NASA Black Hole Simulation Video Is Cool, But Is It Accurate?

Get a Wonderful Person Tee: teespring.com/stores/whatdamath
More cool designs are on Amazon: amzn.to/3QFIrFX
Alternatively, PayPal donations can be sent here: paypal.me/whatdamath
Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk about the recent NASA visualization of falling into a black hole
Links:
science.nasa.gov/supermassive...
• NASA Simulation’s Flig...
• NASA Simulation’s Plun...
Black hole spin: • Scientists Measure The...
• Insane New Discovery F...
Photon ring: • Turns Out, Photon Ring...
• Black Holes Reflect Th...
Original black hole 360 video: • ENTER THE BLACKHOLE IN...
#blackhole #nasa #astronomy
0:00 NASA black hole simulation
1:35 Why this is awesome
2:04 Photon ring and why it's important
3:00 Photon ring confirmation from other studies
4:40 What kind of a black hole this is and why it's unrealistic
6:03 Time dilation
7:45 Crossing the event horizon. Realistic or not?
9:02 External observer myth
10:20 How we know things cross the event horizon
11:10 Perspective inside the black hole
11:40 Time is space and vice versa
12:25 Summary and what would make this more realistic
13:45 Why this matters
14:15 Quantum effects?
15:20 Conclusions
Support this channel on Patreon to help me make this a full time job:
/ whatdamath
Bitcoin/Ethereum to spare? Donate them here to help this channel grow!
bc1qnkl3nk0zt7w0xzrgur9pnkcduj7a3xxllcn7d4
or ETH: 0x60f088B10b03115405d313f964BeA93eF0Bd3DbF
Space Engine is available for free here: spaceengine.org
Enjoy and please subscribe.
Twitter: / whatdamath
Facebook: / whatdamath
Twitch: / whatdamath
The hardware used to record these videos:
New Camera: amzn.to/34DUUlv
CPU: amzn.to/2LZFQCJ
Video Card: amzn.to/2M1W26C
Motherboard: amzn.to/2JYGiQQ
RAM: amzn.to/2Mwy2t4
PSU: amzn.to/2LZcrIH
Case: amzn.to/2MwJZz4
Microphone: amzn.to/2t5jTv0
Mixer: amzn.to/2JOL0oF
Recording and Editing: amzn.to/2LX6uvU
Some of the above are affiliate links, meaning I would get a (very small) percentage of the price paid.
Thank you to all Patreon supporters of this channel
Special thanks also goes to all the wonderful supporters of the channel through KZbin Memberships
Credits:Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian
Yukterez en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gr...
NSF
Licenses used:
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...

[@dhausmig]

There is no shame in self promotion when you're promoting a product with the quality of Anton's videos.

[@Deletirium]

Very true. His videos are like a cup of cocoa on a winter day for me.

[@sicfxmusic]

Anton is grateful for your seal of approval!

[@frstblt]

Damn it's been that long since the 360 black hole video? That's crazy! I still remember when the channel used to be called WhatDaMath and had an intro.

[@Bildgesmythe]

I remember What da Math.

[@aurelienyonrac]

Yes. I remember. ❤

[@BrianFedirko]

i remember, and i've done patreon since then. I love Anton, he rocks!!! He accomplishes the equivalent of a research paper in video every day! Love em. Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love

[@Taijifufu]

Pepperidge Farm remembers.

[@mariovwcardoso5970]

Isn't it still actually called whatdamath? When you open the channel page, that's the name

[@Keitosha]

Not only Interstellar (awesome movie btw), but an anime OVA in 1988 called Gunbuster (6 eps from the creator of Neon Genesis Evangelion) explored time dilation quite dramatically. Reaching speed of light speeds and the rest around them aging differently. Really a tearjerker and a 2nd series were made somewhere in the 2000's called Diebuster.

[@terraneko8999]

i remember watching the very old entering the black hole video of yours, man its been so long

[@sicfxmusic]

Everyone who watched that video has experienced time dilation.

[@AdamDylanMajor]

the simulation misses the blueshift of distant objects or, in other words, something that gives the impression that things are getting closer.

[@koda_pop]

That was my first observation, and it made me irrationally mad at the video lol

[@U20E0]

To be fair, that would make everything very hard to keep track of, as in practice it would just mean that the sky turns black.

[@AdamDylanMajor]

@U20E0 or maybe it's already redshifting and we keep seeing wight because ultraviolet turns into visible light, lol

[@kylelochlann5053]

I think you mean "red shift".

[@AdamDylanMajor]

@kylelochlann5053 when you're close to the black hole, light comes blue shifted towards you, redshift happens for light that comes from the black hole towards you, if you were far away from it.

[@user-fc8xw4fi5v]

I'm a little disappointed that this simulation uses the Schwarszchild solution. It's still cool and all, but using the Kerr solution would probably result in much more realistic black hole physics

[@_nc.incarnate_3770]

They might do that in the future. This simulation itself was generated using a nasa supercomputer and still took days, though the computer was no where near its full capacity.

[@sepijortikka]

I wonder how much more computation it requires.

[@Deletirium]

Can anyone explain what causes a black hole's spin? Is it just imparted from it's parent object's own spin?

[@Grunttamer]

@@DeletiriumI would think it’s that but also from the movement of the particles it accretes.

[@tygical]

​@@Deletiriumjust the angular velocity of the particles that collapsed to form it go into the rotation

[@gptiede]

From the point of view of someone watching someone else fall into a black hole, the person falling would seem to move slower and slower and their light would be red shifted (as the video says) due to time dilation near the black hole. But if you turn this around and ask what does it look like from the point of view of the person falling in, their time dilation would seem non-existent to them. Instead they would see the rest of the universe going faster and faster in time. The image of the Milky Way should get disrupted as the Andromeda Galaxy hits the Milky way, then all of the stars would go out and the universe grow dark. This is an effect that did not seem to be shown in the NASA simulation. A fun think to think about -- from the point of view of a person approaching the event horizon, the universe would be seen to rapidly age. In essence, the black hole is a short cut in time to the end of the universe ... what ever that means.

[@deinauge7894]

no. The infalling observer would not see much of the evolution of the universe. And I'm not talking about being dead, but pure time relations. All he can see is the light that catches up with him until he hits the center. And that's not much

[@jeremyfox7031]

I love any and everything about black holes because we have no idea what happens around and definitely have no clue about inside them. It is just so awesome to think about what might happen around and inside one. Space and time doing weird and crazy things. I believe time travel is a real thing around black holes and for our minds that are on this earth and everything is strictly 60 seconds, 60 minutes and 24 hours of every single day is the strangest thing I can think of. It’s just awesome to think that something like this actually exists in our universe and galaxies.

[@aurelienyonrac]

As you go into a black hole, think fractal. Forever opening before your eyes. Just like in your everyday life.

[@axle.student]

Thanks Anton. this is really well done. 4:29 It is actually quite amazing that we have a kind of photonic histogram of the universe captured in this layer, but so partial and scrambled that it would be near impossible to reconstruct the image of any past object. If only photons carried a record of it's origin so we could piece the jigsaw back together :) > Regarding the assertions here. For every assertion about event horizons there is a contradictory counter assertion. If you suggest any one assertion you get flamed by the opponents. In my mind ALL assertions regarding event horizons appear to amount to nothing better than science fiction. aka no one "Actually" has a clue :)

[@cosmicraysshotsintothelight]

I used to work at an upright video game distributor, and we had a game come in where the vertical (horizontal due to the way they are put into the cabinets) drive was out, so all that appeared on the screen was a thin, straight line right down the middle of the display. But then I noticed something... If i looked at it and swung my head back and forth (kind of like owl's eyes), I could see the entire screen. It was like the 'ride' in 2001 ASO. I could literally stand there and jog my head just so and see the entire screen in that one line. So apparently the drive was working, but only made the screen a mm or so wide, and I (my brain) spotted it. This was way back in like 1981, so I was not thinking about event horizons quite yet.

[@axle.student]

@@cosmicraysshotsintothelight I think I get what you are saying. In this case the information was not lost and still had some original organization. We used to get similar things back in the old days with CRT monitors and TVs where the entire picture would get condensed into a horizontal or vertical line, but was still wide enough that you could make out parts of the image. Bit of horizontal and vertical hold + focus to fix :) > I think the photons around a BH event horizon would be very scrambled with a complete loss of original information :)

[@cosmicraysshotsintothelight]

@@axle.student Well, not lost, just compiled differently than we yet understand. Some 'being' somewhere might be able to 'see' all of the information 'stored'. Birds speak to each other quite fast... whales, quite slowly by comparison- from 'our' POV. Attempting to be a hover drone being added to the swirling disc and then (somehow) diving on down 'across' the event horizon and giving us cursory glance at what that might 'appear' to be like visually. I think we might 'see' information, but may not be able oursleves to re-digest it. Time keeps on slippin'... I was of the understanding that we decided information was not lost. I kind of agree, but do any humans really know?

[@axle.student]

@@cosmicraysshotsintothelight Information is not lost, but I expect impossible to reconstruct and not all of the macroscopic information is there. Some photons come back out and go in random directions, some go into the event horizon. A bit like putting a photo through a fire and keeping the carbon and smoke and then attempting to put the smoke and heat back into the carbon to put the photo back together afterwards lol

[@JorgetePanete]

its*

[@sideoutside]

I must have watched dozens upon dozens of your videos, never realized I wasn't subbed. Well, it's fixed now, you're awesome! YOU are a wonderful person! & YOU have a great day!

[@BrianFedirko]

Anton Rocks!!! From a/my smpleton(s) point of view: The light travels from our earth/sun and gets beamed back at us.. which would mean it's possible that we could watch a movie playback of our planets existence 2x the travel distance of the light to and from the black hole. It also means other distances of black holes are doing the same "video" playback... which could mean sometime in the future we could playback the movie from us at just about any point in history's past. Thus a stupid simpletons thought. Gr8! Peace ☮💜Love "Photonic Histogram" is a phrase I read in another comment?

[@LoPhatKao]

a "simplistic" simulation is fine if it inspires some kid into studying astrophysics, it's done its job

[@Reiman33]

No. Thats the same argument for childrens films being made lazily or with "anti-art" motivations.

[@sadderwhiskeymann]

@@Reiman33 i would say yes! there are still lots of unknowns which means that decisions had to be made. Is there really a point to talk about how they could make different decisions? There always be someone who will support theirs, and someone who thinks otherwise.

[@Hackanhacker]

Absolutly !!!

[@Hackanhacker]

@@Reiman33 What are you on to xD

[@n3v3r1s4]

first they check that out, then they find this video, and then they keep going =)

[@Auroral_Anomaly]

They were probably just trying to show the basics, and weren’t expecting scientific criticism.

[@omnicideoscopy]

🤓

[@gladlawson61]

Just draw it in crayon next time.

[@URnickel_MY2cents]

That's on them ! If a scientifically based institution (NASA) wants to provide their not so necessarily scientifically accurate simulation, they had better be prepared for criticism from the scientific community !

[@kayakMike1000]

​@@gladlawson61 I like crayons.

[@cheradenine1980]

Well they should have done

[@ConnoisseurOfExistence]

I think the photon sphere will also be like firewall. It won't be some gentle light that will show you the past of the universe, because there is a lot of it in dense region. It will probably be more like laser sphere that disintegrates anything that passes through.

[@airin3594]

I appreciate the simulation, it's simple enough for the majority of people to see and understand what's going on regardless of the knowledge about black holes.

[@corujariousa]

Thanks for the video! The simulation is visually stunning but of course still based on very imperfect theories. Entertaining.

[@oneeyejack2]

hum.... shouldn't there be a lot of frequency shift (and so color shifts) occuring all around the field of view ? Just changing speed cause doppler shift.. so there's no way the color is the same in every direction since photons have differents origins and path in the curve

[@darylbrown8834]

Not enough money in their trillions of dollars budget?😆

[@Kenshkrix]

@@darylbrown8834 What are you talking about? NASA has never had that much money. IIRC their entire cumulative budget over the last 60 something years isn't even a trillion.

[@ZeHoSmusician]

@@Kenshkrix : Indeed! In fact, the US military, alone, gets far more money than NASA.

[@MonsterSound]

i don't know how many times I watched your old 360 video entering the black hole. One of the best. ThX again.

[@VanDerHaegenTheStampede]

2:04 So, in a simplified sense, we can say that the photon ring around a black hole shares some conceptual similarities with the Hopf fibration, as both involve a kind of wrapping or projection to circles in space. The photons in the ring are essentially wrapped around the black hole in a continuous manner, akin to the continuous parameterization of circles in a Hopf fibration.

[@andyny29]

The first simulation of a black hole was in the 1979 Disney movie “The Black Hole.” Yes the special effects weren’t too great but it’s worth a look.

[@michaelccopelandsr7120]

How about the time dilation in, "The Ice Pirates?" Loved watching them "fast foward."

[@genuinepenguin6448]

@andyny29 The 1979 movie seems to use the "common but inaccurate" external depiction of a black hole as a 2d disk with mater spiraling around (i haven't watched the full movie, there are some bits on youtube). The first simulation of what a black hole would look like was done the same year by physicist Jean-Pierre Luminet.

[@darylbrown8834]

Sounds like you all believe in the very wrong and b class sci fi of lost in space.

[@darkxkai5754]

spherical mirrors remind me so much of black holes i wonder if they show a visualization of the inside of a black, completely different things but youll get the idea once u see a vid of one

[@cosmicraysshotsintothelight]

I'm NOT sorry I spread the photons!

[@degariuslozak2169]

I remember back in 2009 I saw a simulation like this on KZbin

[@HisZotness]

"The X-ray is her siren song My ship cannot resist her long Nearer to my deadly goal Until the black hole Gains control" - Rush, "Cygnus X-1"

[@garethcroson8851]

As a devout Pastafarian it is my belief that black hole spaghettification is the moment of rapture when one becomes one with The One. Hail the Almighty Noodle! Ramen.

[@fredrickbambino]

For the longest time I thought black holes were just holes in reality and not a star that’s so dense it attracts everything that comes past a certain point

[@MCsCreations]

Well... It's not exactly wrong either...

[@Deletirium]

It's not a star. It probably was one at one time, but there's no fusion going on. That's why it collapsed into a BH. The accretion disc is due to friction of matter and energy orbiting.

[@MCsCreations]

@@Deletirium Exactly like most kids who make movies.

[@murderedcarrot9684]

I used to think of them as huge atoms made up of the atoms it eats.

[@cosmicraysshotsintothelight]

@@murderedcarrot9684 No, that's God, silly. 🤪

[@filonin2]

We do have the math to see what it is like past the event horizon, just not what it is like at the singularity, which is much further in.

[@OgOssman]

Its so fun to think about, so many scenarios, like if black holes create new universe's.

[@tylerdennis4807]

I used to fly to blackholes on elite dangerous, go into camera mode and just slowly spin around enthralled with the visual effects.

[@Idellphany]

Ty !

[@thomasvnl]

All black holes spin, just like all stars spin. That momentum is not lost because it turned into a black hole. Therefor a simulation of a stationary black hole is mighty unrealistic.

[@Thecrucialdruggy]

Spin forward or backward, inward or outward?

[@Deletirium]

​@@Thecrucialdruggy Your screen name's misspelled.

[@AndyWitmyer]

​@@Deletirium Does it matter? Seems rather semantic - I've seen druggy/druggie spelled both ways.

[@boring7823]

@@Thecrucialdruggy Spin is a vector quantity like Velocity. The arrow points out from the centre of (anti?)clockwise face of the spinning disk. When you add two spins their vectors are added in the same way that velocities are. So the answer to your question is "that'a way".

[@boring7823]

@@AndyWitmyer Self declared authorities want "Druggy" to be the more polite variant and "Druggie" to be the slur. Dictionaries don't report any difference in usage, but do see that "Druggie" is less common.

[@camerondavies5272]

At 12:05 you mention how we "don't have physics to explain anything" (in terms of how physics behaves 'inside' the black hole), I thought of a neat analogy. Imagining an alternate version of humanity- with regard to our technological and scientific understanding- where we did not develop the understanding of how electricity behaves. That, we did not have volts to explain the energy needed to move a charge across the volts distance, and everything else that we currently utilise in order to predict the behavior of electricity. And instead, that version of humanity only understood electricity in terms of newton-metres. Just as a form of energy that is tangential to kinetic energy.

[@yvonnemiezis5199]

Glad you explained it🙃👍

[@markorr7125]

As a total layperson in this field, I favour the hypothesis that that a black hole has no interior. Space/Time can not exist "inside" a black hole. All conserved properties are retained on the surface of the event horizon. The idea of an interior is an illusion based on our evolved assumption of euclidean geometry. Going inside a black hole is analogous to going north from the north pole.

[@thedeemon]

What about the stuff that was inside when the black hole formed? Imagine you're in a spaceship and some aliens send a bunch of very massive rockets towards you from all directions. At some point they end up within corresponding Schwarzschild radius, and while the ship is still in empty space surrounded by that shell of massive things, this whole arrangement is now inside a black hole...

[@Anner2k8]

Anton, take a holiday. You've earned it

[@Jbs6187]

Don’t tell other people what to do

[@slomo3937]

The fact that they simulated a non-rotating black hole while obviously every real example is spinning makes the whole visualization pretty pointless. I understand that the simulation of a spinning black hole would be enormously complex and take up a huge amount of computing time - but then again, non-spinning black holes were visualized already more than 10 years ago… so what‘s the point? Thanks Anton for your thorough analysis as always!

[@risenfromyoutubesashesagai6302]

If you want to see some true life, realistic black hole effects, then watch Ren & Stimpy's 1991 episode, Black Hole. That episode is as legit as it will ever be.

[@PartiBuoy]

There’s another video I just saw and it’s very simple to me now. mass cannot be destroyed and the black hole is the very example proving that theory. It grows it shrinks. Even packed into the singularity possibly dwarfing an atom in comparison.

[@roycsinclair]

It would be better to say "It's correct according to our current understanding which means it's subject to revision as we get a deeper understanding".

[@whnvr]

yeah i was pretty disappointed too. no torus, no kerr solution, no doppler shifting, and even the accretion disk felt poorly rendered and not chaotic enough

[@djdrack4681]

Its great to think this is accurate: but there is a BIG factor almost everybody overlooks when talking about dense gravity wells (post-stellar remnants): TIME. Specifically, Time DILATION. Near the event horizon tidal forces + gravity = almost on par with v = c for time dilation: In all probability you'd see 'fast night sky' change rapidly as you got closer and closer to the event horizon. Because not only would particles be destroyed/absorbed by the dense envelope of debris/dust around the BH, but because of gravitational lensing, doppler effect, and other phenomenon. The galaxy could appear to be 'spinning' around you, and you'd be able to see stars wobble around as fast as tops on a table.

[@ENDESGA]

I wonder what Roy Kerr thinks of this hahahaha

[@paulsandin1539]

Why do they say the black holes gravity is so strong that light can not escape? To my understanding, light I produced when the electrons of an atom gets excited and moves to a higher level and the light is produced when the electron bounces back to its original level of orbit. As a black hole would not have any functional atoms, light could not be produced after the atoms are ripped apart or joined the singularity

[@skoitch]

Nothing happens afterward. If any time at all passed from the perspective of an item at the event horizon, “all of time” would pass for the external observer. It’s in the math γ = √(1 - v²/c²). Warped spacetime would tear you down at an atomic level until you were a light years long trail of quarks and gluons. But if somehow you were to survive the event, you would remain at limbo upon reaching the event horizon until enough hawking radiation was emitted to make the horizon smaller. This would take place gradually over trillions of years from an outside observers perspective

[@spiderone_]

If you're interested in this topic, french youtuber Science Clic just released a 360° video of his own simulation that looks imho even better

[@fredthompson5997]

If time and space are affected by giant black holes then this would give the appearance that all of space is expanding when in fact, we are shrinking because we are affected by the black hole in the center of our universe.

[@robertweekes5783]

If you fell in, you would still see light in the outwards direction, because photons and ions are falling in. (But not in the inner direction). Up would be bright, down would be pitch black.

[@deinauge7894]

unless something bright falls in just before you do ;)

[@Foxintox]

At 12:52 I think the distance between the center of the black hole to the horizon (schwarzchild radius) is more like 12 million kilometers . It is its photon sphere which is around 22 million km in radius because Sag A* is rotating .

[@thomasgeorgecastleberry6918]

Black hole operation can be simulated by flushing a toilet. Instead of water you have to think about a time continuum instead, it also helps if your drunk.

[@Videosakko]

3:40 this image reminded me of mortal kombat 2 level where there is pretty similar black hole in the background :D

[@RuiLeTubo]

I like the notion that from the outside we would "see" something frozen in time at the EH, while from that same spot we would "see" the entire evolution of the universe instantaneously😅

[@thedeemon]

That's not quite how it works. Only if the astronaut somehow resists the gravity and hovers near the horizon, then they can see the outer universe accelerated. If they just fall freely, light from outside struggles to catch up and they don't see this "fast-forward effect".

[@RuiLeTubo]

@@thedeemon Of course! Nothing macroscopical could resist that (matter itself maybe). It's just a virtual thing. A mental exercise.

[@kaijukojin4371]

Anton... Hypotheticlally speaking, what if black holes are some futuristic record player? I'm sure if you dip some sensors into those rings, it will play some sick tunes.

[@eternalflame84]

When i saw your 360 simulation 10 years ago on my GEAR i was blown away and super realisticly scared 😂

[@C2FUX]

What if when approaching the black hole some process that we don't understand yet allows something with mass removes its mass in that situation?

[@bozhidarmihaylov]

My confined reflections got scattered..refracted..and trapped..

[@ivornelsson2238]

Nice NASA Science Fiction animation of a 2D flat singularity "hole" :-)

[@hristojivkov6849]

Great video, Anton! Loved it! Keep it up! Greetings from Bulgaria!

[@thecombokiller2]

Hey anton, will you be making a video of the recent solar activity?

[@pedrolopes4778]

Brilliant!

[@jimcurtis9052]

Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 🙏🙃

[@zaqwsx28]

ScienceClic remade the nasa's simulation with suggestions you mentioned

[@red-cc4xp]

ScienceClic English I think made a more realistic one using simple hardware ray-trace rendering. He also did a ridiculous amount of calculations to remake the black hole from Interstellar and compare the movie to the simulation. He also remade and recreated what passing through a wormhole would look like. I mean… dude did his homework.

[@jamesrussell7760]

Much has been made of the spaghettification you would experience as you approach the event horizon. But to get that far, you would first have to cross the accretion disc, a region of intense radiation and very high temperatures. So, I don't think you need to worry about the intense gravity because you would be a crispy critter by the time you reach the horizon.

[@yasirarafat9279]

This simulation should show varying approach distances.1 light year,2light year,3,4,5,6,7 light years

[@GuitarGears4544]

Does anyone happen to know if there is any relationship between the axis upon the black hole spins and the axis of the accretion disc? I always just assumed that they were the same, but I'm not sure why that would be. Thanks in advance.

[@brendancaulfield970]

In addition to the firewall (which in part is a result of the falling subject's local time running ever slower relative to the rest of the universe, and thus their subjective experience of the hawking radiation coming off the black hole and the in-falling photons from the universe around then being hyper blue-shifted to death-ray levels... [Inhales]) I believe the rate of evaporation of the black hole due to hawking radiation would appear to accelerate faster and faster as you near the event horizon. Since our faller's time would run infinitely slowly relative to a distant observer at the event horizon, i don't think in practice that our faller can actually ever reach the event horizon, instead, if they could somehow survive the ongoing firewall effect intact, they would see the black hole evaporate away in front of them... (In practice I think the faller's mass gradually begins to count as part of the hole's mass as they approach the horizon, and the hawking radiation process begins robbing mass from them too.) I just attended a talk by Professor Brian Cox where he talked about a potential divergence in realities between faller and observer: the faller experiences the crossing of the event horizon, and reaching the singularity, but the observer sees the faller incinerated at the event horizon and could detect emissions they would associate with the "ashes" of the faller (ignoring the near infinite red shift that would decrease their photons' energies below the observer's threshold of detection). He accounted for this discrepancy by invoking wormholes that form at the singularity and spew the faller's "ashes" out just above the event horizon. I don't think he needs the wormholes, because i don't think there's any space to traverse beneath the event horizon, nor any time at the event horizon in which to traverse the boundary... The event horizon IS the singularity - unreachable and always destined to shrink away from the faller as they approach, popping like a bubble infinitely close in front of them (destroying them utterly in the process) and depositing their quark-gluon-neutrino-whatever plasma remains (and the remains of everything else it has "consumed" over the hole's lifetime, including the star it originally formed out of) in the extreme distant future when the hole finally evaporates away.

[@Alekosssvr]

No. We do NOT know things cross the event horizon. We KNOW that things go beyond our capability of perception as they approach the event horizon. Statements beyond that are speculation. Here is another speculation : as two equal-mass black holes merge there are regions beyond the event horizons of each black hole that re-connect with the exterior universe, i.e., escape becomes possible. Consider for example two black holes touching - what is the gravitational pull at the contact point? Zero. I know, a very unrealistic case but worth considering.

[@djdrack4681]

IF Hawking Energy exists as theorized, it would prove the possibility of non-rotating black holes...indeed it'd imply the inevitable fate that all BHs would become non-rotating. ALL other post-stellar remnants BOTH achieve very high rotation (spin) but also lose it gradually. (Neutron stars (pulsars), white dwarfs). To assume that BHs can't 'bleed' rotational velocity via energy loss = presumptuous at best: everything points to contrary.

[@endlessdesert3122]

Anton! You must go on lecture tours around the world! Id definitely buy a ticket!!!

[@skoitch]

I predicted in grade school that around a black hole, there should be a point where light/photons enters orbit!

[@markhalson7078]

I thought that relativity meant that the time dilation would be experienced by the ship as it approached the event horizon, not the observer. The ship would appear to accelerate towards the event horizon but appear to fade away to nothing as it got closer, from our perspective. Meanwhile, from the perspective of the travelers in the ship, as time dilation increases, the event horizon would appear to be approaching faster and faster, in fact it would appear to be approaching faster than normally possible. In the same way, a ship traveling at 95% the speed of light might arrive at Alpha Centauri in just 4 1/2 yrs, while the occupants may only experience a few days travel, and from their perspective, they would appear to be crossing the distance much faster than the speed of light would allow. Have I interpreted this incorrectly?

[@ExcitedSaturnPlanet-wt3it]

Wonderful content from a wonderful person

[@sadderwhiskeymann]

I appreciate all the information from this vid (thank you Anton ❤) HOWEVER, you're being unfair imo. Lets not forget that NASA suffers from budget cuts over and over the past years and is making a valiant effort to attract/involve the public. As you admit there are still lots of unknowns which means that decisions had to be made. Is there really a point to talk about how they could make different decisions? There always be someone who will support theirs, and someone who thinks otherwise. Another (little) thing I noticed is that although BH definitely spin, the film's interstellar BH is *completely unrealistic* by professor's Kip Thorn own admittion. In an interview he said that he was asked by the director to design a BH with an extreme time dilation and initially he objected that in order to be THAT extreme it would have to be ridiculously spinning. So, you're kinda wrong there. Lastly, (and that's kinda TMI) I respect NASA so much that I would gladly leave behind my sh!tty life to just be able to deliver them their coffee and have a chance to talk to them bc I am too stupid to be a scientist. 😢 @All have a wonderful day

[@zarzaf6414]

Are we sure that the bh looks like a perfect black sphere as if painted in paint and not a bit fuzzier fading to black region

[@robindao5]

2:35 "light moving at the speed of light".... well der....

[@MrBigdaddy2ya]

Bet it wouldn't look like that at all. I think a black hole would have both attracting and repeling properties depending on the substance and structure of the interacting objects

[@linuxophile]

I took GR many years ago. What I can say is this: since BH do grow in time (evidence: there are supermassive black-holes that have grown!) it is clear that mass falls in in finite observer time. I guess one needs to solve the GR equations of the BH+ the mass falling in (i.e. stress energy tensor on the right side of the equation is non-zero) rather than just computing the mathematical abstraction of a massive worldline falling in the fixed spacetime background.

[@deinauge7894]

the result would interest me too. I cannot exclude the possibility that even the most complete calculations give the same: that the external observer always sees the infaller as being outside of the horizon. Because there is always light coming from him at any small distance from the horizon, so that it needs arbitrary large time to escape. The only effect that can break this argument is, that light comes in quanta, s.t. there is no constant stream of light waves. But that doesn't need the exact calculation, because the infalling observer emits a finite number of photons before passing the horizon anyway.

[@RG2V]

7:05******* Anton, could you please telll us what the text says behind your head,, something about how long the simulation would take on a laptop,, thank you so much for the content

[@saurabhsswami]

Anton! It's okay to take a long segment to show the whole video clearly from start to finish and then break it down into individual parts

[@cosmicraysshotsintothelight]

Heheheehe... he said "long segment".

[@misterlyle.]

A conditionally accurate simulation.

[@uncommonsense360]

I ported this to Apple Vision Pro, and watching it there made my crotch hurt when falling into the abyss.

[@blackbuckcreations2064]

we got anton dissing nasa videos before gta 6

[@cottawalla]

It only recently occurred to me, if as an object reaches the event horizon it reaches the speed of light/causality, it's component particles can no longer bind together, so it effectively evaporates into, what? Quarks? Virtual particles?

[@slo3337]

Theoretically you could "look" at the inner most photon rings and "see" beyond the visible universe

[@axle.student]

Yeah, it's a pity the photons don't carry the coordinate information of the origin so we could recreate an image. Either smart strategy, or poor planning on behalf of what or who designed the photon lol

[@LuisRojas-os9df]

The problem it that the model is wrong,the bottom part doesn't materialize it's an actual gamma

[@slo3337]

From a far away point of view, the inner photon rings appear to be moving very slowly. Maybe taking thousands or millions of years for a photon to make an orbit. But as you get closer they would move faster and begin to escape... Sorta

[@TalismancerM]

If time effectively stops at the Event Horizon does anything *actually* cross into it? Or does it instead fall at the rate of evaporation? (ie it reaches the centre only when the blackhole has evaporated away).

[@gordonwedman3179]

If matter that falls into a black hole seems to disappear, and considering there a lot of black holes, couldn't they eventually absorb the entire universe ? I know it would take a long time, maybe longer than the expected life of the universe, but is it theoretically possible?

[@johnchase2148]

Some call the photon sphere as purgatory.

[@stevenkarnisky411]

Too deep. This was too deep for me when you got to the photon rings! Us folks who don't understand the math humanity has already discovered have no chance solving black hole math or concepts. Thanks anyway, Anton. Interesting, even if only vaguely understood.

[@mrmidnight8975]

From minecarft to this … it’s quite a range a single person could have… kudos ❤❤❤

[@logtothebase2]

The, how did we see the merging of black holes with gravitational waves when we are not supposed to be able to witness something crossing an event horizon as an outside observer, is a question I have not heard or seen answered adequately (to my understanding in any case)

[@KageSama19]

Okay hear me out, what if nothing ever passes the event horizon, but once it's next to the event horizon and it's gravitationally effectively in the black hole, the event horizon expands enough to cover the information.

[@cosmicraysshotsintothelight]

Covers it with a veil... of secrecy!

[@douglaswilkinson5700]

Dr. Sabine Hossenfelder recently stated that the event horizon is not a surface.

[@michaelocchipinti8265]

I am glad you’re taking a sign, the simulations drive me nuts I think the depictions look ridiculous and are designed to look cool instead of accurate. I think you’re being too kind. I think a black hole would look nothing like their simulations.

[@mitrabuddhi]

Hi Anton! It was Amazing! But they didn't calculate time dilation effect. Near the event horizon the progression of background sky like galaxies colliding must be accelerated due to relativistic effects. am I wrong?

[@devinmillican2873]

How is it possible for a singularity to spin? Seems like there would have to be some kind of physical object at the center of a black hole in order for it to spin.

[@sonarbangla8711]

You can simulate what you know, not what you don't know.

[@Biosynchro]

We still don't have a photograph of the centre of M87.

[@darthmemeious9526]

imagine storing data as light bands around artificial kugelblitz singularities for a cool space ass hard drive

[@pizzafrenzyman]

Space is a very dangerous place, and black holes are infinitely dangerous.