What's "inside" a black hole?

[@rahuln5676]

Black Hole: _laughs_ Astrophysicist: What's funny? Black Hole: Information. Astrophysicist: I don't get it. Black Hole: Exactly.

[@Jay-ho9io]

Nice.

[@Darth_Niki4]

Is this some kind of inside joke?

[@Jay-ho9io]

PLEASE tell me you're continuing the joke, because that's so good.

[@Darth_Niki4]

@@Jay-ho9io Me? Oh, I'm just trying to understand the situation. I mean, what's, or rather, where's the matter?

[@Jay-ho9io]

@@Darth_Niki4 heh. 👍🏽

[@cocoabutt1711]

Ren and Stimpy already covered this: black holes contain all of the missing left socks in the universe (composed of free-froating electrons of course).

[@nocillis]

Damn, ya beat me to it.

[@michaelschalck]

Or could it be where all the stuff from IKEA comes from 🙃

[@cocoabutt1711]

@@michaelschalck IKEA furniture does seem to show signs that it was influenced by alien technology. Look at those weird instructions.

[@bradleyp3655]

Electrostatic sock hole

[@Arashmickey]

The Regent Prince George, Son of King George III, would like to know your location.

[@krelios]

Steven Hawkeye fires arrows of pure Hawking radiation at his enemies.

[@woofwoof2412]

I can feel the shitty Hawkeye fanbase vs the good Hawkeye fanbase fighting

[@woofwoof2412]

referring to Hawkeye from MASH and Hawkeye from whatever Marvel movie he's from

[@cozmothemagician7243]

And Radar aims them? /snarkies

[@siwilson1437]

And the arrows are vectors

[@briancurrie2897]

But than why does the black hole evaporate. It should have no preference between particles and anti particles. It should loose as much mass as it gains through “Hawking radiation” . Be smarter

[@benniebug]

"What's inside a black hole?" Short answer: We don't know Long answer: We don't know, but scientific

[@voules.spillay5328]

Not knowing leads to the yearning to know... unlike religion fiction novels

[@Bbonno]

"A whole lot of nothing" "Nothing?!" "Are you dense?"

[@FortyTwoAnswerToEverything]

Hawkeye is in the black hole, waiting just on the other side of the event horizon

[@hartunstart]

Must be happy place. Nobody ever came back.

[@seangrieves4359]

I know nothing is everything. Never have I existed. Knowing, or myself never collapsed into single thing yet in it and from it all appearance appears, empty in essence.

[@thecrazyisreal]

When I was a kid I used to imagine black holes contained things like refrigerators, cats, sinks and chairs floating around.

[@irvingchies1626]

the cats would explain the uncertainty of their contents

[@parlor3115]

Weird flex but ok

[@MaryAnnNytowl]

@@parlor3115 what's the "flex" you're referring to? That's not a "flex," just a description of an idea a little kid had about what was inside a black hole. There's no "flex" there, just a really cute little anecdote. 🙄

[@MaryAnnNytowl]

LOL, W B! That's such a cute little anecdote! I can just imagine the little kid playing "explore the black hole" in their imagination, and finding all those old refrigerators, sinks, and chairs!

[@reed-young]

Nobody can say for sure that they don't, except of course for micro-black holes that are less massive than those objects. (variation on Bertrand Russell's celestial teapot)

[@MuhammadMushfiqulIslamAntu]

No wonder Hawkeye never misses a target, he has got Roger Penrose to calculate his arrow trajectories!! 😂😂🎯🎯

[@espenbgh2540]

"What's "inside" a black hole?" - Anything that comes from the outside!

[@BasedGamerX]

“What’s inside a black hole?” “A singularity” “What’s a singularity” “The thing inside a black hole”

[@yuturtuyieie5544]

A singularity is a point in space with infinite curvature and infinite density

[@Festerbestertester6]

@@yuturtuyieie5544 A singularity is a mathematical convenience, which no serious person thinks can possibly exist in the natural world. It will require a refinement of physics to be able to describe what's inside a black hole.

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

@@yuturtuyieie5544 "What's infinite curvature?" "A singularity"

[@DrDeuteron]

But if a singularity isn't even on the spacetime manifold, so it's not part of our universe, how can it be inside a blackhole?

[@reinux]

what's the matter? never mind what's on your mind? doesn't matter

[@antwonsmith70]

Best explanation of a long standing question I've had. Thank you!

[@jedaaa]

Yeah, the exotic form of matter theory almost never gets talked about.

[@leopignataro]

@@jedaaa there are so many videos stating the singularity hypothesis as if it were fact!

[@ortherner]

@@jedaaa yea, that honestly seems to be the most likely for what's inside a black hole.

[@OmniCalculator]

This is a masterclass on how to expand a simple "idk" into an educational 12min video haha

[@shawnalovely4054]

But a Idk with big words and no actual answer.

[@coldbacon4869]

@@shawnalovely4054 an “idk” with no actual answer is just “idk.” That’s pretty much what idk means

[@NoActuallyGo-KCUF-Yourself]

"I don't know" is a beautiful answer: it's honest, it's interesting, it can lead to other good questions, like "why don't I know? What _do_ I know? Etc.

[@linyenchin6773]

Helpes that her face is lovely to the point that one can almost ignore her non-American dialect. Her voice itself is cute as her face, on top of the dialect not being too saturated.

[@diogenes3300]

She’s explaining ‘why’ we don’t know - not just talking around the question.

[@jamesmnaylor]

I loved reading professor Hawkeye’s ‘a brief history of time.’

[@scrymglin]

When you said "Hawkeye" I thought of Alan Alder in MASH - which makes way more sense :)

[@milkdrinker7]

Hey Dr. Becky! Would you ever do a video about the mechanical aspects of observatories? Like, how they move, know exactly where they're pointing, and follow objects across the sky at sidereal speeds without any jitters or seismic disturbance.

[@JustOneAsbesto]

In the sixth grade we were assigned a science project that could be on anything we wanted, it was really just to teach us how to do research, I think. One boy chose black holes. We all went to the library to start researching, this was back when the internet was new, and he got on one of the computers and searched Yahoo for "black holes". The first thing he clicked was a pretty explicit adult website, and he screamed and fell over backwards in his chair.

[@JavSusLar]

"My God, it's full of stars!"

[@Roozyj]

The laugh after 'Did I just say Hawkeye?' was the best thing I've heard all day xD

[@michaellewis5200]

I didnt know that hawkeye was an astrophysicist?! 🤣

[@JoshRiffMonster]

Yes he is 😂

[@minhduong1484]

He was a fantastic archer as he had a natural advantage was always sitting down

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

Fan fuct: The actor who plays Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) did play "a theoretical physicist from Los Alamos" in the movie 'Arrival'. In real life, Los Alamos National Laboratory has "more than 50 active astrophysicists" so he could've been an astrophysicist. In a 1st contact situation an astrophysicist could be useful if they start communicating with e.g. numbers relating to how hydrogen all around the universe gives out a specific frequency of light (like in the movie 'Contact').

[@AdrianColley]

Honestly, the post-Hawkeye giggling was the highlight of the video, despite all the serious good stuff up to then. Maybe because of it.

[@triadmad]

I guess I'm showing my age here. When she said Hawkeye, I immediately thought of Hawkeye Pierce from MASH.

[@Shinare73]

Showing my age here, but Hawkeye made me think of MASH first. LOL

[@Sankey84Gaming]

I'm 36 and that is exactly where my mind went to as well.

[@michaelsommers2356]

If you were really old, you'd have thought of Natty Bumpo from Cooper's Leatherstocking Tales.

[@vjs2666]

I thought of M*A*S*H as well.

[@jeffthompson9622]

I was a comic book reader before the Mash Movie or TV series, so I had(by chance) the right preconception.

[@Mike_Costello]

@@michaelsommers2356 Last of the Mohicans, but Hawkeye in MASH was named this because 'his' father loved the book.

[@TimbavatiLion]

I like the hypothesis of universes inside black holes. When Spacetime gets condensed just as matter does, the inside of a black hole could literally be bigger than the outside. Infinitely bigger. And all mass and energy and information that falls into it becomes part of this new universe inside. Is every supernova in this universe the big bang of another universe inside? who knows...

[@daddy7860]

Woah. That's some wibbly-wobbly timey-wimey physics you're theorizing. Physics. Phyyyssssics. Physics. Physicsphysicsphysics. Physics.

[@kirbymarchbarcena]

The bloopers at the end of the video was far more interesting than the main topic

[@mirosawszukieowicz1078]

Stephen Hawkeye was MARVELous!

[@melruth5]

Anyone else get so upset that we can’t actually see these amazing things in space? Like to be physically there.

[@catpoke9557]

I like to consider all the ways in which we're lucky when I feel like that. Sure, we don't have a black hole close enough to see. But we can see distant stars and we have one for up close viewing too. We can see nebulas, and we live INSIDE a galaxy. Not only that, but a somewhat large one. We can see galaxies outside of our own with the naked eye, too. We've got rocky planets, and gassy planets too. We've got a moon almost the size of the planet we live on right in front of us. And it's placed so perfectly that it can just barely eclipse the sun, leading to a perfect view of the corona- which is already an exceedingly rare thing, but to add to that, the moon is also able to be eclipsed perfectly by the Earth! For that, we'd be considered a tourist location among space, yet we live here. There's so many amazing things we take for granted in our solar system- such as the most obvious thing: us. We're living beings, something that is probably pretty uncommon in space. Not just that, we're intelligent life capable of inventing and discovering amazing things.

[@melruth5]

@@catpoke9557 thank you for this you’re definitely right! :)

[@henrygonzalez8793]

HAWKEYE !! That was funny... Loved this talk, so interesting & challenging to consider the possibilities that Black Holes present to us. You are my favorite science “explainer” since the heyday of Isaac Asimov. Thanks for your great work.

[@donaldmilne5352]

Showing my age, but that wasn't the Hawkeye I immediately thought of...

[@deltalima6703]

@@donaldmilne5352 MASH

[@francisdavis1271]

One of items I recall about black hole discussions is that stars typically have spin. As one cannot make angular momentum disappear, like the ice skater as the star collapses you would increase the spin. The "singularity" would not be a point.. but rather a circle.... a mathematical circle.

[@ankurmishra3054]

@1:45 small correction, escape velocity applies to non propelled objects, so rockets dont count.

[@k.c.sunshine1934]

"Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; *"one* *can't* *believe* *impossible* *things."* "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. *Why,* *sometimes* *I've* *believed* *as* *many* *as* *six* *impossible* *things* *before* *breakfast."* - Lewis Carroll

[@BytebroUK]

@Dr Becky - May I up-vote this as probably the best possible answer to this conundrum?!

[@alwaysdisputin9930]

nice

[@john-or9cf]

Hmmm, must have been in a US public school…

[@ravenmad9225]

Baby give it up,give it up,baby give it up.

[@arvindiyer1649]

@@ravenmad9225 ummm, what

[@J_CtheEngineer]

“We don’t know” Roll credits

[@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368]

I know what's in them. Shhh. It's a secret.

[@glarynth]

Dr. Becky pivoted so smoothly to the Kinder Surprise Egg genre we barely even noticed.

[@timothyvanderschultzen9640]

In the immortal words of Dr. David Bowman: "My God, it's full of stars!"

[@ricardoabh3242]

Good one! Maybe it should be: « My God, it’s full of one star »?

[@DavidDatura]

Yeah, some seem to think that our universe might be the other side of a black hole and that the Big Bang might of actually been a white hole, where everything spewed out from that black hole on the “other side” so to speak 🤷‍♂️

[@sausagefinger8849]

@@DavidDatura yes M8, I've heard if all the visible universe were inside a massive black hole. What we observe in the night sky is at the same density of what we would expect to see inside a black hole of that size. MASHED

[@badgerello]

“The thing’s hollow-it goes on forever-and-oh my God!-it’s full of stars!” - often misquoted. Blame the 2010 movie.

[@SkipperMacky]

A misquoted quote gaining clicks from idiots instead actually knowledge or questions.. this is KZbin I guess

[@BlizzardofKnives]

Describing stars like Pokemon, this made my morning :D .

[@jasonburbank2047]

This was the best-written script on the subject that I've yet seen. Clear, concise, and honest.

[@thirteenthandy]

Here I was about to say that the bloopers aren't my favorite part and I watch for the main video... and then you said "Hawkeye." 😂😂😂😂 Ok, new favorite part!

[@genestatler2514]

Loved your bloopers on this one. I about fell out of my chair laughing at you laughing!!!

[@themeach011]

Nothing beats a great laugh attack. I had one with my daughter the other day. We were both in tears lol. You always remember those kinds of moments!!

[@johnkotches8320]

Your familiarity with the material makes me think you’re talking off of bullet points as opposed to fully scripted material. We all love the bloopers because it points out you’re just like us, only smarter!

[@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368]

"We're all smart, Jeremy" - James Gandolfini _Zero Dark Thirty_

[@physicslover4951]

@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 "No" -Penny Robinson, Lost in Space

[@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368]

@@physicslover4951 "Yes." - my dog, three seconds ago. At least I think he said "yes". He might have said "woof".

[@physicslover4951]

@@oldmandoinghighkicksonlyin1368 What you said is just stupid. Why the heck would a dog say woof? Lol 😂

[@vibhorsethi1073]

(when I ask really curious questions to scientists) Scientists: We don't know (yet)

[@nHans]

11:01 *_Free frotting_* - a blooper for Dr. Becky, a nightmare for rush-hour Underground commuters. 😨

[@onemantis]

We can never forget the academic achievements made by the great Dr. Hawkeye ;)

[@akizeta]

I wish I could give this another like for Dr B breaking up at the end. :D

[@prajakta8609]

The wildest dreams reference here is absolute gold

[@sushilganesh07]

Can't believe how far you havw come ! I joined the channel when you had 10k subscribers, now you are nearing 300k

[@xuvial1391]

Any kind of "exotic matter" that can resist collapse when the escape velocity >C would have incredibly physics-breaking implications, wouldn't it? It would mean that matter is effectively exceeding C, violating causality, etc etc.

[@ieaturanium574]

I always thought there's a Matthew McConaughey inside a black hole, exerting his influence on bookshelves and stuff

[@thelastofthehitachi972]

hehe, he died and the rest is... fantasy

[@markbosz9347]

My headcanon is that Einstein's "negative time" solution, like the positron in the Dirac equation, shouldn't have been dismissed so lightly. What if the "singularity" compresses matter so much that its only course of action is time (or CPT) reversal? So from the reference frame of a particle entering the singularity, it will emerge from a "white hole", creating a "big bang" that is causally disconnected from us via the event horizon.

[@TheAmazingSnarf]

this. ultimately, it's the switch, or swap, of space for time, and vice versa. i just love our universe. no matter how weird we as humans may be, the universe itself is much, much weirder. mostly.

[@BytebroUK]

Fairly sure that one has been written off by physicists as 'not plausible'. But WTF do we know? Beyond the rules, by definition, we don't know the rules.

[@s1gne]

Time can't reverse, i believe it was because of entropy. Every action causes a reaction and with time reversal that doesn't happen anymore. Then every reaction causes an action but where does the reaction come from? Stuff would pop up in existence without cause.

[@akale2620]

That is one theory. But that would mean every black hole creates a bubble universe within itself.

[@markbosz9347]

​@@s1gne Well, if CPT symmetry is real, there's no way of telling a universe from its CPT reversed version. Cause and effect would be reversed in time only relative to an external time-reversed observer. But since this only happens inside a black hole, its event horizon would preserve causality.

[@ScienceAsylum]

Awesome video. Very nuanced. I like it 👍

[@GP-qb9hi]

There was no mention of Hawking radiation which makes me a bit confused.

[@baptistebauer99]

Your timing was awesome with Dr. Becky's release. Props :)

[@bernardedwards8461]

It's arson, as they say in America.

[@bernardedwards8461]

What I want to know is: In the case of ultra massive black holes in the region of 66 billion solar masses, is it true that the density is much less than that of water, and could a stray solar system enter it without being disrupted? The universe itself is a low density, ultra massive black hole.

[@ulrichsrensen8520]

Yeah but she didn’t tell me about the temperature of black holes. If only there was someone to make a video of how cold they are 🤔😁

[@andrewcharles459]

I think it's just the cutest thing how everyone assumes that, since it's called a hole, there must be something inside it.

[@adrienhamers5873]

It's good that you ask a question in your title and somehow answer it in the miniature. It's appealing without being hard clickbait. I love what you do. Please keep going !

[@VV-cy3nw]

Dr. Becky is awesome! Love this content!

[@terrythetuffkunt9215]

Another ENTIRE universe. We are on the other side of a black hole.

[@condorboss3339]

The Dr. Beckyverse!

[@Andlekin]

"What's inside a blackhole?" - Well does this question matter or have any meaning if time all-but-stops when you enter a black hole?

[@nicolasinvernizzi6140]

the thing is we dont know that time stops inside a black hole that is just a guess. an educated one but a guess nonetheless.

[@jedaaa]

Well, from a photons perspective there is no time, a photon released at the dawn of the universe would experience the entire existence/age of the universe in an instant but of course we see them zipping along just fine so from our perspective a black hole probably is frozen in time but from the inside? It could all be relative.

[@ralos5930]

@@jedaaa There are no photons mate, this is part of the reification of phenomena they do not understand. There is no time either it's only a measure of things that have mass and magnitude. Time is completely our thing, not mother natures thing. We experience the passing of time, but without that something to hold it up, it cannot be observed. Nobody has ever witnessed a photon, it is a virtual particle made up to assist field theory math, nothing more. ALL the greats said the same thing from Telsa, Maxwell, Heaviside etc. These are the people who gave you the entire modern electrical grid, not a fuzzy haired crackpot with a theory. AE was a nutter for giving space properties, it has none, they all said this and they are 100% correct.

[@jedaaa]

@@ralos5930 you're a crackpot. Fuck off.

[@tinto278]

You mean spacetime?? because you cant have space with out time.

[@duderoony]

Pretty much went along with all you were saying Becks when...... the Bloopers came along! AND that laugh with the “Hawkeye” moment! 😂😂😂 Excellent!

[@ralos5930]

What I do love about you, is you have the courage to say 'we don't know' That is damn admirable. Too many today make up stuff and claim they know to get clicks. I don't see you doing that so hats off to you. Wise people search and keep asking questions.

[@fizyknaut8108]

If black holes are Raichu, and the problem is that we can't see it, may I suggest using a Razz Berry to lure it out? That seems to work in the TV series.

[@nousernamejoshua1556]

What could we do to detect a New Moon? Could we bounce something off the Earth to induce earth shine? Rocket can’t see straight up. 🙋‍♂️ 🚀

[@JamesBailey123]

Correction: A rocket does not have to travel at 11km/s to escape. If it had infinite fuel it could eventually escape at 1m/s. It's when you have to impart all the energy at ground level that it's 11km/s, like a rail gun or canon ball type scenario.

[@danieljensen2626]

Also most rockets don't actually escape Earth's gravity unless they're delivering a payload for an interplanetary mission.

[@beilkster]

Odd question: If you fell into a black hole and while falling you could watch the entire universe age (due to space time relationship), then has any material ever reached the black hole (not just crossing event horizon)?? Edit: poorly worded, sorry. When I stated "watch the entire universe age" I was referring to the relative age difference between myself and everything else and not actually watching the universe like a movie on fast forward.

[@user-qf6yt3id3w]

No. You look frozen crossing the event horizon from the outside but you reach the singularity in finite time from your perspective. Actually a bit of Googling turns up very short times for ten solar mass blackhole and a couple of days for a supermassive (10^10 solar mass) one. In fact the proper time, i.e. time experienced by the traveller, is given by the surprisingly simple formula 5 sqrt 5 pi M. Where M is the mass of the www_physicsforums_com/threads/how-long-does-it-take-to-fall-into-a-black-hole.1000235/ Edit: I'm not absolutely sure the above formula is correct. Most physicists do seemto agree that the proper time is finite though. And not very long. You may also be fried by radiation before you are spaghettified by the singularity.

[@WhyneedanAlias]

As far as I understood it if you just were in freefall into a black hole you would in fact not see the entirety of the universe. Time dilation just becomes apparent if you were to resist the black holes gravity (accelerating upwards) and I guess you'd only see all of the universes future if you were to stand still on the event horizon or below... Please correct me I'm not an expert

[@zanshibumi]

@@user-qf6yt3id3w But during those few days the entire history of the universe unfolds, so by the time you become that special matter, the universe has ended. So, back to the original question, what if there is no special matter inside the black hole because every piece of matter that has ever surpassed the mass limit to become one is still falling into the center and will be for literally ever?

[@TimpossibleOne]

@@zanshibumi that's a pipe dream built up by SciFi writers

[@beilkster]

@@user-qf6yt3id3w as you stated "you look frozen crossing the event horizon", which makes sense. But wouldn't that mean all matter also appears frozen (to our perspective). And if it was all frozen, has any reached the center? I understand from the materials perspective it would be finite time. Also not an expert. I poorly worded the original question.

[@JasonRule-1]

Anything that moves or collapses faster than the speed of light cannot be contained within this universe since the speed of light is a maximum upper limit. That implies that inner contents of a black hole may actually be, or perhaps must be, outside of our universe.

[@michaelgian2649]

Hawkeye (in the bloopers) is extremely hilarious, but also a wonderful left-handed compliment to Dr. Stephen.

[@MCsCreations]

I guess now I understand when they say that size isn't everything. 🤔

[@georggregersen735]

I would really like to see a reaction video of the movie "Interstellar" (2014).

[@jedaaa]

It's trash

[@Mekratrig]

Questjon for you, Dr Becky, a “though experiment”: what would happen if the spin of a black hole kept increasing? Would it be feasable for the spin speed to reach the speed of light? Or evan exceed it? What would such a fast spinnar do to its surroundings? Or is this part of the black hole forevar unknownable?

[@akale2620]

Unfortunately, the black hole, or rather the event horizon covering the singularity has mass and can never reach the absolute limit. But it does come close. Thats what causes the time dilation around them.

[@DrDeuteron]

A black hole is made from spacetime, so there is nothing moving..so there's nothing to move at the speed of light. As the spin J goes up, the ringularity gets wider. When J=M^2c, the ringularity reaches the event horizon. This is thought to be the maximum spin, because any larger and the singularity would be outside the event horizon, and theorist don't like naked singularities.

[@martijnklijn2068]

Inside the event horizon space curves such that the spin, and the force coming from it work the other way, inwards to be precise.

[@quixotic7460]

I love it when the answer to the question in the title is in the thumbnail

[@timdutton2056]

I really love your enthusiasm.

[@matthewmartel9295]

We didn't get to hear you sing this time. We were instead treated to some uncontrollable laughter.

[@olmostgudinaf8100]

The sweetest laughter I've heard in a loooooong time ;)

[@windbringer9890]

i have always thought that it was just a really dense thing, that is what makes sense to me

[@AlexandreMS71]

Thats whats I imagine too ... just stuff really packed close, maybe justa quarks but in the end, just normal stuff, nothing too supernatural.

[@juzoli]

@@AlexandreMS71 Density can be quite low for supermassive black hole. If you fill up the whole solar system with atmospheric air we could breathe, it will become a black hole, without being even a little bit dense. Only mass matters, not density.

[@davidgraham114]

Same here, just a dense sphere of matter

[@tiredsentinel1724]

I agree. The simplest solution makes the most sense.

[@windbringer9890]

now i have no clue what i am talking about and i posted this before i saw when she talked about all the ideas

[@Inannawhimsey]

yeah ive been wondering at the "immovable object meeting an irresistable force" regarding two blackholes' singularities hitting each other.

[@stripyrex_gaming]

u just get a bigger black hole, and with a single singularity that becomes common, I don't want to imagine plural singularities in a singular black hole, I am not yet quite there yet to stir fry my brain in search for the krabby patty formula also now known as the M-theory or the grand unification theory. LOL

[@nikolamarko9345]

4) It could be so called "strage matter" (really funny and also scary stuff). 5) It could be new universe and this "inner" expansion could be seen from outside as event horizon. 6) Neutron star - just bigger so it´s wrapped in event horizon. 7) 42 :D

[@VinayakaHalemane]

This cleared my perspective dramatically. I had always been imagining black holes and event horizons as more 2 dimensional without even thinking about why I was imagining it that way. Thinking about the event horizon as 3 dimensional makes more sense now. Lol. For what it's worth, in my amateur opinion my wild theory is that there's a literal hole in the fabric of spacetime (caused by the insane infinite density of mass) inside the event horizon and everything that gets sucked "in" basically falls "downwards" into a world with four spatial dimensions.

[@catpoke9557]

There pretty much is a hole in spacetime. If you look at a simple visualization of how it curves spacetime, it forms something like a hole.

[@wolowizard4441]

Now this should be good. Got my tea with me, let's go! Edit: Hawkeye 😂🏹

[@PaperbackWizard]

I have a feeling that, when you crack the mystery of gravity, you'll find out what black holes look like "inside".

[@jedaaa]

Something to do on a rainy Sunday I guess....

[@ralos5930]

Gravity is only a mystery for those who don't have the intellect to grasp what is going on. Gravity is dielectric acceleration towards a null pressure point (counterpace) between 2 objects. It is the grounding or termination of magnetism which is all that holds the entire universe together. Magnetic attraction is wrong, it is dielectric acceleration as proven beyond doubt by the guy who wrote the book on magnetism itself Ken Wheeler. Have a read over this material you will be gobsmacked. pubhtml5.com/rukq/wubs/basic/

[@PaperbackWizard]

@@ralos5930 You wanna try that again without the pomposity?

[@ralos5930]

@@PaperbackWizard I'm not implying to anyone on here, just scientists think they have the answers and know what's going on, yet cannot even explain the simplest of phenomena like light, gravity, time, magnetism, dielectricity, permitivity, inductance etc etc etc, and how this all plays out in the universe. There is one field - the electromagnetic - a conjugate field, there is the dielectric plane of inertia and its field is magnetism, which is the creation of space. Gravity is a bi product phenomena of this field and is essential for life to exist.. obviously.

[@ralos5930]

@@PaperbackWizard Try this for size mate and you'll understand some more kzbin.info/www/bejne/faqueXlrgMmKjKM

[@mariorojas9508]

Amazing as always (including Hawkeye!) 😂

[@betazep]

😂 Hawkeye… so glad I found this channel. I am late to the game, but it is really exceptional.

[@shawnalovely4054]

I live in the US...but I bought the UK and US editions of your book. Love it so much.

[@timsytanker]

My dog achieves escape velocity every time I open the back door.

[@SassInYourClass]

In an interview with Joe Scott, you stated that sufficiently massive neutron stars have event horizons that are smaller than the star itself. What if we were to, some day, find a neutron star with an event horizon very nearly as big as the star and then just started throwing more mass at it until the event horizon overtook the star? Technically, we still wouldn't know for sure what's beyond that event horizon, but it should be reasonable to hypothesize that that black hole is really just a neutron star, correct? Or does the math show that neutrons happen to collapse at the exact same time that the event horizon exceeds the surface of the star? Intuitively, I don't see why that would be the case, but black holes are weird.

[@michaelsommers2356]

Neutron stars don't really have event horizons. What is meant when people say (incorrectly) that the event horizon is inside the neutron star is that the Schwarzschild radius is inside the star. The event horizon does not form until there is enough mass.

[@Roozyj]

I'm curious if this could be a thing!

[@Rhannmah]

No. What holds neutron stars from collapsing under their immense gravity is neutron degeneracy pressure and other nuclear forces. But even that force has a limit. Adding mass, before the event horizon would ever be outside a neutron star, the neutron degeneracy pressure would fail and it would collapse into a black hole, as a neutron star with 2 solar masses would be about 10 000m radius. That star has a 5000m Schwarzschild radius (event horizon) and the maximum mass a neutron star can have is about 2.5 solar masses. This is just like electron degeneracy pressure that holds up white dwarfs, and when that fails they collapse into neutron stars. When neutron degeneracy pressure fails, it collapses into black hole. You can see here that it's a chain failure of -> electromagnetic force -> nuclear force -> in favor of gravity. What happens to the matter after that is anyone's guess. My shower thoughts on that is that it gets converted to pure energy, and since any amount of energy can occupy the same space, that could explain the seemingly infinitely small size.

[@themeach011]

@@Rhannmah but if it's compressed into an infinitely small space wouldn't all black holes be the same size?

[@craigtevis1241]

@@themeach011 Even if Black holes were infinitely small their Schwarzschild Radius would depend on their mass.

[@olmostgudinaf8100]

Rockets do NOT travel at 11 km/s to escape Earth's gravity. You could escape it at a walking pace, if you had a ladder tall enough. The 11 km/s is the _initial_ velocity of an _unpowered_ object, that will gradually lose speed until it slows down to zero at the infinite distance. But I'm sure you as an astrophysicist knew that ;)

[@luvssmau]

i want to try it lol

[@CorwynGC]

You can't HAVE a ladder tall enough.

[@luvssmau]

a ladder made out of carbon nanotubes maybe?

[@olmostgudinaf8100]

@Boodysaspie No. But the reason may be somewhat non-intuitive. Light ALWAYS travels at the speed of light (c). Even on the event horizon of a black hole. Light does not stop or slow down. So why can't it escape? A black hole's gravity bends spacetime so much that, instead of through space, light travels at c through TIME. The same way as you and I do. EVERYTHING in the Universe travels at c. The difference between having a mass and not is that objects with mass that are stationary in space travel at c through TIME. Objects without mass are stationary in time and travel at c through space. Black holes break the rules so that EVERYTHING travels at c through time only.

[@olmostgudinaf8100]

@@CorwynGC You can, in a rocket. Think of the rocket's engines as constantly building the ladder as it goes.

[@ALoonwolf]

Wow. "We don't know." An actual honest answer from mainstream astronomy for a change! If only they would continue to use phrases like "we speculate" and "we suppose but that's very unlikely"...

[@rotatingmind]

As far as I understood the transition from neutron start to black hole there is no such thing as "crushed resisting neutrons", it's just that as the mass increases the event horizon will simply surpass the radius of the neutron star, and then it's a black hole.

[@spudhead169]

Asking what's in a black hole is like asking how heavy a year is.

[@ebenolivier2762]

Or like what is outside the universe.

[@daphenomenalz4100]

When i first heard of black holes, i just thought they must be everything just super super close to each other, and that's it😂 and super broken. But after i learned more about it on internet, i realised no one knows

[@kindlin]

I mean you're not wrong. A white dwarf would be taking everything down to their individual protons and electrons, that's pretty broken. This is an example of the electron degeneracy pressure (electromagnetism, quantum electrodynamics, QED). Then you have your neutron degeneracy pressure (this is actually just the leftover strong force felt outside the tightly bound neutron quark triplets [hadrons]). This would likely be followed by a gluon degeneracy pressure (gluons, quantum chromodynamics, QCD, similar to QED up above). Then a quark degeneracy pressure (QCD for the 3rd time, but this time the particle not the boson) And finally collapsing beyond all known physics, down into the realm of string theory, LQG, or some other possible explanation. There could also be a strange matter phase in there between neutrons and gluons. This also goes the other way, with stars being kept up by not the particle of QED, but the boson, the photon, with a photon pressure due to nuclear reactions. This isn't a degeneracy pressure, tho, so it's not quite comparable. The last one worth mentioning is the planets, which are held up by valence electrons and the weak EM field that spills out of neutral nuclei.

[@DrDeuteron]

@@kindlin electron degeneracy pressure has nothing to do with QED, and certainly not e=1.6x-10^-19C. Why is the size of a white dwarf divided by the size of a neutron star equal to M_n/m_e, if it depends on electromagnetism or QCD???

[@kindlin]

@@DrDeuteron you do know that QED stands for quantum ELECTROdynamics, right? It's the quantum definition of the electromagnetic force. And the electron degeneracy pressure certainly has to do with electrons, thus QED. IDK about all the rest you're talking about. I'm not super knowledgeable in any of this, I just have a broad understanding of a lot of it.

[@kindlin]

@@goasthmago6354 Gluons are massless, and there is such a thing as photon pressure, or radiation pressure. In fact, the sun is mostly held up by radiative heat transfer from the core, with some convection nearer the surface. This is a really good article on the sun, and the last section is Model Stars, and how the sun is idealized in current theories. courses.lumenlearning.com/astronomy/chapter/the-solar-interior-theory/

[@kindlin]

@@goasthmago6354 I don't think we have any idea how gluons really act in such extreme conditions. Even the LHC isn't close to this level of power. And I personally think it makes perfect sense for massless gluons to be interacting with quarks and forming a kind of gluon pressure, exactly analogous to the electron pressure described in white dwarf stars in this video.

[@physicsisawesome4205]

Physics is incredible 'cause i'ts the king of all knowledge and science

[@GaryFerrao]

Usually i found the bloopers alright, but now that you mentioned it's everyone's favourite it's now become my favourite also. Also that you lost your mind just laughing at the end; the bloopers is what i will skip to first.

[@vitusyu9583]

So cheerful and a layman way to explain about knowledge of the Universe, thanks!

[@dm5o178]

Before you guys watch this, Stephen Hawking spent most of his life trying to figure out what black holes were and what was inside of them. He still couldn't figure it out.

[@I_Don_t_want_a_handle]

@Karl Zaraiva You'd hope, but there's plenty who want to cut those giants off at the knee.

[@shazmunchdylbertoid]

I'm sorry, I'm only familiar with the work of Stephen Hawkeye.

[@danieljensen2626]

That isn't really relevant, it's just a normal part of scientific progress that people make great discoveries when they're relatively young and then don't necessarily get much further in the rest of their careers (although mentoring other young scientists is incredibly important). It's not like "Hawking can't do it so no one can". In a lot of areas of science it takes many people, sometimes thousands, spending their whole careers working on something until we get a breakthrough. In this case a theory of quantum gravity would give us a much better guess at what is inside a black hole, although there's still no way of checking.

[@ralos5930]

Then you didn't read his final paper then? Where he did a 180 on them completley... nobody talking about that one.. He was wrong, the math was wrong, why Crothers and Robataille tore them to shreds. They are real, but, oh see my post at the top and you'll see what I meant.

[@nicolasinvernizzi6140]

@@danieljensen2626 most of the time the key is information. the hypothesis is always grounded on the data at the time and at the same time a little bit of genius. all the information to figure out relativity existed for a time before Einstein. wich makes me think, what hypothesis we would have if someone put 2+2 together.

[@SpinCity1234]

"Massive, but tiny." That's what she said!

[@richardkammerer2814]

It's the Churchillian martini, the ten dimensions or flavors shaken madly about in the general vicinity of the 11th dimension, so very tiny we must have a second.

[@edwardduda4222]

I love that you don't speak in certainties because you can't discover or learn anything new once you do.

[@iainbaker6916]

Superb video, thank you for explaining such a complex topic in plain English. I lean towards the exotic matter hypothesis too, partly because of the issues with the whole ‘infinitely small’ thing, and partly due to the plank length, since nothing can be smaller than that (unless I’m misunderstanding something). Perhaps a ‘core’ of plank length ‘stuffs’ might be sitting at their centre. This ‘core’ would probably still be tiny considering just how ridiculously small a plank length is.

[@hyperhybrid7230]

Black Hole, always a tough question. Total respect to Dr Becky.

[@PaleRider54]

You're a real hoot. 🥰

[@nothingbutlove4886]

accretion disks are really hoot too

[@MassEffect1988]

I'm gonna throw out there - Our universe exists within a singularity of a Black Hole, so on and so forth 👍it can't be disproven, so...

[@indigenous7046]

When scientist say 'infinitely' dense to describe something, you know they have no idea.

[@nathanhimmerich2]

Becky, you mentioned something I've been thinking about for decades now. The escape velocity of a black hole is greater than the speed of light. Doesn't this mean it's feasible that things fall into the black hole faster than the speed of light? Perhaps some things manage to resist this pull with some amount of speed in some other direction, but that's besides the point. Things can and apparently do fall into black holes at faster than light speeds apparently, right? Since this is the case, isn't the dilation of time theoretically going to cause a reversal of time? I mean, things approaching light speed approach a complete stopping of time. Time can be thought of as an axis with 0 at the end, and going faster brings you closer to that 0, with the limit being the speed of light, at 0 on the time axis. Of course meaning time does not move at light speed. If things CAN move faster than this speed, doesn't the axis continue past 0, implying a negative time movement? Doesn't this mean things falling into black holes can theoretically move backwards in time? Of course the philospical argument is that they never reach this sort of speed because time stopped, but this passage of time is relative just like velocity is relative, and the hypothetical falling object would experience time normally, but, compared to things outside the black hole, moves backwards in time. I have no idea what this would "look like", but it has some weird implications if this is the case. If true, perhaps we exist in a black hole. Perhaps the Big Bang is the point at which the contents of this black hole converged into a singularity. The entire universe as we know it may have reached the Schwarzchild radius/density, and began falling inwards. This would explain the faster-than-light expansion of spacetime. This would explain the Big Bang. This could explain why the Schwarzschild Radius for the mass of the universe (estimated) is 13.7 billion light years, an otherwise ironic number. It would have us questioning causation, as it implies cause-and-effect is reversed, but perhaps, on the local level, time isn't actually reversed because we (the atoms of the solar system) aren't travelling ftl relative to one another. This makes me think we exist in a black hole, but we are experiencing this absolutely wild sized black hole increasing in density to a singularity in reverse, while experiencing time on the local level in the "normal" direction. It's a weird idea to wrap the head around, but it seems feasible to me, yet I'm no expert, just a dreamer.

[@jd9119]

From our perspective, the object that falls in to a blackhole gets slower and slower until it freezes at the horizon. And our perspective is neither inside the event horizon nor is it the perspective of the object that is falling in to it.

[@ronjon7942]

Loved it. Nice work DB.

[@chrisperell4590]

The way neutrons arrange themselves as close together as possible, it’s pretty obvious of what the next stage of matter would be. Three neutrons, are compressed together into a new bit of matter. So simple!

[@KarlSchneidertube]

Hi @DrBecky It seems to me that black holes don't have to be super-dense if they are very, very big. If you define a black hole as an object which has an escape velocity equal to or greater than the speed of light at its "surface", then for a spherical object of uniform density, the density required to meet this minimum requirement for a black hole decreases as the square of the radius of the object (basically because as the radius increases, the distance of the surface from the centre goes up as the square of the radius, but the volume and hence the mass of the object does up as the cube of the radius). So a uniform spherical object with a very, very large radius only needs a low average density to be a black hole. Furthermore, If you ask the question "What is the minimum average density for a uniform spherical object the size of the visible universe to have an escape velocity at its surface equal to the speed of light" (i.e. for it to be just dense enough to be a black hole), assuming the radius of the visible universe is 46.5bn light years, you get an answer of 8.32 x 10-28kg/m3 - that's about a tenth of the actual estimated average density of our universe (9.9 x 10-27kg/m3). So does that mean that we're actually living inside a massive, universe-sized black hole?

[@OracleDavis]

It is not a black hole. It is a Dark Star with strong magnetic field running inside it. The surface itself holding spikes.

[@eikopalma3072]

That's an other big science question whose answers is just: "we have no idea". Those ones we enjoy the most.

[@AirCommandRockets]

If you fell into a black hole feet first, as you passed the event horizon, would you be able to see your feet? Or would the light from your feet bend down more towards the singularity never reaching your eyes? Kind of like a continuum of event horizons all the way down.

[@leeasbury7273]

Ur little outtakes though in ur vids....too cute.

[@jlholmes8]

Doctor, I just love your videos. You discuss serious topics, and don’t take yourself too seriously. You are a great heir to professors Hawkins and Sagan in teaching the masses.

[@yourdisappointedmother9449]

videos like these make me want to grow faster to do research on these topics. keep it up :D hope you're doing well

[@DanielTsosie]

Black Holes contain all our missing socks from the laundry.

[@mattw.6726]

Step 1: Collect underpants Step 2: Step 3: Black hole

[@redtreemouse]

The Launch Pad Astronomy did a video about impossibly large black holes. One thing Christian Ready said was that when black holes merge they “ring like a bell” at the end of the merge/orbiting process. Wouldn’t the gravitational waves from that”ringing” tell us something about the structure and density of the stuff making up the black hole?