Is the universe a hologram? The strange physics of black holes | Michelle Thaller | Big Think

Is the universe a hologram? The strange physics of black holes
New videos DAILY: bigth.ink
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: bigth.ink/Edge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since energy cannot be destroyed, only transformed, some argue that information - arguably a form of energy - cannot be destroyed either. So then, what happens to information when it is absorbed into a black hole? Scientists don't know for certain, but some posit that it may be possible for it to leak away from the black hole over time. Black holes may hold information in a two-dimensional manner similar to a hologram, which take on three dimensions when light is shone through them. Some theorize that the underlying nature of reality can be glimpsed through black holes - that all the information about the entire universe is somehow held on a two-dimensional space of something.
To better understand how black holes work, as well as the elements surrounding them, we may need a level of physics to be developed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHELLE THALLER:
Dr. Michelle Thaller is an astronomer who studies binary stars and the life cycles of stars. She is Assistant Director of Science Communication at NASA. She went to college at Harvard University, completed a post-doctoral research fellowship at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in Pasadena, Calif. then started working for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory's (JPL) Spitzer Space Telescope. After a hugely successful mission, she moved on to NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), in the Washington D.C. area. In her off-hours often puts on about 30lbs of Elizabethan garb and performs intricate Renaissance dances. For more information, visit
NASA.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIPT:
MICHELLE THALLER: Black holes really are kind of getting to the very heart of our physics. And I believe that they're kind of showing us the way that eventually we're going to need different physics and new physics. People ask questions like, "What happens inside a black hole?" Or even, "What happens at the very boundary of a black hole, the event horizon, when light is absorbed?" And honestly, our physics is telling us a lot of contradictory things. And our image of what an event horizon really is may be changing. People like Stephen Hawking and Leonard Susskind have recently come up with this idea that a black hole should not be able to destroy information. O.K., what do we mean by information? Information can be almost anything.
All of the different atoms in my body have angular momentum, they have charge, they have mass. There's all sorts of little bits of information that make me me. At the quantum mechanic level, the tiniest of levels, there are different amounts of energy, there are different probabilities that are contained in the structure of my matter. And information, in some ways is a form of energy. It's actually a way that you can describe something which is somehow, in a strange way, a higher energy state than not being able to describe something. And so one of the questions is, "If energy really can't be destroyed energy itself is something that is intrinsic in the universe, you can't really created or destroy it is it possible that information is the same way? Is there really no way to actually destroy the information about what all of my subatomic particles are doing right now?"
So black holes kind of stare you right in the face. What a black hole supposedly does is it absorbs everything. Space and time bend into a black hole so that nothing can escape. That means that any information about the material that fell in is gone. The only thing we know about it is that as a black hole absorbs material, it gets more massive. It actually adds that mass to the mass of the black hole. And as that mass increases, the event horizon becomes larger. Basically, the area where space is so curved that you can't get out begins to extend the more massive a black hole is. The most massive black holes we know of in the universe are many billions of times the mass of our sun. And the physical extent of this event horizon is about the size of our solar system, maybe like out to the planet Pluto.
So is it possible, then, if everything goes into a black hole and nothing ever comes out, space and time go inside the black hole and don't come out? What happened to that information? And this has begun to make a lot of people wonder if we really have thought of black holes the wrong way. Maybe there isn't an event horizon in the true sense. I actually had a friend of mine that studies black holes say, "Well, I'm not sure if they're black. They m...
For the full transcript, check out bigthink.com/videos/black-holes

[@bigthink]

Want to get Smarter, Faster? Subscribe for DAILY videos: bigth.ink/GetSmarter

[@reasonerenlightened2456]

Give it another 10000 years of relentless pursuit of the truth and , perhaps, we would have an answer

[@jonathanjollimore7156]

Edit said nothing useful

[@timothygrech3400]

AMUN RA THE MATRIX GAME OF LIFE.

[@malcolmcurthoys5273]

Does God play dice??

[@thisiszaphod]

The ultimate communicator is Michelle. Makes the complex seem so simple.

[@unlokia]

@@ENXJ Not sure about the profanity, but _"The ULTIMATE"_ is kinda pretentious, over-used guff, yes.

[@TheTeufelhunden68]

@@unlokia Wow! Calm your jets. You two are never going into space.

[@rpylamp8960]

Michio kaku is better at explaining and communicating a theory. She is good but just michio is better

[@user-qe7bt9dz1l]

thisiszaphod I could imagine it simpler actually.

[@cogen651]

I think she's a moron.

[@tortoisegamer5804]

Most articulate explanation of a very difficult theory. This Tortoise approves.

[@MrStosh12345]

This Coyote howls....this message!

[@coolgamerman]

Tortoise Gamer rise up gamers

[@mydogskips2]

+Tortoise Gamer Yup, this is obviously a simplified version, but I listened to about 90 minutes of Leonard Susskind explaining the theory(his theory I believe) and didn't understand half of what I now do after hearing Dr. Thaller speak on it.

[@mikeinvader9]

@@panaccoman i agree. They are pushing this shit like there is no tomorrow. Its nothing more than a theory of relativity cult. This cult like behaviour seems to sprang up in cockroach groups with no people to challenge their bull. Its all done to make you think they aleady know and there is nothing for you to think about when they are still thinking about why the moon really orbits the earth. They just dont want you to think about it.Its a fucking clan of jesters and bullshitters. The only advice i can give people is to not stop thinking like they want you to because these people dont know jack shit. Even think about stuff like gravity that you believe already has been solved. Even if it has .............Think!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@CutleryChips]

Cole Panacci huh? No one said there can’t be objects near a black hole with strong gravitational fields? Earth is so close to the sun but it is not shredded by the sun’s strong gravity. Similarly objects can orbit black holes outside their event horizon.

[@kadewilliams7925]

The less famous cousin to black holes: The Very, very dark navy blue holes.

[@serfasleep]

Kade Williams midnight blue holes

[@kadewilliams7925]

@@serfasleep 😂😂

[@jlstruyde]

Beige hole!

[@pajtaj]

They may even be Khaki Holes, but only before Labor Day

[@ViratKohli-jj3wj]

Butt hole

[@michaelblacktree]

There was a time when black holes (and the scientists who proposed their existence) were subjects of ridicule. Now they're the key to understanding the universe. Funny how that works.

[@chasetuttle2780]

m.blacktree It just goes to show you how the scientific community is no exception when it comes to holding dogmas. Science itself is not a religion, but the people in it are just as susceptible to being religious and clinging to certain paradigms as any religious person

[@michaelblacktree]

People are human. Go figure! 😝

[@sodo5988]

Go get one.

[@chasetuttle2780]

m.blacktree Yes indeedy. This should be obvious, yet many people just kind of tacitly assume that the scientific community is incapable of bias and that if the community at large sees a certain idea as fringe or impossible, then it is completely invalid and not even worth investigating. It’s no coincidence that the greatest scientists in history were philosophers and metaphysicians first and foremost, making them much more open minded to the possibilities; which is why they were able to make the counter-intuitive discoveries that they did.

[@thepurplepanda4]

@@sodo5988 a human? Where could one purchase one?

[@Drizzle52693]

She’s such a good teacher, this is the first time I’ve really understood Hawking radiation

[@quasimobius]

oh, you mean like how she misleads her audience with the old "particles appear out of nothing" con that so many in her circle try to use on the physics-challenged public? Her so-called "virtual particles" never materialized is why they are called "virtual". They are nothing but disturbances in the fields of already existing "real" particles. profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/

[@jesus_built_my_hotrod]

I love how Michelle's hair never gave up on the 80's

[@OurNewestMember]

*How the 80s never gave up on...

[@KurtRichterCISSP]

They even come to Michelle's videos and judge her appearance.

[@Opinionteer]

Looks fine to me.

[@Tomorrison28]

I think it's pretty dope

[@gideonpepys]

Hey, 'The mind..'. The future called. You're dead, and you wasted your life.

[@BladeRunner-td8be]

Michelle is a very gifted teacher. The way she presents and describes the universe is so down to "earth" and it's very easy to pick up on how much she enjoys thinking and talking about stuff like this. It's contagious. She is very genuine, candid, and open. I always watch her when she pops up in my recommendations on KZbin.

[@polecat13360]

She said "the planet Pluto." Take that Tyson!

[@coolgamerman]

polecat13360 lol

[@belloore9958]

😂😂😂😂

[@szpoti]

I've heard that too!

[@SirHarry]

It is a dwarf planet, so it's still a planet

[@ssifr3331]

2:36 Viva la pluto!

[@ananasupreme]

This gets me thinking: What if the universe itself is a black hole and the reason why it keeps expanding is because all the information it's sucking keeps pouring in.🤯

[@kasiopeeya]

You're making me spiritually mad. Please, stop. J.K. B.T.W.

[@maestrofrags3436]

bullshit

[@cnacma]

this has already been hypothesized. you can look it up they call it a "white hole". the problem with this hypothesis is there may never be a way to test this or falsify it so its not really useful to science.

[@frederick909]

Omg... I was just thinking how the entire universe might be a black hole, but never made the connection with the expansion aspect. Cool theory!

[@himanshusehra7484]

That's the power of imagination buddy 😎but universe itself is black hole and there is another black hole in this black hole 😵 h

[@BC-sr3gg]

There actually is people who is super clever spend their life to study our ultimate universe rather than go make money. I respect this woman.

[@hamletfisherman5740]

She makes money by studying the universe

[@maestrofrags3436]

fk this woman makes money more than a google executive

[@Showmetheevidence-]

What’s wrong with making money?

[@AbhinavChauhan2]

@@Showmetheevidence- Nothing. It's about balance. Over obsession for anything is bad.

[@darren.davies3957]

Michelle always makes me smile, concise and to the point, have a great day!!

[@hazardeur]

Yeah, she's doing a great job! Clear and to the point indeed and that's not easy with these kind of topics

[@tonytormenta4653]

darren. davies I have the answers for her questions, you know how can I reach her, email o something, thanks

[@JohnnyEvilsVids]

Just a pleasure listening to her talk. Intelligent and a great speaker. We need more like her!

[@Savoy1984]

Couldn’t agree more...and I think I only understood 3 words of it.

[@MrKydaman]

I could listen to Michelle all day long. Great stuff, love it!

[@jamespikover2278]

I always understood the hologram principle as a 4-dimensional hypersphere projecting onto the 3-dimensional universe we experience (or 5-dimensional on our 4-dimensional space-time). Particles, and the quantum fluctuations that either consist of or create those particles of matter along with energy in the form of light, are a projection from a higher dimension. The projection, literally and physically, is physical matter and energy in the 4-dimensional plane of space-time. A black hole may display all information that it obtains in the event horizon as a mostly-flat surface (it's the diameter of the sphere, not the volume, but not the diameter of a circle aka a 2-dimensional shape). This would make the dimensionality (if that's even a word) of the information of a black hole the same dimensionality as the surrounding universe, at any given point in time. The only reason the holographic principle describes a higher dimension (5 dimensions) is because, just like a hologram is a recording, it is ultimately outside the boundaries of space-time and in fact contains all of it. The duration of the universe (if that's even a thing, maybe it doesn't end) is fully known and described because all information is accounted for, just like we know all the contents of a recorded video that we've already seen. It makes sense to me at least, not that I fully agree with it. The holographic principle supposes that the universe, as a whole (meaning over it's entire duration) is an expression of sorts, leading to something. And that's extremely appealing: that the universe is not only heading somewhere, but ultimately has a purpose, even if we don't understand it, or possibly can't ever understand it. It means there may be higher-dimensional beings that may exist, thus a goal for us to strive towards (growing beyond matter and energy and time, real sci-fi stuff), and a greater form of existence than we could ever imagine, since even our imaginations are buried in the confines of our "holographic" existence, meaning in space-time, and matter/energy.

[@AbhinavChauhan2]

In many traditions the universe is described as an illusion. And honestly this theory if true makes sense and give answers to many hard problems. In Hindu philosophy of non-duelism the 'Brahm' is the fundamental reality of the nature which projects itself as universe and everything within it.

[@brettfisher5122]

This is Michelle's best video by far. Perfectly well explained, no dramatic oversimplifications that would lead someone to misunderstandings, organized, and answers the question directly. 10/10.

[@MikeKayK]

She lost me when she stated that the event horizon may be a shell with information about what's in the black hole. Only for an outside observer does time appear to "stop" for an object crossing the event horizon. For that object, time proceeds normally and they become spaghettified as they continue toward the singularity. Nothing actually stops at the boundary.

[@brettfisher5122]

@@MikeKayK You are both correct and incorrect though. PBS Spacetime showed a good way to visualize the effects of time dilation as every fundamental particle is a marble in a box (no air). An "event" can occur every time the marble bounces off of a side of the box (marble traveling at C). In normal space this is happening like crazy, but as the box is gravitationally accelerated towards the speed of light, the time for that marble to reach the side of the box grows and grows. The box experiencing this acceleration thinks everything is fine because it measures time and experiences reality using these marble collisions. Were the box to observe the universe around it, it would see thousands then millions then trillions then decillions of years flashing by in seconds. The box would make it to the singularity, but the marble would be very nearly stuck, unmoving (with reference to the box).

[@waldemarhachaj8628]

When you think about it, multidimensional universe constructs called games exist as and function as one-dimensional string of zeroes and ones

[@Elwen-xs7gr]

Okay, what makes you have this kind of conclusion? How come one-dimenstional string as zero or one?

[@jtzoltan]

Is that accurate to say if the zeros and ones in this case relies on hardware and the physical universe to actually do anything at all? It might be that in abstracting out the ones and zeros you've left the actual universe behind.

[@happytx1860]

You are fantastic at explaining complex theories. I am open to the possibilities. Thanks

[@vastchaos]

@@panaccoman Could you explain why stars cannot form in the vicinity and the alternate explanation for the observation correlated to black holes? I have extensive objections to the popular TV model of the universe.

[@vastchaos]

@@panaccoman Alternate explanation?

[@ImmortalKingJay]

I could listen to her talk for hours. She explains complex information so well and concisely that you immediately absorb the information as if you were more than a laymen on the subject. A true teacher.

[@loveyouzindagi2950]

Hi Michelle, I love how you simplify such highly complex ideas in simple language that even a lay person like me can understand it. it is really helpful, thanks

[@brendarua01]

This is the best explanation I've heard without going into the match - which aI can't entirely understand anyway.

[@AzimuthAviation]

Nicely put and easier than a Susskind lecture series to get a 2d picture of the concepts of the event horizon.

[@tubhair]

Dr. Thaller, I recently read a brief piece on the possibility of sub-quantum, the next level down from quantum, where everything goes back to “normal”. May I ask your thoughts on this? Thank you.

[@SkyRiderJavelin]

What a fantastic explanation, I have watched a couple of clips trying to understand this concept. Thank's Michelle for making it clear enough for the layperson to follow along

[@derekfrost8991]

Finally I understand, my appartment is a black hole. I chuck stuff in, it gets suspended, disorganized but never comes out.. :)

[@RyanselfAz]

The very best explanation I've heard and in Lay terms no less

[@colmanian]

Clearest and most intuitive description of this I could find on KZbin, thanks! 🙂

[@iane.millais2982]

Hi Michelle, Another great video making physics understandable to the layman such as myself. I have two questions: 1) If entanglement of neutrons is a proven theory, would it not follow that by sending one side of the pair of entangled neutrons into the event horizon, or even the black hole itself, that the changes that neutron would suffer would immediately reflect on the neutron that wasn't sent into the horizon and/or black hole? 2)Would this not be a viable manner of measurement of what happens within a blackhole or is that information lost and therefore the neutrons become unentangled? Keep talking lady, your are fabulous.

[@jeylful]

Thanks Michelle for condensing and explaining this difficult subject so we all can understand it better

[@tonytormenta4653]

jeylful you know her email? For info

[@soumenb22]

She explains so nicely, I wish she would have been my teacher

[@Brando256]

This was pure excellence! The greatest explanation of Black Holes I have ever heard. Magnificent job...loved it! I could listen to Michelle for hours on end. 👍🏾

[@MrRuamazed]

More please. I can’t get enough of Michelle!

[@Dewsta26]

Mind. Blown. :-o Excellent explanation 👍 :-D

[@shmuelcohen4896]

its flat.

[@Sketcher86]

@@shmuelcohen4896 What's flat?

[@shmuelcohen4896]

@@Sketcher86 earth.

[@Sinnbad21]

Michelle and Michio Kaku. Whether they are your favorite or not, no one knows how to tell a story better than these two

[@jeffbell4434]

Yeah I've recently gotten into michio's videos and I really like him a lot too.

[@Voodoo_AI]

Nassim Haramein is pretty good at it also.

[@littlebirdling238]

She is amazingly brilliant,down-to-earth and astoundingly skilled at communicating complex ideas.Bravo!

[@kirstinstrand6292]

Fascinating, I wish I could easily wrap my brain around these concepts. I wonder if listening more than once would help.

[@DarlenMakenai]

Thank you for the explanation Michelle! You are the best at this

[@mrEofPlanetEarth]

We can only hope she somehow reads your comment.

[@anwarparvez5928]

If you are interested in this topic,read this book.... The Holographic Universe by Micheal Talbot....

[@iliketurtles1027]

@Joe Gallop no u

[@toxiclava5879]

Iliketurtles lol uno reversal always works

[@anwarparvez5928]

Cole Panacci Keep an open mind,that's all I can say...

[@Hyumanity]

Cole Panacci If my understanding is correct, Google is showing that Sagittarius A’s radius/event horizon is 10^7 km while 3 light years is 10^13km. So the stars still formed beyond the event horizon and although the conditions are not favourable nor ideal for star formations, they can still form in such conditions.

[@Hyumanity]

@@panaccoman I'm not sure if you'll accept a section from wiki's Supermassive Black Hole (SMBH) but here: " In addition, the tidal forces in the vicinity of the event horizon are significantly weaker for supermassive black holes. The tidal force on a body at the event horizon is likewise inversely proportional to the square of the mass:[10] a person on the surface of the Earth and one at the event horizon of a 10 million M☉ black hole experience about the same tidal force between their head and feet. Unlike with stellar mass black holes, one would not experience significant tidal force until very deep into the black hole.[11]" According to this, since Sagit. A is a SMBH "one would not experience significant tidal force until very deep into the black hole", so could it be that the 11 stars were 3 light years far enough from the event horizon that they were not affected by the tidal force and still formed despite being in a non-ideal environment? How did you form or where did you hear the concept that it shouldn't be possible for stars to form close to black holes?

[@chrisrkw]

There is something wrong or not complete about how Hawking Radiation is described in popular science. If black hole evaporate by spawning particles (at the edge of event horizont), it has to spawn both matter and antimatter. If matter is released, than antimatter remains inside (possibly annihilates with existing matter). But it should with equal probability release antimatter, leaving matter for itself - growing bigger. So in the end shouldn't it remain the same?

[@chrisrkw]

@@kirkhamandy I've already subscribed to PBS, do you mean specific video? URL appreciated

[@itsmybuddha.nature]

Awesome as Always ~💫

[@djurkolalatovic4396]

Why c squared in Einstein's equation, what does it really represent, and what is the problem with quantum gravity?

[@fakshen1973]

My understanding is that C represents not the speed of light but the speed of causality. Light is limited by the speed of causality from our perspective. If you get into the discussion of photons of light and when are where it exists... bring some popcorn.

[@djurkolalatovic4396]

@@fakshen1973 I understand all of that, but E = mc2 tells us that that energy and mass are equivalent, and if we want to convert mass into energy, we multiply it with c squared, and I never heard a good explanation what c2 really represents.

[@jacksavage197]

Love this lady's way of educating us.

[@pondca]

Such a wonderful speaker and educator, thanks Michelle!

[@heatherl4732]

Makes me wonder if there is something more to the supermassive black holes that are in the center of almost every large galaxy. Love this video!

[@mitchlittler]

This sounds almost like theory of forms, lol! What this actually tells us is platonism is alive and well in the physics world. All I'm saying is I think Plato would be really into this theory.

[@davidkeane7802]

2.40 ‘.....out to the planet Pluto’!!!!!

[@chaitu6081]

Hey Michelle... can you explain the significance of Pi and Golden Ration to this Universe, as they are numbers with non recurring and endless decimals. Please tell me of other mathematical entities that are of significance.

[@heraclitus9721]

My real opinion, having thought about how universe came to be and is (won't explain it fully here), is that nothing mathematical can be expressed precisely in all of the universe. Universe's fundamental property is necessary change, and nothing ever exists at any point (no points exist, meaning no precise mathematical creations can exist, only in our idealistic imagination).

[@bombdottcom111]

She's great! Thank you and please have her back again sometime!!

[@LoveDoctorNL]

Go to 2:36 Neill Degrasse Tyson and listen how Pluto is a planet again

[@albo2711]

Yeah Michelle's great. I'm in my first year of a physics degree and I feel really dumb

[@RomanKondrachov]

Very well articulated to the simple curious human beings. Thank you very much!

[@varuntulsyan2558]

Question: Is virtual particles being born out of energy according to E=mc^2 the same as matter/anti-matter being born according to the same equation? If so, why are they called 'virtual' particles? I heard somewhere that virtual particles are the particles at quantum level that give rise to the force fields and are constantly created and annihilated. But now I'm confused. Someone help.

[@gaittr]

I used to think I was smart. Now I'm going to go and play with those blocks my mother bought for me when I was 2 years old. I guess my University of Colorado education and Bachelor of Science degrees in geology and astronomy were worth nothing. This lady is my hero

[@gaittr]

@Fred Fannakapan Today's lesson folks: Troll = A person whose life is so miserable, pathetic and insignificant that they have to seek out human interaction by scouring comment threads for someone they can pick at. Well done Fred. We all know you're a troll. And you're also blocked. I don't deal with little boy trolls.

[@user-sm2pc6qu6z]

@@gaittr nothing wrong with a humble brag and I think you may have overreacted a bit for being called out on it.

[@sodo5988]

Then he went and made a speech about how screwed up the world is and took a picture, like this. 😛 Yall didnt know Einstein was gangsta.

[@mrEofPlanetEarth]

I love einstein but dude fucked his cousin....eww.

[@zakbro]

thanks for this, pretty eye opening

[@scottsimo3170]

Love Your videos, Thank You.

[@joops110]

I think it's much more likely that matter is the result of consciousness, not the other way around. You could call the universe a hologram, which comes down to the same thing.

[@BygoneT]

What? Why would you even consider that when EVERYTHING, including reality itself points to reality being precursor to consciousness? And how would you even know that's the case?

[@joops110]

@@BygoneT I don't know for sure, it's just my philosophy. As long as science hasn't solved the hard problem of consciousness we are free to philosophize. I'll try to explain what I mean as best as I can. Imagine the universe is like an online game server and consciousness is the client. Not literally, just to make a comparison. The server contains and processes the information, bits in a timeless spaceless matterless but beautiful piece of 'code'. Consciousness reads some of these bits, the ones that are relevant to its survival, and turns them into a comprehendable experience. Time, space, matter, colour, sound, motion, etc, are all concepts that only exist within the experience of the client i.e. consciousness. You could say the universe existed before consciousness did, but I say time itself does not exist without consciousness. Time is just one of the things we experience to make sense of the 'code' that is relevant to our survival. The same goes for individualism, we experience our bodies and minds to be seperate entities from one another, while we are all parts of one tightly knit 'code'. Some people call this "collective consciousness". This is all completely hypothetical and if science proves me wrong I'll change my philosophy. I'm not the only one who thinks like this though, if you're interested I suggest searching for some David Chalmer videos. He looks at things in a similar way and explains it much better than I do. Hope this makes sense! :D Edit: The reason why I consider this view is because, in my opinion, it's the most complete hypothesis I have found so far. It encompasses everthing. How would we ever know this is the case? I don't know. Because it revolves around consciousness it's impossible to provide evidence. We can't check what reality looks like outside of the human experience. I hope neurologists and physicists will find a way to explain it in the future, but maybe they never will.

[@David66Stang]

Soooo. Pluto is a planet again? 😜

[@christiancastruita9053]

so is there some type of imbalance in the black holes absorption of matter and antimatter? or it the frequency of both of these events that effect its energy?

[@830jps]

Very well explained. Thanks

[@zerge69]

The universe may be LIKE a hologram, not a literal hologram. That "like" makes all the difference. It´s like saying that the Earth is spherical LIKE a basketball. That's not the same as saying that the Earth IS a basketball.

[@dreamer0772]

So the earth is not a basketball? Are you kidding me?

[@MikeKayK]

@@dreamer0772 No, basketballs are round. The Earth is more similar to a pancake.

[@thepurplepanda4]

@@dreamer0772 all of what I've ever believed is wrong!!!!!

[@zerge69]

@@dreamer0772 You've been lied to all these years my son.

[@heristyono4755]

Honestly, I've never seen a hologram that has no designer.

[@grahamhenry9368]

So let me get this straight. A hologram is too complex to be naturally occurring, so you then assume that something far more complex than a hologram (a designer) is instead naturally occurring and created the hologram? If a hologram is too complex to not have a designer, then a designer is too complex to not have a designer.

[@heristyono4755]

@@grahamhenry9368 not if the designer has always existed

[@grahamhenry9368]

@@heristyono4755 You could say the exact same thing about the hologram. A designer is far more complex than a hologram, so why do you assume a designer could have always existed, but something simpler than a designer is too complex to have always existed? Your logic is contradictory

[@heristyono4755]

@@grahamhenry9368 No I could not. Because we know for sure this universe, be it a hologram or not, definitely has a beginning namely the big bang.

[@grahamhenry9368]

@@heristyono4755 The hologram represents all the information contained within the universe. The big bang didnt create that information, it simply changed its state.

[@Opinionteer]

What happens to E=mc2 if the speed of light is slowed or stopped in a black hole?

[@compellingpoint9072]

Compelling points to consider. Well done.

[@blakewisniewski3750]

I'm a simple man. I see "universe is a hologram" and I click.

[@michil.1192]

I see, another man of (space) culture

[@Fru_videos]

Flat earth? pshh - Flat universe - now we're talking big. ;)

[@herrietako]

Nice to hear you Michele 🥰

[@jonhayes9223]

One of the best explanations ever

[@jiminverness]

A black hole doesn't _destroy_ information. It locks it up for a good long while.

[@heraclitus9721]

Yeah, where did they get the idea that information is lost??? So absurd. it changes like anything else, and remains inside the black hole.

[@aviraljanveja5155]

For this format of videos, Michelle is the perfect candidate. The great explainer. Feynman like :D

[@cjg8763]

Michelle, would love you to give us a more in depth explanation on hawking radiation. Love listening to your explanations.

[@cjg8763]

@@kirkhamandy if its PBS Spacetime I'm sure I've seen it already at some point and likely will again. I just want to hear Michelle explain it. Her words, her voice. That's all. Love falling asleep listening to her (and I do not mean that in a bad way it is in no way at all boring just calming plus I love the way she describes things).

[@status101-danielho6]

If time stops at the event horizon, doesn't that also mean that all the mass is also at the horizon's shell? Wouldn't that affect the black hole's angular momentum or some other characteristic that could be measurable for an outside observer?

[@Jackginnjr]

At about @2:36, she said “the planet Pluto”.... interesting

[@latefordinner4513]

Yes. Many astrophysicists, physicists and planetary scientists still believe Pluto to be a planet and were never sold on the "invalid" definition that said otherwise

[@EduardoAyresSoares]

“Planet Pluto”, yes you are right!

[@d1agram4]

Thank you for calling, JUST onemoment

[@deepakjoshi664]

Very well explained

[@thekaratecowboymusic]

She said 'the planet pluto'! Yay!

[@SahilP2648]

Black holes are just bugs in the code in the simulation

[@MrMikahT]

Sahil Pethe i’ve thought that before. there’s always a loophole or back door to every system

[@paxwebb]

Black holes are too widespread and integral to our universe to be bugs. Almost every galaxy has one or more super massive black holes in their center holding it together.

[@SahilP2648]

@@paxwebb no they aren't widespread and they are not integral. Our universe would be perfectly fine without them. It's true that super massive blackholes at the center of spiral galaxies hold all the planets contained within in a plane but there are galaxies without black hole sin their center. We have only observed blackholes but we do don't know why they are formed. That's why we don't know what is inside them (we don't even know if they have an inside since time stops working). The only logical explanation is that if time, and the 3 spatial dimensions stop interacting with each other like they are supposed to, it creates an anomaly. That's the definition of big in code. Something which isn't supposed to happen or happens outside of test cases or majority use cases is a bug.

[@paxwebb]

@@SahilP2648 "How many black holes are there? There are so many black holes in the Universe that it is impossible to count them. It's like asking how many grains of sand are on the beach. Fortunately, the Universe is enormous and none of its known black holes are close enough to pose any danger to Earth. Stellar-mass black holes form from the most massive stars when their lives end in supernova explosions. The Milky Way galaxy contains some 100 billion stars. Roughly one out of every thousand stars that form is massive enough to become a black hole. Therefore, our galaxy must harbor some 100 million stellar-mass black holes. Most of these are invisible to us, and only about a dozen have been identified. The nearest one is some 1,600 light years from Earth. In the region of the Universe visible from Earth, there are perhaps 100 billion galaxies. Each one has about 100 million stellar-mass black holes. And somewhere out there, a new stellar-mass black hole is born in a supernova every second. Supermassive black holes are a million to a billion times more massive than our Sun and are found in the centers of galaxies. Most galaxies, and maybe all of them, harbor such a black hole. So in our region of the Universe, there are some 100 billion supermassive black holes. The nearest one resides in the center of our Milky Way galaxy, 28 thousand light years away. The most distant we know of lives in a quasar galaxy billions of light years away." hubblesite.org/explore_astronomy/black_holes/encyc_mod3_q7.html

[@SahilP2648]

@@paxwebb like I said, they aren't widespread. Your article itself says that every thousand stars created have the potential to become a blackhole. So that relates to how many planets then? Let's say on average each star holds 5 planets around them. So that means 5000 planets and then POTENTIALLY a blackhole. When a star dies, it may not even become a blackhole. And the super massive black holes aren't at the heart of every galaxy out there. Only spiral galaxies have super massive black holes at their center. So you are clearly in the wrong here. We would be perfectly fine without blackholes. Planets would still be planets, stars would still be stars, solar systems would still be solar systems, and galaxies would still be galaxies. There is literally no 'reason' for them to exist. Your argument is stupidly invalid.

[@esgra-ur]

So we are kind of the consequence of the interaccion between particules and other stuff, like fire is just visual reaccion of high energize particles?

[@KeymoEmbryoSagan]

in simplest terms, a fire is mass being converted into energy , the heat emitted are high energized particles

[@Bradgilliswhammyman]

MIchelle Thaller, been a fan of hers since " how the universe works" series about 20 years ago. Beautiful smart woman :)

[@imaginaryuniverse632]

It seems that everything is made of imagination

[@OnceTheyNamedMeiWasnt]

Or mad of emanginition

[@kelly2fly]

Poor Pluto! Always a pawn used by scientists to argue whether size really matters or not.

[@brusselsproutboy7005]

Phoenix Uprising it’s really about owning your orbit and Pluto unfortunately shares it with many sizable objects.

[@JKDVIPER]

0:14 I think what happens in a black hole is that, it’s a reset button, it’s a recycling center for nuclear parts, maybe we forgot about the creation story, it wound fix a lot of this theory stuff.

[@SunitaSharma-qe4rk]

Michelle explained well 👍👍

[@Kunosachiaka]

2:30 Pluto a planet officially confirmed, you heard it here first folks!

[@goodfoodgoodlife2022]

Nobody: Me: Hey, Dave mustaine talking about science. No Megadeth fan here?

[@OffTheRailGaming]

LOL!!!

[@blackblurable]

That’s best part of life in my honest opinion and I’m not a physicist or scientist. When there’s something more to it to discover and everyone gets better/smarter figuring out the mysteries of the universe. When everything you’ve learned, studied and put together doesn’t add up. I sense that physicists aren’t upset that their data didn’t work, but rather gives them a new challenge. Hearing some of the most brilliant minds say, “It seems to break the laws of physics or what we know up to this point.” Always brings a smile to my face. What if’s are the coolest things to me. What if we could see beyond, this or that exists or is this possible or impossible. People may say it’s never too late, but I really wish I got more into physics, astrophysics, even biology and science as a whole instead of being more introspective about I guess biology (though I admit I leaned more on the philosophical then biochemical aspect yet am trying.) I’d like to say thanks for uploading this and she is very underrated or not enough credit goes to her like fame like others in her respective field. The beauty of this is these people don’t seek anything more than to share their knowledge of what they know and even don’t. You don’t hear about many other fields of studies that talk about what they don’t know but rather do. I think that’s a testament to their humility and understanding. My hats off to them truly

[@marklowry4431]

This video is great!

[@TrapDaily]

I hate the term "information", they always lose me as soon a they mention information. Im so used to information meaning storage on PCs and phones i can't grasp what they mean by information. Someone please think of another word/ analogy to better describe what information really means

[@creamsodaluvr]

Trap Daily Matter

[@wailer27]

Maybe the subject matter is just too complicated for you. Know your limits.

[@SilasGrieves]

It is a fitting term, but I can understand the confusion. There really is no other term to use for “a particle’s particular energy state, mass amount, and dynamic state” other than information. Existential Data? Raw particle figures? Essential Principles? There is just no easier way to say it than “info”.

[@TheWolfgangFelix]

this is all just a recording.

[@AdlinLing]

Very exciting!

[@shannontaylor1849]

2:36 "... out to the planet Pluto." Thumbs-up for calling it a planet.

[@MrGilRoland]

6:15 So the Earth was flat after all. Ah 😓

[@BrainsApplied]

*This makes me have an existential crisis* Is everything real?

[@sabkamalikek2568]

INFJ?

[@BenisonSam]

Just a pathetic attempt at proving that Universe is not made, it's just an automated process. Information comes from a mind, without a mind there's no information! Does everything seems and feels real to you? If yes, then that's because you have been given the senses to understand it. So it's REAL!! You have been given a mind to understand and investigate the information! Life has meaning and purpose, everything around also do the same...

[@thejackanapes5866]

The idea that the Universe might not actually have all the dimensions it appears to have is not the idea that it doesn't exist or isn't real. An illusion is not non-existent. There are simply parts of it that are not what they seem. To exist is to be something, not to not be anything. "Nothing" as a word only has meaning and usage in the context of extants. You could not wonder if you didn't exist if you did not exist or were not real. We are probably all wrong about the actual properties of our existence, or what words to use to best describe it. We're stuck with heuristics and predictive/parsimonious models. What else can we do?

[@a7i20ci7y]

Even if the universe is a hologram (which is kind of a meaningless assertion) that doesn't mean that it isn't real. It just means that what your senses perceive as a 3/4d universe is an interpretation of information stored in a 2D frame work. You can look at a photograph and understand depth and spacial relationships. People say the word hologram and all of a sudden the world is made up and magic woo and crystals and nonsense start to happen.

[@AtlasReburdened]

The only pragmatic solution to any "are we real" question is to assume you are and get back to work.

[@innertubez]

Another brilliantly delivered and thought-provoking video! For example - according to GR there are 3 dimensions of space and 1 of time. But if the universe is a hologram then is the universe really composed of 2 dimensions of space and 1 of time, with the third dimension that we experience generated by the equivalent of a "light" shining through the hologram? Michelle's explanations are so good, but the ideas still make my head hurt!

[@EddieVBlueIsland]

Are black holes type 1 and type 2 perpetual motion machines?

[@notjoe_]

2:35 Pluto still a planet confirmed.

[@HuntingTheEnd]

Michelle is pro-Pluto as a planet! Lol

[@linkkid185]

Love Michelle! 😊💛

[@booJay]

So glad someone like Michelle exists.