/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.15893201]

>observing a black hole from within the event horizon would be the present but relative to within the event horizon every interaction the black hole makes outside of the event horizon is in the infinite past
what

[Anonymous No.15893382]

>>15893201
The reason is because time is moving at different speeds all over the universe. The speed that time moves is due to how much gravity there is in some area of space, which is due to how much mass there is in that same area. Time is moving at a certain rate for us here on earth, but if you were to fly to a black hole and sit just outside it there would be much more gravity so time would move much slower. We would both still be on the same timeline though, there's only one timeline

You can imagine it like the gas particles in picrel. Some are moving faster than others. In the picture it's due to them having different velocities, but gravity has the same effect, not on their velocity but on their relative movement. So you can imagine them having the same local velocity but there's different amounts of gravity in different areas of the image. About your question, gravity is so high and time is so slow inside a black hole that it's pretty much at a standstill, with it being actually at a standstill in the singularity. And because time is moving extremely slow for someone inside the black hole, their biology is also moving extremely slow. This makes it so what they perceive is that things are actually moving at a normal speed and things outside the black hole are moving really fast

[Anonymous No.15893434]

>>15893201
Take the math describing a photon and then just put negative signs everywhere lmao.

Photons exchange mass for energy, black holes exchange energy for mass.

[Anonymous No.15893443]

>>15893201
>outside of the event horizon is in the infinite past
I think that should be future and not past. Time is moving faster outside the black hole

[Anonymous No.15893447]

>>15893434
>>15893201
Also, what I mean by this is that once you fell inside the event horizon of a black hole, you wouldn't be able to escape not because "the gravity is so immense", although that's sorta the reason, but instead because as you were falling into the black hole your relative time would slow down to a crawl and the universe outside the black hole would speed up. As you fell, if you looked upwards, you'd see the whole universe flux and bubble and pull itself apart. The whole lifespan of the universe would pass in an instant. And then, you'd be trapped "inside" the decaying black hole. You can't leave not because you "can't escape" but because there's literally no universe to escape into, it's all gone.

[Anonymous No.15893455]

>>15893447
>>15893434
ALSO

As you're falling into the black hole, in a sort of fuzzy and insanely complex way, the matter you're made of would slowly exchange all of its energy for mass in the same way that the black hole did.

You'd slowly become one with its essential mechanical structure. This process is similar to what being married to a piece of shit wife is like.

[Anonymous No.15893480]

>>15893447
>but instead because as you were falling into the black hole your relative time would slow down to a crawl and the universe outside the black hole would speed up. As you fell, if you looked upwards, you'd see the whole universe flux and bubble and pull itself apart.
I thought you reached the center in a finite amount of time relative to outside? Is it just an absurdly long period of time?

[Anonymous No.15893488]

what is it about black holes that makes them the number one most popular popsci topic of discussion amongst the brainlet soience fangoys?
is it the comic bookish aspects of the spectacular, unrealistic and completely non disprovable conjectures which go along with the topic that make black holes so popular amongst the scientist posers and wannabes?

[Anonymous No.15893518]

>>15893488
what is it about black holes that makes you cry and seethe and cope so hard that you have to post
>what is it about black holes that makes them the number one most popular popsci topic of discussion amongst the brainlet soience fangoys?
is it the comic bookish aspects of the spectacular, unrealistic and completely non disprovable conjectures which go along with the topic that make black holes so popular amongst the scientist posers and wannabes?
every time you hear the term black holes?

[Anonymous No.15893527]

>>15893480
nta but I've read about it being finite time to travel from the horizon to the singularly. The biggest black hole is about 0.03 light years radius
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_Cluster#Supermassive_black_hole
So I guess the time it takes light to travel from the horizon to the centre would be roughly the time it would also take any other object falling in. So depending on the size it would be anywhere from a few milliseconds to a few days local time, outside the black hole time would be moving a lot quicker. That's for a non rotating black hole though, for a rotating one I don't know, it has tidal forces that rip anything apart that comes close to the horizon and then things are kind of flattened onto the horizon, I'm not sure if anything other than light goes to the singularity with those, they behave a lot differently

[Anonymous No.15893587]

>>15893488
cringe
>>15893518
based

[Anonymous No.15893903]

>>15893201
Lol someone's been watching PBS Space Time.
>>15893488
Midwit

[Anonymous No.15894013]

>>15893447
>>15893455
You have no clue what you're talking about. If you passed the event horizon of a large enough black hole you wouldn't even notice. The fact that you can't escape the black hole is similar to how you can't travel outside of your own lightcone (you can't travel to spacetime events which require faster than light speed), which is something that is true even in flat space.

[Anonymous No.15894224]

>>15893455
>last part
lmao

[Anonymous No.15894289]

>>15894013
>You have no clue what you're talking about.
Takes one to know one, buddy.

[Anonymous No.15894704]

>>15894289
That doesn't even make sense. Someone who knows what they are talking about can spot bullshit easily whereas someone who has no clue can not

[Anonymous No.15894934]

>>15893382
>>15893447
>>15893455
>>15893527
>>15894013
Is it safe to say that gravity and time are functionally the same thing when at its extremes then?
I mean, if you travel fast you increase the gravitational force and decrease time, so they must be correlated since the inverse is also true, that if you have a shitton of gravity time stops
How is gravity, time and momentum correlated?
How does gravity affect time but not necessarily momentum, momentum affects time and gravity, but time affects neither?

[Anonymous No.15895667]

>>15894934
>Is it safe to say that gravity and time are functionally the same thing when at its extremes then?
Time is definitely it's own thing, but it might be safe to say that gravity is functionally the same as energy when it's at its extremes. Even more extreme than a black hole singularity is probably the Planck Epoch of the Big Bang. This is less than 1 planck time after the Big Bang started, so up to about 10^-43 seconds. Gravity was unified with all the other forces and all the matter in the whole universe was compressed into a size less than a single atom. Everything was basically energy, there were no forces or particles, the temperature was trillions of kelvin, the conditions were too extreme. Gravity separated from the other 3 forces just after the Planck Epoch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_unification_epoch
There's a full timeline here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe#Tabular_summary

Newtonian gravity treats gravity like a force, like the other fundamental forces. A force that attracts things to one another. But general relativity treats gravity as the curvature of spacetime. And the spacetime becomes curved from mass. It actually kind of becomes compressed which causes things to basically fall towards eachother. If you look at picrel there's a planet going around through space compressing the spacetime as it moves, this is more what it looks like. So really you could say that gravity is not a force at all is is just the resulting shape of spacetime caused by mass. And the more spacetime is curved (compressed) the slower time goes

[Anonymous No.15895669]

>>15895667
...also, picrel here is the kind of simplified version of how gravity is usually shown to be affecting spacetime by some mass. I prefer that animation in the thread above though because it's more like what's actually happening