Leaderboard

Hey guys I have 3 minutes max to make this presentation. How are the facts in this? It's about how black holes work. Also if anyone has any cool ideas on how I can visually do an experiment relating to black holes or anything in the video please tell me. Also should I get rid of the part about field equations and replace it with hawking radiation or the photon sphere? Thanks! (Black solid with text saying 40 billion M☉) 40 billion solar masses. (Cut to me) That’s the size of the S5 0014+81, the largest known black hole in the universe. But did you ever wonder how they work? It all begins with Stars. In their core, nuclear fusion combines four hydrogen nuclei into one helium nucleus, releasing an enormous amount of energy in the form of radiation. This energy pushes against the gravity on the star, maintaining a balance between forces. The energy from the fusion allows stars to fuse heavy elements until it reaches iron. Iron does not release any energy when it is fused, so gravity gains the upper hand, breaking the equilibrium. When a very massive star uses the rest of its nuclear fuel, and there are no more reactions to fight the gravity, it explodes as a supernova. If the core remaining is at least 2.5 times the mass of the sun, gravity will eventually collapse the core into a singularity. A singularity is a mathematical point with virtually zero volume and infinite density. When this happens, it would require a velocity greater than the speed of light to escape the singularity’s gravity. According to Einstein's Theory of Relativity, it is impossible for any object to reach a speed faster than light. Therefore any matter or radiation, including light, that passes within the event horizon of a black hole is trapped forever. Wait. What was that about the Einstein? (Maybe wear a cutout photo of Einstein as a mask? Or have Einstein as a green screen standing next to me) In the early 20th century, Albert Einstein published two theories of relativity. The Special Theory of Relativity, and the General Theory of Relativity. But we only care about the general one right now. According to the general theory of relativity, matter and energy bend space and time. Also known as gravity. This is why objects that travel near a large mass will appear to move along a curved path in space-time. Why do we care? To do this theory, Einstein needed a set of formulas called the field equations. This is where Karl Schwarzschild comes in with a solution. The field equations state that an extremely dense ball of matter create a spherical region in space where nothing can escape. Sound familiar? That’s because it is. Using the field equations we know that if we have the mass of a black hole, we can determine the size of the sphere that surrounds the black hole. This is where Karl comes in. The radius of that sphere is called the Schwarzschild radius, and the surface area that surrounds that sphere is called the event horizon. And as we know from earlier, once something enters the black hole, it’s not coming back. Is there only one type of black hole? Nope! There are three main types that are classified based on their size and mass. The smallest ones are known as Primordial black holes, and are believed to be as small as an atom, but have have the mass of a mountain. Next there are medium-sized black holes. These are called Stellar black holes because their mass can be up to 20 times greater than the mass of our sun and fit into a radius of 8 km. Then we have the champion of all black holes. Supermassive black holes have masses that are greater than 1 million suns and are about as big as our own solar system. Scientists believe that a supermassive black hole resides in the center of all galaxies, including the milky way.

Teach by example. Be responsible with your money and occasionally explain your behaviour. There is no age limit. The details about economics, taxes, stocks etc are simply not relevant until late adolescent. (Besides, it is quite possible our current economic model, which is already horribly outdated, won't survive the next 20 years.) The most important lesson about money to teach by example : never compare your wealth to that of others. Never make envious remarks about those that are more wealthy and never make degrading remarks about those with less wealth.

OK, When you form a molecule of chlorophyll from atoms of Mg, H, C, and N, the "electron shells" of the individual atoms link up to form molecular orbitals. These have energy levels in much the same way as those of atoms but generally with more complex patterns of absorption and emission. In particular those of chlorophyll absorb red light and blue light. Fig 1 here http://www.ch.ic.ac.uk/local/projects/steer/chloro.htm shows a graph of the percentage of light absorbed vs wavelength. (the details of the spectrum depend on the solvent, concentration, and so on, but the idea is the same. To a rough approximation you can say that a leaf is made of cellulose, water and chlorophyll. Water is colourless- it doesn't (significantly) absorb visible light over a distance as small as the thickness of a leaf. Cellulose- the stuff cotton and paper are made of also don't absorb much visible light, but the light is bounced off the surface to some extent. So, if you stripped the chlorophyll out of a leaf it would look a bit like wet paper. It's grey. If you hold it up to the light, some light gets through. On the other hand, some is reflected. Now imagine putting the chlorophyll back. Well, the green light in sunlight isn't absorbed by the chlorophyll so it's partly reflected and partly transmitted- just like before. But the red light and blue light are absorbed by the chlorophyll. So, only the green light is either reflected or transmitted. That's why leaves look green.

I don't believe I need to inform them of anything they don't already know. https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/solar-system/oort-cloud/overview/ 1 PREDICTED PLACE The Oort Cloud is a predicted, but undiscovered region of space. Comments by Ed Stone, Voyager project scientist

Air contains water, Air contains Oxygen. Air contains Carbon Dioxide.. If you leave some melted metal or alloy unprotected against the above three (at least), they can react with them.. e.g. Magnesium reacts with Oxygen, and MgO can react with CO2 (with eventual bicarbonate route), giving MgCO3

Free oxygen in the atmosphere or dissolved in water isn't essential for life. It's essential for some forms of life, but not others. Oxygen is highly reactive, so without being constantly replaced, there wouldn't be any oxygen in the air. It would react with materials in the environment and form stable compounds (oxides). Life involving photosynthesis is the only source of free oxygen in the air, so there's no way that oxygen in the air could come before life. Since we know that some forms of life can exist without oxygen, it's obvious that life came before oxygen. You can have life without oxygen, but not oxygen without life.

I don’t share your humour. If you think its worth pursuing you should go at it.

This is only your idea, and the situation I see is different. The situation I see is that I explained it without any problems, By the way, you say "utter nonsense" without any explanation, after that, you say, "You give me a chance"… This time, "Why do not you want to show ~" You are doing the show alone, so I was hesitant about what to say. My answer is that if my explanation is wrong, you can explain it specifically ~ There is no problem with the movement, and there is no logical contradiction. Only you have a problem with it, but the laws of physics, such as the laws of conservation of energy or conservation of momentum, do not have problems. The dislike you feel is because you have been accustomed to the world of positive mass for a long time. What do you think is a false or forbidden phenomenon in the universe? The actual situation is complicated, but if simply argue, I think that~ A false or forbidden phenomenon is not a phenomenon contrary to common sense, but a phenomenon contrary to various laws of physics. If a phenomenon is a phenomenon that holds various conservation laws, including the laws of conservation of energy and the laws of conservation of momentum, such phenomena are not unreasonable. Take a look at the thoughts of researchers at the University of Washington. ===== http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/04/19/physicists-create-mind-bending-negative-mass-accelerates-backwards/ “Washington State University physicists explained that this mass, unlike every physical object in the world we know, accelerates backwards when pushed.” ~~~~~ Our everyday world sees only the positive effect of the law: if you push an object, it moves away from you. “That’s what most things that we’re used to do,” said Michael Forbes, a WSU assistant professor of physics and astronomy and an affiliate assistant professor at the University of Washington. “With negative mass, if you push something, it accelerates toward you.” ~~~~~ “Once you push, it accelerates backwards,” said Mr Forbes, who acted as a theorist analysing the system. “It looks like the rubidium hits an invisible wall.” ~~~~ The heightened control gives researchers a new tool to engineer experiments to study similar behaviours in astrophysics, such as neutron stars, and cosmological phenomena like black holes and dark energy, where experiments are impossible. ===== What they claim is not a negative gravitational mass, but a negative inertial mass. You can defend your existing knowledge system through the notion of effective mass. Except for the idea of effective mass, see the fact that they explain the phenomenon through the negative inertial mass. Have they considered that objects with negative inertia mass cannot exist and said their experiments were wrong? Not at all ~ I do not know if they have any idea about the existence of negative mass (total energy is negative), but see that they are embracing the concept or phenomenon of negative inertial mass unlike you - Not all scientists think like you. You can think of it as a strange phenomenon about the negative mass. However, the tool to determine whether it is a strange phenomenon to be prohibited should be the law of physics, not your stereotype. This is because you are not a god of physics.

I am polite, but too straight on communication and keep learning to talk with more human feeling. Referring to CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, Oxygen has intensity 1000 on both 508.182 and 525.795 wavelength, which is green, but I don't know on what III represented on reference. I cannot confirm on whether the intensity is strong or not, but GREEN wavelength is existed on chlorophyll based on your source. What about go back to the discussed issue? (learning to be more human :>) Thanks, to everyone very much for any suggestions (^v^) When above image refer to reflected light, could you please provide on what reference / theory is? and I try to understand more on your viewpoint. Thanks, to everyone very much for any suggestions (^v^)