THE CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION OF WHAT IS THE MOON AND OF FALLING OBJECTS (AND THE FALLING MAN), AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY PROVEN TO BE F=MA: Think about the BALANCE of BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE. Consider what is the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE AND what is the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE IN BALANCE. So, consider the man who IS standing on what is the Earth/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. The EARTH/ground CLEARLY proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. Notice the black space of THE EYE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. Now, carefully consider what is the semi-spherical, translucent, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE SKY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. SO, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND, DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Accordingly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The Sun is E=mc2 AND F=ma. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. So, E=mc2 AS F=ma clearly requires and involves invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The EARTH is ALSO BLUE, as it CLEARLY proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 is F=ma.) ACCORDINGLY, the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE AND the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE are NECESSARILY LINKED and BALANCED; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Therefore, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE EYE is the body ON BALANCE, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. INDEED, the balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential. (BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.) SO, objects (including what is the falling man) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; as E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Therefore, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON necessarily matches it's revolution; as E=mc2 IS F=ma. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The Earth AND the Sun are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Therefore, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON NECESSARILY matches it's revolution. Great. E=mc2 IS CLEARLY proven to be F=ma !!!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!!!! The EARTH and the Sun constitute and comprise the MIDDLE AND THE FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE (IN BALANCE) in full and BALANCED compliance and conformity with the CLEAR and universal fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Great !!!!!! Hence, it is CLEARLY proven, in fact, that the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON NECESSARILY matches it's revolution. Great. Obviously, what is THE MOON is subject to and constitutive of both E=mc2 AND F=ma. E=mc2 IS CLEARLY proven to be F=ma. "Mass"/energy involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. The following constitutes even further proof of the fact that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Very importantly, in dream experience, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE. Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; as E=mc2 IS F=ma. By Frank DiMeglio
THE QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE: "Mass"/ENERGY is necessarily gravitational/electromagnetic (IN BALANCE) in conjunction with INSTANTANEITY AND the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON necessarily matches it's revolution; as gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The Sun, the Moon, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH are thus CLEARLY representative of the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. By Frank DiMeglio
@@stevenk-brooks6852 WHY AND HOW E=MC2 IS F=MA, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY: Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. Notice the black space of THE EYE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. Now, carefully consider what is the semi-spherical, translucent, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE SKY. Great. E=mc2 IS F=ma. It is CLEAR. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The EARTH and the Sun constitute and comprise the MIDDLE AND THE FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE (IN BALANCE) in full and BALANCED compliance and conformity with the CLEAR and universal fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Great !!!!!! Hence, it is CLEARLY proven, in fact, that the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON NECESSARILY matches it's revolution. Great. Obviously, what is THE MOON is subject to and constitutive of both E=mc2 AND F=ma. E=mc2 IS CLEARLY proven to be F=ma. "Mass"/energy involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. This CLEARLY explains why objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. THE EARTH is ALSO F=ma AS E=mc2. The Sun is both F=ma AND E=mc2. The BLUE SKY is E=mc2 AND F=ma. What is THE MOON is NECESSARILY F=ma AS E=mc2. THINK. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. (BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.) VERY IMPORTANTLY, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. Great !!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. (THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE.) GREAT. THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. The balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential. The EARTH is ALSO BLUE (as water). Alas, the ULTIMATE unification of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND INCLUDES opposites; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. By Frank DiMeglio
Thank you Sabine, I enjoyed this a lot. I find I have to really concentrate to understand this, and I still miss some of it, but it's a pure joy to listen to someone who really knows what they're talking about, and can express it so clearly. I now find that, at 71, I can still learn. This is a good thing! Thanks again.
I'vevalways been troubled by physicists talking about the black hole singularity seemingly being real. They never differentiate between the mathematical singularity and what really is at the center of a black hole. A neutron star has volume so why wouldn't a black hole have volume at its center. Well the answer comes back, "because the math says so". And while you say we don't know because we can't observe whats inside a black hole, my mind cannot conceive of nothing at its canter. The black hole consumes mass, so there must be mass there, and must have volume. I realize I am trying to visualize something the we can't definatevly know. But its one of those things that hurts this amateur scientists brain. Thank you Sabine for teaching us to question the status quo. Your videos often show me another perspective, in addition to probing deeper into topics than most science videos on youtube. You are a credit to your profession.
I remain skeptical on the possibility of a singularity being discovered in nature , and if it were, I'd look very closely at the instrument of measure. Great video as always Sabine.
2:57 Fun fact: It is only really understandable in complex analysis (complex as in complex numbers), why this type of singularity is called an "essential singularity". In the real numbers, the function can be continued pretty smoothly (continuously, differentiably, ...), but if one allows z to be a complex number, then in any arbitrarily small circle around 0 (minus the 0, which can not be inserted into the function), the function exp(-1/z^2) takes on every complex value with the exception of possibly one complex number according to the "Great Picard Theorem". So it really goes crazy. On the other hand, the function (exp(z) - 1) / z has a "removable singularity" in 0, it can be continued to a complex differentiable function (also called holomorphic), because (exp(z) - 1) / z = (1 + z + z^2/2 + ... - 1)/z = (z + z^2/2 + ...)/z = 1 + z/2 + ... which tends to 1 as z approaches 0.
@@TheReaverOfDarkness it's been a really long time since I did this in college, but it's not that you assume the singularity doesn't exist, it's rather that you are able to compute physically meaningful values even though you are operating over singularities. I'm an EE, and there you have the problem that a simple electron already is a singularity (because the electric field is infinite where the electron is). However, the electric field is holomorphic, and thus you can use "analytic continuation" to still integrate over it and get meaningful results.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality! Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant. Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory. The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy). Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality. Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality. Mind duality is dual to matter duality Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Duality creates reality.
@@hyperduality2838 this is too simplified. matter and energy cannot exist without the space. 2D space cannot exist without 3D. Everything is three, not two.
@@SamGarcia Duality is more fundamental than triality. Space is dual to time -- Einstein or 4 dimensions. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time Hegelian dialectic. Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's cat. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming Plato's cat. Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork. Reality or the universe is actually a Janus point/singularity. Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality. The future is dual to the past -- time duality. My absolute time is your relative time and your absolute time is my relative time -- time duality. Time and space are both dual concepts. Left is dual to right, up is dual to down, in is dual to out -- space duality. Length, distance or space is defined by two dual points -- space duality. Space duality is dual to time duality. Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. There is a dual process to that of increasing entropy namely syntropy (prediction). "Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing Syntropy. Thinking and having thoughts is a syntropic process and rational thinking leads to optimized predictions -- syntropy. Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy). Space/time is synthetic a priori knowledge according to Immanuel Kant -- The Critique of Pure Reason.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality! Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant. Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory. The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy). Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality. Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality. Mind duality is dual to matter duality Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Duality creates reality.
@@hyperduality2838 There is a reality deeper than duality and that projects the duality! There is a "quantum leap" between the two which cannot be understood ( ever) by any human mind.( now that's difficult to rap ones mind around)
@@erikparent8176 Stereographic projection is duality! Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic. Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato. Projection (mathematics) is prediction (syntropy) in physics. I would tend to disagree with you as I discovered the 4th & 5th laws of thermodynamics:- Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law. The conservation of duality (energy) is the 5th law, energy is duality, duality is energy. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein Space is dual to time -- Einstein. Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle. The deeper reality is duality in physics. The big bang is a Janus point (two faces). The "quantum leap" is the mind duality of Immanuel Kant and also Thomas Aquinas! The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Dark energy is dual to dark matter -- The mind/soul or the Janus point. Percepts project into concepts and concepts project into percepts, Immanuel Kant understood this -- stereographic projection (spinors).
@@hyperduality2838 I diverge from Kant's Noumenon in that the deeper reality cannot be labled "The thing in itself" or "object" I'm more in line with Buddhists "no thing" Kant is working in the right direction but lables Noumenon as a concept.
@@erikparent8176 Yes I agree with you but there is still a dual pattern at work here which many people do not accept especially physicists. This dual pattern leads to the idea/concept of a 4th law of thermodynamics because you can ask the question what is dual to entropy? Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics. The observer is dual to observed -- David Bohm, physicist. Syntropy is rational, noumenal (mind). Entropy is empirical, phenomenal, (matter, physics). There is a dual pattern through out Kant's metaphysics which I was not aware of until I started to read his books. Philosophy is not encouraged in physics. "Philosophy is dead" -- Stephen Hawking. If you ignore philosophy you have a "dark age" in physics!
I was updating TH-cam application in Google Play while watching this video. At 5:29 the screen went black and the application restarted. For a while, I was genuinely thinking that this is some kind of intended illustration of what happens in singularity. The speech was perfectly aligned: "There's just ". Just wanted to share to you all... 😀
Dr. Hossenfelder, many thanks for this video, and indeed all of your videos. They introduce me to aspects of the universe I had little idea of. I am in my 8th decade so your career should last long after I have passed away. May I wish you all success in your researches.
@@SabineHossenfelder Dear Sabine, I hope you will talk about different kind of singularity as popularized by Ray Kurzweil (Google's engineering director)...
Hi Sabine ,I will put it down to coinesidence that you chose to do Singularities this week because last week you covered infinity.I'm glad you chose to cover this topic this week see next post ,I enjoy your videos very much as they really challenge my theoritical work.
"if you reach the singularity, that's just the end there is no more space or time beyond this, just ... nothing" this statement really sums up my observation that ever deeper gravity wells taking a simple hydrogen atom through the periodic table of elements (until we get to the fabeled black hole) are the great matter recyclers. What do you have at a singularity? Pure potential. It's like a universe ready to go big bang. It's matter's return to a pure energy state by having all the space time squeezed out of it.
I'm glad I found this channel, incredible descriptions of interesting topics and editing sprinkled with some comedy here and there, it's fantastic thank you so much.
@@tomashull9805 She probably doesn't "celebrate" it, a greeting is not celebration. Most people actually don't, other than eating yourself fat and visiting family. Also most "atheists" are actually agnostic, they just don't know what "atheism" actually is; although Sabine probably does and might be a real atheist (that is do not believe in God).
@@tomashull9805 I mean Christmas comes from the Roman celebration of Saturnalia, which basically celebrates the Winter Solstice: the rebirth of the sun. They changed it to mean Jesus’ Birthday after the Romans shifted to Catholic religion, just to please people and keep celebrating their pagan holidays. If it’s historically a pagan party, I don’t see why Christians should celebrate it either. In the end I think anyone who wants to should celebrate the holiday, either for religious reasons or just to gather with their family and celebrate being together.
In my experience (Physics professor), many if not most physicists consider their models more real than "reality" (nature). This is because of the incredible accuracy of physics models.
Sabine, I have a question that has always interested me. When you look through a magnifying lens and hold it at a distance the image flips. Does this not mean that the light at some point becomes a singularity? For it to flip it must go through a point of nothing, neither the right way up or inverted. This to me is exactly what happens in the explanation of a black hole. To me it seams impossible but it must happen somewhere in its journey.
Orange Manstan, interesting. Let me know when you've got proof... It seems that the water droplet analogy applies, that is, if photons exist as discreet particles. Wouldn't individual photons need to also be shrunkteded to a singularity and also share space with other photons? Space that is also required to shrinktenen itself into a singularity? Hhhmmm.. 🤔 "Houston, we h....."
@@johnlshilling1446 I'm no scientists unfortunately but it's just something that's always baffled me. As for the image to reverse there has to be a point in time when there is nothing there because if there wasn't you would be able to magnify to a point when it is either one or the other way up, so in my mind the light must become a singularity. I'd love for someone like Sabine to explain if this is the case. This to me is here on earth and open for research but I'm probably barking up the wrong tree 😁
@@OrangeManStan Me, too. I'm nowhere near being a scientist, either. It is an interesting observation. I would love to have my thoughts analyzed and rejected, as long as my mutilation was described in a way that I could understand...
So fortunate to have learned about this woman, even if only recently. Sabine, you are amazing! I am watching your videos regularly and enjoy every one. Thank you!
Great video. In my humble opinion, so-called paradoxes like zero-size singularities are simply an indication that the theory/mathematics is no longer applicable. In mathematics, if a function y=1/x is inapplicable at x=0we say the function y is not defined at x, *even if trying to define what division by zero is.* We can only say it isn't defined. I think that similarly, even if we try to define a physical black hole singularity, we can only say that the singularity is not defined. The mathematics leads to a limit of zero, but of course a limit is beyond reach: we could say that a physical singularity is arbitrarily small, but that description is not an identity or definition-- it's still not defined. Similarly, all 'paradoxes' are simply questions whose answer is not defined and/or include assumptions that can't be validated e.g. Cantor Set Theory 'paradox' of whether the set of all sets which don't contain themselves contains itself or not is not a paradox-- the question assumes without proof that such a set exists.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality! Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant. Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory. The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy). Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality. Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality. Mind duality is dual to matter duality Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Duality creates reality.
The statements about "reaching the the other side" could be a more pinned down by explicitly using the topological terminology of continuity and smoothness. I'm also surprised there were no chicken jokes.
Crystal G / The infinity can never be achieved. So the stupid and erroneous explanation is this : "when it does achieve infinity then this goes to zero". Pure stupidity !
While perhaps not strictly within the scope of this channel, hearing your thoughts and commentary on the technological singularity that you touched on in this video would be really interesting!
@@phandinhthanh2295 OK, but if the probe entering the black hole was deploying an antenna long enough to stick out of the event horizon, shouldn't be able to send the pictures to an orbiter?
@@Reth_Hard no, the crazy gravitational force of the black hole will crumble any antenna, bone, metal, ... I think the whole black hole subject is just a waste of time.
@@SabineHossenfelder hello I am 12 years old and my dream is to be an astrophysicist and solve the quantum gravity theory, but please can you answer me this question please !!!!!!! If graviton boson really exist, can it develop string theory/loop quantum gravity and can this boson complete the general relativity or there will be a new theory????? And Thank you🌷
Only on the surface deep within you "interact" with everyone instantaneously! At a fundamental state or level there is no seperation what so ever! You are one with all that is!
As we learned, you are only a "single" singularity if all possible paths would have let there and if there's no escape out of it. So I hope (I'm sure) you aren't.
As far as we know, couldn't we describe leptons, especially electrons as point singularities? Their interactions may be cloaked in virtual pairs in electrodynamics but they are currently described as points.
On singularities and/or wormholes. The question I would ask is; Why use the same formula for the space time field as mass, if they are for all intents and purposes two unique things, that are simply related. Why should the action of 'one thing' be identical to the actions of another 'different thing' ? If that were to hold true, you would only have a different perspective of 'one' thing anyway. With such, you are basically projecting a mathematical model onto something it may not fit and was never meant to fit. Perspective matters (Mass = Spacetime is not the same as Mass != Spacetime). Standing behind someone/something describing a scene before them that you can not see, is not the same as stepping to one side and seeing an alternative perspective for yourself. Especially when viewing the same scene from a different angle.
its the moment in chaotic system where we lose the ability to keep it in keep the system inside some parameters. Which is just another way to state the more understandable reality: this side of point in time we can take certain actions, and after that point we lose that ability, so the system becomes possibly unpredictable and at least in steerable. Which sounds super dramatic, until you realise that similar singularity is between running and jumping. Really the singularity is not the interesting point alone. It is the absence of known landing that makes it scary. There could be a technological singularity where computers can better themselves yet we can still control them. Or a where we regain control after some time has passed. Maybe the computers at first can improve themselves faster than humans, but later humans increase their speed faster then computers, catching up again.
Excellent video! Just one point: the function f(x)=e^(-1/×^2) has a removable singularity at 0 (for real x) since we can define f (0)=0 to preserve continuity. The singularity of sin (1/x) is essential since its values come arbitrarily close to every real number between -1 and 1 infinitely often as x approaches 0 (more on singularities of different types on the new TH-cam channel infinity manifestations).
No, it still won't be continuous when you let x=ia, where i is the imaginary constant as you let a->0. Then f(x) gets infinitely large. Usually we are thinking about complex functions when talking about singularities. There's a theorem that around an essential singularity, the function takes on almost every possible value in a neighborhood of the singularity, the Big Picard theorem.
What I like of the few of the lectures I heard of you, is that you're doing "unpretentious science". I'm not sure that I'm translating correctly the French expression "sans pretention" but this is positive. How come don't we hear a language like yours in popular science? You debunk these sci-fi buzzwords, to honestly say what science can and can't say yet. It seems that when some physicists go to public medias, they like to make things more mysterious to attract public attention. This is the difference between choosing being popular and choosing to talk plainly true. You prove wrong those who say that we can't make things understandable without hiding the inconvenient details. Kudos!
What I like of your lectures is "unpretentious science". I'm not sure that I'm translating correctly the french expression "sans pretention" but this is positive. How come don't we hear a language like your's in popular science? You debunk these sci-fi buzzwords, to honestly say what science can and can't say yet. It seems that when some physicists go to public medias, they like to make things more mysterious to attract public attention. This is the difference between choosing being popular and choosing to talk plainly true. You prove wrong those who say that we can't make things understandable without hiding the inconvenient details. Kudos!
“Singularity is a point beyond which prediction is not possible.” So, I would define children between 2 years and 4 years as singularity. Right now I have the proof of it in the form of my 2 years old grandson! Wishing you a Merry Christmas!💐🧀
I would've also mentioned that singularities are present in Newtonian mechanics: gravitational potential of a point particle with mass. It's another way of seeing that you don't need fancy physics to encounter that.
Just as there is a maximum spacetime speed of light I respectfully suggest that there is also a minimum not equal to zero. Further, my work leads me to posit that the lowest possible speed is the square root of the photon coupling constant alpha in meter/second units. This leads directly into the static magnetic field and quantum gravitation.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality! Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant. Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory. The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy). Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality. Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality. Mind duality is dual to matter duality Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Duality creates reality.
@@spiritualanarchist8162 Well said. "The spice extends life and expands consciousness, the spice is vital for space travel." The Janus point -- check out the new book by physicist Julian Barbour, the big bang is a duality. Anti-particles go backwards in time at the big bang -- Richard Feynman. The conservation of duality (energy) will be know as the 5th law of thermodynamics. Energy is duality, duality is energy. "I have foreseen this" -- Lord Sidious
Thank you Sabine, in a very real way you've shown me the viability of the idea that below the event horizon may in fact exist a dense form of neutronium consisting of higher quark count barrions. I.E. Pentaquarks, Septaquarks, Nanaquarks, etc. Which if you follow this idea to its logical conclusion would seem to indicate that the event we call the big bang may have been the point at which such material was no longer able to withstand the crush of gravity. And in that instant imploded down to the size of a single plank only to rebound as spacetime would no longer have the presence of mass which caused it compress to the point of a black hole. And in this rebounding, if we think of it as the elasticity of spacetime snapping back as would a bungee cord that's been stretched to its limit. Then perhaps we can thus define dark energy, etc as a consequence of the big bang event.
Although I don't understand everything Sabine says, she makes much more sense and appears much more trustworthy, than any of our current politicians. 🙂
Well that might be because the education on how the political system works or how economic theory works is pretty poor in schools. Not to mention the related field of philosophy and the subset if or morality that goes along with it. And even then I see that is actually hard to get people to educate themselves on this matters. Being someone that has a politically related mission. It is pretty hard to get people to sign up to just learn the basics. (And that was before Covid-19) It is easy to blame the politicians, but most of us here have elected representatives and should really blame our selves more. That is not to say the system is not broke. In most countries there are issues with how politics are conducted. But is very few who to change that system for the better. And if you live in a democracy then is partly on you do help make that change.
im barely literate in algebra and graduated 20 years ago so i escaped any kind of advanced maths but im singularly intrigued by sabine and her explanations of things which are all around us yet invisible. she kind of reminds me of feinman with that. such a great teacher. maybe id have done better if i had her back then.
@@SabineHossenfelder True, but I meant in a technological sense, our ability to stop it progressing crosses a horizon and no matter how much fuel we burn, there is no escaping the inevitable slide towards the singularity where we will cease to exist. Doesn't matter, semantics really.. thanks for the reply :)
@@fieldo85 That is true for any non-trivial technological innovation. Just think of agriculture: can you go back for there? The horse stirrup? The clock? ....
@@drrtfm Not really. We could still return to surviving without agriculture (with a reduced population), as humans did for 200k years. We go without horse stirrups now and we don't actually need clocks for survival either, as our past shows.
@@fieldo85 "We could still return to surviving without agriculture (with a reduced population)," Ummm, no, we couldn't because you see (a) people don't know how to do that any more; and (b) that mass population that you need to eliminate tends not to go quietly. In point of fact, the idea that "we cannot go back" is precisely the fact that to go back _requires_ mass death. We go without horse stirrups because we have invented yet further technology. The point is: it couldn't be put back and hidden away, and it changed the face of Europe for a millennium. As for clocks, stop showing up for meetings and see just how far that gets you. Fail to pay your mortgage on time and see how far that gets you. Heck, you are currently using a device that depends on extremely precise clocks.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality! Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant. Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory. The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy). Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality. Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality. Mind duality is dual to matter duality Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Duality creates reality.
"There's nothing particularly interesting happening at the horizon, it's just the boundary beyond which you cannot get out." I think if I was in that situation I would find it of massive interest to me tbh. So interesting, in fact, that it would be pretty much all I could think about, although not for very long as then I would soon expire.
Horizon is just like a point of no return in a trip where you can't go back home because you spent more gas than what you need to return and there's no refueling stations.
Actually if you get this close, its already over for you. Besides radiation, you would need excessive accelation to get away from there squishing you instantly. The closest safe flyby you can get is above 1.5 times that radius.
I would love to see a video about the twins paradox. I know there are a lot of those out there, but many do not sound satisfactory, and your view is always interesting to see
@@tomashull9805 who says it is out of nothing? We just don't know, because we do not have information from "before" the big bang. But that doesn't mean it came out of nothing.
Self similarity (fractals) or equivalence (homotopy) = duality. The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality! Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant. Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory. The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein. Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry. Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy). Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual. Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual. Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality. Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant. The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas. Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes. Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality. Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality. Mind duality is dual to matter duality Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein. Dark energy is dual to dark matter. "Always two there are" -- Yoda. Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality). Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics! Duality creates reality.
Thank you Sabine! I had not realized the true nature of an essential singularity before. I'll have to develop this further, but for now I'd like to postulate that the way physical spacetime maps to a spacelike cross section of a mathematical 4D manifold is maximally discontinuous in the sense that you can use all the information available from the past light cone of any point to define its position in its corresponding cross section but you then have no way of extending beyond that point to its neighbors without bringing in information from outside said light cone, the mapping being only well-defined at the point itself and any points contained within its past light cone. A true snapshot of the universe would then be a set of distinct points without an overall topology, 3D or otherwise. And now I have a name to use for the reason and a way to attack the math.
Awesome stuff! I'm fed up with generic "analogies" from fancy TH-camrs like physics girl or other tech channels. By "using simple words to ease the understanding for viewers" they just hide their own total lack of it. This channel is a fresh breathe of air. At once there's a competent physics TH-camr. Thank you!
Hi Sci Fry, I don't think they do friend which is why Sabine was at pains to point out the difference between Mathematics and Physics- her water drip being a great example. Or were you meaning more generally? I would be interested to know whether you think there is another logical system that could be used to represent nature rendering it predictable, within limits ofc:), and comprehensible. Do you think numbers are a "natural" part of the universe or simply a subjective human construct due to our evolutionary development or a bit of both? Do you think we have reached the end of Physics being able to use Maths to describe aspects of our universe? I would be very interested to hear your opinion:) As a post-grad Social Science student, who thinks Cultural Studies etc belong in music magazines not Universities, my maths stops at Stats but if you suggest human experience is better represented in Poetry I couldn't agree with you more but that is because I am a bit dim and in awe of Donna Stonecipher and her poem "Model CIty" which I heartily recommend to you. Regards, M TAX THE RICH
Always amazing insight and explanations! As time slows to almost a stop at the center of a black hole, matter becomes trapped in yesteryear creating a seemingly bottomless "Time well" similar to the example here but the bottom of the well is far in the past and pinches off very gradually instead. Time Factor Theory Channel
THE HAWKING-PENROSE THEOREM: No space-time (M, g) can simultaneously satisfy the following conditions: 1. M does not contain closed time curves; 2. All causal geodesic inextensible in M contains a pair of conjugated points; 3. There is a prisoner set in the future, or in the past, S (contained) M
Energy-mass stress metrics blow spacially at the origin just as the time scale blow at the event horizon in the black holes. Thank you very much Sabine for such inspiring videos.
@@bahadrartay4666 inspiration, aspiration and perspiration pave the way to the reality.. It took Prof. Kip Thorn 40 years to prove the gravitational waves...
Professor, you are a wonderful lecturer. Brilliant video! I have used the sinx function in spectrum analysis. It's an interesting and practical maths function.
I really need to pursue Ph.D. in Quantum Mechanics under your Guidance, even though I do not have much background in physics still our vibe and thought processes match for example just after reading the title (Are singularities real ?) I somehow chose to divide water droplets and got it.
For several years now, as an amateur viewer of anything related to phsyics, I have been wondering if there is a minimum possible resolution, like a planck-length, which would prevent singularity and anything "infinite". It would just be an astoundingly large (or small) number to define in human terms. But why should this be something to fear? We already need an astoundingly high-number to define the total mass/energy of our universe (which we can't do accurately as we don't know what's beyond the observable universe, but still!). So astoundingly high or small numbers should feel perfectly "natural", and there should be terms to define them as well. And this opens a question, that I feel if answered, may provide some answers to the expansion of the universe. Imagine a theoretical minimum possible resolution for our universe, a pixel, per se. Nothing smaller than a pixel, and nothing can exist between one pixel and the other. Now imagine a theoretical particle that is exactly 1 pixels in size. (Remember, nothing can be 1.2 pixels, it can only be a multiplicative of 1 pixel). How exactly can this particle preserve its "information" as it dissappears from one pixel and emerges on the other? Would it disappear first, and then emerge on the next pixel (use the field theory explanations if you need to), or does it make a copy first in the neighboring pixel, and then the original disappears? And there's also the problem with simple diagonals as per the Pythegorian calculation. Imagine 4 1-pixel sized particles arranged in a 2x2 configuration. What's the distance between the diagonally neighboring particles? Can it really be square root 2? Since no interaction can take place in distances smaller than 1 pixel in such a universe, every interaction also has to happen in distances that are multiplicatives of 1 pixel. So pixels that are mathemtaically square root 2 distance from each other, the diagonally neighboring ones in this case, can never interact. Which can't be true? The only real way such particles can interact or exist or make up a universe, is either by mandatorily being larger than 1 pixels (which is very arbitrary), or by being defined as a wave function that can spread over some radius of pixels, a-la quantum waves. This function is simply a distribution of values on a lattice of pixels with a radius, where each pixel inside this area is attributed a value that corresponds to the probability of that particle being in that particular pixel. Singularity in a unvierse defined as such woulds imply be perfectly defined single-pixel with all the wave information, ie the pixel can't be anywhere else, resulting in a single pixel particle despite being impossible under normal curvatures. But this time it's not a problem, because the wave function of the singularity itself doesn't extend beyond the pixel, and thus it can't interact with it's neighbors anyway. (the square root distance problem doesn't exist for the singurity) But it's neighbors, the pixels just next to the singularity point, still have some degree of freedom in their wave-function definition, leading to some values being placed on the singularity pixel, which eventually leads them towards the singularity anwyay. It can really be as simple as nonograms.
My faforite singularity appears in nature: As a lover of midnight sun, it is sufficient to stay in the north of Sweden in mid-June. But with autumn approaching, one has to move further and further towards the north pole. When the equinox has come, one has to board an airplane (lets assume that this is technically possible) and fly around half of the world to the south pole. There one can continue the northerly journey and arrive at the very end of Antarctica in mid december.
I was hoping you'd talk about 'naked singularities' and explain why they are not theoretically possible. I was having a debate (for want of a better word) with someone yesterday who thinks that something can be "theoretically possible" because "the mathematics are solid" while still being "not possible in nature", and I was at a loss to explain how that simply isn't true.
Well, depends on what you mean by "theoretically possible". Naked singularities exist in the mathematics of General Relativity. Whether they are real, no one really knows. The problem is, if they exist, they'd be hard to tell apart from black holes. It's actually a quite interesting topic. I'll put this on the list, thanks for the suggestion!
@@SabineHossenfelder AFAIK the only way to achieve a naked singularity, even on paper, is to assume multiple (>3) spatial dimensions, or to ignore upper limits of charge and other quantities, such that given the known laws of physics they are not possible, either theoretically, hypothetically or otherwise. Of course, you could very well imagine a 5-dimensional universe in which they are theoretically possible, but that's not the Universe we find ourselves in! Thanks for the reply, Sabine. I look forward to the video. 👍
@@eljcd Thanks for the link. I read a similar article about anti-de Sitter space naked singularities last night, and other 'toy universe' ideas that shoehorn naked singularities into existence, but they all conclude for one reason or another that they're not possible. To be honest, I was hoping to find something that says they _are_ possible, and in this Universe, as I've never read anything that says that. Unfortunately, the person I was -debating- _arguing_ with was more interested in personal attacks than providing a link.
This is mathematical mysticism. Actually, mathematics has nothing to do with reality, then to possibility. They are only accounting of fictive relations, as a particular case these relations can be about physical objects. We can count the fingers, but we can't mathematically define what is a finger.
From an engineering point of view, quite refreshing. A map (mathematical model) does not equal the terrain. When a description is called a "theory" or a "map" it implies it MAY be somehow limited. A jolly good theory, that nobody can deny.
This is the singular-most interesting video on singularities I've seen in awhile. Thanks Sabine!
So you like science fiction? Me too.
@@area51z63 what is that supposed to mean?
@@gentlyschannel4193 What do you think it means?
@@area51z63 that you're in the wrong place, the tinfoil hat stuff is in isle 9
@@gentlyschannel4193 Think less, know more.
I like the way how calm she said “You will die before you reach the singularity.”
There's levels to this 😂
Because she is a professional.
The spirit soul, the true self, is eternal.
@@rajarsi6438 define those things in a meaningful way and demonstrate them to be "eternal". If you can't then why should anyone care what you say?
that's germanly practical ! 👌
I love this lady. No bias. No agenda. No preconceived notions. Just straight data and science.
her advertising could be considered an agenda though
Crazy how in 8 mins, you explain this stuff more clearly than hour long lectures
THE CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION OF WHAT IS THE MOON AND OF FALLING OBJECTS (AND THE FALLING MAN), AS E=MC2 IS CLEARLY PROVEN TO BE F=MA:
Think about the BALANCE of BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE. Consider what is the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE AND what is the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE IN BALANCE. So, consider the man who IS standing on what is the Earth/ground. Touch AND feeling BLEND, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE. The EARTH/ground CLEARLY proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 IS F=ma. Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. Notice the black space of THE EYE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. Now, carefully consider what is the semi-spherical, translucent, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE SKY. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. SO, gravity AND ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy are linked AND BALANCED opposites. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND, DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Accordingly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The Sun is E=mc2 AND F=ma. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. So, E=mc2 AS F=ma clearly requires and involves invisible AND VISIBLE SPACE in fundamental equilibrium AND BALANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. (The EARTH is ALSO BLUE, as it CLEARLY proves ON BALANCE that E=mc2 is F=ma.) ACCORDINGLY, the MIDDLE DISTANCE in/of SPACE AND the FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE are NECESSARILY LINKED and BALANCED; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Therefore, INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. THE EYE is the body ON BALANCE, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. INDEED, the balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential. (BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.) SO, objects (including what is the falling man) fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course); as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; as E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Therefore, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON necessarily matches it's revolution; as E=mc2 IS F=ma. "Mass"/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. The Earth AND the Sun are linked AND BALANCED opposites, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Great. Therefore, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON NECESSARILY matches it's revolution. Great. E=mc2 IS CLEARLY proven to be F=ma !!!! The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. GREAT !!!!! The EARTH and the Sun constitute and comprise the MIDDLE AND THE FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE (IN BALANCE) in full and BALANCED compliance and conformity with the CLEAR and universal fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Great !!!!!! Hence, it is CLEARLY proven, in fact, that the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON NECESSARILY matches it's revolution. Great. Obviously, what is THE MOON is subject to and constitutive of both E=mc2 AND F=ma. E=mc2 IS CLEARLY proven to be F=ma. "Mass"/energy involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma.
The following constitutes even further proof of the fact that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Very importantly, in dream experience, BODILY/VISUAL EXPERIENCE is invisible AND VISIBLE IN BALANCE. Dream experience is/involves true/real QUANTUM GRAVITY, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity; as E=mc2 IS F=ma.
By Frank DiMeglio
Hossenfelder is knowingly and deceitfully lying about physics.
@@frankdimeglio8216 Without explanation, and with no examples, this comment is worthless.
THE QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL UNIFICATION OF PHYSICS/PHYSICAL EXPERIENCE:
"Mass"/ENERGY is necessarily gravitational/electromagnetic (IN BALANCE) in conjunction with INSTANTANEITY AND the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE, as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Very importantly, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Accordingly, the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON necessarily matches it's revolution; as gravity is ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. The Sun, the Moon, AND WHAT IS THE EARTH are thus CLEARLY representative of the fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma. Indeed, the stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky.
By Frank DiMeglio
@@stevenk-brooks6852 WHY AND HOW E=MC2 IS F=MA, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY:
Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves ON BALANCE that ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity, as E=mc2 IS F=ma. This NECESSARILY represents, INVOLVES, AND DESCRIBES what is possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE. Ultimately and truly, TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual IN BALANCE; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY.
OVERLAY what is THE EYE in BALANCED RELATION to/WITH what is THE EARTH. Notice the black space of THE EYE. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. Now, carefully consider what is the semi-spherical, translucent, QUANTUM GRAVITATIONAL, AND BLUE SKY. Great. E=mc2 IS F=ma. It is CLEAR.
Time DILATION ULTIMATELY proves (ON BALANCE) that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Gravity/acceleration involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. A PHOTON may be placed at the center of what is THE SUN (as A POINT, of course), AS the reduction of SPACE is offset by (or BALANCED with) the speed of light; as E=mc2 IS F=ma; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The stars AND PLANETS are POINTS in the night sky. The EARTH and the Sun constitute and comprise the MIDDLE AND THE FULL DISTANCE in/of SPACE (IN BALANCE) in full and BALANCED compliance and conformity with the CLEAR and universal fact that E=mc2 IS F=ma, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. Great !!!!!! Hence, it is CLEARLY proven, in fact, that the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON NECESSARILY matches it's revolution. Great. Obviously, what is THE MOON is subject to and constitutive of both E=mc2 AND F=ma. E=mc2 IS CLEARLY proven to be F=ma. "Mass"/energy involves BALANCED inertia/INERTIAL RESISTANCE consistent with/as what is BALANCED electromagnetic/gravitational force/ENERGY, AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. This CLEARLY explains why objects fall at the SAME RATE (neglecting air resistance, of course), AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is gravity. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy. THE EARTH is ALSO F=ma AS E=mc2. The Sun is both F=ma AND E=mc2. The BLUE SKY is E=mc2 AND F=ma. What is THE MOON is NECESSARILY F=ma AS E=mc2. THINK. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense. (BALANCE and completeness go hand in hand.) VERY IMPORTANTLY, outer "space" involves full inertia; AND it is fully invisible AND black. Great !!! INSTANTANEITY is thus FUNDAMENTAL to what is the FULL and proper UNDERSTANDING of physics/physical experience, AS E=mc2 IS F=ma; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY. The INTEGRATED EXTENSIVENESS of THOUGHT (AND description) is improved in the truly superior mind. (THOUGHTS ARE INVISIBLE.) GREAT.
THE DOME of a person's EYE is ALSO VISIBLE. The balance of being AND EXPERIENCE is essential. The EARTH is ALSO BLUE (as water). Alas, the ULTIMATE unification of physics/physical experience combines, BALANCES, AND INCLUDES opposites; as ELECTROMAGNETISM/ENERGY IS GRAVITY; AS E=mc2 IS F=ma. Gravity IS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy.
By Frank DiMeglio
Thank you Sabine, I enjoyed this a lot. I find I have to really concentrate to understand this, and I still miss some of it, but it's a pure joy to listen to someone who really knows what they're talking about, and can express it so clearly. I now find that, at 71, I can still learn. This is a good thing! Thanks again.
I'vevalways been troubled by physicists talking about the black hole singularity seemingly being real. They never differentiate between the mathematical singularity and what really is at the center of a black hole.
A neutron star has volume so why wouldn't a black hole have volume at its center. Well the answer comes back, "because the math says so". And while you say we don't know because we can't observe whats inside a black hole, my mind cannot conceive of nothing at its canter. The black hole consumes mass, so there must be mass there, and must have volume.
I realize I am trying to visualize something the we can't definatevly know. But its one of those things that hurts this amateur scientists brain.
Thank you Sabine for teaching us to question the status quo. Your videos often show me another perspective, in addition to probing deeper into topics than most science videos on youtube. You are a credit to your profession.
Speculation abound in physics until you get Lost in Math...
I love how you explain physics without trying to amplify the gee-wiz factor. It's refreshing to see a scientist that doesn't worship science.
I remain skeptical on the possibility of a singularity being discovered in nature , and if it were, I'd look very closely at the instrument of measure. Great video as always Sabine.
You are using that singularity right now. A true singularity in nature would also be infinity at the same time
@@brandonwilliams3788 An erection is a singularity that hopes for a big bang ... but sadly infinity is not part of the equation.
One could argue "Now" in the time axis is a singularity since it's impossible to go the other direction, no?
2:57 Fun fact: It is only really understandable in complex analysis (complex as in complex numbers), why this type of singularity is called an "essential singularity". In the real numbers, the function can be continued pretty smoothly (continuously, differentiably, ...), but if one allows z to be a complex number, then in any arbitrarily small circle around 0 (minus the 0, which can not be inserted into the function), the function exp(-1/z^2) takes on every complex value with the exception of possibly one complex number according to the "Great Picard Theorem". So it really goes crazy. On the other hand, the function (exp(z) - 1) / z has a "removable singularity" in 0, it can be continued to a complex differentiable function (also called holomorphic), because (exp(z) - 1) / z = (1 + z + z^2/2 + ... - 1)/z = (z + z^2/2 + ...)/z = 1 + z/2 + ... which tends to 1 as z approaches 0.
Whenever I encounter a singularity, I assume it's holomorphic and integrate around it. Problem solved!
Isn't that tantamount to assuming that it doesn't have a singularity?
@@TheReaverOfDarkness it's been a really long time since I did this in college, but it's not that you assume the singularity doesn't exist, it's rather that you are able to compute physically meaningful values even though you are operating over singularities. I'm an EE, and there you have the problem that a simple electron already is a singularity (because the electric field is infinite where the electron is). However, the electric field is holomorphic, and thus you can use "analytic continuation" to still integrate over it and get meaningful results.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality!
Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant.
Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory.
The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein.
Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry.
Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy).
Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual.
Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual.
Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes.
Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality.
Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality.
Mind duality is dual to matter duality
Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
Dark energy is dual to dark matter.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Duality creates reality.
@@hyperduality2838 this is too simplified. matter and energy cannot exist without the space. 2D space cannot exist without 3D. Everything is three, not two.
@@SamGarcia Duality is more fundamental than triality.
Space is dual to time -- Einstein or 4 dimensions.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time Hegelian dialectic.
Hegel's cat: Alive (thesis, being) is dual to not alive (anti-thesis, non-being) -- Schrodinger's cat.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming Plato's cat.
Absolute truth is dual to relative truth -- Hume's fork.
Reality or the universe is actually a Janus point/singularity.
Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time duality.
The future is dual to the past -- time duality.
My absolute time is your relative time and your absolute time is my relative time -- time duality.
Time and space are both dual concepts.
Left is dual to right, up is dual to down, in is dual to out -- space duality.
Length, distance or space is defined by two dual points -- space duality.
Space duality is dual to time duality.
Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle.
There is a dual process to that of increasing entropy namely syntropy (prediction).
"Through imagination and reason we turn experience into foresight (prediction)" -- Spinoza describing Syntropy.
Thinking and having thoughts is a syntropic process and rational thinking leads to optimized predictions -- syntropy.
Teleological physics (syntropy) is dual to non-teleological physics (entropy).
Space/time is synthetic a priori knowledge according to Immanuel Kant -- The Critique of Pure Reason.
Sabine, thank you for making the world a smarter place! Excellent video as always
I like that she explains things in such a way, that we can actually understand them. It's like she's not trying to waste our time.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality!
Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant.
Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory.
The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein.
Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry.
Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy).
Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual.
Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual.
Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes.
Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality.
Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality.
Mind duality is dual to matter duality
Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
Dark energy is dual to dark matter.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Duality creates reality.
@@hyperduality2838 There is a reality deeper than duality and that projects the duality!
There is a "quantum leap" between the two which cannot be understood ( ever) by any human mind.( now that's difficult to rap ones mind around)
@@erikparent8176 Stereographic projection is duality!
Noumenal (rational, analytic) is dual to phenomenal (empirical, synthetic) -- Immanuel Kant.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
Thesis is dual to anti-thesis creates converging thesis or synthesis -- the time independent Hegelian dialectic.
Being is dual to non-being creates becoming -- Plato.
Projection (mathematics) is prediction (syntropy) in physics.
I would tend to disagree with you as I discovered the 4th & 5th laws of thermodynamics:-
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law.
The conservation of duality (energy) is the 5th law, energy is duality, duality is energy.
Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein
Space is dual to time -- Einstein.
Certainty is dual to uncertainty -- the Heisenberg certainty/uncertainty principle.
The deeper reality is duality in physics.
The big bang is a Janus point (two faces).
The "quantum leap" is the mind duality of Immanuel Kant and also Thomas Aquinas!
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- the mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Dark energy is dual to dark matter -- The mind/soul or the Janus point.
Percepts project into concepts and concepts project into percepts, Immanuel Kant understood this -- stereographic projection (spinors).
@@hyperduality2838 I diverge from Kant's Noumenon in that the deeper reality cannot be labled "The thing in itself" or "object"
I'm more in line with Buddhists "no thing"
Kant is working in the right direction but lables Noumenon as a concept.
@@erikparent8176 Yes I agree with you but there is still a dual pattern at work here which many people do not accept especially physicists. This dual pattern leads to the idea/concept of a 4th law of thermodynamics because you can ask the question what is dual to entropy?
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics.
The observer is dual to observed -- David Bohm, physicist.
Syntropy is rational, noumenal (mind).
Entropy is empirical, phenomenal, (matter, physics).
There is a dual pattern through out Kant's metaphysics which I was not aware of until I started to read his books. Philosophy is not encouraged in physics.
"Philosophy is dead" -- Stephen Hawking.
If you ignore philosophy you have a "dark age" in physics!
Incredible clarity of thought. Thank you Sabine !!
Brilliantly explained. I wish I had teachers like you when I was in school. Thanks Sabine. It is not too late for me to understand the concepts.
So you think that you learned something. OK detail what you learned?
I was updating TH-cam application in Google Play while watching this video. At 5:29 the screen went black and the application restarted. For a while, I was genuinely thinking that this is some kind of intended illustration of what happens in singularity. The speech was perfectly aligned: "There's just ". Just wanted to share to you all... 😀
That just made my day.
At the same time that the screen went dark you realise it was just a little black thing in a colorful and alive universe.
A pleasure to watch, as always.
Dr. Hossenfelder, many thanks for this video, and indeed all of your videos. They introduce me to aspects of the universe I had little idea of. I am in my 8th decade so your career should last long after I have passed away. May I wish you all success in your researches.
Happy you find my videos of interest!
@@SabineHossenfelder Dear Sabine, I hope you will talk about different kind of singularity as popularized by Ray Kurzweil (Google's engineering director)...
Hi Sabine ,I will put it down to coinesidence that you chose to do Singularities this week because last week you covered infinity.I'm glad you chose to cover this topic this week see next post ,I enjoy your videos very much as they really challenge my theoritical work.
I love your videos since they are so professional.
"if you reach the singularity, that's just the end there is no more space or time beyond this, just ... nothing"
this statement really sums up my observation that ever deeper gravity wells taking a simple hydrogen atom through the periodic table of elements (until we get to the fabeled black hole) are the great matter recyclers.
What do you have at a singularity? Pure potential. It's like a universe ready to go big bang. It's matter's return to a pure energy state by having all the space time squeezed out of it.
Excellente! There's so much good stuff to think about here.
I'm glad I found this channel, incredible descriptions of interesting topics and editing sprinkled with some comedy here and there, it's fantastic thank you so much.
I’m so ready for this
Simple, quick and clear explanation about singularities. Thanks!
"Open the U-tube app HAL"..."Sorry Johnny I cannot do that...."
Video by video,knowledge expands...Thank you Sabine
Wishing you a very merry Christmas and a happy new year in advance Sabine 🎉☄️✨💫
Same to you!!
@@SabineHossenfelder I didn't know atheists, like Sabine, celebrate Christmas ? It's kind of hypocritical to pick and choose beliefs....
@@tomashull9805 She probably doesn't "celebrate" it, a greeting is not celebration. Most people actually don't, other than eating yourself fat and visiting family. Also most "atheists" are actually agnostic, they just don't know what "atheism" actually is; although Sabine probably does and might be a real atheist (that is do not believe in God).
@@tomashull9805 I mean Christmas comes from the Roman celebration of Saturnalia, which basically celebrates the Winter Solstice: the rebirth of the sun. They changed it to mean Jesus’ Birthday after the Romans shifted to Catholic religion, just to please people and keep celebrating their pagan holidays. If it’s historically a pagan party, I don’t see why Christians should celebrate it either. In the end I think anyone who wants to should celebrate the holiday, either for religious reasons or just to gather with their family and celebrate being together.
I celebrate George Washington's birthday and I'm not George Washington, so...
In my experience (Physics professor), many if not most physicists consider their models more real than "reality" (nature). This is because of the incredible accuracy of physics models.
Sabine, I have a question that has always interested me. When you look through a magnifying lens and hold it at a distance the image flips. Does this not mean that the light at some point becomes a singularity? For it to flip it must go through a point of nothing, neither the right way up or inverted. This to me is exactly what happens in the explanation of a black hole. To me it seams impossible but it must happen somewhere in its journey.
Orange Manstan, interesting. Let me know when you've got proof... It seems that the water droplet analogy applies, that is, if photons exist as discreet particles. Wouldn't individual photons need to also be shrunkteded to a singularity and also share space with other photons? Space that is also required to shrinktenen itself into a singularity? Hhhmmm.. 🤔 "Houston, we h....."
@@johnlshilling1446 I'm no scientists unfortunately but it's just something that's always baffled me. As for the image to reverse there has to be a point in time when there is nothing there because if there wasn't you would be able to magnify to a point when it is either one or the other way up, so in my mind the light must become a singularity. I'd love for someone like Sabine to explain if this is the case. This to me is here on earth and open for research but I'm probably barking up the wrong tree 😁
@@OrangeManStan Me, too. I'm nowhere near being a scientist, either. It is an interesting observation. I would love to have my thoughts analyzed and rejected, as long as my mutilation was described in a way that I could understand...
Oh, that cut to black holes! It hurt my soul deeply and scared me for life. I see you (your editor?) have a peculiar sense of humor.
No, I just suck at cutting footage. But do not despair, as of early 2021, I'll be handing over to someone who knows what he's doing.
@@SabineHossenfelder I am deeply grateful indeed.
Sie könnten ja Alpha Centauri wieder aufleben lassen.
Toller Kontent 👍😀
Thank you! I have been thinking about singularities for the last hour and this put a lot of things in place for me. Great video!
The First Rule of Black Holes: When in one, yo dead.
I'd like to die like that...Would be cool to know that eventually i'll reach the singularity if it exists
Unless it is a rotating one.
Unless it's Interstellar.
But how can you be dead if nothing can escape the singularity (including your soul)?
@@Bit-while_going No such thing as a 'soul'.
So fortunate to have learned about this woman, even if only recently. Sabine, you are amazing! I am watching your videos regularly and enjoy every one. Thank you!
@5:15 "You die and tidal forces rip you to pieces..." imagine if Dr Sabine was a medical doctor and had to deliver bad news to a patient...
She talks tough but is only an ignorant & fearful girlie.
thanks for taking the time, to present numerous topics
Sabine, a light in the dark.
Perturbation in the aether.
> Not unlike Galadriel (8)
@@v2ike6udik she's bloomin' luminiferous!
Great video.
In my humble opinion, so-called paradoxes like zero-size singularities are simply an indication that the theory/mathematics is no longer applicable.
In mathematics, if a function y=1/x is inapplicable at x=0we say the function y is not defined at x, *even if trying to define what division by zero is.* We can only say it isn't defined.
I think that similarly, even if we try to define a physical black hole singularity, we can only say that the singularity is not defined.
The mathematics leads to a limit of zero, but of course a limit is beyond reach: we could say that a physical singularity is arbitrarily small, but that description is not an identity or definition-- it's still not defined.
Similarly, all 'paradoxes' are simply questions whose answer is not defined and/or include assumptions that can't be validated e.g. Cantor Set Theory 'paradox' of whether the set of all sets which don't contain themselves contains itself or not is not a paradox-- the question assumes without proof that such a set exists.
In a nutshell:
"Are Singularities Real?"
"Well we have not found singularities in nature, but... who knows?". THE END.
We are in the natural singularity. This is what a true singularity looks like
Best, more balanced discussion of singularities I’ve read. Thank you very much.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality!
Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant.
Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory.
The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein.
Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry.
Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy).
Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual.
Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual.
Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes.
Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality.
Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality.
Mind duality is dual to matter duality
Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
Dark energy is dual to dark matter.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Duality creates reality.
The statements about "reaching the the other side" could be a more pinned down by explicitly using the topological terminology of continuity and smoothness. I'm also surprised there were no chicken jokes.
If the value of the function becomes infinitely large does infinity exist or not?
Crystal G / The infinity can never be achieved. So the stupid and erroneous explanation is this : "when it does achieve infinity then this goes to zero".
Pure stupidity !
@@mikel4879 Right! Clear as mud! Gotta love the mental "exercise" i.e. gymnastics.
While perhaps not strictly within the scope of this channel, hearing your thoughts and commentary on the technological singularity that you touched on in this video would be really interesting!
I thought if you fell into a singularity of a black hole you would enter the fifth dimension of love and travel back in time to see your loved ones.
Haha like in interstellar movie
Why aren't we just sending a probe inside a black hole and take pictures inside of it?
@@Reth_Hard bc nothing comes out of a black hole even EM wave.
@@phandinhthanh2295
OK, but if the probe entering the black hole was deploying an antenna long enough to stick out of the event horizon, shouldn't be able to send the pictures to an orbiter?
@@Reth_Hard no, the crazy gravitational force of the black hole will crumble any antenna, bone, metal, ... I think the whole black hole subject is just a waste of time.
smart and lovely. the world needs more Sabine.
Yes!
Really, really interesting! Thank you, Sabine! 😊
Merry Christmas and a fantastic new year! Keep Krampus away! 😊
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Merry Christmas to you too!
@@SabineHossenfelder hello I am 12 years old and my dream is to be an astrophysicist and solve the quantum gravity theory, but please can you answer me this question please !!!!!!! If graviton boson really exist, can it develop string theory/loop quantum gravity and can this boson complete the general relativity or there will be a new theory?????
And Thank you🌷
@@SabineHossenfelder please can you answer that question 🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷🌷
@@SabineHossenfelder th-cam.com/video/Ndr9l0YZ0A0/w-d-xo.html There, the end of science, the beginning of LOVE :*
The analogy with the drop of water is very useful. Thanks for the videos
I have been single for such a long time, I guess I’m currently a singularity.
Only on the surface deep within you "interact" with everyone instantaneously!
At a fundamental state or level there is no seperation what so ever!
You are one with all that is!
Yes, you are interacting gravitationally with everyone on the planet at this moment.
As we learned, you are only a "single" singularity if all possible paths would have let there and if there's no escape out of it. So I hope (I'm sure) you aren't.
As far as we know, couldn't we describe leptons, especially electrons as point singularities? Their interactions may be cloaked in virtual pairs in electrodynamics but they are currently described as points.
I was hoping you would cover this topic. 👍
On singularities and/or wormholes. The question I would ask is;
Why use the same formula for the space time field as mass, if they are for all intents and purposes two unique things, that are simply related.
Why should the action of 'one thing' be identical to the actions of another 'different thing' ?
If that were to hold true, you would only have a different perspective of 'one' thing anyway.
With such, you are basically projecting a mathematical model onto something it may not fit and was never meant to fit.
Perspective matters (Mass = Spacetime is not the same as Mass != Spacetime).
Standing behind someone/something describing a scene before them that you can not see, is not the same as stepping to one side and seeing an alternative perspective for yourself.
Especially when viewing the same scene from a different angle.
The so-called technological singularity is really more like an event horizon.
Nah. It's more like cashing in on a term made popular by something else.
I don't think so. Maths predicts exactly where spacetime leads upon crossing the event horizon. In a way that's the exact opposite of a singularity.
It's more like BS.
its the moment in chaotic system where we lose the ability to keep it in keep the system inside some parameters. Which is just another way to state the more understandable reality: this side of point in time we can take certain actions, and after that point we lose that ability, so the system becomes possibly unpredictable and at least in steerable.
Which sounds super dramatic, until you realise that similar singularity is between running and jumping.
Really the singularity is not the interesting point alone. It is the absence of known landing that makes it scary. There could be a technological singularity where computers can better themselves yet we can still control them. Or a where we regain control after some time has passed. Maybe the computers at first can improve themselves faster than humans, but later humans increase their speed faster then computers, catching up again.
No it+s just trivial.
Thank you for your videos. I learn alot. Keep up the great work
Excellent video! Just one point: the function f(x)=e^(-1/×^2) has a removable singularity at 0 (for real x) since we can define f (0)=0 to preserve continuity. The singularity of sin (1/x) is essential since its values come arbitrarily close to every real number between -1 and 1 infinitely often as x approaches 0 (more on singularities of different types on the new TH-cam channel infinity manifestations).
No, it still won't be continuous when you let x=ia, where i is the imaginary constant as you let a->0. Then f(x) gets infinitely large. Usually we are thinking about complex functions when talking about singularities. There's a theorem that around an essential singularity, the function takes on almost every possible value in a neighborhood of the singularity, the Big Picard theorem.
What I like of the few of the lectures I heard of you, is that you're doing "unpretentious science". I'm not sure that I'm translating correctly the French expression "sans pretention" but this is positive. How come don't we hear a language like yours in popular science? You debunk these sci-fi buzzwords, to honestly say what science can and can't say yet. It seems that when some physicists go to public medias, they like to make things more mysterious to attract public attention. This is the difference between choosing being popular and choosing to talk plainly true. You prove wrong those who say that we can't make things understandable without hiding the inconvenient details. Kudos!
I want to support your channel, but I'm already a member of Brilliant.
What I like of your lectures is "unpretentious science". I'm not sure that I'm translating correctly the french expression "sans pretention" but this is positive. How come don't we hear a language like your's in popular science? You debunk these sci-fi buzzwords, to honestly say what science can and can't say yet. It seems that when some physicists go to public medias, they like to make things more mysterious to attract public attention. This is the difference between choosing being popular and choosing to talk plainly true. You prove wrong those who say that we can't make things understandable without hiding the inconvenient details. Kudos!
“Singularity is a point beyond which prediction is not possible.” So, I would define children between 2 years and 4 years as singularity. Right now I have the proof of it in the form of my 2 years old grandson!
Wishing you a Merry Christmas!💐🧀
Thanks, Merry Christmas to you too! (Is this cheese?)
Yep. And teens become quantum particles. They colapse to a fixed state the moment you interact with them.
Brilliant information over the year thanks
4:40 sad Hawking noises
😂
I would've also mentioned that singularities are present in Newtonian mechanics: gravitational potential of a point particle with mass. It's another way of seeing that you don't need fancy physics to encounter that.
Love you my best physics professor! Loves from Brazil
Just as there is a maximum spacetime speed of light I respectfully suggest that there is also a minimum not equal to zero. Further, my work leads me to posit that the lowest possible speed is the square root of the photon coupling constant alpha in meter/second units. This leads directly into the static magnetic field and quantum gravitation.
There must be a singularity in my brain, a point at which nothing can pass through.
😂
@@johnm.v709 self promotion.. Gtfoh
Always so great and so clear about so hard topic!
When Sabine speaks minds are Relatively blown.
So take a seat, Steve. Oop, I see you brought your own.
@@feynstein1004 what’s with your voice? I can’t tell
@@canyadigit6274 You sound like Wall-E
@@joaoamaro1259 havin s** with a speak-n-spell
Thanks, Sabine!
You show me your singularity, and i show you my multiple worlds.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality!
Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant.
Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory.
The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein.
Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry.
Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy).
Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual.
Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual.
Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes.
Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality.
Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality.
Mind duality is dual to matter duality
Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
Dark energy is dual to dark matter.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Duality creates reality.
@@hyperduality2838 Indeed ! And let's not forget : 'He who controls the spice, controls the universe -The Kwistach Hadderach , Maud'dib
@@spiritualanarchist8162 Well said.
"The spice extends life and expands consciousness, the spice is vital for space travel."
The Janus point -- check out the new book by physicist Julian Barbour, the big bang is a duality.
Anti-particles go backwards in time at the big bang -- Richard Feynman.
The conservation of duality (energy) will be know as the 5th law of thermodynamics.
Energy is duality, duality is energy.
"I have foreseen this" -- Lord Sidious
@@hyperduality2838 'One must overcome duality to reach nirvana '- The Buddha.
'A singularity is the bottom of a black hole'...
- Mine 😉
@@hyperduality2838 P.S: I will check out the Januspoint. You convinced me !
Thank you Sabine, in a very real way you've shown me the viability of the idea that below the event horizon may in fact exist a dense form of neutronium consisting of higher quark count barrions. I.E. Pentaquarks, Septaquarks, Nanaquarks, etc. Which if you follow this idea to its logical conclusion would seem to indicate that the event we call the big bang may have been the point at which such material was no longer able to withstand the crush of gravity. And in that instant imploded down to the size of a single plank only to rebound as spacetime would no longer have the presence of mass which caused it compress to the point of a black hole. And in this rebounding, if we think of it as the elasticity of spacetime snapping back as would a bungee cord that's been stretched to its limit. Then perhaps we can thus define dark energy, etc as a consequence of the big bang event.
Although I don't understand everything Sabine says, she makes much more sense and appears much more trustworthy, than any of our current politicians. 🙂
Sabine for the world leader! I would vote!
That's a pretty broad statement. Is Angela Merkel included in that?
@@patrickfitzgerald2861
Have you seen the choice?
One hand would be enough to count them all. 😄
Well that might be because the education on how the political system works or how economic theory works is pretty poor in schools. Not to mention the related field of philosophy and the subset if or morality that goes along with it.
And even then I see that is actually hard to get people to educate themselves on this matters. Being someone that has a politically related mission. It is pretty hard to get people to sign up to just learn the basics. (And that was before Covid-19)
It is easy to blame the politicians, but most of us here have elected representatives and should really blame our selves more. That is not to say the system is not broke. In most countries there are issues with how politics are conducted. But is very few who to change that system for the better. And if you live in a democracy then is partly on you do help make that change.
@@Cythil
All true.
But I was being slightly facetious. 😉😄
im barely literate in algebra and graduated 20 years ago so i escaped any kind of advanced maths but im singularly intrigued by sabine and her explanations of things which are all around us yet invisible. she kind of reminds me of feinman with that. such a great teacher. maybe id have done better if i had her back then.
The technological singularity would probably be better described as a technological event horizon. Love your work Sabine. Thanks from Australia.
Isn't every moment a horizon in the sense that you can't return to an earlier time?
@@SabineHossenfelder True, but I meant in a technological sense, our ability to stop it progressing crosses a horizon and no matter how much fuel we burn, there is no escaping the inevitable slide towards the singularity where we will cease to exist.
Doesn't matter, semantics really.. thanks for the reply :)
@@fieldo85 That is true for any non-trivial technological innovation. Just think of agriculture: can you go back for there? The horse stirrup? The clock? ....
@@drrtfm Not really. We could still return to surviving without agriculture (with a reduced population), as humans did for 200k years.
We go without horse stirrups now and we don't actually need clocks for survival either, as our past shows.
@@fieldo85 "We could still return to surviving without agriculture (with a reduced population),"
Ummm, no, we couldn't because you see (a) people don't know how to do that any more; and (b) that mass population that you need to eliminate tends not to go quietly. In point of fact, the idea that "we cannot go back" is precisely the fact that to go back _requires_ mass death.
We go without horse stirrups because we have invented yet further technology. The point is: it couldn't be put back and hidden away, and it changed the face of Europe for a millennium.
As for clocks, stop showing up for meetings and see just how far that gets you. Fail to pay your mortgage on time and see how far that gets you. Heck, you are currently using a device that depends on extremely precise clocks.
Another interesting and informative video from Sabine!
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality!
Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant.
Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory.
The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein.
Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry.
Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy).
Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual.
Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual.
Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes.
Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality.
Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality.
Mind duality is dual to matter duality
Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
Dark energy is dual to dark matter.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Duality creates reality.
"There's nothing particularly interesting happening at the horizon, it's just the boundary beyond which you cannot get out."
I think if I was in that situation I would find it of massive interest to me tbh. So interesting, in fact, that it would be pretty much all I could think about, although not for very long as then I would soon expire.
Horizon is just like a point of no return in a trip where you can't go back home because you spent more gas than what you need to return and there's no refueling stations.
@@monad_tcp Good analogy.
Actually if you get this close, its already over for you. Besides radiation, you would need excessive accelation to get away from there squishing you instantly. The closest safe flyby you can get is above 1.5 times that radius.
I would love to see a video about the twins paradox. I know there are a lot of those out there, but many do not sound satisfactory, and your view is always interesting to see
Hello, maybe you mean this:
th-cam.com/video/-2c0P2CEU9A/w-d-xo.html
Sabine, you forgot the biggest singularity of them all: the birth of the universe.
Yeah! And the birth of universe out of nothing too... story like that has gotta be true...🤣
@@tomashull9805 who says it is out of nothing?
We just don't know, because we do not have information from "before" the big bang. But that doesn't mean it came out of nothing.
That really is just a sum of black holes singularities.
@@malik-h2e Are you familiar with the cosmologist Laurence Krauss and his best selling book A Universe from nothing?
@@JonnyRobbie how do you know?
Wow. This is one of those "I never thought of that", and better, I now have some insight thanks to you.
Sabine Hossenfelder SPEAK AND I SHOULD HEAR
Sabine, please a video on self-similarity and renormalization relating it to physical reality. You are awesome.
Self similarity (fractals) or equivalence (homotopy) = duality.
The big bang singularity is a Janus point (two faces) = Duality!
Points, singularities represent limits or boundaries -- Immanuel Kant.
Poles (infinities) are dual to zeroes -- Optimized control theory.
The positive curvature singularity is dual to the negative curvature singularity -- General relativity, Einstein.
Positive curvature is dual to negative curvature -- Gauss, Riemann geometry.
Elliptic or spherical geometry is dual to hyperbolic geometry (dark energy).
Curvature or gravitation is therefore dual.
Potential energy is dual to kinetic energy -- gravitational energy is therefore dual.
Apples fall to the ground because they are conserving duality.
Concepts are dual to percepts -- the mind duality of Immanuel Kant.
The intellectual mind/soul (concepts) is dual to the sensory mind/soul (percepts) -- The mind duality of Thomas Aquinas.
Mind is dual to matter -- Descartes.
Bosons are dual to fermions -- Matter duality.
Active matter (life) is dual to passive matter (atoms, forces) -- matter duality.
Mind duality is dual to matter duality
Energy is dual to mass -- Einstein.
Dark energy is dual to dark matter.
"Always two there are" -- Yoda.
Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought, the principle of equivalence (duality).
Syntropy (prediction) is dual to increasing entropy -- the 4th law of thermodynamics!
Duality creates reality.
Keep up the good work :)
I'm trying! Watch out for a channel update end of the year.
@@SabineHossenfelder of course I will :)
Thank you Sabine!
I always drop when I'm doing when prof H drops a video.
Thank you Sabine! I had not realized the true nature of an essential singularity before.
I'll have to develop this further, but for now I'd like to postulate that the way physical spacetime maps to a spacelike cross section of a mathematical 4D manifold is maximally discontinuous in the sense that you can use all the information available from the past light cone of any point to define its position in its corresponding cross section but you then have no way of extending beyond that point to its neighbors without bringing in information from outside said light cone, the mapping being only well-defined at the point itself and any points contained within its past light cone. A true snapshot of the universe would then be a set of distinct points without an overall topology, 3D or otherwise.
And now I have a name to use for the reason and a way to attack the math.
Pretty sure my mind is collapsing into a singularity now
Awesome stuff!
I'm fed up with generic "analogies" from fancy TH-camrs like physics girl or other tech channels.
By "using simple words to ease the understanding for viewers" they just hide their own total lack of it.
This channel is a fresh breathe of air. At once there's a competent physics TH-camr.
Thank you!
In mathematics, the theory of residues of complex functions is anything but dull, at least from a mathematical point of view.
I loved this video. Happy holidays.
I really wish physicists wouldn't pretend/believe that the math = reality.
....but they don't...so you needn't wish any more .
Hi Sci Fry, I don't think they do friend which is why Sabine was at pains to point out the difference between Mathematics and Physics- her water drip being a great example. Or were you meaning more generally? I would be interested to know whether you think there is another logical system that could be used to represent nature rendering it predictable, within limits ofc:), and comprehensible. Do you think numbers are a "natural" part of the universe or simply a subjective human construct due to our evolutionary development or a bit of both? Do you think we have reached the end of Physics being able to use Maths to describe aspects of our universe? I would be very interested to hear your opinion:)
As a post-grad Social Science student, who thinks Cultural Studies etc belong in music magazines not Universities, my maths stops at Stats but if you suggest human experience is better represented in Poetry I couldn't agree with you more but that is because I am a bit dim and in awe of Donna Stonecipher and her poem "Model CIty" which I heartily recommend to you. Regards, M
TAX THE RICH
Always amazing insight and explanations!
As time slows to almost a stop at the center of a black hole, matter becomes trapped in yesteryear creating a seemingly bottomless "Time well" similar to the example here but the bottom of the well is far in the past and pinches off very gradually instead. Time Factor Theory Channel
She gives me a Singularity
THE HAWKING-PENROSE THEOREM:
No space-time (M, g) can simultaneously satisfy the following conditions:
1. M does not contain closed time curves;
2. All causal geodesic inextensible in M contains a pair of conjugated points;
3. There is a prisoner set in the future, or in the past, S (contained) M
Energy-mass stress metrics blow spacially at the origin just as the time scale blow at the event horizon in the black holes.
Thank you very much Sabine for such inspiring videos.
@@bahadrartay4666 such as vacuum decays at Planch temp., trans-dimensional diffusions to the primordial conditions ?
@@bahadrartay4666 inspiration, aspiration and perspiration pave the way to the reality..
It took Prof. Kip Thorn 40 years to prove the gravitational waves...
Write in your name. What do you think you are to ask about my inspirations that I have already made written - clear .
Professor, you are a wonderful lecturer.
Brilliant video! I have used the sinx function in spectrum analysis. It's an interesting and practical maths function.
I really need to pursue Ph.D. in Quantum Mechanics under your Guidance, even though I do not have much background in physics still our vibe and thought processes match for example just after reading the title (Are singularities real ?) I somehow chose to divide water droplets and got it.
For several years now, as an amateur viewer of anything related to phsyics, I have been wondering if there is a minimum possible resolution, like a planck-length, which would prevent singularity and anything "infinite". It would just be an astoundingly large (or small) number to define in human terms. But why should this be something to fear? We already need an astoundingly high-number to define the total mass/energy of our universe (which we can't do accurately as we don't know what's beyond the observable universe, but still!). So astoundingly high or small numbers should feel perfectly "natural", and there should be terms to define them as well.
And this opens a question, that I feel if answered, may provide some answers to the expansion of the universe. Imagine a theoretical minimum possible resolution for our universe, a pixel, per se. Nothing smaller than a pixel, and nothing can exist between one pixel and the other. Now imagine a theoretical particle that is exactly 1 pixels in size. (Remember, nothing can be 1.2 pixels, it can only be a multiplicative of 1 pixel). How exactly can this particle preserve its "information" as it dissappears from one pixel and emerges on the other? Would it disappear first, and then emerge on the next pixel (use the field theory explanations if you need to), or does it make a copy first in the neighboring pixel, and then the original disappears?
And there's also the problem with simple diagonals as per the Pythegorian calculation. Imagine 4 1-pixel sized particles arranged in a 2x2 configuration. What's the distance between the diagonally neighboring particles? Can it really be square root 2? Since no interaction can take place in distances smaller than 1 pixel in such a universe, every interaction also has to happen in distances that are multiplicatives of 1 pixel. So pixels that are mathemtaically square root 2 distance from each other, the diagonally neighboring ones in this case, can never interact. Which can't be true?
The only real way such particles can interact or exist or make up a universe, is either by mandatorily being larger than 1 pixels (which is very arbitrary), or by being defined as a wave function that can spread over some radius of pixels, a-la quantum waves. This function is simply a distribution of values on a lattice of pixels with a radius, where each pixel inside this area is attributed a value that corresponds to the probability of that particle being in that particular pixel. Singularity in a unvierse defined as such woulds imply be perfectly defined single-pixel with all the wave information, ie the pixel can't be anywhere else, resulting in a single pixel particle despite being impossible under normal curvatures. But this time it's not a problem, because the wave function of the singularity itself doesn't extend beyond the pixel, and thus it can't interact with it's neighbors anyway. (the square root distance problem doesn't exist for the singurity) But it's neighbors, the pixels just next to the singularity point, still have some degree of freedom in their wave-function definition, leading to some values being placed on the singularity pixel, which eventually leads them towards the singularity anwyay.
It can really be as simple as nonograms.
I talked about this here: th-cam.com/video/nyPdIBnWOCM/w-d-xo.html
I like these older videos because there are not so many animations and effects so I concentrate more on what Sabine actually says
Excellent - I particularly liked the point that the ‘technological singularity’ is bogus.
I don't think she said that. She said that it isn't really a singularity, but I think she left it pretty open whether or not it is bogus.
My faforite singularity appears in nature: As a lover of midnight sun, it is sufficient to stay in the north of Sweden in mid-June. But with autumn approaching, one has to move further and further towards the north pole. When the equinox has come, one has to board an airplane (lets assume that this is technically possible) and fly around half of the world to the south pole. There one can continue the northerly journey and arrive at the very end of Antarctica in mid december.
Actual singularity exists 24/7 and is called the Absolute Truth.
I was hoping you'd talk about 'naked singularities' and explain why they are not theoretically possible. I was having a debate (for want of a better word) with someone yesterday who thinks that something can be "theoretically possible" because "the mathematics are solid" while still being "not possible in nature", and I was at a loss to explain how that simply isn't true.
Well, depends on what you mean by "theoretically possible". Naked singularities exist in the mathematics of General Relativity. Whether they are real, no one really knows. The problem is, if they exist, they'd be hard to tell apart from black holes. It's actually a quite interesting topic. I'll put this on the list, thanks for the suggestion!
Hi, you could look at this:
www.quantamagazine.org/where-gravity-is-weak-and-naked-singularities-are-verboten-20170620/
@@SabineHossenfelder AFAIK the only way to achieve a naked singularity, even on paper, is to assume multiple (>3) spatial dimensions, or to ignore upper limits of charge and other quantities, such that given the known laws of physics they are not possible, either theoretically, hypothetically or otherwise.
Of course, you could very well imagine a 5-dimensional universe in which they are theoretically possible, but that's not the Universe we find ourselves in!
Thanks for the reply, Sabine. I look forward to the video. 👍
@@eljcd Thanks for the link. I read a similar article about anti-de Sitter space naked singularities last night, and other 'toy universe' ideas that shoehorn naked singularities into existence, but they all conclude for one reason or another that they're not possible.
To be honest, I was hoping to find something that says they _are_ possible, and in this Universe, as I've never read anything that says that. Unfortunately, the person I was -debating- _arguing_ with was more interested in personal attacks than providing a link.
This is mathematical mysticism. Actually, mathematics has nothing to do with reality, then to possibility. They are only accounting of fictive relations, as a particular case these relations can be about physical objects. We can count the fingers, but we can't mathematically define what is a finger.
From an engineering point of view, quite refreshing. A map (mathematical model) does not equal the terrain. When a description is called a "theory" or a "map" it implies it MAY be somehow limited. A jolly good theory, that nobody can deny.
What a great explanation!