First Evidence Black Holes Source of Dark Energy - EXPLAINED

[@DrBenMiles]

@DrBecky has a great critical review of this breakthrough. It's her field and I'd recommend checking it out: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aZjKYoKJaZhoi6c

[@henrythegreatamerican8136]

The source of dark energy is in the soulless heart of Donald Trump!

[@AaronWhiffin]

Glad you’ve seen that, does it change / persuade your perspective since publishing the video? She’s very convincing, and it’s her research subject

[@DrBecky]

Thanks Ben!

[@Jesus.the.Christ]

Your title is wrong. This isn't evidence. It's bullshit piled high enough to give those "astrophysicists" access to government grants.

[@undertow2142]

I’ve been pondering for many years that space time is the “glue” holding the universe together. Black holes eat space time. Less space time means less glue and the universe gets bigger. Since the universe is a bubble of space time, mass, and energy the outside of the universe must be no space time, and zero values for mass and energy. So it naturally wants to expand but that the glue acts to hold the bubble together.

[@TMan1000]

I love having access to all this new information so quickly. I love learning allot more now than I did in school. Thank you.

[@michaelevans3904]

I knew this intuitively since I first heard the terms " dark energy/ dark matter".

[@SilasVanBuren]

Lot's of us did. We're on the right side of history.

[@tontonbeber4555]

I just discovered this research, I am not specialist in astrophysics, just interested. Thanks for the information. I tried to have a look at the original papers, they are far above my level of understanding, but I feel this is a key discovery.

[@tivenspqr]

Thanks for this Nice, Simple and Elegant explanation of complex aspects of our universe. I wonder if our scientists ever consider the existence of energy/mater in dimensions that we can’t see. Mathematically any number of dimensions can be modeled but we are trapped into 3 dimensions (or 4th, considering time), so technically we can’t understand what could really be in other potential dimensions. At the most we could only perceive weird things happening in our universe as a consequence of us touching the plane (space) of higher dimensions. I would love to see a video of Dr Ben about other dimensions and how scientists understand this. Congratulations for this channel and for making science available to the general public.

[@davidhart5344]

Great comment and very creative. Google string theory which attempts to explain the grand unified theory of physics using up to 11 space dimensions and time dimension

[@JanPBtest]

Yes, of course they considered it, almost immediately after 1915 (when Einstein published the finished version of his general relativity theory). It never quite worked in the sense that it never lead to what's today considered THE foremost physics problem: creating a theory that would encompass both general relativity and quantum mechanics.

[@DeDraconis]

Huh, weird. I think I must have fundamentally misunderstood what Hawking Radiation was, cause I thought it was the mechanism that made Black Holes shrink - not was another source of feeding them?

[@LordAmerican]

That’s because what he described wasn’t hawking radiation. It’s the common depiction, but actual Hawking radiation is more complex. A more accurate description of Hawking radiation (as I understand it from other videos on the topic) is that the event horizon cuts off certain vibrational modes in the quantum fields. This means that the fields cannot be in their respective vacuum states, and so to restore them, particles effectively pop into existence with the necessary vibrational modes to restore the fields to their natural state. The particles produced are random (i.e. not limited to only photons) and have a wavelength of the event horizon’s diameter. And in order to get away from the black hole the particles effectively steal energy from it or the space around it, thereby reducing its mass. Also, because of weird relativity stuff, an observer close to the black hole will not see any particles, but an observer far away could.

[@DeDraconis]

@@LordAmerican What is a vibrational mode? I thought particle pairs popped in and out of existence everywhere, not just in response to black holes?

[@jakublizon6375]

@@DeDraconis You have to understand, qft and the particles of the standard model aren't really particles, they're waves. Seriously, it's a common misconception that they're both particles and waves, but it really is just wavea, and localozed highly stable waves. Quantum fields need an exact amount of energy to generate a "particle". But quantum fields do SO MUCH MORE. Particles do not mediate force, fields do So when two electrons repel each other, only the field is involved We say they exchange virtual particles, but thats just a hack to make calculationa less difficulr, but theybatenr real. Their approximauoms of the continuous fields actually doing the work. Even empty fields all have a non zero rest energy thanks to the uncertainty principle. I'm getting there, don't worry. Think of a quantum field as extending drln one "end " of the universe to the other. Now, put a black hold in the way. Because quantum fields are are always shaking, they always have some wave activity. When put a black hole in the way, it literally puts a hole in the field. That really disrupts the field, and certain frequencies or modes (loose analogy) become impossible. Because quantum fields are everywhere spacetime is, they are inside the black hole too. That should help you visualize how energy can leak from the black hole. A mode is the quantum field behavior when it is disjointed in some way. The field essentially freaks out. It creates an effect in the electromagnetic quantum field. While part of the field gets trapped in the black hole(sorta), the uncertainty principle allows radiationto sometimes exit. Mass is responsible for the modes, so as radiation leaks, it takes some of the mass with it.

[@disgruntledwookie369]

@@DeDraconis they do but the event horizon introduces and boundary condition which changes the allowed vibrational modes. Kind of like fretting a guitar to change the string length. This is advanced QFT.

[@disgruntledwookie369]

Actually I have a better analogy. First understand that particles are essentially just fancy vibrations in their respective quantum fields. A quantum field is a bit like a drum skin, it has a kind of tension so when you give it some displacement it oscillates around the equilibrium. When you hit a drum you create ripple like waves that travel in all directions across the drum skin. If the drum was very large or even infinite, the waves would travel away just like ripples on a pond. But when the waves hit the edge of the drum, the skin is pinned down, it canno5 vibrate. This is called a boundary condition and the waves will reflect off the boundary and interfere with themselves. Depending on the wavelength of a given way and the size of the drum, some frequencies will interfere with themselves destructively and cancel out while others will have just the right frequency to interfere constructively and form standing waves. This is completely analogous to an electron confined to an atom. The electrostatic attraction between the electron and the nucleus is like the boundary of the drum skin. It restricts which frequencies are allowed for the electron wave, hence atomic energy levels. The event horizon of a black is similar, except it affects ALL the quantum fields at once. It restricts which vibration modes are possible within its vicinity, and that means different particle states are allowed compared to a normal vacuum. Basically, if you put one finger on the drum skin and then hit it, the sound is different, muffled. Your finger is the black hole. The frequencies that make up the sound are the different particles. Roughly speaking.

[@user-yl7wn2fz1t]

A beautiful conjecture that, if proven, will reshape all we know about the universe.

[@dark7element]

Talking about cosmology and the future death of the universe is often a depressing topic, but this is actually good news. If black holes are able to exert this kind of control over the fabric of spacetime, that means a whole lot of wild technologies just became theoretically feasible, up to and possibly including faster-than-light-travel and backwards time travel (both of which are actually the same thing).

[@canaldemais]

Surely… if these Black Holes are so much larger than the “old Galaxies” justify and the size can be explained by the 68% “missing component”… is this simply further evidence of vaccuum energy/ dark matter… which is being “consumed” by the old black holes… does this make any sense?

[@DrakeLarson-js9px]

Great Summary of black holes, dark energy and their likely linkage from a 'recent conventional wisdom' perspective... however ... I wish more recent Inversion Physics conjectures were also included in this video...

[@dodaexploda]

Thank you for this excellent break down. I saw the news and I didn't really understand it. This was a perfect explanation.

[@subhanusaxena7199]

Very interesting video which makes a nice complement to Sabine's video that highlights a number of issues with these papers. My main question is who to be sure this is causation not just correlation (which I believe the authors also highlighted as an unresolved issue with their paper) Also, when you say "in a phenomena called red shift" at 2:15 did you not mean a phenomenon, or were there more than 1 phenomena you were meaning to highlight? Thank you

[@JanPBtest]

Americans frequently use the incorrect plural ("phenomena") when the singular ought to be used. I gave up trying to fix this.

[@DistantThunderworksLLC]

Are we sure the black holes themselves are the source of the universe expanding, or are both just subject to the same process causing both the universe and black holes to grow/expand? Why would one conclude this correlation is causation? I don't see the evidence for jumping to that conclusion.

[@blijebij]

Precisely!

[@NullHand]

All the paper showed is that the growth of black holes is correlated to the accelerating expansion of the Universe, measured by redshifting. To like 5 sigma. Correlation is not equal to causation. Correlation between A and B can't discern if A causes B, B causes A, or both A and B are the result of unknown C. This basic misunderstanding of scientific statistics causes a great deal of chaos once research leaves the Ivory Towers where they keep most all the humans trained in both statistics and the scientific method. Nowhere is this chaos and confusion worse than in "medical science".

[@AWildBard]

Great explanation. After listening twice, I almost feel I understand it. But it's totally mind-blowing to contemplate. As mass accumulates, the universe expands as if the black holes' masses is somehow related to the expansion. Possibly even the cause ??? It doesn't seem like there could be a mechanism ... could there be a way to understand it at all? I imagine this could lead to the expansion of our understanding of physics if it is something that is knowable by humans.

[@supercommie]

I have a crazy idea. What if Black Holes contract the space around them somehow making each galaxy contracting in relation to the rest of the universe. Wouldn't this give you an expanding universe where pockets of mass(galaxies) stay roughly the same size to each other but shrink in relation to the rest of the universe. Although this wouldn't explain why galaxies with bigger black holes in the middle don't "contract" faster. But hey... It's an idea. O_o

[@buckanderson3520]

I've been saying for a couple years now that black holes drive expansion. Good to know I'm on the right track! My thought on it was much more simple. I asked this simple question. What do you get when you take an object and accelerate it in every direction, away from everything? The answer was black holes and an expanding universe.

[@netherflux5882]

So Blackholes creates energy? Don't be delusional, Blackholes are not the holes you learned about watching porn 😂

[@filipkrastev7256]

@@netherflux5882 you're an accident

[@Richard-Monssen]

For quite a few years I've hypothesized this as well that the expansion of the universe is also likely responsible for our direction of time. Entropy being how we reconcile the direction of time but the expansion of the universe is also intrinsically entropy anyway so it would make sense that the expansion/entropy would be affected by gravity. Black holes having an effect on both of these makes sense, furthermore Black Holes would also be linked and reaching back to the Big Bang in the singularity giving birth to the only white hole.

[@blueckaym]

That's very interesting! Very strong correlation to ignore! Not to remind that correlation on its own doesn't point to the direction of causation (if there IS causation at all). But what I'm wondering is regarding the "source" of Dark Energy (DE). From other videos on the subject I understand that DE actually manifests in the vast empty space in between galaxies. And in the scale of a galaxy or a stellar system it's too weak (compared to gravity) that it can't pull anything apart, only makes galaxies move away from each other (unless perhaps they're in a denser galaxy cluster?). My point is how would the largest source of gravity (attractive force) inside a galaxy be the source of a repulsive energy outside of galaxies?

[@gregburdett2957]

Does this have any impact on the theory for Dark Matter to explain how many galaxies behave? Specifically if these galaxies that need dark matter to explain their behavior have a massive black hole at the center which is the source of Dark Energy, does this also have an impact on how these Galaxies behave?

[@davidhart5344]

Hmm interesting, This talks about a hypothesis for the mechanism for the expansion of the universe. But a great question none the less

[@Wabbelpaddel]

Well... by E = mc², perhaps, just perhaps, that effect is conveyed by particles. So that may not be too far off.

[@RicardoMarlowFlamenco]

8:13, 9:59, 11:29, 12:22 Ok this video is missing a huge part of the story, the second paper, which shows the actual cosmological contribution is via STELLAR MASS BLACK HOLES, NOT SUPERMASSIVE BLACK HOLES. The reason the seeming fine tuning of cosmo constant is so small, (10^-120 smaller than Planck), and also the KICK START of the acceleration in evolutionary history, is due to the epoc of large early stars collapsing into black holes. Still, the mechanism for this is not understood yet.

[@alvarofernandez5118]

This could really help us formulate the theory of quantum gravity better.

[@netherflux5882]

Never in a million years...

[@eytansuchard8640]

Dear Dr. ben Miles, By the Geometric Chronon Field Theory, if you consider that not only conventional mass generates gravity but also charge does with + generating extra gravity and - generating weak anti-gravity, the electrons that are accelerated to relativistic speeds and escape the galactic pull ,constitute what we call dark energy. On the other hand, the active galaxies accumulate + charge which cause a dark matter effect, e.g. the positively ionized hot gas of the Bullet Cluster. This charge falls into the the super massive BH and causes it to expand beyond the expected value by mainstream physics. See "Electro-gravity via geometric chronon field and on the origin of mass" in ResearchGate. It is much more correct than the peer reviewed version from 2017. Many errors have been corrected in the ResearchGate version and the it is beyond comparison more advanced. Kind regards, Eytan Suchard.

[@canadaquan]

very well explained. thanks

[@Greatest-rm9sq]

Yes more galactic phenomena content pls thank you lol

[@SilasVanBuren]

I've been predicting this for the past 2 years.

[@storm14k]

I've always wondered how spacetime could be falling into the center and stretching without being pulled from somewhere. I wondered if this could cause the expansion but I guess it would be uneven.

[@Calikid331]

The thing is that spacetime isn't finite, a "tugging" of spacetime in one place won't cause it to expand in another place, because it's infinite this simply doesn't happen.

[@storm14k]

@@Calikid331 🤯

[@noneofyourbusiness2437]

So if we could somehow get rid of every single black hole in the universe, the universe would either stop expanding or start shrinking? That seems wierd considering the fact black holes pull stuff in rather than pushing stuff out.

[@dark7element]

Yes it would, but getting rid of black holes is probably impossible because of how the event horizon works. Even if you somehow had a weapon that could "break" the singularity at the core of a black hole, if you fired it, it wouldn't reach the singularity until the end of the universe. It doesn't matter if you have a magic reactor that can literally generate endless energy from nothing, powering a beam that could blow up a star with a mass a thousand times greater than the black hole. You can shoot the black hole, sure, but the beam will take quintillions of years to actually reach the singularity. And when it does, it just adds to the black hole's mass, because in a singularity there is literally no difference between mass and energy.

[@noneofyourbusiness2437]

@@dark7element Whatbif we were somehow able to create the theoretical opposite and make White Holes and pushed them into eachother? Would they not cancel eachother out?

[@dark7element]

@@noneofyourbusiness2437 Unfortunately, I think that as far as we understand science, the white hole would only succeed in feeding the black hole and making it bigger. Basically, any way that you combine a black hole and a white hole of equal size, what you end up with is one black hole and one white hole twice as big. It doesn't matter if it's the second black hole or the white hole that you push into the first black hole, the effect is the same. That's assuming white holes are stable - recently physicists have suggested it is more likely that white holes would expel all their mass/energy at once due to the density being infinite. If that's the case, it is highly likely that a white hole was the cause of the Big Bang. In which case, good news! Our universe is producing billions of new universes. I mean, not so much good news for US, since getting to one of those new universes would require passing through a singularity, but good for whatever lifeforms evolve in those universes, if any.

[@ravenragnar]

While black holes do have an effect on the surrounding space-time, their influence is limited to the regions immediately surrounding them, and they are not thought to be significant contributors to the overall energy of the universe or the accelerating expansion of space.

[@scharlui]

Question: is the SN Type 1a candela really as constant as assumed. ? Is the higher metallicity of a later Generation Star not influencing the Explosiontemperatur?

[@mrararatovich]

Great question

[@scharlui]

@@mrararatovich THX. Btw I am a geologist interested in those questions thus I may be awfully wrong

[@hugegamer5988]

So black hole horizons comove with the visible universe boundary, and the radius scales linearly with energy. So in the future we won’t need to worry about the heat death of the universe, it will become harder and harder to avoid ever expanding black holes and it will all end in a Big Gulp.

[@johnscanlon8467]

Remember Frank Tipler's fervent wish that all the energy of the universe will eventually, just before the Big Crunch, end up in a single black hole, where somebody (for reasons, duh) will inevitably spend their time running a simulation of Frank (and everyone else) experiencing eternal cosmic bliss? Not that that was ever going to happen... but yeah, it looks more and more like that's not going to happen.

[@boba2783]

So dark energy escapes from the gravity of a black hole?

[@Ludak021]

There was mass for black holes to consume. They also consumed the light and everything else before it had a chance to reach us 9 billion years later to observe.

[@mrdraw2087]

This is probably the most interesting science video I've ever seen. So, if I understand it correctly, the expanding universe causes black holes to grow. Does this, in turn, cause the universe to grow further, creating a positive feedback loop? Does that mean that eventually the entire observable universe will be swallowed by an ever-growing black hole? That's kinda depressing. But then what causes the expansion of the universe in the first place? And how can black holes convert mass, with positive gravity, into dark energy with essentially negative gravity?

[@nicks4081]

Thank you greatvideo \ l !

[@bentationfunkiloglio]

Enjoyed the video. However something seemed a bit off. It was 90% background and 10% new/interesting information. More emphasis on the new and interesting would've been appreciated.

[@n.w.1803]

A quick thought on Universal expansion: Maybe this isn't the place to ask, but if I may, another KZbin video has recently shown us that gravity itself is, as has long been wondered, limited in its propagation by the speed of light. In other words, that gravitational waves, or ripples in spacetime, if you prefer, travel at or near lightspeed. So then..if the Universe is indeed larger--maybe much larger--than our current horizon of 14 billion or so lightyears would suggest, perhaps gravity is failing to arrest expansion simply because the Universe is out of reach? Even if the conglomerate mass of everything were sufficient to slow or contract the cosmos, I mean, maybe it fails to do so simply because there isn't sufficient time for gravity to work; that Universal expansion has already outrun, if you will, gravity's ability to catch up. This doesn't do much to explain how expansion came to be in the first place, I guess, but if the initial phases were faster that 'c' , then maybe the stage was set for an infinite expanse..?

[@timothy8426]

If you consider cold resistance of space itself devoid of thermaldynamics, dark energy, then yes. These bubbles expand under extreme pressure of thermaldynamics. Like Atoms expand under extreme pressure. Hydrogen under extreme pressure expands cold resistance into helium under extreme pressure to equalization of pressure. Force of pressure is heat. Mass occupies space as space itself. Cold resistance is equal to mass. Mass falls at the same rate of resistance to its redirected thermaldynamics within it in equalization to pressure. All mass is neutralized resistance within and is in quantum magnetic fields of forced pressure cycling circulation patterns in equalization to resistance. Repulsion and propulsion are the two states of thermaldynamics in space itself. Cold resistance and thermaldynamics coexist as opposed force. Heat is the cosmic speed limit in resistance to cold space as Frequencies singularities outside of entanglement of mass. Conservation of maximum momentum velocity in resistance is constant cosmic speed limit in and out of entanglement. Force of pressure is known as weight in mass. Table of elements proves hypothesis. Heat pressure expands cold resistance into equalization of pressure in resistance to repulsion of pressure. Density can't exceed resistance within it. Stars don't collapse. They expell their thermaldynamics outward into space towards the weakest point of resistance. Proximity mass is the weakest point of resistance. Circulation patterns are formed around these bubbles of pure fabric of space itself devoid of thermaldynamics. A generator is the event horizon. Proximity mass is repelled towards the greater mass of neutralized resistance within. As proximity mass collects equalization increases. Resistance increases as mass accumulates. No gravity. No electrons. Heat flow. Magnets repel and propel. Bonding power of atomic strength of unification of unidirectional flow cycling thermaldynamics in magnetic fields of forced pressure. Pressure against cold resistance increases resistance. Hydrogen expands into helium under extreme pressure. More thermaldynamics flowing, more repulsion equalization as cold space itself. Mass moving through space as space itself point to point interactions between forward momentum and exchanging thermaldynamics and cold resistance.

[@thejll]

Lovely floating droplet at approx. 5: 59 - thin layer of air separate the drop from the liquid.

[@chrissears9912]

Fantastic video!! Has uniformity of dark energy been measured? Is it concentrated around black holes?

[@JamesSmith-fz7qk]

It can’t be measured yet… and nobody knows what it is. There are only theories.

[@Getoutmeswamp]

How could something with such a strong gravitational pull cause the expansion of the universe?

[@zorrothomas8641]

Could black holes cause the expansion, technically black holes are infinite point, so that doesn’t make sense, that energy has to go somewhere, so why not into the universe, the universe expands faster with each new black hole, as it try’s to bring itself to a singularity, which instead the universe never allows that and continues to expand faster to compensate for it, as more black holes come and as they grow bigger, the universe in turn will increase in size and speed, will only slow down if the black holes just suddenly stopped, best way to visualize it, is to think of a balloon, and a black hole as it’s opening, fill the hole with water and the balloon will expand everywhere, the more holes you add to the balloon with each hole adding water will only increase the rate of the expansion of the balloon. The idea that a black hole creates a singularity or a pocket universe are just too far fetched, this theory actually has common sense to it, but the universe doesn’t care about common sense.

[@nosuchthing8]

But dark energy is a force that pushes matter around. Why would black holes, that only attract, be a source of dark energy?

[@Hotsource]

Be interested to hear what Penrose makes of this.

[@chefdimi115]

You put a balloon with some air in a box slowly remove the air and as the pressure reduces the more the balloon expands. If our universe is a balloon of matter surrounded by nothing it will expand the greater the surface area the faster it expands. That's my theory.

[@chaos6876]

I thought the universe was expanding at the speed of light - the fastest speed that can be achieved? This speed should be constant? However the matter/galaxies may be increasing in speed? I think they have found an interesting relationship between black hole mass and expansion of universe, but I dont think the conclusion is correct. I suspect what has been found is a relationship between increasing gravity , and its corresponding antigravitational effect which results in a greater push over greater distances. Antigravity is required to balance the increase in gravitational potential energy which is a negative quantity and thus maintains compliance with the first law of thermodynamics. Not sure how the current proposal of increasing black hole mass and thus energy is explained in the proposed theory? If black holes create dark energy how is this explained in terms of themodynamics? Will be interested to see the final,outcome of this research.

[@larscarter7406]

Maybe a black hole is like a fire that uses matter around it and changes it into dark matter and dark energy? Eventually it just burns out.

[@SaiconKim-ib4mr]

You are right, AGN is the source of dark energy. All motion in the universe is simply the process of thermal equilibrium between different regions of dark matter. Dark matter consists of invisible particles. They never attract but vibrate and repel each other. The repulsive force is proportional to their temperature. Hot dark matter (the so-called dark energy) expands to contribute to the formation of the cooling down cosmic voids. Cold dark matter are contracted (that causes the red-shift quantization). In contracted regions there is compressive power in the form of potential waves (the invisible origin of all fundamental forces) that supply energy for the local, "transitory" negative-entropy evolution, beginning with the formation of "ordinary" matter. When vibrating particles are compressed towards each other, they will turn around each other to fight against the universe and become a visible particle that comprises of 2 opposing forces: the vibrating (uncertainty and superposition) repulsive force of the visible particle in the center, and the compressive force of the potential waves all around in the invisible matter, spreading out into the outer space. The intensity of the potential waves determines the so-called "mass" of the object, and any bystander in the "field" will be pushed towards the object. Matter is gathered to form celestial bodies and cosmic structures. The heat of cold regions increases gradually with shining stars and successive explosions (novae) until the final explosion: the "quasar tsunami". Each AGN is virtually a big crunch and big bounch, it propels very hot dark matter (maybe thousands billion degree) with strong winds (maybe faster than the speed of light) into the outer space to contribute to the formation of cosmic voids, beginning a new cycle. The cycles of the universe will be of smaller amplitudes and when the entropy attains the highest possible value and there is no energy exchange with other universe, all motion of the universe including life and evolution will finally stop, time also stops, but the energy of the universe in dark matter is conserved, space still exists.

[@mikul_]

Could gravity waves have anything to do with it? I mean Hawking's radiation feels a bit to weak.

[@crazieeez]

I think black hole may contribute a little to dark energy. There aren't enough black holes to contribute the totality of dark energy. I think the temperature decline causes space to expand similar to freezing water to ice, volume expands to accommodate for ordered states of H2O. Space has units and configurations. The question is what causes space to become ordered for its expansion?

[@joshcooper6465]

Ok.. so like.. the rate of expansion is a function of time.. and the innards of a blackhole are supposedly existing "in the past" could the two things not be related

Dear Reader, Is it totally besides reality'' , when you accept the possibility that we don't live in one universe, but in at least two universes; one universe outside the black holes, where matter is in shortage and information is in abundance, and one universe of sub-atomic particles, where matter is never to show it's basis building blocks and information/organisation is insufficient (so relativity is the best we have to deal with)? And can black holes be the one way bridges between both universes? Letting through energy (matter=energy), without characteristics (information/organisation deficit), known as black energy, from the inside out, and letting matter in, but keeping information at the edge, so deconstructing it to sub-atomic semi-matter for the second universe? In the same thought experiment dark matter can be 'deinformationalized' matter from a previous universe, that has gone the way of de-organisation (100% entropy) all the way to the end. And now can't interact with our present universe, acting out in the same playing field (guided by the higgs-boson field of the previous universe). Just some thoughts. Michel F. van den Brun Dutch Philosopher

[@mbmurphy777]

Are the black holes consuming dark matter rather than stellar material? Is that why they continue to gain mass?

[@johntaylor2683]

If they are the source of dark energy, which is negaive energy, they must consume positive energy and so grow, to make the energy balance, a thought.

[@sanjuansteve]

Do most physicists agree that black holes are simply super dense spheres of mass not unlike neutron stars whose neutrons are touching neutrons with no apparent motion, black holes have another level of gravity and density that has the quarks and gluons pressed together with no remaining apparent motion or vibrations at all that have become dense enough that their event horizon diameter exceeds the sphere’s diameter, going black from our view?

[@basildaoust2821]

OK, I heard the words, did I understand them, unlikely, but you have two galaxies that are as showing around 10:06 and the blackholes are different sizes. I ask so what? Why should you expect that BH1 and BH2 were the same sizes at the birth of the galaxy, and why couldn't one of the BH have eaten another BH which made it bigger? I get the feeling space science is a lot about guessing.

[@drunkbeaverproductions]

a lot of space science is about writing papers to get more grants... if you answer it all in the first paper you write your grant money dries up...

[@KieranDevine]

Black hole + hawking radiation = infinite universe filled with mostly matter, as opposed to antimatter.

[@TomTom-rh5gk]

Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Gravity is an inward force and the produces an outward force called "explanation".

[@Etheralstew]

Wrong. There is nowhere near enough black holes to be the 'source' of dark energy. One of many sources? Maybe. Regardless, that's not what the paper was saying anyway.

[@RedneckRepairs]

All those references to "tiny", "pinpoint", and "singularity" are very misleading. The core of a black hole needs only be smaller than the event horizon. Even the largest (most dense) neutron stars generate an internal event horizon near the core, and they are decidedly not what is commonly defined as a "black hole". (more below) It is likely that all black holes actually are, are quark stars..neutron stars crunched own to the next level. It is important to note that measurements of distance, length, volume, etc, are somewhat meaningless within a black hole, as they draw a quantity of space time inside the event horizon upon formation, and as they accrete more mass. There is literally more room on the inside, than is visually observable from the outside (if measuring the event horizon's diameter)...much like Dr Who's Police Box, for lack of a better metaphor.

[@eyejswije8860]

14:50 how to feel good about a dying universe

[@RAVENBIRD88]

Close, but no cigar. 😓

[@willyouwright]

Black holes could be eating space. Thus it's not that space is expanding more that space is being stretched by pulled apart by black holes around the universe.

[@joerogers3473]

Inventor of Hubble bubble gum. That's naughty and hilarious simultaneously.

[@marcomattano3705]

If anyone can solve how this mechnism work, it will be an unbeatable candidate for a Nobel Prize

[@popquizzz]

I realize it is much more effective to produce papers on empirical data that can be rationally hypothesized, but why do we restrict our imagination in many of these records to standard Einsteinian physics? Since there is an underlying observation that expansion is occurring everywhere but is not experienced insofar to the local observer in their local galaxy or local group and that this should be relatively easy to establish as proof right here in the Milky Way? I'm not saying that I'm not buying it, but I would rather live in a universe that did not have a theoretical speed limit, and where this expansion may be the effect of some field the opposite of gravity that is leaking into our universe and may be accelerating the Aether of spacetime, but its effects are only dispersed in the emptiness of a conglomeration of matter. In other words, can we measure the effectiveness of the Hubble constant is areas where more baryonic matter is vs. less baryonic matter?

[@omsingharjit]

They are coming very close to my theory no joking There's also Relation between Dark matter , dark energy and the cause of BigBang In my theory .

[@JanPBtest]

To my nose dark matter smells just like aether in the pre-relativity days. IOW, a kludge, with an ever-increasing number of tuning knobs attached to it, designed solely to save an incomplete theory (in this case: the classic GR). What's needed, instead, is something like Einstein did in 1905: change the paradigm so that, first of all, GR and QM are properly married together. Without it, it's going to be the never-ending aether-like chase, magnified by the new James Webb data.

[@ThinkTank255]

This is actual cosmology and it shouldn't have taken so long for cosmologists to find these results.

[@lennyfrombrooklyn]

Creating black holes in the lab is a bad idea. It should literally never be done.

[@roosh2927]

I’m sorry, did you say you’re a physicist but aren’t familiar with something as well-known as Hawking Radiation?

[@Cook2430]

We're in a black hole. And the black holes in our galaxy, all contain other galaxies, which have their own black holes that contain more galaxies. We are infinite.

[@drunkbeaverproductions]

ok, im not a PhD Physicist or anything... but if we are looking at black holes billions of light years away, a) there was a LOT of medium to be turned into UberMassive stars that only lasted a few hundred thousands of years and then boom, Supermassive blackholes and those Supermassive Blackholes would have its own shell AND the 70F degree soup that was plentiful... how much of that early mass would we not see due to the event horizon and would be eventually reaching the singularity over our (relative) time of billions of years (increasing mass) even though they are seen as in an empty core to us... and b) it was my understanding that "Dark Energy" occurs OUTSIDE OF gravitationally bound systems ONLY, a black hole is the CENTER of its own gravitationally bound system so thus how could it be the mechanism for a phenomenon occurring in the non gravitationally bound void???... finally c) SN1A candles are being found to be less accurate than we first believed (Cosmological Crisis) and Cephids seem to be more accurate... at the distance of elliptical galaxies we would not be able to pick those out.... I am a layperson and i find some seriously uninvestigated variables that need to be fleshed out before this hypothesis could become a scientific theory...

[@craigfowler7098]

I studied degree level physics over thirty years ago and always thought black holes might have something to do with the expanding universe. For me this is an exciting development, great time to be alive.

[@noegojimmy]

But what is the critical point? What was before the first black hole? Was Universe static? Was it collapsing?

[@craigfowler7098]

@@RockBrentwood Yes we all can be very precise with language, that is what I meant. True that the accelerating expansion was not confirmed until 1998, but there was definitely discussions of that nature around that time, certainly at my university.

[@alastorgdl]

@@craigfowler7098 Of course you don't find strange that these videos about dark matter and universe expansion are all over the place now that JWST has confirmed standard model AND BIG BANG are a scam

[@WildFungus]

I thought that listening to PBS space time, the larger the mass the larger the impact of its gravitic field which would cause expansion of orbital range, which would drive wider ranges. As a complete non educated I've watched a lot of stuff like this and I honestly think both of them are just 'gravitic effects'

[@jayrenee378]

I'm calling it. Every black hole is a different universe. We are in a black hole.

[@Willy_Warmer]

That’d be pretty cool. You could also say that a black hole that is growing is the universe in that black hole expanding, or rather the growth of black hole by consuming shit makes the universe grow, and towards the end of the universe the black hole is in and the black holes life time, when it starts collapsing, the universe in it starts dying. That would also probably mean that there would be a infinite loop of universes, all following relatively the same time line and living and dying right after one another.

[@cosyneproject]

This is quite a common idea and has been around for some time. I think it's very possible.

[@andypayne2743]

The observable universe would be inside the event horizon.

[@victorbellew3759]

Scientists calculated all the matter in the observable universe if it were compressed to a black hole would have an event horizon larger than the observable universe.

[@cosyneproject]

@Victor Bellew and the key word is 'observable' there - the unobservable universe is thought to be enormously larger than the observable one.

[@DrBenMiles]

Black holes... dark energy... I guess it should have been obvious from the start. Feels to me like there are some holes in this as an idea. I'm left with a sentiment of, "ok, but how?" What do you think?

[@rabinderkoul1577]

Dark energy is not a consequent of black holes. Blackhole evaporation emits regular energy articles. Not dark energy.

[@rabinderkoul1577]

@@arunjoy8151 what if the universe is in the mouth of single toothed. Moron?

[@kylelochlann5053]

There isn't any "but how" - not even remotely. Presumably, they're arguing that because the mass of a black hole depends upon the boundary conditions at infinity and for our universe we don't have asymptotic flatness at infinity but an asymptotically de Sitter spacetime at timelike infinity that this then implies a dark energy content of a black hole. However there is no such calculation and I'm wondering if I may be giving them more credit than they deserve. What it looks like, at least over a superficial reading of the paper, is that this is nothing more than them arguing that if these new exotic dark energy black holes exist, and if they scale up in proportion to the cosmological scale factor then when averaging the dark energy density over sufficiently large volume then the total dark energy density is a constant - but this doesn't tell us very much (and I may not be giving them enough credit in this case).

[@theOrionsarms]

It seems obvious, if you consider the fabric of spacetime as a sheet stretched by black holes then the sheet between black holes becomes thinner when black holes sink into the fabric of spacetime, and eventually in the space between galaxies have a negative curvature start to blow up itself.

[@theOrionsarms]

@@arunjoy8151 imagine the fabric of spacetime as a rubber sheet floating on the water above a swimming pool, when you walk on it your feet sink in it but the water below make the rest of the sheets to inflate.

[@Calaban619]

In a half asleep dream imagining, I pictured this: Blackholes not only Frame drag the "grid" of spacetime around in a kind of torque, they also Frame SUCK the spacetime inward as well. So the expansion of spacetime is the pulling of the 'sheets' down each big black hole- so the 'grid' between black holes gets stretched, and thats the redshift we see, as opposed to any actual expansion.

[@ashleysmith9516]

That's really interesting!

[@gloowacz]

I had this idea for years. Since the observable universe is just a tiny part of the entierty, the cumulative effect from the sum of all black holes (majority of which are outside what we can observe) would create an effect that, when observed from our cosmological bubble, looks like expanding space. I do not have access to a theoretical physicist to tell me how is that idea wrong and I am sure it must be right? Since the idea is so simple, I'm sure they thought of it, and then discarded it, otherwise it would be mentioned somewhere...

[@kirkhunter146]

If that was the case the Universe would be contracting instead of expanding

[@gloowacz]

@@kirkhunter146 not if the initial velocity of matter in the universe was past escpae velocity from the universe. And then, the 'inner" black holes are accelerated outwards, but not by gravity but by the fact that space itself is accelerating outwards. At some point a given inner black hole overtakes outer ones, and becomes speeding up the formerly outer ones, who accelerate and overtake again, ad infitum.

[@poodlescone9700]

The implications are incredible. That means there is a way to use matter to power space time motion which means an Alcumbierre drive is feasible.

[@JanPBtest]

It's not feasible because the Alcubierre drive requires matter of negative energy density and in the amounts, pressures, and temperatures, and momenta approaching those of the inside of a neutron star. So not only nonexistent but also quite impractical 🙂

[@SpecialEDy]

The universe isn't expanding, the speed of light is slowing down. You're measuring distance with the speed of light, and making the absurd assumption that velocity is constant but distance is not. Velocity = Distance / Time Distance, Time, and Velocity, none of them can be assumed to be constant. For any one to change, the law of conservation of energy must be violated. For two to change, no laws need to be broken.

[@richarddeese1991]

Thanks. Very interesting. It is perhaps important to keep in mind that light [EM radiation of all types] does add energy density to a black hole. So it would seem that, even if a black hole isn't actively feeding, all the EM radiation out there would still increase it's size / mass. Witness the Kugel blitz. Over billions of years this would (presumably) add up. Of course, other things could be going on, too. I've been thinking a lot lately that the simplest explanation for dark energy ought to have something to do with gravitation, but black holes themselves hadn't entered my mind. It'll be fun to follow this. tavi.

[@DrBenMiles]

Absolutely, worth thinking about 👍 i don't have a good feel for the amount this would contribute, but it will contribute some part at least

[@demoa0414]

That's interesting because over billions of years the amount of light entering a black hole will be huge so it could be a way to explain this mass gain ,i really encourage you to do some research on that you could find something interesting,for me i spent the last month working on the idea that black holes are related to the expansion of the universe my aim at the start was to see if they were related by trying to get some mesures on hubble's constant but in the way i thought of what if the black holes were resolving matter into energy and that this energy is causing the universe to expand it was exiting but when they released the paper last weak it was a bit disappointing because the idea was no longer new😂

[@AltMarc]

How much, does light pressure (photon-impulse transmission on everything it hits) account for the expansion of the universe? Isn't vacuum energy just that light pressure around us? ( I recall that idea about two parallel plates being so close that light can only push from the outside of the plates) The black holes being the engine of space time makes even more sense, when you take the viewpoint from the universe (itself not expanding) where everything inside (galaxies to the rulers) is shrinking.... caused by black holes.

[@cressidacassini1363]

My sis and I have always only thought of this as the conclusion, but now that its with us... it almost feels like there should be more it.. this just can't be it

[@mmo4754]

I came up with this idea myself about a year ago or more, though it wasn't as fleshed out and I did not really have theory or evidence to back it up. I think I may have even left some comments on some videos about it the idea of the two being connected.

[@SilasVanBuren]

The exact same thing happened to me, I've been talking about this on discord for the past two years and was laughed at.

[@jwplatt9233]

Sabine Hossenfelder pooh-poohs this in her latest Science News video, saying "I really think physicists keep screwing themselves over by calling this [Cosmological] constant Dark Energy" and "It seems likely to me that soon enough someone else will come up with a perfectly mundane explanation for the data and you'll never hear of this idea again." I give her more credence and weight than that latest headline-grabber.

[@cohomologygroup]

This result reminds me a lot of Leonard Susskind's ideas about ER=EPR. If the Einstein-Rosen Bridge leading from the event horizon to the singularity is expanding as the black hole ages, then this created spacetime in the neck of the black hole would contain the same vacuum energy as in the rest of the expanding universe. In other words, rather than black holes' increasing mass being the cause of dark energy, might this instead show they share the same cause: vacuum energy?

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Likely a cyclic thing. QV feeds dark energy, black holes feed the QV and when all matter is gone, evaporate until the universe is devoid of gravity. Spacetime, without resistance, expands at infinite speed -> new big bang (Penrose conformal cyclic cosmology). rinse, repeat.

[@outerrealm]

The Einstein-Brooklyn bridge leads to Williamsburg

[@ChaineYTXF]

Susskind best idea about ER = EPR (suggested during one of his classes) is to set P equal to 1. True genius.

[@JohnVKaravitis]

English, please.

[@jarirepo1172]

I have been always wondering how the universe started to expand in the first place, how could there be inflation etc. But if concentrated mass causes more space to form, then it is only natural for it to happen, isn't it? Well, I am probably way over my head here anyway...

[@riassslave558]

this was my first time checking out both your channel & your content; truly I am so grateful that the algorithm allowed me to stumble upon your neck of the KZbin forest because so often I get the feeling that both the algorithm + KZbin are secretly plotting ways to either drive ppl to new even more insane levels of insidiousness by putting only the fringyest of fringe theory-styled programing that while i admit that can be entertaining..., ultimately though it's not a very worthwhile undertaking in most situations & it would become a choice between watching something just to kill some time or being pleasantly surprised by what the algorithm has dished out to me at the just the right time when i'm in just the right kind of receptive headspace so as to actually harken unto your very informative yet at the same time completely entertaining proving that once again deeply intense concepts don't have to be presented in a stark, sterile & mind-numbingly overbearing in tone to the point of feeling as if you don't adhere to what the content creator is providing; well then damned be ye all , the fact you've found a way to remove the pretensions that seem somehow inherent in the subject matter on a molecular level therefore the one that presents these concepts, ideas & theories must also be , well you & a few other amazingly gifted individuals on this platform choose to do these things your own way & at your own pace....Bravo & kudos ! Stumbling onto this video turned a blaise day into a now super-charged & most awesome day ...thanx for that...& i'm looking forward to future uploads¬KEEP UP THE GREAT JOB YOU'RE DOING until next time L8rsk8r🛹😋🤘

[@society_for_praising_appli6261]

blase - turn spellcheck OF while skating away on thin ice uv new day. Kudos and bravo echoed!

[@Calikid331]

If black holes contain vacuum energy, doesn't this also help explain what we think is dark matter as well? Could it be that they have way more mass/energy than we initially thought?

[@robheusd]

Same idea here. If dark energy is not uniformly spread out over all of space, but concentrated within black holes, we can assume that the rate of expansion of space is dependent on distance - further away, less space expansion. It means that stars further away from the black hole have less "work" to do to overcome the expansion of space, hence they will show up as moving faster then though. Perhaps also, the gravitational constant is dependent on distance from the black hole (and time).

[@WildFungus]

it sounds like, this is going to make dark matter and dark energy become understandable things that aren't dark any more (eventually), are the 'same thing' and aren't energy or mass.

[@danthesquirrel]

My first attempt at an educational path was in physics and the link between black holes and dark energy makes so much sense and has such a "truthiness" feel to it for me that this does not bode well for the hypothesis. My speculations for what scientists will find on the quantum realm is currently at 100% incorrect compared to chimpanzees randomly hitting yes or no buttons getting at least 50% right. I did find this entertaining and for whatever it is worth it all seems reasonable to me.

[@smlanka4u]

Probably, galaxies expand into space and space comes between them to balance the density of space between galaxies. And it shows that we are living in an island universe.

[@PrayTellGaming]

This has been my own theory on the universe, which is that black holes are recycling machines, breaking down matter into its most basic form and spitting it out back into something that becomes nebulae, stars, star systems, galaxies, and once again black holes.

[@austinhoag5130]

That’s not what this theory is saying. What you’re describing is exactly what supernova do, though! What this theory is saying is that somehow the matter engulfed in a black hole is converted into energy, not more matter of a different kind.

[@StephenGoodfellow]

With an unblemished record of experimental failure to find anything remotely resembling Dark Energy or Dark Matter, we can now confidently link them together with black holes, a cosmic phenomenon the basis of which is pure gravitational math with no consideration to super hot plasma configurations. Cosmologists, full speed ahead!

[@franepoljak9605]

Could a point of space in the middle of galaxies/galaxy clusters moving away from each other, in the moment when it's observable universe becomes completely "empty", be an origin of a new big bang? And, as the expanding is accelerating, it could also explain the rapid inflation period after a big bang?

[@dark7element]

This is not far off from Penrose's "conformal cyclical cosmology" theory.

[@terrytatum2487]

I happened to read this Farrah et al. observational paper on the same day as its online publication. I emailed Farrah that evening (never getting no reply) that a more likely theoretical explanation would not be that black holes trap dark energy WITHIN, but rather that they likely RADIATE dark energy outward while absorbing positive energy inward from "splitting the vacuum" near the BH horizon. My theoretical paper, first submitted to ApJ in the last week of February, was nearly identical to the one I published today (4/18/2023) in Journal of Modern Physics (also peer-reviewed), entitled "How Dark Energy Might Be Produced By Black Holes". It attempts to tackle the possible mechanism in a way similar to the Hawking radiation approach, only with the energy sign of the absorbed particle reversed ("positive" rather than "negative"). Accordingly, this would allow ASTROPHYSICAL black holes to GROW in mass-energy while radiating negative energy into the outer vacuum. I refer to this novel mechanism as "black hole dark energy radiation." Naturally, more observational data is necessary to sort these things out, but my approach, based also partly upon Dirac's mathematical formalism and FSC, has a nice symmetry to it. Important advances in physical theories often do. Sometimes the gatekeeper journals are slow to recognize important new ideas. I wonder why? Perhaps E.V. needs to take a rest.🙂

[@gene8945]

What does create quantum behavior which determines (sic) Heisenberg law, Hawkins radiation, vacuum energy, basically everything that drives the expansion, etc? what is your "expansion energy" that black holes generate out of matter? Dr. Miller, you mentioned that black holes grow in the dead galaxies, but with what??? Where do they get matter to break down into smth as authors of that article hypothesized? The only conclusion here is that this coupling constant shows correlation, and not causation)

[@ConnoisseurOfExistence]

I didn't get anything... If there's energy in the empty space, why wouldn't it cause regular attractive gravity, rather than repulsive dark energy? Whouldn't it has to be negative in value to cause repulsion? Accretion isn't the only process by which black holes accumulate mass, but also mergers between black holes and probably between black holes and neutron stars. If black holes increase their mass simply with the expansion of the universe, without acquiring it from infalling matter or black hole mergers, that would mean that they create mass out of nothing. But even if so, that new mass will only create more attractive gravity, not repulsion. This doesn't make any sense...

[@paulmichaelfreedman8334]

Another possibility assumes inflation actually happened. The big bang process spontaneously created black holes where spacetime literally tore open due to the extreme rate of expansion. The energy in the big bang would have been more than enough to create such rips in spacetime. No mass needed, just energy which resides in the extreme curvature of spacetime. As these black holes would have gulped down gargantuan amounts of energy due to the extreme density, dark energy would have gotten a start boost, fueling inflation until the universe was large enough that black holes became limited in their consumption. Just thinking from the top of my head here, love to hear counter arguments to shoot this hypothesis down.

[@johnvanderpol2]

So if I understand it is that for normal and small blackholes their mass is radiated away over time due to quatum fluctuations causing Hawking radiation. But for super massive black holes, it consumes the quantum fluctuations?

[@subjectiveperspective1730]

I'm no expert, but if you look back at "bandaid" solutions to old incorrect theories, like the lumineferous aether, dark matter and energy sure look like one. There's something we're not getting.

[@doncarlodivargas5497]

But if black holes are emitting dark energy, is the "dark energy" continuing out in space outside the galaxy? If so, how fast is it movement out in space? And how come this "wind" from the centre of an galaxy are not blowing out all matter out in the universe at the same time?

[@denzali]

I think inside all matter is locked in “dark energy” I think black holes vacuum pack this energy and redistribute it. But I also feel like matter in the physical dimension displaces dark energy like ice in a glass- same stuff but in a different modality. So same stuff but taking up a different volume. That’s what my heart tells me anyway 😂

[@harrywoods9784]

Just a thought, Dark energy and the truer nature of a quantum vacuum , maybe one in the same. Some of our assumptions may be revised in the near future. We live in interesting times.🤔IMO

[@Davidutul]

Interesting theory but i have a question for it. How would the universe expands in it's early ages, before any black hole would apear,or even after a few apear in some galaxies ?