Home Artists Posts Import Register

Content

Seriously though, today's episode has been delayed due to my (Matt's) extreme obsessiveness.  There are a couple of things I wanted to fix and so we're releasing the episode tomorrow  instead. As a teaser, we'll be talking about what really happens at the event horizon of a black hole. Here's a gif I made as part of the graphics notes for Grayson. It's a black hole being dropped onto a spacetime diagram. The singularity is at X=0 and an event horizon appears at X=1. All light paths are curved in its vicinity. The light-cone of a falling observer bends towards the event horizon until, at that horizon, all possible futures encompass the singularity.

Files

Comments

mastermazeproductions

What software did you use to make the gif? or was it made in an animation program and then exported as a gif?

pbsspacetime

My process is ugly. I made this as a Keynote animation, recorded it as a .mov then converted to a gif. Don't judge me.

Anonymous

This is probably the wrong place to ask this, but is it right to think of the event horizon, as a point where there is no path (geodesic) out of the black hole? I mean, if you were inside the event horizon, would you be able to point in a direction that would lead you out of the black hole, or is space so distorted that all paths end up taking you closer to the singularity?

Anonymous

Speaking of event horizons, you all might find this new paper interesting: "Echoes from the Abyss: Evidence for Planck-scale structure at black hole horizons" <a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.00266v1.pdf" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.00266v1.pdf</a>

Anonymous

My personal favorite interpretation of Quantum Mechanics is Rovelli's Relational interpretation. It's the most parsimonious one I've seen. It avoids much of the issues with Copenhagen (no objective collapse) and with the dualism imposed by Many Worlds (in fact, it could be argued that, under the interpretation, there are *zero* worlds - there is no universal wave function) and nicely jives with information theory - all by taking Special Relativity seriously. It doesn't answer every question, and still leaves plenty of mystery. And of course, it may simply be wrong. But there's something about it that feels very elegant.

Anonymous

if Dark Matter forms a black hole, what happens if the monkey falls in? and is the dark matter black hole the same as a normal matter black hole and could it be possible that the black holes in center of galaxies are actually 2 black holes , one dark and one normal overlapping with an Einstein Rosen bridge between them?

Anonymous

If dark matter is some form of matter of any kind, a black hole that came from dark matter should act exactly the same as a baryonic matter ("normal" matter) black hole, as far as current theory is concerned.

pbsspacetime

As far as we know, dark matter is indistinguishable from normal matter once it's inside a black hole. It only contributes its mass (and charge, if it had any), and any other properties are lost from the point of view of the outside universe.

pbsspacetime

Hey Greg, yeah, I've read a bit about RQM and I was struck by the tantalizing combination of unintuitiveness and simplicity. I think the "one true interpretation" will certainly have both of those qualities. We're going to need to shatter some preconceptions (that we probably aren't aware that we have) to make progress, and RQM seems to do that. I'm going to have to look into it more deeply.

Anonymous

so black holes are not opaque to dark mater then, so could we assume a neutron star has an event like horizon to any matter with mass and might be the only thing made of normal matter that can actually capture dark matter?

Anonymous

This post makes me think about the questions that we do for finding extra-terrestrial life: It is not "where" but "when".