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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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 universe space significantly younger outside of the black hole? Is matter less finite? It really makes the mind wander
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
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.
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.
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 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 ?". For people who are interested: they are likely already aware; for people who are not interested: it's safe to ignore it.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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 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.
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?
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.
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.
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
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.
Yes, we're going to ignore a sensationalist conclusion that is not supported by evidence.
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.
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?
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.
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?
Sounds a lot like pseudoscience unless I am missing something major
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.
De sitter space and anti de sitter space took me a while to grok as it relates to all this stuff
Grok remains a perfectly cromulent word, imo.
Even if everything Elon touches isn't
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:
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
My intellect level is dipshit: do you know a good source for me to study and learn about this?
Copied from another user in this thread
I would suggest nasa.gov
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 wanderRight 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?
I mean technically the sentence structure says that:
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.
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!
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.
In the grand scheme of things:
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.
Bars.
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 ?". For people who are interested: they are likely already aware; for people who are not interested: it's safe to ignore it.
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
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.
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.
Just tell your landlord we're in a black hole and the rent doesn't matter.
Isn't matter the whole issue
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.
You are matter but you don't
And then punch your landlord in the face. They are a landlord, they probably deserve it.
Link to this? I had not heard that.
Here's a summary
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.
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?
Do you have an essay you could throw at me, or some kind of video that explains it in reasonably understandable detail?
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.
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?
Like a sort of universe-sized Coriolis effect?
All hail the great Space Toilet
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.
https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/average-rent-by-year
https://www.space.com/space-exploration/james-webb-space-telescope/is-our-universe-trapped-inside-a-black-hole-this-james-webb-space-telescope-discovery-might-blow-your-mind
Wow crazy I'll make sure to adjust my schedule
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
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
Makes sense. Everything in this universe sucks. Ha. I'm funny. Anyways...
Didn’t she-ra do something like that?
what
Your life just got worse. You're paying rent inside of a black hole.
What's this discovery?
abolish all rent. see the cat. seriously!
Cool.
Is it weird that I'm rooting for the black hole to destroy me?