Go to https://curiositystream.thld.co/drbecky_0223 and use code DRBECKY to save 25% off today. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today’s video.
This Night Sky News we’re chatting about what JWST results we’ve been treated to this week, including a beautiful spectrum of one of the most distant galaxies known, GN-z11. Plus there’s been a claim of observational evidence of SMBH growth that can’t be accounted for which some researchers have claimed is evidence that black holes are responsible for the accelerated expansion of the Universe (i.e. dark energy). This one hurt my head to film, so let’s dive in to understand it together.
Download the high resolution (192MB!) image of Abell 274, aka Pandora’s Cluster, here: https://webbtelescope.org/contents/media/images/2023/107/01GQQF4KP3GNVB12G6R0V8KSGM
JWST observing schedules: https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/science-execution/observing-schedules
JWST data archive (with public access!): https://mast.stsci.edu/portal/Mashup/Clients/Mast/Portal.html
Twitter bot for JWST current observations: https://twitter.com/JWSTObservation
00:00 Intro
00:58 “The Green Comet”, C/2022 Z3 ETF is fading
01:32 Half moon + Mars in Taurus
02:26 Jupiter + Venus Conjunction
03:52 Saturn + Toenail Moon
04:08 AD : CuriosityStream
05:32 JWST discovers tiny asteroid
09:20 JWST spots 50,000 galaxies in Pandora’s Cluster
12:40 JWST’s high resolution spectrum of distant galaxy GN-z11
20:56 Black holes could be dark energy evidence?
36:23 Outro
36:44 – Bloopers
Müller et al. (2023; JWST spots new asteroid) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.06921.pdf
Weaver et al. (2023; Pandora’s cluster 50000 new galaxies) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/2301.02671.pdf
JWST Proposal 2561 (Pandora’s cluster) – https://www.stsci.edu/jwst/phase2-public/2561.pdf
Bunker et al. (2023; JWST spectrum GN-z11) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/2302.07256.pdf
Yan et al. (2022; redshift 20 galaxies in JWST claims) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/2207.11558.pdf
Padovani (2017; light distribution from growing SMBH) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/1707.07134.pdf
Farrah et al. (2023; growth of SMBHs) – https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/1538-4357/acac2e/pdf
Farrah et al. (2023; black holes coupled to dark energy) – https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3847/2041-8213/acb704/pdf
Hubble (1929; expansion of the Universe) – https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.15.3.168
Riess et al. (1998; accelerated expansion of the Universe) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/9805201.pdf
Gliner (1966; vacuum energy black holes) – http://jetp.ras.ru/cgi-bin/dn/e_022_02_0378.pdf
Dymnikova (1992; vacuum energy black holes) – https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00760226
Mazur et al. (2015; vacuum energy black holes) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/1501.03806.pdf
Kerr (1963; solution to GR for spinning black holes) – https://journals.aps.org/prl/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.11.237
Croker & Weiner (2019; black hole vacuum energy coupled dark energy) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/2107.06643.pdf
Smethurst, Beckmann et al. (2023; merger-free SMBH growth) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/2211.13677.pdf
Martin et al. (2018; simulations of merger-free SMBH growth) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/1801.09699.pdf
McAlpine et al. (2020; simulations of merger-free SMBH growth) – https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.00959.pdf
Smethurst et al. (2019; infographic figure showing more efficient merger-free SMBH growth) -https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.01355.pdf
Video edited by Jonny Hyman: https://www.youtube.com/@theHumanVerse
Video filmed on a Sony ⍺7 IV
—
📚 My new book, “A Brief History of Black Holes”, out NOW in hardback, e-book and audiobook (which I narrated myself!): http://hyperurl.co/DrBecky
—
📚 “The Year In Space” celebrating all things space in 2022 from me and the rest of the Supermassive Podcast team: https://geni.us/jNcrw
—
👕 My new merch, including JWST designs, are available here (with worldwide shipping!): https://dr-becky.teemill.com/
—
🎧 Royal Astronomical Society Podcast that I co-host: podfollow.com/supermassive
—
🔔 Don’t forget to subscribe and click the little bell icon to be notified when I post a new video!
—
👩🏽💻 I’m Dr. Becky Smethurst, an astrophysicist at the University of Oxford (Christ Church). I love making videos about science with an unnatural level of enthusiasm. I like to focus on how we know things, not just what we know. And especially, the things we still don’t know. If you’ve ever wondered about something in space and couldn’t find an answer online – you can ask me! My day job is to do research into how supermassive black holes can affect the galaxies that they live in. In particular, I look at whether the energy output from the disk of material orbiting around a growing supermassive black hole can stop a galaxy from forming stars.
http://drbecky.uk.com
https://rebeccasmethurst.co.uk
36件のコメント
Go to https://curiositystream.thld.co/drbecky_0223 and use code DRBECKY to save 25% off today. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today’s video
If you say there is a lot of unaccounted growth of black holes could that does that not make the black hole dark energy link stronger?
24:15, is it so? I think by observing objects what rotating near black hole, didnt we can make assumptions what "shape" black hole has?
I keep seeing YouTubers with black fingernails, men and women. What's up with that?
Downloaded that image in full resolution and i'm marveling at the beauty and at what is out there <3
Dark energy is the reflection of matter brought through the black hole that created the universe. Maybe.
Wonderful explanation. Thank you. How much of black hole investigation includes higher-dimensional influence? Since the gravity well of a black hole is so immense, I would think that would also affect higher dimensions, which could alter the appearance of physical matter, and perhaps influence what is now explained as dark energy.
So, to quote Douglas Adams, you think this is all just "…a load of Dingo's Kidneys…"
You're not alone on calling out t his "study". Meanwhile, other youtube "astrophysicists" are hailing it as the next big breakthrough :)))
23:40 Here's one of the toughest theories, Einstein's GR, in one paragraph for you mates. Listen to me slowly. Kerr (or anyone) didn't solve EFE in the sense most folks confusingly think the word means, like solving a quadratic equation. What he did find was find a system of partial differential equations (PDE) that can be ascribed a physical meaning: “solving” Einstein's geometrodynamic equations, the one and the only a problem in General Relativity exactly means finding a second-order total differential of the metric of a quasi-Riemannian manifold. “Manifold” is a 4D space that is locally flat almost everywhere. “Locally flat” means that a small patch of this manifold looks like Special Relativity works in it. Your own flat is flat in this sense: it's a small patch of curved approximately spherical Earth surface. SR and Newtonian mechanics work in your class or your flat, because it's locally flat. “Second order” means you need two initial conditions if you're lucky to fully solve the PDE is elementary function: initial position and initial velocity for everything. F=ma is an example: a=dv/dt, and v=dx/dt, so that x=x₀+v₀t+at²/2; x₀ and v₀ determined by initial conditions. No magic, but EFE solutions are mindbogglingly complex, in the maths sense, not physics: the physics is conceptually simple, the same as solving Newton's equation. Unlike Newton's F=ma, the only possible solution, GR admits a-many different ones, based on the physics of the stuff you study. “Metric” means a global tensor that fully describes this manifold (under certain assumptions, of course, of GR, but they are already satisfied, so the second-order DE is a solution, just like F=ma is a complete solution for Newton's mechanics, assuming F is a force acting on any little speck with a mass withing the system—this is exactly how the assumptions, or better put other necessary requirements of a dynamic theory sneak into the equation that we call a “solution”). "Quasi-Riemannian" means flat enough for physicists do their physics thing. “Quasi” means that some directions in this space (namely, time direction) are not like the others (namely, directions in space), but maths is still fine. “Almost everywhere” means just everywhere except maybe small regions where the solution does not behave, but we can leave these places alone. These are, naturally, the "bad" essential singularities in the space that's a “good” space everywhere else. The event horison is not an essential singularity: it can be removed by a clever choice of coordinate. For example, if you freely fall into a BH, you don't observe any horizon when you cross it (whether that had been, in the end, really a clever choice of coordinates, I shall leave to ponder on to you my dear reader… hey, where are you? why do you stick to this horison and getting redder and sluggish and faint… and faint… have you caught the flu?). The one at the center of BH is an essential singularity: you can't get rid of it. Kerr's solution, describing an intrinsically rotating BH, has the essential singularity that is, strictly, not an [24:00] infinitely small point with no volume; it's a one-dimensional ring, but that's doesn't change anything: it's volume is still zero, and energy density is infinite.
That's all to it. Now you understand what the Einstein's GR is about. And don't hang on near event horisons any more, it's unhealthy.
Looking at that JWST pic…
Does Sr Becky have any comment on Steve Crothers mathematical proofs that black holes don't exist and that Einstein's 1915 paper on GR contains mathematical errors in its application of tensors? Probably not, too many jobs depend on ignoring anything that falsifies relativity…
A classical conservative argument. They usually dont go well, Becky. I study singularities and geodesics for 45 years. I know that I know less today than I thought I knew back in the days about singularities. The dark energy bulk increase of bh might point to a non-local feed mechanism. It's extremely interesting. Keep up the good work!
I really do think a Black Hole is but a really-really massive Neutron Star that we are incapable of comprehending.
How come the Big and Little Dipper are so similar, just their scale was different. How did the cosmos do that =/
Hi Dr. Becky, nice to meet you!
Thanks for the informative dialog regarding the Dark Energy/Black Hole "relationship".
If the speed of light were getting slower, would that look like expansion?
I'm late to this party and no one will see this, but the JWST cluster image is what I've been dreaming of since I first became fascinated by our universe, in 1958 or so. Certainly since my astronomy class in 1996 when we were amazed by Hubble! Tears I can't even explain, but JWST is going to satisfy me in this lifetime, which I didn't expect, hoped I'd live until the next… great telescope. Job done.
Electromagnetic
Real time peer review. Wait. No. Professor review. With an assignment. There’s gonna be a test.
I, hereby, am announcing that I discovered the essence of dark energy and that any other theories out there are destined to oblivion. Here it is (I am still working on equations): the over-presence of entanglement in the expanding universe is the cause of anti-gravitational effects that are deemed to be "dark energy".
Ah, so it was Jupiter and Venus that I saw getting cozy in the low western sky. I thought it was a couple of planes coming in on a similar heading, but noticed they hadn't moved at all after walking a mile. I then assumed they were alien spacecraft, ordered a Guinness at the pub, and promptly forgot all about it.
22:07 As merely a physics fanboy, my interpretation of what you've said here is that "dark energy" is really just a catch-all term for a big hole in our current understanding. Based on observations so far, we've created a sort of "energy map," roughly 70% of which is so thoroughly unknown that we're drawing sea monsters around its edges. As we make more observations, we'll likely break "dark energy" down into multiple categories – one of which may or may not be labeled "Life of Balrog."
Do I have that right?
PSA for anyone like me who misheard the good doctor and submitted selfies: she said "astrophotography" not "asshole photography." She's looking for images of the night sky, not pics of assholes like me.
if time stop in a black hole will mass ever go in and if its possible wee will see big bang beacuse time dont have started in black holes i am confused
If Dark Energy (Brian) and Black Holes are related does that make a Black Hole a Dangerous Brian?
You & your viewers might find these fringe scientists worthwhile, coupled with guess what, history & myth!
https://youtu.be/t7EAlTcZFwY
Doesn't our current understanding of expansion say that space expands between galaxies, but galaxies themselves do not expand? How could black holes expand with space if galaxies don't?
is dark energy the super large scale of what causes the law of diffusion?
I saw a Gaussian distribution and the word black and assumed this was about race and IQ only to be disappointed when clicking on this video and fully reading the title.
"Do we have a Bwian?"
When all the black holes merge, as a ticking time bomb, there will be another big bang……
How does this correlate with John W. Moffett and his "Reinventing gravity"?
I have wondered for awhile if a blackhole, a term I detest, can become so massive it pinches itself off from our space time.
Skepticism is a necessary part of the scientific process. And certainly nothing can be claimed as proved until you got 5 or 6 sigmas behind it. However, this is the first time I have heard of a reasonable sounding explanation for the accelerated expansion of the universe that actually uses already known physics without having to invent new never before seen hopium particles and other nonsense. And I think it jibes with Hawkins ideas on black holes in a way I think he would approve. I think there are too many confluences of theory, evidence and sensical causality for this to not be at least reasonably close to reality. Even if this turns out to not be true, we should laud these researchers for a rare demonstration of innovation, ingenuity, creativity and insight not seen much these days. I think we may be witnessing a Nobel Prize here. Time, and further study, will tell.
The evidence for unexplained black hole growth is interesting , their conclusion is highly speculative , and provocative – it provoked me to call bullshit
Dear Dr Becky. I haven't been able to re-watch ( no power S.A . ) Did you say the half-moon is visible ½ the time of a full moon and a ¼ is ¼ time of the full moon?