What is the Fate of the SUN? Will it EXPLODE in a SUPERNOVA?

Thank you to Wondrium for sponsoring today's video! Signup for your FREE trial to Wondrium here: ow.ly/I3oJ50LVqnY
REFERENCES:
What if you fell inside a Black Hole: • What would we see if w...
Hawking radiation: • Hawking Radiation expl...
Why neutron stars don't all collapse: tinyurl.com/2jto24l3
White dwarfs: tinyurl.com/y98568rs
CHAPTERS
0:00 Celestial tug-of-war
1:26 How Fusion creates outward pressure
2:30 What is Pauli Exclusion Principle?
4:09 How do White Dwarfs form?
5:00 Chandrasekhar limit
6:00 How do Neutron stars form?
7:00 Neutron Degeneracy pressure
8:00 Mechanism of Supernova explosion
9:47 Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit
10:30 How do Black Holes form?
12:06 Further study
SUMMARY
The universe is full of opposing forces balanced in a celestial tug-of-war, until they sometimes aren’t. In stars, the two opposing forces are gravity which tries to collapse the star inward, and outward pressure due to the energy of fusion. This tug of war can remain in relative balance for billions of years.
But what happens when large stars run out of fuel and gravity overwhelms that outward pressure? This can cause a cataclysmic collapse, resulting in a colossal explosion called a supernova. And what remains is sometimes a neutron star or a black hole. But how does a sudden collapse result in such a powerful explosion, and why does a neutron star or black hole form?
The process of a supernova explosion:
A star creates outward pressure against gravity by the energy from fusion. It fuses increasingly higher mass elements, starting with fusing hydrogen to helium then progressing up through the periodic table until a core of iron and nickel is produced. Fusion stops there because the fusion process creating iron consumes more energy than it produces.
When this happens, no energy gets produced, and so the outward thermal pressure decreases, allowing gravity to collapse the star. The core contracts. Sometime electron degeneracy pressure keeps the core from collapsing further.
What is electron degeneracy pressure? It has to do with the Pauli exclusion principle. There are simply no other free quantum states for electrons to occupy, so there is no physical possibility of compressing more.
Once a star is in this degenerate state, gravity cannot compress it any more. So the core of the star survives. This core of a star where the electron degeneracy pressure keeps it from collapsing further, is called a white dwarf. This is what will happen to our sun after billions of years.
But, there is a limit to the amount of mass that such a white dwarf can have. Indian-American physicist, Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar discovered this limit to be about 1.4 times the mass of the Sun. This is known as the "Chandrasekhar limit." So if the mass of the collapsed star exceeds of 1.4 times the mass of the sun, even this electron degeneracy pressure is not enough to keep the star from further collapse. The star will keep collapsing. And at these conditions, electrons combine with protons in a process called electron capture, to form neutrons. Electrons are captured by the nucleus, creating a smaller ball of pretty much nothing but neutrons, and no more atoms remain. The star becomes like a giant atomic nucleus. The Pauli exclusion principle which which causes electron degeneracy in White dwarfs, also applies to neutrons in neutron stars.
#neutronstar
#blackhole
The core of the star which is like one giant nucleus now, forms a kind of incompressible wall. And since the in falling outer part of the star now has nowhere to go, the collapse of its outer mass now bounces off this neutron core.
The energy of this sudden rebound causes a shock wave which disrupts the overlying stellar matter, and pushes it to escape velocity. And this is what results in a supernova explosion.
For a brief time, a supernova can be as bright as the entire galaxy. What’s leftover from this process is a neutron star, and it can remain a neutron star for billions of years. But if electron degeneracy can be overcome by gravity, why can’t neutron degeneracy also be overcome by gravity? It can.
Just like the Chandrasekhar limit which when exceeded results in a Neutron star, there is something called the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit (or TOV limit), which when exceeded results in a Black hole. The limit as about 1.5 to 3.0 solar masses. So if the remnant neutron star is 1.5 to 3 times the mass of our sun, gravity can overcome even the neutron degeneracy pressure, and collapse it further to something even smaller than a neutron star, theoretically, infinitesimally small, a black hole.
When a black hole forms, nothing can escape from it, not even light. So unless there is in falling matter into the black hole, which gets compressed and heated to produce high energy radiation like x-rays or gamma rays, which would be visible on our telescopes, we would not see anything. That’s why it’s called a black hole.

[@englishforfunandcompetitio248]

Honestly speaking, for the first time you gave me a clear concept of electron degeneracy. I was always confused whenever I listened on how supernovae occur. Hats off dude!

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad I could help!

[@jamescarnevale3312]

Mr. Ash, Over the years your work shows consistently improvement. Thank you for making the difficult easier.

[@sobo2]

Yea, this time he started to tell us the timings of stuff. Please continue that way Mr. Ash.

[@terrifictiger]

Arvin Ash is brilliant as usual and can keep making amazing videos. This channel is pure gold.

[@ArvinAsh]

Glad you enjoy it!

[@wewillworld522]

Universe work's like that's :L'Univers Gyro électrique 3D. L'unification de la relativité générale et de la physique quantique: kzbin.info/www/bejne/npWpdpWJrs6spNk

[@JoHn-if6wy]

Meh his videos are kind of too short. But he knows it. 3/10

[@winklethrall2636]

I've been a science geek for 50+ yrs, and that's my first time (that I can remember) to hear a clear explanation of these differences. I would not have guessed it had to do with the exclusion principal, but it is certainly easy to understand now.

[@scottperry9581]

My sentiments exactly. I cannot imagine why I have not heard this explanation before. He made it so clear.

[@PMA65537]

Did you not watch Carl Sagan's COSMOS series about 1980? My parents didn't let me stay up that late but I got it as an adult; about 13 hours of DVD.

[@friedgreenaliernwomerns2600]

but u still have no awareness especially about yourself or about anything probably believe in God and Santa Clause

[@dongshengdi773]

@@scottperry9581 Freeman says: Science and religion are two windows that people look through, trying to understand the big universe outside, trying to understand why we are here. The two windows give different views, but they look out at the same universe. Both views are one-sided, neither is complete. Both leave out essential features of the real world. And both are worthy of respect. Trouble arises when either science or religion claims universal jurisdiction, when either religious or scientific dogma claims to be infallible. Religious creationists and scientific materialists are equally dogmatic and insensitive. By their arrogance they bring both science and religion into disrepute. The media exaggerate their numbers and importance. The media rarely mention the fact that the great majority of religious people belong to moderate denominations that treat science with respect, or the fact that the great majority of scientists treat religion with respect so long as religion does not claim jurisdiction over scientific questions. Physicist Freeman Dyson

[@misterlau5246]

@@PMA65537 yes, but I watched COSMOS anyway back in the day. Very quiet shhh. It's funny I was like I was going to watch xxx movies 😅😅😅😅😅

[@readmelast]

Best overview and explanation I've seen about the latter stages of a star's life. Learning how to pronounce Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar was a bonus.

[@arjun33as]

As an Indian, for me pronouncing that name is like piece of cake

[@frankelkjr8041]

This presentation was really good! A bunch of different explanation I've NEVER heard of about the process a Star takes to form a white Dwarf, Neutron star or a Black Hole.

[@alanpedro1448]

Same

[@tdhanasekaran3536]

I never miss Arvin Ash's videos (on few occasions I repeatedly watch many times) since his explanations are clear and easy to understand and I learn something new every time (like in this case the Pauli exclusion principle is the cause of electron degeneracy and about the TOV limit for black hole formation).

[@sergeynovikov9424]

the most interesting and fascinating (and the most complex!) objects in the universe are biological life forms, which formation and evolution are determined by the same fundamental laws of physics which drive the formation and evolution of dwarfs, neutron stars and of black holes..

[@grandlotus1]

So smoothly logical. I only knew some of these concepts in isolation - you turned it into an entertaining and fascinating narrative.

[@gdeamonlord]

One of the best channels which describes to everyone's understanding complex stuff, thank you!

[@Saucedgg]

Can’t get enough of your videos, been binging for a few days now

[@pedrohenriquetostes9396]

Star with the sun's mass: *finally dies and starts collapsing due to gravity* Electrons: *aww hell naw, u ain't doing shit here today*

[@28th_St_Air]

The spoonful of Mt. Everest comparison was amazing.

[@abhishekdey9717]

Arvin glad to see you man after so long. Great video, Season’s Greetings 👍🏻

[@terrellhewitthewitt9784]

I swear this is the most detailed I've seen...thank you

[@vitaayusit]

Excellent video sir.. explained in a very lucid way

[@AndreaZzzXXX]

another great video, congrats Arvin Ash. And thank you for the english subtitles, it's a great help for not mother tongue like me (from Italy). grazie :-)

[@kimlasscock8663]

Thanks I have been looking for this explanation

[@delmonti]

wow...... I actually understood all of this. Perfectly explained in such wonderful clarity. THankyou sir!

[@LQhristian]

Another excellent video!!

[@onlyeyeno]

Thanks for another intriguing and entertaining video. And I feel like I have to express my astonishment over the "original drawing" by Kepler (@8:22). Where he in a "sketch" just to show where a star(super Nova) appeared, rendered a "full blown artwork" including the mythical representations of the constellations... And we "know the man" as a being ""just"" an astronomer and mathematician", but his genius clearly didn't end there... " Best regards. (And yes, I know that he is far from alone in this, and I'm often astonished by other "scientist's illustrations" made before the camera was invented. It almost seems like being an accomplished artist almost was a requirement to being a "good scientist", since the only way to document Your "discoveries" in many cases was by Your own illustrations of what Your had seen...)

[@user-ox6hj6bm3t]

It's amazing how all the mass of the universe bound by its gravity "banged" out to begin with

[@immortalsofar5314]

You squeeze something hard enough in one direction, it's going to break out in another. It's down to a difference in pressure.

[@misterlau5246]

The production of your videos is very impressive!

[@SumitPrasaduniverse]

As usual it was beautifully explained 👌

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

Beautiful work 👏

[@donjasjit]

I learned more here than most space videos. Thanks.

[@Wendy-zl8kv]

I could listen to you all day!!

[@nHans]

Super-impressed with your pronunciation of Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. 👍👏

[@sobo2]

8:53 : Whow! i have spent years of watching such videos but Arvin Ash is the first one who tells us the timings of these processes. THANK YOU for that, Arvin. No more wondering of does this take minutes or years to happen?

[@user-in3jd6cm2t]

Cool sound effects!

[@christopherwalls2763]

Great job

[@konstantinkonstantinov6963]

Excellent!

[@dotbaban99]

This is outstanding sir .please make more on this topic.

[@hariottappalam8912]

Ash you have done a brilliant job.Keep the good job going

[@stephenbrickwood1602]

The time frames are amazing, particularly the short time frames.

[@philipmurphy2]

Excellent video, You rare to hear of this on Linear TV these days.

[@vjp2866]

Oh, this channel is pure gold, I like to know what happens beyond neutron degeneracy level like u explained electron degeneracy level to become a neutron star.

[@ArvinAsh]

This is a mystery. The singularity is where our equations fail. Quantum mechanics tells us that neutron degeneracy should keep the star from collapsing further, but gravity has something else to say.

[@vjp2866]

@@ArvinAsh hmm.... Wow. Simply wow.

[@vjp2866]

@@ArvinAsh I have another doubt, let's say if black hole is 100km in diameter then the volume cannot be zero right? Because if a hole have diameter and circumference then it must have some volume right?

[@Circuit7Active]

Great video. One of your best IMO

[@MillisecondFalcon]

I'd love to see a follow up video about if and how this process differs in the largest and the most massive stars. Can extremely massive stars collapse due to gravity and form a neutron star or black hole without having first completed the standard fusion cycles?

[@sitaramar13]

Fantastic video

[@harvindyadav7540]

Best explanation for this topic. ☆☆☆

[@amitkasliwal2115]

Fantastic Video! Great Animations and clear explanations! Can you please elaborate on Red Giants more..Whather Sun like stars have to go through Red Giant stage or can directly collapse to White dwarf? Also if Massive stars directly collapse to black holes or have to go through Neutron Star stage for brief time..

[@djp1234]

This is the most interesting thing in the universe. How the laws of physics work. And the biggest question: WHY does all of this stuff exist?

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

2:31 "The electrons can't have the same quantum state because the Pauli exclusion principal says so." Ok but why does it say so? Is it because 2 electrons with the same spin requires angular momentum whereas 2 electrons with opposite spin has total angular momentum = 0 ?

[@ArvinAsh]

It has to do with quantum mechanics. Oversimplified: For identical 1/2 spin particles, the sum of their wavefunctions are non existent. This means that the probability of finding them in the same place at the same time become zero. This is true for all fermions (1/2 spin particles), but not for bosons which are not half spin.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

@@ArvinAsh Interesting. TY

[@actsims]

This is an excellent explanation of this topic so far I have listened to. The route of Iron Core to white dwarf to neutron star/supernova is explained well. How suddenly do neutron stars become black holes? Are there any intermediate steps? Why and how it goes to nothing?

[@ArvinAsh]

It's very quick

[@maudias]

I really love your channel. I am such a curious geek and finding these answers without being a physicist is hard sometimes. Thanks for making it very accesible. Also, curious questions: why does it take 2 hours for the shockwave to reach the surface? Thank you.

[@ArvinAsh]

The shock wave travels at non-relativistic speeds, the surface is on the order of 500k km from the center, so it take a little time.

[@maudias]

@@ArvinAsh thank you for taking the time. 😊

[@alphagt62]

@Arvin Ash I often here that statement, that if you had a spoon full of Neutron Star, it would weigh as much as a mountain. But, would it stay compressed if it were removed from the Neutron Star? Or would the lack of gravity cause it to expand back into regular matter? Or, what exactly would happen? Thanks for yet another riveting video! Always enlightening!

[@dlevi67]

@@alphagt62 It wouldn't stay compressed - it would explode very quickly.

[@alphagt62]

@@dlevi67 that’s what I thought, the gravity of the Neutron Star is what keeps it compressed. Unless, somehow the neutrons were held together by the strong nuclear force? That doesn’t seem likely. Of course, it’s not possible, so no need to worry. It’s just a size comparison. The gravity of the Neutron Star would destroy the spoon!

[@MrKKUT1984]

I'd like to see more about the different types of supernovas including superlumeous and/or hyper novas

[@ArvinAsh]

hypernovae are very interesting, I agree!

[@Corvaire]

Well done Arvin. ;O)-

[@BenjaminGSlade]

Thanks!

[@ArvinAsh]

Thanks very much!

[@Lightning_Lance]

If the universe didn't exist, we would know the position and momentum of all particles (because there wouldn't be any). If the universe was predictable, we would know the position and momentum of one particle based on the position and momentum of another. Therefore, the uncertainty principle predicts that the universe must exist and the configuration of the universe must be random.

[@eshaanbhargavpatel1768]

10:38 a black hole is not infinitesimally small, it's just a neutron star, but its mass is so high that even light gets stuck in the area around the star.

[@DM_Curtis]

Unlike a white dwarf or a neutron star, a black hole describes not an object but a region of space and time. We have no idea what form a matter exists inside of one.

[@odiihinia]

Any matter that is dense enough to make enough of a gravitation pull....

[@smlanka4u]

@@odiihinia, The collapse could be a result of an extra gravity that neutrinos would make while coming out from the star releasing 99% of the star's energy. Gravitational pull can't be stron'g enough to make White Dwarfs, Neutron stars and Black Holes. Neutrnos must be the graviton that make the hidden force called gravity because neutrinos change their mass when they travel. And they could have a partial force because of some other reasons.

[@dongshengdi773]

@@odiihinia The public has a distorted view of science because children are taught in school that science is a collection of firmly established truths. Physicist Freeman Dyson

[@DrDeuteron]

there is no matter inside. It is destroyed at the singularity. A blackhole is made out of spacetime, all the mass is in the energy of curved spacetime. I heard this from Kip Thorne, so it is correct.

[@Dragrath1]

@@DrDeuteron We don't know if there even is a singularity because General Relativity as we know it breaks down at that scale and most physicists believe this singularity is simply a representation of this breakdown but this is not known for certain.

[@wilsonli5642]

Just a couple of random thoughts that occurred as I watched this video: 1. What force would we say is being exerted by the Pauli exclusion principle? It seems like we eliminated electromagnetism and gravity - is it the weak force? Strong force? Or should we just think of the PEP as a separate fundamental force? 2. We often talk about neutron stars forming pulsars, spinning much faster due to the huge reduction in size. Is there also periodic radiation that comes from white dwarves? Do astronomers care about that phenomenon, if it exists? Or is it just much weaker / less reliably periodic than neutron stars, and therefore less interesting?

[@ramlydiosa]

In a blackhole, time slows down from the event horizon until it stops at the "center" . So gravity can overcome even the neutron degeneracy stage but in the case of black holes, it can no longer collapse because Time prevents it from doing so . A black hole is a collapsing star that is frozen in time

[@marcinzarach5150]

Bravo I 'm love yours film. Super Pozdrawiam, dzieki

[@zeropain9319]

Nice video! Sounds like the Pauli exclusion principle doesn't apply when the TOV limit is exceeded?

[@ArvinAsh]

Well we don't know, because it should apply according to QM. But Relativity tells us something different, that there should be a singularity.

[@demongo2007]

Can you do a video on 1) quark stars and 2) Planck stars? Both seem to be theoretical phases that could exist between neutron stars and black holes, would be interesting to understand the potential nature of the exotic matter that could exist in these structures. In particular, it would be interesting to learn more about the relationship between Planck stars and the loop quantum gravity theory, and how observation of such a star could prove that theory.

[@GRay-fp2kb]

Excellent video. Gravity is thus responsible for inception and maintainance of “conglomerated mass”in the form of protogalaxies, galaxy clusters, galaxies and stars in a hierarchial system of everchanging centre of mass. It is thus the mass equivalent of particle “charge”. But this force is only felt near massive objects and is weak (or absent) where there is no big mass, so can be considered “local effect” for cosmological distances where the antigravity effect of dark energy reign supreme. Even a black hole (most of which are innocuous due to their all engulfing effect being felt only at short distances except possibly the supermassive ones) finally evaporates for dark energy to take over again. Therefore the notion of quantum gravity at infinitesimally small scales is difficult to contemplate. The forces of “dark energy”, “dark matter” and “gravity” may be a hierarchial manifestation of a more fundamental aspect of “time” from the instant of the “gap” between the origin of creation (inflation) and the actual big bang, the notion of time being “appreciated” from the latter. The surmised boundary within which all play of appreciable energy takes place (usually represented by the cone like picture starting from the big bang which is our space) is also a manifestation of time (like the smaller time cones for an observer inside it). Space is known to be hyperbolic and its expansion will “appear” to form a “horizon” to an observer though in actuality the expansion goes on infinitely. Any manifestation of energy (which can be intellectually appreciated) must have the notion of time or sequence of events deeply intertwined with it.

[@unknowngba]

Thank you so much for this amazing informative video. Now a days my day doesn't end without watching a Arvin ash video😊

[@andresdelaguardia1536]

Why does the outer shell material of the soon-to-be-dead star "bounce" against the core of the neutron star in a Supernovae explosion? Why doesn't it just get absorbed by the super-dense neutron star?

[@rezadaneshi]

Very eloquent. Question. saying mass of any size can not achieve light speed because when on the way speeding up and growing in mass, it reaches the critical mass for singularity and ends collapsing long before achieving light speed, is a reasonable conclusion and could it be why we can never travel to the past using faster than light speed approach?

[@immortalsofar5314]

My childhood tug of war stories were a little bleaker than Arvin's. There was a phase in my school where people would sneak up behind someone, grab an arm and both pull in opposite directions. Fortunately, I had an instinctive grasp of forces so I quickly figured out that rather than just stand there and take it, I just had to pull in the direction of one of them to send him falling back, the other guy flying and me being the only one ready for it.

[@FD-rt3rv]

Arvin is a super hero 👏

[@dewaard3301]

I thought it was the neutrino pressure from electron capture that caused the supernova explosion? Otherwise where does all the extra energy to accelerate the outer layers to beyond their original potential come from?

[@ArvinAsh]

It is mostly conversion of gravitational potential energy, but the vast amounts of neutrinos produced also supports the supernova explosion. The entire mechanism is not settled science yet, so we are still learning what the various contributing components are.

[@KillaQ1996]

One thing I have always wondered, is the exact mechanism by which a black hole gets formed. In my thesis it's still due to the pauli exclusion principle, since the neutrons have nowhere else to go in space the only way to keep up the exclusion principle would be by the neutrons occupying different positions in time (future to present), which would tie in nicely with the mathematical description of the singularity being a future point in time instead of a central point in space.

[@mrcool7140]

🤨🤔😮😯😲😳🤯

[@Somethin_Slix]

Very well said, KillaQ.

[@ArvinAsh]

The way to think of it is this: If you make a neutron star heavy enough, its Schwarzschild radius exceeds its radius, meaning that it becomes a black hole. What happens inside this black hole remains a mystery, so we don't really know what's happening inside it. QM says that neutrons can't compress further. GR says that all the mass becomes a point of infinite density. Either GR changes somehow at quantum scales. Or extreme gravity somehow changes quantum mechanical laws we know about. A quantum theory of gravity would solve this mystery.

[@miltonayala3845]

You Sir are an Amazing Educator! Arvin and Niel are National Treasures! I need to know two things Ash, What is Energy? At a fundamental level- we say energy this energy that, all matter was in a state of energy in the beginning- what is it? Is it a field, that permeates and expands an fluctuations create matter? Is it a Brane? I need to know! My 7yr is asking, I gave her the ability to do work and money analogy, but she wants to know what is it. Does it have a basic or fundamental form-I believe you said light was the fundamental form.Finally, what happens inside a black hole. We know not even light can escape it, at the bottom or the singularity is it like a container- a physical thing or an actual hole in space time. If the singularity is a point, everything rushing to that point, does the singularity gets bigger or gravity stops motion and time- freezes anything inside in space and time! I need to know!

[@erikRairden]

I love science, but sometimes it's funny hearing the arguments that sound like this: "It can explode due to the giraffe-banana postulate. If the TOV limit supersede the fermion-incabulator principle, then the net angular momentum of the system is zero."

[@julianvermund3951]

I'm confused... when a white dwarf pulls in gas from a companion star & "slowly" reaches the Chandrasekhar limit, it explodes completely in a Type 1A supernova instead of becoming a neutron star. Why does a white dwarf explode in this scenario, but become a neutron star in in the giant star collapse scenario described by Arvin?

[@ArvinAsh]

If the Chandrasekhar limit is exceeded, then the white dwarf will become a remnant neutron star after the explosion.

[@DrDeuteron]

Note that: [radius of a white dwarf] / [radius of neutron star] ~ [neutron mass] / [electron mass]. This is because the length required for a quantum state goes as 1 / mass, from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.

[@piotr2037]

Excellent video! However it brings me to a question - if there is a plasma inside a star (freely moving electrons and nucleus), how Pauli exclusion principle apply here? Electrons don’t occupy any orbits in plasma… or they do…?

[@tdhanasekaran3536]

A billion years is a freakin long time for us to fathom (100 crore years) and even one million years (10 lakh years) is a loooooong time. Everything about our evolution and existence of our Universe is simply mind blowing. Now scientists talk about the existence of infinitely multiple Universes and ours might be just one of them.

[@Rationalific]

Why is it that I've watched videos on white dwarf stars, neutron stars, and especially black holes, but I've never heard about the exact reasons why they form. I know that "gravity gains control" over the other forces with black holes, and I'd heard of some of these mess limits before, yet I had no idea how the process actually works. I'm sure there are multi-hour long lectures with someone on a blackboard writing equations that go over the process in a way that is not understandable to me, but I don't think there is any video or other piece of information out there in the world that gives such a clear picture in such an understandable way, audibly and visibly. I have to say that while there is a lot of good content on KZbin, it is Arvin Ash (more prolific) and ScienceClic (less prolific) above all that in their own ways have given me the most moments of true realization with regards to physics and such that I only had vague notions about previously. There is only one thing that still seems out of reach regarding this topic, and I'm not sure if it's just over my head, or over humanity's head, but does the Pauli Exclusion Principle actually break down with enough gravity?

[@iamlegend3674]

Layman here. My question is what are the neutrons turned into, inside a black hole?

[@ArvinAsh]

Theoretically a single point of infinite density - the singularity. However, this is probably just the limit of our equations, and is likely not a real thing. We don't really know what happens at the singularity.

[@iamlegend3674]

@@ArvinAsh Thank you for the response. All this quantum physics and general relativity seems fascinating to me. I'll try reading as much as i can.

[@ThexBorg]

Hey Arvin, here's a thought... what if the structures become phase coherent which changes their relationship to surrounding matter? Is this quantum state possible?

[@samgordon9756]

Question: we know that it's possible for a black hole to form fast enough to prevent the supernova. That the Star just falls into the remnant rather than being blown apart. The idea being a star just winks out. But how likely is that? A star collapse implies particles bumping into each other. That's going to cause some to scatter right? So wouldn't an accretion disk form as particles end up missing the point of no return but not managing to get ejected to infinity? If that is not correct, why?

[@-infinity0infinity61]

As i believe Einstein said explain this to me as if explaining to a child. If you cannot explain it that way you must not fully understand. You clearly understand. Thank you so very much for explaining this and furthering my curiosity!

[@kanhaiyapateltheexplainer56]

Thanks for your explanation please explain how neutral neutron star create so much powerful magnetic fields

[@KimTiger777]

What I find amazing is how gravity is strong enough to keep even a black hole in its shape, and yet our understanding of what exactly gravity is unknown. Mind boggling!

[@nihlify]

That's like saying you're surprised you're not flying out into space just because we don't know exactly what gravity is...

[@alexanderquilty5705]

Furthermore, a balloon with enough charge can appear to defy gravity by sticking on a wall. Just a balloon!

[@SyedSaifAbbasNaqvi]

Black hole is not an object like Neutron star or white dwarf. Its a region of space and time. We have no idea what lies inside it.

[@dongshengdi773]

@@nihlify Freeman Dyson says: . I have no use for a theology that claims to know the answers to deep questions but bases its arguments on the beliefs of a single tribe. I am a practicing Christian but not a believing Christian. To me, to worship God means to recognize that mind and intelligence are woven into the fabric of our universe in a way that altogether surpasses our comprehension. Dyson 2002a .

[@Mrog-33]

@@SyedSaifAbbasNaqvi well actually... Looks like all the socks ever lost are in there... 7 peanuts, a quarter stick of pepperoni for some reason and dryer lint... Yeah that's really all... Nothing mysterious 😁

[@zitherzon2121]

White dwarf and neutron stars make one realize just how much empty space there is within atoms and between them.

[@VikingTeddy]

Do we know for sure that the neutron star is compressed further, or could it still be behind the event horizon?

[@ignacioniveiro5471]

Is anything known about quark degeneracy pressure? Why all neutron star explanations stop beyond neutron degeneracy pressure? Most times, it's not even mentioned that there could be some other things out there beyond neutron stars!!! And perhaps could there be a neutrino/photon degeneracy pressure that makes infinitely dense singularities impossible?

[@ArvinAsh]

If you make a neutron star heavy enough, its Schwarzschild radius exceeds its radius, meaning that it becomes a black hole. What happens inside this black hole remains a mystery. QM says that neutrons can't compress further. GR says that all the mass becomes a point of infinite density. One or both of these theories is incomplete.

[@martinvukovski4370]

Is there a chance that quark degeneracy pressure could exist? If it does it could lead to a further explanation as to what is going on inside the core of a black hole as maybe there is a chance that once the TOV limit has been exceeded, the neutrons dissolve into individual quarks as to preserve the Pauli exclusion principle as neutrons as a whole are much larger than quarks hence if they dissolved into quarks then they could fit tighter together, allowing for an increase in density which could be enough to explain the ‘physics-breaking’ effects we see of black holes such as gravity that is so strong light doesn’t escape.

[@shethtejas104]

#AskArvin If Fusion process remains unsustainable and therefore stops at the creation of Iron/Nickel at the core of a star, where do heavier elements come from? As usual, brilliant video, great animation.

[@ArvinAsh]

See this video for an explanation: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rZi4enVqqaljma8

[@shethtejas104]

@@ArvinAsh Thank you! I watched the video. Got my answer. To me the most fascinating part was when you described the mechanism behind creation of Boron, Beryllium and Lithium. That they are produced by fission and not fusion. That was very counterintuitive and I think nobody can guess it.

[@kellymantei5393]

Would it work took use a spherical volume formula for the mass per volume of a neutron star, and convert it to a cylinder with a diameter of one neutron with x height , to explain the deflection of blackhole spacetime?

[@GururajBN]

Excellent video. Removed many basic doubts. What is the difference between a nova and a supernova? Can you please explain?

[@LordAmerican]

A nova is a surface-level event that leaves the rest of the star intact that occurs when a white dwarf in a binary system cannibalizes its larger companion too quickly. Too much material builds up on the white dwarf's surface and heats up the surface enough to begin nuclear fusion. That results in an explosion that expels material off of and away from the white dwarf, and the system returns to normal. A supernova, however, results from the gravitational collapse of a star's core. They can occur in massive, lone stars (like Betelgeuse) and the aforementioned binary stars alike. This video outlined the basics of a supernova: the core fuses iron, which doesn't output any energy, and so it collapses at nearly 25% the vacuum speed of light. The rest of the star is left literally hanging (picture Wile E. Coyote running off the edge of a cliff) until gravity catches up to it and pulls it down as well (Wile E. Coyote looking down). The outer layers slam against the excruciatingly-condensed core and rebound, ripping the rest of the star apart in the process. In the case of type Ia supernovae, the white dwarf is able to accumulate enough material to reach ~1.4 solar masses, at which point the white dwarf is massive enough for nuclear fusion to ignite in its core. The problem, though, is that the white dwarf is not massive enough for its own gravity to balance the new outward pressure from inside its core, and so the white dwarf explodes in a supernova. For the most part, no stars are seriously injured in the making of a nova; however, no star survives going supernova.

[@rickpilhorn]

I thought this for years: A black hole is a quark star. But I also think that there are multiple types of things that make black holes. So whatever makes up quarks also make a more dense black hole type (maybe why we have super massive black holes).

[@samuelec]

Not sure I understood what you are saying. All type of matter is made of atoms, atoms are made of elementary particles like quarks. Once you get that a soup of elementary particles turn into a black hole, how this black should have any different "density" from another black hole?

[@asw654]

Fun theory, but it’s completely made up. There’s no evidence, only wild speculation of what is actually within the event horizon of a black hole.

[@stevemallot721]

Yet another fabulous explanation! One question, why has no one (that I've found) proposed a quark degenerative pressure, in leu of a singularity?

[@ArvinAsh]

I don't think there is any difference between neutron degeneracy and quark degeneracy, because neutrons are made up of nothing but quarks.

[@sjsomething4936]

There is an interesting theory that some models suggest is possible for neutrons stars to become quark stars, and the quark stars to have all of their mass converted into pure strange quark plasma, quite intriguing but of course very far from proven. It also suggests that pure strange matter is predicted to be stable *and* infectious! If you’d like to have a look, it’s on a channel called Learning Curve that the KZbin algorithm suggested to me. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jojdXmlta6eNeKc

[@iHazRayGunz]

Kurgesagt made a great video on this

[@stevemallot721]

@@ArvinAsh Do quarks maintain a 'minimum distance' from each other (I know it's not that simple) in a similar manner that electrons do? Some sort of repulsive force that can be overcome by enough gravity and temperature that results in an even smaller, but not zero volume?

[@kevinmcfarlane2752]

That was the clearest presentation I've seen of this topic. However, I'm still puzzled. If electron degeneracy pressure cannot be overcome by gravity due to the Pauli Exclusion Principle (but beyond a certain limit the electrons get stripped away to form neutrons) then how come neutron degeneracy pressure CAN be overcome by gravity? I can see how you will eventually get a black hole due to greater than light escape velocity but why wouldn't the core remain as neutrons? There's nothing further to be stripped away, so the Pauli Exclusion Principle should hold. What am I missing?

[@Yusuf-tf3fh]

Could you please make a video on Magnetic confinement fusion?

[@eeronat]

Pronouncing Chandrasekhar the way Arvin Ash pronounced should carry a felony charge.

[@PM-fs2eg]

When the stars matter bounces off the neutron core and into space...why doesn't that matter 1) turn into neutrons and 2) stay around the neutron core (instead of bouncing off)...since the core has so much matter (and gravitational force)? Once again an incredible interesting vid. Thank you Arvin 🙏

[@misterlau5246]

Because the power of the explosion. And some material of course springs back and orbits the neutron star. So you are right.

[@quantisz4416]

Excellent question! There's no time to gravitational attraction because of the sudden rebound that creates a huge amount of energy that pushes out the infalling matter to escape velocity (and remember: escape velocity is the speed required to any object overcomes the gravity pull). The central core made of neutrons is incompressible and therefore produces a shock wave that obliterates the remnants of the star.

[@misterlau5246]

@@quantisz4416 and there's the issue of where the charged particles outside the neutron star, with luck a mean magnetar, but exactly where do they come from?

[@quantisz4416]

@@misterlau5246 I don't know if I understood your question properly but Magnetars get their colossal magnetic fields from certain processes that I suspect that aren't unanimous among astrophysicists. There are rogue Magnetars, that got ejected by the its partner star during a violent mass/ energy exchange when the binary system still exist. These back and forth interactions are candidates to explain these events. Other theories claim that the titanic magnetic fields of these cosmic monsters are formed via conservation of magnetic flux or through convertion of the rotational and heat energy present in the Supernova into magnetic force (maybe it could explain the slower rotation velocity in the Magnetars compared to default Neutron Stars). Other accounts include dynamo processes and superconducting tracks formed in the instable nucleus. Along with gravity, the magnetic force is the only interaction that "survives" big distances and long times (in electricity charges cancel each other and the nuclear forces are restricted to tiny scales) and because that to understand its nature is very relevant. Anyway, If I didn't answer your question correctly please do it again in a different fashion.

[@PM-fs2eg]

@@quantisz4416 thank you so much 👍😊

[@duzzt100]

I've heard there's talk of the neutron star core going further if neutrons break to free flowing quarks.

[@factchecker9358]

There is no matter left in a black hole, but what holds its shape in space in that warpage?

[@ArvinAsh]

It is the event horizon where light doesn't escape. It is theoretically a sphere, but I'm not sure that it is perfectly spherical, particularly if the black hole has spin.

[@Dragrath1]

One thing you left out likely for simplicity is that based on what we think we know neutron degeneracy pressure alone doesn't support neutron stars though it contributed its actually the strong force which caries out most of the resistance against gravity. This is why the model of the strong nuclear force is so important for understanding what the limits of mass are to a neutron star. However personally having taken a deep dive into the unconstrained Einstein field equations over the pandemic lockdown I have come to suspect the criterion for internal self consistency i.e. information conservation plays a very important role at this scale. This mostly comes from the implications of the No big crunch theorem which through a proof by self contradiction Matthew Kleban and Leonardo Senatore showed that for any sufficiently large nontrivial initially expanding universe that no total inflection point in the cumulative direction of expansion or contraction can ever exist else you start to run into mathematical paradoxes and self contradictions. iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1475-7516/2016/10/022/meta This in mathematical terms implies that the off diagonal terms of the metric tensor for any universe which isn't perfectly homogenous and isotropic at all possible scales (i.e. a perfectly homogenous and isotropic conformally invariant universe) there will always be a nonzero value for each off diagonal element of the metric tensor everywhere in spacetime one of the realizations of this is that when stuff gravitationally concentrates it will always result in far more underdensities being produced than over densities which due to the net expansion of space causes the rate of expansion to not only vary locally everywhere but overall always grow with a differential sign in the same direction as the arrow of time. I.e. for any overall expanding universe there will always be a positive arrow of time and vice versa likewise with a contracting manifold giving a reversed arrow of time. Moreover by applying information theory we can also use this and the defining property of systems of differential equations that there must always be a unique solution for each and every valid set of initial conditions we can independently Hawking radiation at least in the case of the cosmological event horizon. However this uniqueness has some fascinating implications since the terms of the metric tensor everywhere must be unique they can never be zero or symmetric meaning that you can't reduce the Einstein field equations down from the full 16 differential equations and the system will always be fully nonlinear in general. There are notably no known analytical solutions for the full Einstein field equations which is why astrophysicists and cosmologists have largely ignored this relying on idealized reduced/simplified solutions where symmetries cause these nonlinear terms to go away. Now you can reasonably simplify things down this way locally provided that these off diagonal terms are small relative to the linear terms. However at cosmological distances or sufficiently small distances these underlying assumptions break down and these small but nonzero contributions from nonlinear asymmetric terms start to nonlinearly diverge from the simple analytical metric limits thus ultimately adding up and growing to become significant or in the case of cosmological distances mathematically dominating the large scale behavior of the system giving a net acceleration of expansion purely due to the effect of acceleration and asymmetric distributions in mass and other forms of energy. The first thing to note here is that these additional equations and terms at large scales happens to produce effects indistinguishable for the observations that have been attributed to some mysterious "dark energy" allowing us to drop the term entirely as a model input as it will emerge automatically provided there is some nonzero initial anisotropies due to say some kind of quantum fluctuations. However for the subject at hand what stands out here is that those same nonzero and generally repulsive terms should appear to become significant at very very small scales too assuming there is some level of quantization which is very likely given that these off diagonal elements behave suspiciously like what we call quantum entanglement with the constraints on the metric imposed by the need for all information that existed at the start to persist into all later timeslices. That is to say you get something similar to bells inequality and the laws of thermodynamics with the property we call the total entropy of the informational contents of the manifold at a given timeslice in statistical mechanics becoming for all intents and purposes the nonlocal hidden variable in a nonlocal hidden variable theory. Point is that here we get a superposition of asymmetric terms composing the metric tensor which is the same mathematical situation that gives us the Pauli exclusion principal in quantum mechanics. If this limit analysis of the consequences of a theorem are correct then this implies that at some small scale a repulsive contribution to gravity should come into play between the underlying "quanta" of the metric. If this is correct then there in principal should not be any hard transition between a neutron star and a black hole rather the system should asymptotically approach the state of a black hole as the mass of the compact object grows. Of course with gravitational redshift that light should get stretched out in wavelength so by the point you get to large masses like supermassive black holes this will annoyingly be basically unobservable as the wavelength spectrum of the object approaches the hawking temperature BB. So the best I can hope for in testable predictions is radiation emitted from an object with more than 3 solar masses though to be frank none of this is new mathematics is just actually ditching the assumption of the so called cosmological principal as it can be shown to break internal consistency/information conservation and or causality and the above metamathematical limit analysis is of the set of all possible solutions which don't violate causality and information conservation in the limit of sufficiently large universes.

[@JonDisnard]

What about quark gluon plasma? Is that not the next level of degeneracy after neutron? The heat & pressure for QGP might exist in the core of a neutron star, or as a brief transition stage on the way to becoming a black hole. Perhaps black holes are really just QGP's on the insides...

[@JohnnyAngel8]

For the weakest of the four forces, gravity surely is the most influential.

[@LordAmerican]

The weakness of the forces is only a relative thing. If we look at the large scales (beyond atomic radii), then the "strong" and "weak" forces basically don't exist at all. In fact, the weak force is actually quite strong; we just call it weak because it has the shortest range of all the known forces. On the larger (but still small) scales, electromagnetism becomes the strongest, and at the largest scales gravity dominates everything.

[@benmcreynolds8581]

I had a thought experiment💭 "What if black holes are like Grand Recycling Machines ♻️ of the Cosmo's♻️" System's with-in Nature can have a balancing act type ability to convert and transfer energy. Like a ecosystem that keeps cycling energy so natural systems can function.. *I was just thinking how a ecosystem of a forest flourishes due to it's symbiotic relationship with Fungi and mold/lichen, bugs, soil, mycelium, a water source, etc. With the help of the fungi the Forest no longer suffocates itself. The Fungi gets to help breakdown and convert the carbon thats locked away in the forest floor, fallen Tree's, plant matter that's all throughout the soil. On top of that it works together symbiotically with the living plants roots to help them breakdown & absorb nutrients. That plant cant function to that level on its own without the combination relationship of these 2 aspects of nature which keep this ecosystem functioning. This is true in many different ways, in many different types of systems, all throughout nature. A part of me can't help but look at parts of space like that and wonder? Like if certain things in nature work here, then maybe there is a new way we have yet to discover and see how they behave. Aspects that could keep systems functioning throughout nature and space. Some things we are limited to what perspective we can perceive and what we can utilize for further measurements but we can still use our imaginations. Then fine tune things from there 👍🏼 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~{Hypothetical idea}~ What if our universe is 1 half of a sorta ying yang ☯️ universe. 1 side is what we see, the other side could maybe be a Anti-universe. Maybe there could be a membrane layer in-between the 2 layers. Which allows for quantum particles to pop in and out of existence and decay from that membrane with the other half. The 2nd half could be our universe but maybe be an anti-universe. Where anti-particles go? Where the anti-matter can create this balancing act with-in the system of the cosmos. (It doesn't mean there is multiple versions of ourselves and all that stuff when people talk about a multiverse. No, not that.) It's just a thought about a possible natural way to balance things out, yet also describe the fluctuations we see in quantum mechanics. I just had a random daydream thought and obviously I hope more professional people's minds end up diving into this sorta possible theoretical physics. I think Neil Turok had a similar theory. ⚖️ 🌐🧲🌡️🔆☢️⚛️♻️🌐☯️ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 🧲🌡️📡🔆☢️🔌🔊🔋♻️☯️⚛️ Out of every aspect of physics, i feel Gravity and all the aspects of Electromagnetism play such a crucial aspect of the cosmos and we possibly have much more to learn about these fields of physics? if you really think about it- It's really facinating how so many properties with-in Nature use: ~{"Differences"}~ That factor seems to be a key factor in keeping dynamic systems functioning. *{High pressure/low pressure, hot/cold temp, different densities, static electric charges/discharges, electromagnetism north/south poles, different velocity/angular momentum, different amounts of energy/mass/frequency/vibrations. The different layers between different regions such as, land, water, air, edge of atmosphere, space, the different regions in space with different particle density, background radiation, creating bubbles/membrane layers, cloud regions, nebula's/ Galaxy's, Galaxy clusters, less dense voids regions of space compared to dense regions of space. All of these things are basic differences but create a way for the dynamic engine with-in Nature to continue flowing and operating to create and convert energy.} Just Like How a battery 🔋 transfers + charges through a membrane layer to a - charged side. Like how regions of high/low pressure and temperature 🌡️differences create winds. In water or a planets core- add some factors and It creates ocean currents and flow. Then internally in our planet it creates plate tectonics, planetary convection, geothermal activity, magnetic field around our planet, to hold a atmosphere. 🧲🌡️📡🔆☢️🔌🔊🔋♻️☯️⚛️ I'm curious if there's more to learn about Gravity ~When it comes to our perspective on observing the Massive scale parts of the Cosmos? Like Entire galaxies/nebula's/filaments & any other diversely complex grand scale objects. They definitely have all sorts of behaviors interacting with-in them. I'm sure those factors need to be improved with how we factor them in to get our calculations of this layer of the Cosmos more accurately accounted for (Maybe it's just "we don't fully understand it yet?")

[@tyroberts2261]

Question: if cosmic rays are protons and neutrons stripped of their electrons, when they collide, do they fuse. If they do can we observe this. What particles form. Does the collision depend on the angle of the collision? Near parallel having less energy than head to head? 5:18

[@cleander97]

Too bad we still don’t know what causes gravity at the nuclear level. Great video. Thanks!

[@vknidhi]

Hi Mr Arvin, that's fantastic. You have clarified me of some basic doubts I have had for some time on this subject. But, as knowledge leads to further search of knowledge, your statement creates another doubt in me: For the neutron stars to overcome neutron degeneracy pressure and collapse into a black hole, you have mentioned a TOV limit of 1.5x to 3x solar mass for the neutron star. Why is there an upper limit of 3x? What if the upper limit is exceeded?

[@HugoFilho.]

3x is when the radius of the neutron star is smaller than its Schwarzschild radius, when the llimit is exceded the neutron star it likely forms a black hole. The size of a typical neutron star is about 25km and more massive=smaller The SR of 3 solar masses is 18km and a 3 solar mass neutron star is very likely to be smaller than 18km

[@vknidhi]

@@HugoFilho. Thanks for your response. In short and in simple terms, I understand that when the neutron star is of 1.5x to 3x solar mass it remains a neutron star. When the mass of the neutron star exceeds 3x solar mass, it goes on to form the black holes. Schwartschild radius only defines the size of the object. My question was more pertinent the mass.

[@ArvinAsh]

1.5-3 is the range beyond which a stellar mass can form a black hole.