Black hole Firewalls - with Sean Carroll and Jennifer Ouellette 

Think of it as an apology from the Royals of England to your and any other country who had to endure their reign earlier in history. Also, you have the internet, the most powerful tool in history for learning, if you want it to be. Good to see that you have an interest in the basic fundamentals of everything, it's an extremely good character trait in my eyes. Schooling does count for something, but the basic human trait of curiosity is so much more important.

I am from India, but I have the resources! How is it that you don't? All we need in today's world is a laptop with internet connection and am sure u have that.

You got smart people in India. The most important resource :)

You speak english and have the internet... The world is yours

check out Leonard Susskind's lectures from Stanford. You, like the rest of us, have access to the best lecturers I the world. This is a wonderful age. Take advantage of it!

WTF at times it was a utterly incomprehensible USELESS explanation & nobody knew WTF he was talking about eg: 47:47 _"In a black hole, the 2-dimensional event horizon really does contain all the information you need, to talk about what's happening inside, according to the holographic principle. But it should be true even in this room, or the galaxy or the universe. & if that is true, locality is being dramatically violated, because there is a lot less that can possibly happen in this room than you thought could. You thought that something could be happening here & something could be happening there & different things could be happening at every point. But the holographic principle says: No, that's not true. 1 of the arguments for it, is if you imagine all of the different possible things that could happen most of them would have a lot of energy & would collapse to make a black hole. So there is an upper limit on the number of things that could happen in this room, & the size of the upper limit is proportional to the area of the walls around this room. So there is this hypothesis that all of physics really lives in a world that is 1 dimension lower than the world we actually see. & again, we are trying to make sense of this idea. We are making progress, but we are not completely there yet."_ _"The other idea that has come out of Black holes and argues against locality is called Black hole complementarity. Remember I said that, from the point of view of Bob from far away, he sees radiation coming out of the Black hole, and he says: well if I trace it backwards, it must have been very high energy radiation when it left the event horizon. Whereas Alice, in the conventional way of thinking about things, passes through the event horizon & sees nothing there, just empty space. So they had incompatible ways of describing the same situation. Bob thinks the event horizon is bubbling with high-energy radiation; Alice says there's nothing there. Black hole complementarity says: they are both correct. Black hole complementarity says they are different-sounding ways of giving equivalent descriptions of the same fundamental underlying reality, & that 2 things that are seen by 2 observers can look very very different, as long as the observers can never get together to compare notes. So what happens is, if you give Bob enough time to collect the Hawking radiation, & figure out what he thinks the horizon looks like, & you give Alice enough time to fall into the horizon. If Bob then says: alright, I've got some data; I know what's coming out of the Black hole. I am going to fly into the Black hole & tell Alice what I saw. It is too late. She has been spaghettified & crushed into the singularity. So these 2 observers see a very different thing happening in the world, but hey can never talk about it. Only we - God-like physicists, looking at the whole thing from afar, can give the bird's eye view on everything that is going on. That is the principle of Black hole complementarity. It's borrowed from the early days of quantum mechanics when Niels Bohr pointed out that you are allowed to measure position, OR you are allowed to measure velocity. You are not allowed to measure both at the same time. That was quantum complementarity; this is Black hole complementarity. So again, it's a violation of locality in some sense. It says that the right way to describe the world isn't what's happening here, & what's happening there, & what's happening there, and what's happening there, separately. What's happening right there can depend in a very dramatic way on who's looking at it & from what perspective. So somehow, all the information about what's going on in the world is not simply located in individual points in space. It's encoded in some cryptic way that we don't yet understand, & that's what we are trying to get at, by doing these thought experiments. The problem is, these 2 types of non-locality, don't seem to be enough to solve the firewall puzzle."_

+CaptianKeyz Imagine where we could be as a species, if more people thought of this as entertainment instead of the absolute dreck populating TV, cinema, and radio, encouraging our children to follow in the footsteps of the great thinkers.

CaptianK

CaptianKeyz Godnrules

Yes!!!

dont 4 get to think 4 yorself,and reverse everything.

He;s an idiot who doesn't even believe in the scientific method. You like him 'cause he's an atheist.

Sean’s enthusiasm and eloquence are to be admired. The trap he sets is you may believe everything he says.

Nikola Perkovic bringing up religion when nobody was talking about it. You seem like a rational person, give us your method to scientific research.

@@percestyler Sean Carroll doesn't believe in the scientific method?? That nonsense you wrote plus the typical name calling reveals it is in fact you who doesn't like him just because he's an atheist. Everything he's said here is valid regardless of the existence of God.

@@iannamandwa7017 we are all american at heart.

0000000

So what? You think hell is on the other side? You "worry" me a bit... You are not religious, are you?

Not to be pedantic, but... Actually the packets that DO get through generate more heat than the rejected packets. All packets are equal before inspection. Dropped packets simply cease to be, but allowed packets have to be reassembled and forwarded to their destination, which requires more energy to transmit on down the line as either electricity or light.

LOL i just explained that firewalls have been around for some time (before computers)... if i remember right the first recorded instance was after londons great fire... adjacent buildings had to share at least one wall of stone, brick, or other masonry.

Onl no mm on

Information as stated in physics should be more fundamental than the term used in computer science. I guess.

Not to be rude but ADHD is lame

@@WebesJamm ha what?! Most random & weird comment ever wtf…

@@ermagherd1204 he's referring to it not being real because it's generally bad diet related etc than being a specific disease I think

@@Hakor0 I'd love to hear your information on it, the diet/brain correlation is interesting af but I never heard anything about ADHD being related

​@@Hakor0xx

Same 👋

Same. I have the need to watch Sean Carroll lectures while doing something slightly less complicated than quantum mechanics, namely lace knitting. 🤣 Weirdly, it keeps me on task!?

instaBlaster.

Wife?

He's good at collapsing the interrogative wave function.

Drop the icrap please, it is disgusting.

Perhaps all was not lost, as in another universe you did become a theoretical physicist! Although i bet in that universe you wish you had become a professor of psychology.

I'm 63 with a high school education who got D's in any math class I managed not to flunk and I intend to spend the rest of my days trying to understand this stuff! Enjoy physics on your free time!

That joke was so British. I can't think of anywhere else where someone would come back like that.

reply: "its alright son, its not any more testable now than it was 100 years ago for its originator"

BadTrip l look

He's on shrooms , just making stuff up - he fakes norble reel Goode...

Good luck with your Doctorate then!

@@garymingy8671 Well, you are certainly ''minging'' Gary!

@@geoden Hopefully I will spell his name correctly next time.

@@garymingy8671 Quite right, not interesting

Or shout them whit tomatoes

You would never understand even after watching BILLION times Fool Cockroach 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂😂😂😆😆😆

My meal would reach absolute Zero before I even start eating!

+kash krupa just enjoy the humor

I'll just measure the size of this black hole as I'm falling into it.....What? If you're going to die anyway, there is no down side. Tuck and roll, tuck and roll.

you can also avoid spaghettification by falling into an extremely large black hole, for a time anyways...

gamesbok o

gamesbok so

It's charge that's positive and negative, but otherwise yes. The black hole loses its energy because Bob escapes.

​@@alexlarsen6413 I thought I heard Sean say between 32 and 35 minutes that the charge of the two particles is opposite, the spin is opposite and also the energy is opposite. So the particles falling in have negative energy. I don't think enough time was spent on this oddity.Does that mean the firewall is comprised of negative energy? And how do particles with negative energy behave? And what happens when they interact with particles with positive energy? And can particles have negative energy inside a black hole but not outside? There are a lot of questions which were not dealt with in this talk.

Sounding like an old-school dubstep intro

He's just good at vulgarization.

I don't think the average person can understand the higgs mechanism. At university they don't even bother teaching it to undergrad students. I never understood any of this stuff until I started writting out the math and playing around with the numbers: Put in 0 or 1 and see what answers you get. It took e yaers to figure out how a massless particle can push" a massive particle but it can due to compton scattering. Once you do the math it makes sense.

It's true that some people are very logical without having a particular interest in mathematics. However, if you are interested in mathematics, e.i. are good at it, you very likely are logical. But, yes, Philosophers are very logical and great thinkers but aren't necessarily good mathematicians.

I am such a person. Good for me! XD

@@daveb5041 There are different levels of understanding. I can follow most public lectures about GR, black holes and quantum physics without a lot of difficulties, but there's no way I could do the math, and I'm well aware that public lectures are a very downsized version of what a physics student would have to learn. So it's like being around a black hole: From the perspective of an average citizen, I'm quite savvy in astrophysics and quantum theory, but from the perspective of a physics professor, I'm not even a noob. And, as we have learnt, both are right ;)

Let go , saniety ain't all it's cracked up to be or snot to bee swelling to extreame deminsions impossible to alloy smelt nor brazed , amen ,adue

.....that Carrie.........

RIP Dave...

wrong video mate. I agree David Tong is good better than Carroll

I'm no expert, but maybe the answer has to do with the uncertainty surrounding quantum mechanics. That the amount of time it takes for the black hole to evaporate can be calculated, but this is only an average, and it could be much quicker or much slower depending on the roll of the dice. Crucially that there is an infinitesimal probability that it will take an infinite amount of time to evaporate. Therefore you can never say categorically that the black hole has evaporated before Alice has fallen in. Secondly that the photons reflected from Alice as she falls in will rapidly become very dim and infrequent - and perhaps these become merged with those emitted by the hawking radiation? Maybe if you shine more light on Alice as she falls in, this will allow you to see her better, but this also adds mass to the black hole, delaying the time of occurrence of evaporation.

yup. the same level of energy evenly spread throughout. effectively making it not full of energy.

@@mammy24 lols, what funny way for a counter-argument.

Love her laugh too..

The Arctic Thing i have no idea o.0 maybe it’s a clue for where ozymandias is lol

you would have to walk in their shoes to know.

as a student who has to deal with cryptography on the reg I am confused either way

Since I learned about the holographic principle, I have the vague idea that black holes and cryptography have very much in common.

+Daitaigenjitsu You just have to go off-topic, don't you?

I wouldn't call it disgusting, I would call it natural. Evolution, even cultural evolution, is very gradual. You can't fault people for behaving like the primates that they evolved from.

Guess most of the people are scared off for life from physics (or science in general) in high school. Remember your physics classes? They didn't have much in common with lectures like this, did they? Plus, most of the times they didn't even cover interesting stuff. I think science teachers could learn a lot from RU-vid.

My favourite quote from Oscar Wilde: "We are all in the gutter but some of us are looking at the stars".

You know there's a lot of physics in the steps of gangdam style lol

Absolutely! You are SPOT ON!!!

@@Lynettjames yes!! glad someone understands what I meant

No it isn't. A lot of this video is incomprehensible. DrPhysicsA did the best video on BH. E.g. Carroll said this gooblegook: 47:47 _"In a black hole, the 2-dimensional event horizon really does contain all the information you need, to talk about what's happening inside, according to the holographic principle. But it should be true even in this room, or the galaxy or the universe. & if that is true, locality is being dramatically violated, because there is a lot less that can possibly happen in this room than you thought could. You thought that something could be happening here & something could be happening there & different things could be happening at every point. But the holographic principle says: No, that's not true. 1 of the arguments for it, is if you imagine all of the different possible things that could happen most of them would have a lot of energy & would collapse to make a black hole. So there is an upper limit on the number of things that could happen in this room, & the size of the upper limit is proportional to the area of the walls around this room. So there is this hypothesis that all of physics really lives in a world that is 1 dimension lower than the world we actually see. & again, we are trying to make sense of this idea. We are making progress, but we are not completely there yet."_ _"The other idea that has come out of Black holes and argues against locality is called Black hole complementarity. Remember I said that, from the point of view of Bob from far away, he sees radiation coming out of the Black hole, and he says: well if I trace it backwards, it must have been very high energy radiation when it left the event horizon. Whereas Alice, in the conventional way of thinking about things, passes through the event horizon & sees nothing there, just empty space. So they had incompatible ways of describing the same situation. Bob thinks the event horizon is bubbling with high-energy radiation; Alice says there's nothing there. Black hole complementarity says: they are both correct. Black hole complementarity says they are different-sounding ways of giving equivalent descriptions of the same fundamental underlying reality, & that 2 things that are seen by 2 observers can look very very different, as long as the observers can never get together to compare notes. So what happens is, if you give Bob enough time to collect the Hawking radiation, & figure out what he thinks the horizon looks like, & you give Alice enough time to fall into the horizon. If Bob then says: alright, I've got some data; I know what's coming out of the Black hole. I am going to fly into the Black hole & tell Alice what I saw. It is too late. She has been spaghettified & crushed into the singularity. So these 2 observers see a very different thing happening in the world, but hey can never talk about it. Only we - God-like physicists, looking at the whole thing from afar, can give the bird's eye view on everything that is going on. That is the principle of Black hole complementarity. It's borrowed from the early days of quantum mechanics when Niels Bohr pointed out that you are allowed to measure position, OR you are allowed to measure velocity. You are not allowed to measure both at the same time. That was quantum complementarity; this is Black hole complementarity. So again, it's a violation of locality in some sense. It says that the right way to describe the world isn't what's happening here, & what's happening there, & what's happening there, and what's happening there, separately. What's happening right there can depend in a very dramatic way on who's looking at it & from what perspective. So somehow, all the information about what's going on in the world is not simply located in individual points in space. It's encoded in some cryptic way that we don't yet understand, & that's what we are trying to get at, by doing these thought experiments. The problem is, these 2 types of non-locality, don't seem to be enough to solve the firewall puzzle."_

Oners82 Well. Since I've posted this comment/question I've been studying and reading about these black holes paradoxes. I realized that actually the black hole evaporates not because it irradiates the matter that falls into ir, but because there is anti particles created from the virtual particles separation that happens at the event horizon. So what comes out of it actually comes out of the event horizon and not from inside. If I am right, that answer my question. So in fact, what is coming out of the black hole is not actually coming from inside. It's just the positive particle from the virtual particle that was created at the event horizon. Actually no information is coming out it, and that information that falls into like dust, meteors, etc., is being neutralized by antimatter created at the event horizon. So in fact, by this point of view information would really be lost.

Oners82 If the pair production is the process by which they evaporate, technically the information that comes out is not coming from the black hole. So how can he evaporate if not by the annihilation of matter inside it? I mean, the radiation that is coming out comes from the event horizon, not from inside, right?

Oners82 Or does the meteor that falls into the black hole is radiated out?

Oners82 I suppose there are two events regarding information falling into the black hole. First is the negative pair particles created at the event horizon which negative ones fall into. Second one is about the matter that comes from the space such as meteors, dust, stars and so on. These seems to me quite different events. If you consider the quantum entanglement principle to be preserved and use black hole complementarity to solve it, that would be OK with particles that are entangled. But a meteor is not entangled, is it?

Oners82 Well, I understood. Actually I kinda understood the whole point of my question (which was my idea that information would be lost through the contact with negative particles into the BH) on your first answer when you said that when positive and negative matter collide they release energy, so it enlightened my mind on how my thoughts about the hole process was wrong. Thanks for your consideration. I really am. Sorry for my dumbness :-) I'm sorry. I haven't made my self clear. This would be a second question. Actually this comparison I've made before, which may seem really stupid, in my mind has some sort of a sense. I've made this comparison because along Sean's lecture he talked about how it would feels like for someone to fall into a black hole. First he says that according to no drama principle (classical thought), a person would feel nothing at the no return point (event horizon). After this, he speaks about the Firewall concept, that Alice would be shred to pieces right at the event horizon. After that he proposes complementarity principle as a solution to this deadlock. Basically, the whole point of my comparison is that, his subject is considering entangled particles that would never talk to each other in such event. But what if we are talking about a non entangled particle falling. Would complementarity apply to that scenario? I mean, there wouldn't be a particle to "not talk to". Wouldn't it mess complementarity? It seems to me that complementarity, when it concerns whether a particle is shred to pieces or if it would feels nothing at the event horizon, only solves the cases with entangled particles.

Andrew Galloway now that is clever. To bad you didn’t post this 5 years ago. It would have a million likes!

Can i get it if hes dead and alive ?

For me ? Or the cat ?

+Conspiracy Cat I think the word is witty.

Really? Shit I gotta catchup

even 5 year olds know the Dirac equation! ;o)

+Steve Bergman What is QW? It that QM upside down?

+NicenEasyuk Maybe, but we, the general public, is still outdated since QFT is fashion among physicists now...

Quantum Woo are the metaphores that are used to make people understand QM a bit more. Unfortunately, those metaphores are never 100% accurate. Even I am guilty of this for parts of QM.

exactly

Pause the video.

In a vacuum, maybe.

Peter Wexler I think that's the unfortunate Dunning Kruger effect.

Peter Wexler it's like giving some kids a short basketball lesson, only there's another big one by Michael Jordan after you, it's safe to have some self deprecation here,

Oners82 "I think you are probably the only person who gives a shit, let alone even noticed the headsets." Anyone who's got at least an undergrad degree in Speech Communication will notice, and half of those will "give a shit."

Oners82 I think that I have heard enough out of you. Later daze.

Peter Wexler If she cannot lift the Hammer, she is not worthy. Simple as that.

Good thing that you are. ;)

its bias also I like sean. who is a great communicator and learned a lot from him when I was his student in Caltech

RonJohn63 she reminds me of a white noise machine

Kinda looks like her. I thought the same.

Was just thinking the same!

It's hard to laugh when you are mesmerized and your jaw is hanging open. Maybe that's why?