Hey Space Timers! Want to deep dive some Space Time and watch ALL the episodes referenced in this week's episode? Then check out our episode companion playlist: th-cam.com/play/PLsPUh22kYmNAO4wmE0sua4zqcs0D7eqv7.html
That's a great idea! These videos are so massive in their undertaking that at least 5 other videos can be directly recommended, while those 5 will each lead down their own rabbit holes.
Hey could anyone help me with something. The geometry around a blackhole just simply would not allow for this correct? The very space around a black hole falls INWARD toward the singularity. To get expansion the solution for that is a whitehole. Isn't it?
@@k_tessthere are many unknown forces around black holes. Atom nuclei we predicted many particles to explain the stability of nucleus , simmilar theory required to explain structure of black hole😢
If the new theory in the video is correct, then you can bet that black hole's dark enery is also responsible for the phenomenon we now ascribe to black matter.
Although I agree with being skeptical about a new observational experiment's conclusion. There are other observational experiments that had reached the same conclusion. Gravity = the spaceless and timeless vacuum energy state of matter!!! :)
I am but a very ignorant electrician , I have followed this channel for year , I get maybe 30-40% of what’s being discussed , but your presentation skills, you vibrant explanations , and your sheer intelligence makes every video a joy to consume , thanks for what you do
I remodel homes. Aka glorified handyman. I've been learning about astrophysics for decades and still I am unable to grasp most of it. I've always wanted to know the fundamental truth of reality.
Same here, long time follower of the channel with zero background in astrophysics: I love the subject so much that I keep watching although I constantly make almost nothing out of it 🥲
"the smarter your mind, the smarter your god"... 100% factual truth "ignorance is not a disease, but a state of mind"... also 100% factual truth I am over 60, and I can't stop educating myself, lol I know, I will continue learning daily - till the day I die....and that is a cig way into my great-grandmother's words "You live 100 years, you learn 100 years, yet you'll die an idiot". DO NOT stop learning!!!
@@johnnybhoy4278 keep watching... understand will follow. On Wikipedia.com, choose "simple English" (if option is possible) to get the gist of anything before diving into the info fully... I do. helps a lot. Best of wishes and NEVER stop learning!
It didn't strike me as criticism, but rather, a healthy degree of cautious scepticism. The grander the claim(s), the more it behoves the reader to remain cynical. And from what little my Neanderthal brain comprehended from this video, this paper's proposing some pretty massive claims (pun intended).
PBS Space Time is in my opinion, the best science show I have ever seen. It's hard to put into words how much I love your videos. Absolutely fantastic work.
PBS Space Time, SEA and Anton Petrov are my top 3 space related channels. No sensationalized click bait, just straight up current scientific information. What a treat!
add cool words to the mix. dr kipping teaches at columbia and is a fantastic communicator with a way with words. him and SEA are my all time favorites.
"A black hole only knows about what falls into it" in my head became "The black hole knows what's inside it at all times. It knows this because it knows what isn't inside it."
This is the first "dark energy is just..." theory that actually makes some sense. It's probably wrong, but it's not obviously wrong, that's always a good start in science. Einstein and his greatest blunder is a fascinating story, all the more so when it turned out he was so damn smart that he actually got it right, for the wrong reason.
I've got some vague ideas on this. First, it's very biased to think of gravity as the attraction of matter to itself, it could instead be a repulsion between matter and empty space. This actually makes more sense when you use the 2D visualization of gravitational bodies being attracted on a sheet of fabric, or the surface tension of water pushing objects suspended by the tension together. Further, there is a bias to assume that the universe is expanding. It assumes that time and velocity are constant, but distance isn't. A decay in light's energy over universal scales of time, a change in light's velocity over the life of the universe, an increase in the rate at which matter interacts locally(our experience of time), or the universe shrinking locally, would all give us the same observations. Instead of considering possibilities, we've become burdened with the idea that space must be expanding, but any measurement or "constant" of the universe could have changed. For all we know, the light we see of distant galaxies is traveling at the exact same frequency it was emitted at. 🤔
If empty space repels matter, clumping it all into gravitational bodies, then universal expansion becomes logical and intuitive. The universe is also cooling as time progresses, part of this could be attributed to the fusion of matter, the gravitational accumulation of matter, and the conversion of matter into light which is discarded into eternal voids. These are observable or logical changes we can see occurring throughout the visible history of the universe, and I'm inclined to believe that these obvious and observable events may be a root cause of what we think is universal expansion. We are condensing and cooling at a small scale, how does that effect our observations of distant and ancient objects which haven't experienced the same level of progression at the time we are seeing them?
I love the phrasing “For complicated reasons due to relativity being weird…” 😂 So true! Wonderful video! I think I understood only 5% of it but it’s still wonderful! Great work!
I always look forward to the PBS Space Time video when a hot topic pops up in cosmology. I appreciate that the skepticism is expressed respectfully on this channel. And there should certainly be skepticism on these claims, but it is better to consider the possibility that the authors could be on to something rather than arrogantly dismiss them with a wave of the hand. This channel gets it right. Thanks for the continuing effort to help explain the topics to someone like me. I am a highly interested layperson, and the vast majority of other channels are either too basic for me, or far beyond anything I could understand without actually being a researcher in the field.
Thank you Matt! I was wondering if you and your show could cover "Quantised Inertia" theory at some point? A vehicle going to space to test the theory is going to space on a Falcon 9 soon, and I think more people would be interested to hear about it.
I understood that paper's conclusions a little differently than how you set it forth in the video. As space-time expanded the black holes wound up with more space-time in them, space-time has an inherent vacuum energy, and because of the law of the conversation of energy requires the added energy inside the black holes to be balanced, it affects space-time outside of the black hole causing the acceleration of the universe around it. In other words, there is no separate stuff comprising dark energy it's just the vacuum energy of space-time combined with how that space-time expansion is interacting with black holes that causes the phenomena we observe that we attribute to dark energy.
Yeah, she actually studies the black holes in galactic centers and their evolution and she pretty much ripped this paper apart. Essentially, the authors ignored a lot of research from the past 20 years where we now better understand how the black holes in galactic centers grow, not just thru absorbing gas and stars but also via black hole mergers as larger galaxies swallow smaller ones and their central black holes.
I love this jab at quantum consciousness. It feels fitting for the topic. I have a hard time making sense of it and it was explained to me in detail for a class I’m taking for my degree.
I've watched a number of decent videos on this topic. That said, I've come to expect PBS Space Time to provide the clearest explanations, and this episode did not disappoint. 🙏
Dear brothers and sisters, I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity" [Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download. 1) New representation of Gravitation 2) Structure of black holes 3) Finite structure of space-time. 4) Real dimensions of space-time 5) Singularity 6) Source of dark energy...etc "Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
Currently the places to hope for a real space craft engine capable of taking us into the cosmos are in a few places as I understand it. There is little to no hope in negative energy being a thing. What does a graviton look like is definitely going to answer some questions. Are there fundamental forces we haven't discovered yet is lastly also super important. Fact of the matter is, light speed is not fast enough. We need to understand energy better. I suppose we will eventually start blowing up anti-matter bombs to observe conditions no longer existent in our current state of the galaxy and unlikely to occur again. Maybe some answers will be observable we haven't considered in such high energy events we can collect every possible information off of.
The part of me that wants it to be true because of how neat of a solution it would be says "maybe it's the universe trying to remain topologically homogeneous?" But the desirable answer is often not the real answer.
@@paulmichaelfreedman8334that's what I thought when he told about need for BH to be evenly distributed. But what about Hawking radiation, it should cause BH to shrink.
If their claim, black hole growth is coupled with the expansion of the universe is true, then could they potentially figure out a way to calculate the vacuum energy density using this idea helping prove their theory? For example, by using Hawking’s equation for black hole entropy they could try to relate the vacuum energy density (VED) to a black holes surface area in the formula then rearrange the formula to come up with a new prediction of VED and see if this matches observed values.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
We can do a few things to test for the coupling. 1. Adapt Gravitational Lensing Techniques: Develop lensing analyses specifically aimed at detecting small variations in expansion rates near SMBHs. 2. Rotation Curve Anomalies: Investigate galaxies with particularly massive SMBHs to see if their outer rotation curves differ in ways that might hint at localized expansion influences. 3. Dark Matter Profile Variations: Study whether SMBHs cause specific dark matter density anomalies that could indicate subtle spacetime changes potentially linked to expansion effects. 4. CMB Anomalies as Probes: Use high-resolution CMB data to detect potential differences in temperature or density near galaxy clusters with large SMBHs.
I've thought of a similar situation. If our Universe is indeed 'inside' a Black Hole in a parent universe, the rate at which that Black Hole consumes matter determines the strength of Dark Energy and the rate of expansion of our Universe. A Black Hole that is consuming almost nothing would mean that the universe inside it would have a very slow expansion, while one that is feasting on a star would have a much faster expansion. I guess I'm implying that the Hubble 'Constant' is not constant, but depends on the amount of matter falling into our 'parent' Black Hole.
The hubble constant is already not constant. It's really the "hubble parameter". It is only constant across space(as far as we can tell), not time because the expansion rate changes with density.
I've seen almost every of your videos, for past 6-7 years, each of them terrific quality. Never bias, always factual with passion and realnest. Awesome content! 😉😁
Other than that weirdly pro Max Tegmark video that came out conveniently just a week after it was found that his organization was founding nazi extremist groups…
Agreed. Had to laugh at a guy in one of the comment replies above you saying all Matt does is make up "pure unadulterated nonsense", and hopes that people that understand science don't see it and that enough people that don't understand the science believe his "nonsense".
While I was watching this I took note of just how clean the camera footage is, and how well it's blended with the background and animations. Overall the visuals of videos on this channel are really well done, and I wish to voice appreciation of that.
"Come up with a theory that explains a thing, design experiments to test that theory, and record the results" are the basics of the scientific method, but another, just as important, part of the method is "rigorous adherence to honesty in your experiments and the willingness to accept when your theory is flawed."
I had the same response. The idea that old galaxies should have smaller black holes seems weird. Assume a galaxy that does not accrete more mass. Over time it’s black hole should increase in size. Which would make “black holes grow faster than their galaxies”
Or just testing for correlation? It doesn't really say anything else as the space of explanations for that correlation (and all scientific explanations/theories-other-than-equations) is infinite, and we generally just use Occam's razor with no deductive logical basis to use it, sometimes more complicated explanations are the correct ones (though in the case of simplified models, it's more precise to formulate Occam's razor in terms of number of assumptions, and simplifying assumptions are assumptions)
Thank you for putting that famous paper in the proper and historically accurate context - especially since TH-cam hosts quite a few popular, rushed and inadequate "reviews".
Shots fired! The fact that Matt is willing to use the d-word ("dishonest") in his characterization of the paper is all you need to know about his personal opinion of it.
If we use the inflated balloon as an analogy on expanding space, the geode black holes work like pressing a finger (or other object) on the balloon to get it to expand its surface with the existing gas inside it?
Oooo I like this analogy since you could apply it to all mass actually. Most mass would have an impossibly small amount of push back against that expansion thus no visible expansion, but a SMBH would have a significant amount since it represents an impossibly huge cumulative pressure on the surface of the balloon by a fixed volume. You might have something to work with there.
Hello from the future! We have a new study about this that’s really interesting! DESI’s measurements suggest that dark energy may not be constant over time but could evolve, as indicated by the parameters w_0 and w_a in its equation of state. The researchers propose that this observed evolution can be explained by cosmologically coupled black holes-black holes whose masses increase in proportion to the universe’s expansion. By fitting a w_0w_a model to dark energy produced by baryon conversion in these black holes, they find that the DESI-preferred models are naturally recovered without additional parameter adjustments. This suggests that the time evolution of dark energy observed by DESI could be a result of the mass growth of cosmologically coupled black holes, offering a potential astrophysical origin for dark energy.
I’ve thought like this for a long time, I m glad to see that theoretical physicists have at least considered all this. It may be wrong but I’m glad curiosity allows all possibilities to smash up against evidence.
"People love to imagine that things that they don't understand are somehow connected to each other." This explains so many behaviors! I'll keep this in mind from now on.
Great video! This is a really intriguing idea, and one can see how people might wish it into existence. It's a novel take for sure, and it will be cool to see if the paper is dissected seriously by the community.
Thank you very much for doing the "What If Black Holes ARE Dark Energy?" video, this was something I had explicitly requested on the Discord back when that idea was published.
Regarding the reformulation of the Friedman equations they presented to accomodate the non-local influence of black holes, I wondered whether it could indicate a way to link this whole thing (gravity and stuff) to quantum mechanics, which is indeed non-local
GR is also "non-local", the thing is, we're limited by not being "pure energy", just look at the frame of reference of a photon (basically everything everywhere with "no time nor space").
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
haha, Dr Becky came up - love it! that said, when a PBS spacetime vid hits my notifications, i drop everything. you guys make some of the best content on the internet. meetings at work? launch the vid and mute my phone. someone asks me a direct question? "oh, i was fixing something, somewhere (i was listening to conjectures about the universe)... can you repeat the question?" Please, never change. haha!
If ER=EPR, could that provide a mechanism for cosmological coupling to work and provide a solution to the even distribution? As in, all supermassive black holes are connected to each other via wormholes, which provides a way of ‘sharing information’ on large scales and smoothing out the distribution.
Shhh don't say it. It's a conspiracy. Wormholes are impossible to be use. Universe is to dangerous to travel. We all need to stay at home and wait for the next pandemic to kill us all.
Correlation does not imply causation. It would be huge if we discovered that black holes were actually Geodes that are made up of, and tap into, vacuum energy. I think the idea of Cosmological Coupling may be plausible but requires a lot more observation and analysis. But to say they account for all dark energy is a fantastic claim that requires fantastic evidence...
Could black holes manifest as dark energy by pulling spacetime inwards? Pulling spacetime inwards towards centers of mass could have a similar effect (or similar appearance) to spreading the voids outward... stretching spacetime out in the center, rather than the empty/void space having negative density. Love the channel!
That's a neat idea for sure. But to me (a complete layperson on this stuff) that sounds like the empty space between galaxies is homogenous and unchanging, which would imply the amount of redshift of light from far away galaxies shouldn't be dependent on the distance it travels across space. In other words, galaxies far away from us (and of similar size) would have roughly equal redshifting no matter the distance - because only the space close to galaxies would cause redshifting. And as for larger galaxies with stronger black holes (which results in stronger pulling of spacetime), we would expect to see more redshifting for those larger galaxies. But again, I'm not an expert by a long shot and might be missing something.
@@dannydewario1550 if there is more distance to an object, then there more area being stretched by black holes between here and there. If every black hole is pulling space in (causing the light traveling through it to stretch) and there are more black holes stretching space between a more distant object than a nearer object, the redshift would correlate with distance.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Dear brothers and sisters, I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity" [Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download. 1) New representation of Gravitation 2) Structure of black holes 3) Finite structure of space-time. 4) Real dimensions of space-time 5) Singularity 6) Source of dark energy...etc "Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
Wouldn't the rate of expansion then depend on the local density of black holes? Then some regions of the universe will expand faster/slower than others.
That was my exact question. That changes the shape of the universe making the visible horizon different in every direction. Meaning no more Hubble constant.
Not necessarily. Depends on the underlying physical mechanism by which the black holes convert mass/energy into space. If it's something like water pouring into a bathtub, then well, the water level rises uniformly even though the source is localized. This analogy is stronger than one might think - fluid dynamics equations are suspiciously similar to GR, both of which treat the subject matter as a continuous medium - even though we KNOW that water is NOT continuous medium, it's made of particles. Or better yet, imagine a tiny stream of water falling onto a kitchen table, slowly growing a pool.
@@empireempire3545 Fair enough I didn't read the paper so I'm a bit unqualified to even ask a question. Yet this is the second video on this subject I've seen in as many days. I would love to explain dark energy this way, but it just seems way too hiding in plain sight to explain such a confusing and complex subject. So I guess I'm looking for that steel toed boot to kick it in the head. Thanks for your explanation it does make sense considering what is expanding is all part of the same single fabric.
@@empireempire3545 I know that this is all conjecture but I like to imagine that space is an emergent property of mass / energy and that as it expands, it has to push against the surrounding spacetime, causing it to compress, causing what we call gravity. This expanding space still has to go somewhere and that's we observe at larger scales, i.e. cosmic inflation. What makes black holes unique is that the space is expanding faster than light can travel across it and any light that enters is basically red-shifted into oblivion.
That innocent sounding phrase, "That may one day be detectable," pretty much kills of it. Nonetheless welcome a change from the more SF oriented episodes that we've had recently.
If dark matter is made of stuff, suppose it is an undiscovered particle for instance, is it possible for a black hole to absorb it into the event horizon? Would that change the mass of the black hole? Would it grow? Could this effect explain the very large rate at which supermassive black holes expand?
The only thing we know about dark matter is that it interacts gravitationally. Anything that does so becomes part of the black hole once it crosses the event horizon, and adds its mass/energy to it. There has been an argument that since dark matter doesn’t seem to participate in electromagnetism, it would have a hard time accreting efficiently, since unlike ordinary matter, it cannot loose velocity and any orbital angular momentum by blazing it away quasar like in an accretion disk.
@@NullHand yeah, that makes sense. I wonder if it would be possible to measure how much dark matter falls into a black hole and if that could tell us something about it. That seems a little out there though.
Dear brothers and sisters, I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity" [Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download. 1) New representation of Gravitation 2) Structure of black holes 3) Finite structure of space-time. 4) Real dimensions of space-time 5) Singularity 6) Source of dark energy...etc "Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
For me I think it’s fair to imagine the same amount we know about black holes equals roughly the same amount we know about dark energy. Great team to push new ideas. They must align with the old rules but new discoveries make new rules. For me it’s the elephant in the room that black holes are what keep our sun orbiting around the Milky Way, keeps the earth spinning and set to motion the weather even.
Hit the nail on the head at 0:00, I woke up just the other day and put some powdered creamer on to my coffee and observed the floating mounds of creamer create a swirl within the coffee as it dissolved on top of the meniscus and sank into the coffee, that gave me the idea that our universe might just be sitting on top of a higher dimensional 'meniscus' and the gravity that sinks into it causes our galaxies to swirl in ways we can't explain without dark matter.
You should check out the video he suggested, Dr. Becky is just the best when it comes to black holes, and she gives them an even fairer review than Matt
Since "dark energy" is merely a placeholder, it - of course - remains to be seen. But I think there are too many "known unknowns" (to say nothing of "unknown unknowns") to dismiss this out of hand. As always in science, more testing and exploration and creation of detection techniques are required. Science is the process of generating *questions* . The occasional _answer_ popping out is an anomaly; not the goal.
I have speculated for years that dark energy is just another perception of black holes consuming space itself. If all black holes consume space, they cause a stretching of the spacetime between them and would be responsible for the primary red shift of measured galactic movements.
If you consider the 'rubber sheet' analogy, then it would make sense that if you have points on that sheet that are pulling in the sheet, then the points would increase in mass due to the 'sheet' they absorb and that the 'sheet' in-between would become stretched and give the impression of expansion. Over time, as the points increase in mass, they pull in more sheet, giving the impression that the expansion is happening faster. To someone living on the sheet, the difference between expansion and sheet removal would be very difficult to distinguish. And of course, if the sheet is being pulled in at a constant rate, it would also explain the rotational velocity discrepancy in galaxies, thus explaining dark matter.
Interesting and creative analogy! But, the black holes are not the only ones that are consuming the fabric of space-time, so to speak, also ordinalry mass object, like planets, stars, etc., are doing the same thing, just that the intensity or "speed" is order of magnitude lesser that of the black hole objects.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Dear brothers and sisters, I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity" [Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download. 1) New representation of Gravitation 2) Structure of black holes 3) Finite structure of space-time. 4) Real dimensions of space-time 5) Singularity 6) Source of dark energy...etc "Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
Once, when camping with friends and being FAR too high, we got into a conversation about this sort of thing. Somehow we got onto the line of discussion where the act of matter and energy being compressed by a black hole could directly relate to a corresponding expansion of space/time and that this might result in a point where all matter and energy had been "eaten" and nothing but black holes were left in the universe. At that point they'd begin to slowly evaporate into Hawking Radiation stopping the release/creation of dark energy and this would result in the expansion of the universe stopping and reverse, beginning the "big crunch". As I noted above we were all very, VERY high at the time.
Exactly, so that's the quantum foam limit in its elastic tension. I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
I've said this years ago on this channel, but I think dark energy is essentially just the part of gravity we haven't figured out yet. And if we can get the shape of black holes down (you know, get rid of the singularity in the math) then we may immediately get an answer as to what's causing dark energy. While this study has me far from convinced of their conclusions, I do like that they used that very idea to get here and I hope more do it.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
My intuition is that something about dark energy and the massive structure of the universe has something in common with a foam, where the empty spaces are expanding as the "seams" are contracting. But this is totally unbased in anything like expertise or math, just a feeling... and those are best not trusted, but instead should be tested tentatively. It is really hard to get a grasp on these things (like black holes) that break our reality models, and to put them into a larger picture without distortion. Thank you so much for these constantly enlightening videos!
I believe the prevailing thought is even simpler -- that space itself contains energy which contributes to the expansion of the universe, and thus the more space there is, the greater the energy and thus the greater rate of expansion. Adding seams would seem (sorry) to complicate things unnecessarily, but then I know as much as you do about all this -- i.e. almost nothing!
It would be nice if it were true. I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity.
My thought is that black holes don't contain an actual physical singularity, just a virtual one infinitely far into future. Due to the colossal time dilation it takes literally forever for the singularity to form, by which time the BH will have already undergone Hawking evaporation. Has this been considered?
Yes this scenario is considered in loop quantum gravity. "Loosely speaking, the full phenomenon is analogous to the bouncing of a ball. A ball falls to the ground, bounces, and then moves up. The upward motion after the bounce is the time-reversed version of the falling ball. Similarly, a black hole “bounces” and emerges as its time-reversed version-a white hole. Collapsing matter does not disappear at the center: it bounces up through the white hole. Energy and information that fell into the black hole emerge from the white hole. The configuration where the compression is maximal, which separates the black hole from the white hole, is called a “Planck star.” Because of the huge time distortion allowed by relativity, the time for the process to happen can be short (microseconds) when measured from inside the hole but long (billions of years) when measured from the outside. Black holes might be bouncing stars seen in extreme slow motion"
You should do a refresher into the archives of our own favorite space time channel! But just for the sake of your question, pretty much every respected astro/physiciscist / researchers do *not* believe that the singularity in a blackhole is a real, it's widely recognized that the singularity comes about because our current laws of physics are missing some key component(s) needed to properly describe blackholes. Think of it like a computer program that has a bug caused by faulty code, which makes it divide by zero, and so it spits out an answer that is impossible to reconcile and Call of Duty crashes. The singularity in blackholes just suggests our math is wrong, and I don't know of any non crackpot scientist who believes otherwise!
These sorts of things appear to occur on scales one might think are irrelevant to any form of society, but it's in coming up with and solving the various equations associated with these ideas and theories that some of the world's most powerful computers have been and are being developed; and to me, that's the *coolest* part of theoretical physics and cosmology
Ive been watching these vids for a while now, i appreciate Matts breakdown into simple terms on the subjects even if sometimes i dont fully understand them
"No real relationship, whatsoever". I have to disagree there. You might say a meaningful relationship, which can be true, but it's also not wrong to say they are connected and you could probably find a meaningful connection if you looked hard enough, and it may not be what you expect. Another matter of perception.
That's true even if they aren't tied to cosmic expansion. Hawking radiation is black body radiation, and until the temperature of the CMB drops below the temperature of a black hole, the hole grows rather than shrinks (heat flows towards cold, not the other way around -- or, put another way, the black hole absorbs more from the CMB than it emits). So in the present universe, black holes bigger than 133 micrometers (about the mass of the Moon) cannot evaporate.
Even without this idea, the time it takes for ordinary black holes to evaporate is 10^100 years. The universe is only 1.37 x 10^10 years. Essentially, only microscopic black holes can evaporate on any practical time frame.
It's not an un-reasonable assumption. If we couldnt outright detect the location or existence of a blackhole, its possible our instruments could be incorrectly missing that data.
Great video. With dark energy, I suspect it's a case of the theoreticians getting way ahead of the experimental data available. Or as Asimov would put it "Insufficient data for a meaningful answer".
Dear brothers and sisters, I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity" [Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download. 1) New representation of Gravitation 2) Structure of black holes 3) Finite structure of space-time. 4) Real dimensions of space-time 5) Singularity 6) Source of dark energy...etc "Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
Cosmological coupling (new theory where black holes are thought to be the source of dark energy) says that black holes cut off from the additional inflow of matter will still continue to expand, due to interior vacuum fluctuations. Hawking radiation, on the other hand, is theorized to shrink black holes cut off from additional matter, due to vacuum fluctuations on their exterior. Are these two theories mutually exclusive of each other?
I've been binging on this and other channels to help me digest information about physics at which I'd otherwise shrug my shoulders. I sometimes find it easier to comprehend things when I don't get lost in the minutiae, and this sort of content helps me with that (I think). I still struggle with dark energy. My brain keeps telling me that black holes contain separate universes. We know mass and energy from our universe can pass the event horizon and theorize it becomes incorporated into the singularity. If there lies the possibility that our universe is nested within another, where our universe exists within a black hole in a parent universe, is it not possible that dark energy is fed into our universe as our parent universe feeds it matter and energy? Is it not possible that dark energy is the parent universe's matter and energy that fell across the event horizon following the instant our universe was created? Perhaps the mass and energy from our parent universe is not wholly compatible with our own universe, but continues to fall through and be present, regardless, contributing to our growing universe? Or perhaps that the information stripped from mass and energy falling into the black hole that cannot bear our universe's physical laws is damned to an existence at the threshold of the event horizon to be rejected back into the parent universe as Hawking Radiation or something along those lines? Would the feeding of mass and energy across the event horizon not lead to one or two inevitabilities: the universe that is being fed would have to expand in space and/or grow in density? But I'm also struggling to comprehend merging black holes if they, indeed, do contain separate universes within? If the universe within one black hole has different physical laws than another black hole with which it collides and merges, would the resulting merger produce a unified universe from the mix of the two physical environments or would the universes merge in such a way that the physical laws for each incorporated universe allow them to both simultaneously exist within the same space, only interacting through compatible physical laws? I'm in way over my head, but this stuff is so fascinating!
The unreliability of intuition is why we developed the scientific method. 😄 Just imagine the mess we'd have made of quantum physics without science, given its profound counterintuitiveness.
Matt links to a video by Dr. Becky, you should really check it out! If you like it, she also has good explanations on dark energy, etc in other videos. Re: multiverses, etc. Remember these are mathematical constructs created by following mathematical theory. A "universe" is a set of numerical values on one side of an = sign. Multiverse theory is the logical conclusion of following the math that was used to define that "universe". So most of your yes/no questions are answered "depends" - they depend upon the values used to formulate the original mathematical universe.
I really want to read your replies in full, but for sole reason whenever I try to "read more," I'm directed to this reply. 😢 Thanks for helping direct my curiosities, I can at least see that I should check Dr Becky's content.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Absolutely. The distance between black holes is increasing from momentum, and being the strongest gravitational masses in the universe, by far, they pull everything along with them in their expansion. Next, you might find that the expansion of space between black holes might be faster than the expansion of the surrounding universe, because they don't pull everything in at the same rate as they are moving away.
I've been doing a lot of considerations of black holes myself. The one thing that has me thinking, is, What we consider as "black holes" could be solid mass objects, the gravity is so high it causes the neutron star to form in the next dimension, and what would actually happen if a neutron star is compressed, causing the larger strings to break down, and all that is left is the smaller strings but maintains a rough stellar size, such as our Sagittarius A*. Since we are unable to see other dimensions at a distance, and only getting touches or glimpses of other dimensions in the subatomic worlds, why wouldn't our universe be multi dimentional as well? Perhaps we only see 3 of the 5+ dimensions of spacetime? (you can't really see the 4th dimension, as that would be 'time'. We can see it's cause and effects.) The reason I bring this up, is because known physics breaks down after crossing the event horizon, mainly because we can't see inside the void.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Could the coupling be another proof of the non-locality in quantum mechanics? I saw a paper talking about energy transfer through entangled particles using an ibm quantum computer, could this be a related phenomena since the singularity is technically a quantum object?
If true it might be, but it's most certainly false. Dark energy can be thought of as a term being added to the stress-energy tensor such that there's a distribution of negative energy particles. In order for black holes to produce this dark energy effect on the universe, they'd probably have to become repulsive. Somewhat related though, there's a theory that entangled particles are connected via wormholes. These wormholes would also require a negative energy density to be stabilized. Maybe the wormholes contain dark energy? Maybe entangled particles flying apart might have an effect on the quantity of dark energy? The experiment you're referring to required negative energy densities after all.
@@Laff700 I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
I listened to Dr Becky and she misses some basic concepts. I'll pass on that. I'm very glad you covered this. Sometimes the fringe is correct and deserve their day in court.
Fringe ideas are published by mainstream scientists all the time, they just don't typically get much publicity. But it's important to distinguish between fringe ideas backed up by doing science, as in this case, and the type of nonsense you see people claiming in TH-cam comment threads, like the Electric Universe, which isn't backed up by science at all.
@@EnglishMike Preaching to the choir. I have a personal issue with the way I learn physics. It's via visualization not math directly. I can grasp concepts easily, but don't have the math to back my ideas up. I've been trying to communicate but without the PHD and proper channels open I am hopelessly lost. Any recommendations are welcome. Find a technical cosmological physicist and waste their time essentially. I've been learning for decades. I have a small chance were I might be able to make a difference.
I take issue with the first example. While there's no evidence that quantum effects directly give rise to consciousness, there's plenty of reason to thing the two ideas may be related. At the very least there is enough of an active debate, such as the Orchestrated Objective Reduction theory, and most of the criticisms of that theory basically come down to "it's not what I wrote my thesis on, so I don't like the idea." As such putting "Consciousness ≠ Quantum Mechanics" is certainly a bit premature. At the very least, the molecular machinery that makes up the neurons that exhibit consciousness are subject to quantum effects, so maybe don't use the example, or if you do use the example at least don't use symbols that imply you know for certain the two are not related.
... from whose perspective?? To an outside observer, the object inside the black hole slows down and becomes frozen. But to the object inside the black hole, it would seem to continue moving at the same speed, while the outside observer would appear to move much faster. It's all relative. :)
So if Dark Energy does turn out to be created by black holes would that mean its just a measure of how much spacetime has been stretched since the beginning of the universe by massive objects?
Maybe. I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Thank you for this beautiful summary of the background. I find some analogy between this idea of equating DE to SMBHs, and OTOH a quip I came up with a dozen years back, in the form of the bold assertion that _Dark energy is ambient pollution from alien warp drives!_ -- with diverse motivations ranging from the humorous take on Fermi's Paradox; through an objection made to a subliminal perception (likely to be widely shared) that the focus on uncovering some Earth 2.0 that's expected of exoplanet research, was premised on a secret project to escape by relocating there (rather than address) a self-inflicted destiny of runaway greenhouse effect attributable in good part to vehicular emissions; to a more direct if vague analogy between _accelerating_ expansion and _runaway_ greenhouse effect; and, finally; to alluding to the idea that _the negative gravity (and negative self-gravity!?!) of the massive amounts of negative mass-energy postulated to enable FTL Alcubierre drives, leads to expect that in case of a leak or loss of confinement, the negative mass-energy would in fact race to mimic the uniform distribution and influence currently attributed to dark energy._
I'd concede however that the satire directed by this quip at the expectation of our relocation to some Earth 2.0, is at risk from Poe's Law. A picture emerges of a Universe polluted by the failures multiplied over eons, of desperate attempts of planetary civilizations to save themselves using unstable approximations to an Alcubierre drive...
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
We often see black holes depicted in 2D models as the singularity pulling down spacetime. Are there any good videos that discuss how black holes actually look in 3D? Like is the BH actually flat and the horizon could be on plane with our POV / seen at different angles? Or would it look more like an orb? Like if a BH is facing us where we are observing directly above the event horizon in the 2D model, how far does the singularity go down? Wouldn't it run into other things near it?
You can see the black hole in 3D in the movie Interstellar. There is a gif of how spacetime curves towards the inside of an object's center of gravity. You can imagine gravity as the concave curvature of a contracting vortex and dark energy as the convex curvature between galaxies.
Interesting ideea. But i wonder of the next possibility: What if dark energy is actually done by virtual particles? After all, virtual particles is matter that comes to existance and disappears, so what if when it comes to existance, it comes with it's own piece of space, the size of the virtual particle. Something like a "virtual space". Yet when the virtual particle disappears, the "virtual space" that it created doesn't also disappears. Virtual particles are in a constant based on the absence of normal matter which would make virtual particles to apear more frequent in between the Galaxyes for example. And since the virtual particles are everywhere and constant, it could be possible to be an explanation for the constantly growing of the universe caused by what we call dark energy. Sure it's just an ideea and maybe i misunderstood the virtual particles but if not,is worth thinking as a possibility
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
@@jusore but you know that virtual particles are defined by their state of existing for short times. Like they apear and dispaear at high frequency and speed. So I'm confused on how black holes can transform matter into virtual quarks, like do they make the energy composure we call matter back to space or what?
@@Davidutul Continuing with the exercise of imagination... when the virtual particles are annihilated, they will be decomposed into their constituent elements, simpler than the virtual particles, in which case I imagine that what makes up a particle like the quark, while it is a quark, has enough energy as to be considered matter, while if a quark could be subdivided into constituent particles (or a lower energy subparticle) that make up the quantum foam, it would make sense to say that these constituent particles would be the ones that give rise to virtual particles. The black hole would contribute to the generation of spacetime foam, disintegrating quarks, bosons and leptons into their constituent subparticle/s.
My thoughts. Imagine space time mapped out on the surface of a balloon . If you press on it, it creates a dimple towards the centre and mass on the surface of the balloon is attracted to the bottom of the dimple by gravity. Create a dimple deep enough and the mass that falls on will be traveling fast enough that when it reaches the bottom it's able to punch through the surface to the inside of the balloon, adding to the pressure inside the balloon causing it to push out and expand the surface to accommodate the extra volume within this causing the expansion of the universe...
It’s a neat idea. The issue is that the analogy breaks down surprisingly quickly. We can pretend that the geometric scale of the universe is synonymous with an actual balloon in a 1-1 way, and that there is something synonymous to highly pressurized air guiding the expansion, and that such an event would not be perfectly synonymous with a balloon or else the universe would pop, but there’s so many other mathematical and physics problems that causes that it’s almost impossible to make such a comparison useful. It’d be neat and logical to our brains if the universe worked like that- but the universe is rarely that simple!
This would require a 4th spatial dimension at 90 degree angles of the known 3 dimensions, making time the 5th. There is more evidence against that being true than for it. But who knows, maybe that's the way vacuum energy gets around and remains homogenous. It certainly makes sense when assuming the other parts as being correct. On that note, the interior of a black hole could be translating matter from our 3 dimensions through the 4th which will make matter disappear eventually in our 3 as the distance grows larger (in the 4th)
My theory for the "cosmological coupling" is in relation to how stars produce protection their solar systems. SMBHs produce a similar protection which surrounds the mass of the galaxy itself which is why it doesn't expand with the rest of the universe and would fall in like with dark energy holding galaxies together.
Could cosmological coupling be a kind of quantum entanglement, along the lines of ER=RPR, where the great voids from which space expands outward are essentially white holes?
Could you do an episode of black holes made of dark matter? Even though we can't interact with dark matter, because the Event Horizon is only dependent on space-time curvature, it might be possible that they look exactly the same as regular black holes to the naked eye.
If a black hole is made of black matter, and it generates Hawking Radiation, then it might the only way to convert dark matter into energy that then would also become regular matter with a large enough timeline, thus the black holes plus Hawking radiation and time might be the only machine capable of turning dark matter into matter.
Somebody please figure out what dark matter is❗️Or maybe orthodoxy is a ball & chain that seems to trap us from conceiving of or promoting speculative ideas. I don’t buy into dark energy is behaving as outlined in the papers BUT it would be very interesting if black holes appear to be growing faster than orthodoxy allows. AND if there is a component of BH curvature causes by dark matter and maybe even dark energy.
I recently find myself investigating the cyclic universe theory, black holes, singularities and now I find myself investigating Hawking Radiation And dark matter. What a wonderful mental journey.
If you enter a black hole space would seem to be expanding away from you, which is exactly what we see. We are inside a black hole, which is why there is a red shift expansion that increases the farther away you get.
Hey Space Timers! Want to deep dive some Space Time and watch ALL the episodes referenced in this week's episode? Then check out our episode companion playlist: th-cam.com/play/PLsPUh22kYmNAO4wmE0sua4zqcs0D7eqv7.html
That's a great idea! These videos are so massive in their undertaking that at least 5 other videos can be directly recommended, while those 5 will each lead down their own rabbit holes.
If we live in a blackhole, this is all moot.
Hey could anyone help me with something.
The geometry around a blackhole just simply would not allow for this correct? The very space around a black hole falls INWARD toward the singularity.
To get expansion the solution for that is a whitehole. Isn't it?
@@k_tessthere are many unknown forces around black holes. Atom nuclei we predicted many particles to explain the stability of nucleus , simmilar theory required to explain structure of black hole😢
If the new theory in the video is correct, then you can bet that black hole's dark enery is also responsible for the phenomenon we now ascribe to black matter.
Thanks for the shoutout Matt and co! Great to see some of the historical cosmological context covered 👍
Love your content Dr. Becky!
This is the TH-cam space channel synergy I've been waiting for!!! 😃
Awesome channels, both Dr. Becky and Matt's PBS Space Time!!
Although I agree with being skeptical about a new observational experiment's conclusion. There are other observational experiments that had reached the same conclusion. Gravity = the spaceless and timeless vacuum energy state of matter!!! :)
Here's the link to Dr. Becky's video on that topic: th-cam.com/video/3gg1OS435UE/w-d-xo.html
I am but a very ignorant electrician , I have followed this channel for year , I get maybe 30-40% of what’s being discussed , but your presentation skills, you vibrant explanations , and your sheer intelligence makes every video a joy to consume , thanks for what you do
I remodel homes. Aka glorified handyman. I've been learning about astrophysics for decades and still I am unable to grasp most of it. I've always wanted to know the fundamental truth of reality.
Same here, long time follower of the channel with zero background in astrophysics: I love the subject so much that I keep watching although I constantly make almost nothing out of it 🥲
"the smarter your mind, the smarter your god"... 100% factual truth
"ignorance is not a disease, but a state of mind"... also 100% factual truth
I am over 60, and I can't stop educating myself, lol
I know, I will continue learning daily - till the day I die....and that is a cig way into my great-grandmother's words "You live 100 years, you learn 100 years, yet you'll die an idiot".
DO NOT stop learning!!!
@@francescosegre keep watching... it will come!
@@johnnybhoy4278 keep watching... understand will follow.
On Wikipedia.com, choose "simple English" (if option is possible) to get the gist of anything before diving into the info fully... I do. helps a lot. Best of wishes and NEVER stop learning!
I love how respectful you are in criticizing others' work. It's a hard skill to acquire, and you set a great example.
He does it in such a way to where some people won't even notice. A beautiful skill to have.
It didn't strike me as criticism, but rather, a healthy degree of cautious scepticism. The grander the claim(s), the more it behoves the reader to remain cynical. And from what little my Neanderthal brain comprehended from this video, this paper's proposing some pretty massive claims (pun intended).
I feel the more time you spend trying to be productive and running into your own limits, the easier it can be to be humble critiquing others.
Because it's not critique.
He's just performing the script!
PBS Space Time is in my opinion, the best science show I have ever seen. It's hard to put into words how much I love your videos. Absolutely fantastic work.
Check out Sea, also Space is Ace
@@ryanaromero Will do, thanks for the tip
PBS Space Time, SEA and Anton Petrov are my top 3 space related channels. No sensationalized click bait, just straight up current scientific information. What a treat!
add cool words to the mix. dr kipping teaches at columbia and is a fantastic communicator with a way with words. him and SEA are my all time favorites.
Thanks everyone for great tips on channels, they're great!
"A black hole only knows about what falls into it" in my head became "The black hole knows what's inside it at all times. It knows this because it knows what isn't inside it."
"For complicated reasons due to general relativity being weird" is now my go-to excuse for basically anything 😂
"You've been late to work three times this month"
@@jengleheimerschmitt7941 "But time is relative to each observer, so from my perspective, I wasn't late, you were just early."
@@DSW_314 ...now you sound like key and peele doing NDT...
i really love when Matt changes his cadence going into the ". . . Space Time" outro
This wasn't a good one for the outro
That's the one thing I hate about these videos.
Thats the one thing i get in these videos
What I'm hearing is that dark energy and thus black holes are actually the friends we made along the way.
This is the first "dark energy is just..." theory that actually makes some sense. It's probably wrong, but it's not obviously wrong, that's always a good start in science.
Einstein and his greatest blunder is a fascinating story, all the more so when it turned out he was so damn smart that he actually got it right, for the wrong reason.
And a new study this week is giving this theory some life
I've got some vague ideas on this. First, it's very biased to think of gravity as the attraction of matter to itself, it could instead be a repulsion between matter and empty space. This actually makes more sense when you use the 2D visualization of gravitational bodies being attracted on a sheet of fabric, or the surface tension of water pushing objects suspended by the tension together.
Further, there is a bias to assume that the universe is expanding. It assumes that time and velocity are constant, but distance isn't. A decay in light's energy over universal scales of time, a change in light's velocity over the life of the universe, an increase in the rate at which matter interacts locally(our experience of time), or the universe shrinking locally, would all give us the same observations. Instead of considering possibilities, we've become burdened with the idea that space must be expanding, but any measurement or "constant" of the universe could have changed. For all we know, the light we see of distant galaxies is traveling at the exact same frequency it was emitted at.
🤔
If empty space repels matter, clumping it all into gravitational bodies, then universal expansion becomes logical and intuitive.
The universe is also cooling as time progresses, part of this could be attributed to the fusion of matter, the gravitational accumulation of matter, and the conversion of matter into light which is discarded into eternal voids. These are observable or logical changes we can see occurring throughout the visible history of the universe, and I'm inclined to believe that these obvious and observable events may be a root cause of what we think is universal expansion. We are condensing and cooling at a small scale, how does that effect our observations of distant and ancient objects which haven't experienced the same level of progression at the time we are seeing them?
I love the phrasing “For complicated reasons due to relativity being weird…” 😂 So true!
Wonderful video! I think I understood only 5% of it but it’s still wonderful! Great work!
5%! Look at Ms Big Brain here 😅
Damn, 5%?
Spacetime tomfoolery
My man understood regular matter and ignore dark matter and energy lol😂
You guys are getting percents?
I always look forward to the PBS Space Time video when a hot topic pops up in cosmology.
I appreciate that the skepticism is expressed respectfully on this channel. And there should certainly be skepticism on these claims, but it is better to consider the possibility that the authors could be on to something rather than arrogantly dismiss them with a wave of the hand. This channel gets it right.
Thanks for the continuing effort to help explain the topics to someone like me. I am a highly interested layperson, and the vast majority of other channels are either too basic for me, or far beyond anything I could understand without actually being a researcher in the field.
I saw discussions of this showing up on news feeds and I thought to myself "I think I'll just wait for Space-time to hit this"
I always appreciate the detailed visuals. Keep up the good work!
Thank you Matt! I was wondering if you and your show could cover "Quantised Inertia" theory at some point? A vehicle going to space to test the theory is going to space on a Falcon 9 soon, and I think more people would be interested to hear about it.
Props to your motion design/VFX team. This might be some of their best work yet
Came here to say the same thing. Amazing visuals on this episode!
let’s just say everyone has their standards.
it's AI 🤣
@@HellXels no it does have that unique style, not AI
@@windowsxpmemesandstufflol Prompt: Graphics in style of PBS spacetime
AI: Gotcha fam
I understood that paper's conclusions a little differently than how you set it forth in the video. As space-time expanded the black holes wound up with more space-time in them, space-time has an inherent vacuum energy, and because of the law of the conversation of energy requires the added energy inside the black holes to be balanced, it affects space-time outside of the black hole causing the acceleration of the universe around it. In other words, there is no separate stuff comprising dark energy it's just the vacuum energy of space-time combined with how that space-time expansion is interacting with black holes that causes the phenomena we observe that we attribute to dark energy.
So glad you plugged Dr. Becky's channel. She has a great explanation.
Agreed! 💯%
Yeah, she actually studies the black holes in galactic centers and their evolution and she pretty much ripped this paper apart. Essentially, the authors ignored a lot of research from the past 20 years where we now better understand how the black holes in galactic centers grow, not just thru absorbing gas and stars but also via black hole mergers as larger galaxies swallow smaller ones and their central black holes.
I love this jab at quantum consciousness. It feels fitting for the topic. I have a hard time making sense of it and it was explained to me in detail for a class I’m taking for my degree.
Been looking forward to this video since the paper dropped. That was quick considering all the animation and editing, thanks spacetime!
thanks spacetime, for everything you do
I've watched a number of decent videos on this topic. That said, I've come to expect PBS Space Time to provide the clearest explanations, and this episode did not disappoint. 🙏
Dear brothers and sisters,
I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity"
[Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download.
1) New representation of Gravitation
2) Structure of black holes
3) Finite structure of space-time.
4) Real dimensions of space-time
5) Singularity
6) Source of dark energy...etc
"Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
I really appreciate the detailed breakdown at the end! Great to see specific reasoning as to the strong and weak points of a result :)
Currently the places to hope for a real space craft engine capable of taking us into the cosmos are in a few places as I understand it. There is little to no hope in negative energy being a thing. What does a graviton look like is definitely going to answer some questions. Are there fundamental forces we haven't discovered yet is lastly also super important. Fact of the matter is, light speed is not fast enough. We need to understand energy better. I suppose we will eventually start blowing up anti-matter bombs to observe conditions no longer existent in our current state of the galaxy and unlikely to occur again. Maybe some answers will be observable we haven't considered in such high energy events we can collect every possible information off of.
15:14 . . . Excluding Zero CC @ 99.98% : " So you're telling me there's a CHANCE . . . . Yeeeaahh ! " 🤣
The part of me that wants it to be true because of how neat of a solution it would be says "maybe it's the universe trying to remain topologically homogeneous?"
But the desirable answer is often not the real answer.
In the end the universe is going to do what it is going to do even if we think it shouldn't be able to do it.
Which made me think of Matt's topic last year about primordial microscopic black holes with planck size. What if they are the even distribution?
@@paulmichaelfreedman8334that's what I thought when he told about need for BH to be evenly distributed.
But what about Hawking radiation, it should cause BH to shrink.
@@oskarskalski2982 But how big must a BH be to grow more from universe expansion than shrink from hawking radiation? Where would be the equilibrium?
I hope this guy is remembered next to educators the likes of Bill Nye and Carl Sagan
If their claim, black hole growth is coupled with the expansion of the universe is true, then could they potentially figure out a way to calculate the vacuum energy density using this idea helping prove their theory? For example, by using Hawking’s equation for black hole entropy they could try to relate the vacuum energy density (VED) to a black holes surface area in the formula then rearrange the formula to come up with a new prediction of VED and see if this matches observed values.
Yes, I was wondering about Hawking Radiation.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
We can do a few things to test for the coupling.
1. Adapt Gravitational Lensing Techniques: Develop lensing analyses specifically aimed at detecting small variations in expansion rates near SMBHs.
2. Rotation Curve Anomalies: Investigate galaxies with particularly massive SMBHs to see if their outer rotation curves differ in ways that might hint at localized expansion influences.
3. Dark Matter Profile Variations: Study whether SMBHs cause specific dark matter density anomalies that could indicate subtle spacetime changes potentially linked to expansion effects.
4. CMB Anomalies as Probes: Use high-resolution CMB data to detect potential differences in temperature or density near galaxy clusters with large SMBHs.
I've thought of a similar situation. If our Universe is indeed 'inside' a Black Hole in a parent universe, the rate at which that Black Hole consumes matter determines the strength of Dark Energy and the rate of expansion of our Universe. A Black Hole that is consuming almost nothing would mean that the universe inside it would have a very slow expansion, while one that is feasting on a star would have a much faster expansion.
I guess I'm implying that the Hubble 'Constant' is not constant, but depends on the amount of matter falling into our 'parent' Black Hole.
The hubble constant is already not constant. It's really the "hubble parameter". It is only constant across space(as far as we can tell), not time because the expansion rate changes with density.
I've seen almost every of your videos, for past 6-7 years, each of them terrific quality. Never bias, always factual with passion and realnest. Awesome content! 😉😁
Other than that weirdly pro Max Tegmark video that came out conveniently just a week after it was found that his organization was founding nazi extremist groups…
Agreed. Had to laugh at a guy in one of the comment replies above you saying all Matt does is make up "pure unadulterated nonsense", and hopes that people that understand science don't see it and that enough people that don't understand the science believe his "nonsense".
And what have you learned in 7 years?
I'd argue that PBS space time has a clear pro-reality bias.
@@FussyPickles it's a bot
While I was watching this I took note of just how clean the camera footage is, and how well it's blended with the background and animations. Overall the visuals of videos on this channel are really well done, and I wish to voice appreciation of that.
This paper sounds like a strong case of "having a conclusion before making the experiment" to me.
Yeah like which publication
"Come up with a theory that explains a thing, design experiments to test that theory, and record the results" are the basics of the scientific method, but another, just as important, part of the method is "rigorous adherence to honesty in your experiments and the willingness to accept when your theory is flawed."
@@DFloyd84 But wait, the theory is "99.8%" non-flawed! Close enough for jazz, as they say. And cosmology evidently.
I had the same response. The idea that old galaxies should have smaller black holes seems weird. Assume a galaxy that does not accrete more mass. Over time it’s black hole should increase in size. Which would make “black holes grow faster than their galaxies”
Or just testing for correlation? It doesn't really say anything else as the space of explanations for that correlation (and all scientific explanations/theories-other-than-equations) is infinite, and we generally just use Occam's razor with no deductive logical basis to use it, sometimes more complicated explanations are the correct ones (though in the case of simplified models, it's more precise to formulate Occam's razor in terms of number of assumptions, and simplifying assumptions are assumptions)
The thing that amazes me is that there is a answer to all our questions we have about the universe.
Thank you for putting that famous paper in the proper and historically accurate context - especially since TH-cam hosts quite a few popular, rushed and inadequate "reviews".
Shots fired!
The fact that Matt is willing to use the d-word ("dishonest") in his characterization of the paper is all you need to know about his personal opinion of it.
Black hole interiors are also coupled to healing pyramids, ancient aliens and the ghost of my dead cat. Crazy how nature does that!
Your cat too??!!
Ghost in the Cat!
Been waiting for this one! Thank you Matt and team for another amazing video on a most fascinating subject! Visuals are insane btw, so well crafted.
I watched Dr. Becky's video on this first and this was an excellent follow up. Thank you.
My brain was blown as usual. Thanks, Matt.
If we use the inflated balloon as an analogy on expanding space, the geode black holes work like pressing a finger (or other object) on the balloon to get it to expand its surface with the existing gas inside it?
Oooo I like this analogy since you could apply it to all mass actually. Most mass would have an impossibly small amount of push back against that expansion thus no visible expansion, but a SMBH would have a significant amount since it represents an impossibly huge cumulative pressure on the surface of the balloon by a fixed volume. You might have something to work with there.
Hello from the future! We have a new study about this that’s really interesting!
DESI’s measurements suggest that dark energy may not be constant over time but could evolve, as indicated by the parameters w_0 and w_a in its equation of state. The researchers propose that this observed evolution can be explained by cosmologically coupled black holes-black holes whose masses increase in proportion to the universe’s expansion. By fitting a w_0w_a model to dark energy produced by baryon conversion in these black holes, they find that the DESI-preferred models are naturally recovered without additional parameter adjustments. This suggests that the time evolution of dark energy observed by DESI could be a result of the mass growth of cosmologically coupled black holes, offering a potential astrophysical origin for dark energy.
I’ve thought like this for a long time, I m glad to see that theoretical physicists have at least considered all this. It may be wrong but I’m glad curiosity allows all possibilities to smash up against evidence.
"People love to imagine that things that they don't understand are somehow connected to each other."
This explains so many behaviors! I'll keep this in mind from now on.
Great video! This is a really intriguing idea, and one can see how people might wish it into existence. It's a novel take for sure, and it will be cool to see if the paper is dissected seriously by the community.
in the english language "black" equates to "dark"...that's good enough for me.
Thank you very much for doing the "What If Black Holes ARE Dark Energy?" video, this was something I had explicitly requested on the Discord back when that idea was published.
Regarding the reformulation of the Friedman equations they presented to accomodate the non-local influence of black holes, I wondered whether it could indicate a way to link this whole thing (gravity and stuff) to quantum mechanics, which is indeed non-local
Wondering the same thing, if Susskinds “ER=EPR” (entanglement & gravity) relation could somehow be connected.
GR is also "non-local", the thing is, we're limited by not being "pure energy", just look at the frame of reference of a photon (basically everything everywhere with "no time nor space").
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
haha, Dr Becky came up - love it!
that said, when a PBS spacetime vid hits my notifications, i drop everything. you guys make some of the best content on the internet. meetings at work? launch the vid and mute my phone. someone asks me a direct question? "oh, i was fixing something, somewhere (i was listening to conjectures about the universe)... can you repeat the question?"
Please, never change. haha!
If ER=EPR, could that provide a mechanism for cosmological coupling to work and provide a solution to the even distribution? As in, all supermassive black holes are connected to each other via wormholes, which provides a way of ‘sharing information’ on large scales and smoothing out the distribution.
Shhh don't say it. It's a conspiracy. Wormholes are impossible to be use. Universe is to dangerous to travel. We all need to stay at home and wait for the next pandemic to kill us all.
Correlation does not imply causation. It would be huge if we discovered that black holes were actually Geodes that are made up of, and tap into, vacuum energy. I think the idea of Cosmological Coupling may be plausible but requires a lot more observation and analysis. But to say they account for all dark energy is a fantastic claim that requires fantastic evidence...
Could black holes manifest as dark energy by pulling spacetime inwards? Pulling spacetime inwards towards centers of mass could have a similar effect (or similar appearance) to spreading the voids outward... stretching spacetime out in the center, rather than the empty/void space having negative density.
Love the channel!
Just wrote this comment myself!
That's a neat idea for sure. But to me (a complete layperson on this stuff) that sounds like the empty space between galaxies is homogenous and unchanging, which would imply the amount of redshift of light from far away galaxies shouldn't be dependent on the distance it travels across space.
In other words, galaxies far away from us (and of similar size) would have roughly equal redshifting no matter the distance - because only the space close to galaxies would cause redshifting. And as for larger galaxies with stronger black holes (which results in stronger pulling of spacetime), we would expect to see more redshifting for those larger galaxies.
But again, I'm not an expert by a long shot and might be missing something.
@@dannydewario1550 if there is more distance to an object, then there more area being stretched by black holes between here and there.
If every black hole is pulling space in (causing the light traveling through it to stretch) and there are more black holes stretching space between a more distant object than a nearer object, the redshift would correlate with distance.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Dear brothers and sisters,
I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity"
[Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download.
1) New representation of Gravitation
2) Structure of black holes
3) Finite structure of space-time.
4) Real dimensions of space-time
5) Singularity
6) Source of dark energy...etc
"Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
Wouldn't the rate of expansion then depend on the local density of black holes? Then some regions of the universe will expand faster/slower than others.
On the largest scale matter as well as black holes should be equally distributed.
That was my exact question. That changes the shape of the universe making the visible horizon different in every direction. Meaning no more Hubble constant.
Not necessarily. Depends on the underlying physical mechanism by which the black holes convert mass/energy into space. If it's something like water pouring into a bathtub, then well, the water level rises uniformly even though the source is localized. This analogy is stronger than one might think - fluid dynamics equations are suspiciously similar to GR, both of which treat the subject matter as a continuous medium - even though we KNOW that water is NOT continuous medium, it's made of particles.
Or better yet, imagine a tiny stream of water falling onto a kitchen table, slowly growing a pool.
@@empireempire3545 Fair enough I didn't read the paper so I'm a bit unqualified to even ask a question. Yet this is the second video on this subject I've seen in as many days. I would love to explain dark energy this way, but it just seems way too hiding in plain sight to explain such a confusing and complex subject. So I guess I'm looking for that steel toed boot to kick it in the head.
Thanks for your explanation it does make sense considering what is expanding is all part of the same single fabric.
@@empireempire3545 I know that this is all conjecture but I like to imagine that space is an emergent property of mass / energy and that as it expands, it has to push against the surrounding spacetime, causing it to compress, causing what we call gravity. This expanding space still has to go somewhere and that's we observe at larger scales, i.e. cosmic inflation.
What makes black holes unique is that the space is expanding faster than light can travel across it and any light that enters is basically red-shifted into oblivion.
That innocent sounding phrase, "That may one day be detectable," pretty much kills of it.
Nonetheless welcome a change from the more SF oriented episodes that we've had recently.
If dark matter is made of stuff, suppose it is an undiscovered particle for instance, is it possible for a black hole to absorb it into the event horizon? Would that change the mass of the black hole? Would it grow? Could this effect explain the very large rate at which supermassive black holes expand?
The only thing we know about dark matter is that it interacts gravitationally.
Anything that does so becomes part of the black hole once it crosses the event horizon, and adds its mass/energy to it.
There has been an argument that since dark matter doesn’t seem to participate in electromagnetism, it would have a hard time accreting efficiently, since unlike ordinary matter, it cannot loose velocity and any orbital angular momentum by blazing it away quasar like in an accretion disk.
@@NullHand yeah, that makes sense. I wonder if it would be possible to measure how much dark matter falls into a black hole and if that could tell us something about it. That seems a little out there though.
Dear brothers and sisters,
I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity"
[Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download.
1) New representation of Gravitation
2) Structure of black holes
3) Finite structure of space-time.
4) Real dimensions of space-time
5) Singularity
6) Source of dark energy...etc
"Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
as a recently diagnosed person with autism, the connection between the things you mentioned in the beginning do in fact have a connection.
Always nice to see Soviet scientists given the credit they deserve!
We couldnt have done it without Tsolikovsky
For me I think it’s fair to imagine the same amount we know about black holes equals roughly the same amount we know about dark energy. Great team to push new ideas. They must align with the old rules but new discoveries make new rules. For me it’s the elephant in the room that black holes are what keep our sun orbiting around the Milky Way, keeps the earth spinning and set to motion the weather even.
Just a thought: this kind of widespread interference “at a distance” may be related to quantum entanglement
Hit the nail on the head at 0:00, I woke up just the other day and put some powdered creamer on to my coffee and observed the floating mounds of creamer create a swirl within the coffee as it dissolved on top of the meniscus and sank into the coffee, that gave me the idea that our universe might just be sitting on top of a higher dimensional 'meniscus' and the gravity that sinks into it causes our galaxies to swirl in ways we can't explain without dark matter.
Thank you for making a video on this. I have talked about this subject a few times, so its nice to see it being covered.
You should check out the video he suggested, Dr. Becky is just the best when it comes to black holes, and she gives them an even fairer review than Matt
I love how we have dismissed the Aether but are now on the lookout for dark matter and dark energy! 🙃
Since "dark energy" is merely a placeholder, it - of course - remains to be seen. But I think there are too many "known unknowns" (to say nothing of "unknown unknowns") to dismiss this out of hand. As always in science, more testing and exploration and creation of detection techniques are required. Science is the process of generating *questions* . The occasional _answer_ popping out is an anomaly; not the goal.
Your use of the abbreviation "SMBH" was confusing at first, because it could mean "Super-Massive Black Hole" OR "Stellar-Mass Back Hole".
I have speculated for years that dark energy is just another perception of black holes consuming space itself. If all black holes consume space, they cause a stretching of the spacetime between them and would be responsible for the primary red shift of measured galactic movements.
If you consider the 'rubber sheet' analogy, then it would make sense that if you have points on that sheet that are pulling in the sheet, then the points would increase in mass due to the 'sheet' they absorb and that the 'sheet' in-between would become stretched and give the impression of expansion. Over time, as the points increase in mass, they pull in more sheet, giving the impression that the expansion is happening faster. To someone living on the sheet, the difference between expansion and sheet removal would be very difficult to distinguish.
And of course, if the sheet is being pulled in at a constant rate, it would also explain the rotational velocity discrepancy in galaxies, thus explaining dark matter.
Interesting and creative analogy! But, the black holes are not the only ones that are consuming the fabric of space-time, so to speak, also ordinalry mass object, like planets, stars, etc., are doing the same thing, just that the intensity or "speed" is order of magnitude lesser that of the black hole objects.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Dear brothers and sisters,
I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity"
[Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download.
1) New representation of Gravitation
2) Structure of black holes
3) Finite structure of space-time.
4) Real dimensions of space-time
5) Singularity
6) Source of dark energy...etc
"Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
Once, when camping with friends and being FAR too high, we got into a conversation about this sort of thing. Somehow we got onto the line of discussion where the act of matter and energy being compressed by a black hole could directly relate to a corresponding expansion of space/time and that this might result in a point where all matter and energy had been "eaten" and nothing but black holes were left in the universe. At that point they'd begin to slowly evaporate into Hawking Radiation stopping the release/creation of dark energy and this would result in the expansion of the universe stopping and reverse, beginning the "big crunch".
As I noted above we were all very, VERY high at the time.
Exactly, so that's the quantum foam limit in its elastic tension. I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
I've said this years ago on this channel, but I think dark energy is essentially just the part of gravity we haven't figured out yet. And if we can get the shape of black holes down (you know, get rid of the singularity in the math) then we may immediately get an answer as to what's causing dark energy.
While this study has me far from convinced of their conclusions, I do like that they used that very idea to get here and I hope more do it.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
My intuition is that something about dark energy and the massive structure of the universe has something in common with a foam, where the empty spaces are expanding as the "seams" are contracting. But this is totally unbased in anything like expertise or math, just a feeling... and those are best not trusted, but instead should be tested tentatively. It is really hard to get a grasp on these things (like black holes) that break our reality models, and to put them into a larger picture without distortion.
Thank you so much for these constantly enlightening videos!
I believe the prevailing thought is even simpler -- that space itself contains energy which contributes to the expansion of the universe, and thus the more space there is, the greater the energy and thus the greater rate of expansion. Adding seams would seem (sorry) to complicate things unnecessarily, but then I know as much as you do about all this -- i.e. almost nothing!
It would be nice if it were true. I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like.
If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised.
Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity.
I don’t understand most of what he talks about, but I’m addicted to listening to it and trying.
My thought is that black holes don't contain an actual physical singularity, just a virtual one infinitely far into future. Due to the colossal time dilation it takes literally forever for the singularity to form, by which time the BH will have already undergone Hawking evaporation. Has this been considered?
That's interesting, no idea what the implications would be, or if it's testable at all.
No, it's not considered as your idea is inconsistent with relativity.
It's a chicken and the egg kind of thing.
Yes this scenario is considered in loop quantum gravity.
"Loosely speaking, the full phenomenon is analogous to the bouncing of a ball. A ball falls to the ground, bounces, and then moves up. The upward motion after the bounce is the time-reversed version of the falling ball. Similarly, a black hole “bounces” and emerges as its time-reversed version-a white hole. Collapsing matter does not disappear at the center: it bounces up through the white hole. Energy and information that fell into the black hole emerge from the white hole. The configuration where the compression is maximal, which separates the black hole from the white hole, is called a “Planck star.” Because of the huge time distortion allowed by relativity, the time for the process to happen can be short (microseconds) when measured from inside the hole but long (billions of years) when measured from the outside. Black holes might be bouncing stars seen in extreme slow motion"
You should do a refresher into the archives of our own favorite space time channel! But just for the sake of your question, pretty much every respected astro/physiciscist / researchers do *not* believe that the singularity in a blackhole is a real, it's widely recognized that the singularity comes about because our current laws of physics are missing some key component(s) needed to properly describe blackholes. Think of it like a computer program that has a bug caused by faulty code, which makes it divide by zero, and so it spits out an answer that is impossible to reconcile and Call of Duty crashes. The singularity in blackholes just suggests our math is wrong, and I don't know of any non crackpot scientist who believes otherwise!
These sorts of things appear to occur on scales one might think are irrelevant to any form of society, but it's in coming up with and solving the various equations associated with these ideas and theories that some of the world's most powerful computers have been and are being developed; and to me, that's the *coolest* part of theoretical physics and cosmology
Ive been watching these vids for a while now, i appreciate Matts breakdown into simple terms on the subjects even if sometimes i dont fully understand them
"No real relationship, whatsoever". I have to disagree there. You might say a meaningful relationship, which can be true, but it's also not wrong to say they are connected and you could probably find a meaningful connection if you looked hard enough, and it may not be what you expect. Another matter of perception.
If black holes gain size coupled to cosmic expansion, does this mean holes of a certain minimum mass cannot reduce in mass due to evaporation?
That's true even if they aren't tied to cosmic expansion. Hawking radiation is black body radiation, and until the temperature of the CMB drops below the temperature of a black hole, the hole grows rather than shrinks (heat flows towards cold, not the other way around -- or, put another way, the black hole absorbs more from the CMB than it emits). So in the present universe, black holes bigger than 133 micrometers (about the mass of the Moon) cannot evaporate.
Even without this idea, the time it takes for ordinary black holes to evaporate is 10^100 years. The universe is only 1.37 x 10^10 years. Essentially, only microscopic black holes can evaporate on any practical time frame.
It's not an un-reasonable assumption. If we couldnt outright detect the location or existence of a blackhole, its possible our instruments could be incorrectly missing that data.
Great video. With dark energy, I suspect it's a case of the theoreticians getting way ahead of the experimental data available. Or as Asimov would put it "Insufficient data for a meaningful answer".
Dear brothers and sisters,
I have published a series of papers (totally 9 nos.) on "Theory of Singularity"
[Volume 10; issue 03,04; 2023] - arcjournals - International journal of advanced research in physical science - Open access for free download.
1) New representation of Gravitation
2) Structure of black holes
3) Finite structure of space-time.
4) Real dimensions of space-time
5) Singularity
6) Source of dark energy...etc
"Fundamental theory of Singularity" - The new proposed study that serves one fundamental for general relativity and quantum mechanics by solving the incompatibility between them...thank you
Cosmological coupling (new theory where black holes are thought to be the source of dark energy) says that black holes cut off from the additional inflow of matter will still continue to expand, due to interior vacuum fluctuations. Hawking radiation, on the other hand, is theorized to shrink black holes cut off from additional matter, due to vacuum fluctuations on their exterior. Are these two theories mutually exclusive of each other?
I've been binging on this and other channels to help me digest information about physics at which I'd otherwise shrug my shoulders. I sometimes find it easier to comprehend things when I don't get lost in the minutiae, and this sort of content helps me with that (I think).
I still struggle with dark energy. My brain keeps telling me that black holes contain separate universes. We know mass and energy from our universe can pass the event horizon and theorize it becomes incorporated into the singularity.
If there lies the possibility that our universe is nested within another, where our universe exists within a black hole in a parent universe, is it not possible that dark energy is fed into our universe as our parent universe feeds it matter and energy? Is it not possible that dark energy is the parent universe's matter and energy that fell across the event horizon following the instant our universe was created? Perhaps the mass and energy from our parent universe is not wholly compatible with our own universe, but continues to fall through and be present, regardless, contributing to our growing universe? Or perhaps that the information stripped from mass and energy falling into the black hole that cannot bear our universe's physical laws is damned to an existence at the threshold of the event horizon to be rejected back into the parent universe as Hawking Radiation or something along those lines? Would the feeding of mass and energy across the event horizon not lead to one or two inevitabilities: the universe that is being fed would have to expand in space and/or grow in density?
But I'm also struggling to comprehend merging black holes if they, indeed, do contain separate universes within? If the universe within one black hole has different physical laws than another black hole with which it collides and merges, would the resulting merger produce a unified universe from the mix of the two physical environments or would the universes merge in such a way that the physical laws for each incorporated universe allow them to both simultaneously exist within the same space, only interacting through compatible physical laws?
I'm in way over my head, but this stuff is so fascinating!
The unreliability of intuition is why we developed the scientific method. 😄
Just imagine the mess we'd have made of quantum physics without science, given its profound counterintuitiveness.
Matt links to a video by Dr. Becky, you should really check it out! If you like it, she also has good explanations on dark energy, etc in other videos.
Re: multiverses, etc. Remember these are mathematical constructs created by following mathematical theory. A "universe" is a set of numerical values on one side of an = sign. Multiverse theory is the logical conclusion of following the math that was used to define that "universe". So most of your yes/no questions are answered "depends" - they depend upon the values used to formulate the original mathematical universe.
I really want to read your replies in full, but for sole reason whenever I try to "read more," I'm directed to this reply. 😢
Thanks for helping direct my curiosities, I can at least see that I should check Dr Becky's content.
Must have been a bug. Got to read the full contents after I replied. Thanks!
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Absolutely. The distance between black holes is increasing from momentum, and being the strongest gravitational masses in the universe, by far, they pull everything along with them in their expansion. Next, you might find that the expansion of space between black holes might be faster than the expansion of the surrounding universe, because they don't pull everything in at the same rate as they are moving away.
I've been doing a lot of considerations of black holes myself. The one thing that has me thinking, is, What we consider as "black holes" could be solid mass objects, the gravity is so high it causes the neutron star to form in the next dimension, and what would actually happen if a neutron star is compressed, causing the larger strings to break down, and all that is left is the smaller strings but maintains a rough stellar size, such as our Sagittarius A*. Since we are unable to see other dimensions at a distance, and only getting touches or glimpses of other dimensions in the subatomic worlds, why wouldn't our universe be multi dimentional as well? Perhaps we only see 3 of the 5+ dimensions of spacetime? (you can't really see the 4th dimension, as that would be 'time'. We can see it's cause and effects.) The reason I bring this up, is because known physics breaks down after crossing the event horizon, mainly because we can't see inside the void.
If I remember correctly the interior of a black hole is scaled at 1/2 Dimension.
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
I'm hyped you're doing this video. I'm interested in this theory.
Could the coupling be another proof of the non-locality in quantum mechanics? I saw a paper talking about energy transfer through entangled particles using an ibm quantum computer, could this be a related phenomena since the singularity is technically a quantum object?
If true it might be, but it's most certainly false. Dark energy can be thought of as a term being added to the stress-energy tensor such that there's a distribution of negative energy particles. In order for black holes to produce this dark energy effect on the universe, they'd probably have to become repulsive. Somewhat related though, there's a theory that entangled particles are connected via wormholes. These wormholes would also require a negative energy density to be stabilized. Maybe the wormholes contain dark energy? Maybe entangled particles flying apart might have an effect on the quantity of dark energy? The experiment you're referring to required negative energy densities after all.
@@Laff700 I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Gosh, this guy is by far my favorite show host for PBS ST
I listened to Dr Becky and she misses some basic concepts. I'll pass on that. I'm very glad you covered this. Sometimes the fringe is correct and deserve their day in court.
Fringe ideas are published by mainstream scientists all the time, they just don't typically get much publicity. But it's important to distinguish between fringe ideas backed up by doing science, as in this case, and the type of nonsense you see people claiming in TH-cam comment threads, like the Electric Universe, which isn't backed up by science at all.
@@EnglishMike Preaching to the choir. I have a personal issue with the way I learn physics. It's via visualization not math directly. I can grasp concepts easily, but don't have the math to back my ideas up. I've been trying to communicate but without the PHD and proper channels open I am hopelessly lost. Any recommendations are welcome. Find a technical cosmological physicist and waste their time essentially. I've been learning for decades. I have a small chance were I might be able to make a difference.
I take issue with the first example. While there's no evidence that quantum effects directly give rise to consciousness, there's plenty of reason to thing the two ideas may be related. At the very least there is enough of an active debate, such as the Orchestrated Objective Reduction theory, and most of the criticisms of that theory basically come down to "it's not what I wrote my thesis on, so I don't like the idea." As such putting "Consciousness ≠ Quantum Mechanics" is certainly a bit premature. At the very least, the molecular machinery that makes up the neurons that exhibit consciousness are subject to quantum effects, so maybe don't use the example, or if you do use the example at least don't use symbols that imply you know for certain the two are not related.
I agree, physics needs to be more open minded to that sort of thing.
would the time dilation beneath a black hole's event horizon prevent the matter inside from actually ever reaching singularity?
... from whose perspective?? To an outside observer, the object inside the black hole slows down and becomes frozen. But to the object inside the black hole, it would seem to continue moving at the same speed, while the outside observer would appear to move much faster. It's all relative. :)
Love when my favorite space channel shouts out my other favorite space channel!
So if Dark Energy does turn out to be created by black holes would that mean its just a measure of how much spacetime has been stretched since the beginning of the universe by massive objects?
Maybe. I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
Thank you for this beautiful summary of the background. I find some analogy between this idea of equating DE to SMBHs, and OTOH a quip I came up with a dozen years back, in the form of the bold assertion that _Dark energy is ambient pollution from alien warp drives!_
-- with diverse motivations ranging from the humorous take on Fermi's Paradox; through an objection made to a subliminal perception (likely to be widely shared) that the focus on uncovering some Earth 2.0 that's expected of exoplanet research, was premised on a secret project to escape by relocating there (rather than address) a self-inflicted destiny of runaway greenhouse effect attributable in good part to vehicular emissions; to a more direct if vague analogy between _accelerating_ expansion and _runaway_ greenhouse effect; and, finally; to alluding to the idea that _the negative gravity (and negative self-gravity!?!) of the massive amounts of negative mass-energy postulated to enable FTL Alcubierre drives, leads to expect that in case of a leak or loss of confinement, the negative mass-energy would in fact race to mimic the uniform distribution and influence currently attributed to dark energy._
I'd concede however that the satire directed by this quip at the expectation of our relocation to some Earth 2.0, is at risk from Poe's Law. A picture emerges of a Universe polluted by the failures multiplied over eons, of desperate attempts of planetary civilizations to save themselves using unstable approximations to an Alcubierre drive...
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
We often see black holes depicted in 2D models as the singularity pulling down spacetime. Are there any good videos that discuss how black holes actually look in 3D? Like is the BH actually flat and the horizon could be on plane with our POV / seen at different angles? Or would it look more like an orb? Like if a BH is facing us where we are observing directly above the event horizon in the 2D model, how far does the singularity go down? Wouldn't it run into other things near it?
You can see the black hole in 3D in the movie Interstellar. There is a gif of how spacetime curves towards the inside of an object's center of gravity. You can imagine gravity as the concave curvature of a contracting vortex and dark energy as the convex curvature between galaxies.
Congratulations on acknowledging Dr. Becky. Wish i could listen to both of you tear apart an astronomy topic sometime.
Interesting ideea. But i wonder of the next possibility:
What if dark energy is actually done by virtual particles? After all, virtual particles is matter that comes to existance and disappears, so what if when it comes to existance, it comes with it's own piece of space, the size of the virtual particle. Something like a "virtual space". Yet when the virtual particle disappears, the "virtual space" that it created doesn't also disappears. Virtual particles are in a constant based on the absence of normal matter which would make virtual particles to apear more frequent in between the Galaxyes for example. And since the virtual particles are everywhere and constant, it could be possible to be an explanation for the constantly growing of the universe caused by what we call dark energy.
Sure it's just an ideea and maybe i misunderstood the virtual particles but if not,is worth thinking as a possibility
I often envision black holes tugging at the fabric of spacetime and spacetime like auxetic quantum foam, and black holes as factories of spacetime, turning matter into virtual quarks, because stars are said to fuse simple to more complex atoms, and denser stars are made of simpler elements, like neutron stars, it makes some sense to me that black holes make quarks stop being particles and go to be virtual particles. And gravitational waves, and matter that is converted into gravitational energy, contributing to the expansion of the universe. Look up a video titled "Auxetic Foam Research at HPMI" to see what an auxetic foam sample looks like. If the connection of black holes with dark energy is verified, the warp drive would have to be revised. Dark energy is said to be basically antigravity. It's something important for interstellar travel in reasonable time.
@@jusore but you know that virtual particles are defined by their state of existing for short times. Like they apear and dispaear at high frequency and speed. So I'm confused on how black holes can transform matter into virtual quarks, like do they make the energy composure we call matter back to space or what?
@@jusore it is interesting but just a bit confused there
@@Davidutul Continuing with the exercise of imagination... when the virtual particles are annihilated, they will be decomposed into their constituent elements, simpler than the virtual particles, in which case I imagine that what makes up a particle like the quark, while it is a quark, has enough energy as to be considered matter, while if a quark could be subdivided into constituent particles (or a lower energy subparticle) that make up the quantum foam, it would make sense to say that these constituent particles would be the ones that give rise to virtual particles. The black hole would contribute to the generation of spacetime foam, disintegrating quarks, bosons and leptons into their constituent subparticle/s.
@@jusore so basically those virtual particles would break into the smallest possible type of particles possible, like plank size level?
This is the best channel I have ever seen on youtube.
My thoughts.
Imagine space time mapped out on the surface of a balloon . If you press on it, it creates a dimple towards the centre and mass on the surface of the balloon is attracted to the bottom of the dimple by gravity. Create a dimple deep enough and the mass that falls on will be traveling fast enough that when it reaches the bottom it's able to punch through the surface to the inside of the balloon, adding to the pressure inside the balloon causing it to push out and expand the surface to accommodate the extra volume within this causing the expansion of the universe...
The Latex Hypothisis.. interesting. ;O)-
It’s a neat idea. The issue is that the analogy breaks down surprisingly quickly. We can pretend that the geometric scale of the universe is synonymous with an actual balloon in a 1-1 way, and that there is something synonymous to highly pressurized air guiding the expansion, and that such an event would not be perfectly synonymous with a balloon or else the universe would pop, but there’s so many other mathematical and physics problems that causes that it’s almost impossible to make such a comparison useful. It’d be neat and logical to our brains if the universe worked like that- but the universe is rarely that simple!
@SolarFed except as far as we know the universe doesn't have defined edges
This would require a 4th spatial dimension at 90 degree angles of the known 3 dimensions, making time the 5th. There is more evidence against that being true than for it.
But who knows, maybe that's the way vacuum energy gets around and remains homogenous. It certainly makes sense when assuming the other parts as being correct.
On that note, the interior of a black hole could be translating matter from our 3 dimensions through the 4th which will make matter disappear eventually in our 3 as the distance grows larger (in the 4th)
@@SolarFederate I was kidding :O/-
My theory for the "cosmological coupling" is in relation to how stars produce protection their solar systems. SMBHs produce a similar protection which surrounds the mass of the galaxy itself which is why it doesn't expand with the rest of the universe and would fall in like with dark energy holding galaxies together.
Best show on you tube for years straight. Keep it up Matt!
Could cosmological coupling be a kind of quantum entanglement, along the lines of ER=RPR, where the great voids from which space expands outward are essentially white holes?
Here faster than the rock orbiting near a supermassive blackhole
Timing is everything
From my perspective you never actually got here…
I crave spaghetti now...
I love when I comment in these videos and 6 months later the video comes out proving it.
Could you do an episode of black holes made of dark matter? Even though we can't interact with dark matter, because the Event Horizon is only dependent on space-time curvature, it might be possible that they look exactly the same as regular black holes to the naked eye.
If a black hole is made of black matter, and it generates Hawking Radiation, then it might the only way to convert dark matter into energy that then would also become regular matter with a large enough timeline, thus the black holes plus Hawking radiation and time might be the only machine capable of turning dark matter into matter.
@@thevikingbear2343 It would only generate Black Hawking Radiation, obviously
Somebody please figure out what dark matter is❗️Or maybe orthodoxy is a ball & chain that seems to trap us from conceiving of or promoting speculative ideas. I don’t buy into dark energy is behaving as outlined in the papers BUT it would be very interesting if black holes appear to be growing faster than orthodoxy allows. AND if there is a component of BH curvature causes by dark matter and maybe even dark energy.
A black hole can't be made out of matter of any kind as this would violate relativity (Geodesic Incompleteness theorems).
@@kylelochlann5053 Please define “MADE OUT OF” In relationship to BHs.
I recently find myself investigating the cyclic universe theory, black holes, singularities and now I find myself investigating Hawking Radiation And dark matter.
What a wonderful mental journey.
If you enter a black hole space would seem to be expanding away from you, which is exactly what we see. We are inside a black hole, which is why there is a red shift expansion that increases the farther away you get.
Great material to fall Asleep