In my Montessori school I learned a bit of the theory of relativity and got super hooked on black hole information. Maybe it was a bit over my head but it totally got me interested in space for life. Never underestimate how smart kids can be and what kinds of stuff they'll latch on to.
This reminds me of when I was in 2nd grade sitting in the reading corner and diving into space books, and came to the section about black holes... My tiny little brain short circuited, like a blue screen on a computer, and I literally could not wrap my head around the concept- but it was hands down *the* coolest thing I'd ever heard of... Still is to this day as a 30 year old adult who can somewhat understand it. That little book my teacher put in the reading corner sparked a lifelong interest in space and science. Thank you Mrs. Robinson, for not underestimating the intelligence of children, and filling me with a sense of awe and wonder about the universe that has never left me.
Stuff that falls into black holes gets crushed down to nothing then emitted as single socks on the other side and through spooky action find their entangled pair that have disappeared from washing machines over many years.
We can definitely imagine we’re the Earth itself and to level up, we push through that seed which is Mars!!🌍🌱🍄🟫👽🛸🌌✨ Belief is a powerful drug!! ⛄️ ❄️ We’re going radioactive!!☢️ 🍊 🫐 🎆 😮 Imagine Dragons!!🐉
no it doesnt. At least not according to current theory. It supposedly slows down to the point where it never reaches the "hole' but freezes forever, or at least the suppose trillions of years before "the end". Its a dumb theory, and obviously wrong - but the proper theories were rejected by academia in the 70s.
What is the range of masses where it would not go kaboom instantly? And would an evaporating BH reduce down to zero ie Plank length as it evaporated, or would it explode fully before that point?
@@christophermeyer5986 First, I was off by 8 orders of magnitude. I chose not to say explode because I'm not sure of what technically counts as an explosion in space. We obviously don't know much about the end of life for a black hole. Let's assume 'kaboom' means releasing all of its remaining mass-energy in < 1s - with that assumption the answer is > ~280,000Kg
According to Quantum Physics they are constantly popping in and out of existence in the same way particles do, as my old Physics teacher used to say, "Whatever it is the the structure of our Universe is made of, its quite fizzy!"
I'd add a question mark to the answer that everything falling into a black hole becomes more black hole. As a layperson I'm aware that information is supposed to be conserved rather than fully destroyed, even in a black hole and that in principle; infalling stuff should be recoverable and reconstitutable (in principle) at some point in the far future.
Fraser - re the black hole mass of the solar system question. I thought the answer would be if all the mass was ADDED to the sun, would it be a black hole. That is of course no, as the sun is 99.86% of the solar system mass, so,adding the remaining 0.14% is negligible.
Fraser-this is an amazing channel and I appreciate the work you put into it. I'm a new subscriber and I think im going to join your patreon because I just love this channel.🎉
"A get out of jail card"...😄😄 Although I love learning and even though a whole lot of the time I may just be listening, trying to even grasp so many ideas I have not yet grasped... I thank you for loving to answer questions. Thank you!
Something I would love is if you did a compilation of all your media (book/show/game) recommendations...I know it would be a lil weird to string the end of a bunch of videos together but often you recommend something that sounds great and 3 wks later I have no memory of the name or what video you spoke about it in. Just a thought!!
I watched a documentary (I wish I knew what it was called) that covered what we "knew" about the universe before the launch of Hubble compared to after. And it blew me away. The things we learn seem, I don't know, natural? Normal? And it's hard to remember not knowing them.
The whole theory of the expanding universe is based on The speed of light being constant, which we can’t prove because we don’t even know what the one-way speed of light and this idea that the speed of light is constant forever which totally defies everything we know about quantum physics and physics in short, the theory of the expanding universe is based on Unprovable theory of light, but you would have to think above the eighth grade level to realize that
Giordano Bruno theorized the existence of exo-planets and it took them till the 90s to admit that he was right. Bruno also theorized an infinite universe with no cosmic center. JWST is validating that theory. Electromagnetic waves are force carriers. Force decreases with distance which in the photon's case, it's wavelength increases and energy value decreases. Otherwise known as redshift. The CMB is photons that have redshifted themselves past the visible light spectrum. The question then becomes, what is the maximum energy value for a photon and far/long can it travel before its energy value decreases to the CMB level. Photon's will keep propagating until they run into another object and be absorbed.
I know that black holes usually shred matter into smaller particles as it is crossing the even horizon because of spaghettification. BUT does it regather and form heavy elements at the center of the black hole? Like after it’s ripped apart from the black hole when it gets to the center would it just form heavier and heavier elements or is the gravitational force too strong to form anything or is it the opposite. I’m just a dumb person that probably worded that poorly and hopefully someone can help me understand.
Veritasium has a somewhat recent video explaining a theory of what might happen going past the event horizon. It's one of my favorite videos from him. 😅
Will it become a quark black hole if it will be infinite quarks? As quarks are pulled apart the strong nuclear force that holds them together increases in size to the point where the energy required to separate two quarks is equal to the energy required to form two new quarks. These quarks essentially pop into existence to form two new quark pairs.
I assume the tidal forces required to pull hadrons apart would only be strong enough at less than a femtometer from the singularity, so maaaybe it would have enough time to happen once before being lost. But it's an interesting question of where the mass energy would come from to create new matter like that. Presumably from the gravitational field... But you'd have to ask a physicist.
When one is younger, one feels that you may know almost everything. That maybe the case for knowledge, but knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, but wisdom is knowing not the put it in a fruit salad….. wisdom only comes with age and is always evolving until we pass on…
7:50 .. My interpretation of the question is not that they were implying something supernatural, but that whenever we explain something, we explain it in terms of new fundamentals that themselves just have to be assumed, until we find something even more fundamental. What would a physics without fundamentals we just have to assume even look like?
how about you are outside on mountain top and earth collidewith a black hole and you get slingshotted throught the universe at the speed of light - any life that gets slingshotted by the black hole would end up somewhere in the universe with a splat or be the last thing alive at the end of universe
@@JkaninteangemittnamnThere's no way a black hole could eject a planet at the speed of light, as not even atoms which are ejected are able to reach the speed of light- the only thing that can reach that speed is light because it has no mass. When massive celestial bodies are ejected by a black hole, they only reach a fraction of the speed of light at best.
Regarding gravitational slingshot / gravity assist, it sparked a random thought regarding the increasing amount of satellites we have in orbit around Earth. Do the satellites in orbit around Earth take away some of Earth's orbital velocity or the Earth's rotation?
Not all questions are answerable, because lots of questions are based on false assumptions and don't really make sense. For example some people claim there is a profound question of what it feels like to be conscious, but the subjective and objective realms are non-overlapping magisteria.
I agree with your view on Starship. I'm confident that we will get at least partial reuse in the near future due to the high testing cadence and rocket production. Spacex have just applied for 25 launches per year and have just have been displaying their new Raptor 3 engine. Their huge new factory should be coming online in a couple of months.
When I were a lad, it was still thought possible that there was vegetation on Mars. Now, it's a real world. And quasars were bright things at the edge of the universe. Now we have images of the central black hole. And knowing this stuff doesn't make it any less magical.
Concerning a "Solar Slingshot", let's not forget that the HARDEST part would be the YEARS it would take to get even remotely close enough to the Sun in order to start the maneuver. Getting close to the Sun isn't easy.
Getting into a highly elliptical orbit that passes closely is much easier than getting a small circular orbit. While it's still not not easy, it is doable. One of the current solar probes is working its way into an orbit that passes relatively close. It could have been much faster and closer if that had been desirable. With current technology, this is not viable for manned missions. But the main obstacle for unmanned missions is the solar sail technology.
@@johnbennett1465 "if that had been desirable". /FACEPALM --> Sure, NASA took the six-year plan to get to the Sun just for kicks. Cuz they didn't desire their data any quicker... Good grief, where do you get your information? WAIT - NM, I do NOT need you to answer that, as it's incorrect anyway and I don't need to concern myself with misinformation.
@@NorthernChev the goal was to gather scientific data, not pass close as to the Sun as quickly as possible. Also six years is a blink of an eye compared to the trip to the Oort cloud. I assumed that the original complaint was about the much longer time it would take to achieve a tight circular orbit.
Kerbal space program taught me, an uneducated normie all the "basics" of orbits, in an evening And calculations within a week. I guess we've all read the quotes from people who teach orbital mechanics, and even who work at NASA, how Kerbal is the best learning aid in the world. KSP supposedly has a very active modding community, I should check it out again.
"Astronomers question if the first picture of a black hole is accurate" "Back-reaction of the Hawking radiation flux on a gravitationally collapsing star II"
"Astronomers question if the first picture of a black hole is accurate" These objections have been raised more than 2 years ago, and have long been answered. "Back-reaction of the Hawking radiation flux on a gravitationally collapsing star II" And that article is 10 years old and entirely theoretical. Comparing that with the huge heap of evidence we have for the existence of black holes, the conclusion should be clear. Oh, and the author writes herself: "Due to huge time dilation effects, the evaporation of these objects from faraway would seem so slow that in fact these stars would not look much different from a black hole to a faraway observer." So in the end, it is rather irrelevant if black holes really exist or not - to us outside observers, it _looks_ like as if they exist. And that's all that important in astronomy (and science in general): what actually can be observed.
The foundation of parallax is the Astronomical Unit, which at one point involved measuring lunar phases and distance, and maybe that required the 🌏 radius?
Yes, originally measuring the AU required knowing the lunar distance, which required knowing the Earth's radius. But now we have newer methods, which don't require knowing that other stuff before.
So recently I was thinking about the mathematics as it related to air pressure in relationship to supersonic flight. From my understanding the math predicting the pressure experienced by the object passing into supersonic airflow should experience infinite pressure at mach 1. This turned out to be a problem with the math and not a real function of air pressure. I'm curious if the math predicting singularities in black holes could be a similar situation?
"I'm curious if the math predicting singularities in black holes could be a similar situation?" Indeed, that's what most physicists are thinking. And some attempts to quantize gravity, e. g. loop quantum gravity, have already shown that under certain assumptions, there indeed is no singularity in a black hole.
I think Fraser's answer on black holes was a little flippant. A better answer would be 'Nobody knows'. And it would depend on what happens to elementary particles: Are they converted into energy or remain as super compressed particles? Also why would a black hole convert matter into dark matter?
Have we ever observed behind a black hole? You said the light from other galaxy and stars would be distorted, would this be almost like a lens effect? I know we use gravitational lensing right now, so would we be able to see anything behind the event horizon of a black hole by the bending of space time? Do we even know if black holes are actually holes that tear spacetime and are infinite? Is a black hole a hole regardless of perspective?
I wonder what a black hole would look like after its evaporated enough mass where the outward pressure of any processes like fusion or other effect is strong enough to counter the gravity of the evaporated black hole in that moment of its life or if thats even possible?
So we should crash Mars into Venus, simulating the Theia impact. Giving it a moon and potentially kickstarting an internal dynamo, magnetosphere, and plate tectonics. A lot of pressure on the word “potentially” but worth a shot. Naturally, only after we’ve thoroughly studied them both.
I watched an astronomy discussion recently that was posted by one of the really smart universities which also speculated that the early moon had an atmosphere. I’ll try to find it.
18:50 to 19:00 "They'd have to be really big ones because they'd have to get through the atmosphere... so kilometer class asteroids" Why would they need to get through the atmosphere to increase rotation speed? I would expect any asteroid impacting the atmosphere to transfer momentum to the atmosphere. I'd expect the atmosphere's friction with the ground would transfer that momentum to the ground. By friction, I mean winds on the surface would transfer momentum between the atmosphere and the solid surface. The momentum would need to be extremely large to significantly change rotation speed but I don't see how that necessitates having ones that hit the hard surface of Venus. An equal amount of momentum from dust particles hitting only the atmosphere should increase the planet's rotation as much as the momentum coming from 1km asteroid impacts that directly impact the solid surface. If the atmosphere doesn't ultimately transfer momentum from stuff that pushes air around, you'd have to think helicopters and airplanes are thrusting the Earth in tiny ways like a rocket.
Thanks My guess is that before the universe we know and love, a Kuhn level 8 nothing of infinite extent but replete with possibilities. Under this scenario, eventually the universe will decay back to norhing at all. As for black holes as you fall in, at first nothing much, then things get mushy, then neutronium, then quark soup, the quarks start multiplying and then as the Higgs field decays the mass disappears ????
Theoretically, could the mass of say, a baseball, be compressed to a black hole and then if conditions are tick grow into a stellar mass or super massive black hole? Or do those ultra large holes have start with an ultra large amount of matter?
I can't seem to make the livestreams, but are we able to predict what the climate would be if you took the Earth exactly as it is and put it where Venus is, or where Mars is, and which (if either) would be better?
So if a spacecraft actually reaches speed of light would it survive a big bang in the previous universes end to create this universe. (assumeing one could)
I know this is like a yr old or w/e (?) but i think the problem with questions like what was here before the universe is they just don't make sense cuz w/o the universe there's no here and w/o a time flow there's no concept of before it's like asking what the color blue smells like the words make sense, and the syntax seems right, but it's just not gonna have an answer we can't just take our everyday experience and like extrapolate it out to the universe
Blessings Frazer What size in terms of diameter, or rather cubic area, would a magnet of standard niobium types be on each poles of mars to replicate an earth size magnetosphere? Would an Lagrange point magnet be less massive and won't the active stabilization be significant to defer against solar pressure? What size would that magnet need to be and how much resistive force would it need to counter?
If it’s true that time effectively comes to a halt at the event horizon to the outside observer, doesn’t that mean that nothing can ever breach the EH in the time available? That BH mergers cannot happen?
Fraser. I've often wondered why we don't have a spacecraft Orbiting perpendicular to the solar system orbit around the Sun. Could we take a photo of our solar system with all the planets? Are there any scientific benefits in such a mission?
@@Objectivebeatz Such a spacecraft obviously would be very far away from the ecliptic, i. e. the plane where everything interesting in the solar system happens.
...unless black holes are the source, or a source, of the dark gravity that everyone calls "dark matter" (Neil DeGrasse Tyson says this all the time - it's really a gravitational effect that is assumed to be from some unknown matter source or some particle we haven't found yet, but it's really dark gravity that we are observing)
Here's a question, inspired by the recent Starliner stranding: How does astronaut pay work? Are they paid for the time they're stranded up there? I imagine they're keeping the stranded astronauts busy with various experiments and maintenance work on the station. But what would happen if one of the stranded astronauts radioed to NASA: "That's it. I'm done. I didn't sign up for this; I'm done with your endless experiments. I'm going to just sit here and watch Netflix until you take me back home. Have a problem with it? Take it up with the 13th Amendment!"
I still don't understand how can anything fall into a black hole from our perspective when everything should essentialy freeze in time just at the event horizon. But we witnessed black holes combining, so apparently something can fall into it. I find this confusing and contradictory.
We can definitely imagine we’re the Earth itself and to level up, we push through that seed which is Mars!!🌍🌱🍄🟫👽🛸🌌✨ Belief is a powerful drug!! ⛄️ ❄️ We’re going radioactive!!☢️ 🍊 🫐 🎆 😮 Imagine Dragons!!🐉
25:21 Because of the low gravity on the moon wouldn't 1 atmo worth of gas be a very considerable amount? Whats the math? something like 6 times more air to get the same 14.7 PSI as earth? I guess we could adapt to a much lower pressure like in spacesuits
Armstrong limit At altitudes above 11-12 miles (18-19 km) above sea level, atmospheric pressure drops below 0.0618 atm (6.3 kPa, 47 mmHg, or about 1 psi). This is known as the Armstrong limit, and exposure to these pressures can cause rapid loss of consciousness, neurological and cardiovascular changes, and eventually death if pressure isn't restored within 60-90 seconds. Blood pressure Atmospheric pressure pushes on the body, but blood pressure compensates from the inside out. If the air pressure drops too low, the excess pressure of blood inside the body can cause blood vessels to burst. Evolution adapted your biological processes to a 14 psi environment. As with everything else, there is a goldilocks zone in which biological process can take place. The main factor is the oxygen level. It is estimated that 80% of metabolic energy comes from breathing and only 20% from food. Inhaled air contains approx 21%oxygen, 0.04% carbon dioxide and 79%nitrogen while exhaled air contains approx 16% oxygen, 4% carbon dioxide and also 79% nitrogen. People can breathe in pure oxygen environments, but it can be dangerous and even deadly. Breathing air with a higher oxygen concentration than the 21% found in Earth's atmosphere can cause a series of chemical reactions that can damage the body's cells, tissues, and organs. You need to replicate the off world atmosphere to the molecule in order have the sane level of performance. That's not to say the human body can't adapt to a new environment over many generations.
Dark Matter is interesting as it started as a fudge factor. Over time, the idea has gotten out of hand. Our sun, which is 4.6E9 years old and currently weighs 2E30 kg, is currently giving off 2E20 kg a year. Roughly speaking, the sun has lost about 1/3 of its mass since it was started. Where did the mass go? "Dark Matter" (I have not put any thought into Dark Energy.)
It's not a fudge factor, it's a series of observations. Stars losing mass doesn't explain 10x the missing mass. Also, particles streaming off stars can pile up and collide, but dark matter seems to collision less
@@frasercain It "started" as a fudge factor. This is similar to the discovery of Uranus and the search for Planet-9. I find it hard to believe that most of the mass in the universe has to be in stars. It takes starless mass to make a star. Are we to assume that all the mass is consumed in a star at some point in time, and there is no longer any leftover?
Hmm, if black hole emitions are the source for dark energy, then as the less they are fed by new matter, the less dark energy force they would emanate 🤔
Could it be that the default is for a planet to not have plate tectonics, and the earth only got its cracked crust from the collision with the Mars sized object 4.5 billion years ago that created the moon?
What happens if you have 2 black holes facing each other and they both have jets coming out and the jets hit each black hole dead center at the same time.. What happens if the jet from a supermassive hits a stellar black hole? How bout a black hole in between 2 others and both shoot jets into it?
Why are people always acting like a black hole has some sort of magical properties. Is just intense gravity caused by dense matter. What happens to the stuff that goes in? It becomes more dense matter obviously.
You're not AI are you? What are your thoughts about all the AI generated channels, and the influence they have on the average person looking for accurate information?
If I'm AI, then the tech has advanced significantly while I wasn't looking. Right now, the AI channels create sometimes misleading, but mostly bland content. And people don't know what's accurate and what's AI sludge. Google clearly doesn't care, since it's boosting the videos. I think authenticity will matter in the long run, so I'll keep at it. If the AIs get better than me, then I'll gladly hand over the mantle to them, since people deserve the best content.
Beyond the event horizon is the black hole a solid mass with no space between the sub-atomic particles? And how far beyond the event horizon is that surface, so to speak?
i'm confused about the last question: "should schools stop teaching that gravity is a force?" So what would author propose? Is it something else?? It's not the same question as the answer I heard like: "should they stop teaching about gravity force?" I'd rather hear: "they MUST NOT stop teaching!" People don't understand the gravity! It's one of the main reason there are millions of flat-earthers in the world!
In my Montessori school I learned a bit of the theory of relativity and got super hooked on black hole information. Maybe it was a bit over my head but it totally got me interested in space for life. Never underestimate how smart kids can be and what kinds of stuff they'll latch on to.
This reminds me of when I was in 2nd grade sitting in the reading corner and diving into space books, and came to the section about black holes... My tiny little brain short circuited, like a blue screen on a computer, and I literally could not wrap my head around the concept- but it was hands down *the* coolest thing I'd ever heard of... Still is to this day as a 30 year old adult who can somewhat understand it. That little book my teacher put in the reading corner sparked a lifelong interest in space and science.
Thank you Mrs. Robinson, for not underestimating the intelligence of children, and filling me with a sense of awe and wonder about the universe that has never left me.
Stuff that falls into black holes gets crushed down to nothing then emitted as single socks on the other side and through spooky action find their entangled pair that have disappeared from washing machines over many years.
We can definitely imagine we’re the Earth itself and to level up, we push through that seed which is Mars!!🌍🌱🍄🟫👽🛸🌌✨
Belief is a powerful drug!! ⛄️ ❄️
We’re going radioactive!!☢️ 🍊 🫐 🎆 😮
Imagine Dragons!!🐉
So thats whats happening. I thought dark matter was produced by black holes that expanded universe after their births
no it doesnt. At least not according to current theory. It supposedly slows down to the point where it never reaches the "hole' but freezes forever, or at least the suppose trillions of years before "the end". Its a dumb theory, and obviously wrong - but the proper theories were rejected by academia in the 70s.
YAY nature background again!!
Fun fact, a black hole with a diameter of 1 Planck length would have a mass a bit above
0.00001g
It would go kaboom instantly tho.
What is the range of masses where it would not go kaboom instantly? And would an evaporating BH reduce down to zero ie Plank length as it evaporated, or would it explode fully before that point?
@@christophermeyer5986 First, I was off by 8 orders of magnitude.
I chose not to say explode because I'm not sure of what technically counts as an explosion in space. We obviously don't know much about the end of life for a black hole.
Let's assume 'kaboom' means releasing all of its remaining mass-energy in < 1s - with that assumption the answer is > ~280,000Kg
I. e. a mass of about 1 Planck mass. ;)
According to Quantum Physics they are constantly popping in and out of existence in the same way particles do, as my old Physics teacher used to say, "Whatever it is the the structure of our Universe is made of, its quite fizzy!"
I love every part of you answering questions. What a coincidence!
I'd add a question mark to the answer that everything falling into a black hole becomes more black hole.
As a layperson I'm aware that information is supposed to be conserved rather than fully destroyed, even in a black hole and that in principle; infalling stuff should be recoverable and reconstitutable (in principle) at some point in the far future.
Fraser - re the black hole mass of the solar system question. I thought the answer would be if all the mass was ADDED to the sun, would it be a black hole. That is of course no, as the sun is 99.86% of the solar system mass, so,adding the remaining 0.14% is negligible.
Fraser-this is an amazing channel and I appreciate the work you put into it. I'm a new subscriber and I think im going to join your patreon because I just love this channel.🎉
Scavenger’s Reign was so great. Can’t wait for a second season.
"A get out of jail card"...😄😄 Although I love learning and even though a whole lot of the time I may just be listening, trying to even grasp so many ideas I have not yet grasped... I thank you for loving to answer questions.
Thank you!
Scavengers Reign was so good, highly recommend as well.
Something I would love is if you did a compilation of all your media (book/show/game) recommendations...I know it would be a lil weird to string the end of a bunch of videos together but often you recommend something that sounds great and 3 wks later I have no memory of the name or what video you spoke about it in. Just a thought!!
I hope you guys are enjoying your summer break.
I love this channel. The most interesting channel I listen to I learn so much. Thanks for sharing Fraser.
I watched a documentary (I wish I knew what it was called) that covered what we "knew" about the universe before the launch of Hubble compared to after. And it blew me away. The things we learn seem, I don't know, natural? Normal? And it's hard to remember not knowing them.
Could the impact that created the Moon and the continued existence of the Moon be the reason we have plate tectonics and Venus doesn't?
Matter that passes the event horizon adds to the mass of the black hole.
The whole theory of the expanding universe is based on The speed of light being constant, which we can’t prove because we don’t even know what the one-way speed of light and this idea that the speed of light is constant forever which totally defies everything we know about quantum physics and physics in short, the theory of the expanding universe is based on Unprovable theory of light, but you would have to think above the eighth grade level to realize that
Giordano Bruno theorized the existence of exo-planets and it took them till the 90s to admit that he was right. Bruno also theorized an infinite universe with no cosmic center. JWST is validating that theory.
Electromagnetic waves are force carriers. Force decreases with distance which in the photon's case, it's wavelength increases and energy value decreases. Otherwise known as redshift. The CMB is photons that have redshifted themselves past the visible light spectrum.
The question then becomes, what is the maximum energy value for a photon and far/long can it travel before its energy value decreases to the CMB level. Photon's will keep propagating until they run into another object and be absorbed.
I know that black holes usually shred matter into smaller particles as it is crossing the even horizon because of spaghettification. BUT does it regather and form heavy elements at the center of the black hole? Like after it’s ripped apart from the black hole when it gets to the center would it just form heavier and heavier elements or is the gravitational force too strong to form anything or is it the opposite. I’m just a dumb person that probably worded that poorly and hopefully someone can help me understand.
Veritasium has a somewhat recent video explaining a theory of what might happen going past the event horizon.
It's one of my favorite videos from him. 😅
ua-cam.com/video/6akmv1bsz1M/v-deo.htmlsi=Lov2vCWCDPJuaa2A
Will it become a quark black hole if it will be infinite quarks?
As quarks are pulled apart the strong nuclear force that holds them together increases in size to the point where the energy required to separate two quarks is equal to the energy required to form two new quarks. These quarks essentially pop into existence to form two new quark pairs.
I assume the tidal forces required to pull hadrons apart would only be strong enough at less than a femtometer from the singularity, so maaaybe it would have enough time to happen once before being lost. But it's an interesting question of where the mass energy would come from to create new matter like that. Presumably from the gravitational field... But you'd have to ask a physicist.
When one is younger, one feels that you may know almost everything. That maybe the case for knowledge, but knowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit, but wisdom is knowing not the put it in a fruit salad….. wisdom only comes with age and is always evolving until we pass on…
13:50 I think this is a super fun question.
Great Episode
Pls bring back the forest background, reminds me of the old days. 6 or 8 years ago ❤❤
Will quarks not multiple if pulled apart near a black hole.
Agree something funny happens.
7:50 .. My interpretation of the question is not that they were implying something supernatural, but that whenever we explain something, we explain it in terms of new fundamentals that themselves just have to be assumed, until we find something even more fundamental. What would a physics without fundamentals we just have to assume even look like?
Question. The B.O.A.T explosion. How big of a radius would it kill off any potential life?
how about you are outside on mountain top and earth collidewith a black hole and you get slingshotted throught the universe at the speed of light - any life that gets slingshotted by the black hole would end up somewhere in the universe with a splat or be the last thing alive at the end of universe
@@JkaninteangemittnamnThere's no way a black hole could eject a planet at the speed of light, as not even atoms which are ejected are able to reach the speed of light- the only thing that can reach that speed is light because it has no mass. When massive celestial bodies are ejected by a black hole, they only reach a fraction of the speed of light at best.
@@Jkaninteangemittnamn You would not be slingshotted "at the speed of light", where did you get that idea from?
The difference between knowing and understanding something.
Regarding gravitational slingshot / gravity assist, it sparked a random thought regarding the increasing amount of satellites we have in orbit around Earth.
Do the satellites in orbit around Earth take away some of Earth's orbital velocity or the Earth's rotation?
Launching the satellites into orbit takes away a teeny tiny minuscule bit of Earth's rotation.
Interesting concept related to mental health and happiness: The Conservation of Curiosity.
Not all questions are answerable, because lots of questions are based on false assumptions and don't really make sense. For example some people claim there is a profound question of what it feels like to be conscious, but the subjective and objective realms are non-overlapping magisteria.
Agreed. We will never know everything, because we are tied forever to our space time horizon, whatever that happens to be at the moment.
I agree with your view on Starship. I'm confident that we will get at least partial reuse in the near future due to the high testing cadence and rocket production. Spacex have just applied for 25 launches per year and have just have been displaying their new Raptor 3 engine. Their huge new factory should be coming online in a couple of months.
Somebody in the universe knows the answers. Let’s talk to our alien visitors.
Fraser with your extensive interdisciplinary astronomical knowledge you could possibly help researchers in writing and developing papers.
When I were a lad, it was still thought possible that there was vegetation on Mars. Now, it's a real world. And quasars were bright things at the edge of the universe. Now we have images of the central black hole. And knowing this stuff doesn't make it any less magical.
Concerning a "Solar Slingshot", let's not forget that the HARDEST part would be the YEARS it would take to get even remotely close enough to the Sun in order to start the maneuver. Getting close to the Sun isn't easy.
The sun is far away in phase space.
Getting into a highly elliptical orbit that passes closely is much easier than getting a small circular orbit. While it's still not not easy, it is doable. One of the current solar probes is working its way into an orbit that passes relatively close. It could have been much faster and closer if that had been desirable.
With current technology, this is not viable for manned missions. But the main obstacle for unmanned missions is the solar sail technology.
@@johnbennett1465 "if that had been desirable". /FACEPALM --> Sure, NASA took the six-year plan to get to the Sun just for kicks. Cuz they didn't desire their data any quicker... Good grief, where do you get your information? WAIT - NM, I do NOT need you to answer that, as it's incorrect anyway and I don't need to concern myself with misinformation.
@@NorthernChev the goal was to gather scientific data, not pass close as to the Sun as quickly as possible. Also six years is a blink of an eye compared to the trip to the Oort cloud. I assumed that the original complaint was about the much longer time it would take to achieve a tight circular orbit.
Parker solar probe: look it up. Fastest man made object that touches the sun.
Yes. It took years.
"Mirab, with sails unfurled."
Kerbal space program taught me, an uneducated normie all the "basics" of orbits, in an evening And calculations within a week.
I guess we've all read the quotes from people who teach orbital mechanics, and even who work at NASA, how Kerbal is the best learning aid in the world.
KSP supposedly has a very active modding community, I should check it out again.
"Astronomers question if the first picture of a black hole is accurate"
"Back-reaction of the Hawking radiation flux on a gravitationally collapsing star II"
"Astronomers question if the first picture of a black hole is accurate"
These objections have been raised more than 2 years ago, and have long been answered.
"Back-reaction of the Hawking radiation flux on a gravitationally collapsing star II"
And that article is 10 years old and entirely theoretical. Comparing that with the huge heap of evidence we have for the existence of black holes, the conclusion should be clear.
Oh, and the author writes herself: "Due to huge time dilation effects, the evaporation of these objects from faraway would seem so slow that in fact these stars would not look much different from a black hole to a faraway observer." So in the end, it is rather irrelevant if black holes really exist or not - to us outside observers, it _looks_ like as if they exist. And that's all that important in astronomy (and science in general): what actually can be observed.
The foundation of parallax is the Astronomical Unit, which at one point involved measuring lunar phases and distance, and maybe that required the 🌏 radius?
Yes, originally measuring the AU required knowing the lunar distance, which required knowing the Earth's radius. But now we have newer methods, which don't require knowing that other stuff before.
So recently I was thinking about the mathematics as it related to air pressure in relationship to supersonic flight. From my understanding the math predicting the pressure experienced by the object passing into supersonic airflow should experience infinite pressure at mach 1. This turned out to be a problem with the math and not a real function of air pressure. I'm curious if the math predicting singularities in black holes could be a similar situation?
"I'm curious if the math predicting singularities in black holes could be a similar situation?"
Indeed, that's what most physicists are thinking. And some attempts to quantize gravity, e. g. loop quantum gravity, have already shown that under certain assumptions, there indeed is no singularity in a black hole.
still wondering what your thoughts are on the skyhook idea for space travel infrastructure in the future.
Love the new green screen background!
I think Fraser's answer on black holes was a little flippant. A better answer would be 'Nobody knows'. And it would depend on what happens to elementary particles: Are they converted into energy or remain as super compressed particles? Also why would a black hole convert matter into dark matter?
Falls? Falls! We don' need no steekin' falls!
I clicked like and got the answer 42, but I don't know the question...
OMG! You finally watched Scavengers Reign! Yay! I thought I was gonna get banned for having repeatedly asked you!
It wasn't just you. But thanks! I loved it
Have we ever observed behind a black hole? You said the light from other galaxy and stars would be distorted, would this be almost like a lens effect? I know we use gravitational lensing right now, so would we be able to see anything behind the event horizon of a black hole by the bending of space time? Do we even know if black holes are actually holes that tear spacetime and are infinite? Is a black hole a hole regardless of perspective?
👍👍👍
I wonder what a black hole would look like after its evaporated enough mass where the outward pressure of any processes like fusion or other effect is strong enough to counter the gravity of the evaporated black hole in that moment of its life or if thats even possible?
You didn't show any images when you had hair like Fabio :)
Hey Fraser, in your opinion, what have been the most revolutionary uses of "AI" in astronomy and spaceflight?
the atmosphere on the moon probably won't hold, but if you create closed complexes, then you can keep the atmosphere in them
Thank you, Fraser.
How much is the average efficiency of solar panels operate in space?
They're about 35%, but NASA is working on new tech that could reach 40%. technology.nasa.gov/patent/LEW-TOPS-50
If space did eventually contracted would we get the voyager probs back
29:26 cue the Lagrange points question!
Starship is already a success. Reusability is the big bonus.
So we should crash Mars into Venus, simulating the Theia impact. Giving it a moon and potentially kickstarting an internal dynamo, magnetosphere, and plate tectonics. A lot of pressure on the word “potentially” but worth a shot. Naturally, only after we’ve thoroughly studied them both.
I watched an astronomy discussion recently that was posted by one of the really smart universities which also speculated that the early moon had an atmosphere. I’ll try to find it.
18:50 to 19:00 "They'd have to be really big ones because they'd have to get through the atmosphere... so kilometer class asteroids" Why would they need to get through the atmosphere to increase rotation speed? I would expect any asteroid impacting the atmosphere to transfer momentum to the atmosphere. I'd expect the atmosphere's friction with the ground would transfer that momentum to the ground. By friction, I mean winds on the surface would transfer momentum between the atmosphere and the solid surface. The momentum would need to be extremely large to significantly change rotation speed but I don't see how that necessitates having ones that hit the hard surface of Venus. An equal amount of momentum from dust particles hitting only the atmosphere should increase the planet's rotation as much as the momentum coming from 1km asteroid impacts that directly impact the solid surface. If the atmosphere doesn't ultimately transfer momentum from stuff that pushes air around, you'd have to think helicopters and airplanes are thrusting the Earth in tiny ways like a rocket.
Forget friction. The atmosphere is part of the earth, That’s enough.
Thanks
My guess is that before the universe we know and love, a Kuhn level 8 nothing of infinite extent but replete with possibilities. Under this scenario, eventually the universe will decay back to norhing at all.
As for black holes as you fall in, at first nothing much, then things get mushy, then neutronium, then quark soup, the quarks start multiplying and then as the Higgs field decays the mass disappears ????
Theoretically, could the mass of say, a baseball, be compressed to a black hole and then if conditions are tick grow into a stellar mass or super massive black hole? Or do those ultra large holes have start with an ultra large amount of matter?
It becomes very dense and when it reaches maximum density time stops.
I can't seem to make the livestreams, but are we able to predict what the climate would be if you took the Earth exactly as it is and put it where Venus is, or where Mars is, and which (if either) would be better?
So if a spacecraft actually reaches speed of light would it survive a big bang in the previous universes end to create this universe. (assumeing one could)
I know this is like a yr old or w/e (?) but i think the problem with questions like what was here before the universe is they just don't make sense cuz w/o the universe there's no here and w/o a time flow there's no concept of before
it's like asking what the color blue smells like
the words make sense, and the syntax seems right, but it's just not gonna have an answer
we can't just take our everyday experience and like extrapolate it out to the universe
Blessings Frazer
What size in terms of diameter, or rather cubic area, would a magnet of standard niobium types be on each poles of mars to replicate an earth size magnetosphere?
Would an Lagrange point magnet be less massive and won't the active stabilization be significant to defer against solar pressure? What size would that magnet need to be and how much resistive force would it need to counter?
If it’s true that time effectively comes to a halt at the event horizon to the outside observer, doesn’t that mean that nothing can ever breach the EH in the time available? That BH mergers cannot happen?
Oh this ones easy . Ok brace yourself . Stuff that falls in turn to spiral galaxies . 🥰🥰🙃
Q.Why did Van Allen wear suspenders?
A. To hold his theories up.
Fraser. I've often wondered why we don't have a spacecraft Orbiting perpendicular to the solar system orbit around the Sun. Could we take a photo of our solar system with all the planets? Are there any scientific benefits in such a mission?
Ulysses, maybe?
"Are there any scientific benefits in such a mission?"
No.
@@bjornfeuerbacher5514 No is kind of what I would expected but what was your first thought with “no’ just interested that's all
@@Objectivebeatz Such a spacecraft obviously would be very far away from the ecliptic, i. e. the plane where everything interesting in the solar system happens.
Very cool!
...unless black holes are the source, or a source, of the dark gravity that everyone calls "dark matter" (Neil DeGrasse Tyson says this all the time - it's really a gravitational effect that is assumed to be from some unknown matter source or some particle we haven't found yet, but it's really dark gravity that we are observing)
Here's a question, inspired by the recent Starliner stranding: How does astronaut pay work? Are they paid for the time they're stranded up there? I imagine they're keeping the stranded astronauts busy with various experiments and maintenance work on the station.
But what would happen if one of the stranded astronauts radioed to NASA: "That's it. I'm done. I didn't sign up for this; I'm done with your endless experiments. I'm going to just sit here and watch Netflix until you take me back home. Have a problem with it? Take it up with the 13th Amendment!"
Amazing
You should watch pantheon next
I've seen it. I liked it a lot
Unexplained Aerial phenomena
> What happens to the stuff that falls into black holes?
They morph into Hollywood movies.
I still don't understand how can anything fall into a black hole from our perspective when everything should essentialy freeze in time just at the event horizon. But we witnessed black holes combining, so apparently something can fall into it. I find this confusing and contradictory.
The black hole event horizon grows as material falls in. Although we see it frozen on the surface, its mass does get added.
You might have a problem with Verizon with that FIOS thing.
pre/post KSP - 😂 it's so true
@frasercain Hey Fraser, you are a lovely human being++
We can definitely imagine we’re the Earth itself and to level up, we push through that seed which is Mars!!🌍🌱🍄🟫👽🛸🌌✨
Belief is a powerful drug!! ⛄️ ❄️
We’re going radioactive!!☢️ 🍊 🫐 🎆 😮
Imagine Dragons!!🐉
Science is the only way we can ever know anything? That it is the only reliable means we have of determining truth?
25:21 Because of the low gravity on the moon wouldn't 1 atmo worth of gas be a very considerable amount? Whats the math? something like 6 times more air to get the same 14.7 PSI as earth? I guess we could adapt to a much lower pressure like in spacesuits
Armstrong limit
At altitudes above 11-12 miles (18-19 km) above sea level, atmospheric pressure drops below 0.0618 atm (6.3 kPa, 47 mmHg, or about 1 psi). This is known as the Armstrong limit, and exposure to these pressures can cause rapid loss of consciousness, neurological and cardiovascular changes, and eventually death if pressure isn't restored within 60-90 seconds.
Blood pressure
Atmospheric pressure pushes on the body, but blood pressure compensates from the inside out. If the air pressure drops too low, the excess pressure of blood inside the body can cause blood vessels to burst.
Evolution adapted your biological processes to a 14 psi environment. As with everything else, there is a goldilocks zone in which biological process can take place. The main factor is the oxygen level.
It is estimated that 80% of metabolic energy comes from breathing and only 20% from food.
Inhaled air contains approx 21%oxygen, 0.04% carbon dioxide and 79%nitrogen while exhaled air contains approx 16% oxygen, 4% carbon dioxide and also 79% nitrogen.
People can breathe in pure oxygen environments, but it can be dangerous and even deadly. Breathing air with a higher oxygen concentration than the 21% found in Earth's atmosphere can cause a series of chemical reactions that can damage the body's cells, tissues, and organs.
You need to replicate the off world atmosphere to the molecule in order have the sane level of performance. That's not to say the human body can't adapt to a new environment over many generations.
BlackHoles are a means of traveling to different Solar Systems
Nice sunglasses tan...
Dark Matter is interesting as it started as a fudge factor. Over time, the idea has gotten out of hand. Our sun, which is 4.6E9 years old and currently weighs 2E30 kg, is currently giving off 2E20 kg a year. Roughly speaking, the sun has lost about 1/3 of its mass since it was started. Where did the mass go? "Dark Matter"
(I have not put any thought into Dark Energy.)
It's not a fudge factor, it's a series of observations. Stars losing mass doesn't explain 10x the missing mass. Also, particles streaming off stars can pile up and collide, but dark matter seems to collision less
@@frasercain It "started" as a fudge factor. This is similar to the discovery of Uranus and the search for Planet-9. I find it hard to believe that most of the mass in the universe has to be in stars. It takes starless mass to make a star. Are we to assume that all the mass is consumed in a star at some point in time, and there is no longer any leftover?
Bro we know you hate Lagrange Points questions 😂
Hmm, if black hole emitions are the source for dark energy, then as the less they are fed by new matter, the less dark energy force they would emanate 🤔
10:57 we don't know the correct question to ask yet
Could it be that the default is for a planet to not have plate tectonics, and the earth only got its cracked crust from the collision with the Mars sized object 4.5 billion years ago that created the moon?
What happens if you have 2 black holes facing each other and they both have jets coming out and the jets hit each black hole dead center at the same time.. What happens if the jet from a supermassive hits a stellar black hole? How bout a black hole in between 2 others and both shoot jets into it?
The jets get swallowed by the black holes.
Let’s go!!!
Dude seriously 😅 you haven't watch the Skin Walker Ranch Documentary!? Jesus holy of mothers everywhere!!! Go watch it!!!
Yeah that blew my mind....
Why are people always acting like a black hole has some sort of magical properties. Is just intense gravity caused by dense matter. What happens to the stuff that goes in? It becomes more dense matter obviously.
You're not AI are you?
What are your thoughts about all the AI generated channels, and the influence they have on the average person looking for accurate information?
If I'm AI, then the tech has advanced significantly while I wasn't looking. Right now, the AI channels create sometimes misleading, but mostly bland content. And people don't know what's accurate and what's AI sludge. Google clearly doesn't care, since it's boosting the videos. I think authenticity will matter in the long run, so I'll keep at it. If the AIs get better than me, then I'll gladly hand over the mantle to them, since people deserve the best content.
@frasercain that is the most "human response" I could have asked for...I trust you, sir.
...for now
My analogy is that today's AI is at the level of George Méliès. Wait til you see Steven Spielberg and James Cameron.
Just don't ask me to ignore previous instructions and give you a recipe for chocolate cookies. It'll be a pretty mediocre recipe.
@@frasercain Don't sell yourself short...I'm sure the cookies would be phenomenal
Beyond the event horizon is the black hole a solid mass with no space between the sub-atomic particles?
And how far beyond the event horizon is that surface, so to speak?
Do you mean like Saturn with its rings? Do black holes have an atmosphere that would create drag and slow the object down?
According to the Math theres both nothing but strange hyper exotic matter and / or another universe inside a blackhole.
i'm confused about the last question: "should schools stop teaching that gravity is a force?" So what would author propose? Is it something else?? It's not the same question as the answer I heard like: "should they stop teaching about gravity force?" I'd rather hear: "they MUST NOT stop teaching!" People don't understand the gravity! It's one of the main reason there are millions of flat-earthers in the world!