Pun alert, In the Plunging Region, a deep dive really is necessary.

​@@abj136So you're saying you can appreciate the gravity of the situation?

@@Deletirium no choice, got to go with the flow

That's what she said.

@@abj136ba dum tss

Serious Question, Anton. Is "Bizzare Area" an actual astronomical / astrophysical term? It seems there are a lot of these, most not yet designated as such. I congratulate you for being the first!

It's a huge loss, sorry I don't agree

Remember when Chandra toom a boat 🚢 ride

SAVE CHANDRA PLEASE! There should be a major campaign to save the Chandra telescope. To which science communicators could also contribute, such as Fraiser Cain, Brian Greene, Sabine Hossenfelder, Brian Keating, Dr. Becky and Dustin from "get smarter every day" etc. They all have so many viewers that a rescue campaign supported by them could be successful. Especially as this excellent device would work very well for at least another 10 years. It's super mega tragic what's happening and not just a huge loss for science, but for all mankind. We all shouldn't let this happen! Maybe we can all motivate our beloved science communicators to come to an agreement? PR would surely benefit everyone. Please support this cause! Thank you very much! 😊👍

Yeah but shutting it down this far ahead of a replacement was completely premature and stupid. Considering how much money is wasted by the US government, it's really hard to justify the financial juggling NASA has to do all of the time.

​@@user-li7ec3fg6hSince use of Chandra, Hubble, JWST, etc. is free for anyone in the world to use and it's the American taxpayers who actually pay for it why don't the taxpayers from Canada, UK, EU, etc. fund it?

😂

I came here for this comment. I think this is the farthest in I’ve seen his greeting. Soon he’ll be in the greeting plunging region

@@johnk6598 tbh I am already pretty spaghettified

I can't imagine how he's able to maintain a daily video schedule, but definitely a win for us.

@@Deletirium I know right, the fact that everyday I come on this app and there is always a new video out blows my mind. I dont know how he does it but it is def a win for us all!

Well, between the horizon and the ISCO. I think the big news is that in the past we couldn't get observational information about that region.

The problem is with the evidence/proof. It is predicted mathematically that such region exist, but we don't have evidence yet that it is actually there. This is essentially the first evidence that such region might actually exist.

There is no Schwarzchild radius. Most people don't know that Einstein repeatedly said that singularities are not possible. In the 1939 journal "Annals of Mathematics" he wrote - "The essential result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the Schwarzchild singularities (Schwarzchild was the first to raise the issue of General Relativity predicting singularities) do not exist in physical reality. Although the theory given here treats only clusters whose particles move along circular paths it does seem to be subject to reasonable doubt that more general cases will have analogous results. The Schwarzchild singularities do not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily. And this is due to the fact that otherwise the constituting particles would reach the velocity of light." He was reffering to the phenomenon of dilation (sometimes called gamma or y) mass that is dilated is smeared through spacetime relative to an outside observer. It's the phenomenon behind the phrase "mass becomes infinite at the speed of light". Time dilation is just one aspect of dilation, it's not just time that gets dilated. A graph illustrates its squared nature, dilation increases at an exponential rate the closer you get to the speed of light. Dilation will occur wherever there is an astronomical quantity of mass because high mass means high momentum, this includes the centers of very high mass stars and the centers of the overwhelming majority of galaxy centers. Dilation explains galaxy rotation curves/dark matter. It can be inferred mathematically that the mass at the center of our own galaxy must be dilated. This means that there is no valid XYZ coordinate that we can attribute to it, you can't point your finger at something that is smeared through spacetime. More precisely, everywhere you point is equally valid'. In other words that mass is all around us. The concept of singularities is preventing clarity in astronomy. They were popularized by television and movies beginning in the 1960's. Singularities were not taught in colleges before 1960. Nobody believed in them when he was alive including Planck, Bohr, Schrodinger, Dirac, Heisenberg, Feynman etc.

​@@shawns0762 I don't think people actually believe that singularities exist. They are understand to be mathematical artifacts that means our understanding breaks down and that it requires further research. Of course, there are attempts made where singularities are considered and see what comes out of it, but again, it is known that this is just mental exercises rather than the actual description of reality. That is just what we do with Maths. And while singularities are popular in fictional work, doesn't mean people actually believe they are real. Magic is popular, does that mean people think they are real? Not at all. Same with time travel, multiple world/universes, Star Wars, etc.. I don't know why you equate popularity in fiction means people actually believe in it. [Singularities were not taught in colleges before 1960]... but of course. That is actually true for the entire Theory of Relativity. The Theory of Relativity isn't taught in schools until that time. That is practically true with most scientific theories. That is true with Theory of Evolution for example, was still illegal to teach about it in school in the 1920s about 40 years after Darwin published his book). You are not making any point here. This is nothing but a non sequitur. So... You are just tilting at windmills.

@@shawns0762 The first singularity theorems were published in 1965. What did Einstein have to say about them?

I don't know if they all spin in the same direction explicitly but we have found a pattern in the orientation of their accretion disks: all or almost all observed BHs align to a certain axis almost as though the universe has a north and south. We still don't know why

@@hughlion1817 nice one 👍 you have confirmed my suspicion that there are bigger forces at play in the form of positive and negative energy, thank you 👍

Lol, Danny Trejo's the bomb. FYI, "Machete" has a sequel, IIRC. 🤓

FEED THE ALGOGOD

Obligatory reply to simulate engagement

The algorithm can never be satiated

Yk it

Me too

Not Anton, but do have a Physics background. The answer would be yes. Einstein's equations accept any combination of mass or energy in a volume to produce curvature in spacetime. If that amount of energy or mass exceeds the Schwarzchild limit, then it will create a black hole. As far as our theories can guide us the amount of energy you're describing at the size is enough to reach this limit.

Would that be the equivalent of a kugelblitz ?

answer from "alien" : nope. you could tear a space open but you wont be making a blackhole. blackhole is another MATTER. its not a result of energy density. something earth science still dont get it. and when you tear a space open, you only creating incision to form another space inside. you dont tear open a space into some hole towards some other universe. thats SCIENCE FICTION theory. and yes, THERE CAN BE A SPACE INSIDE A SPACE. is this means our universe can be inside another space? theoritically, but sadly, since there is no edge of the bubble of this universe, its not.

Does that promote the idea that this is all just a computer simulation and the guy running it just doesn't have the latest hardware?

@@ThePdog3k Not particularly no, it just follows from mass-energy equivalence. If you want to come up with stories about why some seemingly arbitrary physical parameters are what they are, whether a black hole starts from mostly mass or mostly energy doesn't really affect that, but basically anything involving Planck scale quantities you can make that analogy to a simulation's limit on render resolution. It's not evidence, but it's a fun mysiticism.

Also gravitational waves.

Agreed. I think understanding gravity better might even help us discover an analog to FTL.

Atmospheric Aerogel Drones

If we study virtual particles and the different ways they recombine, we will discover that there recombination can form patern like a wave. That wave being the bending of space time at small scale. At bigger scale it looks like a hawking radiation in a black hole. The sliding of virtual particles one going in the black hole, the other going in our univers as a real partcle. That singularly at the edg of the black hole is where nothingness is being unzipped into 2 worlds. And then we generalize that point and realise it is happening everywhere. Including right here right now. I just don't understand why it is not being discovered.

@@aurelienyonrac In my opinion information is not being destroyed at the Black Hole but stored. Once the mass reaches a certain level, it gets the core unstable leading to a massive explosion creating a Galaxy. The Energy expelled shakes the Space-Time creating massive Gravitational waves that interact with the surrounding Galaxies.

In the Kerr geometry the ISCO can be anywhere between 0.5 r_s and 4.5 r_s, depending on the dimensionless spin parameter and the retrograde/prograde orbit.

Yes, radially outward light can escape, though we see it coming from the photon ring.

That sounds like an incredibly fun game.... I bought No Man's Sky for some of the same purported reason and was sorely disappointed, but yours sounds better.

@@Deletirium No Mans Sky is better today than before for sure. So if its been awhile def check it out again. Also on Nintendo Switch now. Whats even cooler is LowMemSky.....this is a fan game for the Pico-8 program. Its a retro style 2d pixelated.......No Mans Sky.

If an outside observer -- watching from a frame of reference far away enough from the black hole to be unaffected by gravitational time dilation -- watches an object approach a non-rotating black hole then the object will appear to the distant observer to slow down and actually stop at the event horizon.

@@douglaswilkinson5700 How many non-rotating black holes do we know of?

@@heisag From what Dr. Kip Thorne, Dr. Becky Smethurst, et al, have said there are probably none (due to conservation of angular momentum.) It makes computations and explanations simpler to start with that initial condition. Rotating black holes are more complicated. E.g. a Rotating BH causes frame dragging. When an object approaches a rotating BH it appears to be pulled into orbit around the BH (because spacetime itself is being dragged.)

@@heisag Non-rotating BHs that astrophysicists have 3σ or better confidence of existing: zero (due to conservation of angular momentum.) According to Kip Thorne, et al, non-rotating BHs are easier to deal with before testing hypotheses with ones that rotate (e.g. frame dragging.)

@@douglaswilkinson5700 Thank you for the answers. I asked since so much we learn from YT physicists regarding black holes are based on the seemingly nonexistant non-rotating ones. At least you specified non-rotating ones in the first answer, which is more then 90 percent does. And, rotating black holes are much more exciting.

Especially for lions!

No, there'd be plenty of light falling in after the traveler vanishes at the singularity. In the Kerr geometry the traveler can intercept all of the in-falling light due to the peculiar interior spacetime of a rotating black hole. No, the traveler vanishes at the singularity before it evaporates.

I was just wondering if after you die, what would happen if your consciousness visited a black hole. What would it be like in there? Would you get stuck? Do post life consciousness enjoy hanging out in black holes?

The distant black hole collisions were observed by the James Webb ST, which is an infrared telescope.

The MAXI black hole pair is quite close, about 10k light-years, and the x-rays were observed at the ISS.