Kip Thorne - Why Black Holes Are Astonishing
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 лис 2014
- For more on information and video interviews with Kip Thorne, please visit bit.ly/1DpWJQU
For more videos on why black holes are astonishing click here bit.ly/1FimsZi
To buy episodes and seasons of Closer To Truth click here bit.ly/1LUPlQS
Black holes warp space and time, squeeze matter to a vanishing point, and trap light so that it cannot escape. Black holes, with masses millions or billions times that of our sun, sit at the center of galaxies. How can black holes perform such stupendous tricks, and what can we learn from them?
For more Closer to Truth interview videos, please visit www.closertotruth.com
Kip’s “aeeeeeh” happens when a black hole tries to swallow his words because he’s exposing them
Hahahaha
Surly the single most beautiful explanation of black hole science for us mere mortals. Kip is an incredible teacher. I can listen to this man all day, and what’s more, I understand what he’s saying.
Kip Thorne is one of the few scientists who can bring these amazing concepts down to my level so I can understand them. He is so beautiful to listen to. Unfortunately, the videos are too short.
I like Dr Kaku but Kip explained this better than anyone. It’s comprehensible now
God almighty; this is the best six minutes I’ve spend in a long time.
Good gracious it feels good to know this!
Now I’ve got something worth pondering on my drive to and from work.
This guy is AWESOME! I could listen to him for HOURS and not get bored for a second.
I’ve watched numerous videos on the topic and this is probably one on the most brilliant and dense explanations of the concept without involving false approximations like dense matter etc. Brilliant!
I’ve come back to this fabulous explanation of black hole science. Kip is a masterful teacher.
The universe is truly amazing, and we can only see and understand to the limits of our minds.
Excellent video interview with Kip Thorne, a leading expert with a deep understanding of the topics discussed.
This is by far the best explanation of this topic. Kip is one of the GOATS
So many things just became clear to me by just watching this video! Thank You!
A fantastically clear explanation of a very deep subject.
Thank you Kip. You blow my mind
omg he explained it so perfectly - I finally get it a little better
Best explanation of black holes ever!
obscenely frightening and at the same time gloriously fascinating
Very clearly explained. Thanks.
Best explanation I’ve ever heard of a black hole!
one of my favourite blackhole talks :)
This is probably the best explanation of a black hole on UA-cam.
There is no matter in a black hole! Gobsmacked on an epic scale! Dr. Thorne never fails to amaze me with his “oh, and by the way” details.
The single most best description of a blackhole.
Very nice, clear explanation. Best I have heard.
Love Kip Thorne
This is the first description of black holes I’ve heard that says they do not contain matter. Suddenly all the other related phenomena of warping space and time, what happens beyond the event horizon, etc makes more sense. It’s one thing to know the equations but now to have it all comprehensible, well it’s just cool
That’s the best black hole 🕳 explanation I’ve ever heard
Go, Prof. Thorne!
There are very few times where I'll say something blew my mind because I think that phrase is an overused meme, but honestly ... this blew. My. Freaking. MIND! :D
I didn't know a black hole was basically just made up of warped spacetime. The more you know.
Technically it was made up of matter initially, notably as a form of supernova (massive star that exploded and died). This in turn created a huge gravitational field, which brings space time and matter into a single spot called singularity. As the blackhole is being fed by a nearby star, the gravitational field gets stronger and the size of the blackhole grows. It destroys the mass and converts it into energy, which is the energy of warping spacetime
+Astro Physics that is a great explanation, thank you! My question is, if I understand correctly, the black hole has a strong gravitational pull, therefore it really never stops feeding from anything that is near, and since its pulling things near itself, then wouldn't they grow insanely big, basically eating everything after a long time?
Andromeda The Sun has a strong gravitational pull as well but it doesn't "eat" anything. Gravity for a black hole works kind of the same. As you get nearer, your angular momentum increases, roughly balancing out the gravitational pull. That's why you can have an orbit around the Sun and a black hole, theoretically.
Unless you have a path that converges with the black hole or is close enough that you'd lose some angular momentum, you won't get 'sucked' in.
So where does the matter that falls in goes?
It falls into space-time, it goes into an atemporal state
What a great explanation on something do hard to wrap your head around. Makes sense now lmao
love it 👍
This is the first description of black holes I’ve heard that says they do not contain matter. Suddenly all the other related phenomena of warping space and time makes more sense. It’s one thing to know the equations but now to have it all comprehensible, well it’s just cool
I like the way that he can compare it to every day observations, he truly understand the concept of a black hole!
@@rubenanthonymartinez7034 thanks for you opinion!😀
@@rubenanthonymartinez7034 Andrea Ghez disagrees.
@@rubenanthonymartinez7034 that's a fancy sounding argument but it's wrong. It works using the non-relativistic energy-momentum relation, in which a contracting radius is stopped by Heisenberg- velocity. However, as Chandrasekhar showed, when fermions become relativistic, they no longer can stop the contraction. This happens at his eponymous limit, which agrees with the size of white dwarfs from observation.
I totally forgot about Mr. Thorne's speaking impairment -> "aeeeh" ...and almost choked on my soup from laughter, haha. Jesus, that caught me off guard. :P Bless this wonderful man, though. His wisdom and knowledge are a gift to mankind. :)
Very good physicist
Really good explanation; but.......If no mass is inside, what prevents space time from snapping back into its proper (non warped) place? Wasn’t it explain to us that mass tells space time how to
Curve? So how can you have a curvature in the absence of mass? Anyone, please feel free to comment....(intelligently mind you)
black holes and that space between your car driver seat and the console where stuff falls into are 2 places nothing will ever escape
Haha you said it buddy
So space is tensile indeed...
Could an accelerating expansion of time inside black hole (along with a contracting space) pull anything that falls into black hole to the center / singularity? In which case maybe the mass / energy of black hole is at the surface horizon?
Regarding his description of a black hole, I simply don't believe that there is no matter in the black hole... I also don't believe that there is a singularity at it's center... There is no way that I can refute what he's stated, but the same holds true for what I've stated. Our understanding of what's happening within the black hole is limited to our untestable theories.
What does "to and fro" mean?
I keep going back and forth on what it might mean, but I'm not sure
Lol!!!
If no matter inside black hole, does someone or something passing the horizon become energy?
I heard before too that you have first neutron stars and then with even more contraction all elementary particles fall apart and are converted into a singularity. This is the first time I hear that all of the original matter and energy are converted into warping and bending spacetime. It's an elegant solution to something I never understood. It was like inside a Black Hole the fabric of the cosmos gets completely torn apart when it's actually a very natural process that happens rather often so it seemed a really big ugly flaw in the universe.. So in this model there is no singularity and those horrible jet streams could perhaps even have certain good consequences for star formation???
I think I get it. It sounds like he's saying that matter adds energy to spacetime just by occupying it. In that case, it would seem that the distribution of this energy throughout spacetime could provide insight on how objects move through it...
Why speed of light is a constant. It is something to do with mass ratio of protons to that of electrons. Like the pendulum producing a constant frequency.
Interviewer: Kip, describe the structure of black holes.
Kip: aeeeeeiiggh
if the matter is converted into warped spacetime, what is maintaining the persistent warping of the spacetime?
That is a great question. My first thought upon hearing Thorne's description was that a black hole is sort of like a "scar" in spacetime, but perhaps it is more like a bottle or an ice tray. The collapse of the matter that causes the black hole does so in such a way that the spacetime within its volume gets "frozen" into place at least since it can no longer spring back and release energy to the rest of the universe. Almost as if that bowling bowl on the trampoline vanished but the deep dent in the trampoline remained. Or maybe like a battery that can keep getting charged but can't be used (since black holes can keep growing). But I know that doesn't really answer the question of why spacetime would get stuck or frozen that way versus always being able to "unwarp" by using the same energy. From what I learned, that reason is because the instant the escape velocity of the collapsing matter exceeds the speed of light, there is no force that can undo the warping. So whatever is going on to maintain the persistent warping of spacetime is irreversible as far as we know.
Innertubez, I would like to correct and expand on your explanation of black holes.
You mentioned matter exceeding the escape velocity of light. That is actually not possible, black holes are black because the process of a star going supernova responsible for creating the warping of spacetime, is what give the black hole it's gravitational property of having an escape velocity that exceeds the speed of light. Light travels through the gravity well of a black hole but never reflects, which is why they are black.
I'm not a theoretical physicist, but I have paid close attention to documentaries, books, and lectures over the years on the Universe and the strange wonders that exist within it.
If you want to know how strange black holes are, when scientific theories predicted their existence, nobody believed such an object could exist.
White dwarfs and neutron stars were well excepted, but black holes were deemed to be far fetched.
Black holes are a 20th century discovery. They've existed for billions of years and we have just recently discovered them.
@@innertubez Maybe space time only has so much elasticity and is unable to "snap back" after a singularity has formed and then been destroyed. I also wonder if we have the concept of gravity backwards where, instead of being a pulling force exerted by mass, it is instead a pushing force exerted by space in response to the presence of mass.
Gravity from the singularity.
The energy has been added to warp it. It would stay warped until energy is taken out again. Surely.
@4:23 I wonder if it is true that you wouldn't notice, if the space around you is moving in fast enough, unless you are moving somewhat fast as well, would your body still function? More specifically; is the space within moving you with it fast enough that blood at your feet could still make it to your head? It couldn't travel up to your head, but is your head travelling fast enough down to meet it?
The fact that you're also spaghettified, or extruded in to a long thing strand, means that the distance from head to feet grows. It might grow at such a pace that fresh blood won't ever reach your head again, besides everything being pinched.
nice
Warping of space and time inside black hole accelerates time towards the center of black hole as space contracts inside black hole?
i was thinkin if it is really a black hole in space, why is it rotating? ei: shouldnt the gravitational pull be a more or less a straight line from all directions, rather than a vortex?
I didn't understand just how strange blackholes are until now
Lots of them in Koondoola
Is that Jerry Stiller giving the interview?
so if i look at my watch after passing the horizon, time will stand still?
Is the center of black hole an energy density?
Kip Thorne was a big deal 20 years ago with his book on gravity. He never seems to be in the news, yet he got a Nobel prize in 2019.
Umm he was one of the 3 men who worked for 30 years and developed LIGO and the technology to measure ripples in Space Time. Once thought to be impossible, due to the incredibly small distances needed to get data. We are taking 10²¹, that's 10, with 21 zeros after it. On the very first day they turned it on, they captured the space ripple from the collision of two Black Holes 1.3 million light years away
You know he basically wrote _Interstellar,_ right?
its crazy to think about something with 10 billion times the mass of the Sun
especially when it isn't made of matter, like he pointed out.
Full video: ua-cam.com/video/oj1AfkPQa6M/v-deo.html
"There is no matter in the black hole, its not a physical object - A black hole consists of warped space and warped time" - Very important words!
confusing, first he says you do not experience anything special when crossing the horizon and they saying that there is no matter inside the black hole.
so this means you cannot enter a black hole, you cannot cross the horizon because there is no matter inside. and by the way the back hole evaporates before you enter because of the time difference between the outside universe and the environment near the horizon
Kip knows what is at the singularity we're just not on his level yet.
And think although we can define the horizon or perimeter of a blackhole, we can't simply define its diameter at all....
As we really don't know where the geometrical centre of a blackhole lies..
So curious, how do we know that it's not a "more dense Neutron star" type of object and instead assume it is zero volume? Logic and math would seem more likely it is a sphere of very dense matter instead of a singularity right? Obviously I'm wrong here, but want to understand why. The zero size singularity divide by zero idea just sounds wrong to me.
Wait.. Is the circumference larger than the diameter, or the diameter greater than the circumference?
How is it warping? If Euclidean geometry doesn't apply does that mean that space is warping via a 4th spatial dimension that we can't see just like in the two dimensional example where it was warping through the third dimension and the blind ant couldn't perceive it?
For a Euclidean geometry, a triangle has 180 degrees no matter where you are. However, when warped space time is involved, the triangles don't necessarily have 180 degrees but can have less than 180 or greater than 180 degrees.
It also exists within our 3 dimensional world, it's just that we are used to triangles having 180 degrees because that's the world we normally deal with
Imagine a hole in a table. That's a 2 dimensional hole. Now imagine a hole in the middle of space, a hole from every direction you approach it.. it would appear to be a 3D hole in space, pure black since light can't escape.
That's incorrect, you can have a n-dimensional space with an intrinsic curvature different from 0. Flat n-dimensional space can be studied with euclidean geometry, curved space can not.
I want to stress that there is no need to embed the n-space in a n+1-space to explain the curvature: it is an intrinsic property of the space itself. You may want to study differential geometry on rienmannian manifolds to grasp the thing better.
Spacetime is NOT a rienmannian manifold because the metric is locally lorentzian (thus we call it a lorentzian manifold) but rienmannian manifolds are just fine if you want to get it to the core.
Since the black hole has no mass, I presume the mass of the original star is converted into energy and the energy is stored in the black hole? Would that be potential energy stored in the black hole, like rubber on stretched trampoline?
potential energy stored in the fabric of spacetime, warping it in such a way that it wraps around.
God bless Kip Thorne, and the nuanced lesson at the end about Energy/Matter being concentrated into warped Spacetime. Absolutely stunning and brings a tear to my eye.
I'm 26 and will solve Dark Matter one day.
My absolute favorite thing ever is Spacetime - Thank you Einstein, and professors of GR !
Nicholas, be sure to not neglect Hawking's Point. Which is, basically, spacetime curvature is the negative energy reflection of the presence of positive energy density. Which goes all the way back to cosmic t-0 with the concurrent emergence of the hyperinflating spacetime along with the fermionic/bosonic hyperplasma.
One thing I can’t seem to wrap my head around is the black hole warping space in all 3 dimensions the trampoline analogy only describes a 3 dimensional stone warping a 2 dimensional sheet:(??
I have the same problem. The trampoline is easy to picture but I guess the black hole is warping in something shaped like the opposite of a sphere I don’t know!!!
if there is nothing left of the star and therefore the black hole is made up of nothing what keeps the black hole from closing up? the singularity?
If the matter in the star is destroyed in creating the black hole then what is it that maintains the warped spacetime?
Try to think of it this way, when you have a fabric and place a weighted object on it, the fabric stretches downward/inward. The fabric conforms to the weight of the object placed upon it, stretching it further depending on the weight. If the object is extremely heavy and the fabric can hold it without breaking, it sags deeply. So imagine you set a baseball on said fabric, most likely it would sag a little bit but it wouldn't be extreme. You roll a marble across the fabric, and because it is sagging a bit from the weight of the baseball the marbles path moves from a straight line across the fabric to a curved line around the baseball, eventually falling inward and against the baseball after spiraling around it a few times. Now, imagine replacing that baseball with an equal sized, incredibly dense ball of steel or led. This ball sags the fabric way more than the baseball would. Maybe the fabric sags all the way to the ground, the fabric is now sagging to a point where you can no longer see the dense ball of led/steel all you see is a hole. What happens if you roll the marble now? Well because the fabric has sagged to such an extreme degree, that curve in the fabric around the object becomes a path leading downwards or inwards. You roll the marble and instead of just gently curving around it drops straight down the hole and falls inward towards the ball. The object never disappears it just sags so deeply that you can no longer see it. This is a simple way to conceptualize how a black hole works, only it is spherical (a 3 dimensional hole) meaning that you fall straight down(or inwards) no matter where you enter it. So the matter itself is what maintains the warping of space-time. Just like our led/steel ball maintains the sag in the fabric until it is removed.
Thank you... but:
1. this isn't an answer to my question
2. if you think this truly explains anything the I submit to you that it actually explains othing
Sorry...
FYI, I asked Dr. Thorne these questions:
---
I was watching: ua-cam.com/video/oj1AfkPQa6M/v-deo.html “Why black holes are astonishing”
In the video you stated that all the matter that went into creating the black hole is destroyed and so there is no matter left in the black hole.
If the matter of the original star is destroyed in creating the black hole then what is it that maintains the warped spacetime?
I’m also curious as to what it is that destroys all the matter?
---
Here are his answers:
---
destroyed by singularities inside the black hole. The hole holds itself together through nonlinear self interaction.
---
that's exactly what I thought for a long time but now that Kip Thorne said that the matter is no longer there, I do not quite get it.
+Aval Sirithanawat A better word is scrambled. The energy and information of that matter still exists in the black hole on its surface
how do black holes move thru space if there is only warped spacetime in them?
WTF. He changed my ideas completely
wow
Would I still get pulled in, never to return, if I had a harness and a really strong cable attached to me?? I think I could get back out
+ryanrobin12 I think you should give it a go. Livestream it and on the way home, stop off at the moon and get some of its cheese for all of us.
A cable is a collection of atoms and sub-atomic particles held together by electromagnetic and nuclear forces which propagate through space with the speed of light and are responsible for chemical and nuclear bonds. The fact that atoms "stick" together is because they are communicating "force particles" forth and back through the vacuum between them, which in some regards resembles two people, Alice and Bob, communicating with each other using flashlights. Now, if you float one inch above the event horizon of a black hole without you freely falling towards it (important condition), and then you dip a cable through the event horizon, then the atoms that pass through the horizon first won't be able to "communicate" their force back to the atoms that have not yet passed the horizon. Not only that, the atoms that passed first cease to exist (losing any causal connection to the rest of the universe outside the black hole) from the perspective of the atoms that are still outside the horizon. It's not different from Alice being outside the event horizon and Bob falling through it: Bob won't be able to communicate with Alice anymore.
a cable made of antimatter.
the harness would need infinite energy to pull you out, which is impossible to achieve
The harness attached to what? To earth? To a space ship?
May be the space ship will get pulled in along with the harness. Or broken up or whatever happens in there :)
These blackholes can eat up nearby stars. Leave alone your harness :)
what are those strange screens behind him charting?
m sure the one who gets this all deserves nobel
Currently reading his book Black Holes and Time Warps because it was mentioned on JRE by Brian Cox
Cool
lolol
If there is no mass then where does the gravity come from ?, or does he just mean inside the event horizon and the singularity does have mass. I've always said that the singularity could be tightly compacted quarks, the same way that a Neutron star is with neutrons.
If an atom is 99.999% empty space, is it the same with Protons and Neutrons ?, 99.999% empty space ? (approximately)
How many Protons/Neutrons in a teaspoon compared to how many quarks in a teaspoon ?
If A is the size of an Atom and A=100,000, and P is the size of a Proton, and Q is the size of a Quark, does that mean that P = 1 and Q = 1/100,000 ?
How much smaller is a Quark compared to an Atom ? If Quarks are 10 Billion times smaller than an atom would it makes sense that 10 Billion teaspoons of elemental iron, (when broken down into Quarks), would fit into 1 teaspoon ?
I read somewhere once that an Electron is actually smaller than a Quark.
Isn't it also theorized that a black hole's circumference (i.e. event horizon) scales linearly with its mass, instead of the cubic root of its mass as it does for ordinary objects?
Just based on dimensional argument it has to be proportional to GM/c^2, so yes. Just occurred to me, if you set the newtonian version of gravitational binding energy (3GMM/5R) equal to Einstein's versions (Mc^2) you get R= 5/3 GM/c^2......close...the correct factor is "2", not 5/3.
What gives black holes stability if they are nothing but warped space? Is it spin?
Their mass as I understand it
To our best current understanding, space time is pliable/malleable. An object with mass will bend/Warp the "fabric" of space time. The more massive the object, the more extreme the warping and hence the gravitational pull. It's why the rubber mat or bed sheet demonstration works. It's not the best analogy but it is "correct". If I place a large Boulder on the trampoline. It will warp the surface area greatly. If I then vaporize the boulder. The surface will rebound. How is space staying curved without the mass remaining at the center of the black hole??? I always thought there was an incredibly small massively dense core. Why do answers always lead to more questions???? 😂😂
I was wondering why black holes are astonishing - just couldn't figure it out.
Oh, and there isn't something like warped space. or warped time. This isn't the way EInstein spoke, for example. Before mixing everything together, one should ask one self if a time gradient or vector, isn't sufficient to explain that space isn't the same. For example, why the Sun's gravity is deviating light from a star behind ? We don't steering space, time etc. We know that Time is slower next to mass. Then if time is slower, maybe a line becomes a curve seen from outside. That's all. Space isn't warped, it's different depending on the observer, because of the time gradient.
One would likely notice going through the event horizon. In free fall the velocity would nearly reach the speed of light, so the light from surrounding universe would turn into infintismal dot behind your direction of movement and would acquire nearly infinite red shift. Correct me if I am wrong.
You are wrong. The velocity you fall in is dependent on the size of the black hole so to assert that it would necessarily be close to the speed of light is wrong, and you would not notice that you had crossed the horizon because nothing happens. It's just space. Even if the effects you mention are accurate they would be almost the same just before and just after you crossed the horizon, so how could you tell? You couldn't due to the equivalence principle.
@@Oners82 I see one obvious mistake in my reasoning, namely the red shift of light behind the observer - in fact it should be blue shifted due to the opposite effect of the time dilation. The frequency of electromagnetic radiation coming from the universe would increase nearly infinitely, hence the blue shift. I still do not grasp why terminal velocity at the event horizon would be different depending on the black hole size. In all cases the event horizon is the boundary of no-return for photons, hence the terminal velocity should be the same. Distinguishing the precise state of the crossing may not be possible for a human observer but should be measurable by equipment with reasonable accuracy. Again, I may be wrong and missing something obvious.
@@AndrewOstrovsky
"I still do not grasp why terminal velocity at the event horizon would be different depending on the black hole size."
It wouldn't, I misspoke (I was thinking that the velocity would vary due to the surface gravity altering based upon black hole mass, but that is obviously not the case.).
Anyway, as for what speed an object would cross the horizon it depends on the reference frame.
For a falling observer they never cross the horizon as the apparent horizon retreats until the observer hits the singularity, so it is meaningless to talk about a velocity as they enter the BH.
For a distant observer the infalling object peaks at a velocity of about 0.38c, and then the speed rapidly falls to zero due to time dilation.
The only observer who would observe the infalling object travelling near c would be a shell observer, in which case the speed would be observed to tend towards c as it approaches the horizon.
@@Oners82 It is quite interesting. The idea of receding event horizon have not occurred to me, yet it must be the case due to the general theory of relativity. Therefore indeed the crossing of the event horizon should not be noticeable at all and is somewhat meaningless. Nevertheless I think it should be measurable in principle when a particular observer would "register" the crossing by examining behavior of light from that observer. I realize that the time dilation would place that event for outside observers in infinite future and curvature of space-time would bend, distort and reflect the stream of incoming photons into chaos... Again, I am not sure if I still miss something here. Anyway, if you are aware of fairly detailed source of information for non-scientists about BH descent experience I will appreciate any link TIA.
@@AndrewOstrovsky
Yeah, I got that from a physicist yesterday regarding the receding horizon.
I have also heard Sean Carroll say before that with a small black hole (solar mass) the time between the horizon and the singularity for an infalling observer (from the perspective of an outside observer) is about a microsecond, so the infalling observer would not have time to see much anyway, even ignoring spaghetification!
However with a large black hole such as the supermassive one at the centre of our galaxy the time would be an hour or so, and you would not even realise you were in trouble and had gone past the point of no return for a while.
An important point to remember is that when falling into a BH you are not in an accelerated reference frame, you are in an inertial frame so it would be no different to simply floating freely in space (due to the equivalence principle). It is only when the tidal forces become extreme that the symmetry breaking becomes noticeable.
"I think it should be measurable in principle when a particular observer would "register" the crossing by examining behavior of light from that observer."
What you see depends on the mass of the black hole due to the tidal forces being dependent on the BH's mass.
For a solar mass BH you would be dead well before you got to the horizon, whereas with a supermassive BH you could "cross" the horizon and you would witness gravitational lensing.
If you knew the exact mass of the BH you were entering I suppose it could be calculated due to the amount of lensing, but in any practicle sense you literally wouldn't realise what had happened.
physics.stackexchange.com/questions/170502/will-an-object-always-fall-at-an-infinite-speed-in-a-black-hole
ua-cam.com/video/_8bhtEgB8Mo/v-deo.html
www.businessinsider.com/what-happens-when-you-enter-a-black-hole-2014-12?r=US&IR=T
Human life span is so short, and that reminds me of the professor brand said in the Interstellar movie:" I am a physicists, I am afraid of time." Scientist today may have the idea of the universe but just the limitation of our technology limits the experiments, the experiment would have to take decades to be done...
Black holes are obviously a universe balancing act (so that should be the start of your equation) furthermore they will explain if they are also balancing multiple universes. Maybe our universe is the reverse of a system of black holes of a neighbouring system and our universe is or composed of black holes from another dimension. Simples.
Well well, today I learned that black holes have no mass. And I always thought that with all those stars falling in there they'd be compressed to a pinpoint.
I know this is an old comment, but black holes DO have mass. What he's saying is that black holes are not made of matter. But they do have mass.
They are spinning faster the more stars fall in
Sam A how do we know black holes aren’t made of matter?
That trampoline analogy really made me smart to that information:
Where does the matter go when it's destroyed though?
Wait... i have a question.
So i just assume you know what a supernova is.... well that is how according to theory a black hole is created. so a supernova, like for example the Crab Nebula; is visible for a quite a lot of time... months if i'm not mistaken....
something else i know about black holes is that if you see someone approaching one, he appears to move towards the event horizon slower and slower and then he eventually stops moving and instead, fades away.... that's because of the time dilation, right? so might it actually be that when a supernova occours... that there will always be a black hole? we just dont see it turning into one, since it is fading away.... and we just dont see it doing that because of the same reason we would not see an astronaut moving pass the event horizon. Couldnt this be true? please proof me wrong i dont think every collapsed star in a supernova is massive enough to create a black hole but my brain just made this up ;D
+Dario Herzog "so a supernova, like for example the Crab Nebula; is visible for a quite a lot of time... months if i'm not mistaken...." supernova and nebulae are different things. supernovas are the explosion, lasting hours, maybe days (can't remember), nebulae are the gas, etc of that explosion. the matter that was exploded out.
"so might it actually be that when a supernova occours... that there will always be a black hole?" when the exploding star is not massive enough to form a black hole, it will form a neutron star, and that we can detect. smaller stars that die form other things, like a white dwarf for example. scientists have figured out how massive a star ha to be to form a black hole at the end of its life.
So I don t get it> if those things are out there, why don t all the things in the universe collide inside them???
A singularity in the centre ! In other words, we don't know!
ok. Can someone explain to me this please, Dr. Thorne said, black hole is like putting heavy mass on the centre of the Trampoline and it dents the Trampoline on the centre. But if you remove the Mass from the Trampoline, the Trampoline returns to its original state (Flat). Another example is when Planets, Stars pass through space, they warp space, but once the Star or planet passes the particular spot in space, the space does not stay warped. How come Black hole space stays Warped, how come it does not return to the original state if the matter that created it is destroyed as Dr. Thorne stated ?
Well, first off, you can't just remove the Mass from the blackhole as the mass itself has converted into a form of Energy (although blackhole can lose mass as a form of Hawking's radiation if no mass is being fed into the blackhole). When a star explodes as a Supernova, the gravitational energy is stronger than the energy required for atoms to stay apart. The gravitational energy of the dying star remnant pulls in the space around it, concentrating it into a single area called the Singularity. Now mind you, Energy can't be destroyed but can be converted. So the mass of the supernova remnant will pull the space around it due to the high density of mass = very high gravitational energy. He is saying the mass of the dead star has turned into the energy of warping the space time itself, as high mass warps the space time around it.
A planet or a normal star does warp space around it, however, the mass is not high enough to create a blackhole. You can only get a blackhole if you have high enough mass. Blackholes stay warped because of the fact that it has reached a critical mass which will stay there, unless you are able to extract mass or energy, but in a case of a blackhole this is almost impossible. No matter or light can escape blackhole because the escape velocity is speed of light (light can't escape but will be stationary at the event horizon). It's like running at 10 miles per hour against a wind pushing you back at 10 miles per hour, you will run but will be running in the same spot going nowhere.. Stephen Hawking came up with the theory in saying that a blackhole that is not being fed by any source of mass (simple case) will lose energy as time goes by, which is called Hawking's Radiation. Therefore, if there are no stars or any energy/mass around a blackhole, eventually the blackhole will lose energy and evaporate, ceasing to exist.
Thank you Guys ! You gave me a lot to chew
Astro Physics
But doesn't a black hole have the same mass (or equivalent energy) than the star it was created from? From what I've known so far, black holes are created when super massive stars implode, resulting in an object with the mass of the star in a comparatively tiny area therefore an extreme density creating that enormous gravitational field.
What evidence was brought forward to suggest that there isn't an actual extremely dense object in the black hole (Singularity?) but converted energy dedicated to keep space-time warped?
SirLugash You can't assume what is in the blackhole but according to the leading general relativity theoretical physicist, it's converted into energy. We can't say that it somehow turned into an object because that object in itself would have to be destroyed and broken down into the smallest entity which in this case would be crushed beyond it being turned into an 'object'. Also, when a star becomes a blackhole, the mass isn't the same as the star. It's actually much less than the star because the outer layer of the star blows away in a supernova. Therefore the core that remains is much smaller. The blackhole increases in size and mass due to there being a lot of other stars nearby which starts feeding it
Astro Physics
Thanks for the explanation. I should've known that this topic is way more complicated than I thought it would be ;)
From what all I've heard about them, black holes are scary.
Its high time we send our best cameras inside a blackhole...wonder what the last visual would be.
Even if we could locate the nearest black hole, assuming it's not hidden away in our solar system, it would take many thousands or millions of years to transport a camera there, and that's an extremely optimistic estimate.
So matter that falls into a black hole is converted to energy?
Kip says here that the matter and energy trapped in a black hole is consumed in or converted not to energy but to the warping of spacetime.
As you fall towards the event horizon of a black hole, an outside observer will see you slowing down. When you are at the event horizon time, as seen from outside, time will have stopped entirely. As a result, the outside observer will never actually see you fall through the event horizon, but in stead see you "frozen on" the horizon. Similary, as you fall towards the event horizon, if you look away from the black hole you will observe the outside universe and time there will pass quicker and quicker. At the event horizon, time will pass infinitely quick and you will observe the passing of billions of years in milliseconds. So I don't understand why Kip says that once you are inside, you can "look out on the stars". Those stars will be long dead by then.
Black holes have no mass. They're just warped spacetime. Wow! I didn't know that.
Personal question on Kip: does anyone know why his voice was so high here? he usually has a characteristic deep and slightly raspy voice.
Probably different acoustics to the room/recording equipment
Sometimes people change the audio/video speed if they are pirating a video. Just a guess.
Hľadá svetlo to je to samé kde na priklad vo sne podľa sna chcete sa dostať preč z čierne dieri kde na to ne záleží pre to že komunikácia kde koľvek v čierne diery alebo vo tme