Boy does this guy gotta work on his delivery!!

Ddaonjngpxphpxpdp pvpzpzzckbv LP

Star collapses do something else we produce beastars will produce black holes when they die and produce black hole looks like this is a massive star something like 40 or 50 times when this star died its core collapses into a black hole that black hole it consumes star collisions in those beans produce the cameras that we detect here on Earth and eventually the death of the star ends with the same sort of supernova. Took about 15 or 20 seconds time a 40 solar mass star will actually die in Pretty in a comparably amount of time so this is an incredible satellite look for signs that somebody was violating the tree and performing a test which would a flash of memory without lights with great and they detected many flashes are family and fortunately for when we saw this Camry what we finally determined that we were seeing flashes of these dying stars from other galaxies we've now quit up dedicated telescopes job is to look for a gamma ray burst and to tell us when one has happened as quickly as possible so we can try and study them spacecraft a tailored telescope is it will sit there waiting for us to go off somewhere.

@@rodneyadderton1077 Stars do not collapse . Stars loose MASS from ejection of matter , Not radiating light.

Hear, hear!

hahhahaha i agree

He was riveting except for his telescope size. 8 meters kinda jarred me as far as a home tripod mount.

@@mikelouis9389 I thought I heard bs... lol

Some insightful commentors out there... but for every gem... there's going to be alot of crap as well. KZfaq allows anyone with an account (and a pulse) to air their thoughts... it's all free... and you get what you pay for🙄 Great presentation though! I learned something about radio astronomy I didn't know before😊

Frank1fm Actually just curiosity and a few college physics courses. I thought it was great.

Try some Sean Carroll or Frank Wilczek

They always are for some reason

My burning question: Why is the speaker wearing ruby slippers?

Science fiction is just that , science fact is now where near science fiction , but assholes like nut case hawking`s with their ego driven science have put modern science back in the realm of druids. Stop putting hypothesis forward as the fucking truth .

Love your comment!

It was pretty amzing.

@@mikelouis9389 yes it was and I liked your original comment because it's fairly possible that matter around black hole(accretion disc)is from stars that venture a little bit to close to black hole. Greetings from Pearl of Adriatic 🌅

Spencer. There IS a reason, and you KNOW what it is. Reflect. Courage, man! Venture over the event horizon of your latent self, into "… that undiscovered ‘country‘..." wherein lies your brilliant, ideal self capable of comprehending ALL!

Dang yes pedantic. But no he won't figur out quantum gravity

@Oners82 Nope, it's "thunk". I wasn't trying to say it correctly, but rather to use a well known expression from way back. Google is your friend :-)

Can confirm, it is "thunk".

No pun intended right? Amazing pun by the way lol

@Oners82 it's an old joke about the unnecessary complexity of English irregular verbs: drink drank drunk, sink sank sunk...think thank thunk.

Look behind you it’s me

What passion? He was as dull as a dry sock =3

My poor fellow, you haven't heard enough science talks.

@@Kuiriel lol so true:)

Not dull just very layer back. But his love of the topics he covered is evident if your not blind and mean spirited. Good luck being a bitchy never happy human being

@@edgeofenlightenment7088 chill dude ppl are just joking. But if that is mean spirited.....

There is no color, but there is crazy.

Claim's with out evidence can be dismissed without evidence , you claim is as outrageous as religion. Black holes do not exist , Black is not part of the electro magnetic spectrum, Holes can never have mass. Here is the actual evidence against the label , Black joles, why when they where named over 200 years ago does a an ignorant christian get to name them. Black holes are just stars that do not radiate. Not holes solid objects. The black disc in the EHT image is the size of the dark star not the hole that cannot exist. John Michell (/ˈmɪtʃəl/; 25 December 1724 - 21 April 1793) was an English natural philosopher and clergyman who provided pioneering insights in a wide range of scientific fields, including astronomy, geology, optics, and gravitation. Considered "one of the greatest unsung scientists of all time",[1] he was the first person known to propose the existence of Dark Stars not black holes in publication, the first to suggest that earthquakes travel in waves, the first to explain how to manufacture artificial magnets, and the first to apply statistics to the study of the cosmos, recognizing that double stars were a product of mutual gravitation. He also invented an apparatus to measure the mass of the Earth. He has been called both the father of seismology and the father of magnetometry. The term “black hole“ was itself coined in 1968 by the Princeton physicist John Wheeler, who worked out further details of a black hole's properties. The most common black holes are probably formed by the collapse of massive stars. Stars do not collapse, they explode. Your entire post is nothing more than Psychotic Psycho Babble.

At 45 minutes 48 seconds on the dot, fingers crossed green stick technologies picks up the ball with those quartz crystal memory chips. Much joy to the leaps and bounds of tech and how far it's come along. I myself appreciate that dragon speech program and all it's done.

This is a good question... anybody?

One of the explanations has to do with the expansion of the universe which happened so rapidly that black hole could not form. Personally, I'm not a fan of the inflationary models of the universe so I don't know about that one. The best answer has to do with the curvature of space time. At the beginning of the universe you just can't get space time to curve in such a way that a black hole can form because of the way all the forces were balanced at that time. However, The initial universe had to be balanced in a very particular way so that a black hole didn't form. And that is a mystery!

The instant before the big bang happened the laws of physics did not exist. So there was no Gravity, or Space, or Time, there was no mass, no particles, no light. So the possibility of a Black Hole before the big bang is nil. In the moments after the Big Bang the laws of physical universe began to formulate and eventually balance, but by that time the universe was already rapidly expanding away from itself.

Dylan Childs They can’t. We have Common Core now, dumbing them down so they all learn exactly the same thing, no more, no less, and as slowly and painfully as possible.

So much stifled potential.

@Mike Louis When I heard that, I thought I had misheard. I repeated that bit and yes, he did say 8 meter. Wow. Perhaps he meant 8 centimeter and the centi got dropped.

@@Atanu I think it is the same scope I have, which means it is an eight inch telescope.

@@DonH_Zeroth57 Thanks. So it's not 8 cms but 8 inches. Then I wonder why he said 8 meters.

@@Atanu sometimes when public speaking I get a little tongue tied and twisted, so likely just a mistake. And in relation to the entire talk, it was a small one.

@@DonH_Zeroth57 Quite understandable. It was a very trivial slip and anyone should see past it to the overall excellent presentation. Thanks. Cheers.

@SmoothRide Gravitational interactions

Hawking radiation?

You might wery well have a point there. Or Gateway to another dimension. For sure Black wholes has a bigger purpose. Could be big bang was the birth from a black wholes energy in another dimension. Dark matter seems to be out og this World and I like your veuw.

A wormhole or what's usually known as an Einstein-Rosen bridge is when two points in space are bent so much that they touch. Theoretically, well, in science fiction some sort of technology is used to keep both openings open (since normally they would collapse) and the center or singularity point is widened...this would then allow information or in sci-fi solid matter to pass between two points in space without passing through any of the points between them. Its irrelevant how far apart they actually are... Three feet or opposite sides if the universe. The distance as we measure distance is a moot point. Its theoretical....and possible, but nobody has ever produced one nor is that likely considering the energy you would need to keep it open. A black hole is described in the video above. Its a mass that is so great that gravity continues to compress it so much that it curves space practically infinitely. Its not a doorway or some sort of way of transmitting data. Basically the fabric of space at the event horizon is stretched so much that although light still travels at light speed it can never make it past the event horizon which from a photons perspective will always be receding. But in reality its just the geometry if space that is bent... Its an interesting phenomena in that it once presented a paradox to physicists concerning the principle of conservation of energy....or conservation of information. This was resolved in the 80's by the proposal of hawking radiation which was later observed.

I see. And what's the optimal methodology when it comes to sucking eggs? ^_^

@@nagualdesign I wouldn't know, I give up...what is it?

until it's not

when communicating with the space probe you know exactly the frequency you're trying to get, so it's easy to pick out of the background noise.

Wow 3 years

Apart from the cost of setting up a station on the moon... d'you remember that they mailed the petabytes of data back, on hard disks? I'm pretty sure ya can't just Fedex a big ol' box of disks back from the moon, every month or so...

@@0623kaboom, you are probably quite right but to validate your idea, it must be observed on a macro scale too, i.e. for black holes... And gravity is too weak to be measured at particle scale.

Black holes are simple, actually being able to literally see them is really complicated! :)

of course it is they are trying to see 1% of something by looking at 99% of what is not there ... instead of changing scale and measuring what can be done and viewed at a more readily usable scale and then relate it back out to the macro scale

+0623kaboom they have a limit? I thought he said that wasn't known. I thought the thinking was that they lost mass (by emitting Hawking radiation) and the smaller they got, the faster they evaporated (going 'poof').

Trust me the brain of a flatearther is a lot more complicated, so while they still exists, study them well.

I would expound that the professor does articulate at a level commensurate to one's ability to comprehend conducive to optimum academic cosmology theory; in general terms of course.