Hawking Radiation explained simply, or How black holes explode!

[@ArvinAsh]

Let me address a common question that many of you have, which is (I'm paraphrasing), "Why does only the negative energy particle get absorbed, shouldn't negative and positive energy particles be absorbed equally?" First let's clarify that both virtual particles - matter and antimatter have positive energy. They just have opposite charges. Either can get absorbed by black holes. From the perspective of someone watching far away from the black hole, the escaping particle has positive energy. In order to balance the equations via the principle of conservation of energy, the particle that gets absorbed must have negative energy. When a virtual particle escapes the black hole, it effectively become a "real" particle with positive energy. When this happens, its partner must have negative energy due to energy conservation. The black hole shrinks in mass because absorption of negative energy is the same thing as losing mass. However, don't take this too seriously because although this is a popular way of illustrating Hawking radiation (even Hawking tells this same story in his book, "A Brief History of Time"), it is not quite what is really happening. It is a close enough approximation. Hawking's 1974 paper really talks about a mechanism that is closer to my second explanation in the video. It is understandable why Hawking never tried to explain the actual more precise mechanism. It is very difficult to convey without getting into advanced physics. A simplification of that mechanism is this: There are no particles (See my video on QFT - quantum field theory). What we really have is a quantum wave function of the fields near a black hole. This wave function is constantly evolving. This function evolves into a black hole with slightly less mass, and a bunch of particles that move away from it in all directions equally. This is perceived as the black hole having a "temperature" analogous to a black body in classical thermodynamics. Physicist Sean Carroll of Caltech describes this as not being much different than an atom whose electrons have a bit of extra energy which drop down to a lower energy state by emitting photons. Hope that helps. Thanks for watching my friends.

[@jannmutube]

------ > If I remember correctly, a neutrino is an effect /property of decay. It does seem logical that what is left of the core of a neutron star would continue to decay and that matter or energy would be released. However, where's the empirical scientific evidence that atomic waves and particles can re-enter quantum space at all? How can a wave or particle be Un-observed? Once a wave becomes a particle, how can it become a wave again if particles don't exist in quantum space? What happens when time equals 0 in the Heisenberg formula? Can zero time, energy, and space (shape) still equal an uncertain (any) distance? ----- > If a star is captured by a black hole, it would have energy to burn. Don't neutron star black holes emit gamma rays from north and south of their spin? My understanding is that atoms don't emit photons in nature, except in the process of hydrogen fusion (which produces helium). My understanding is that nuclear fission is not a natural process (and results in radioactive daughter particles ). Do black holes spin clockwise and counterclockwise within the same black hole? If I remember correctly, WMAP didn't record any black holes in the baby universe. Is there any evidence that the universe is spinning? Is gravity, the strong and electroweak force in the unified field theory considered an UN-obesrved black hole in quantum space?. I never heard that electrons emit photons. My understanding is that plasma(a photon) is released from the atom's nucleus or the quanta when an atom is split. In a particle accelerator, protons are denuded of their electrons so that they can be spun at near the speed of light. So, it seems that atoms would loose their electrons at speeds equal to or greater than the speed of light. In chemistry, every element is defined by the number of its protons and electrons. Apparently, atomic matter can't travel at the speed of light. Neither can a proton, only photons. In chemistry, it is said that neutrons don't have a charge. So, how do they stay together at all? If they can penetrate into quantum space, why aren't they diffused throughout the entire universe of subspace? chem.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Introductory_Chemistry/Map%3A_Introductory_Chemistry_(Tro)/04%3A_Atoms_and_Elements/4.03%3A_The_Properties_of_Protons%2C_Neutrons%2C_and_Electrons

[@69ElChistoso]

I was just about to ask that very question. Actually, I did ask it, and deleted it after reading this. Thanks.

[@rowan8877]

how come my consciousness doesn't want me to know where it came from?

[@mahadahmedbaloch]

I have that book!

[@mahadahmedbaloch]

So the radiating particle will always be positive energy and regular matter

[@Incestrul_Lust]

This dude is the best at explaining difficult subjects

[@zugravuandrei9642]

Dude, this is not a dude... you're a dude, dude... this is a nerd/geek GOD

[@Nick6Michael]

@@zugravuandrei9642 Dude, why don't you dudes shut up

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. See you in the next video.

[@hupekyser]

@@ArvinAsh you really should have said.... Thanks my dude. Come on Arvin play along. 😂

[@ArvinAsh]

@@hupekyser Haha...I'm not cool enough to say "dude." I think viewers would cringe.

[@emiliomencia7429]

This is not talking about science news (99% of the science youtubers), this is a scientific explanation based on second law of thermodynamics. It's a big difference

[@jellymop]

J Hankins well nothing is proven. It’s all theory but the more we theorize and the more we’re wrong, the closer we will get to the truth. Still fascinating.

[@CyanUK]

@@jjphank We don't need to see a black hole directly when we can see that somehow an "empty space" is having such huge gravitational effects on everything around it

[@Xbob42]

@@jjphank Saw the first sentence of your first reply and knew you'd be a Bible-thumping dipshit. Yay for predictable gibberish!

[@robblerouser5657]

I once said to my old Physics teacher, "Hello, what's new?" He said,"Entropy."

[@1mol831]

I still can’t get my mind around negative energy and borrowed energy.

[@micahconnor8954]

@@1mol831 crazy how everything in the universe makes so much yet so little sense, but the universe does it all anyways, and we're lucky enough to get to be in awe of it

[@Guy-z6o]

Yup the older it gets the newer it seems from one perspective.

[@5dgisd528]

One of my favorite topics, from my favorite science KZbin creator - Win!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. See you in the next video.

[@sebastianclarke2441]

Wow Arvin you did it again! You took one of the most complicated theories in physics and somehow made it digestible. There are very few videos that successfully communicate the more fleshed out version of this theory and once again you've excelled above all! Congrats on making it into my fave list for the third time and thank you so very much for an astoundingly informative and enjoyable video!!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. Glad you enjoyed it.

[@ShubhamShubhra]

I thank KZbin's algorithm to direct me to your channel. While many channels try to dumb things down to cater to a wider audience, you keep the math there. That means you give your general audience much more credit and you deserve much love for it. Although, I have a bachelor's in engineering, I didn't really had working knowledge of so many of the things you talk about while treating your audience as adults with a functioning brain. This is a breath of fresh air. Thank you.

[@RohitKumar-tc7vz]

Your explanation is so cool that even a high school can understand and get interested towards these concepts. In future you may be one of the reason behind some major discovery because definitely some students will get so much interested seeing your video and pursue career in this field and it may happen to be future nobel laureate.

[@PlanetFrosty]

Excellent discussion of a complex issue. Hawking Radiation is a challenging concept.

[@infantry630]

I watched two other videos before I found this one. The two other videos left me just as confused as I was before I started them. Then I watched this one, and it *clicked*. I should’ve known to come to you first. I’m only a passionately curious layperson who will never have a PhD in physics, but your videos make me understand concepts that I never thought I’d *ever* understand. That helps me know the world around me better, and (more importantly) it makes me appreciate the world around me exponentially more. It sounds corny, but “thank you for this” seems woefully inadequate. Even still, thank you for all you do. It’s appreciated by so, so many of us “everyday” people that yearn to know the universe just a little bit better than we did yesterday.

[@dhoffheimerj]

One of his best yet. Thanks.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend.

[@janhavideshpande6189]

I have started not only to love/ admire but conceptually, deeply understand quantum physics because of your videos. appreciations and greetings from INDIA. keep up your good work!

[@KazimirQ7G]

12:50 - _"Almost all entropy of the universe is contained in black holes. _*_Anything outside a black hole is negligible."_* - Arvin Ash, 2020

[@Wayoutthere]

That made my brain stop working..

[@KazimirQ7G]

@@Wayoutthere That blew my mind as well.

[@KazimirQ7G]

@@jjphank I'm 34, so technically Millenial. I believe science and religion are compatible in their own way. I love science, technology, evolucionism and deep questions of nature. It's really a pitty society has been struggling to deal with both ideas. Luckly I'm ok believing in God and in The Big Bang Theory. *Sidenote:* please, keep in mind that "Theory" and "hypothesis" are different things in science. Theory means a well stablished description of nature, with a plethora of math and evidence to support it. Hypothesis are the possibilities.

[@ManiBalajiC]

I am sure what makes you think you are so wise to consider there is a GOD , GOD is oldest idea from human beings to understand universe , as time goes by we need to change not get stuck with it and bash others who are having a better understanding of the world. If you think all the words in th BIBLe are true and provides evidence for everything that there won't be an need for an scientific community at all, if you gonna consider Aliens they would still come from the UNIVERSE not outside of it unlike GOD who defies spacetime.

[@hosamfikry2924]

Your videos are mainly covering 90% of what I am interested to watch on KZbin! But your humbleness and simplification of complex topics are special. I wish your work is more reachable by more curious minds :)

[@starman2420]

This is the first Arvin Ash video I've watched. Very clear and informative, immediate subscribe. The other quality aspect of this presentation is that various perspectives are given. And just yesterday, I was wondering if black holes ever exploded, and if they are basically a homogenious sphere of super compressed pure energy. Both questions answered, thanks Arvin.

[@BrokenSymetry]

I just want to say that, I've watched a LOT of videos that tried to explain hawking radiation, and this is the best explanation I've found so far! I has a question, but i noticed you answered it in the comments. So that's all I wanted to know!

[@smitpatel6620]

Your videos are FAR BETTER THAN PBS SPACE TIME 👏

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. I think most of their videos are good, but completely incomprehensible unless you have an advanced physics background. That to me is a disservice to viewers.

[@manojbhatta765]

Pbs is more complicated to understand

[@pythagorasaurusrex9853]

I would not compare apples and pears. PBS videos are adressed to a different kind of audience than Arvin's. Both serve their own kind of viewers.

[@smitpatel6620]

@@pythagorasaurusrex9853 but any video from anyone should be understandable for anyone. PBS is not doing any quiz type thing on video. If video can't satisfy its audience then it is not as worthy as you think. You can read comments below every video of PBS

[@stephenzhao5809]

2:27 2nd Law of black hole mechanics: In any natural process, the surface area of the event horizon of a black hole always increases, or remains constant. It never decreases. vs 2nd Law of Thermodynamics: In any natural process, the entropy of a closed system always increases or remains constant, it never decreases. 3rd law, Thermodynamics: Can't reach zero temperature vs Black hole mechanics: Cant's reach zero surface gravity. 4:08 What was the mechanism he outlined that would allow balck holes to emit photons? 4:14 Virtual particles can exist if product of energy and time is less than the constant (ΔEΔt < h/4π). That is, particles can exist that violate this uncertainty principle. Virtual particles can exist if product of energy and time is less than the constant (ΔEΔt < h/4π). That is, particles can exist that violate this uncertainty principle. Violations are allowed if it happens over time such that no measurement can occur. But it's as if by not obeying this Heisenberg uncertainty principle (ΔEΔt < h/4π). the universe really doesn't register or record its existence because no measuring device would ever be able to measure this directly. A particle with some finite energy, as long as the change in time is very small, can exist. 5:38 particle/antiparticle pairs can come into existence from empty space if they annihilate each other very quickly. This is how virtual particles are formed in empty space. And space is teeming with them. Quantum foam is bubbling with particle/antiparticle creation and annihilation. Casimir effect: in which the quantum foam outside a set of two plates is greater than the pressure inside the plates, and this creates a force pushing the plates together. So this virtual particle creation and annihilation does exist, and is a central partof quantum mechanics. The severe curvature of space-time near the event (back to Hawking Radiation) 6:19 ... Mechanism of Hawking Radiation ... 7:43 ❤[BTS pp says] Two speed limits, light speed ( C = 299,792,458 m/s) & dark speed ( Δ ≤ the maximum speed in the primordial Inflationary epoch) have made reality the whole three portions entangled: Planck World (outside of an event horizon), Dirac Sea (which immerses everywhere but exists two singularities, i.e. Δ and C, similar to threshod energy), Superspace the parity (House of God). 7:45

[@blazindino9371]

Just today I wondered how a black hole actually evaporates and there you just upload. Amazing video and well explained!

[@luudest]

7:24 1. The Black hole receives negative energy by the the virtual particle and therefore it loses mass. Would you not ecpect receiving the same amount of positive by another virtual pair of particles? So both effects cancle each other out? 2. Is the virtual pair considerd to be produced at the Event Horizon or at ISCO? (innermost stable circular orbit)

[@ArvinAsh]

According the equations, only positive energy escapes, so to in keeping with energy conservation, the particle falling in must have the negative energy. Virtual pairs can be produced anywhere including within the event horizon - escaping by means of quantum tunneling.

[@luudest]

Does Earth also emit Hawking Radiation? Does every body with mass emit HR?

[@eugenebrown5827]

I love your videos and wish I had you as a professor in college.

[@jimjim3979]

The thing is that youtubers have way less knowledge but still somehow get as to the picture as prolifically as possible. Sometimes simplifying things as required as possible is the case. But academic is A DIFFERENT STORY. You are supposed to become a real scientist from there so you can't just approach the subject superficially. But still academic professors have a lot of leeway to improve.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. Thanks for watching.

[@ArvinAsh]

You might be surprised how little some professors know beyond the subject of their PhD thesis. Main issue is that teaching ability is not the primary criteria used in hiring professors at top research universities, where the emphasis is on ability to attract grants and pump out papers. In my experience, the less professors knew about a subject, the more difficult their explanations tended to be. The most knowledgeable professors made it so that every student understood.

[@randomdude9135]

@@ArvinAsh Yes, like Einstein's quote- "If you can't explain it in simple words, you don't understand it enough."

[@Nick6Michael]

@@randomdude9135 God damn man, PBS space time annoys the shit out me with their fucking thesaurus, sometimes I wonder if these idiots even know what they are talking about. I have no idea how I stumbled across Arvin Ash channel, it was probably while I was searching for a quantum entanglement video but I'm so greatful I found him, he is such a great KZbinr and explaining diffucult to understand subjects.

[@johns9864]

Question ( hopefully not too dumb): if a black hole is a puncture in space time as in 0:15, then as the black hole moves, shouldn't it expand the puncture? Does space time repair itself? Space time in a region goes back to "normal" once the black hole moves away from that region: how?

[@ArvinAsh]

Good question. "Puncture in space-time" is just a metaphor. What it means is that space-time behaves in a different way inside the black hole than outside it. It doesn't actually mean a hole, as in nothing, or no space-time there. It is just a different space time. It is really not much different than the earth or the sun moving in space - the bending of space time goes with the mass. The black hole also has a mass.

[@johns9864]

@@ArvinAsh since a black hole has mass, and is a singularity, I'm trying to understand where the mass is present? I had visualized it as a flat piece of paper getting punctured by a heavy ball and the ball falling through the 2 dimensional paper to a higher third dimension. I visualized the mass of the black hole pushing it's mass out in a higher fourth dimension . Kind of like a tesseract . Question 1 if the black hole mass were present in our dimension, then that mass density would be infinite, and is infinity not prohibited in calculations? Question 2 if my visualization of the heavy ball puncturing the paper is incorrect, then how is the tremendous mass of the black hole "handled" by it? Where does it go? Thanks.

[@JMO77UK]

@@johns9864a black hole is a finite mass in an infinitessimally small volume (singularity), giving an infinite density. These infinities just means there is something we don’t understand in our current physics. In Hawking radiation, the mass of the black hole (very) slowly evaporates so that the black hole eventually disappears.

[@peewee7848]

I liked the entropy explanation of Black Holes. So Awesome!!! Keep up the Great work! 👍

[@BladeRunner-td8be]

Quantum physics is astounding. When I hear that particles come into and out of existence all the time, I feel flabbergasted. Particles are constantly coming into and going out of existence all over the universe, and this is allowed because they annihilate each other within a specific time limit. Some particles that pop into existence around the horizon of a black hole are not permitted to destroy each other. One of them is sucked into the black hole while the other remains outside of it. In effect, this breaks the physic's laws everywhere except for what happens near the horizon of a black hole. What blew my mind was that the negatively charged photon inside the black hole makes it lose energy. At least now I understand a bit of what is going on with Hawking Radiation. Up until now, I had no idea how something could lose mass and energy if it absorbs something, mainly a particle, and if I'm honest, my understanding is not complete in this area. I do not comprehend the idea of negatively charged particles inside a black hole yet. This channel is outstanding at explaining the details of physics without the math. As always, thumb up! Cheers

[@barry7608]

Very well explained thank you, I actually understood most of it.

[@endorphinsaddict]

I've been reading books of Stephen Hawking and find that watching this video and many others of yours really helps reinforcing my understanding. Thanks so much for the efforts!

[@erikendacott9854]

Thank you for making these really interesting videos!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. Glad you like them!

[@balensyamend5404]

Describing the problems Associated with theories really help us to better understand it Thank you for that keep it up

[@Nick6Michael]

Yes, yes, exactly what I wanted to watch.

[@KineticSymphony]

This makes way more sense. It never clicked in my brain before because by the virtual particle explanation, you'd expect larger black holes with more surface area at the event horizon to emit exponentially more radiation than smaller black holes. When the opposite is true. Thanks for clarifying. :)

[@mattheww9656]

That was explained very well. Thank you.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@sang-jinri7491]

We should all be thankful to Arvin who has the empathy and the audacity to share the knowledge in layman's terms. I have seen too many book / video authors who thrive in maintaining the advanced knowledge of physics esoteric - either intentionally or due to a lack of empathy. Seriously, how many of us have tried reading Hawking's book "A Brief history of time" and come to a clear understanding? - I certainly was one of them who didn't. And yet, watching Arvin's 14-minute long video helped me understand the gist of Hawking's book.

[@michaelcornish2299]

Spot on. A nice clear explanation of this subject.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful. Thanks for watching.

[@michaelcornish2299]

@@ArvinAsh One of the hardest things is explaining complex (and often simple) things clearly. You do a great job, I am a teacher and sometimes use your videos in my lessons.

[@ArvinAsh]

@@michaelcornish2299 Wow. thanks. Comments like yours keeps me motivated to make more of these, and to make absolutely sure they are scientifically accurate.

[@michaelcornish2299]

@@ArvinAsh Credit where credit is due, keep making them. Lately I have been working to improve my understanding of many topics. My students ask so many interesting questions, it is nice to be able to answer them with help of videos like this and others.

[@cosmicadventure9184]

Everything arvin ash touches turns clear like crystal thank you so much for your generosity 🥰🥰🥰

[@handsfree1000]

How very interesting. I understand the ideas but the detail is beyond me by a order of magnitude

[@1024det]

What you said at the end reminds me of my compsci thesis, where I was building a ANN where connections had also time as a an independent variable for each connection. Professor said the system would have too much entropy that all you will get is noise from any configuration. So I can see how the black hole is just a bunch of noise without patterns to make sense of.

[@ArvinAsh]

Yep, you can think of a black hole as a region in space where the entropy is the highest it can possibly be.

[@BlackWolf6420]

Love this channel!! 💪🏻🤩

[@rkn8109]

Thank you so much Arvin, it was so needed here....!

[@rhisavbora2975]

Do you think gravity may not be quantized...I may sound stupid but how can bending of spacetime can be quantized..

[@FobbitMike]

Not stupid. General Relativity is a "classical" theory and makes the assumption that spacetime is smooth down to an arbitrarily small size. I suggest you read the book "Something Deeply Hidden" by Sean Carroll to get an idea on how spacetime and gravity my be emergent features based upon entanglement and entropy.

[@manan-543]

It's not stupid. Don't worry. One of the theories of quantum gravity which is the reconcilation of general relativity and quantum mechanics postulates the existence of graviton. We haven't actually discovered such a particle yet. There may not be a particle. There might be a different theory for quantum gravity without a particle that we don't know yet.

[@donmanley412]

I have thought this too the field that carries gravity is space time we are trapped on earth because we are born in its gravity well

[@ArvinAsh]

My hunch is that there is quantum theory of gravity waiting to be discovered. General relativity and Quantum mechanics are very successful, but they can't be the final answer.

[@primeedits840]

Precise explanation makes things interesting....great

[@levitheentity4000]

can you explain electromagnetism? •is the eletromagnetic field made of photons? •why opposed charges attract eachother? •why equal charges repeal eachother?

[@ArvinAsh]

See my video on Maxwell's equations. "why is the speed of light what it is?"

[@0blivious71]

Thanks, I know you put in a lot of time making these videos... I enjoy your videos probably the most ...

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. I appreciate that!

[@vdiitd]

10:05 Does this mean if LHC ends up creating microscopic blackholes, they will blow up with explosions?😱

[@tomkerruish2982]

Yes, but don't worry. It already creates explosions by colliding protons with antiprotons. If - and this is an extremely speculative if - it does produce miniature black holes, they will not produce any effects more energetic than those already present.

[@ArvinAsh]

No, the LHC black holes, if they get created, would have a total energy that was so low that it would not be macroscopic explosion. It would be a tiny explosion with not much energy than other particles that are being annihilated in the LHC all the time.

[@vdiitd]

@@ArvinAsh Ah, ok. Thanks for the explanation.

[@SpookyRipples9]

@6:20 Why is always anti-particle gets sucked in & not the particle by black hole at the event horizon? Didn't get this! Also @8:25 , animation shows waves are being transmitted through black hole. How is that possible?

[@fjbayt]

Try the PBS videos like this one kzbin.info/www/bejne/p4Gum2OPo7B0hNk it complements each other

[@ArvinAsh]

Antiparticles do not have negative energy. The particles that gets captured has the negative energy in order to balance conservation of energy. Waves are disrupted by the black hole, but not all get absorbed. The waves with a frequency the size of the black hole can escape.

[@frankblack1185]

Sir Rodger Penrose did the work with Stephen Hawking too.

[@SaebaRyo21]

Finally, a long awaited video that i have been desperately wanted to see has watched now. Kudos for your explanation sir as you have clearly explained all the necessary explanations about Hawking Radiation that were roaming in my head since a very long time e.g. how to measure it etc. Thank you, sire :)

[@drew2276]

Argh this has done puddled my brain. It'll grow back strong after I sit and ponder on this for awhile

[@kidamkolkoznam]

11:32 What is that beam shooting out of black hole poles? and what is actualy the shining thing that rotates around black hole?

[@ArvinAsh]

The shining thing around the black hole is matter that is spinning at very high rates around the black hole. The friction created by this super fast spinning makes the matter give off energy. But this only happens in black holes that are feeding on matter. Most black holes are not thought to be feeding. They would just be dark.

[@kidamkolkoznam]

@@ArvinAsh thanks a lot for the answers, but what is that beam shooting out from poles? It is represented in lots of pictures of black holes.

[@Shaaan]

@@kidamkolkoznam I think That's just a try to represent a 3d BH into 2d one.

[@jaikumar848]

Hi Arvin Ash ! If we isolate a black hole and keep feeding him only electrons one by one ...will black hole continues to swallow ?? Or it will stop at certain point ?

[@FobbitMike]

It will continue to "swallow."

[@jaikumar848]

@@FobbitMike what about electrostatic repulsion? ?

[@ArvinAsh]

As Mike said, there is no reason it would stop. The surface of the event horizon would keep getting bigger. But as far as I know, there is no upper bound to this.

[@jaikumar848]

@@ArvinAsh if you give pour -ve charge particle in black hole will it become -ve ? Does total charge remain conserve in black hole ??

[@Mosern1977]

@@jaikumar848 - pretty sure Black Holes is thought to have mass, electric charge and spin.

[@yendorelrae5476]

I really enjoy your videos. I do care about what you have to say because I find you to be very credible, thus welcome your info. Thanks to you Arvin (and your team!) for quality scientifically accurate video presentations!

[@ArvinAsh]

Awesome! Thank you!

[@sivansharma5027]

Your videos are way better than 'PBS spacetime'. That guy doesn't make much sense to me

[@jeancorriveau8686]

Now that I begin to understand cosmology, I realize Hawking was a genius. He combined aspects of General Relativity with quantum physics.

[@neelofazrath]

Why I like ur video?? Because other over simplifies it for the sake of explanation. Thus causing confusion. example, for long I thought in double slit experiment a conscious observer is needed. For Hawking's radiation, I always thought, why not positive energy particle (green) sucked into the blackhole and negetive energy particle (red in ur video) got away, thus increasing energy. So black hole will gains some +ve, other time some-ve, so it should remain same. Now I know, it is a completely different mechanism. Thanks

[@drit84]

I had the exact same question!

[@hunk2140]

1.The universe is a black hole. And every black hole is a universe. 2.The big bang is the collapse of our black hole into a singularity, creating a universe in its interior. 3.The universe is a black hole contained in a parent universe with the same laws of physics and other black holes. 4. The 7th dimension of string theory is the plane of possible universes with the same laws of physics but different initial conditions. 5. A black hole is a quantum computer. 6. Entanglement creates a tensor network of strings. 7. Entanglement entropy is a measure of the complexity of the string configuration, its degrees of freedom. 8. In a black hole, complexity evolves as fast as possible. This is its algorithm and its clock rate. 9. The number of hidden bits in the interior is equal to the surface area of the event horizon in Planck units. This is its memory capacity. 10. The AdS/CFT correspondence works exactly like a quantum error-correcting code. 11. The surface fluctuations of the event horizon are a hologram of the interior. 12. Quantum interference patterns on the event horizon are computations in a higher number of dimensions an infinite distance away.

[@jimjim3979]

The best thing to ever happen to KZbin posts a video about Hawking radiation??? That happens only in dreams

[@edtapia8580]

Best video on the topic in my opinion!

[@istvansipos9940]

(me) - I need a huge dose of brain pain. Now. (Arvin + physics) - Say no more, sir!

[@CyberiusT]

You want pain, you should go to PBS Spacetime. I do love that channel, but Matt doesn't spend as long hand-holding before moving on to more brain explosions.

[@jpsilver3510]

@@CyberiusT yeah i find myself going back alot on matt's videos. But they go into alot of really cool topics, and you can win a shirt by doing some math!😁 Although i still feel that this channel does a better job at explaining the topics to people like me that don't really have a physics backround other than thousands of KZbin videos.

[@RaffaCaboFrio]

I had to watch 3 times to understand this video. Awesome! I love this Channel.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks. Yes, most of my videos require multiple viewings. I pack a lot of information in them.

[@Pearls_of_the_Internet]

How do you know this stuff?

[@manan-543]

I think he has a some background in physics and also he researches very deeply for every video.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. I have a science background, but I also read a lot and do tons of research before posting a video. For subjects I am not as familiar with, I call on other experts, for example for the 2D life, and alien intelligence videos.

[@PitchWheel]

Superb video and a new approach to concepts that were explained so many times... Thank you!

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@manan-543]

Hi Arvin. Had some questions. The particles that get absorbed into the black hole must have negative energy so that the particle that escapes has positive energy which we observe as hawking radiation. But in some of the wormhole videos I had seen negative matter and thus negative energy doesn't exist. So is the negative energy being talked about just sign convention or it's actually negative energy if it makes sense. I'm probably mixing two different concepts😅 What would the wavelength of hawking radiation be for the black hole at the centre of our galaxy which is about 24 million kms. Is there a formula for it. Just curious. In your second explanation, the waves absorbed in the black hole must have negative energy in order to see the positive energy in the universe. How does a wave have negative energy?

[@Urkhster]

For your first question, my understanding is that the virtual particles are made as a particle-antiparticle pair. When matter and antimatter collide, they self annihilate, creating near 100% mass to energy conversion. With the anti particle being the one that is absorbed by the black hole, it would find itself colliding with normal matter, and then both would annihilate into energy, causing a reduction in mass of the black hole.

[@ArvinAsh]

Great questions! I will answer your first question, but don't take it too seriously because the popular idea of one of the matter-antimatter particles being sucked in by the black hole is probably incorrect. It is used by most people, including Hawking himself in his book, " A brief history of time" as way to most easily visualize what is happening. My second explanation in the video is closer to what actually happens. But to answer your question, either the particle or antiparticle can be trapped by the black hole. Neither has negative energy when it is formed from in the space outside the event horizon. However, the one that gets trapped has negative energy as soon as it enters the event horizon. This is why hawking radiation has positive energy. The conservation of energy requires the one entering the black hole to have negative energy. However, a more technically robust answer is that the one that falls in has negative energy because it is in something called a "bound quantum state." That’s why it falls in. A bound state has more potential energy, which is negative than kinetic energy which is positive. So its total energy is negative. For the 2nd and 3rd questions, the wavelength of the 24 M Km black hole would be about 24 million kms. Similar the answer above, the waves which enter the black hole must have negative energy since we experience positive energy waves emanating from the black hole.

[@RossCooper-g7c]

If virtual particles pop into existence as particle/anti-particle pairs... Why would the anti-particle be more likely to enter the black hole than the particle? If the anti-particle enters the black hole, that would seem to reduce the black holes mass. But if the particle enters the black hole and the anti-particle does not... wouldn't that increase the size of the black hole and lower the mass of something else?

[@YatiAcharya]

How come we only see positive energy coming out? Negative always goes in? Why? 🤔

[@ArvinAsh]

When one pair of the virtual pair becomes real by escaping the black hole, it's partner absorbed becomes the negative mass particle. It is by definition alway the one that is absorbed by the BH.

[@omsingharjit]

Oh here is it....

[@omsingharjit]

@@ArvinAsh negative by mass of by charge ?

[@timbeaton5045]

@@ArvinAsh I think we have got used to hearing the (over)simplified explanation with the virtual particle pair theory, and that bogs people down. The problem is, and i have looked into the real Hawking derivation, (and given up of course! I'm just an interested layman!) that the actual contents of Hawking's work is technical, and difficult to understand, unless you are well versed in both GR and QM. You did give us a better approximation to what Hawking theorised about BH radiation, and well done for that. For more info on what is actually behind Hawking's idea, you should check out the PBS Space Time episode on YT, as well (dated 15 march 2018, if you're interested . I Indeed, f you haven't already done so!

[@cbmasson3572]

Another great video! Good work.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend!

[@harshitarora8565]

If one particle from the antimatter-matter pair goes inside the Black hole then it means that the black hole is also gaining mass. So how does it's mass decrease through Hawking radiation?

[@christianheichel]

I've always thought the same thing

[@gameinn2010]

It loses TWO particles then gets ONE back ... dumbass

[@christianheichel]

No, it's talking about a particle that appears right on the border half of it goes into the black hole half of it goes out. One's anti-matter ones regular matter

[@jppagetoo]

In order for a matter/anti-matter pair to pop into existance, they need to borrow energy from the universe. They borrow energy from the universe outside the event horizon. Normally they recombine, destroy each other, give the energy back, and the universe is unchanged (this action is widely called the quantum foam and happens everywhere all the time). But when one of the particles goes inside the event horizon it is stuck inside the black hole and therefore it must take some energy from the black hole and be destoyed. The particle outside the event horizon then become "real" and has the energy equal to that taken from the black hole by it's unfotunately demised partner. So the black loses a tiny amount of energy to the universe outside the event horizon. Hawking radiation.

[@jppagetoo]

Another way to look at is that Hawking realized a black hole has Entropy. Therefore it has a temperature above absolute zero. When the temperature of the universe is less that that of the black hole it must transfer that heat from the black hole into the surrounding space. It does this through Hawking radiation.

[@sizu257]

Simple question. Why does a black hole necessarily need to have a temperature like a black body? Where this rule comes from?

[@Toolmanatl1]

If you think this was simply explained, then I have a bridge to sell.

[@db3536]

Excellent video thanks Im still confused by the concept of virtual particles. I shall have to do some more research. Thanks again

[@meriammohammedadem3191]

Why arent you my teacher 😭😭😭

[@ArvinAsh]

Hopefully, I am.

[@dcfromthev]

He is

[@kidamkolkoznam]

@@ArvinAsh Are you a proffesor irl?

[@meriammohammedadem3191]

I meant school teacher

[@harshad761977]

The particle absorb by the black hole can be any particle, it can be either positive mass or negative mass particle. So in such a scenario the possibilities can be either black hole grow in size or doesn’t grow or shrink. So why does black evaporates over time then?

[@ArvinAsh]

Great question! The virtual particle pairs are both positive energy, with opposite charges. As soon as the escaped particle becomes real by escaping the black hole, its partner becomes the one with negative energy. It is by definition the one that is absorbed by the black hole. When negative energy is absorbed, that is the same thing as negative mass, which results in a net loss of mass by the Black hole.

[@harshad761977]

The one which escaped and the one absorb by black hole, are they still entangled? Can they still communicate each other?

[@HappyFlapps]

Who else comes here just to see the hot chicks?

[@FobbitMike]

Arvin is the only science KZbinr I know of who provides us with eye candy. Go Arvin!!

[@Michael-pe5gh]

Awesome video - thank you Mr Arvin

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you liked it!

[@jakobbgh6310]

I will probably never understand much of the topics in your videos. But you have a very seldom ability to make totally un-understandable things into something where I think, that I am getting a first understanding of what it is about. THANKS :-)

[@manan-543]

This is kinda relatable lol. I like to think I understand the topic well but that might just be an illusion. Kinda demonstrates the dunning-Kruger effect. Anyways something that works for me is that after watching a particular video on a complicated topic I'll come back to it after probably a week or a month and suddenly I understand the topic much better and in a refined way.

[@ptgannon1]

I read "A Brief History of Time." This video helped fit the pieces together. Thanks.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@danielrvt]

Amazing topic, amazing video. Thanks!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend.

[@redpower6956]

Your videos are incredibly amazing, thank you so much Arvin. Can you do a video on Neutrinos?

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks for the suggestion. And thanks for watching.

[@ardagus9917]

question: Why is it that ONLY particles with negative energy fall in? Shouldn't gravity affect everything the same??? 2rd question: Hypothetically what would happen if an antimatter black hole collided with a regular black hole of equal mass?

[@ArvinAsh]

Both matter and antimatter escape, whatever particle escapes has positive energy, what is absorbed by the black hole has the negative energy.

[@voidremoved]

@@ArvinAsh That is the most interesting thing. Thanks to the guy for asking and thanks for responding

[@Bassotronics]

Plot twist: Black holes are actually very shiny and bright. The reason why they appear black to us is because anything that travels faster than light our brain cannot process and we see it as black.

[@anishashee8511]

Amazing explanation sir 👍🤩

[@TheConsciousTutor]

Thank you for the wonderful explanation on this subject matter!!

[@jimmyyu2184]

In the future, maybe centuries from now. S. Hawking will be recognized on the same (if not higher) pedestal like A. Einstein. Just recently, scientist observed one of Einstein's prediction (based on his calculation). Galileo, Newton, Kapricus, Einstein, and Hawking are or will be the giants. We are so fortunate to stand on their shoulders and gaze upon the stars.

[@ArvinAsh]

No doubt Hawking was a genius, but I would not put him in the same category as Einstein, Newton, or Maxwell.

[@bjm6275]

Hi Arvin, enjoyed the video. You helped to understand more about black bodies and Hawking Radiation. What if a black hole is actually a hole, a puncture in space. Because of universal gravity this may cause the puncture to become a vortex or well into which the very fabric of space would fall and flow. Perhaps space inside behaves according to other dimensions, extra or quantum dimensions that are lower than 4D space. Hawkings calculations are based on the assumption that a black hole is a solid object, a black body even. Those calculations would not apply if a black hole is a spherical void. Vortices, voids and wells do not have outer surfaces. Hence, in that case a black hole would not reflect light. Perhaps it has a spherical shape because when a star collapsed to form it gravity, warped space pushed from all sides. So when the black hole formed the flow of space fabric continuously falls into the black hole from every angle in space. The perimeter of the event horizon is where the fabric of space ends and the black hole begins as space cascades over the edge into the black hole toward its center, which is likely the opening of a wormhole deeper into extra dimensions. Although a black hole could evaporate, close or seal, there is no proof that one ever has. The only way possible it seems for this to happen is for a stupendous explosion near a black hole that disrupts the flow of the fabric of space into the black hole. Which is probably an impossibility. It may only be possible if the flow of the fabric of space, which prevents the event horizon from closing, to be disrupted somehow. Perhaps the mass a black hole is actually from the faster than light speed of the extremely warped fabric of space, hence extreme gravity, and any other energy and particles that fall towards and into the black hole. The heat would also come from the fabric of space and other energy, because of their motion and friction. The black hole merely facilitates the falling of particles and energies through the event horizon. Another thought is that virtual particles come from those extra dimensions, in part because they had fallen through macroscopic black holes, through sub-quantum black holes throughout space within the quantum foam. Perhaps, they settle as part of the fabric of space and its quantum foam rather than being annihilated. Virtual particles may be how the fabric of space is recycled and renewed. Space is a closed system. Energy and particles leave 4D space through macroscopic black holes into quantum space and return to 4D space from quantum space through microscopic black holes.

[@ArvinAsh]

It is not really a puncture as to say "there's nothing there." I used that metaphor because the space-time inside a black hole is very different than the space-time outside it.

[@bjm6275]

@@ArvinAsh Thank you. Yes, I understood. I was just presenting the hypothesis that it was a hole, void and vortex. That would change how black holes are conceived, our perspective, calculations and help answer questions of quantum mechanics. Thank you for reading, considering and replying to my comment. :) I look forward to more intriguing videos from you, many of us do. You are a great orator.

[@bigpappastumpy666]

Hi Arvin, do you have an opinion on the 'electric universe' theory? Project sapphire and the thunderbolts project? I value your opinion and would love to see a video with your particular take on the subject. Love you channel. Thanks man.

[@ArvinAsh]

I may do a video on that. I am very skeptical about them. There are many problems.

[@priyanktamilsekaran8550]

Need more videos, one per week is not enough! Feed me more!

[@ArvinAsh]

Haha. Thanks for the thought. Actually, even one a week is quite a challenge for us. Each video requires a gargantuan effort to research, write, create animations for, etc. It's like making a mini movie every week. So far, I have resisted becoming like other KZbinrs who spew out multiple videos per week. But hopefully, you guys see and appreciate the difference in production quality.

[@priyanktamilsekaran8550]

Arvin Ash Content and the way of explaining is really top notch. Difficult concepts summarised in layman terms which is itself quite brilliant. I would like to suggest a topic and it's Energy and information. Energy which is my field of study, I would like to know more about it as well as how information and energy are interlinked is a great addition to the topic. Thank you and moreover I have a stupid question It's ” fire an bullet from ground to space and it's assumed its above escape velocity and the bullet travels in space without any collision to some other planets after say 10 years like jupitor and while it falls into jupitor or some planet too heavy; what happens to bullet energy? If the planet is heavy enough doesn't energy required to fire bullet is lower than bullets energy at other planet? Assuming planet is extremely heavy then earth may be 1000* times?.

[@ArvinAsh]

@@priyanktamilsekaran8550 If I understand correctly, you are asking how a bullet landing on Jupiter could have higher energy than the energy it was fired with on earth, correct? Here's what you have to keep in mind: The bullet in space has potential energy relative to the gravity of Jupiter. When the bullet lands on Jupiter, it converts the potential energy into kinetic energy.

[@Dragrath1]

Oh nice you gave the more accurate description of Hawking radiation. Only thing I might have suggested including is discussion of analogous systems such as "sonic black holes".

[@ArvinAsh]

That's a good idea. It might have been a simpler illustration. My only concern with sonic black holes is that I am very skeptical that they accurately represent celestial black holes.

[@Dragrath1]

@@ArvinAsh Yeah I worry about that comparison as well since part of what makes black holes so particular is that they are at the limits of our theories and that is one of the major limitations of analogous systems I just thought it might be worth mentioning.

[@johnlord8337]

Black holes without white hole emissions can only consume and push back the dematerilized quarks back into dark matter ( a particle quark grinder portal), or a separately existing 3D black hole apart from a dark matter connection with the continuum. For the portal, it could continue with or without a white hole. For an separate black hole, it will either fill up and then either have to manifest with a white hole and (1) spew out such massive quanta back into the physical universe, (2) explode, or (3) just "get fed up" and eventually turn into a stellar object (sun), quasar, pulsar, a crystalline neutron star, or move into any death cycle of red/brown dwarfs or red giants - depending on its size and volume. Hawkings saying that a black hole could be filled up and then just evaporates and deflates back into the universe would be very small black holes. A black and white hole can continue to manifest eating up and spewing out quarks as new combinations of particles and elemental products. The photons, associated with electrons (and no other quarks) must be spewed electron companions, or such thermonuclear byproducts (like nuclear bombs). It would be this electron and photon emission that could appear as the initial formations of a white hole, or the dying-death of a black hole (w, w/o a white hole), and its final evaporation. So many complex factors with small and large black holes, alongside w/ w/o white holes ... and whether the black hole is attached to the continuum and dark matter universe.

[@seanmostert4213]

5:37 just how life works, we borrow energy for a period of time and then it is returned. Change is a constant in our universe. It is the driving force behind the evolution of galaxies, stars, planets, and life itself. From the microscopic level of quantum fluctuations to the vast cosmic scales, everything is in a state of flux. The laws of physics, such as entropy in thermodynamics, further emphasize that change is not only inevitable but necessary for the progression of time and the unfolding of events. Without change, the universe would remain static, lacking the dynamics that allow for the diversity and complexity we observe.

[@kidamkolkoznam]

7:20 negative energy? I am confused. If pair of matter and antimatter paricles pop up into existance I will asume that matter is positive energy and antimatter is negative energy (i am guessing, not sure if this is right, just trying to understand). So why it has to be the atimatter one that goes into black hole (and loses mas in that way), why can't particle made of regular matter be the one that goes into the black hole (and in that way black hole will gain mass) ?

[@ArvinAsh]

Both matter and antimatter have positive energy. The one that falls in becomes the negative energy particle as soon as its partner escapes and becomes a "real" particle instead of a "virtual" particle.

[@kidamkolkoznam]

@@ArvinAsh wow, so either one enters the black hole becomes negative energy. Is there any explanation of some kind of mechanism behind that?

[@zerototalenergy150]

what a plesaure...to listen to your talks !thank you !

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks for watching my friend.

[@voodoonights1671]

Well explained and interesting.

[@andrewbodor4891]

The photons that escape a black hole appear outside the event horizon as the matter inside exerts energy against the press of gravity. According to first law of thermodynamics, energy can not be created or lost. The energy that the atoms, squished as they are, still exert to maintain themselves, goes out of the black hole in the form of radiation. In turn the black hole becomes smaller in mass; eventually to evaporate, with all its mass turned to energy that has escaped the black hole.

[@goober685]

Thank you for explaining that so well.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@intpintpintp]

That's just amazing, thank you.

[@Alexanders-Type-I-Civilization]

Great video Ash! Thank you! I recently finished Stephen Hawking's book "Brief answers to the big questions". I'm still trying to wrap my head around all of it. It fascinates me.. I have some theories of mine but thry are pure imaginacion. First thing that came into my head when understanding the quantum mechanics of a back hole is that I think they are rich in negative energy maybe dark energy too. If we can find a way to harness that negative energy around it maybe we can biuld that warp drive we're all excited to see.

[@Alexanders-Type-I-Civilization]

I re-watch the video cause I find it very captivating and a question cames back into my mind that I hope one of you guys can answer it: (and I know it's far fetched) Isn't a black hole the result of space time riping itself, when matter turn into negative energy?

[@steviejd5803]

Dear Arvin, you are absolutely the best! That's it, no need to expound any further. The end.

[@Speak_Out_and_Remove_All_Doubt]

Great video. I get the particle - antiparticle annihilation analogy but not so much the particle waves from infinity. But how come / why do we get the 'positive energy' of quantum form particle production and the black hole gets the negative energy? Would it not be 50:50?

[@ArvinAsh]

See my pinned comment.

[@TheLosrodri]

Boy is all of this HIGHLY theoretical..I do LOVE that he tied this all back to GRBs, even though the data doesn’t apparently support any sort of BH implication..who the hell knows if any of this is true

[@ArvinAsh]

Yep. It is not measurable for any observable black hole. Theoretically, if we ever create black holes in the LHC, then we will see the effect. But Hawking Radiation fits with the highly proven equations of relativity and quantum mechanics. I don't know of any credible physicist that disputes it.

[@medexamtoolscom]

There's something else that almost no one is aware of. If space is metastable, the final moment of evaporation of a black hole would set off vacuum decay. So if space is metastable, you'd better HOPE there aren't any primordial black holes about to finish evaporating, because that would end the universe. Think about it now, it is the only thing in the universe that actually attains the planck temperature, if anything would set it off, that would.

[@XEinstein]

When I was studying physics I hated entropy (and anything related to thermodynamics). Having recently learned about entropy not only in black holes but in information theory, I'm really fascinated that entropy really seems to be something fundamental to the universe

[@FobbitMike]

Current cutting edge speculation is that entropy, along with entanglement, may be the most fundamental things in the universe, with all else being emergent features.

[@XEinstein]

@@FobbitMike Exactly! And I'm so incredibly curious to learn about these theories for the next decade or so as they are being developed.

[@medexamtoolscom]

Also, a convenient way to figure out the temperature of a black hole, is to start with accepting that a planck mass black hole has a planck length schwarzschild radius, a planck temperature blackbody temperature, and a duration of the planck time before evaporation, and from there, the duration of a larger black hole scales up with mass to the 3rd power, its radius scales up with mass, its temperature scales down with mass, its radiative power scales down with mass squared and its surface area of course scales down with mass squared. So using this principle, you can take a black hole of any size and quickly figure out how long it will last and how powerful its radiation would be and its temperature.