Could a Star be Powered by a Black Hole?

[@ScienceAsylum]

Sponsored by Blinkist: Use the following link to start your free 7-day trial with Blinkist and get 25% off of a Premium Membership: blinkist.com/scienceasylum

[@-_Nuke_-]

wow that's awesome!

[@shot.on.iphone]

I liked your video as always

[@wilderbeast9368]

Happy Super Month! 👩🏿‍🦰

[@GiovanniV69]

Blinkist makes me think of the old Cliff Notes... used them occasionally back in school.

[@vladimirpezo3734]

@@-_Nuke_- Pb

[@TheReaverOfDarkness]

7:05 I want to clarify this point for viewers. Yes, he means that material falling INTO the black hole creates an OUTWARD pressure. This is because the black hole's event horizon is extremely tiny compared to its mass, and so matter falling in becomes highly compressed. This compression leads to fusion in a region around the event horizon, and generates tons of heat which makes a strong radiation pressure OUTWARD from the black hole. This outward pressure from radiation balancing inward pressure from gravity could balance itself indefinitely until the universe expanded far enough to no longer sustain the balance and it became just a black hole.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks for the elaboration 👍

[@LeopoldoGhielmetti]

It's the same phenomenon that make supernova explode and that's called rebound, the material becomes so dense and hot that all the matter that comes after has just no space to go through and bounds back.

[@diegocabrales]

In the video it is said that they're not nuclear reactions who make reach hydrostatic equilibrium in black hole stars but instead material falling into their cores, which are black holes. Your clarification indicates that there are indeed nuclear reactions happening around the event horizons of that black holes. The photons emitted from that nuclear reactions creates radiation pressure which counteracts gravity and then we finally have hydrostatic equilibrium. So now I'm confused. Do nuclear reactions make hydrostatic equilibrium or they don't?

[@Shenron557]

Just commenting here to get notification from replies. I would like a clarification if its fusion or in-falling material that causes the outward pressure (at 7:05)

[@TheReaverOfDarkness]

@@diegocabrales I think he just misspoke. When he said "rather than fusion", he meant it was different from stellar dynamics, not that the process does not involve nuclear fusion of material.

[@braydenarmstrong594]

It’s always cool how the universe just completely disregards what we think should and shouldn’t be possible

[@ScienceAsylum]

Right?! 🤓 I love it.

[@MarkpageBxl]

The Universe is kind of a supermassive asshole in this regard, really.

[@mejanlamichhane8752]

@@MarkpageBxl love this comment

[@grayaj23]

"There are no black holes bigger than this." Universe: Hold my beer.

[@bigbadt]

It doesn't disregard our thought. Our thoughts Are based on its observation and we are yet to uncover a lot of what it's hiding

[@Lucky10279]

You know you've been watching too many astronomy videos when hearing stuff like "4.6 billion suns" doesn't even phase you.

[@ScienceAsylum]

😆

[@turingmachine4617]

yeah. when I heard it repeated, it was like, "waiiiit, what?"

[@LuisAldamiz]

"The universe is big, mindbogglingly big... " "Billions and billions"... We get used to pretty much everything as long as it's not physically painful.

[@altosack]

@@LuisAldamiz - Somehow, I think 4.6 billion suns would be painful, any way one would choose to measure it. Of course, once numbers get large enough (or small enough) to be unimaginable, they’re generally not painful.

[@catpoke9557]

Good point. My family was once watching a documentary and they mentioned an earth-like planet and they were shocked. I then went "There's tons of those. They're in like every solar system." They basically go "Lol no," then the documentary moves on and mentions how they're absolutely everywhere. They do a shocked pikachu. This was a long time ago and it was pretty funny.

[@razi_man]

To be honest, I like it when real things break our theories. When something "theoretically shouldn't exist", it makes me excited, because this is a pavement for new discoveries. That, or maybe our scientific instruments aren't advanced enough yet, it is cool either way.

[@lomiification]

"Shouldn't exist" always feels like blaming reality for our theories' failings

[@playgroundchooser]

Damn, that is deep... And completely true.

[@LendriMujina]

@JZ's Best Friend Yeah, finding out how you can prove yourself wrong is a big part of a scientist's job.

[@LuisAldamiz]

Actually that's exactly what it means. Instead of saying: lots of growingly super-massive evidence for our theories being wrong... they say "that shouldn't exist", as Pythagoras allegedly did re. irrational numbers including the one named on his honor, Pi.

[@mikebaker2436]

I think when scientists say "shouldn't exist" they mean exactly what you are saying.

[@Eldoran1989]

Shouldn't exist is no judgment by scientist it's the Realisation that their understanding is missing sth. That's science in essence. Science is not becoming a know-it-all its about understanding what we do not understand yet

[@chinlomane]

as a casual consumer of scientific videos especially involving space, I love your content. You always bring up interesting topics with answers to questions that I did not even think of. Keep up the awesome work!

[@ScienceAsylum]

Glad you enjoy it 🤓

[@CynicallyAndrew]

Great explanation, thank you for the breakdown :)

[@hermit1358]

Thanks

[@lubricatedgoat]

@@hermit1358 You're welcome

[@hermit1358]

@@lubricatedgoat I dont think so🤔

[@pufferfishaeugh1432]

@@lubricatedgoat thanks

[@lubricatedgoat]

@@pufferfishaeugh1432 glad to be of service.

[@shouldb.studying4670]

I think this might be my new favourite episode. The way concepts were linked together and scales used was perfect. 👏

[@matheussanthiago9685]

I've always wondered if primordial gas could be collapsed straight into black-holes spiking the star fase directly you sir, have won yourself another subscriber

[@Jezee213]

I was just thinking the same thing! I know there are theoretical "primordial black holes" but?

[@aluisious]

Probably not, because a bunch of hydrogen will always start fusing at high pressure and density and that energy will push on the incoming gas.

[@AlleyKatt]

This one was well thought-out and definitely answered some black hole questions I've pondered. About halfway through had to pause because I remembered that you just moved to your new house and thinking through all the details of this kind of video would be extremely tough anytime near such a big move. Anyway, I hope you get back to visit our old fair township once in a while... well, after the fix the damn roads season is past. Love your channel.

[@ScienceAsylum]

I'd be lying if I said it's been easy. Transitions are difficult for me no matter what they are. Moving is a huge transition and moving into a house (that I'm 100% responsible for) is a lot more transition than I've ever experienced. This was the first video this year that didn't feel hectic to produce. Hopefully, that means things have finally settled down and the rest of the year will be better.

[@richardbarstow3861]

I love this dude. None of my friends or family share my passion for physics and science, which makes me feel I am crazy for contemplating such academics with no practical implications for a humble salesman such as myself. Embrace the crazy!

[@ianp3112]

Knowledge is power, Learning is fun! You never know but this knowledge may help you connect with a potential client! For another great resource for astronomy and physics check out David Butler on KZbin and his series how far away is it?(astronomy) and how small is it?(physics) Cheers 😽

[@artdonovandesign]

I KNOW! I can't even explain why I love it so much

[@tex1297]

I can understand you. Its wery hard to discover amazing things and then there is dobady to share with. I have once explained higgs mechanism to my wife. She was very nice and patiently heared me out. Then she said, "sorry i dont think i understand this". Hovever i made a decision and i am lookin for new jobs, so i can converge my daly work to things i am interested 😁. Keep enjoying phisics, reality is the best sciencefiction😁👍

[@richardbarstow3861]

@@tex1297 Learn on my friend!

[@dipolifom]

FAST FAST! Oh and you missed calling the black hole star as "black hole sun" by Soundgarden 😏 Amazing vid as always. Love your style and work

[@ecospider5]

Your scripts are truly brilliant. You make the fact that there are more than one of you so natural it’s amazing.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks! 🤓

[@tonyrainbolt9388]

"fact" that there are more than one? Of course there are more than one - that's the fact!

[@TheHumanHades]

I have heard about quasi stars before but it is now I understood them. Thank you.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Glad I could help 🤓

[@worvtube]

I don't know why, but that "fast fast" makes my day EVERY time!!!

[@MyEyesAhh]

I love the animation for gravitational waves. The thought of that split second in which two singularities are the distance of a couple feet from colliding, where space and time are bent so ridiculously. Its so cool

[@andrewpatton5114]

It's the most violent thing in the universe today. Several solar masses get converted into gravitational radiation. If we could see gravitational radiation, a black hole merger would outshine the largest supernovae.

[@greatPretender79]

"It's important not to confuse mass with volume" -Nick Lucid

[@creator4413]

Keeping the concept of density in mind… it gets tricky to not confuse mass with weight, this means keeping the concept of gravity AND density in mind. Throw the Higgs field into the equation and you have one very confused me

[@mikebaker2436]

7:00 I blame the sweet Animal Metal shirt for subliminally causing my brain to sing a Soundgarden track when the words Black Hole Star appeared on the screen. 🤣🤣😂 🤘🏻🤣🤘🏻

[@aleksandartasevski3904]

It's always good to come back and check on your videos 🤘

[@ScienceAsylum]

Yep! You never know if YT just decided to stop showing them to you.

[@edwindijk6222]

always a pleasure to see you work👍

[@cjwrench07]

This channel is my Blinkist I don’t have time to read non-colouring theoretical physics books, so this has become my best substitute.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Huge compliment 👍

[@austin101t4]

"You know what else is hard?" 9:25 I thought he was talking about something else lol

[@spookwagen-thegreat1350]

Amazing video! It's very entertaining while not being patronizingly simple or overly complex at least for myself. The skits are also superb.

[@algordon5843]

Nic Your a genius. I am 64 years old with a physics' and chem education that ended in high school. Somehow you managed to put together a video that even I could understand. Thanks. Keep it up mate.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Glad I could help! 🤓

[@Tokhaar]

Your content is not only fascinating, it's also very fun to watch, and the way that you explain makes it easy to understand, unlike other channels...

[@julioandresarriagarangel7183]

¡Gracias!

[@entropyachieved750]

Top vid, love your take on these subjects

[@otakuribo]

I think it's sweet that Nick buys all his shirts in duplicates for his clones

[@ScienceAsylum]

It gets expensive _real_ fast.

[@richardwalker6004]

Thank you !!

[@peoplesrepublicofunitedear2337]

I remember reading about TZOs (Thorne Zitkov Object, or something like that), where the core of a star is a neutron star while the outside is a hypergiant star.

[@pauls5745]

we've only just scratched the surface and begun to look outward. im sure some really strange objects exist out there, making black holes seem ho hum

[@alanodonnell7234]

Awesome crazy. Well done for another awesome video

[@jackson_mcgrath]

Never heard of quasi stars before, very cool concept

[@MAGA_Extremist]

This is my first time ever learning about quasi Stars. Extremely interesting! Love it!

[@MichaelFrith]

Has anyone considered the role that dark matter might play in the formation of super-massive black Holes considering the role that dark matter plays in galaxy formation - assuming dark matter exists?

[@LendriMujina]

It's possible. We know dark matter has mass, after all; that's literally *all* we know about dark matter. We don't know how gravy interacts with it.

[@LuisAldamiz]

Dark matter does exist (we don't know what exactly it is but the evidence very consistently points to it being some sort of "stuff" and not a generic error in our models/theories: there are galaxies without dark matter, gravitational lensing as we know it needs of actual dark matter, etc.) and it should as you say be considered in BH modelling scenarios. I believe there's some theorization on that but I don't know enough to explain it.

[@scudder991]

I was thinking the exact same thing. But since we don't yet know what dark matter is, it difficult to credibly account for its impact to the formation of hypothesized quasi-stars.

[@davidedrich6985]

Dark matter I think is 5X the amount of visible matter. That should be the same in the time when quasi stars form. The way they suck in whatever matter near them to form they should suck in dark matter just the same as regular clump-able visible matter. So they should be made up of possibly 5 parts dark to visible matter. Regular black holes are going to be of 99% visible matter because stars are formed from visible matter. I don’t know if it matters or how you would test it. It depends on the distribution of dark matter at the time of quasi star formation.

[@davideblonda6159]

Beautifull video, keep up the great job, love your video style.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks! Will do 🤓

[@TheAmbientMage]

It always amuses me how mediocre and average our galaxy is. "Our sun is so massive, you could fit everything in the solar system inside of it several times over." "Oh wow..." "Yeah, but it's pretty average for a star. Not all that big comparitively." "Oh..." "We also have a super massive black hole in the center of the galaxy." "What? No way..." "Yeah. It's pretty tiny for a super massive black hole though." "Oh... ok..."

[@iamgreatalwaysgreat8209]

Its good, if sun was too big or too small then we probably wont exist .

[@TheAmbientMage]

@@iamgreatalwaysgreat8209 I get it. It's just funny. It's like we live in the generic suburbs of the universe.

[@stefaniasmanio5857]

We are the stars of mediocrities, yet we keep on trying … sad enough… anyway, we are great in been nothing…

[@iamgreatalwaysgreat8209]

@@stefaniasmanio5857 Sir/Ma'am Why your comment sounds so depressed?

[@stefaniasmanio5857]

@@iamgreatalwaysgreat8209 😅🤣🤣🤣🤣👍just joking… well, actually no… 😳🙄😅

[@cestemshow]

Awesome Video. Thanks

[@chuckoneill2023]

Congratulations on getting a proper work bench --- not that I was complaining. My main thought was "This is proof that Nick is definitely a theorist, and NOT an experimentalist." I was also a bit concerned you might hurt yourself.

[@hanzhang3589]

7:15 The Eddington limit of the BH no longer applies, as the BH is sitting in the interior of a quasi-star. However, the Eddington limit of the quasi-star still applies, regardless if you're in the early universe or not.

[@snowthemegaabsol6819]

9:25 You were holding back a lot on that one To my knowledge there are 3 black holes that have a mass greater than 50 billion solar mass upper limit. At this point everyone knows about TON 618 which tends to sit on top, and it's 66 billion solar mass figure coming from spectral analysis of H-beta emissions. But the Phoenix A quasar is one that I don't hear talked about a lot even though it could be much bigger and uses an interesting approach, much different to spectroscopic or kinematic analysis. It's probably just not an old enough method and its applicability in such an extreme case isn't known, so the 100 billion solar mass figure has too much uncertainty to it. Still though, looking at the actual paper in the astronomy and astrophysics journal, it doesn't seem too outlandish. Who knows what this might lead to, maybe there will eventually be more expounding upon the models of the early universe to explain such ultramassive giants

[@Nosirt]

Black holes is where advance aliens live. And no, you can’t disprove this because no info from inside the event horizon can be attained. It is scientifically as accurate to say unicorns exist in black holes as it is to say nothing is inside the black holes.

[@justsomeguy4260]

They should make a new category for these behemoths and call it HYPERMASSIVE BLACKHOLES

[@HypnosisBear]

@@justsomeguy4260 they have made a new category and it's called "Stupendously large black holes". I'm not joking, it's a real thing.

[@caseyyeow1649]

​@@HypnosisBear They are called ultramassive black holes.

[@nicholastauiliili2665]

@@caseyyeow1649 it’s a real term, ultramassive black holes is the term given to black holes larger than 10 billion solar masses, stupendously large black holes is the term given to black holes larger than 100 billion because they’re literally stupendously large when 50 billion is supposed to be the limit

[@pelikanidolazetrceci2793]

Thanks!

[@IrocZIV]

"Black Hole Star" made me think of "Black Hole Sun" though I don't think that is what the song was talking about :P

[@forsetti84]

Just reading the title made me feel goosebumbs and axious. Thanks mate

[@otakuribo]

Today I learned how the hearts of galaxies were born 🌀💙

[@slother93]

Great video! Thanks for clearing up some questions I had about black holes.

[@andrewparker318]

If the quasi-star theory was true, wouldn’t we also see evidence of intermediate black holes with 10-100 thousand solar masses, ones that never got a chance to merge or grow larger?

[@LendriMujina]

Not really. In the age quasi-stars would have existed, there wasn't enough space (in the most literal sense) to not get a chance.

[@andrewparker318]

@@LendriMujina yes but nick explained that after the universe expanded enough, and the quasi star disappeared, the remaining black hole had around 10,000 solar masses. From that point on, the universe had expanded enough so that it couldn’t directly feed on the vacuum of space anymore, and it was now up to the black hole to merge with others and consume material to become truly supermassive. Or am I misunderstanding something?

[@LendriMujina]

@@andrewparker318 Even then, they were still much, much closer to each other, and collisions would have happened exponentially more often at the time.

[@aurelienb3984]

We actually see a few intermediate mass black holes ranging from several hundreds solar masses to a few tens of thousands solar masses

[@pauls5745]

i do think there can be more than a couple ways black holes are formed. regular 2d holes (like in your jeans) can be formed in many ways. I can assume similar events can produce 3d holes out in space

[@tyranmcgrath6871]

Got more than I bargained for with this video, well done

[@flowersinformaldehyde]

Always love when you talk about black holes 🖤

[@ScienceAsylum]

I enjoyed researching this one 🤓

[@flowersinformaldehyde]

@The Science Asylum It must've been a very interesting and difficult research given how little data we have on those supermassive "vacuum cleaners" 😂

[@TheRealReVeLaTioN]

I must say, this is by far one of the most entertaining learning channels I’ve come across. I find learning anything I didn’t already know entertaining but even when I come across stuff I was already aware of, this channel is so entertaining I end up learning a lot more than what I thought I already knew. Definitely a channel worth subscribing to!

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks! I'm glad you like my work.

[@cosmoscarl4332]

Black holes don't contain the mass of the stars the devoured. They are regions of spacetime that represent the mass they devoured. That's one description. They contain the equivalent energy of the matter that fell in but it's all spacetime inside. I believe the matter is broken down behind the event horizon and becomes virtual particles. Black holes create spacetime. The singularity is the subatomic "gateway" through which the spacetime leaves the region of the black hole and becomes spacetime outside. It wells up in the voids between galaxy clusters and filaments as virtual particles that then annihilate and what is left is expanding spacetime. Kind of like dripping PVC glue into a bucket of water. That is dark energy, and it's speeding up because there are many more black holes now than in the past and they've had time to pull more mass and turn it into spacetime. That may mean that the expansion could slow down in the future. It's also a way that black holes evaporate. Not dissimilar to Hawking Radiation. Just a thought experiment I've been thinking about for the last twenty years.

[@thejohnstonzoo]

Good job. That was interesting.

[@CT-pi2gl]

So cool! I was having a terrible week, and this video was unexpectedly a huge morale boost.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Glad I could help!

[@shot.on.iphone]

Your dialogue always motivate me "It's okay to be little crazy"

[@dnaann1867]

He emphasizes on little

[@ColinTimmins]

Thanks for another great video. Your explanations gets a “chefs kiss”. Love your Animal shirt. =]

[@ScienceAsylum]

Thanks!

[@user-eh6th9wj5k]

Love your videos!

[@scottfranco1962]

"we tend to find supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies" I would say we tend to find galaxies around supermassive black holes. Its the reason the galaxy formed.

When I watch this guy I feel like a kid learning these stuff for the first time.

[@ScienceAsylum]

That's wonderful! 🤓

[@nicouxgwendal]

@The Science Asylum There is a big misconception about black holes. They neither need to be created from a star, nor need to be superdense objects. To cut short a long story, the Schwartzchild radius is proportionnal to the mass : Rs = 2GM / c² (where G is the gravity constant and M the mass of the black hole). But its density is Ro = k / M² (where k is a constant equal to 3 c^6 / 32 π G^3) Some examples: Mass in solar M0 / Schwarzschild radius (km) / Volumic mass in g cm-3 10^0 2,952 10^0 1,845 10^16 10^1 2,952 10^1 1,845 10^14 10^2 2,952 10^2 1,845 10^12 10^3 2,952 10^3 1,845 10^10 10^4 2,952 10^4 1,845 10^8 10^5 2,952 10^5 1,845 10^6 10^6 2,952 10^6 1,845 10^4 10^7 2,952 10^7 1,845 10^2 10^8 2,952 10^8 1,845 10^0 10^9 2,952 10^9 1,845 10^-2 10^10 2,952 10^10 1,845 10^-4 10^11 2,952 10^11 1,845 10^-6 For reminder, the volumic mass of water on earth at sea level is 1 g.cm-3. So a supermassive black hole which is a milliard (yes milliard...10^9. Billion is 10^12) times more massive than the sun, can be two hundred times less dense than water on Earth...so "just" 5 times more massive than the air you are breathing now! It may of course collapse it-self into a singularity, but at its origin, a black hole does not need to be super dense. What it needs is to be a sufficient large sphere of "not that crazy dense material" surrounded by way less dense material (or at best void). No needs to invoque super incredible primitive stars...just density variations 🙂

[@sjonjones4009]

Who else has "Black Hole Sun" playing in their head after him saying Black Hole Star?!

[@CJ-111]

Sometimes I just think about how complex the universe is. It blows my mind

[@aluisious]

If you want to start getting trippy about it, your mind is part of the universe, trying to think about itself. A very complex part we barely understand. We know more about black holes than we do about how consciousness works.

[@michaelmcdoesntexist1459]

A Star made of a Black Hole... This must be the most metal thing i've ever heard. It deserves a better name than quasi-star. Something like Badasstar.

[@OmateYayami]

Well, there is another type that works in similar way and is even named similarly, it's quasar and it does exist.

[@KohuGaly]

Something similar exists (and has been likely observed) for neutron star. ie. A neutron star at the core of a red (super) giant. Those are literally metal (or at least, they have abnormal abundance of certain metallic elements like lithium and rubidium).

[@ScienceAsylum]

Agreed. Quasi-Star is a terrible name.

[@peterbogardus5209]

How about ‘black-star’

[@AlaiMacErc]

Soundgarden star!

[@I.____.....__...__]

7:02 _♫ Quasi-star, won't you come, and wash away the space, quai-star, quasi-star, quasi-staaar ♫_

[@i-am-evil-morty6710]

"you know what else is hard?" 😂😉

[@TheHyprBeastX]

ayooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[@bytefu]

That was so obvious that I had no doubt of finding it in the comments :)

[@wrjazziel]

Thank you!

[@lindsayforbes7370]

Haven't seen you for a while. Nice video though. Aren't black holes just amazing 😀

[@ScienceAsylum]

They are! They're the most extreme objects in the universe.

[@oilcanshawn4918]

Love your videos u make it interesting thank you!

[@ScienceAsylum]

Glad you like them! 🤓

[@sinebar]

Couldn't a black hole singularity be thought of as a particle instead of just a collapsed star? They seem to have similar properties such charge, angular momentum and infinitesimally small. They seem more particle like than just a collapsed star. So maybe a collapsed star actually becomes a gravity made supermassive particle or GMSP. I know it probably sounds crazy and I'm just throwing out the idea so please don't jump on me but could such a model combine the 4 fundamental forces in a grand unification? And perhaps we could even imagine the Big Bang originating from some kind of particle that became unstable and decayed resulting in the birth of our universe. I'll call it the Genesis Particle.

[@dkeffectdetector8920]

singularities have nothing to do with particles, the particle isn't an infinite dense energy, if it was then all particles would have been evaporating in hours while releasing 10,000 times the energy of allnuclear weapons on earth, and while having a giga temperature, a black hole with a millimeter radius of its event horizon would have had 10^30 K temperature

[@LuisAldamiz]

The singularity (which is contested by some, who imagine that it'd be rather some sort of quantum ultra-compressed "something", very small and compact but not infinitely so) would be like that but the mass is mega-huge and that's also a measure of "size", not in terms of space occupied but in terms of "weight", so to say. Even the heaviest fundamental particles are "mega-hyper-tiny" in comparison if we judge by mass and not by supposed space "size", they are "mega-hyper-tiny" by mass compared to any everyday object we can see or touch, even compared with atoms, which is about the tiniest thing we can hope to see (via electron microscopy). In any case, the core BH could well be something like an extreme neutron star, a quark soup or maybe some sort of quark-gluon plasma or whatever. Maybe at such pressures everything becomes a photon and all are piled up like a super-laser that can't escape itself (energy = mass) but actually occupies a "singularity". As you surely know bosons can exist in the same space-time, unlike fermions, they can pile up ad infinitum in a single spot. We really don't know and will probably never know for sure, but for all practical purposes all we can effectively know of that "thing" is its mass and spin, because it's almost impossible that it ever accumulates any significant, noticeable, charge, or that, if it does, it matters even, because charge carriers (photons) can't escpe to communicate, to transmit it (it's a purely theoretical property, unlike the other two, which are real and have implications). In fact, the spin typically means that the BH "singularity" is not a dot but a circle, the dot "singularity" would only exist in a spinless BH.

[@LuisAldamiz]

@@dkeffectdetector8920 - No because Hawking radiation is only a theory and has no empirical evidence whatsoever backing it. Do not accept as truth anything that has not been empirically demonstrated even if the theorist is someone as brilliant and lovable as Mr. Hawking.

[@dkeffectdetector8920]

photon itself doesn't carry any charge

[@dkeffectdetector8920]

ring, not a circle

[@kpf7539]

7:02 missed the perfect opportunity for a soundgarden reference

[@TheReaverOfDarkness]

Pro tip: if your hypothesis disagrees with your observations, the hypothesis is the one out of the two of them that's wrong. Supermassive black holes should exist because they do exist.

[@Zdman2001]

When a scientist uses the short hand "Shouldn't exist", it really means "Should not exist based on current Scientific understanding". Science is never 100% known and is constantly adjusting to new observations.

[@HermanVonPetri]

I think it's past time for science communicators and other media to retire the terms "shouldn't exist" or "shouldn't do XYZ." It's much more accurate to say "not yet explained" or "not yet understood how."

[@thewizard4200]

Awesome video!

[@starenharkon4265]

0:50 wow ididnt know that before.thx

[@Bassotronics]

SuperMassive Black Holes are Lucid Animals! (Looks at Nick and his shirt)

[@fijipodd]

You know what, it's 3am, I'm tired as heck and you gotta do me with a title like that?

[@michaelhanford8139]

Black holes power stars? Science asylum is definitely an appropriately named channel.

[@sanchezzz69420]

Man, you know how to draw us back to your channel. I couldn't get here fast enough. Glad to see you again! 😎👍🏽✌️

[@playgroundchooser]

I've said it before, but damn this comment section is chocked full of intelligent and witty people. Proud to be amongst you, Crazies!

[@craytherlaygaming2852]

Quasai stars gotta be some of the coolest shit I've heard about honestly

[@samuelwilder483]

Love this guy!

[@PRADEEPKUMAR-yh7tj]

"And you know what else is HARD" 😂😂😂

[@Xurreal]

I love the way you had Skeptical Clone giving you that laser eyed stare 🤣

[@akdoc2003]

Black hole sun, won't you come And wash away the rain? Black hole sun, won't you come? Won't you come? Won't you come? - Soundgarden

[@bobinmaine1]

As soon as I clicked on the video, I thought about writing a comment expressing my disappointment in how long it's been since you've said, "FAST, FAST". But you said it in the vid! I'm a dork at heart and like I've said before, I don't care how many times you use that it will always make me smile.

[@simo9445tsns]

Thanks

[@CTCTraining1]

Huge thanks for answering a question I had back in 1980 (ish) when Carl Sagan said that quote about “we are made of star stuff” and even teen me knew the exotic matter in the Earth didn’t come from our sun and must have been from residues prior suns going supernova... but how many prior times? Having annoyed my physics teacher and failed to get a satisfactory answer I forget about it until today. So, at most 3 times ... can’t say I’m not disappointed it wasn’t 42 but it is good have an answer. Many thx. 😀👍

[@AlaiMacErc]

Not at most three times; the "Populations" are broad categories, not exact number of generations as such. Some of the matter in the solar system _may_ have been in 42 previous stars! But those would have all have to be relatively large, short-lived stars. A lot of the recycled mass at each step is going to instead end up in much smaller stars, which won't have had time to burn out, and don't eject significant mass even when they do. So the 'average generation' of the material is almost certainly much less.

[@realcygnus]

Good one !

[@mannyourfriend]

Great video

[@adityachk2002]

Amazing

[@promiscuous5761]

Thank you.

[@EgnachHelton]

It's amazing to see that black holes with the size similar to our sun is probably smaller than Tokyo or NYC.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Yeah, stellar-mass black holes are surprisingly small.

[@sash4all]

Your channel simply explains it the best way and brings it on the point👍 I love it. In my mind black holes still need a bit of charge to stay 3 dimensional, it's still a part of matter, but they simply can't emit light anymore, like matter with electrons would.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Electric charge is required for matter to support itself, but a black hole is the exact opposite of that. A black hole is what you get when matter _can't_ support itself anymore. An event horizon forms around it. That event horizon is just a region of space, not a surface made of matter.

[@sash4all]

@@ScienceAsylum I think, it's the same "matter" like protons are made of. In my eyes black holes are just proton stars. Protons are positive charged and attracting negative charged electrons. That's the same black holes also do, they sucking just the negative charged parts and rejecting the positives... that's also called hawkings radiation. Those rejected positive charged quantums are forming the quantum field. Every single quantum also rejects each other and is forming a field around Black holes and simply around everything in the Galaxy. The "space" or "gap" between the matter of the black hole and the quantum field is the event horizon. Protons also don't emitting light, right? Also a reason why I think black holes are just proton stars and absolutely black not because of its gravitation, how most people think, it's because they are simply not able to emit photons. Maybe Star is the wrong definition, but if they "radiate" hawking radiation, even if they just reject it... I think it fits... we have neutron stars and "electron" stars like ours, why not?! (Neuton stars are also not just neutrons) In my eyes, also the emitting of photons is caused by the quatum field around us. Uranium, for example, is losing weight, it changes over years into lead, just by losing energy into the quantum field, quantums can't be destroyed or produced, where is all the radiation coming from, if not from the quantum field. It makes neutral charged photons out of positive quantums just by sharing its surplus negative energy.... The quantum field is also the same like spacetime in my eyes, the denser it is, the faster uranium would radiate, for example. If I'm talking about charge I mean charged like photons, which is able to transport charge by Einstein's photo electrical effect, electro magnetic and the uncertainty principle of heisenberg, from a Star to a solar panel for example. It's energy or heat and heat also is energy, but also negative electric charge, in my undertanding. Photons or heat, both can be transformed in electric energy. I mean we have just ➕️ and ➖️ in universe, no matter if we talking about electricity, heat or magnetic fields. Even magnetic fields are used to produce electricity. In my eyes is gravitation just an overage of positive attraction, like magnets attract the negative charged side... We need more energy to throw the apple, then it needs for falling down... The "negative charged electric heat" of the universe decreases and is getting changed into " positive" gravity, by cooling down. Sorry, I'm just an scifi artist and from germany, it's double difficult to find the right words, but that would make sense to me ^^ and I hope I was able to explain it... 😅 I'm really not 100 percent a fan of standard model, quantum field or string theory, but I like parts of all of them... that's enough so far I think 😬 but that's my opinion

[@gnjoeyhowell]

Soundgarden pioneered this idea in 1994 with "Black Hole Sun".

[@gravityalchemist6599]

Awesome!

[@JesseP.Watson]

Nightmarish legal dispute just coming to a close... This was the perfect antidote: always remember THE BIG PICTURE. Thanks.

[@SzeptyTechniki]

Well, you have my sub thanks to this video. I`m very curious about next movies that You will create. Take care and big "Hi" from Poland ;)

[@Dr_Mario2007]

Population III stars were a very weird freak in term of star formation and lack of metallicity, so there's no questions that Quasi-stars existed. I am truly grateful that the only surviving Population III stars today are mostly mixes of orange and red dwarf stars nowadays, as a Quasi-star is one upsettingly lethal star due to how stupid bright it is, enough light to pulverize and incinerate anything that gets too close to it, which is honestly extreme. The best closest modern equivalent would be the Eta Carinae binary star system. And a bit nitpick from the physics standpoint; quasi-star is actually powered by TWO separate processes; nuclear fusion and inward collapse towards the black hole core. Why nuclear fusion? Obviously the materials that are falling down get stupid hot quickly, enough to set off the nuclear fusion, thus generating enough backpressure along with the light to keep the quasi-star as whole from collapsing too quickly.

[@Violent2aShadow]

🎶 Black hole sun, won't you come, and wash away the rain? 🎶

[@grugbug4313]

Solid! Top KEK!

[@smorcrux426]

How is it possible that these intermediate black holes grow only due to collisions but become billions of times bigger than their original sizes? How come we can't fine any intermediate sized black holes that still exist nowadays? If black holes can be tens of billions times more massive than stars, and galaxies have a few tens of billions of stars, is it possible to have a black hole with a mass higher than the entirety of the rest of its galaxy? In that case, will all the stars in its galaxy actually orbit around it? Why do we only find supermassive black holes in the center of galaxies? Do the galaxies form around them?

[@LuisAldamiz]

That's what he's suggesting: that they may be primeval black holes created in the Big Bang and not at all mergers of stellar mass BHs. Galaxies do seem to form around supermassive BHs indeed.

[@benweieneth1103]

Missed opportunity for a "Black Hole Sun" reference.