Hi friends! Thanks for watching this video :) Please do check out Skillshare at this link - the first 1000 people to use the link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership! skl.sh/parthg10201
The entropy that an electron contributes to black hole is: 2*π*k*α*β = S k - Boltzmann’s Constant α - the fine structure constant β - Ratio of the ( ( 2*G*m / r )*( 1 / c^2 ) ) m - mass of electron G - Gravitational Constant r - radius of electron c - speed of light If you would like to see more please reach out Parth. Thank you!!
Whenever you make such cool videos explaining complicated stuffs so easily, I get into this misconception of thinking of myself as a genius😝😝 thanks a lot Parth!
I wish , Einstein would have seen Bell's inequality, then the genius would have explained the mystery of Quantum Physics. We missed this opportunity just by a decade.
Thankyou for this, I'm reading Stephen Hawkings book and wanted to understand more about Hawking's Radiation. This has brought me another step closer. A video on virtual particles and how these result in radiation from a black hole would be great.
Pls more, more, more and more videos on blackholes. Bro you make my day with these videos. I love physics and I love your videos too A really beautiful yet simple explanation and you didn't even make it feel a bit complex either. 😘
When you look up the classical definition/application of entropy; of how much useful energy or work you can get out of a physical system, it makes perfect sense that black holes have crazy high entropy despite their crazy low temperature. Entropy is a measure of how...decayed a system is; that is, more entropy = less energy that can be harvested for useful purposes (e.g. movement, etc). Unless a black hole is rotating (penrose process + superradiant scattering), what energy can be extracted, from a black hole? Exactly... Gravity & gravitational potential is kind of weird like that. The more scattered the mass is, the more energy could be extracted from it. Imaging it as an engine of mass passing by a paddle or something like that. Once you hit the bottom of the gravitation well; of a black hole, there is nothing left to extract, and so the entropy would be maximized.
1:30 a rocket velocity does not have to be higher than the escape velocity to leave Earth, if it uses engines (as it looks on your video BTW). It is a very common mistake to think so. The truth is: the escape velocity is necessary to leave Earth without engines, as a free falling body. If you move 11 km/s your orbit will become open and you will fly to infinity while free falling. But if you have enough fuel, you can fly to any distance from Earth even at walking speed
Dear Parth, thank you so much for those great videos :-). Can you please explain in a video the correlation between the amount of elementary particles (including bosons +their counterpart (in supersymmetry) and the 11 dimensions in string theory? I know there are speculations about more dimensions, but are 11 possible dimentions enough to make all the above mentioned strings =particles/bosons? Thanks a lot :-)
the escape velocity isn't the speed of a rocket being thrust upwards. the escape velocity is the instantaneous velocity if there is no other energy applied to a mass. It is the velocity of an object such that the energy of the object (kinetic energy) can escape the gravitational pull (potential energy and not mgh). A rocket can escape the earth at 1m/s if there is enough energy in the rocket to eventually pull away from Earth. Also, the velocity of an object decreases to 0 as the energy is converted from KE to PE. Love the videos but we need to be careful not to dumb down the content too much as it leads to confusion. I remember being confused by such a concept in the mid-80s by a teacher who didn't really understand it.
Hey Parth, sorry for the late comment. Entropy can also depend on the energy. How do you think we can measure entropy of Black Holes using the energy? Even though energy will be very less on the outside of the event horizon but the energy is higher beyond it.
It is false that a rocket has to reach the escape velocity in order to overcome the gravity of a given planet, say the earth. The concept of escape velocity applies to non-propelled objects. If a rocket has enough fuel to maintain a speed much lower than the escape velocity, it can perfectly leave the earth's gravitational field.
Yeah it's obvious the escape velocity is flatout the initial velocity needed to yeet an item out of Earth forever from the surface without more propelling, now if one keeps propelling, even if the velocity is lesser, it still will escape Earth.
It is actually the relative velocity which doesn't have to be equal to the escape velocity ... but the thing which matters is the acceleration of the rocket which has to be more than the earth's gravitational acceleration. The escape velocity is the velocity attained by the rocket due to the kinetic energy attained by it to overcome gravitational acceleration from the centre of the earth. But practically the normal force provided by the ground against the weight of the rocket, accounts for the required acceleration at that height. So the relative velocity we see is the (total velocity - escape velocity) because we are also having the same escape velocity at the surface, due to the acceleration provided by the normal force provided by the ground. I hope I could explain myself and the fact that rocket science is not that simple. SpaceX is sooo renowned just like that!
Im not a complete expert but i feel like I've studied enough to give an answer. Im pretty sure it's because quantum mechanics which is largely used to make predictions in the small scale, does not mesh well with general relativity which is largely used to make predictions and measurements on the large cosmic scale of planets, stars, and galaxies. Gravity has not been described on a quantum level yet, everytime we try it, it leads to either paradoxes, singularities, extra particles, extra dimensions, etc. And the theories we have available now that attempt to do this, cannot be proven experimentally yet as we don't have the technology yet.
You talk about radius of the black hole. The concept of distance seems to have been re-written recently to something based on how far light would travel in a certain time (which again is defined as some number of oscillations of a specific electron orbital of a specific atom). What is that inside the black hole? Is that a different distance? If you measure that from the inside of a black hole the meaning of distances seem to be different from somewhere way outside a black hold. This is all very confusing
I still have an issue with the assumption that any event horizon exists from our perspective. It cannot in any meaningful sense of time from our own external perspective. Hence I'm not sure it's useful to talk about entropy from the Swarzschild metric perspective. From our perspective this will never exist in finite time. Help!
The second law of thermodynamics is not correctly stated. The entropy always TENDS to increase, but there is usually a very small chance the entropy can decrease spontaneous for a small amount of time. An example would be the chance of all air molecules in a room gathering in a small corner for a split second , not likely but possible
I just saw a video of a lecture where it is mentioned that the entropy of black hole only depends on area ,also mentioned here, does this imply that a black hole has no form or structure inside like an empty ball?as the entropy is a measure of degrees of freedom or disorder?
Isn't the equation S = kB ln omega limited to a closed system? What is the formula for entropy in the universe? Is there one? If not, how about: Entropy is the sum of all potential differences (gradients) at the beginning ("Big bang") divided by the sum of all potential differences (gradients) now? This would at least explain, why entropy always grows. Always? Well as far as I know nobody has a clue of what is going on in a black hole. Thermodynamics don`t work in black holes I would imagine. I mean what`s the meaning of heat, work, time, space and energy in a black hole? What if black holes are huge recycling machines that gobble up high entropy stuff and one day pop in a big bang emitting "primordial energy" with the least possible degree of entropy? But what do I know, I am just an idiot. Anyway: I love your videos!!!
sir please make a course on Quantum and relativity theory serially playlost by which we can follow your series properly from basics to higher. thank you please
Why do we assume that the second law of thermodynamics applies to black holes in the first place? I don't see any reason why a black hole couldn't just be an exception. Unlike, say, the law of gravitation, the second law of thermodynamics is really just a statistical observation, and to take it as fundamentally, unalterably true strikes me as a little presumptuous.
What would happen to the black hole's entropy as it begins to evaporate? Would there be a balance between the loss of entropy of the black hole and some gain of entropy by the universe?
So to a black hole, is one source of entropy is equal to another source of entropy given equal mass? It doesn't matter if it's salt or salt and pepper?
In the universe entropy is always increasing; could the universe stop at surface horizon of black hole, allowing the inside of black hole to be a region of decreasing entropy?
5:17 what if the object some how left its entropy outside the black hole right at the surface before entering the blackhole and thus this also satisfies second law of thermodynamics can we say this can be an correct explanation.......😁😁
It will be nice if you spend some time in explains the equation and how is the entropy derived . Most of the video watchers have maths background so no need to worry
You need more than just a basic maths background for that. Infact math wont even be the issue u need to know about many other Physics topics, Such as black body radiation, Statistical Mechanics and Statistical Thermodynamics and on top of that Quantum Field Theory (Which in turn would require tons of mathematics such as tensor analysis, Group theory etc). So that much detail would require like two year worth video lecture series to finally arrive at a full detailed derivation of Bekenstein - Hawking entropy.
My brain hurts. Consider two different objects, A and B, both of which have precisely the same mass but each of which have a different measure of thermodynamic entropy. We may choose to throw either object A or object B into the black hole, but regardless of which we throw in, the total entropy of our (non-rotating) black hole will increase by the same amount, because it depends solely on the mass contained within. How does that make sense? You can choose option A and throw x amount of entropy into the black hole, or choose option B and throw 2x amount of entropy into the black hole, but its total entropy will increase by z regardless of your choice? Shenanigans!
If entropy always increase in the Universe, does that mean the Universe is infinite small and big and the Universe never ever reaches heat death since when nothing happens anymore, entropy stays the same.
If you can afford me to critic you're video: -A black hole isn't necessary dense -Defining entropy as a mesure of disorder is a really big simplification
But what if the interior of a black hole is one-dimensional? If you asked the universe how much force would be required to close dimensions, the answer would be the Swartzschield radius. The event horizon would then be an interface between two different sets of conditions. On our side 4 dimensions, on the other side, one dimension. It would have no time, no entropy, and the only information it would have would be the order in which particles went into it.
I have a question: why the spacetime (as shown in various videos) curves more around a blackhole than the star from which it formed. ( even if the mass of both of them is same, actually less of the blackhole. )
Because the area or volume of a black hole is much much smaller than an object with equivalent mass. Imagine a 10 pound bowling ball on a rubber sheet, it bends the the 2 dimensional sheet on to a 3rd dimension, now imagine that the ball was the size of a marble but was still 10 pounds, it would warp the rubber sheet a lot more around its area. That's more or less an oversimplification of what's happening because in reality it's 3 dimensional space that's curving into a 4th dimension because general relativity describes the universe as having non euclidean geometry.
But hold on, for the same mass you can have different amounts of entropy but the entropy added to the black whole only depends on the mass added to it So that would still lead to violating the 2 law of thermal dynamics
If we say that all the physical laws will breakdown due to the singularity in a black hole, why we are so sure that the second law of thermodynamics works inside a black hole?
This seems like a weird and probably incorrect explanation. Unless you treat the second law as more mystical than it is you just acknowledge that it's a statistical law. Entropy tends to increase on average, there are just many more ways something can be disordered than ordered. As a result, entropy increases just because it's more likely to increase than stay constant and even more unlikely to revert. IIRC the entropy of black holes is attributed to them because Hawking found out that black holes must produce radiation and that this radiation looks exactly like that of a blackbody, which is a body that radiates thermal radiation. Tons of complicated math and technical things later you can find some "entropy" describing black holes in a useful way.
5:40 HI Parth, the condition in the second law of thermodynamics is for a closed system, and as far as we know the universe is not a closed system. so the primary assumption that Black holes cannot decrease Entropy itself is flawed in a way. can you please consider if the universe is an open system, and the 2nd law of thermodynamics don't hold good for the entire Observable Universe then what would it mean for the Black hole?
Awesome video. My own body’s Shwarzchild Radius is 1.3339x10^-25 meters. Kinda cool to think that I know what size I need to be for myself to become a black hole haha. Can anyone calculate my mass? :) hint: i need to stop eating so many donuts
Perhaps the black hole is not a closed system and therefore the second law would not apply. It is obvious that the universe as a whole is not closed. So perhaps these thermodynamic arguments are not appropriate tools to examine the interior of black holes!
Confess I can’t understand the claim that a BH is very, very dense object. Of course the density can be enormous for some objects that cannot be reduced to BH , like the earth, but the strange thing is that the more massive is the object BH , the less dense it becomes! Why that? Because M increases with r , while V increases with r^3 therefore very massive BH can reach very low densities like that of vacuum. As a matter of fact if we put in the equations the assumed r of universe and its estimated mass we could well obtain a density corresponding to that observed and thus we could well be living in the biggest BH!
You are talking about the event horizon, not the singularity. Unlike most objects whose mass is distributed throughout their entire volume, all of the black hole's mass is at the singularity, which then has supposedly infinite density. and of course, this is just a non-rotating not charged black hole.
Since we don’t know what happens inside the Schwarzschild radius which defines the event horizon, why we should suppose that all matter crashes into a singularity? Is n’t a singularity such an absurd idea since the mass has to be there within the event horizon due to the gravity that BH is still so evident? In my opinion it is much more logical an uniform distribution of BH mass on the surface of the event horizon than a further collapse into a singularity.
@@amedeofilippi6336 Singularity is an absurd idea, and currently, nobody knows what's happening behind the event horizon. However, the surface-mass model does not match the behavior of real-world black holes. And singularity is the simplest form of a BH, which may not even exist in our universe. If a BH has charges or is rotating, there might be a ring in the center instead of a singularity. But just like you said, we don't know much about these things.
by no means a scientist, so anyone who is please feel free to correct me. but i think the current main theories is that either the universe will expand so far it will die a heat death, with everything too far apart to reach each other. OR the universe will eventually implode on itself, causing a new big bang event somewhere down the line.
How would something increasing have a final value of zero (barring negative values)? The entropy of an isolated will always be increasing until it reaches thermal equilibrium. So the final entropy won’t be zero, but some maximum value
Presumably this is von Neumann entropy., but still don't see why entropy is proportional to surface area? Why not volume? That's the big open question, if you ask me.
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี : คู่มวยแห่งยุค (11 ตุลาคม 2567)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/aTc7-tPYuJM/mqdefault.jpg)
Hi friends! Thanks for watching this video :) Please do check out Skillshare at this link - the first 1000 people to use the link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership! skl.sh/parthg10201
Parth G one question do we know if gravity stretch’s space time or compresses it
Great video parth!! Can you, in the future, consider making some content on the Penrose co-ordinates & their uses in theory, maybe?
I used to be a science student in highschool, ever since I watch your videos even after changing my field. Really love how you explain stuff!
The entropy that an electron contributes to black hole is: 2*π*k*α*β = S
k - Boltzmann’s Constant
α - the fine structure constant
β - Ratio of the ( ( 2*G*m / r )*( 1 / c^2 ) )
m - mass of electron
G - Gravitational Constant
r - radius of electron
c - speed of light
If you would like to see more please reach out Parth. Thank you!!
Amazing video.. well explained.. love your voice explaining Universe secrets and Science in such soothing manner ..😇
Yeah, his voice is MUSICAL
Whenever you make such cool videos explaining complicated stuffs so easily, I get into this misconception of thinking of myself as a genius😝😝 thanks a lot Parth!
Was literally waiting for it.
Just watched it right now, the video is totally right and at the same time fantastic!! I am your regular viewer Parth!!!
I wish , Einstein would have seen Bell's inequality, then the genius would have explained the mystery of Quantum Physics.
We missed this opportunity just by a decade.
That was 😔😔
Einstein solved it all he just kept it secret for future generations to discover...
yes !! we want these type of videos more. Next - entropy of a rotating blackhole. : p
more black hole stuff.....please & thank you, Parth G!!
Penrose diagrams with event horizons are very interesting.
Probably one of the best videos you've uploaded
please talk about internal energy and changes in internal energy in one of your upcoming videos soon. Love your content!
Yeah yeah yeah Parth please do a video on Hawking-Bekenstein formula !!!!!!!! We inevitably want that one
Thankyou for this, I'm reading Stephen Hawkings book and wanted to understand more about Hawking's Radiation. This has brought me another step closer. A video on virtual particles and how these result in radiation from a black hole would be great.
Pls more, more, more and more videos on blackholes.
Bro you make my day with these videos.
I love physics and I love your videos too
A really beautiful yet simple explanation and you didn't even make it feel a bit complex either.
😘
When you look up the classical definition/application of entropy; of how much useful energy or work you can get out of a physical system, it makes perfect sense that black holes have crazy high entropy despite their crazy low temperature.
Entropy is a measure of how...decayed a system is; that is, more entropy = less energy that can be harvested for useful purposes (e.g. movement, etc).
Unless a black hole is rotating (penrose process + superradiant scattering), what energy can be extracted, from a black hole? Exactly...
Gravity & gravitational potential is kind of weird like that. The more scattered the mass is, the more energy could be extracted from it. Imaging it as an engine of mass passing by a paddle or something like that. Once you hit the bottom of the gravitation well; of a black hole, there is nothing left to extract, and so the entropy would be maximized.
Great content, I enjoy watching and learning with your videos. Congratulations and I hope you continue with this. Greetings from Argentina!
Superb. Thanks for tis amazing video 🌝
1:30 a rocket velocity does not have to be higher than the escape velocity to leave Earth, if it uses engines (as it looks on your video BTW). It is a very common mistake to think so. The truth is: the escape velocity is necessary to leave Earth without engines, as a free falling body. If you move 11 km/s your orbit will become open and you will fly to infinity while free falling. But if you have enough fuel, you can fly to any distance from Earth even at walking speed
Cam you explain feild equations.??
Dear Parth, thank you so much for those great videos :-). Can you please explain in a video the correlation between the amount of elementary particles (including bosons +their counterpart (in supersymmetry) and the 11 dimensions in string theory? I know there are speculations about more dimensions, but are 11 possible dimentions enough to make all the above mentioned strings =particles/bosons?
Thanks a lot :-)
Ohh juicy. Thanks for sharing this very interesting topic.
As always, mind blowing.
the escape velocity isn't the speed of a rocket being thrust upwards. the escape velocity is the instantaneous velocity if there is no other energy applied to a mass. It is the velocity of an object such that the energy of the object (kinetic energy) can escape the gravitational pull (potential energy and not mgh). A rocket can escape the earth at 1m/s if there is enough energy in the rocket to eventually pull away from Earth. Also, the velocity of an object decreases to 0 as the energy is converted from KE to PE.
Love the videos but we need to be careful not to dumb down the content too much as it leads to confusion. I remember being confused by such a concept in the mid-80s by a teacher who didn't really understand it.
i enjoyed your presentation and i really wish for a detailed video on this topic.....#mmm i need more
Hey Parth, sorry for the late comment. Entropy can also depend on the energy. How do you think we can measure entropy of Black Holes using the energy? Even though energy will be very less on the outside of the event horizon but the energy is higher beyond it.
E=mc^2, but like he said, this will be different for rotating black holes. You have to factor in their rotational energy
please I would like to see more videos on the black hole in your way of explaining.
Make a video about millinium prize problems like Navier stokes equation :)
Helping me a lot
It is false that a rocket has to reach the escape velocity in order to overcome the gravity of a given planet, say the earth. The concept of escape velocity applies to non-propelled objects. If a rocket has enough fuel to maintain a speed much lower than the escape velocity, it can perfectly leave the earth's gravitational field.
Yeah it's obvious the escape velocity is flatout the initial velocity needed to yeet an item out of Earth forever from the surface without more propelling, now if one keeps propelling, even if the velocity is lesser, it still will escape Earth.
It is actually the relative velocity which doesn't have to be equal to the escape velocity ... but the thing which matters is the acceleration of the rocket which has to be more than the earth's gravitational acceleration. The escape velocity is the velocity attained by the rocket due to the kinetic energy attained by it to overcome gravitational acceleration from the centre of the earth. But practically the normal force provided by the ground against the weight of the rocket, accounts for the required acceleration at that height. So the relative velocity we see is the (total velocity - escape velocity) because we are also having the same escape velocity at the surface, due to the acceleration provided by the normal force provided by the ground.
I hope I could explain myself and the fact that rocket science is not that simple. SpaceX is sooo renowned just like that!
Maybe achieving escape velocity is more ECONOMICAL..not so
@@kirby771 Why then can't you do that to escape a black hole?
@@nexus3112 I have no idea what you're trying to say
Can you please make a video on the Hawking radiation and its equation in the future or maybe the next video??😅😅
Wow.. great video i hope you will be uploading more amazing videos.
Nice explanation bro.. subscriber from Chennai..
Can you explain ,why we need different laws to explain quantum physics and astrophysics? Please answer or make a vedio on this
Im not a complete expert but i feel like I've studied enough to give an answer. Im pretty sure it's because quantum mechanics which is largely used to make predictions in the small scale, does not mesh well with general relativity which is largely used to make predictions and measurements on the large cosmic scale of planets, stars, and galaxies. Gravity has not been described on a quantum level yet, everytime we try it, it leads to either paradoxes, singularities, extra particles, extra dimensions, etc. And the theories we have available now that attempt to do this, cannot be proven experimentally yet as we don't have the technology yet.
@@eriklavina2828 thanks for ans????
@@iam_anand no problem, i hope he makes a video on this though, im sure he can explain this much better in a full length video
You talk about radius of the black hole. The concept of distance seems to have been re-written recently to something based on how far light would travel in a certain time (which again is defined as some number of oscillations of a specific electron orbital of a specific atom). What is that inside the black hole? Is that a different distance? If you measure that from the inside of a black hole the meaning of distances seem to be different from somewhere way outside a black hold. This is all very confusing
A video on explaining tensors??
Requesting you to do a video on Gravity, specifically I wanted to understand if gravity isn't a force how do things accelerate..
I still have an issue with the assumption that any event horizon exists from our perspective.
It cannot in any meaningful sense of time from our own external perspective.
Hence I'm not sure it's useful to talk about entropy from the Swarzschild metric perspective.
From our perspective this will never exist in finite time.
Help!
The second law of thermodynamics is not correctly stated. The entropy always TENDS to increase, but there is usually a very small chance the entropy can decrease spontaneous for a small amount of time.
An example would be the chance of all air molecules in a room gathering in a small corner for a split second , not likely but possible
thanks for such awsome contents. :)
Please make a video on STRING THEORY
I just saw a video of a lecture where it is mentioned that the entropy of black hole only depends on area ,also mentioned here, does this imply that a black hole has no form or structure inside like an empty ball?as the entropy is a measure of degrees of freedom or disorder?
How early chemists used to distinguish between compound, element ? Please make a video on that.
Isn't the equation S = kB ln omega limited to a closed system? What is the formula for entropy in the universe? Is there one? If not, how about: Entropy is the sum of all potential differences (gradients) at the beginning ("Big bang") divided by the sum of all potential differences (gradients) now? This would at least explain, why entropy always grows. Always? Well as far as I know nobody has a clue of what is going on in a black hole. Thermodynamics don`t work in black holes I would imagine. I mean what`s the meaning of heat, work, time, space and energy in a black hole? What if black holes are huge recycling machines that gobble up high entropy stuff and one day pop in a big bang emitting "primordial energy" with the least possible degree of entropy? But what do I know, I am just an idiot.
Anyway: I love your videos!!!
sir please make a course on Quantum and relativity theory serially playlost by which we can follow your series properly from basics to higher. thank you please
Do one on the deodesic equation
Can you please go through each of Hawkings black hole laws?
Why do we assume that the second law of thermodynamics applies to black holes in the first place? I don't see any reason why a black hole couldn't just be an exception. Unlike, say, the law of gravitation, the second law of thermodynamics is really just a statistical observation, and to take it as fundamentally, unalterably true strikes me as a little presumptuous.
Can there be a video on dirac equation
Hey , Parth . I want to Thank you for making this video . This topic has intrigued me a lot and I have been thinking about this lately . :)
Can you make a video about Hawking radiation???
Hey I have a question, does black hole have its own temperature .If it had its own temperature so it will surely radiate some energy ???
Read Stephan Hawking...
Which book of hawking....?
Hawking radiation one, which is about Black hole. I guess , "Theory of everything".
But yet hawking radiation is not proved
@@adityasinghds7204 and so is quantum mechanics.!
Boltzmann constant keeps on appearing everywhere regarding Temp energy entropy ...it would be a topic worth it
What would happen to the black hole's entropy as it begins to evaporate? Would there be a balance between the loss of entropy of the black hole and some gain of entropy by the universe?
but why does the entropy of a blackhole proportional to its surface area , where did that equation come from ? whats the intuition behind it ?
So to a black hole, is one source of entropy is equal to another source of entropy given equal mass? It doesn't matter if it's salt or salt and pepper?
In the universe entropy is always increasing; could the universe stop at surface horizon of black hole, allowing the inside of black hole to be a region of decreasing entropy?
5:17 what if the object some how left its entropy outside the black hole right at the surface before entering the blackhole and thus this also satisfies second law of thermodynamics can we say this can be an correct explanation.......😁😁
Well, where will that disorder go? This is literally impossible. Please, if this explanation is correct, then it will destroy Physics.
It will be nice if you spend some time in explains the equation and how is the entropy derived . Most of the video watchers have maths background so no need to worry
You need more than just a basic maths background for that. Infact math wont even be the issue u need to know about many other Physics topics, Such as black body radiation, Statistical Mechanics and Statistical Thermodynamics and on top of that Quantum Field Theory (Which in turn would require tons of mathematics such as tensor analysis, Group theory etc). So that much detail would require like two year worth video lecture series to finally arrive at a full detailed derivation of Bekenstein - Hawking entropy.
My brain hurts. Consider two different objects, A and B, both of which have precisely the same mass but each of which have a different measure of thermodynamic entropy. We may choose to throw either object A or object B into the black hole, but regardless of which we throw in, the total entropy of our (non-rotating) black hole will increase by the same amount, because it depends solely on the mass contained within. How does that make sense? You can choose option A and throw x amount of entropy into the black hole, or choose option B and throw 2x amount of entropy into the black hole, but its total entropy will increase by z regardless of your choice? Shenanigans!
If entropy always increase in the Universe, does that mean the Universe is infinite small and big and the Universe never ever reaches heat death since when nothing happens anymore, entropy stays the same.
If you can afford me to critic you're video:
-A black hole isn't necessary dense
-Defining entropy as a mesure of disorder is a really big simplification
whats a better definition of entropy ?
But what if the interior of a black hole is one-dimensional?
If you asked the universe how much force would be required to close dimensions, the answer would be the Swartzschield radius.
The event horizon would then be an interface between two different sets of conditions. On our side 4 dimensions, on the other side, one dimension.
It would have no time, no entropy, and the only information it would have would be the order in which particles went into it.
How is this with rotating black holes?
I have a question:
why the spacetime (as shown in various videos) curves more around a blackhole than the star from which it formed. ( even if the mass of both of them is same, actually less of the blackhole. )
Because the area or volume of a black hole is much much smaller than an object with equivalent mass. Imagine a 10 pound bowling ball on a rubber sheet, it bends the the 2 dimensional sheet on to a 3rd dimension, now imagine that the ball was the size of a marble but was still 10 pounds, it would warp the rubber sheet a lot more around its area. That's more or less an oversimplification of what's happening because in reality it's 3 dimensional space that's curving into a 4th dimension because general relativity describes the universe as having non euclidean geometry.
@@eriklavina2828 exactly well explained
@@siddhant07wc6 thank you 🙂
@@eriklavina2828 Thanks for explanation
If you are at Schwarzchild radius than there is chance to escape from blackhole?
What is the time in uk
Love from india bro😘😘😘
Entropy is linked to change. The particle never regresses into a previous state
But hold on, for the same mass you can have different amounts of entropy but the entropy added to the black whole only depends on the mass added to it
So that would still lead to violating the 2 law of thermal dynamics
Can you make a video related to this year Nobel prize in Physics
two words: very nice.
If we say that all the physical laws will breakdown due to the singularity in a black hole, why we are so sure that the second law of thermodynamics works inside a black hole?
This seems like a weird and probably incorrect explanation. Unless you treat the second law as more mystical than it is you just acknowledge that it's a statistical law. Entropy tends to increase on average, there are just many more ways something can be disordered than ordered. As a result, entropy increases just because it's more likely to increase than stay constant and even more unlikely to revert.
IIRC the entropy of black holes is attributed to them because Hawking found out that black holes must produce radiation and that this radiation looks exactly like that of a blackbody, which is a body that radiates thermal radiation. Tons of complicated math and technical things later you can find some "entropy" describing black holes in a useful way.
Is the entropy of black hole all at the surface horizon?
👌
5:40 HI Parth, the condition in the second law of thermodynamics is for a closed system, and as far as we know the universe is not a closed system. so the primary assumption that Black holes cannot decrease Entropy itself is flawed in a way. can you please consider if the universe is an open system, and the 2nd law of thermodynamics don't hold good for the entire Observable Universe then what would it mean for the Black hole?
Simplified equation: my_desk = black_hole = disorder. Nothing escapes from my desk.
Is there a black hole thats not sphere?but instead of a cylinder?
Nice🙃
Why was this equation so celebrated when it seems so easy?
❤️
Awesome video. My own body’s Shwarzchild Radius is 1.3339x10^-25 meters. Kinda cool to think that I know what size I need to be for myself to become a black hole haha. Can anyone calculate my mass? :) hint: i need to stop eating so many donuts
Perhaps the black hole is not a closed system and therefore the second law would not apply. It is obvious that the universe as a whole is not closed. So perhaps these thermodynamic arguments are not appropriate tools to examine the interior of black holes!
Who skipped the center add skill share😅😅😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
R subscript s? You assuming space near a blackhole is euclidean? Really?
You may want to rethink this and provide a proper reference frame sir.
Confess I can’t understand the claim that a BH is very, very dense object. Of course the density can be enormous for some objects that cannot be reduced to BH , like the earth, but the strange thing is that the more massive is the object BH , the less dense it becomes! Why that? Because M increases with r , while V increases with r^3 therefore very massive BH can reach very low densities like that of vacuum. As a matter of fact if we put in the equations the assumed r of universe and its estimated mass we could well obtain a density corresponding to that observed and thus we could well be living in the biggest BH!
You are talking about the event horizon, not the singularity. Unlike most objects whose mass is distributed throughout their entire volume, all of the black hole's mass is at the singularity, which then has supposedly infinite density. and of course, this is just a non-rotating not charged black hole.
Since we don’t know what happens inside the Schwarzschild radius which defines the event horizon, why we should suppose that all matter crashes into a singularity? Is n’t a singularity such an absurd idea since the mass has to be there within the event horizon due to the gravity that BH is still so evident? In my opinion it is much more logical an uniform distribution of BH mass on the surface of the event horizon than a further collapse into a singularity.
@@amedeofilippi6336 Singularity is an absurd idea, and currently, nobody knows what's happening behind the event horizon. However, the surface-mass model does not match the behavior of real-world black holes. And singularity is the simplest form of a BH, which may not even exist in our universe. If a BH has charges or is rotating, there might be a ring in the center instead of a singularity. But just like you said, we don't know much about these things.
If entropy is always increasing so will there be a time when entropy will come 0?
by no means a scientist, so anyone who is please feel free to correct me. but i think the current main theories is that either the universe will expand so far it will die a heat death, with everything too far apart to reach each other. OR the universe will eventually implode on itself, causing a new big bang event somewhere down the line.
How would something increasing have a final value of zero (barring negative values)? The entropy of an isolated will always be increasing until it reaches thermal equilibrium. So the final entropy won’t be zero, but some maximum value
Entropy is technically caused by probability
Well what was that?
Plz tell anything you are saying slowly
.....With patience...It will help us to understand better....🌌🌌✋✋✋
Black holes are not objects you should know that
THIS GUY TEACHES REAL PHYSICS NOT SHOWING USELESS ANIMATION AND USELESS THEORIES
God is sleeping, once he wakes, something will happen.
I know there is no coincidence that I literally saw the name, RA. Well, (R subscript 8 A)
@@Cashitoutside i didn't get you.
@@rvmishra9881 Awe, sweetie. The pure of heart shall see Him in all things. You can, too. I believe in the power of your intellect.
Are you Indian working in 🇬🇧
Is the Planck length squared in the equation?
Presumably this is von Neumann entropy., but still don't see why entropy is proportional to surface area? Why not volume? That's the big open question, if you ask me.
cool realy cool !! and simple and clear and logicly 💛🌍🕑😃