Comments by "Brandon" (@gravoc857) on "Astrum"
channel.
-
58
-
Simplest way to explain the creation and annihilation of virtual particles: You already laid the foundation in this video when you said energized particles pass their energy to the next particle in line. Same applies to whatever the quantum field of reality is. Think about the quantum field as an ocean, being tugged and pushed on, by our moon. This quantum ocean of what we perceive as nothingness, stews and sloshes about. This creates points of congestion, and points of emptiness at random intervals, in random places, Just like tangible and virtual particles, the quantum field of reality cannot be destroyed. Therefore, a large energy spike within the quantum field of reality (empty space, or a vacuum), results in the strong nuclear force creating a pair of virtual particles. Instead of the applied energy overwhelming and breaking the quantum point of space. The quantum field reacts by pushing energy away via particle creation and annihilation. Consider virtual particle pairs to be nothing more than a temporary transportation vessel to move energy away from one point, to another. This is the balancing act that generates the pair of particles, and creates a stable fabric of reality for more complex particles to exist. Why this mechanism is in place is unknown. Some attribute it to divinity. Scientists just don’t know enough to make an accurate theory of why. We have some unproven theories. But even if we prove these theories. It just moves the goalpost of “why” back further, as additional layers of complexity need peeled back to get to the root cause of everything.
The reason for the need for the creation and annihilation of virtual particles in the vacuum of space, is because there aren’t any other tangible or virtual particles around to pass that energy off to. Our intuition lets us easily understand the passing of energy in the world we see, because we see it all the time. Such as when you microwave food, or making a camp fire, or generating body heat from exercising. You experience with your own senses the build up, and release of energy from one particle, to another. In the void of space, where these mechanisms for passing energy aren’t available. The creation and annihilation of virtual particles takes on that role. In absolute absence, the universe creates, rather than passes along.
Back to the point - These particles are supposed to self-annihilate. Which is why Hawking radiation works, but also why it’s so confusing. If a pair forms right on the event horizon of a black hole. One particle can escape, becoming a permanent virtual particle (black body heat radiation), and the other particle also remains as a permanent particle, sucked into the abyss of the black hole.
Since we know that virtual particle pairs aren’t creating themselves from nothing. We know that some of the mass & energy of the black hole is being used in this process.
57
-
15
-
13
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
@astrumspace While Hawking Radiation is still an unobserved theory. It does have circumstantial supporting evidence that suggests it’s existence.
Black Hole Thermodynamics. Two of them have been proven (observed). Hawking radiation falls under black hole thermodynamics. So, the more laws of BHTD we observe, the higher the probability that Hawking Radiation is correct.
The larger a black hole is, the cooler it is. This has been observed and happens for two reasons. First reason is the larger a black hole becomes, the larger it’s Eddington Mass limit becomes. Meaning, the black hole feeds with greater efficiency, and ejects less energized material at its poles. Therefore, the black hole appears cooler. The second reason is because the larger a black hole becomes, the less energized particles are at the event horizon. Small black holes will cause objects to begin Spaghettification, before passing the event horizon. Usually starting around the accretion disk. For ultramassive and above sized black holes, Spaghettification occurs inside the event horizon. Therefore, we see less energized particles, showing a cooler black hole. The temperature of black holes is referred to as Hawking Temperature.
Black holes have finally been proven to show entropy. Using gravitational waves, scientists measured the merger of two black holes, resulting in the surface area of the two merged black holes increasing. This is called the Hawking Area Theorem.
I recommend looking into the company “Technion”, and their work with artificial analog black holes. They call them “dumb holes”. Fascinating stuff. They proved the sonic equivalent of Hawking radiation exists, and behaves exactly how Hawking Radiation is theorized to behave. They proved sonic radiation is stationary, just as predicted for photon radiation-based Hawking radiation. This is strong circumstantial supporting evidence for the existence of Hawking Radiation.
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mydogbrian4814 In the case of virtual particle pairs, either the particle or anti particle can escape a black hole. It’s not that one type always goes in, and the other goes out. Either can escape by chance, due to positioning around the event horizon at the time of particle creation & annihilation.
Regardless of which particle enters, and which particle escapes. The result is a net loss in energy/mass of the black hole.
Anti is a bad name to give to particles. It implies some sort of opposite energy. Energy is energy, regardless of anti or normal. This naming convention is a great way to simply explain what’s going on, but it’s also lead to mass confusion when going into more complex levels. It’s a great intuition tool while learning the fundamentals, but this assumption needs to be broken, to understand the more complex levels of this topic.
What determines if a particle is anti, or not, is it’s spin.
Spin itself is also a horrible naming convention for the higher levels of understanding. Again, a great model to intuitively visualize, but it’s not an actual representation of what’s truly going on.
Think about it this way: Can clouds in the sky spin? While yes they can, a cloud isn’t a singular particle. It’s a blend of many particles. When people picture a spinning particle. They imagine a ball shape, spinning. Well, virtual particles aren’t spherical little spinning balls. They are a cloud of probabilistic locations where the particle could be at during any given time. So, how does a cloud of probability spin? It gets even more confusing when you realize that certain particles have to complete a spin and a half, to complete one “spin”.
I think the best way to visualize a spinning particle, or anti particle, is to envision it as a cloud of probability that interacts with causality. The type of particle, and whether it’s anti or normal, determines its interaction with causality. Particularly, the way it resists against causality.
Normal particles move with causality, but still resist it.
Anti particles move against causality, while also still resisting it.
This perceived spin and anti/normal particle conception is just a simplified way of showing how energy reacts and responds to the field of causality. Causality, in simplified terms is what provides spacetime, mass, and possibly the other fields of reality. Whether it exists as one construct, or several independent fields is heavily debated.
This fact that an anti particle moves against causality, is why particles and anti particles annihilate. Causality moves really fast. It moves at the speed of light. Which is why there’s claims that light itself doesn’t move, instead, light is pushed and carried by spacetime itself. It’s also why there are claims that anti particles are moving backwards in time, or, backwards in causality.
But back to the original point. The black hole actually isn’t doing anything at all when a pair of particles form. The black hole merely just is in the way, disrupting a cosmic scale mechanism of energy fluctuations in the field of reality. The field is self is doing all the work and action. This field steals energy from the black hole to generate the pair of particles. Anti or not, energy is still energy. So long as one particle escapes, whether anti or normal, the black hole results in a net loss of energy/mass.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 Exactly. Nothing is incapable of existing. Nothing is defined as nothing. That’s a logical fallacy, because to defining nothing, is to give it substance and tangibility.
So if nothing cannot exist. That only leaves something.
The universe was never created. It always was. Our universe was created. We’re a beyond-microscopic complement of the greater universe. We only exist within our dimensional plane. Once ours ends, the other planes continue.
Ours doesn’t truly end either. We just approach the end of a meta stable universe. Once we pass beyond meta stability, time stops existing. Therefore, space stops existing. Only the quantum realm remains. At which point, it can spend 1 second, or infinite googolplexes as quantum energy. The universe will be incapable of telling the difference, & a standard of time only begins once tangible matter exists within the universe. So it will spend the undefined quantum period, awaiting for the next event trigger, which drags micro to macro. All of which, will occur instantly from the quantum perspective.
Roger Penrose Cyclical Universe theory & quantum field theory is what I am referencing above.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1