Universe Size Comparison 2020 CG Reaction

Check out my gaming channel: / @cggaming4664
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
*NO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT INTENDED. ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS

[@TheFallenGuardian1992]

A quasi-star is a hypothetical type of extremely massive and luminous star that may have existed early in the history of the Universe. Unlike modern stars, which are powered by nuclear fusion in their cores, a quasi-star's energy would come from material falling into a black hole at its core, and you're right by the way. At the end of a quasi-star's lifespan, the outer layers collapse into the black hole after a million years to a few milllion years. Also the quasi-star might be where super-massive black holes came from.

[@malcolmlewis6014]

When the James Webb telescope comes into operation it will redefine the observable universe being 100 times more powerful than the Hubble , i believe its deep field photo will show a similar pattern to Hubble's but with billions more galaxies where there was was just empty space shown by the Hubble deep field.

[@luketrottier9388]

15:23 keep in mind the insane density of a blackhole; it's true that the milky way's supermassive blackhole is tiny compared to many, but the amount of solar masses it contains is still outrageous. To be that big diameter as a black hole, the solar masses are unreal. EDIT: Heard a few more words. Keep in mind that the blackhole alone doesn't hold the galaxy together and rotate it; dark matter is very important in that role.

[@MrEd-qg8td]

Our central black hole has 4 million times the mass of the Sun.

[@luketrottier9388]

@@MrEd-qg8td yes, and some supermassive blackholes are billions of solarmasses. Despite this, our milkyway is incredibly high solar mass. Just not relative to the big boys

[@LShaver947]

It's crazy to think about, in order to make the sun a black hole you need to shrink it down to the size of a 2 meters diameter, so imagine the size of the star needed to create SAG *A

[@steven95N]

Pretty interesting thought but while the Super massive blackhole is the predominant feature of all known galaxies. Most galactic mass is thought to be located in the galactic halo. Kinda weird. Makes you think. Maybe the supermassive blackhole just acts as a focal point but the galaxy as a whole is a huge mess of interactions between matter.

[@wilosaur]

@@steven95N I've always thought of it as the galactic dump, any time two objects pass eachother in such a way that one of them suffers orbital decay it'll fall right to the center of the galaxy.

[@avsbes98]

The Quasi Star is not a normal star. It is a luminous sphere around a black hole, consisting of mass falling into the black hole, that gets the energy to shine from the material falling into the black hole instead of fusion.

[@MrEd-qg8td]

At the end there were the Multi-Verses

[@luketrottier9388]

Once this video started with the planck length, I knew I was in for a treat. If spacetime is quantized - reaches a maximum 'small' scale size, in which distance is quantized, not smooth or continuous, rather like a video frame or a strobe light, you are in one place still, then appear in the next place still, and on a macro-scale the illusion of smooth motion is presented. I believe spacetime is quantized myself, it also solves a paradox (how could you ever cross a road or move anywhere if you can sub-divide your movement to infinitely small levels? nevermind the breakdown of known physics sub-planck). So this video started us out with the theoretical smallest size that can exist before ballooning out in size massive to get to atoms and stuff. Wish they would have went to electrons, quarks, neutrinos or a few other things like that on the way up to make the scale more obviously huge in change, but loving this video.

[@MidnightSt]

"If spacetime is quantized" it IS (afaik+i believe). the fact that planck length per planck time equals speed of light (max speed achievable, but also min speed achievable) very strongly hints at that. it's similar to (i'm a programmer) having positions as integers (pixel position on screen (planck length)) and speeds as integers (number of pixels travelled per cycle (planck time). in that case, the slowest movement you can do is one pixel per one cycle, resulting in speed of light. at the same time, the fastest movement you can do (without losing any data about the trajectory) is one pixel per one cycle, resulting in speed of light. (therefore the UPPER AS WELL AS LOWER speed limit in universe is the speed of light (the stillness/lower speed of objects is an illusion created by them interacting with and bouncing back and forth in the higgs field), therefore the speed of light is the only speed technically possible without wasteful generation of data that will be ignored, or losing important data, is that one single speed, comprised of interaction of those two quantized time times quantized space. as a game programmer, the only thing I can say about this is "of course...? naturally? what would you expect? that single "design decision" about the spacetime position being ints (or any other limited-precision-datatype) is literally the most natural thing you'd do in game programming. you have a "frame" (an arbitrarily long slice of time, depending on hardware) and you have a "minimum usable fraction of a distance unit", and this is exactly how they interact, naturally, out of laws of maths, without the need for you to explicitly define anything. moreover, if you wanted any other behavior, you would have to explicitly code it. this also, depending on your interpretation, becomes a very strong suggestion that our universe is actually a simulation, even though I have no idea how a race advanced enough to simulate universe could be simultaneously stupid enough to use ints (of any kind, or in general, limited resolution datatype) as a base datatype for the whole simulation. OR, it becomes a sign that the nature is several magnitudes weirder than we originally assumed. OR, both of the previous options together.

[@Wesker1984]

Wasp 17b is that large because it all about mass and density which makes stars, black holes etc. Although the diameter of a body can be large, again it's all about mass, density and gravitational force.

[@luketrottier9388]

Yeah, look into hot jupiter exoplanets, very interesting. You have some pretty mammoth planets, sometimes travelling even closer to their stars than Mercury.

[@BikeLifeJunior100]

Mans look off of wikepedqia

[@ericgolightly8450]

You would still need 14 Jupiter's of mass for a brown dwarf, and about 80 for a star

[@nivesh2898]

Sagittarius A indeed has a certain amount of gravity that affects the Milky Way, but it is not what keeps the galaxy together as a unit. In fact, it is the equivalent of one of your eyelash hairs affecting your body with its mass. The galaxies are gravitationally bound together mainly by dark matter.

[@MidnightSt]

"atom is mostly empty space" not incorrect, but not whole. the actual whole statement is "the existence is mostly empty space, on any level" "damn, how small it is, look at that pulsar" yup, pulsars are ridiculously small. that's why they're called "pulsars" = "some small thing pulsing in the skies, we have no idea" * xy years later * "oh damn, it's actually a star! oh, well..." "this is a good video because he cramps all the things together" yes, exactly, that's why i'm irritated that for the past two days all reaction videos I got suggested were the crappier ones. 20:00 YES. YOU ARE CORRECT (somewhat). NOT. EVEN. A. FUCKING. PIXEL.

[@MidnightSt]

protip: if you see a name you don't recognize (in videos like this), (and it's below about 14k km diameter), it's either (in the order of probability) : 1. a moon of Jupiter OR 2. a moon of Saturn OR 3. a rock in Kuiper's Belt or Oort Cloud. OR 4. anyithing else. "Saggitarius A... oh, it's smaller than I thought" ...yeah well, things tend to orbit 3 to i don't know how many times away from the thing... 5. 15:40 it's not just the black hole, it's also everythig else. black hole pulls on the closest stars, which pull on their planets, AS WELL AS OTHER STARS, which pull on their planet... etc etc. it's a gravitational CHAIN thing going on. 6. "How can a black hole be at the center of the star?" The rest orbits around the black hole and fuses during doing that....? the black hole is NOT THE COLLAPSING PROCESS. The black hole is result of that process, stabilised.

[@wborworse]

Anything that floats in space

[@user-ys2lz1nn4q]

in the end video is multi-verse theory

[@brq_1009]

It tells...that one centimeter or milimeter size of black hole could wipe our earth surface..that shows how powerful black hole is...

[@UnionJxck]

The humans stacked on top of eachother one is just amazing. I did the math - 7.9 billion x 1.77 meters (average height of human) = 12390000000 meters 12390000000 meters to miles is 7698789 and 7698789 miles to light years is 1.309 Light years

[@hebbu10]

Jupiter would need 100 times more mass for nuclear fusion

[@masterclass3941]

Nah just 80

[@dumigamez397]

@@masterclass3941 74

[@garethpendlebury7996]

A common misconception that all galaxies have a Keplerian orbit around a central black hole. It just isn't true all of the time. I've just read an article (I'm no astrophysicist and the mathematics behind it all baffle me, I'm just so fascinated by it all) by Hossan Aly. Basically Sagittarius A, being an atypical black hole for a galaxy like ours, only has a sphere of influence of around 3 parsecs (approx. 9.78 light years) it only effects 100 or so stars. Our solar system is 8000 parsecs from the centre (approx. 27000 light years). It's also estimated that there could be anywhere from 10 million to 1 billion black holes in our galaxy alone. All headache inducing stuff!!

[@HolgerLovesMusic]

The difference betwen Serius B and Serius A is so massiv!

[@lubomirkubasdQw4w9WgXcQ]

00:15:22 no, the galaxy doesn't really orbit the black hole, it is mostly dark matter that does that

[@HalkerVeil]

Because the math says so.

[@Fyrecide]

Regarding Quasi Star: keep in mind how massive it is in size. It's massively bigger than our own sun, and many times bigger than the current largest star (which itself is many, many times bigger than our sun as well). Theoretically, I suppose it could be massive enough that a black hole, depending on it's mass, would take so long to suck in everything around it in on itself and wouldn't have enough pull to reach the inner edges of the Quasi Star. I'm certainly no expert, but the gravitational properties of black holes aren't all consistent with each other so there's no hard or fast "rule" as to what can or can't be done/happening with every single stellar object out there. We can't really know in this case, I suppose, considering it's hypothetical and there's no current way of measuring or testing anything for it.

[@Storm_Fox]

It Dosn't give Empty Space! Only Full Space!

[@nivesh2898]

A small black hole have more power than a big black hole

[@CGReaction]

you mean it has more tidal force otherwise in total big black hole has more gravitational force and range.

[@nivesh2898]

@@CGReaction Yeah, smaller ones are more dangerous because they cause stronger tidal effects.

[@JupiterVortex]

How is this star has the same size as jupiter even though Jupiter still needs 100x more mass? Well we’re talking about mass, not size so even if it’s as small as a coin, if it still got the same mass and has the same composition it would still be Because “Density”

[@nivesh2898]

17:19 not every black hole have the strength to destroy a star, some black holes are weak

[@TheFallenGuardian1992]

If Jupiter had 12 times it's own mass added to it, making it 13 jupiter masses. Then it would have been a failed star. AKA; a brown dwarf.

[@lubomirkubasdQw4w9WgXcQ]

00:13:47 sirius... ly? haha

[@estabonramos4849]

Um your in space

[@allenwright123]

You could talk, instead of pausing it every other second.. there's only music in the video.

[@Fyrecide]

But it moves pretty quickly so he'd never be able to say what he wants to and keep up with what is going on. At least this way, he's seeing everything and not talking through other stuff that's happening and focusing on what he's saying rather that what he's seeing. Give him a break.

[@lubomirkubasdQw4w9WgXcQ]

00:12:30 a brown dwarf

[@lubomirkubasdQw4w9WgXcQ]

00:13:05 nevermind

[@lubomirkubasdQw4w9WgXcQ]

00:13:04*

[@lubomirkubasdQw4w9WgXcQ]

so evermind i guess

[@Jericho.ff553]

Dude you sound funny 🤣