Spinning Black Holes
2024 ж. 15 Мам.
5 371 282 Рет қаралды
A pulsing black hole in the centre of a distant galaxy sheds light on black hole and galaxy formation. How fast are black holes rotating and how does that rotation change over its life-span?
Huge thanks to Prof. Geraint Lewis and study author Dr. Dheeraj Pasham.
A loud quasi-periodic oscillation after a star is disrupted
by a massive black hole
ve42.co/pasham
Special thanks to Patreon supporters:
Donal Botkin, James M Nicholson, Michael Krugman, Nathan Hansen, Ron Neal, Stan Presolski, Terrance Shepherd
Music from epidemicsound.com "Colorful animation 4" "serene story 2" "To the stars 01" "Black Vortex
Animations by Alan Chamberlain and courtesy of NASA
I'm doing my PhD on black holes & I just finished doing an analysis of the black hole spin in GRS 1915+105 (it was actually the first BH in the table of spins you showed). I was super impressed by how accurate everything in your video was! I study all of this for a living right now lol. I also loved the animations - I always have trouble finding a good accretion disk animation which shows how the ISCO shrinks as the black hole spin increases. A fantastic & informative video.
Badass
Just a thought - anything that travels faster than light will disappear from all of the scientific instruments - or it will be detected as dark/black - since it is beyond the light spectrum... Think about the particles that appear & disappear in quantum fields... These stars & Sun are not mere objects in the sky, they are alive and in fact more alive than a human can comprehend... Many scientists in the past were rarely distracted by their instruments or theories and therefore they were able to bring out revolutionary concepts from the depths of their minds... The more you measure, the more you miss out on the detail... The way forward for the science is to go beyond the limitations of the light... This is possible from within and not without...
Is it approximately correct to think of the energy released (as grav waves) when 2 black holes collide, as the difference in potential + kinetic energies before & after the collision? Do concepts like PE & KE apply in GR? Is any of that energy released as EM radiation?
Tesla referenced human energy 🌬👻jesus christ referenced living waters 💎👨🎓👩🎓science described water memory 🌊🎭psalms16:24 k,j proverbs27:19 existence psychologically god bless fight the good fight 💖👻💎👨🎓👩🎓🗽🤍⚖🌪🌬
@@miguelchippsinteligente6072 Why God is all about fighting? Good or bad, he/she is still destroying a part of his/her own creation...
4:57 Should have chosen diameter, so it would be d_isco Edit: Please sign the petition in the replies if you support this cause
I'll recommend that to the scientists ;)
That would have been a much better choice
r_isco kid was a friend of mine..... music fun is where you make it. :)
Haha, what a _funky_ idea...
It's spinning and giving off light, it HAS to be d_isco.
“Black holes are some of the simplest objects in the universe” I really really hate editing comments but it seems a good amount of you don't realize I was quoting him in the literal same video and have tried disagreeing
Absolutely!!!
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Duh I knew that
From the perspective of general relativity, they are quite simple actually 😁 one of the simplest solutions to einsteins field equations. Conversely, real black holes with all their quantum weirdness that we don't really know much about, are probably the most complex things out there 😂
outside, yes but inside HELL NO
It's pretty amazing to me that just 50 years ago, many scientists doubted that black holes existed, whereas now, not only have they been experimentally verified, but we're learning about many of their properties as well as their origins.
50 years ago was the 1970’s
@@Hi-sg4wt 100 years ago, when was that pls
@AboveEmAllProduction It was the 1900's
@@obssaasrat7781 no it was 1922. 22 years is a lot of years to round off. enough time for a world war to start and end.
@@Hi-sg4wt Really????? I thought it was 1641! /s
My flight is taking off. I want to know about black holes! EDIT: HOLY COW MAN I can't imagine how much research you did for this! I've always wondered how star diameters are approximated. Thank you so much for this! Bravo!
go through the square people pipe Destin! I learned a lot about black holes in making this video...
@SmarterEveryDay Derek's talk about spin made me think about the toilet swirl - please make a video on black holes!
how about Uranus
I have a question for both of you... I have heard it said that, due to Relativity, if a person were to fall into a black hole, it would appear to an outside observer that the falling person would slow down and freeze in place at the point they reached the event horizon. If that is true, it would also suggest that time would appear to speed up for the falling person, looking back at the observers. This has made me wonder what the limitations of that time warp would be. Would relative observer time continue to get faster and faster as the person falling continued to get closer to the singularity? Would it be theoretically possible to witness the end of the universe as one fell into the black hole?
Sorry, Destin. I saw this before you... 😉
Big stars : "exist" Blackhole: Its free real estate
Oood
Anything: "exists" Blackhole: **drooling🤤 intensifies**
To shreds you say?
Not real estate, food.
999th like
When I was 17, I listed all my dream jobs (there were 18 of them). Being a physicist was at the top of that list, teaching number two. Despite living that latter profession, I still enjoy videos like this. Thanks Veritasium for keeping my interest alive. I may not understand it all, but I love it regardless.
You have 69 likes. Thats all I am gonna say
How old are you right now?
I really wanted to see a picture of the "naked singularity" and had it typed into google before I realized that's probably not gonna give me the exact results I want
I think you were imagining a naked black hole.
Did you try "I'm feeling lucky" option? ;)
Gave me a lame movie title :/ Rotten Tomatoes gave it 27% lmao
If Tetrimidion and Invictus collided,
I think the only chance we would get is if for some reason light escapes from the black holes when they collide, as the event would be quite chaotic.
God really does know how to make extreme beyblades
lmao
Wonder if we're all just in a giant beyblade battle
@@rozellgabriel6299 you really deserve a like 😂
@@rozellgabriel6299 cues Bayblade team song while zooming out into the Galaxy, only to see god like beings battling with Milky ways
@Spiderman would that not require the angular momentum to be greater than the combined gravitational pull?
These acronyms are getting better every year.
ASASSN is really dope IMO..
the reason that space exploration is so slow that NASA doesn't start a project if they can't find an acronym for it.
I know, right? I can't wait for the next season
I agree
+Rafael Santos Can’t wait for “THICC”: Thermal Hydrogen Instant Charge Conservation (no, I _don’t_ know what that means / if it means anything)
I found black holes always scary, but finding out they spin at insane speed makes them so much awesomely horrifyingly more scary for me.
U have a phobia for black hole, search for it
Same 😫
LOL
10^36 KM/S ROTATION OF BLACK HOLE(PHOENIX A)
@@multiverseandparallelunive6224 not really, 3 x 10^5 km/s is roughly the speed of light, and a black hole cant spin faster than that
I took up astronomy in college and they never talked about interesting stuff like this
the teach u what ur not suppose to know lol
Probably because astronomy and astrophysics are two very different things...
astronomy and astrophysics go hand in hand
@@SlashoftheGreatnessOfficial Yes. Maths and physics go hand in hand. But maths isn't physics and and physics isn't maths. I didn't learn Newtonian motion in maths class any more than I learnt Pythagoras theorem in physics class. Nor did anyone else. They're separate disciplines.... like astronomy and astrophysics. I would have hoped that someone who actually passed an Astronomy course would understand the difference by simple dint of having passed an Astronomy course...
Why are you here
I am curious how someone could dislike this video. Perhaps they have trouble understanding it, the burden of knowledge is too much for them, or perhaps they too, are really uncomfortable with naked singularities.
Why not both?
They believe the earth is flat and the sky is a dome hologram
@@macaroane don't forget that Geniuses days the Earth 5.8k years old, meaning we couldn't possibly see further than that many light years.
Or flat earthers..
That's the oldest trick in the book. Trying to insult the intelligence of others to discredit them and humiliate them into going along with whatever lame MS says. Not really any more though, every will know soon
The real question is Does the universe spin
No, it is stuck facing one direction, the outside.
@@davidroyer8516 Angular momentum can only be assessed relative to something else around it that you consider stationary. Ultimately you run into the need to either 1) have an outside as a reference, which doesn’t exist for the universe, or 2) to define the universe itself as stationary, in which case the total angular momentum must add to zero (unless you can find a way to violate the conservation of angular momentum law). Either way, the universe does not spin.
@Liam Boyle Yes there is galactic spin, but the central black hole is not exactly at the center of the Milky Way (just close). The galaxy as a whole has some kind of slow spin about its true center. The gas, stars and the central black hole all orbit around this true center at a faster speed than the galaxy as a whole spins, but with different speeds for each object, slower as you move away from the center. This means objects pass into and out of the galaxy’s spiral arms over time. Other galaxies all spin at different rates and in different orientations to our galaxy. Same for planetary systems within our galaxy. Some stars even orbit within smaller circles inside their big circle around our galaxy. It’s evidence of an unpredictable universe designer.
It's all relative.
@Liam Boyle You're absolutely right! :) The European Southern Observatory in Chile watched stars orbiting the the black hole at the center of the Milky Way this past year, viewable here: kzhead.info/sun/h6pxhKyRbKWmoKc/bejne.html ... The folks here though are wondering about whether the universe in general is rotating, which maybe remains an open question. I suppose it depends on whether the Milky Way and other galaxies rotate about some universal center. As I understand the Big Bang Theory, there is no implied center to the universe. Expansion doesn't so much radiate out from a single point, rather it is as if we are on the surface of an expanding balloon. I would also suppose that we have much to learn still about the nature of the expansion of the universe, the distribution of dark matter, why the higgs is lighter than expected, the specifics of quantum gravity, and a host of other questions before we can make any declarations. It's fun to think about though :)
So that star was blinking every 131 seconds means that it was revolving around black hole every 130 seconds??😮😮
Aliens : sending some flashes in space to see if anyone is out there Scientist : Nah ! Its a black hole
I was looking for this comment 💀
Alien making some selfies at blackhole.
I thought it was bill gates sending beams to harm humanity
Wait, Bill Gates moved into a Black Hole now?
Since regular pulses are common in the Universe and occur naturally, aliens, who are trying to contact another intelligent life, would have sent some flashes in a distinct pattern - like for example 1 flash at every prime number seconds.
Derek should do a co-lab with Kurzgesagt on black holes.
Collab. And yes, I agree. I love their animations.
Lè Kurzegesagt presents, Derek explains
@Micaiah Weaver hmm.. nah.
YES
He needs to get his own bird avatar first.
*So this happened 290 million years ago ?*
Yes
Ah, the Permian period
Random Brown Guy I know how to google too!
@@randombrownguy1519 holy LMAO
Pro_wiE hhahahahha yes 😂😅
'naked singularity make scientists uncomfortable' scientists got no game
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding but isn't ISCO the wrong thing to focus on here regarding on the limit of the rotation, the ISCO is for matter orbiting the black hole. Photons departing radially outwards can escape for any point exterior to the event horizon regardless of the rotation. For a black hole with a rotational parameter of more than 0.28 photons can orbit prograde in the plane of rotation right down to the event horizon. Isn't the problem with rotation parameter > 1 the fact that the kerr metric would create a ring shaped singularity that had a radius larger than the Event horizon, and therefor expose a 'naked singularity'
Scott cawthon
That's what I'm thinking 🤔
Maybe
Hey Scott, fancy seeing you here. I was wondering the same exact thing. the ISCO is for solid matter, we should be looking at the photon sohere, or the IBCO.
So this vid is popping into everyone’s recommended now lol
Not only a new veritasium video, but a new one about BLACK HOLES? is it my birthday?
It's Christmas all over again.
I KNOW!
Bday for 5 million of us
Black holes are both amazing and scary at the same time.
but gloryholes are just simply amazing, not scary...
He's learning black magic.
Our universe is a black hole
@@zodiacfml White hole not a black hole as we are moving away from the singularity not towards it.
If you pass through the event horizon of a black hole, the reason you cant escape is that the space-time curvature is so extreme that all paths leads to the singularity, which ever way you looked you would see the singularity, it would look like it was smeared into a shell around you. The big bang is a singularity, as we look farther away we look further back in time, look far enough and we can see back to the big bang (we are stopped from being able to see it due to the surface of last scattering), you would see the big bang in any direction you looked, it would be smeared into a shell around you. The only difference is that we are moving away from the singularity, like a black hole going backwards in time, which is called a white hole.
Vertasium, I can't thank you enough for these wonderful science videos. For engineers and science loving people like myself, it's very hard to find good quality content as freely available as you make them and on top of it you make them easy to understand, fun and damn interesting. Thank you so much and I hope you continue to make such wonderful videos.
I am in awe of your videos and how you masterfully explain them by not only teaching a class but the whole internet.
I miss free Vsauce vídeos Edit: I already now that DONG exists, thanks
His content is worth paying for. No?
@@wabbasMEpern Just because something is worth the price doesn't mean a particular person can pay for it (or that they should even be charged for it).
Is that what he's been doing?! Man, i just thought he stopped making videos.
Jalal M yes 😓
Christopher Bross exactly, i cant pay 3€ for each video
"This is called a naked singularity and it makes a lot of scientists uncomfortable." Prudes!
3:45 Who else loves this iconic background sound !
Your channel is one of the biggest reasons I’ve decided to finally go back to school, and for certain. No more maybe in a year or maybe next years, I’m going this fall for certain :) . I’m planning on getting a bio-engineering degree, but if I can have it my way instead of time’s way, I hope to get many different scientific degrees, as theres no single subject I can just dedicate my only KNOWABLE life to. Thank you for all the videos you’ve released, and for reminding me of why I fell in love with science as a kid. It’s like I found my passion after all these years, after school and general life circumstances seemed to just be determined to beat it out of me 😭 I will come back to this channel one day!! When things are different, but for the better.
how's it going now
These acronyms are getting better every freakin year.
ASASSN? What's next? EMIYA? GARCHER?!
Next is D-ISCO
CRisco
SABR, LaNS.er, BrSrKr, a.Ven-GER Idk lol
EZIO
Why are you in Dumbledore's study?
Checking out all those reused phonebooks.
What's interesting to me is that - at my rate of reading - that's a lifetime's worth of books. Hope there are no boring ones!
That's The John Rylands Library in Manchester UK
This is the coolest thing I’ve learned about space in a while. Thanks man. You and your team do a pretty cool job.
Thank you so much for this content and all the other stuff your channels brought to me/us! With all the chaos in the world and our small little habitats these small lessons soothe me down and bring back a smile on my face. Only my kids and music have a similar effect on me.
"This is called a naked singularity and it makes a lot of scientist uncomfortable" *GEE I WONDER WHY* Edit: Btw, the replies to this comment are mostly about one guy arguing that the earth is flat. Shame isn't it? Edit: FREEEDOOOOM HE'S GONE! WHAT A NEW YEAR MIRACLE
ew i can se ur singalaraty thats not even thereticly posibal
@@lukesmith8896 dude i love you
^ || || Gay
@Flearther McPlane yeah that had been said about 2001, 2002, 2003, … and 2019 before that, still waiting.
@Flearther McPlane sry i didnt get u are u tryn to say earth is flat?
2:18 that moment when you can't understand the simplest objects in the universe
Welcome to phisics lol
in set theory, you have sets of this , Ruyssels and so this disturbs me even more
🤣🤣🤣
The reason they're "simple" is because it's just pure mass. In theory of course.
Kaos1382 Everything is pure mass except things that move at the speed of light, like photons which have no mass
Time: Is linear and always passes at the same rate The Ergosphere: *_”I’m about to end this man’s whole career”_*
People on earth: "The sun doesnt go around the earth! The earth moves around the sun!" People on blackholes:
spaghettified people on blackholes*
@@ironhideiii2261 aka they dead
Muuuuuurph!
*Maximum Spin* sounds like an 80's anime
holespin.com
BURAKKU HORU *ZA MAKSHIMOMU SPINOU!!*
or a band lol
or a very off deadpool reference
or a 1980s disco band
lol. the rendition at 1:24-1:25 has been my computer background for years :D I also put my bin at the black hole with all the shortcuts around it.
That's really clever 😂
That's not what black holes look like. Your life have been a lie.
@@michaelbuckers Do black holes really 'look' like anything if we can't see any light bouncing of them? (also: *has been a lie.)
@@ishab.6798 You thought that was a smart remark, but joke's on you, black holes emit hawking radiation so they do look like something! Also clearly it was about surroundings of the black hole and the shape of its shadow. None of these images in the video are accurate.
@@michaelbuckers What do you mean with the shape of its shadow? Also, of course I knew it wasn't a real picture. He even mentioned it too in the video that they are artists' renditions.
5:17 comedy gold
that event already happned, but the light reached us after millions of years.
Our sun: Level 1 crook Spinning black hole: level 99 mafia boss
thats how mafia works!
I beat you
More like level 998
Earth: tutorial mode
Love your videos about space !
me too!
love all these idiots believing NASA's lies.
You would love David La Point his video for a better understanding of space
@@Killatomate85 Love watching you being an idiot
@@Killatomate85 love all those idiots believing we're in a space snowglobe
I see black holes I get this eerie feeling... They are just so mysterious. Thanks for clearing some of the mystery, Derek.
Derek: This is called a naked singularity. Me: Hehe... *nAkEd*
what's so funny? have you never seen a naked hole?
@@voxelamateur lol, just not your naked hole.
if a lot of black holes are dormant, traveling through space is like playing mine sweeper lol
Niles Samaniego Black holes are really tiny though
@@penguinexpress12 their effects aren't
@@christopherjones7191 They aren't. Not if you are travelling through space, anyway. Black holes are extremely uncommon compared to other stellar objects. This means it's already very unlikely to find one, especially since space is so incredibly empty in the first place. After you find a black hole, you need to get extremely close to it to experience its tidal forces. Even if you approached a sun-mass black hole at 1au, you would experience nothing more than the gravitational pull our Earth experiences. For stellar-mass black holes, you would need to get very close - probably within the radius of the sun - to start experiencing tidal effects that can be seriously harmful.
@@huaen8880 I agree with you. My intention for that sentence was that while the black hole itself was infitesimally small, its gravitational effects were still much greater than their small size would suggest.
Christopher Jones but it would only be the same gravitational pull as a star of the same mass
Thank you for providing content that is quite possibly the best available anywhere on this platform. Well done and greatly appreciated.
As always, great explanation and animation. Keep it up.
1:21 I just laughed out loud when the heroic music came in, given the context Really informative video btw!
At some point, I lost focus of the terminology and was sucked into his voice. Then I hit the isco and pulled myself back together. I feel brighter now.
So can we assume the black hole "gargantua" in interstellar fed on a star at some point too? Cool. Great video by the way ^^
Yes!
Yup, and Gargantua was also a spinning black hole! Movie logic dictated that it spun at near the theoretical maximum (as that's the only way time would have worked like it did on Miller's planet... that, and Miller's planet being much closer than was depicted), but the final on-screen render showed the black hole rotating at 60% of the maximum instead, as 99% would have caused Gargantua to look a bit lopsided and distorted, which may have confused viewers (as opposed to looking only slightly lopsided).
Gargantua fed on love. It is believed the spin of Gargantua was exponentially fuelled by Christopher Nolan's ego.
@@NukeMyHouse I see someone have read "The Science of Interstellar".
It was a great read for sure.
I imagine risco like the whirl in a toilett or bathtube in 3D, as faster it spins (as faster the water floates down the pip/fermions and bosons go down the hole) as steeper and more sharpened the whirl walls are. 😅 You did a very good job in explanation!
Quick questions from a know-nothing: I'm confused about the dwarf star orbiting the black hole, the one that you described as always there but not visible until the star was sucked in to the black hole. I assume that its orbit is in a place of equilibrium where the gravitational force pulling the dwarf star in matches the centripetal force of the spin pushing it out. But then a star gets sucked into the black hole. Wouldn't that massively change the gravity of the black hole? According to your explanation, such an event would also increase the spin, but are we saying that increase in mass and increase in spin are equivalent somehow? Or did the dwarf star change its orbital pattern after this event? I guess we can't compare before & after, but is it in any way possible that it DIDN'T change its orbital pattern after such a dramatic event? How would a star getting sucked into a black hole change the trajectory of an object already in orbit around that black hole? Wouldn't it disturb the orbital pattern greatly in the short run, then, settling down, cast the dwarf star into a new long-term orbital pattern? The bigger implication of what I'm asking is whether the dwarf star was actually there and orbiting in that manner before the event, or if the event introduced the dwarf star into orbit or somehow dramatically changed its orbit. Thanks for the time, and thanks especially for the great videos.
Just FYI, redshift can only be used to calculate distance at very large extra-galactic distances where the expansion of the universe accounts for most of the object's observed motion. At distances where we can resolve individual stars from stellar clusters (as opposed to resolving individual stellar discs), which we can only do within our galaxy and some members of the local galactic group, cosmological redshift can't be used because the Doppler shift primarily traces the stars' peculiar motions within their galaxies or of their host galaxies through their group or cluster. We can use stellar spectra to gauge a star's distance, but to do so we have to compare the spectra to stellar evolutionary models to distinguish dwarfs and giants of the same temperatures and estimate the star's intrinsic luminosity at that stage in its life. For isolated stars (not part of a multiple system or cluster but free-moving in the galactic potential), stellar evolutionary models are often the best distance-estimating tools available, and that's not saying a whole lot.
I kind of understood the first half of your comment, then I got lost :(.... men I wish I could have studied astrophysics *sigh*
"Free-moving in the galactic potential..." what a beautiful idea. What a lovely turn of phrase. Did you make that up?
@@tampauser6879 it's a succinct definition of the term we'd use, "field star", although I evidently sacrificed too much clarity for brevity. "Galactic potential" was short for the potential well of the Milky Way. We use the term "potential well" a lot in the field to describe the gravitational sphere of influence of a mass or (more often) group of n masses where n may be a large number. "Potential" comes from "gravitational potential energy", and the "well" part comes from the way we often try to describe intuitively how massive objects deform space according to relativity. The usual metaphor is a bowling ball on a tautly stetched sheet: the ball creates a depression or "well" that makes smaller objects dropped on the same sheet fall toward it.
Are there galaxies from the local group from which we can identify individual stars? I thought that's only possible for within the Milky Way...
@@PaskalS some particularly massive stars can be picked out in the Magellanic Clouds and the sparse outskirts of the Andromeda and Triangulum galaxies. It's hard af, though.
Ah finally a Challenge for my *BEyBlAdE* Our battle will be legendary
funniest comment here
Hahaha I laughed more at this than I thought I would've thx
Damn, that Black Hole spaghettified that star real good
Starghetti
So why didn’t Cooper become S’ghetti?
@@UrNewStepdad91 Yeah but what about UY Scuti?? I bet these black holes won't look so menacing next to the colossal UY Scuti!
@@leociresi4292 larger, more gentle black hole + creative liberties
Slurp.
I love your videos, thank you so much for the time and effort put into creating them. They are great for communicating science people wouldn't know otherwise!
Tesla referenced human energy 🌬👻jesus christ referenced living waters science 💎👨🎓👩🎓science described water memory 🌊🎭psalms16:24 k,j proverbs27:19 existence psychologically god bless fight the good fight 💖👻💎👨🎓👩🎓🗽🤍⚖🌪🌬
@@miguelchippsinteligente6072 ... what...?
Sweet library dude!
That's The John Rylands Library in Manchester UK
LOL...it's a custom background image.
@@TucsonDude 😂😂😂🤣
@@TheBankaiMusic djr gvvvv. ؤرؤؤللللالشبببييقلللبللببللءؤؤؤرررليبققفاغفقثضصىىىىتننوةنننم alhamdulla
@@jaydutta7711 siuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuUuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu Uuuuuuuuuuuu
Oh my Christ. Thank you for showing how we measure these distant objects!
😂
Haven't you watch Cosmos a Space Odyssey? Watch it! It's awesome!
Why on earth are there so many dislikes.....did the dislikers misheard "Naked singularities" with "NAKED SINGLE LADIES" ???
Both make men uncomfortable, when they're nerds XD
Probably cuz they thing black holes are racist
@@monkeyojacko why do you guys have to bring your shitty agenda into everything
@@abisgamer4825 I think he's *against* it tho
😂😂😂😂, makes sense though
I think I’m certain everything spins now, even the universe
Indeed
But what would it even mean for a non continous object liek the universe to spin?
Just curious....If the galaxy is 290 million light years away and we are detecting this event now, does that mean the event actually happened 290 million years ago ? since the information would have taken that much time to reach us.
Yep ! :)
Yees
Mhm that’s how the mafia works
Yes.
this is why star wars can never work
Always wondered how scientists were able to come to conclusions. Would love to see more of this type of videos. Thanks
Out of all the channels I don't understand, this one is my favorite. I'm partially kidding, of course; much of the math is beyond me, but Muller does brilliantly to help make complex science more accessible for those of us without a significant background in physics and mathematics, but no lack of curiosity.
And *Dereks* genius is to keep you watching even when you have no idea what he is saying.
Excellent presentation as always, thanks for the education.
This is the content I subscribed for haha.
Me too
Same
This is what Vsauce should've always been like: free for everyone.
Because if someone is good at something, they should always do it for free...?
@@Roxfox yeah not paying a conceited douchebag a monthly fee to watch youtube videos
@@matguimond92 I don't know why you think I care, but that's fine. It's your decision, and a sensible one as far as I'm concerned, if you were looking for validation.
@@matguimond92 what is with the entitlement ? Its his content, he can charge for it if he wants to.
Roxfox you make it sound as if he wasn’t getting paid at all. Monetization on KZhead works like network television. VSause had a lot of subscribers and views so the advertising revenue should have been pretty substantial. This doesn’t even mention the ability to sell merchandise, obtain episode sponsors and Patreon. You’re ultimately right though, it’s Michael’s choice, but he wasn’t doing it for “free”...not anymore than NBC, CBS, Fox etc.
I swear this is the most interesting black holes video on YT
5:17 "This is called a naked singularity, and it makes a lot of scientists uncomfortable" 🤣 🤣 🤣 an underrated pun. Kudos and congrats 👍🏾
Umm this happened 250milion years ago Step up ur game guys.
Patience.
That's actually got me trippin lol
Or does it only occur when we view it? It's all relative
@@penguin44ca that's not how light works
@@eattoast6378 BUT THATS HOW MAFIA WORKS
So your telling me the flashes were caused by a white dwarf star, something unimaginably huge, going half the speed of light, unimaginably fast... I feel small.
In fact white dwarfs are small (still aproximately the size of earth) but they are unimaginably dense, because there mass are comparable to the sun.
A star circled a black hole once every TWO. MINUTES. It takes Mercury freaking 88 days to trundle around our star. But this white dwarf, only a little smaller than the FREAKING SUN. Friggin zips around a SUPER MASSIVE BLACK HOLE. In TWO. MINUTES.
@@paolo8339 Oh I didn't know that! Thanks for the info!
@@greypotter1005 I was thinking the same thing 2 minutes for that to happen... WOW!!!
White dwarf stars aren't unimaginably huge, unless the Earth is too huge for your imagination, since that's about how big a white dwarf star is. Though it's about a million times more massive than the Earth.
Very nicely presented. Thank you for this video.
This man deserves a Nobel Prize. His videos are the ones which have motivated me to understand science , not memorize it.
Love your work man!
Wow. This was a really good video. I like it! Keep being awesome!
Thank you for the explanations. Great work thank you
School should teach this way. Awesome video as always.
"This is called a naked singularity, and it makes a lot of scientists uncomfortable" Not the only naked thing that makes them uncomfortable
Yeah, your mom has that effect on people.
Or the blinking is just alien lighthouse and we are making those theories here :D
@Sir Woof trump
They would be extinct by now as this happened millions of years ago.
@Sir Woof This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard
@@zapcrossworld4036 dafuk 🤣
@Sir Woof what makes you think they're not?
Very nicely presented. Lucid and understandable.
I sure am glad they don’t express it as diameters, or it would be a disco!
Copy cat
amazing what one can tell simply from the light emitted from distant objects
And a 1000 years of science
Or the lack thereof...
arguably less considering the public fear of science for eons, pushed by religious institutions
It's easy to form theories about things that no one can physically verify... There have been hundreds of scientific theories disproven over the years. This information is no less susceptible.
@@thehoovah It's part of its charm. Of course, we can't really say ANYTHING 100% for sure (this could all be just the matrix and we wouldn't know) but we still try to understand the universe around us with the current information we have. If, however, this is proven to be incorrect, then that just meant that there's a better explanation that we have yet to find and the journey to learning about this phenomenon begins anew. This time, we are equipped with a better understanding than last time (since we DID disprove the previous theory and what made that possible didn't come from nowhere).
I understood... some of it
Hel yeah me too. 😂
Whatever he told about was simple Physics that you usually study in school, he wasn't talking of higher level concepts, so if you are a kid you will soon read the formulas and terms he used. :) it's not that hard.
@@cloveramv Not really. Many concepts were higher level. I was never taught about black holes or anything about black body radiation or the acretion disk in school. I learned it all myself.
More than I did...and yet I optimistically watch.
Amazing video BRAVO mate🎉
srsly these videos are so amzing tysm!!
next video: can dark matter be made with strong enough coffee?
Brown matter could be made with strong enough coffee, *but that’s for a different video* 👀
Black matter *is* strong enough coffee
Only if nibbler eats it.
@@medexamtoolsdotcom lol
"There's coffee in that nebula!" - captain janeway
Will you ever do another collab video with someone where both videos are meant to be played together simultaneously? Like the toilet flushing video.
Thanks a lot for this video. That spinning phenomenon looks to be due to the coriolis force. I would like to know about the black holes magnetic fields too.
I love your content :)) keep making videos
thank you!
10 April 2019 first ever image of black hole seen by public.
@Claudia Juarez dude it was a multinational project that started at least in 2017, it had multiple petabytes of data to construct, it took the largest radio array ever made to image it. Shut up if you don't know what you're talking about.
@Claudia Juarez i conclude you are a very smart flat earther, tell me if i'm wrong
Ok, I think you'll stop saying your opinion on the internet, and think about that people can always disagree with ya, but tho bruh I think it's real smh
@Claudia Juarez The distance and obstruction: WHY DO YOU THINK THEY HAD TO USE AN ENORMOUS ARRAY OF TELESCOPES ACROSS THE GLOBE? FOR FUN?
Conclusion: you are one of those conspiracy theorists on the history channel at 3:46AM
I love watching your videos. I am not a student of science but I love science. I want knowledge and your channel is the place to acquire knowledge.
Thanks for this.
0:20 "It's as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced"
Thank You for a great video, big fan of this channel. I do have a question though and I apologize for potential ridiculousness of it as astro-physics or or really any physics is very far from being my daily subjects of involvement but are much of personal curiosity. So if the massive star that got eaten by the black hole actually got consumed while passing by the black hole then wouldn't it's trajectory have to intersect with the actual event horizon of the black hole in order to be effected or is the animation just not correct? Also wouldn't the mass of the star that got eaten have to be smaller than that or the dwarf star that is apparently circling the black hole emitting those x-rays in order to experience effect of the gravity since the dwarf star manages to circle around without the experience of the same effect? and lastly how come there is any light or debris left circling the black hole? by my logic if the large massive start got engulfed while passing by then there really shouldn't be anything left from it and only hawking radiation would get emitted according to some earlier videos from this channel. Greatly appreciate any potential relative responses :)
just a few months later, and you'd have been able to show an *actual picture of a black hole*. incredible.
What’s remarkable is all of the events in our galaxy, alone. With the events being farther than we can explore, or events happening once in a blue moon that are happening right now. And we’ve missed them completely.
Looking at a naked singularity makes scientists uncomfortable...
lol
9:47 what's the fissure artifact that just popped up at top right of screen?
Looks like an eye lash lol
space worms
space worms lol. Looks like a green screen error.
Wasnt disappointed. That looks pretty cool 0o Black holes are simply just interesting
5:18 Black Hole: _[spins so fast it unveils its singularity]_ Scientists: _[blushing]_ Black Hole chan: Do you want me to put my clothes back on, scientist-kun? UwU
please delete this comment i cant 😂😂🤣🤣🤣
Shut up please
Something I'm curious about - everything in space seems to spin - planets, suns, blackholes, galaxies etc. But what about the whole thing? Does the universe rotate about the big bang origin too?
Interesting question. However: Is it even a valid question? Would there be any conceivable way one could detect the difference without observing from outside the universe somehow? I'm not talking about feasible with our current technology, I'm talking about theoretically possible. If not, then the question is unanswerable and meaningless.
@@silkwesir1444 I don't know enough to know that lol - but its never bad to ask imo :)
If there is an big bang origin in space, which there is not to our current knowledge. Only an origin in time.
Simple answer: no. Long answer: A common misconception is that the big bang was a single point that originated the entire universe. This is not exactly what happened. In reality, it was a violently fast expansion of the universe. Imagine you have a deflated balloon and that you draw a grid on it. Then, out of nowhere, you inflate it really really fast. Ignoring that it could pop, you notice that the grid is still there; the squares are just much larger. There are no new squares. That's what the big bang was like. We live in a single square (the observable universe) that once was very small. If you also draw dots inside the squares, you may notice that they don't grow in size - just space itself does. Things didn't start expanding out of a single point, everything started to get further away from everything else. The name "big bang" causes a lot of confusion and people think that it was an explosion. A more appropriate name would be something like "big stretch". Why do things spin in the universe? Imagine you have a sphere. Now, roll it on the floor. Ignoring things like friction and slope, the sphere will just keep rolling in a straight line, forever. Now, imagine that you attach it to a rope, and that you hold the end of the rope really close to the floor. Now, if you try to roll the ball, it won't go in a straight line, it will start spinning around the end of the rope, like a bow compass. The rope is like some kind of force that is pulling the sphere and not letting it go. Gravity is a bit like this rope. Things in space would just move randomly in a straight line, if it weren't for gravity - a force that attracts things, making them spin around each other. This force gets stronger the more massive things are. Taking all of this into consideration, it becomes clear why the whole universe isn't spinning around the origin of the big bang: first, because it doesn't exist. EVERYWHERE is the origin of the big bang. And if there was a single point where everything originated from, there would be no reason for anything to spin around it.
Assuming for a moment our universe is infinite, which it seems like it is (due to its impressive flatness), the big bang didn't occur at a particular point in space. This is part of science communication that really bugs me: the conflation of our universe with our observable universe. When we say that the universe was squished into an infinitesimally small point, what we're referring to there is the observable universe. Prior to the big bang, if the universe is infinite, the universe was still infinite. It's just that the very big, finite volume of it we can observe today and into the future that was squished into a point. The big bang, rather than happening at a particular point, occurred everywhere, or at least everywhere that our observable universe used to be. There's no single point today or then around which the universe might rotate. I do recall, however, reading about a GR solution that gave you time travel in a rotating universe, so I really hope I'm wrong, I've got some personal fashion trends I want to correct.