Sixty Symbols - 2020-07-09
Researchers may have used wormholes to solve the so-called "Black Hole Information Paradox", as Tony Padilla explains. More links and info below ↓ ↓ ↓ More Black Hole videos: http://bit.ly/Black_Hole_Videos More Tony Padilla videos: https://bit.ly/Padilla_SixtySymbols Papers and reading from this video: Replica wormholes and the black hole interior https://inspirehep.net/literature/1767458 Replica Wormholes and the Entropy of Hawking Radiation https://inspirehep.net/literature/1767472 The entropy of Hawking radiation https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.06872 Black holes and quantum information https://www.nature.com/articles/s42254-019-0146-z Tony Padilla is a professor at the University of Nottingham. Also catch Tony on Numberphile: http://bit.ly/Padilla_Numberphile Visit our website at http://www.sixtysymbols.com/ We're on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/sixtysymbols And Twitter at http://twitter.com/sixtysymbols This project features scientists from The University of Nottingham http://bit.ly/NottsPhysics Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/sixtysymbols Sixty Symbols videos by Brady Haran Artwork by Pete McPartlan http://www.bradyharanblog.com Email list: http://eepurl.com/YdjL9
The notion that two particles are created and then separated is a very simplified one. If anyone wants to dive a little more on the theory pbs spacetime has an excellent video using the concept of posible wave lengths when horizons occur and also a nice explanation of the unruh radiation
It is fundamentally wrong because it would mean that hawking radiation intensity would be proportional to the surface area of the black hole, but it is actually the opposite.
It's also the Sci-Fi phenomenon of "vacuum energy". While we've not actually gone up to a blackhole to see what's all is going on, we're pretty sure anti-matter isn't being created at the event horizon. If this spontaneous creation-and-annihilation were true, statistically 50% of the time the anti-particle would be would be on the outside. (which would go on to collide with normal matter in the universe, which would be bad for everyone.)
@jfbeam antiparticles are constantly being created in nature on Earth too. So it isn't that bad.
@XGD5layer So the theory goes. There's no proof one way or the other. (nor do we have the technology to even try.) Of course, if the theories are correct, there are micro blackholes forming and instantly evaporating as well. (we can't prove that either.)
@jfbeam oh no, I'm not talking about spontaneous creation from nothing. I'm talking about regular stuff like potassium-40 decaying (bananas produce 4 positrons in 5 hours), when induced by cosmic rays, or artificial processes like PET (Positron Emission Tomography) which is used for medical imaging.
Initially it sounded like he was saying that the information wasn’t lost because it remained trapped in the black hole, but theoretically you could peek at it through these wormholes. But if that’s the case, what happens when the black hole evaporates completely? Wouldn’t the information be lost at that point? Like, when the mansion burns down and takes the paintings and dilettante with it? 🤔
But then it sounded like the information actually escaped through these wormholes. But if that’s the case and they don’t form until half of it has evaporated, does that mean the first half of the radiation escapes with no information about its origin, and half escapes with double information? 🤷♂️
And what does it even mean for “half” of a black hole to evaporate if they can be of arbitrary size and even grow during their lifetime? 🤪
I was thinking the exact same questions. Do these wormholes lead to this "island" that is not in our universe? So the interior of a black hole is in a different dimension, lets say the 5th dimension, and the information remains there forever? Can a wormhole be destroyed so there is a permanent loss of information?
Maybe the half size evaporation was for the case when a backhole is dormant, but still in any case it looks like half the information will be lost 🤔
You’re giving it much more thought than it deserves. It’s just more nonsense science fiction.
The first part is actually something I was also wondering about and was thinking about asking. But I think I might have an idea on the second part you asked: From what was said it seems to me like the radiation itself doesn't actually carry the information at any time, but that you can - under the given circumstances - create a wormhole that links the radiation back to the black hole which is what allows you to get information out of it. In that case the radiation wouldn't need to be released with the information already inscribed but could link back up with the black hole later on when it has radiated away enough to allow the formation of those wormholes.
(But I have absolutely no idea of how accurate that thought is - that's just how I understood it from the video)
They seemed to say that as the black hole gets closer to evaporating, these wormholes get "easier" to create. Thus they may spontaneously spew out the information?
Thanks for this video! The questions and answers were perfect, specifically the segment when asking "what is meant by information". One question: if the wormholes that connect the radiation to the inside of the blackhole are only possible at 1/2 mass or less, does that mean the information paradox still exists before 1/2 the mass is evapourated?
Brady, you are sooo GREAT at asking AMAZING questions!
i love his animations lol
that's the real elephant
Thanks for the brilliant summary! I have so many questions!
What are the consequences of this new theory for a near heath death universe in the far future? Will there be wormholes all around when most of the black holes are almost evaporated? You mentioned, it was gettin easier to make the wormholes as the black hole evaporated more and more. Can they come to existence spontaneously when the hole is almost evaporated?
What happens, if the radiation falls into an another black hole? Will there eventually be many black holes interconnected by wormholes?
Very small black holes evaporate very quickly (am i right?), are there such black holes in our universe? Can they be tested for signs of wormholes?
Also as far as i know, for a wormhole to be kept open some exotic matter is needed which has negative energy. Does the new theory say anything about the nature of such thing?
And another thing might be unrelated: if one of the member of an entangled particle pair falls into a black hole, will they still be entangled. Does this not violate the principle of event horizon?
Sorry if my questions are naive, my physics knowledge comes mostly form SciAm and your channel :)
Thanks again and I hope you keep us updated in many more videos!
Greg
I love your idea of many black holes being interconnected by wormholes from their Hawking radiation falling into each other! That's so cool!
I love it. Thanks for the video. Can you use this to measure when the blackhole was created? By assuming it used to be twice the size, if there's no wormhole you know it was never that size.
This concept of information is well above my head but really fascinating!! How is it possible to determine if a black hole has reached half of its initial size or is it by chance that wormholes are detected, therefore it is beyond half it's size? Also had a brain fart while going back on the video: The detection of back hole size and entropy state is in the past so the black hole may not exist anymore in our present day?
I have always thought that black holes are like cells (being a biologist): they uptake material such as proteins and chemicals that undergo catabolic and anabolic pathways. Catabolic occurs as the material enters (at the event horizon) and anabolic occurs outside (after radiation is emitted).
This is so fascinating! Hopefully I learn enough physics soon that I can understand the paper myself
So glad Brady asks the questions he does. Really helps break the ideas down imo
Hi Brady. First of all I wish to salute you for the accuracy of your questions and the respect with which you treat the professors. it's a fine line. you're a top tier interviewer. This made the hopeless layman in me wonder about preservation of information. Succintly, what about the cosmic event horizon?also as an after-question, since the cosmic event horizon is relative to the observer, this law, dictates that all information must be preserved, then we mean, preserved for the system, right? in a, running time backwards, kind of manner? if we could presume that if we reversed time, an object having disappeared behind the cosmic ecent horizon, might reappear, could we not presume the same of an object having fallen in a gravity well? why does the strength of the gravity well matter so much in the case of black holes, beyond the fact that it's not observable for a period of uhhh god-observer-based time? i don't see how becoming non observable affects its ability to follow a reverse time path to its origin. sorry for the disjointery, i can't English.
Worm hole through the black hole. That's a deep rabbit hole.
So basically, they didn't solve anything. They came out with a theoretical solution to a paradox and accepted it as scientific fact, even though the fact of the matter (pun not intended) is you can't detect or interpret this apparent information coming through any apparent wormholes (not to mention the physical implications and aberrations of spacetime you'd get if there were worm holes coming out at random angles/tangents to the black hole). This is unfalsifiable, which is akin to pseudoscience. I could've just said "After entering a black hole, the information ends up in another universe, trust me guys, that way our knowledge of entropy/thermodynamics/quantum mechanics isn't wrong!"
@Jazza BigHits The thing is though, there are other areas that are tacked down. There are mathematics and concepts of the entire theory that is being used to create this explanation. You can do certain things with the equations, and you can't do others. In this case, what we know was used to produce simulations and conduct thought experiments. The results of those things were used to go further. When you conclude that things like the Page Time are real and measurable, and that Hawking radiation is real and measurable, you have certain ways of imagining the problem that are more firmly tacked down. It's certainly possible that they are TRUE concepts but we're imagining them incorrectly. The end goal here is that eventually someone is going to make a discovery, or solve an equation, or propose a theory that clicks into place with everything, everywhere, from the end of spacetime to the other end of spacetime. That theory of everything will be concrete and leave nothing up to interpretation. In order to get there, you need to explain things individually first.
@Jazza BigHits nope you're wrong, they disproved a theory which was ridiculous, using a theorem
There is no actual proof of this. Only theory. Claiming it is solved is not factual
If you think of our universe as a 3D plane. Black holes are actually just holes that spill into the proto dimension. Quantum particles exist in there too in some way which is why you get spooky action at a distance.
And now we need a video on imaginary time.
@LateNightHacks 😆😆😆😆
root of -1 time
It happened on imaginary last Tuesday.
Wick rotation
That would be awesome. In the meantime, I think of imaginary time as what happens between when I go to sleep and the alarm clock goes off....
Tony's enthusiasm is beyond awesome. This video is one example, second only to his reactions during his visit to CERN. I've listened to way too many scientists who had passion, but were totally unable to share or communicate it. Tony spends days doing the work, finds personal joy, then shares the mix with us. We are fortunate beyond all reason.
4 questions: & Thanks for the great video!
1) if quantum pairs of matter antimatter particles are created at the event horizon would these particles be entangled, and would they continue to be entangled after one of them crosses the event horizon.?
2) Why would this create Hawking radiation? wouldn't it be just as likely that the antimatter particle forms outside the event horizon and the matter inside?
3) To rethink Brady's great question, what if we could list all matter in the universe including the elephant? Couldn't we then say everything is here but the elephant, so that must be whats in the black hole?
4) Could there be photons of light "orbiting" a black hole at the event horizon?
Thank again!
Fascinating subject. Agreed with the premise that when we do finally understand black holes it will reveal a higher understanding of the universe too.
Would love to know where this theory stands nearing 2022. Is it still considered a real possibility? I remember this episode well, I found it incredibly exciting.
Something I've been wondering, seeing that the deeper we go into quantum mechanics, the more we find to dig through, is that perhaps the frame of reference itself could be the "source" of the lost information itself. Perhaps as the nanoparticles at the smallest scale, whatever that happens to be still undiscovered, enter the black hole and are randomized, in the same way as matter falls into certain stars and the atoms themselves break apart, forming neutron stars, quark stars, etc., nothing about those nanoparticles are changed except for their bonds to each other. As a result, there is no information lost, though the larger scale effects, being charge, mass, energy, etc., become accessible similar to how a video in edit may be lost due to the randomization of magnetic poles on a hard disk. You still have the same mass and volume of magnetic material in the same locations, but since the poles are now all over the place and not in an order, the "information" of the video in question is now missing. (Always keep backups, by the way.) The same thing is likely happening with a black hole, and as it evaporates, these nanoparticles are being liberated somehow.
Always excited to watch a video with professor Tony
I love Brady's thinking face. His gears are chugging along at such a high pace.
Imaginary time is time spent watching Sixty Symbols instead of working....
@David Last Name nah, I don't want to talk to you. Don't like your attitude
@Usr You are accusing me of having blind faith, and you don't like MY attitude? Lol, you need to check yourself. Just an FYI, nobody is claiming they CANT be wrong, but that is miles away from you accusing others of having blind faith simply for thinking an expert in a field knows what he is talking about. I have no idea how you are able to make such nonsense claims. Another FYI, neither the expert on this video not the commentors are claiming he CANT be wrong, that is a lazy argument that you are making up because you can't think of anything to actually say.
You don't want to talk to me? The feeling is mutual. Stop making baseless accusations.
Nah, that's real time. The imaginary time is what you think you're spending working.
@Creeps Compilation Exactly why are you even watching this? Let alone; HOW?
@Usr There are a few of us who make stronger links between mathematics and the observable universe.
I mean, that link (via physics) has held to be the best interpretation of the way that things work for only a few thousand years.
I agree you are completely right to be sceptical about that correlation.
But I still find 'unproved' mathematical discoveries to be at least (more, usually ) as meaningful as what I read on the latest news web page.
Edit: And many, many times more interesting.
Question is, in what state does the information present itself when it gets pulled out? Does it snap back to the state it should be in at the time is was pulled out, does it retain the state it had when it was "destroyed" by the black hole, or does it disregard all of that, having a state of uniformity (simplicity?) prevalent at the end of the universe?
It makes sense as to why you must use imaginary time, due to the information not existing within the confines of time inside a blackhole anyways.
I'd like to add though that this suggests, regardless of the current state of something, you should be able to access its information using a wormhole the same way the radiation does for information inside a blackhole. But of course, that's assuming we are able to create wormholes ourselves.
So...
We have found a solution but it is too early to be easy to understand without looking at the math
Cool stuff none the less
Finally! somebody gives a crystal clear explanation on the meaning of the word "information" as applied to the "black hole information paradox". I think "information" may not be the most appropriate word here. It could be replaced by the word "identity": the identity of an elephant that fell into the black hole is completely and totally destroyed after every proton and neutron that made up the elephant's body are dissociated into their constituent quarks and gluons and become one with the black hole's interior.
But from an observer sufficiently far away from the black hole, it may take an eternity for the elephant to travel even the slightest distance from the event horizon towards the black hole's center. So maybe those wormholes may actually be a way to salvage at least part of, if not the whole elephant!
What happens during a black hole merger? In a merger, some of the mass of the black hole(s) is directly converted into gravitational waves, so it seems to me as if the information paradox is even more severe than with evaporation.
So do the wormholes represent information flow across the event horizon? Also, if black holes evaporate due to random particle/anti-particle creation, why would predominantly anti-particles fall in to cause the evaporation? Wouldn't the formation of particle/anti-particle pairs be random, and the in-falling particle be random as well, and yield a 50/50 mix?
The technical aspect of the black hole information paradox is that it looked like black holes violated unitarity which essentially says that when you consider all the possible outcomes of a quantum mechanical event, the probabilities of those outcomes have to add up to 100%.
Two thoughts: can we have (or is there) a video on Black Hole evaporation? That seems like a fundamental Hawking concept that deserves more explanation.
And also: isn't information preserved to observers of an elephant falling into the black hole because the object doesn't disappear to them, it slows down and fades away as it crosses the event horion, so presumably if you looked hard enough with a sensitive enough detector for long enough you could detect the elephant fading from sight? Or is that just too simple-minded to be of any utility?
Question: can you actually unpick the fluid cups original state if you have enough computing power, or is the motion of the molecules random in a way that is impossible to backtrack? I had thought Brownian motion was partly determined by quantum randomness.
Tonys cheeky smile and glisten of passion in his eyes fills me with a joy. Like a child discussing the secrets of their favorite game.
So this only occurs after around 1/2 the mass has been radiated away?
Doesn't that mean everyone was 1/2 right and half wrong 1/2 of the time?
How do you count that if two black holes merged?
If objects that fall past an event horizon relativity makes it seem to an outside observer that the object is eternally stuck at the event horizon.
Doesn't that mean it's possible to sense/detect everything that has crossed the event horizon, as long as you can separate the signal of that thing frozen as it crosses the event horizon from the the noise of everything else that has ever fallen into that black hole?
That's so fascinating! Though definitely a bombshell at the end. Calculations in imaginary time? But these processes happen in real time inside/adjacent to a black hole no? Wouldn't you have to factor time into your calculations? Then again, time is affected by gravity, which is an absolute mindbender in and of itself. Is there no time in black holes maybe? My head is starting to spin :D Please Brady and associated professors, do keep us updated on further developments on the topic!
Imaginary time, as in imaginary numbers, is orthogonal to the real.
You can use them to solve mathematical problems, but imaginary quantities don't have a real world representation.
So my question is, what about the Hawking radiation that is emitted before this kind of wormhole operation is possible (the black hole loses about half its mass)? I suspect it's just a failure in explanation, but it seems to me that the answer is that "sometimes information isn't lost, but sometimes it is"
I agree with Tony on that last point about quantum gravity. The more I've looked into this myself the more I've come to suspect that most, if not all the major theories of quantum gravity, might turn out to be "not even wrong". As for my thoughts on Hawking radiation, I think tunneling electrons from the black hole interior deposit photons beyond the black hole's event horizon, and that these electrons would also be comprising the gravitational field of the black hole, hence acting as a sort of quantum for gravity. But that's just my own crazy theory.
I was hoping to hear more about what exactly travels through the wormhole. Is it extremely constrained somehow so information only flows out of the black hole? I've always thought wormholes were a theoretically idea that many doubted the existence of, but it seems to be sorta taken for granted in this discussion. Don't they cause all sorts of paradoxes in principle?
Would love to hear more about spacespace and imaginary time
I always just assumed that the solution to the BHIP would have to do with the holographic principle, simply because from all outside reference frames, nothing ever actually crosses the event horizon of the black hole due to the asymptotic dilation of time
I understood hawking radiation and the process of the creation of the virtual particles, they take the energy from the black hole when 1 falls past the event horizon therefore the black hole looses mass, after the newly created hawking particles I understood it is connected to its counterpart via a wormhole. So my question was when the hawking radiation is no longer under the influence of the black hole the particle and its dragged its wormhole a distance the wormhole should radiate gravity and as space time itself falls through it would expel into normal space expanding it in the process
My first thought after watching this video:
Is it possible to use a black hole as a transmmiter of information in a form of black-hole-radiation by throwing something precisely calculated into the hole?
Emma Watson is one of the last names I would've expected in a Sixty Symbols video.
Gucci Mane
when was it said?
If Dr. Becky Smethurst was still working on these videos, then she'd be dropping Emma Watson references everywhere.
@NoName Starting around 18:50
Wamma Etson?
i wonder what implications this has for bridging the quantum world to the classical and the importance of entropy in information
In practice this paradox applies as much to neutron stars as well as black holes. The process of creating neutrons from protons and electron erases info as well
So I can just about wrap my head around virtual particles and imaginary numbers. Barely (I think). Imaginary time? Now this has me intrigued.
Brady coming out with some really good questions here. As usual.
Well now I definitely need an entire video on imaginary time!
It took me quite some time to understand that i graphically can represent a rotation. I'm unsure about imaginary time as time is constrained to one direction.
I always believed a lot of Spurs scorelines would be lost by an evaporating black hole.
I'm absolutely gutted by this discovery.
Question: if we annihilate matter and antimatter, we end up with a flash of light, of energy. To me, that release looks like its not possible from that to climb back at what has been annihilated. Isnt this the same "losing informations" issue we have (had?) with black holes singularities?
When the "worm holes" are created do the items get rebuilt or no? For example could someone go inside and it would shoot you out perfectly like a version of time travel?
6:08 remember the time order of what is happening. of course if you keep track of the amount of elefants in the galaxy and then one disappers you know what fell into the black hole. but the problematic part is to work it out in the opposite direction. you know just the state of the universe at the later time (and just at that time, not the history of everything that happened) and you want to find out what it was before.
You don't know wether an elefant or a car is missing without knowing the history (or at least one state from an earlier time).
But doesn't that 'debunk' the whole point of this video? If the information of the elephant only comes out after trillions of years when the black hole evaporates doesn't that mean that between the elephant falling inside and the information coming out in the future that information doesn't exist inside the accessible universe?
@Jason Koukas Information not being accecssible to one region of space for a period of time isn't the problem (that isn't in contradiction to the laws of quantum mechanics).
The information is inside the black hole in that period and the whole construction just shows this explicitly by giving a mechanism for how it is transferred to the outside before the black hole evaporates due to hawking radiation.
I guess your argument is that since the information doesn't exist in the accessible universe in the meantime than this is the same as assumming it was destroyed (it doesn't exist at all. who cares if it exists somewhere inaccessable). But that's too simple.
If we can geither the information at a later time than it obviously still exists.
@Toast Brötchen they didn't really solve anything
Excellent explanation!
frostyusername - 2020-07-09
Brady is on point with his interview questions, truly a master in his art.
Stephen Campbell - 2020-11-20
@Naimul Haq so is this perspective Quranic in origin, and if so, are there any particular surahs that seemed connected to using science? Or you might be a Christian. I just assumed based on the name.
John Do - 2020-11-20
Master Chief Level.
7177 - 2021-04-21
Agreed!
Petra Kann - 2021-06-02
Have you ever attended a conference in Australia and sat through question time after a presentation is made?
Nothing gets by to the keeper. It’s on par with defending a PhD dissertation
Jonathon Jubb - 2022-02-05
@Rictus The questions are arranged with the person interviewed prior to talking, it's not rocket surgery...