whats inside the event horizon?
>>16885242everything that's not outside of it, of course
a real dimensional collapse, not just mathematically
Event horizon doesn't have inside.
>>16885242Hell.
>>16885242A bag of fries
>>16885242remember when everyone pretended this blurry goatse jpg was a big deal
>>16885341we might live to see them figure out getting it in focus
>>16885242What do black hole BEC analogues say is inside? Genuine question.
Apparently, in a space suit, you pass through the event horizon without even feeling it. (After total dismemberment)
>>16885242>whats inside the event horizon?Our universe, but reflected.
>>16885242what happens if an electron's waveform collapse inside of the event horizon is the sigma 1,000,000 event that makes it instantly teleport outside of the event horizon?
>>16885242>whats inside the event horizon?>>16885244Kek>>16885250There's a second temporal dimension that gets stretched out. Basically a phase angle. Temporal pathways become non-unique.
>>16885242the black hole is a gravitational soliton. it is made of gravitons and there are no other particles present
>>16885361If it's a supermassive black hole, it would be very gentle and you would not even feel a thing. On the inside it would be like being underwater and just get denser and denser as you approach the center.I like the theory that actually reaching the center of a supermassive black hole would take many magnitudes longer than the predicted legnth of time itself. Like, our entire universe would be dead and gone in a vold of absolute zero heat with no energy left and no pertubations happening in the QM field to start it back up again, long before you ever start to fall apart or turn into speghetti. Fucking wild to think about that shit.
>>16885722to an outside observer you would never even cross the event horizon, to the person falling in they would proceed normally and be able to see the entire future timeline of the universe in front of you before you reach the singularity. wild shit indeed.
>>16885242Your Mom.
What even is a black hole?Is it three dimensional?If it was big enough could I eat it like a grape?
>>16885787>is it 3 dimensionalaccording to the math its actually one dimensional. a black hole is just a single point with infinite density. they can have different amounts of mass, but no matter how much mass they have, its all concentrated into that single point. which really shouldnt exist in physical reality, but the math that predicted their existence says there really HAS to be a singularity, its fundamental. it creates a 3 dimensional event horizon around it that would just appear as a blackbody, but in essence the black hole itself is just a one dimensional rip in spacetime that produces infinite density, infinite space time curvature, infinite time dilation.
>>16885242Muh dick
>>16885242the same thing that is outside, but warped in such a way as to make every trajectory in forward space lead towards the singularity, with backwards time travel as the only way out.
>>16885242Degenerate matter and electromagnetic radiation>yOu cAnT kNoW bEcAuSe nO iNfOrMaTiOn cAn eScApE!!cope. energy went in, energy comes out. it's just a big mess of the underlying substrate of whatever particles actually are "under the hood", which we don't know, but it doesn't go anywhere. two black holes passing near each other sometimes explode or cast out matter and energy, which is exactly what you'd expect from a tightly packed bundle of matter and energy. it is fascinating that energy can behave in this way, but there's zero reason to believe it it "disappears" or "teleports to a white hole in another universe" just because it can't be measured anymore, the fact that such baseless speculative ideas have persisted so long in the popular culture is simply ridiculous
>>16885787A sphere of extremely dense matter>If I was big enough could I eat it like a grapeThat would be extremely painful
A black hole is just one really big atom. Prove me wrong.
>>16885944what are neutron stars then?
>>16885889a singularity, not a sphere. if theres no singularity theres no event horizon either.
>>168857920d = point1d = lineetc.
There needs to be some mass for existence it to sink to, It would be an enlarged focus without matter as a bond.
>>16885242If a star blows off its outer shell, I doubt it would the structure integrity to be a pure singularity. It looks squeezed between a high energy.
>>16885997yeah I knew that Im just retarded
>>16885242inside I don't know, but in the event horizon some civilizations can extract information of the universe
Magnetic attraction strong enough to break elements down into their smallest possible Plank size building blocks, leaving no room for those parts to move. filling in every empty location, a singularity, entropy, a singular ratio scale
>>16886118I think the system failed you guize.Prolly a global typo in that edition or something.See >>16886012
if light doesnt have mass, why is it affected by the gravity of a black hole?
>>16885974>no protonsNot an atom.
>muh black holesyou are like little baby
>>16885974Chads..
>>16886501>Space stretches the closer it is to mass.If that anology is correct then at some distance incredibly far way from any mass we would expect to see the spatial dimensions contract towards a point?But wait, that's the opposite of what I was told. The popsci idea of a black hole was a singularity at the center. How can that happen if the space is getting stretched towards infinity as matter falls into a black hole?
>>16886509>wins nobel prize in 1935 for discovering the neutron in 1942h4x
>>16885792>according to the mathAccording to the math we had the ultraviolet catastrophe, math is useless if it isn't empirically verified.
>>16886548 the experiment used to discover the neutron was in 1932
