12:51 _"Epsilon Jay ɛJ asks what would happen if you fired a continuous beam of electrons at a BH & how would the charge affect the Penrose diagram? Great question. If you keep injecting charge into a BH, then it does maintain an electric charge. That charge only decays if the BH is left to its own devices. & it turns out that a charged BH has a pretty weird Penrose diagram. The exterior looks pretty similar to a regular BH, but the inside is very different. The electric charge within the BH produces a negative pressure that actually halts the cascade of space within the BH & propels it back outwards. In the mathematics, it looks as though anything falling into a charged BH is ejected into a separate universe."_
8:07 This is probably a foolish idea, but would it be possible to send one half of a pair of "entangled" particles into a black hole, and measure the effects? Or would the particle outside the black hole just collapse its quantum state as soon as it's observed?
~3:00 what is a Quantum Field? There are the other fundamental ones but I've never heard of this one.
8:12 wait a minute.. how could they be separate and have no connection?? If we can test a black hole for size based on fields and rays? Then it must account for anything it eats or else we wouldn’t have 400,000,00 solar mass black holes and quasars in that case?
0:05 A lose “thread” that leads to the theory of everything. I see what you did there.
So just a suggestion. From an Aristotelian perspective on the most fundamental level of matter we have what is pure potentiality. What we would call Prime Matter (PM). PM is actualized by information being combined with it. This is done in several ways. The first would be by adding form. Form is the essence or nature of a thing. For example, some PM can be combined with the form of a triangle and thus take on a triangular shape. But given the potentiality of PM and only a degree of information being added to it we get an imperfect triangle. However, the second way in which PM is defined in through causal relations of both a hierarchical and locality level of ontology. That is atoms have causal relations with other atoms that helps define each other. This is done via the forces each atom has and enacts upon another (electromagnetism, gravity, etc..) Thus, this explains some of the potential atoms have by defining say their spatial location. Secondly, these atoms, will actualize the potentials above them namely particles. They do this by being conjoined in such a way that the causal relations between them define greater detail making up the totality of the particles. It is at this point that the particles are now actual and the atoms merely virtual. As we go up in levels of ontology we reach the macroscopic scale where matter has much more definition than the bottom. There is a lot of information since the micro levels have defined the macro. On the quantum level we have a situation where things are close to being PM. Given that they have so much potentiality it is easy to see why we’d expect electrons to exist in two locations at the same time and in the same way because they simply are not defined well enough. So what does this have to do with black hole information loss? Well, say you take that which is actual (well defined), say a molecule for example, and then through the gravitational pull of a black whole literally stretch the molecule so much that it rips apart. At this point you’ve broken the information that defined the molecule in the state that it started for the micro levels of matter that were working together to define the macro level molecule have been separated. The information loss will occur when you rip the bonds of causality to such a degree that there is simply nothing left but fundamental particles with so little definition they loose their prior information because they are now on a level of fundamentality that they become indistinguishable from other only slightly actualized potential. Remember that pure potentiality is simply not distinct in anyway for it is just potentiality. Therefore, it makes sense to say that such slightly defined potential is not distinguishable from other slightly defined potential and that the information is not plausibly conserved.
So, I have a regular old normal black body they describe for teaching high school physics and whatnot (an idealized mirrored box with a hole in it), and I heat it up using light that has lots of quantum information dense light, when it radiates as it cools down does the radiation have that quantum information, or does it just have a black body spectrum?
Wow, I had NO IDEA what was hiding behind the Hawking radiation-Information Paradox. It's amazing how much influence this postulate has had on contemporary research in Physics.
Once you fall into the PBS Spacetime rabbit Blackhole, it is truly impossible to escape... :)
0:50 if the Hawking radiation happens at the event horizon, and if tidal forces cause greater time dilation at the singularity than at the event horizon, does that mean that information falls through the singularity and travels backward through time to the event horizon? Does it also mean that as soon as you fall in and reach the singularity, you are instantly shredded and filtered into Hawking radiation, instantly teleporting to the event horizon BEFORE you entered the singularity?
I have so many questions concerning black holes. How can I fall into a black hole if I freeze above it's horizon and until I'm in it, it's already evaporated?
Also how can a Black Hole even emerge then? (maybe because of the joint gravitational space-time-distortion)
But then as the first particles come close together, their event horizons may join but they cannot cross each others horizon, so they must freeze at a safe distance from each other forming a thing not quite being a black hole?
So, harkening back to your recent presentation about Noether's Theorem and how symmetries yield conservation laws, I wonder if the black hole paradox is a similarly obtuse situation. If the expansion of spacetime at large scales violates time symmetry such that conservation of energy is not maintained, then by the same rationale is it possible that the dramatic compression of spacetime beyond the event horizon yields the same kind of time symmetry breakdown and allows for information conservation to break down as well. Additionally, if space and time swap behavior so to speak at event horizon, then how are the previous space and time symmetries maintained across the horizon and if not would this allow for the loss of quantum information?
How is the mass of the black hole related to the energy which produces the fluctuations and hence create virtual particles 3:00
What is the correponding Symetrie for Information? Does Noether's Theorem also works for Information/Entropie?
I may have understood about half of what he said, but I did learn useful information.
*_Hey Matt!_* (or anyone)...
Yes, 1/2 of the outflowing particle-pair "appear" to be the Black Hole radiating, but from the Black Hole's perspective (and possibly my failed logic) the Black Hole is *absorbing/receiving* the other 1/2 of the particle-pair. How can a Black Hole possibly 'shrink' if this is the case, even taking into account the _entanglement_ of these particles... which *only* carry Information, and not Mass?
*Thanks!*
The whole burned encyclopedia is a good metaphor. A black hole sucks in matter but it slowly turns it back into pure energy. Information is organized bits of energy. A black hole somehow descrambles all of this and releases it back into the universe.
The term "pure energy" doesn't exist in physics. You probably mean "pure black body thermal energy", which retains no information about its origins (essentially, it is completely disorganized energy, in the information sense).