Hawking Radiation explained simply, or How black holes explode!

Hawking radiation,Black-Hole Evaporation and black hole explosions! Stephen Hawking theorized that a black hole may not be so black. He showed that when you apply the laws of quantum mechanics to classical physics, you find that they shine. They give off photons. How is this possible given that nothing escapes from black holes?
In classical physics, the mass of a black hole cannot decrease, it can either stay the same or increase. To Stephen Hawking and others, this idea looked similar to the 2nd law of thermodynamics which is, “In any natural process, the entropy of a closed system always increases or remains constant, it never decreases.” Similar to the 2nd law, there are also ways to state the other 3 laws of thermodynamics such that they are true for black holes as well.
In 1972, physicist Jocob Bekenstein, proposed that the surface area of a black hole is its entropy. The larger a black hole is, the more stuff it has consumed. Since everything it consumes has information, the greater the entropy of the system. Why? Because the more disordered a system is, the more information is required to describe it.
The analogy with thermodynamics suggest that black holes are a thermal body. In thermodynamics, there is something called a black body, which doesn’t transmit or reflect any radiation, it only absorbs it. A black hole, too, is something doesn’t transmit or reflect any radiation. If a black hole can be thought of as a black body, then it must have a temperature, because all black bodies have a temperature, which means it must shine.
When Hawking saw these ideas, he found the idea of shining black holes to be preposterous. He set out to prove why they would NOT shine. But when he applied the laws of quantum mechanics to general relativity, he realized the opposite. In 1974, he published a paper outlining a mechanism for this shine.
All of space is teaming with virtual particles that come in and out of existence all the time. This is based on the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. One version of this can be written as the following: Delta-E*Delta-t ~= h/4*pi. This equation says is that the uncertainty in energy and uncertainty in time are inversely proportional to each other. But it also means that you can get particles with an energy, if it occurs for a very short period of time, or particles can exist that violate this uncertainty principle. Particle/antiparticle pairs borrow temporary energy from the present, and give it right back in the future by annihilating themselves. This occurs over a shorter time than can be measured.
Can we measure this? It manifests as a force in something called the 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.
As particle-antiparticle pairs get created near the event horizon, one particle can get sucked into the black hole and another is released before the two can annihilate each other. This is what we perceive as Hawking radiation. From our perspective outside the black hole, the particle we got is positive, but this means that the black hole got negative energy. In other words it lost energy. This is the same thing as the black hole losing mass.
#hawkingradiation
#stephenhawking
The biggest problem with this explanation is that the radiation from black holes is not in all wavelengths, as would be expected with this mechanism. The radiation actually has a wavelength equal to the size of the black hole. So smaller black holes emit shorter wavelengths, or more energy, than larger black holes. The better explanation is that waves coming in from infinity and being disrupted because of the black hole event horizon, as it is forming. Certain vibrations of waves are deflected by the gravitational field of the black hole as it forms in the past. The waves entering the event horizon are disrupted in a way that the wave on the other side, carried away energies corresponding to the size of the black hole. This corresponds to an energy spectrum analogous to a black body at a certain temperature. So this is why Black holes radiate.
Can we measure it? Probably not, but one prediction is made. As the black hole evaporates over time, the temperature rises, and the evaporation rate goes to infinity. This would be seen as a burst of high energy photons or gamma rays.
So do we detect Gamma Ray bursts? We do - about one gamma ray bursts per day. But the pattern of gamma rays do not fit with what we would expect to see in a black hole explosion. What we see are bursts with variations in brightness, from bright to dim to bright again. The black hole evaporation should look like a steady increase in luminosity until a final explosion. But despite the lack of evidence, Hawking Radiation perfectly fits within the laws of quantum mechanics, and few physicist dispute its existence.

[@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.

[@Jollysvidsfordispute]

@@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

[@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.

[@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.

[@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.

[@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

[@dhoffheimerj]

One of his best yet. Thanks.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend.

[@PlanetFrosty]

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

[@blazindino9371]

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

[@peewee7848]

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

[@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.

[@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!

[@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!

[@Nick6Michael]

Yes, yes, exactly what I wanted to watch.

[@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.

[@rkn8109]

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

[@jeancorriveau8686]

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

[@BlackWolf6420]

Love this channel!! 💪🏻🤩

[@barry7608]

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

[@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 :)

[@balensyamend5404]

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

[@erikendacott9854]

Thank you for making these really interesting videos!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend. Glad you like them!

[@mattheww9656]

That was explained very well. Thank you.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@primeedits840]

Precise explanation makes things interesting....great

[@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!

[@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.

[@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.

[@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 :)

[@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!

[@jimjim3979]

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

[@handsfree1000]

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

[@cosmicadventure9184]

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

[@madlad9726]

Such Quality Content

[@drew2276]

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

[@frankblack1185]

Sir Rodger Penrose did the work with Stephen Hawking too.

[@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. :)

[@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.

[@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.

[@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?"

[@cbmasson3572]

Another great video! Good work.

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend!

[@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.

[@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!

[@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.

[@edtapia8580]

Best video on the topic in my opinion!

[@TheConsciousTutor]

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

[@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.

[@BillyTwoFingers]

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.

[@rajachan8588]

Terrific video. Thank you again

[@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.

[@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!

[@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.

[@voodoonights1671]

Well explained and interesting.

[@Michael-pe5gh]

Awesome video - thank you Mr Arvin

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you liked it!

[@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.

[@Toolmanatl1]

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

[@PitchWheel]

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

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@intpintpintp]

That's just amazing, thank you.

[@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.

[@MrGriff305]

This guy is amazing. I wish I knew what he knows. Physics is just basically fantastic and absurd. They laughed when creating this simulation we're in. 🤣

[@danielrvt]

Amazing topic, amazing video. Thanks!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend.

[@hqs9585]

Amazing lecture!

[@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

[@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!!

[@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!

[@Qrooel]

This is great, thanks!

[@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.

[@anishashee8511]

Amazing explanation sir 👍🤩

[@ptgannon1]

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

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@goober685]

Thank you for explaining that so well.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad it was helpful!

[@LFamilyJourney]

I love your videos... thanks.

[@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

[@venkatnarayanan4525]

Phenomenal video

[@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.

[@zoksss5323]

Must say, very interesting video

[@jessemontano6399]

Man!!! That title picture would make such a rad t shirt!!! Great video, btw. The thumbnail pic. Oops

[@zerototalenergy150]

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

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks for watching my friend.

[@brianwright9215]

Another excellent video 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks my friend.

[@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?

[@tonypacino7034]

Great video 👍

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@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.

[@solapowsj25]

Thank you. 😀😀

[@db3536]

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

[@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.

[@antares1840]

Finally someone that explained this subject in a different way than the usual virtual particles pair. You and Matt O'Dowd (from PBS Space Time) have given the best explanations so far! I would like to ask what do you think about the quantum bounce predicted by the Loop Quantum Gravity which states that as the black hole shrinks down to the Planck scale it bounces back becoming a white hole.

[@steviejd5803]

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

[@navimaia8440]

I really enjoy your channel. May I ask what you mean when you say “more information is needed to describe” the system? When I watched that I thought “well the ordered state isn’t more random, it’s just a different configuration of particles that has the same statistical probability as every other configuration”.

[@nerdexproject]

I love your videos!! C:

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks for watching my friend.

[@sinebar]

I call this Hawking radiation paradox: If time runs faster outside the event horizon of a black hole than it does inside the black hole, Hawking radiation would evaporate the black hole before enough time has passed inside the black hole for such an event to have occurred. So how is it that a black hole could experience two frames of reference at the same time? There seems to be a real paradox here. If an observer inside a black hole looking out could survive long enough, could she witness hawking radiation evaporate the black hole before enough time in her frame of reference passed for the evaporation to occur?

[@ebenolivier2762]

Christine LaBeach General relativity predicts that time stops at the event horizon as viewed by an observer outside of the event horizon. It also predicts that all space-like curves become time-like within the event horizon. This means that all matter falling into a black hole will be ripped into its constituent elementary particles. So you would not survive inside the black hole. Putting that aside, I suspect that a quantum theory of gravity will show that time doesn't completely "stop" at the event horizon, it just slows down to the slowest pace allowable by the universe. This pace would be equal to the rate of Hawking radiation. If this was not the case, conservation of energy would be broken. So from the point of view of a particle falling into a black hole, it would appear as if the black hole gets smaller and smaller as it approaches it, since from the frame of reference of the infalling particle, time is moving at a "normal" rate, but the black hole is also evaporating at the same time. The universe will appear to age very rapidly however from the frame of reference of the particle, until it's ejected at some distant future time again from the event horizon of the black hole. In fact, it will look as if the universe is "exploding" with high energy gamma rays in all directions, since everything will be blue shifted. Thinking about it like this, no particles ever really "enter" beyond the event horizon, since there is no space beyond it, only time. The event horizon is like a surface that records information and then releases it again much later (from the point of view of an outside observer). See the holographic principle for more info on this.

[@dosomething3]

Christine LaBeach The traveler into the black hole will live his fruitful life until they die. Time for all the travelers into the black hole will go on to infinity. So if there is life inside a black hole it will live to its infinity. They will experience their own death of their own universe. Just like we will experience our own death of our universe. Our universe will kill itself by entropy. From the observer point of view The people living inside a black hole are frozen. From the point of you of a person falling into the black hole they are traveling super fast. So as they look back to our universe they see our universe aging super fast. They see the end of our universe very quickly. And from their point of you when their bubble universe experiences its death by entropy it’s already long after our universe which is their origin universe has long died by entropy. So by the time the Black hole dies by Hawking radiation they have already long ago experienced their own bubble universe death by entropy.

[@robertmolldius8643]

Thanx!👍🙂

[@bobross5716]

Really great vid. Just wanted to clarify that in the uncertainty relation, while delta-E refers to an uncertainty in energy, delta-t actually refers to time frame, not an uncertainty in time

[@Sinnbad21]

Arvin Ash is a beast. Love this guy

[@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

[@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.

[@mesunmesun224]

Perfect description. Nothing ever truly dies. It jitters. Lol

[@jmanj3917]

Nothing "escapes from a black hole". The pair of virtual particles originates from outside the event horizon. The virtual particle doesn't "escape" from inside the black hole. It forms outside the black hole, and it stays outside the black hole. The other virtual particle from this pair crosses the event horizon, adding its values to the interior of the black hole. These once virtual particles are now real, and the mass of the infalling particle is negative, which decreases the mass of the black hole. That's it. Nothing escapes from the black hole.

[@Firebrand911]

I really appreciate these videos. If you could add equations just in a sub-titles or over-head-titles (but keep your current conversational style), just to share whenever you can post them, it would be great. For example, when you say, "Casimir Effect" or something, just post an equation next to it, whenever you can. Or for example, when talking about the waves entering and leaving a black hole and how to calculate it. This can be complex, so if it doesn't fit neatly, then at least a link to a paper or reference or website that discusses it. This way we are all on the same informational page. Rather than solely in loftiness of imagination. Thank you!

[@ArvinAsh]

The Casimir effect is a physical phenomenon and is due to the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle. I showed the equation on the main screen for that.

[@shockwave9916]

@Arvin Ash loved the explanation Arvin. Please make a video on Multiverse.

[@ArvinAsh]

You read my mind. That is the next video!

[@shockwave9916]

@@ArvinAsh wow !! Can't wait for it