So this means there are potentially millions of other universes whose portals are within our own?
Good, this one universe did seem a bit too small to hold my ego.If you mean entering a black hole, well, parts of you will probably make it in. After the spaghettification.
Can’t go to work if I’m 1 atom thick.
You’ll have to log in remotely via teams
I’m sure the audio won’t work in space, just like on Earth.
An atom will not be able to mute in a 10+ people meeting. You’ll fit right in!
You know they’ll still make you try though lol
You’ll be (probably) fine crossing the horizon into a sufficiently large black hole as far as spaghettification goes. I dont know where we landed with the whole firewall thing though so that might get you either way
abolish all rent. see the cat. seriously!
Just tell your landlord we’re in a black hole and the rent doesn’t matter.
Isn’t matter the whole issue
You are matter but you don’t
You need to explain to them that rent isn’t matter, so it doesn’t matter.
Scientifically speaking, all objects are matter, or rather they are matter. In terms of the financial perspective, your rent does matter, whether or not you want to pay it.
And then punch your landlord in the face. They are a landlord, they probably deserve it.
fact… potentially…
Yes, we’re going to ignore a sensationalist conclusion that is not supported by evidence.
The actual model is just that, a model. It says that our universe can be described the same way as we describe the information systems around an event horizon, and in many cases in physics, if a system can be described using the same model it is often related, connected or the same in some way.
It’s not sensationalist, but it’s highly misinterpreted and turned into sensationalism.
It doesn’t really give us anything meaningful that we can use or understand the universe better just yet, but maybe someday someone will figure out something that helps us better understand where the universe came from. That’s all. It’s a very convincing theory if you learn about entropy and Planck-scales and event horizons around black holes, but it’s not even sensational on its own.
My intellect level is dipshit: do you know a good source for me to study and learn about this?
I would consider backing up and learning to walk before you try to run, once you grasp the really difficult concepts surrounding this, when the concepts combine these much larger models it feels a lot more humbling and awe inspiring.
One of the better entry level docu-series is The History of the Universe series on youtube for when I just want to listen to the stories of how and what we learned and it goes over the materials many times in pretty simple ways. Since every idea and discovery is connected there’s no wrong place to start.
I would suggest nasa.gov
It’s not sensationalist, but it’s highly misinterpreted and turned into sensationalism.
Seems like every cool physics theory turns out this way. Physics: it exists for the masses to misinterpret
it’s certainly an interesting theory, it makes me wonder, if that actually were the case, how much time has passed outside of the black hole? Like is
the universespace significantly younger outside of the black hole? Is matter less finite? It really makes the mind wanderIt really helps to understand that a black hole isn’t a point in space, it’s a point in time. After you cross an event horizon, you will see the universe outside accelerate as you fall closer to the singularity, in fact if you didn’t get stretched out into particles you would see the whole universe disperse and grow cold suddenly.
If you’re across the event horizon of a supermassive black hole you have more space and time to play with and can exist for a very long time before you get pulled to spaghetti, but that singularity is always in your future. It doesn’t matter which direction you fly or whatever tools you use, the center is always in your future.
Right but outside of the black hole, outside of it’s gravity well, time moves faster. So how much time would have passed outside the black hole?
The difference between rates increases as the observer’s spacetime gets more and more distorted, so the closer you get to the black hole the faster times moves outside the event horizon.
To the extent that from the singularity itself, the outside universe is equally stretched out to forever since all reference frames are equal, so outside a literal infinity passes… and no we don’t have any understanding what this means, only that it seems to exist like this and this is one of many problems we still have with our understanding of black holes.
So like I’ve been vaguely paying attention to them finding larger, farther, and more red-shifted galaxies. I’ve been suspecting the universe is a black hole for a while now.
What if: information CAN survive the event horizon… but only if it hits the accretion disk from the side at the perfect angle to spiral in. That’s why JWST is finding galaxies that are larger, older, and much more common than we’d anticipated -they’re extra-universal objects.
What if dark energy is a function of hawking radiation… and the expansion of our universe is driven by primordial black holes? Maybe hawking radiation is the black hole equalizing the same anti-matter/matter asymmetry we’ve observed in our universe.
I’m sure someone formally educated on the subject can debunk those ideas tho.
Bro what if… *hits blunt* What if the whole universe was like… like a quantum multiverse and shit- like, if we were supersymmetrically entangled without own spacetime strings
Hear me out:
I’m fairly educated but not formally on the subject.
The idea is this: conservation of information does not break anywhere we’ve ever observed, and much of physics is based around the immutable “conservations.”
This means, whatever happens, whatever billiard ball configuration of particles things are in, you can calculate where they came from and how they got to that position. It’s very basic to causality and we’ve never seen exceptions to it, aggressively so, the universe tends to do funny things just to preserve this kind of law. Except in black holes. All of our understanding about them says that even if they evaporate over vast time scales, there’s still no way to “reassemble” the information that comes out, it’s a cosmic information laundering service, which breaks a very fundamental conservation.
So, the idea is… what if information is preserved around the “edge” where we see particles slowly fall in and seem to take a literal eternity to fall in? What if that somehow retains all the knowledge of everything that fell in? When you calculate this idea up, you get a sea of information happening at the smallest possible scale, where information gets packed into it’s densest possible state. And it also lines up almost exactly with what we imagine the universe to look like when describing it entirely as an information system. What’s really happening in this situation is the universe is basically a flat “sheet” of information “bits” that curls around you, you the observer is sitting right into the center of this parabolic “lens” that assembles this information into a 3D picture of the universe. (See: holographic universe principle.) This idea that our observation of the universe is the center of a projection somewhat explains a lot of things like subjective experiences, a lot of quantum weirdness and what’s happening at the quantum foam scale.
To understand this better you have to discard your understanding of locality and that your perceptions and experiences of time and space are largely illusions made by your brain to explain the input you’re getting. There is no real such thing as “That thing is far away” it’s more like “there’s an informational rule how much time/space is between this event and that event.”
I recommend PBS Spacetime, they did a lot of videos about the idea but they can be a bit heavy if you haven’t caught up a little on entropy and time/space diagrams and black holes.
The hardest to understand thing about physics is that for those of us who got off on an earlier offramp it absolutely feels like this is an entirely different category of thing than a statics or dynamics class. Like, it feels like a lot when you go from “here’s how ballistics, tension, and springs work” to “this is how electricity flows through metal and what forces make it do so”. Then eventually, people who majored in that shit wind up doing this shit.
Oh it definitely is an exercise of stepping outside everything we know and are familiar with. This is a product of the objective fact that our entire experience of the universe is basically a lie. We have brains that have given us an interpretation of everything that’s happening, and we couldn’t exist without that interpretation “flattening” something far larger and more complex for us, but it’s still not a complete picture.
Example: we think of things as solid objects, we think of a “chair” and point it and say “chair” when in reality it’s mostly empty space, made up of a vastly complex system of interacting fields waving and vibrating in a way that makes a brief, passing shape of a “chair.” All those waves and interacting fields are “chairing” for a moment, taking up a shape that pushes against our mostly-empty space bodies that are temporarily “bodying” for a moment and makes it seem like we’re sitting.
Another: time is gravity. Gravity is time. This one baffles everyone because it’s also equally accurate to interpret time as a dimensional vector, but that’s only one interpretation and in the real universe, there’s no law or rule saying that things can only have one accurate interpretation. How is gravity time? Well mass effects the flow rate of time, so clocks run at different rates closer or further away from something like a giant rock in space. But the issue is objects traveling (everything is traveling) have to compensate for this change and get pulled towards the rock. The same way as if you lay a stick across a flowing stream, the center of the stream flows faster than the banks, so the stick gets pulled sideways.
This is a fantastically subtle effect, which is why it takes a whole-ass planet to generate an area where things stick to the ground, but you can fight the effects of an entire planet simply by lifting your foot.
Pshhh I figured this out when I was 17 the first time I took psychedelics.
Love PBS Space time!
So like in your opinion, tldr, do you think it’s explicitly impossible for light to survive entering a black hole such that it could reproduce an image of whatever it reflected off?
Light that falls over the edge of the event horizon cannot get out again. The distortion from the mass of the black hole is simply too steep and we’ve taken pictures of the dark shadow that this creates in space.
Once over the event horizon, the light still “exists” in some manner, but has been effectively cut off or removed from ever interacting with our universe again, so it also doesn’t really exist anymore.
The real problem happens further down towards the singularity where space pinches off. That part of the gravity well is so steep and trails off to forever, that light/particles cannot actually enter it, the same way that it’s hard to send a probe to orbit the sun or mercury because it takes so much slowing down. As a circular orbit shrinks, the momentum of the orbiting object is conserved so the object speeds up, as it speeds up, it gains enough velocity to push back out. So particles approaching infinite velocity do… what? We don’t know, but this is just one of many places where our physics and understanding breaks down because it approaches infinities.
Light that falls over the edge of the event horizon cannot get out again
I’m talking as an inside observer. Like what if spaghettification = red shift and the “too large, too old, to developed” galaxies like MoM-z14 detected by JWST are actually from outside our universe’s event horizon.
There is a whole area of cosmology that looks at large-scale event horizons, they can exist in many forms, and yes the “drop off” point over large scales is somewhat similar but those far away galaxies actually appear more like what we would see if a galaxy was falling into a black hole, IE: they turn red and seem to fade away… this is because we stop receiving new information from them because the expansion of space is faster than new photons can reach us… this doesn’t cut off sharply, it’s just the last photons stretch out so wide that the waves may as well be flat.
From which point of view?
If the observer is inside the event horizon of the black hole, they’ll see the light as normal. There’s nothing special about the event horizon for the observer or the ray of light.
If the observer is outside of the black hole, they won’t ever see the light.
I’m talking as an inside observer. Like what if spaghettification = red shift and the “too large, too old, to developed” galaxies like MoM-z14 detected by JWST are actually from outside our universe’s event horizon.
It’s definitely possible in the case of a real black hole. I think it’s unlikely to apply to the model we’re talking about - the spaghettification would have to happen outside the event horizon, and that only applies to very small black holes.
It explains subjective experiences?
Sort of. It’s a very loaded topic but it may help explain how different observers can see different outcomes from some events. (See: barn door/ladder problem) because it reframes every observer as their own center point of a hyperbolic projection, collapsing waveforms as that center point observes events in their own sphere.
Sounds a lot like pseudoscience unless I am missing something major
You might be missing a lot, if you’re interested get started with shows like PBS Spacetime and History of the Universe on youtube for some simple groundwork to understand a lot of the science behind these ideas.
De sitter space and anti de sitter space took me a while to grok as it relates to all this stuff
I’m sad that you said the word “grok” and got downvoted for it. Way to ruin a nice old word, Elon.
Grok remains a perfectly cromulent word, imo.
Even if everything Elon touches isn’t
Here’s a far out idea based on absolutely nothing:
What if all of the information imprinted on the event horizon of a black hole is duplicated and becomes the stuff that creates a new universe inside of a black hole.
Like. Everything that ever hits the event horizon are the pieces from which a new universe is built
I mean technically the sentence structure says that:
- Fact: NASA has done something
- That something: potentially discovering that we are in a black hole
So in a sense there is no contradiction there with the words “fact” and “potentially”. Although there is a relevant possibility for confusion of what is being stated as a fact, so your point stands. I just like nitpicking on technicalities :D
In a sense removed from context, yes.
Does that mean we’re having spaghettification for dinner?
I, for one, would like to see the cafeteria menus in advance so parents can adjust their dinner menus accordingly. I don’t like the idea of Milhouse having two spaghettification meals in one day.
time to spagettify spaghettis, lets create hyperspag
Shiiiit lexx was right
I’m pretty sure that kind of knowledge falls under the “huh. Neat.” category anyway. It’s the kind of knowledge that, while a cool thing to learn, will have absolutely no bearing on my current life, and is not going to be likely to have any practical applications for many years to come.
It’s for the folks plagued by existential dread that need to know where we came from. Well son, it’s black holes the whole way down.
Heh. Ya take history far enough back, it’s all there ever was. 🤷🏿♂️
I mean, what if you happen to live trillions of years and reach the edge of the universe?
I do have a perfect record of not dying so far, so it’s possible!
what
Your life just got worse. You’re paying rent inside of a black hole.
As smug and pretentious Neil deGrasse Tyson is, he said it best, something along the lines of: What does this mean to us in the grand scheme of things? Nothing.
It’s been a while so I’m a little hazy on the details, but in one of the Culture books by Iain M. Banks there’s a part where a bunch of Minds (for those unfamiliar: kind of beyond godlike artificial intelligences that run a utopian civilization, the eponymous Culture) are talking about how they can create simulations within simulations so perfect that it would be impossible to tell if you were in one, and what if their entire reality was just one in a long chain of nested, perfect simulations? But in the end they come to the conclusion that there’s no way to tell and nothing they can do about it anyway, so they might as well just get on with it lol.
Are you saying that he said that about this in particular or that it’s a quote he says about loads of things? xD
On a side note: I don’t think we should hate on DeGrasse Tyson, because hating on him seems to be a meme that’s just gone too far. Isn’t it rooted in a literal 4-chan greentext? But I think he’s polite, nice, and the things people interpret as disingenuity are just his presenting quirks. Like the “tweeting the same mirror joke every month” actually has a more neat explanation.
All I know is that with a mirror, you can kiss yourself but only on the lips
As I often do, I disagree with Tyson, the model may help us understand the origin or nature of the universe someday. It’s just a model, but when a model can be tested or studied in some way, we generally tend to learn new, grand things about everything.
It’s not sensational, because it doesn’t say anything radical, other than show a very similar relationship between information systems in event horizons and the way our whole universe can be modeled as an information system.
In the grand scheme of things:
- We’re turbofucking the climate, even though we’ve understood the warming effects of CO₂ for 170 years, and had viable solutions to climate change for like 50. And yet we’re increasing CO₂ emissions year after year. It’s not certain the human civilization as it currently is will survive the next century.
- We’re throwing non-biodegradable plastics everywhere, even though we’ve known for like 50 years that it is devastating for many ecosystems and human health.
- Capitalism is squeezing the global working class ever harder with each passing day, and yet class consciousness is not growing fast enough, despite us scientifically understanding the unsustainability and evils of capitalism for like 160 years.
So yeah, in that grand scheme of things, making models of the larger universe is not actually that important. First we need to make use of the discoveries made way over a century ago.
If the knowledge of our problems prevents you from appreciating and finding any wonder in life and the larger universe, you have been defeated long before any of the actual threats have gotten to you.
I hope you find something that gives you joy or inspiration or a sense of grandeur in at least something. If it wasn’t for science we wouldn’t know about 2 out of three of those things, so maybe think how well your message is going to go over with people who are already aware of all that and just trying to find something greater in life than the perpetual, life altering struggles we’ve been dealing with and surviving for the last 200,000 years.
I am able to find joy in science and life in general. I will state it in a different way: this is not something the average person needs to worry/think about, unless they are interested themselves.
The original tweet (or whatever this is) has the same energy to me as “are we just gonna ignore <the latest Marvel movie>?”. For people who are interested: they are likely already aware; for people who are not interested: it’s safe to ignore it.
If the knowledge of our problems prevents you from appreciating and finding any wonder in life and the larger universe, you have been defeated long before any of the actual threats have gotten to you.
Bars.
Cool.
Yeah, it’s hard to get too worried about specifically how the universe will collapse in 50 million years when I’m not sure our society will exist in 50 years and I’m not sure I will have a job in 5 months.
Anyone trying to frame this idea as worrying is trying to grift using science.
The idea in itself will never impact you personally. Most likely.
See, it’s just a model for understanding how information systems work, and you can model the entire universe as an information system which could be identical to what happens around event horizons. It could be a big deal for people trying to understand how all this formed and where we came from, if you’re curious about that kind of thing and have learned a bit about entropy and time and space and event horizons it’s a pretty remarkable idea.
But the most realistic thing that will come from it is just more questions, even if it’s true.
Best case: we learn that there are connections in time/space that we never were aware of or can use this model to predict particular kinds of spacetime effects and could figure out things like why space is expanding. Wildly best case: we figure out something about gravity we never considered and you get your goddamn hoverboards. Better late than never.
Wow crazy I’ll make sure to adjust my schedule
Link to this? I had not heard that.
It’s by no means confirmed. It’s one theory out of many. The JWST data shows galaxies have a significant preference to all spin the same way. Mathematicians say this would be evidence in favor but not fully confirm the black hole theory (also called the Swarthschild theory if you want to DDG more). Some suspect it’s bias from the rotation of our own galaxy affecting the data and they plan to calibrate more
“they plan to calibrate more”
Garrus approves.
Like a sort of universe-sized Coriolis effect?
All hail the great Space Toilet
It also depends on the definition of black hole you are using.
Because light in our universe doesn’t leave (escape) our universe it fits that definition of black hole.
If there was some slight angular momentum to things right after the big bang, would it not then make sense that everything would predominantly be still moving in that direction?
I wonder if there are rules pertaining to black holes existing within other black holes. If black hole A is inside black hole B, does it make sense to have a meaningful distinction between black hole A and the other stuff inside black hole B?
The observed direction in galaxies, if true, may be a hint towards an idea that is much older, and it involves the way the universe can be modeled as an information system and how those information systems function around event horizons. It’s hard to even give a fast summary without dropping an essay about a lot of our misconceptions about time and space and the Planck scale, etc. But the most we may get from it might be a better understanding of things like the actual shape of our universe and why/how it’s expanding and other observational goals.
Do you have an essay you could throw at me, or some kind of video that explains it in reasonably understandable detail?
I highly recommend PBS Spacetime, they did a number of videos on black holes, information and the holographic universe principle. Otherwise, I replied here with a short essay, but reading it I realize how woefully inadequate my description is.
I follow PBS Spacetime already, so chances are I’ve seen the videos you’re thinking of and can’t remember them offhand. I’ll give your link a read tho, thanks!
Anton Petrov also has good analysis of papers like that, here’s him explaining why no the observation does not support the black hole cosmology as long as we’re not cherrypicking https://youtu.be/xXSV9JaWxCE
Doesn’t mean the paper is shit, it always helps drawing parallels to notice differences and refine our equations, but the sensationalism must prevail for all the news sites reporting on it I guess.
They can be a little hard to grasp, I had to back up and do some work before I connected it to other ideas that have been played with like the parabolic/hyperbolic universe idea. It’s kind of beautiful when you start to “feel” it and I think if anything, these ideas have value in their beauty.
They may not be accurate, they may not be useful, but neither are Monet paintings and we still stare at them for hours.
This theory could also explain those strange galaxies that shouldn’t exist according to our model that JWST keep finding. Maybe they are from the universe outside the black hole!
It’s not a thing. Or, like, this theory (“black hole cosmology”) has been around for ages, it’s not broadly accepted and I can find no evidence of NASA publishing anything explicitly in support of it. The pop-sci articles are all linking back to this study which decidedly does not make the conclusion the universe might be inside a black hole.
Makes sense. Everything in this universe sucks. Ha. I’m funny. Anyways…
Didn’t she-ra do something like that?
