I love listening to her talk. She's very intelligent, but explaines everthing in easy to understand manner. I also love her enthusiasm. Makes me wish I would have gotten into astronomy.
My hypothesis that Dark Matter is not a WIMP, but maybe is a deformation of space-time by which the curvature of space-time ALONE is the cause of the gravitational effect. Gravity is the consequence of the curvature of space-time. It may be possible that the structure of space-time itself could be warped without the presence of mass. Space-time has been shown to react like a fabric by warping, twisting, and propagating independent of mass. These properties have been proven with observations of gravitational lensing, frame dragging, and now gravitational waves. Fabrics can be stretched, pressured, and/or heated to the point of deformation. Such extreme conditions were all present during inflation, so it is plausible that space-time’s elastic nature could have hit its yield point and permanently deformed. Therefore, if gravity is the consequence of the warping of space-time, and fabrics can be permanently deformed, then a deformation could create a gravitational effect independent of mass. Thus, the unidentified dark "matter" that seems to be so elusive to modern science may not be matter at all but merely warped deformities causing gravitational effects. DM could be a microscopic black hole with no mass at the center... Prediction: Spacetime's elastic property hits a yield point, so only that part of geodesic's "stretch marks" would remain after inflation stopped. These steep gravitational wells would not follow the inverse square law.
I suspect so (unless GR is wrong)... but it might be a really long time before anyone produces observational data that's *clearly* supportive or dismissive.
Fantastic lecture. Leaves me with more questions than when I started, and that's a good thing. I need to look more into what Janna means when she says "black holes are empty space time." Like, if the matter that we all incorrectly think is there, is not actually there, what is perpetuating the gravity and space time warping. If a black holes "evaporates" off all of its matter into Hawking radiation, at some point does the black hole experience enough mass attrition to no longer be a black hole?
Imagine stirring your tea, creating a whirlpool. When you withdraw the spoon, the whirlpool won't suddenly stop, it is only gradually slowed by friction. The friction coefficient of spacetime is not sufficient to slow the whirlpool of a BH to any appreciable degree. As for the mass attrition, Hawking showed that the BH will evaporate over roughly a googol of years, as the temperature of spacetime falls below that of the BH. At a certain point, it's gravity will be overcome by the energy contained within, and it will release the remaining energy in a final, universe-shaking pop.
The more gravity something has the slower time go's (the more time is has), it's called gravitational time dilation. I have a theory that black hole aren't holes, as i believe that all matter that falls into it go's past the event horizon all the way to the center. I believe that people viewing a black hole see everything stop at the event horizon, because to the observer gravitational time dilation at the event horizon is infinite, so matter just appears to stop. My theory also explains what scientists recently witnessed when they saw two black holes collide, they expected with the increase of gravity the event horizon would get smaller, but saw it get bigger. AS with my theory the increase of gravity would move the point of infinite time out making the hole bigger.
Try thinking of spacetime as a liquid, in which you are immersed. Actions of things in the liquid produce ripples. If the action is energetic enough, the ripples are detectable over the observable body of liquid.
62 M of Sun? Not all that much. For a couple of month I'm wondering, what will happen when supermassive black holes merge? Like, say, those in the middle of the Milky way and the Andromeda; will it be detectable only by supersensitive instruments or will there be some pretty noticeable events?
Have you seen any read how's in the galiex a red druf you have putt on things that are not in there yet so much easier than trying to reach the position
Einstein realised that gravity is actually indistinguishable from acceleration. And then he probably also realised that earth most likely must be flat. Because how can "gravity" ever be caused by acceleration on a globe earth? It makes no sense. But he couldnt say this. So that's when he came up with "space time".
@@maxwellbauer3917 Well, maybe, "earth must be flat" is going to far. Maybe "if it's not a globe it must be flat" is actually false dicohtomy. But it's evident that Einstein's idea about gravity, and globe earth.. does not agree
Very cool You know what would be even cooler? Get Michelle Wolf and imitate this lecture, same background, same slides, more or less the same words, but with snickering, that hilarious voice and jokes interspersed. That would truly be something.
When two super massive black holes meet they throw energy in one direction like gravitational lensing and creates light in one direction called big bang.
Dr. Thorne, who is now retired from LIGO. Dr. Drever, who has dementia and lives in a nursing home near Edinburgh, is not able to enjoy the victory lap. Dr. Weiss, who is retired with emeritus status at M.I.T.
No, they are not in conflict because there is no matter inside. If a 10 solar mass matter formed black hole combines with a 10 solar mass antimatter formed black hole, you get a 20 solar mass black hole minus the mass equivalent of energy emitted in gravitational waves. The type of matter that originally formed the holes is irrelevant.