Why "even light"?

[Genady]

Variations of this phrase in description of black holes are endlessly repeated:

Quote

Nothing, not even light, can escape

(Black hole - Wikipedia)

Quote

nothing, not even light, can escape

(Black hole | Definition, Formation, Types, Pictures, & Facts | Britannica)

Quote

even light can not get out

(What Is a Black Hole? | NASA)

Etc.

My question is, why they use the phrase "even light" as some kind of extreme, as if light is expected to escape from everything and everywhere? What is it about light that if IT cannot escape then NOTHING can? (I am not asking about the physics of it, but about the use of this phrase in the layman descriptions.)

[exchemist]

41 minutes ago, Genady said:

Variations of this phrase in description of black holes are endlessly repeated:

(Black hole - Wikipedia)

(Black hole | Definition, Formation, Types, Pictures, & Facts | Britannica)

(What Is a Black Hole? | NASA)

Etc.

My question is, why they use the phrase "even light" as some kind of extreme, as if light is expected to escape from everything and everywhere? What is it about light that if IT cannot escape then NOTHING can? (I am not asking about the physics of it, but about the use of this phrase in the layman descriptions.)

Do they mean light is made of bosons, so even rather than odd? 😄

Actually I presume it is because they have just described the strong gravitation of black holes, so readers may be thinking that bodies with mass can't escape, rather than massless photons. 

[swansont]

51 minutes ago, Genady said:

My question is, why they use the phrase "even light" as some kind of extreme, as if light is expected to escape from everything and everywhere? What is it about light that if IT cannot escape then NOTHING can? (I am not asking about the physics of it, but about the use of this phrase in the layman descriptions.)

Relativity is not really a widely-understood bit of science. Most people who are familiar with Newtonian gravity know it depends on mass. Light is massless.

For those who might have a smattering of relativity knowledge, they might know that the speed of light is pretty fast, and constant.

Popular science descriptions are not written for the scientists in the associated field.

[Genady]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

Actually I presume it is because they have just described the strong gravitation of black holes, so readers may be thinking that bodies with mass can't escape, rather than massless photons. 

 

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Most people who are familiar with Newtonian gravity know it depends on mass. Light is massless.

For those who might have a smattering of relativity knowledge, they might know that the speed of light is pretty fast, and constant.

Do you think the writers of these descriptions actually think about what readers might know about light and gravity? Or do they just keep repeating the catch phrase without thinking about it? I wonder, who had written it first.

[swansont]

16 minutes ago, Genady said:

Do you think the writers of these descriptions actually think about what readers might know about light and gravity? Or do they just keep repeating the catch phrase without thinking about it? I wonder, who had written it first.

If they’re decent writers (and editors). People aren’t going to read impenetrable explanations - it’s got to be accessible 

[Genady]

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

If they’re decent writers (and editors). People aren’t going to read impenetrable explanations - it’s got to be accessible 

They could say, e.g., "nothing, including light, ... ". What is the point of saying "even light" other than a dramatic effect?

[Genady]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

Relativity is not really a widely-understood bit of science.

Turns out that this^^^ is a very mild way to put it. Just an hour ago my wife called me to show the question in Jeopardy:

This is too obvious. No need to know anything about these people and their prize. There is only one choice, isn't it?

None of the contestants had anything to say about it. Silence!

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Genady said:

They could say, e.g., "nothing, including light, ... ". What is the point of saying "even light" other than a dramatic effect?

Hmmm. Writers…dramatic effect. Is there a connection? 

8 minutes ago, Genady said:

Turns out that this^^^ is a very mild way to put it. Just an hour ago my wife called me to show the question in Jeopardy:

This is too obvious. No need to know anything about these people and their prize. There is only one choice, isn't it?

None of the contestants had anything to say about it. Silence!

This is what I dislike about Jeopardy! - a secondary clue that’s much easier than the primary clue.

(I say this despite the fact that my mom was on the show, ages ago, in the Art Fleming days. And was a one-day champion)

[Endy0816]

I figured was based on the original, classical view, of a BH in terms of escape velocity.

 

[MJ kihara]

On 7/31/2023 at 11:30 PM, Genady said:

What is it about light that if IT cannot escape then NOTHING can? (I am not asking about the physics of it,

When the science behind the reasons is not clear esp in a form that can also be clearly understood by a layman it creates a room for ambiguous terms and phrases to be used.
If you have the science behind it you would really know why it doesn't escape...which on itself will really lead you to something wonderful,that is,what escape from the Blackhole..... simplicity and consistency in scientific explanations leads to reduction in ambiguities....sometime when you try to bring clarity you end up with a pet theory.

 

[Genady]

49 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

When the science behind the reasons is not clear

It is clear.

 

49 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

esp in a form that can also be clearly understood by a layman

It can be clearly understood by a layman.

 

49 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

it creates a room for ambiguous terms and phrases to be used.

Therefore, there is no such a room.

 

50 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

If you have the science behind it

I do.

 

51 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

you would really know why it doesn't escape

I know why it doesn't escape.

 

52 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

simplicity and consistency in scientific explanations

It is simple and consistent.

 

52 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

leads to reduction in ambiguities

There are no ambiguities.

 

53 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

sometime when you try to bring clarity you end up with a pet theory.

This is what has happened in your case, I assume.

[MJ kihara]

3 minutes ago, Genady said:

It is clear.

 

It can be clearly understood by a layman.

 

Therefore, there is no such a room.

 

I do.

 

I know why it doesn't escape.

 

It is simple and consistent.

 

There are no ambiguities.

 

This is what has happened in your case, I assume.

Talking past each other...we are not in speculation section I could have asked you further questions and provided my arguments to clarify...of which so far am not near...am not intending to hijack the thread... personally am not a fun of pets but I will learn to...so that I learn how to dress them to be presentable.

 

 

On 7/31/2023 at 11:30 PM, Genady said:

as if light is expected to escape from everything and everywhere?

What is the difference between  escaping and emission..in your context?

[Danijel Gorupec]

Hmm... I was supposing that 'not even light' is simply used to explain why it is called a 'black' hole. Most of the time, however, I guess, the phrase is just repeated without much thinking.... maybe we should not overthink it either.

[exchemist]

4 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

When the science behind the reasons is not clear esp in a form that can also be clearly understood by a layman it creates a room for ambiguous terms and phrases to be used.
If you have the science behind it you would really know why it doesn't escape...which on itself will really lead you to something wonderful,that is,what escape from the Blackhole..... simplicity and consistency in scientific explanations leads to reduction in ambiguities....sometime when you try to bring clarity you end up with a pet theory.

 

Not sure I follow this. Are you saying people who can’t think straight may end up with pet theories? There does seem to be evidence for that, certainly. But that’s not what this thread is about.

[Genady]

6 hours ago, MJ kihara said:

What is the difference between  escaping and emission..in your context?

Why?

How about "nothing gets out ..."?

[Genady]

On 7/31/2023 at 10:28 PM, Endy0816 said:

I figured was based on the original, classical view, of a BH in terms of escape velocity.

 

If this is the case, then the comparison to light is simply wrong, because one does not need a high velocity to escape a Newtonian BH. One could just crawl out of it.

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, Genady said:

If this is the case, then the comparison to light is simply wrong, because one does not need a high velocity to escape a Newtonian BH. One could just crawl out of it.

What do you mean by crawl out? Do you mean a powered spacecraft or something?

[MJ kihara]

6 hours ago, exchemist said:

Are you saying people who can’t think straight may end up with pet theories?

What is thinking straight? It depend on the range of thinking,the narrower the range it is,the straighter it appears,that is what I think.

3 hours ago, Genady said:

How about "nothing gets out ..."?

I totally agree with this.... yeah atleast nothing gets out.

[exchemist]

11 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

What is thinking straight? It depend on the range of thinking,the narrower the range it is,the straighter it appears,that is what I think.

I totally agree with this.... yeah atleast nothing gets out.

Thinking straight involves well-defined ideas, that can be clearly expressed, and which are connected in a coherent way. 

[MJ kihara]

2 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Thinking straight involves well-defined ideas, that can be clearly expressed, and which are connected in a coherent way. 

At every phase in history there seems to be a well defined coherent way of thinking for the majority of people at that particular phase of history only later to be realised that there were hidden layers of ideas within those coherence.

7 hours ago, Danijel Gorupec said:

Hmm... I was supposing that 'not even light' is simply used to explain why it is called a 'black' hole. Most of the time, however, I guess, the phrase is just repeated without much thinking.... maybe we should not overthink it either.

I tried to overthink about that phrase when I came across it to understand it, it lead me to alot of things... sometimes even ambiguous phrases can lead to deeper meaning when you try to search for clarity out of those phrases...to me 'even light' seemed to emphasize the indestructible nature of Blackhole to say the least,this gave me the urge to over think about it to go beyond the established facts.

[exchemist]

25 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:

At every phase in history there seems to be a well defined coherent way of thinking for the majority of people at that particular phase of history only later to be realised that there were hidden layers of ideas within those coherence.

I tried to overthink about that phrase when I came across it to understand it, it lead me to alot of things... sometimes even ambiguous phrases can lead to deeper meaning when you try to search for clarity out of those phrases...to me 'even light' seemed to emphasize the indestructible nature of Blackhole to say the least,this gave me the urge to over think about it to go beyond the established facts.

A good tip for clear thinking and expression is to communicate in complete sentences, not in half sentences trailing off with "........... ". That way lies slack thinking and, if you're not jolly careful, pet theories.😀

You are not thinking clearly here. "Even light" says nothing whatsoever about the permanence or otherwise of black holes. Or, if you think it does, you need to explain why you think it says that, since it is far from obvious. 

 

[MJ kihara]

2 minutes ago, exchemist said:

😀You are not thinking clearly here. "Even light" says nothing whatsoever about the permanence or otherwise of black holes. Or, if you think it does, you need to explain why you think it says that, since it is far from obvious. 

 

 

Lots of misunderstanding,it like you are fighting invisible enemy.

6 minutes ago, exchemist said:

A good tip for clear thinking and expression is to communicate in complete sentences, not in half sentences trailing off with "........... ". That way lies slack thinking and, if you're not jolly careful, pet theories.😀

 

When you see that ' ...' '....' associate it with me..🤗 its the way my neurons are firing. This one "........." for slack thinking you should tell me/us how you came up with it.

Otherwise brain do the thinking... communication and sentences don't think, saying communication and sentence think is bad science (BS).

[Genady]

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

What do you mean by crawl out? Do you mean a powered spacecraft or something?

Yes, this is right. A powered spacecraft, a ladder, a tower, a rope hanging from an orbiting spacecraft, etc.

[exchemist]

1 hour ago, MJ kihara said:

Lots of misunderstanding,it like you are fighting invisible enemy.

When you see that ' ...' '....' associate it with me..🤗 its the way my neurons are firing. This one "........." for slack thinking you should tell me/us how you came up with it.

Otherwise brain do the thinking... communication and sentences don't think, saying communication and sentence think is bad science (BS).

Experience: people that can't communicate coherently often can't think coherently, I have found. 

[md65536]

On 7/31/2023 at 2:30 PM, Genady said:

My question is, why they use the phrase "even light" as some kind of extreme, as if light is expected to escape from everything and everywhere? What is it about light that if IT cannot escape then NOTHING can? (I am not asking about the physics of it, but about the use of this phrase in the layman descriptions.)

The phrase "not even light can escape a black hole" is correct. Do you find it confusing? The statement doesn't imply that light is expected to escape from everything, or that if IT cannot escape then NOTHING can, and I doubt many others have that confusion.

Edited August 3, 2023 by md65536