Hawking radiation

[@ScienceClicEN]

A precision about what happens at 7:05 : the particles observed far away are the same as those created near the horizon. Far away, no particles are created since both observers are in free fall. But still they receive the particles created near the horizons that escape the black hole's pull

[@TheBlueLawliet]

9:50 why is the curvature at the horizon of large black wholes mild compared to smaller ones? Isn't the definition of the event horizon a curvature? Like here light cant escape anymore because a curvature has been reached? Shouldnt all black holes have the same curvature at their event horizon? What am I missing?

[@myeongsangcho9670]

Okay.., so you mean, To make free-fall-observer see vacuum near event horizon, black hole needs to emit "real" particle with positive energy. Am I correct?

[@Dragrath1]

@@TheBlueLawliet Curvature yes but the term you are describing as mild are the change in the curvature with distance i.e. the derivative of the curvature with respect to the distance from the black hole or any other object

[@SEJay-gj2cv]

Just found this channel and now I'm addicted! Subbed and sharing :) Wondering if there's a seamless version of this animation you made?: kzbin.info/www/bejne/raPamHygd7qMjMU Also curious if you've tried doing any similar using levels of black&white or color gradients to help visualize levels of gravity? Thanks again!

[@jesseaustin2438]

The formula at about 14mins seems to be my equation i used to solve to show gravity is an integral of time,, not the derivative of space like ScienceClic English said for A New Way To Visualize General Relativity,, and time like my precalc or calc teacher said is an integral and i mighta added or he said of space, but the derivative, the opposite of an integral, of what gravity is is a construct of time, since u can get a 1st derivative of what makes gravity or what it is, force, and force is mass x acceleration and acceleration is distance per time squared. So the 1st derivative of gravity, with respect to time, is -2mass x distance per time cubed, and i just had gravity's 1st derivative is spacetime w mass there, and ill get to the 2nd derivative, but if u solve for time from the 1st derivative of gravity w respect to time, and gravity is not just gravity turned into mass or gravity and space and time,, distance n time cubed is shown to be spacetime, but gravity per quantum mechanics as the reality of space or spatial quantum mechanics,, which this vid says isnt like known but kinda was used to theorize Hawking Radiation,, and then w that all as what the 1st derivative of gravity is equal to is solved to show what time or T equals, then u shud get that formula, but ScienceClic has said gravity dimension, what i thought is time of time n time is thought as a dimension so another d that i came up w in september 2017 n commented on a new way to visualize general relativity by ScienceClic, and i also had thought i shud think of other things one might think is gravity like the derivative of time whichd be space so i thought maybe it cud be thought the derivative of space, but i just educated thought it shud be an integral, which is what they say as far as they knew no one had made such a theory, but i had, and i had emailed Sean Carrol about such March 9th 2019, and SciClic said they called it a temporal dimension. But back to the 2nd derivative of gravity w respect to time, it is a 4d time x mass and distance x 6 which shows 6 sides like a cube or 3ds each w 2 sides, prob positive and negative, but it describes space but as a point particle and as a whole 4d spacetime where 3d space is made of each dimension as a time like thing. A dimension w distance. But distance is multiply thru and is probably related to c, lightspeed.

[@hackerulroman]

I like how he has pauses sometimes so we can think a bit about what we just heard

[@uppercut2246]

Thats your issue, you don't think..

[@hackerulroman]

@@uppercut2246 ?

[@luciuspertis5672]

@@uppercut2246 NOPE

[@rgbtryhardled636]

@@uppercut2246 bro wtf

[@afonsodeportugal]

@@uppercut2246 The condescension is strong with this one!

[@denzali]

Can we please take moment to applaud the visual side of these videos 👏🏻 they are so smooth and poetic, they flow along in a way that is so hypnotic it embeds the ideas discussed so well.

[@Dreju5566]

This channel is so freaking underrated

[@gewesen297]

Hell yea

[@helonki7161]

Indeed it is, I’m very happy that I found this channel. He describes very efficiently and illustrates things in an easy way to understand. He also puts a lot of effort into his videos such as the animations and stuff. I don't really know how he can have so few subscriptions and views in comparison with the quality of his videos. He definitely deserves more.

[@unimornnbr1]

This channel is incredible

[@Xingchen_Yan]

I found this channel when it has around 10k subs and I was like what, where peepol

[@Gizmoz.in_]

True

[@soranuareane]

I come into these videos with the presumption that I already know and understand the concepts being explained, but *every single time* I walk away with new insights and understanding. Your videos are so thorough I'm consistently amazed. The pacing is perfect. The explanations are simple. You need 10x more subscribers.

[@xyzabc12345jkl]

this is exceptionally factually accurate

[@patukka3336]

Dunning Kruger effect

[@ajr993]

I gotta say your voice is lovely, and the background music is so fitting. It's an absolute joy to listen to you explain physics concepts in a simple, elegant way that doesn't condescend.

[@ScienceClicEN]

Thanks! The voice is actually from Octave a friend who accepted to narrate the videos, I think he does a great job, glad you think so too!

[@sangeetakaushik225]

@@2piee I think because he said that in a black hole the laws of space and time are reversed so if a negative particle wants to live because they must be vanished so they enter the black hole to live and thus a black hole loses energy and it's mass

[@ferretappreciator]

@@2piee to add onto what Sangeeta said, negative and positive virtual particles normally destroy eachother. Real particles must have a positive energy to exist, but in a black hole the opposite is true. The negative particle and the positive particle both want to exist, so the negative particle escapes to the black hole which then allows the positive particle to escape away from the black hole, and as those negative particles are absorbed by the black hole it gets negative energy, therefore it shrinks... Or something

[@mctg9043]

@@ferretappreciator So both particles want to live, and the negative particle can be real if it goes in the black hole and the positive particle can be real if it escape the black hole's pull. So if the negative particle falls in and the positive particles escapes, it's a win-win and both particles become real, while the negative particle falling into the black hole makes the black hole shrink.

[@counterleo]

I know right, he is the Morgan Freeman of scientific explanations. This plus the background music has something so stimulating to it I think

[@RareManga]

I have wasted my life on science KZbin videos. You are by far the best with your explanations and visualisation for an ordinary person to understand. Please don’t ever change or leave the KZbin community. There are still billions of people who haven’t seen your videos. You are a gift. A messiah of science videos.

[@ALGARIC]

Never ever change the way you make your videos! You explain everything perfectly, now I finally understand things that I didn’t understand before. Thank you!

[@tanweerriyadh3785]

How the f***! Is that you Ari !

[@ALGARIC]

@@tanweerriyadh3785 Nope, sorry to disappoint you. I should’ve change my YT name a while ago but I’m so lazyy (Also I’m not really good at original names lmao)

[@tanweerriyadh3785]

@@ALGARIC lol😂.. Appreciate the clarification

[@knopfir]

@@tanweerriyadh3785 bro yknow theres a reason why the verification mark exists yea?

[@haistapaska20]

Only get a better microphone!! Please

[@Nebuch]

That was a great explanation of a concept which is really tough for me.

[@uppercut2246]

Concept- Idea- Conjecture - fairy tale. Not that hard.

[@baseestelar8014]

@@buddysnackit1758 Relative to whom? If so does everyone.

[@birseylerceviren2694]

@Nebuch selamlar abi.

[@aaronposter6852]

Same. I never understood how Hawking radiation could be possible if information can’t escape from a black hole. I now realize it’s because the escaping particles don’t ever cross the event horizon, so they aren’t originating from inside the black hole itself. Very hard topic to grasp but I finally grasp a very basic idea of a subject that always made my head spin.

[@publicstaticvoid1010]

@@aaronposter6852 The thing is, this demonstration of hawking radiation is wrong and is unfortunately a rather popular myth. There are no actual particles being created at the edge.

[@SK-mj8pt]

This channel's potential is through the roof. Awesome coverage!

[@ScienceClicEN]

Thank you 🙏

[@victorhakim1250]

The BEST video on Hawking radiation I've ever seen. Very illuminating. Thank you

[@ScienceClicEN]

Thank you !

[@SaberTooth2251]

Seems this topic is popular lately. Thrilled to see you cover it!

[@kamalnawhal9356]

But how could you see it properly without seeing it

[@thorH.]

I was literally supposed to make a presentation on this topic a couple of weeks ago lol

[@ogpd4898]

@@thorH. could you send me it?

[@thorH.]

@@ogpd4898 its in German but yes

[@DinoTaken]

For anyone confused on why time and space switch their places, let me explain. Time is like a time cone, you can only go in on direction, forward. Space is like free movement; you can go any direction. When space is reversed to time, you can only go in one direction, to the singularity, so now space is like a time cone, you can go in only one direction, the singularity of a black hole. According to Einstein's theory, when a person falls into the singularity, time is destroyed, DESTROYED. This is why a black hole is sometimes called a, "reverse of creation," because both key elements of a black hole flipped because of the black holes behavior towards spacetime fabric and its bending.

[@starryamity33]

Blackholes sound like how lights are to bugs at night, messing with their automatic orientation to north based around the sun (which in our case would be time) being at their back (which in our case would be the past), so you continually fly toward and around it endlessly while thinking you are flying straight and away from it. That's horrifying. :D

[@nabhpriyagautam5540]

But how does it allow particle inside black hole have negative energy, plz explain if possible, that would be helpful.

[@kylecaliflores7112]

​@@nabhpriyagautam5540virtual particles forms near the event horizon of a black hole, something different can happen. The intense gravitational field of the black hole can separate the particle pair before they annihilate. One particle falls into the black hole, while the other escapes into space. When one of the virtual particles escapes to become real radiation (Hawking radiation), the total energy of the system must remain balanced. The particle that escapes carries positive energy away from the black hole, which observers far away can detect as radiation. The particle that falls into the black hole must then have negative energy, relative to an outside observer, to balance the energy book. This negative energy contribution effectively reduces the total mass-energy of the black hole

[@ClaudioFermi-z5h]

What? Please say where the Relativity states that time flows in one only direction?

[@ClaudioFermi-z5h]

A singularity is rather when common laws of physics brake down. You have no idea what are you talking about..

[@oLuii]

This channel makes me realize how small my problems actually are. It's comforting.

[@stdesy]

Seriously. The enormity of reality dwarfs anything on any scale we can even truly comprehend.

[@Gione908]

No one ever explained this concept in such an incredibly accurate way, thank you from the bottom of my heart Alessandro, this video is amazing!

[@informing_]

Okay, this channel must be trending worldwide, I literally get busy with these subjects and just know really got what Hawking radiation really is. Please share these videos everywhere, this here is human progress, it can inspire people.

[@Panbu1975]

Thanks

[@nihil_._sum]

This channel deserves a kind of novel prime in education and visual representation of science. Also who can dislike this?

[@AverageAlien]

Novel prime

[@cleanseroftheworld]

Took me a sec to realize he means Nobel Prize

[@ashrude1071]

autocorrect?

[@akhilanr1233]

'also who can dislike this?" - the people who dont understand the beauty of whats told in the video

[@HerbertHeyduck]

Theres always people around dislike everything for no apparent reason.

[@Lausa2k]

English is not my native language but the way this excellent narrator is combining words together is somehow very rewarding.

[@anujtiwari6949]

Believe me it's the most underrated channel on youtube.... Just want say one word "WOW" .. never saw explaining that much deep concepts with such simplicity...

[@Alexf-piano]

Hey my dad and me is a astrophysicist and your teaching is a great way to let young kids to learn space time ! Keep up the good work.

[@TrabberShir]

The explanation up to 8:10 is probably the best explanation I have seen on youtube. 8:10 to 9:30 is a step back I think, but still better than the typical rehash of Hawking's imperfect analogy. Very well done.

[@LBTennis]

This is one of the best channels on all of KZbin. All of media for that matter

[@F3F3R0NK4]

I really love how you make pauses so the listener can realize the what are you trying to explain and everything then fits together.

[@beln33]

If you did some serious reading about QFT, BH, gravity, information & thermodynamics prior to this video, you’ll find this video to be so revealing and helping to understand HRad and BH. This video, and all others of this YT account are of another league: simply the best. I would even say, if you watch it again every so often, it can also keep you on track and guide you in your endeavour of understanding better and more profoundly the subjects mentioned here.

[@PelycheeaceRA]

i can recommend the PBS Space Time channel too.

[@parasharkchari]

14:05 -- I'd seen this equation in the textbooks so many times before... and I don't know why this fact never struck me all this time. That realization straight up brought a tear to my eye.

[@SolarasNaracott]

I've heard this explained to me before, but not as like this. I now have a much better understanding of Hawking Radiation because of how clear your videos are. Keep up the good work!

[@EarlCo]

This is literally the best video, animation, graphics, depiction, and narration I've ever seen explaining the reconciliation of Quantum Gravity.

[@nezir6050]

Your approach to make impossibly difficult concepts more understandable by people with different backgrounds totally works. I hope this channel always remains like this. Thanks for making science more accessible and more comprehensible.

[@ScienceClicEN]

Thank you very much I am glad you like the format !

[@jiml989]

Having skimmed through most of the comments (as of 4/22), I see two issues questions raised more frequently than others. People want a more in-depth presentation of 1) how particles are split (+/-) at the horizon and 2) the reversal of space and time inside a black hole. I hope ScienceClic will provide a video to that end and clarify some of the other concepts that the questioners asked about.

[@MrMegaMetroid]

honestly, spot on comment. i understand broadly what happens, but only through the visualisation with the annihilating particles later in the video. i dont understand how the flipping of space time allows a particle to be negative inside and positive on the outside. i feel like there might just be one or two sentences missing to piece this puzzle together but i cant figure it out

[@sleepycritical6950]

@@MrMegaMetroid based on superficial searches and understanding, mathematically it's due to the flipping of the signs +/- in the metric of the spatial and temporal term, which is used to calculate the energy. Past the horizon, the signs flip and so the energy comes out as the opposite of what it would otherwise be. The better question is since the energies can be positive and negative, why does it not happen in reverse, that is if it absorbs negative energies then it would be positive past the horizon this gaining energy. This part is the only one I don't understand. I think it's a misunderstanding of what positive and negative energies actually means but I can't confirm this.

[@amirriahi3448]

I think this video can answer your 2nd question ! kzbin.info/www/bejne/fYK9ZIVuZs6se5I&ab_channel=ScienceClicEnglish

[@coreyalexbarker]

Remember that the particle illustration was just kind of a mental hack to understand the underlying quantum field phenomena. There are loads of quantum fields of different types (EM, electron, quark, etc), one for each type of particle whether that be boson or fermion (force vs matter). A particle is a propagating vibration in the underlying field, and each particle has a defined frequency and wavelength corresponding to the mass/energy of that particle. And to get a "real" particle that you can measure (eg an electron), energy must have been imparted into the quantum field in question, because you can't get something from nothing. Now here's the cool part. Even when there aren't any "real" particles around, the quantum fields still fluctuate randomly, but these fluctuations cancel one another out. Not like positive and negative energy really, more like how two lasers of the same frequency but coming from opposite directions can cancel each other out via destructive interference. So out in the vacuum of space, everything cancels out and we don't see any evidence of these quantum fluctuations (most of the time, for those pendants out there). But in the vicinity of an event horizon, all the fluctuations that would normally come from the direction of the horizon can't escape, so there is a sort of imbalance in the various quantum fields. When this occurs, a distant observer might be able to measure a "real" particle that originated from near the event horizon. And because you can't get something from nothing, the black hole would have to "pay back" the relevant quantum field, which reduces the black hole's energy/mass. Which quantum fields are affected depends on the radius of the event horizon - the larger the event horizon, the longer the wavelength of quantum fluctuations that get trapped inside the event horizon. Since a larger wavelength corresponds to a lower frequency and energy, big black holes would only disrupt the balance of the lowest frequency fluctuations (ie you would only see extremely low energy/frequency photons coming from the vicinity of a supermassive black hole). As the black hole radius gets smaller though, it begins to affect smaller and smaller wavelengths of fluctuations, which corresponds to higher frequency/energy fluctuations. What might that look like? A faint buzz of extremely low frequency radio waves that slowly increase in frequency. After awhile, it would sweep into the radio bands we use up through AM and FM. It's extremely improbable (but not impossible) that we'd hear Rick Astley's masterpiece in there briefly. The black hole is shrinking at a slow but perceivable rate (if you keep a close eye on it for maybe a few billion years) because the radio waves are carrying away energy that the black hole has to "pay back". This decreases its mass which causes its event horizon to contract. The frequencies would continue to increase until we left the radio part of the spectrum and entered the infrared, visible, and UV bands. Still we're only seeing photons at this point (maybe a stray neutrino/antineutrino pair here and there). The black hole is actually getting pretty small now compared to its original size. Once we go past xrays and into the gamma bands, we'd start to see a few electrons/positrons streaming out. We only begin seeing particles other than photons now because the frequencies/energies of the quantum fluctuations the event horizon is disrupting have grown to frequencies/energies greater than the rest mass of the electron. The black hole is very tiny at this point, and begins to resemble an explosion played in slow motion. This process continues to accelerate with more and more energy being dumped into the outward stream of particles. At some point, we see quark/antiquark pairs in every imaginable configuration. Maybe a random potted petunia gets flung out of the maelstrom. Not impossible. In a very short period of time, what begun as a chill event horizon singing songs to us becomes a miniature supernova. And at the end...we don't know. Will the black hole completely disappear? Will some remnant of weirdness be left over? Who knows. It was a cool show though.

[@hs.j7291]

@@MrMegaMetroid my guy, this same channel has already made a video on the flipping of space and time at the event horizon, you should watch it!

[@l.d.landau8846]

I think this channel is the best physics channel on KZbin.

[@3dgar7eandro]

"How can a channel with such quality and precision in explaining complex topics be available on KZbin for free? It’s remarkable how Science Click has condensed much of Hawking's research and theories into such an elegant and easy-to-understand video! I can’t help but wonder who is behind this brilliant work!"

[@imagine.o.universo]

You just had replace Kurzgesagt in my list favorite channels. Now you are at the top of the list.

[@random8358]

The animation quality is top-tier

[@chenalvision]

Sorry I have a few more questions after watching the video: Why do only positive and not negative waves fall in (5:49), and conversely, why do only negative and not positive waves try to but fail to escape the horizon (5:44)? Why do only the negative and not positive particles fall in (9:00)? How do the positive particles escape the black hole without falling in (9:08)? Thank you.

[@xBosil]

I have never seen anyone explain that in a video when I tried to see material about that, and it doesn't start to make any sense to me unless it is explained.

[@SyDatNguyen-r4j]

If both of them fall in, then they would annihalate during their fall. If they both escape, then they would also annihalate when escaping. If the opposite happen, cuz the negative energy one can’t be real outside the black hole, they will annihalate at the horizon

[@astrocat4066]

You know the math is hard when there's no numbers

[@Open_Mike_B]

In my final year of engineering school there wasn’t a number in sight 😂

[@IvanPompa-lr7iy]

Well there is an 8 in the formula hahahahahha

[@luudest]

9:14 would you not expect that negative and positive particles are absorbed with the equal amount? -> thus the mass of the black hole remains constant?

[@sabouedcleek611]

I agree with you too, but I believe it could be explained because of the small segment about black holes inverting space and time(?), allowing for the particle with negative mass to exist. If the particle with positive mass is captured, then the particle with negative mass will not be able to exist for a long time and be destroyed by cancellations with other virtual particles. Therefore, the situation in the video is the only valid case for a particle to pop into existence, and the net effect must result in the Hawking Radiation

[@Antonio-wh8lh]

@@sabouedcleek611 So from my understanding of the video (like seriously I am not an expert at anything) I believe -In the black hole, positive energy and negative energy particles can exist -outside the black hole, only positive energy particles can exist So there are the following cases 1: negative energy -> black hole, positive energy -> escapes => Hawking radiation 2: negative energy -> black hole, positive energy -> black hole => no net change of total energy (mass) of black hole So sometimes case 1 occurs and sometimes case 2 occurs But case 2 doesn’t change energy while case 1 decreases energy of black hole Therefore, black hole loses energy At least from my interpretation of the video

[@luudest]

@@Antonio-wh8lh What about 3. Postive energy -> black hole, negative energy escapes?

[@247_sirazulmonir9]

it's not negative energy or mass- it's about matter and antimatter. antimatter is just time reversed matter. watch nick lucid's video on hawking radiation for more detailed explanation

[@ScienceClicEN]

@@247_sirazulmonir9 No beware this is not antimatter, it's a common misconception. Hawking radiation emmits as many particles as antiparticles. Here I am talking about particles / antiparticles with negative energy. This is not the same as just antiparticles.

[@esjihn]

love the ambient music please keep this in all videos. Makes them very soothing to watch.

[@paris_mars]

There's 3b1b for math and this channel for physics. This is amazing, beautiful, and clearly and meaningfully explained.

[@tanvirfarhan5585]

I have learned more from this channel than I have in several year's worth of schooling. I can’t believe this is free content. Thank you so much. WORLD'S BEST CHANNEL

[@NicolasLavender]

Remember, school can teach you much more than this KZbin channel could ever about physics. In the end of the day, this channel is providing entertaining explanations to a concept that is impossible to understand without several years of school/college. Therefore, even if you where referring to just physics, that statement does not make any sense since several years of physics college education would teach you immensely more information than every video on this KZbin channel.

[@tanvirfarhan5585]

@@NicolasLavender yeah i agree with you but my school has never tech me in a such a beautiful way. it took me 4-5 months to understand this but still I was confused. but this video is more understandable and simple. my school only tech me how to get good grade and solve equation. but don't let us to think and imagine it.if u learn it from school you won't get that feel for physics.and good thing is that u can learn whenever u can but in schools if u r not interested you still have to learn it you are forced !

[@hitbox7422]

@@NicolasLavender I agree with you to a certain degree. Fact is, Einstein derived his equations mainly from imagining a photon traveling on a curved world line, not only simply by doing the math. I'm pretty sure that most of these gigantic scientific leaps are derived from our imagination, although recreating it with the formulating principles of mathematics is the last and most important factor.

[@danielbeckstrand2992]

I look forward to these videos each week more than anything.

[@timewaster504]

This channel does the best explanations of all of these phenomenon I have ever seen.

[@kasroa]

Every time I watch one of your videos I feel like many gaps get filled that other videos on the subject leave as gaps. The level of detail is obviously meticulously chosen for each section of the video, so that the viewer is never left with an obvious burning question that doesn't get answered. The animations are just perfect too, probably the most useful and effective I've seen.

[@JohnDoe-zw6to]

This channel is such a nice complement to the normal educational channels that give a general overview of things. It has a special gift in diving deep into the most complex topics while somehow keeping it accessible to the masses.

[@No-oneInParticular]

Best video yet. It's exciting to see paradoxes, gaps in understanding, reasons why it works and reasons why it doesn't work. Potential for new ideas, potential for new discovery. It's inspiring. Thank you :)

[@ninjxxitty]

you and anton and pbsst too are all great sources of scientific information and comprehension. im really glad i found your channel

[@yendorelrae5476]

Your novel explanations with your visual grids are treasure, thank you!

[@mmarriott5818]

This is the best explanation I've seen, even better than PBS Spacetime.

[@rontogunov282]

it's still not clear to me why accelerating near the horizon changes the apparent cancellation of particles and antiparticles. is it because their distance appears greater apart perpendicular to the event horizon such that they cannot regroup/cancel? Second, what is it about negative energy particles that makes it that they're the ones that are captured and not the positive ones? With those particles appearing at the edge of the event horizon, you'd think there would be an equal probability of a positive or negative energy particles to be absorbed...

[@sergeiburtsev5712]

I have the same question. The video's author introduced an unexplained universe level restriction that negative waves can go only in the direction outside of black hole and positive waves can go only inside.

[@gertjanbron1841]

I do have the same exact questio

[@xBosil]

@@sergeiburtsev5712 I thought I was the only one really bothered by that fact

[@samhay4143]

This is the one part of Brief History of Time that I didn't properly grok when I read it as a teen. Grand video; thank you for your help.

[@rhopsi-q6b]

Super interesting! And _extremely_ well explained and animated. I almost got the feeling that I understand this world.

[@ElGrand.Samarkand]

Underrated channel Beautiful video Easy explanation This is gold

[@lolglolblol]

This was a great explanation! I'd already heard the explanation with virtual particles before, but it wasn't clear to me why only the antiparticle would be sucked into the black hole, especially since the explanation basically ascribed it to random chance. I didn't know why this wouldn't simply be counteracted by the positive particles also having an equal chance of being sucked in. When watching the first part of your video, I immediately saw what was really happening.

[@Maeve_Rose]

they always use antiparticle because its easier to understand, but neither particle really existed until it leaves. It doesn’t matter if it is the anti-matter that or the matter that escapes, Because the energy used to create that particle was energy from the black hole. Which essentially means that the Black Hole is losing energy and therefore losing MASS, so its just easier to abstract the energy loss into an antiparticle always falling, then to try and explain the multi step process.

[@manuelsalazar5257]

Im a serious consumer of science based channels on youtube and your videos are certainly some of the best, I really love your explanations! This channel has so much more potential, I would seriously suggest doing collabs or something with other science channels, im sure they'll love it and it will really help you popularize your channel, and anyone would love to work with such quality as yours. I only discovered this by chance but im so glad I did. Good luck and keep up thee great videos!

[@itetecnun]

Man! I discovered your channel by chance and I am completely in love with it, the quality of your videos are so good that are difficult to describe. I really enjoy learning new things, or at least trying to, since these topics are a bit hard. Anyway, great work, keep it up!

[@lorriecarrel9962]

To my observation,your analogies are the best I've ever seen hands down,outstanding .

[@matej_grega]

Why is this so good?

[@MrVikingsandra]

I can't get enough of these videos honestly. I'm checking my knowledge and they help me digest concepts I hadn't fully grasped. Love your work!! 👏👏👏👏

[@HowlingFretFumbler]

This is phenominal. The explanation - the animations - everything!

[@jnjbaggott1]

Every video you have made is the best explanation I’ve seen on that topic, it’s wild

[@frankdaze2353]

There were multiple points during this video that I had to pause as I was running up against what I thought I already understood. I’m sure I’ve heard explanations of HR that didn’t break my mind so much, meaning either they lacked something or you have put it in such approachable terms that I’ve been more able to see at which point my understanding breaks down. I’m sure it’s the latter. Awesome video! I can’t wait to check out more

[@mansouryoutubization]

Amazing technique in converting very subtle physical concepts into animation, a neat combination of art and science, you mastered in both area. an excellent narration, very soothing voice, obviously every second of video is thought and planned accuratle, BRAVO, keep the good work!

[@ScienceClicEN]

Thank you very much !

[@franciscorojas8088]

Thank you for doing these videos. I can only imagine the effort behind your research and trying to explain such complex topics in under 20 minutes. Will be pointing people towards your videos every time I see someone looking for answers.

[@Stardust_Lily]

This is so wonderful! I've been a big fan of watching numerous physics videos and usually fall back on PBS Spacetime (which is amazing! Complex info in relatable analogies, and Matt O'Dowd is a treasure 😊). This is just as amazing, and gets into the deeper end of the pool of these incredibly complex subjects in a way I've been hungry for! New subscriber now, and gonna spend the rest of my week watching all y'all's vids and eagerly awaiting the next. :)

[@blockify]

Me in school: *sleeps* Me at home: QUANTUM FUCKING PHYSICS BABYY!

[@Vicinfi]

This cannel is worth way more than 500k subscribers. Should be at least as famous as Veritasium and Kurzgesagt.

[@1adamgriffin1]

why would only the negative virtual particles be captured by the black hole? surely, when a VP pair spawned at the horizon, there would be a 50/50 chance which one is on the inside

[@DrVickyHarris]

Exactly! Which would imply no mass lost on average. I’ve never got this. They say the negative particle is allowed to “become real” which is odd because it’s always been real, just anti matter. The language is too confusing and I’m not liking it. Going to have to,listen to it again but I’ve got a PhD in this and this really didn’t add up!

[@xBosil]

@@DrVickyHarris that is literally too annoying that no one bothers to explain, this concept seem very important to me and isn't explained

[@PlounCZ]

They do actually have a 50/50 chance. The video showcased only the negative, however there is no reason and why would that be. Energy is relative. It is calculated based on things like mass, motion and for us most importantly its potential energy. Because the particle is falling extremely fast, think of it as having negative potential energy. This overweights its energy. Even if it was a positive particle that's motionless in a flat field. On the other hand, even if a negative particle is send out, its initial energy will be at first negative. It is barely in motion. If its 99.99% of c and you need to be at least 99.989% of c to escape at that current point where it is at the moment, it will be extremely slow. Its motion is preserved and eventually the acceleration from the gravitational field will alleviate and it will slowly start escaping → its potential energy starts increasing because its motion is high and the potential energy keeps increasing too. That is why over time it becomes actual matter. I hope that you get the case when a negative particle is send into the black hole and the positive particle is send to space. Keep in mind that if the circumstances aren't perfect, they get usually both absorbed by the black hole. If anything is unclear or something i wrote is wrong/misleading and somebody is actually reading this even after all this time then surely let me know. I might and very well will be wrong about at least some details.

[@SyDatNguyen-r4j]

If both positive and negative virtual particles fall in, they would still annihaliate during their fall, and if they both escape, they would also annihaliate when escaping. If the opposite happen, since the negative energy particle isn’t possible outside the black hole, they would annihaliate at the event horizon

[@PlounCZ]

@@SyDatNguyen-r4j negative particles are completly possible. They're called antimatter. antimatter annihaliates with standart matter. to be honnest, the explanation provided in this video leaves more questions, than it answers. There's a better one whitch explaines it with waves coming thru the black hole. all of those questions don't even began to exist and while it is less intuitive, it is more realistic aproach that explains it well in the end

[@rishisingh9778]

Extremely underrated channel. Great graphics, great explaination!

[@alteskonto1145]

I really love the neon look of the little particle waves. It gives the v i b e s

[@isonlynameleft]

The best plain description I've heard for Hawking radiation, excellent!

[@feynstein1004]

Best physics channel ever

[@jaker721]

Black holes are so fascinating. They are so unlike anything else that we can observe in nature

[@deanrichardson4712]

But just like everything we can't observe in nature.

[@deantoth]

This channel is amazing. One of the best quantum science explaining channels, if not the best.

[@mrsamot4677]

Wow. First video I’ve watched from this channel and I’m hooked. Subbed.

[@rodchristoffersen7052]

Really liked your method of explaining this concept. Maybe instead of thinking of them as absorbing stuff, it is generating stuff, but those paradoxes are interesting and remind me of the mobius strip idea. Maybe just transforming energy forms (you know it can't be destroyed just transformed), what a conundrum. Thankyou for this clip so thought provoking and actually made them more interesting for me.

[@emigrek]

Best channel in the world (at least this universe)

[@ScienceClicEN]

🙏

[@itisbettertopoopinthesink]

This answered all my questions! great job Keep it up💯💯💯

[@kevin_heslip]

Thank you. I really wanted to know more about this, and didn’t know that I did

[@georgenabraham]

One of the most underrated channels I've ever seen.

[@afiq980]

Amazingly clear explanation!

[@aashsyed1277]

i live i pakistan

[@max-fj7np]

Im subbed to so many science channels, don't know why it took the algorithm so long to bring me to you. Glad it did though, this video explained hawking radiation better than any other channel Im subbed to

[@mohammedaayachi3828]

Just read about most of this in the book 'a short history of time' by Stephen Hawking, and miraculously, you made a video about it. Can't thank you enough and keep it up, I only found out about this channel a month or so ago and it's already my number one!

[@emixonalgaert4376]

Even though i don't understand 98% of the stuff here i could listen all day to these videos, they are so good.

[@1971jwing]

Mind explodes at the horizon. Holy cow batman that was awesome. Thank you! The visualization of gravity between earth and free falling objects was amazing.. Thanks for your efforts. 🤟🤓🤯

[@ScienceClicEN]

Ahah thanks! I'm glad you liked it! If you want I have a whole video about the visualization called "a new way to visualize general relativity"

[@adriangoleby]

This channel was fundamental to going back to study! Perfect animations!

[@rhgulay1821]

Now this is something perfect for my learning method.

[@adityahari-veryboring]

quite phenomenal visualisation . such great art of simplification

[@silviosarunic3234]

The best channel on YT!!! Bravo❤️

[@ScienceClicEN]

🙏

[@PatricioHondagneuRoig]

We need more subscribers. This is criminally underrated.

[@GabrielyanAkop]

Great channel! I "ate" all your videos in one sit. Perfect, quite intuitive and interesting visualisation, especially for those, who just like me, are not natural scientists. More content is needed! How about making new series on dark matter, dark energy, supersymmetry, string theory, theory of quantum gravitation?

[@amateurpro6993]

Its just awesome...can't find words to describe...crystal clear explanation of concept, mindblowing bgm, engaging baritone voice....OMG! Its freaking amazing....This video deserves an oscar for its VFX 👌👌👏👏👏

[@mikemironov7551]

In every video I reliably find some new insights neatly packed in animations of amazing quality! It is like watch whole course by Susskind in ~15 minutes! Thank you!

[@captaincruise8796]

But you miss out on Susskind’s dry jokes and awkward pauses.

[@MethLord]

This channel is criminally underrated

[@marcuscarana9240]

So watching black holes evaporate is the ultimate watching paint dry scenario.

[@philipparker5291]

Everything from this channel is brilliant, both in terms of explanation as well as its visual presentation. Thanks!

[@abhiramcd]

Finally, you reached 113k, I am damn sure you will get 1 M this year or the other. Love from India.

[@KaNa95]

The best channel in the universe! Thanks to the author for the work, I watch your content from the Chechen Republic.

[@andreacosta2238]

Absolutely stunning as always!!

[@aristotleolympiada4540]

WOW, that was absolutely brilliant. Prof. Hawking, you were an extraordinary mind coming up with this.

[@ryangaudlip8424]

Can you do a series on the math behind quantum field theory? Kinda like what you did with special relativity. It was so interesting to learn