844
That's none of my business (lemmy.world)
submitted 11 months ago by to c/funny@lemmy.world
88 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 102 points 11 months ago (35 children)

fact... potentially...

Yes, we're going to ignore a sensationalist conclusion that is not supported by evidence.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 35 child comments
    •
  • [+] 55 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (32 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 32 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago* (22 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
    •
  • [+] 15 points 11 months ago (18 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago* (6 children)

    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?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
    load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    It explains subjective experiences?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 11 months ago (3 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    Sounds a lot like pseudoscience unless I am missing something major

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (2 children)

    De sitter space and anti de sitter space took me a while to grok as it relates to all this stuff

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (3 children)

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
    • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •