I suddenly feel like I'm wasting everyone's time. There's literally a similar thread from a week ago... I guess we might have seen the same video. (Well thank you everyone for humoring me.)
Anyway
The black squiggle looks smooth to me.
And does that mean a free-falling object would have an...
The video shows a different example, but that's exactly what I was imagining.
I'm confused now. Which squiggle are we talking about now? The one with the triangles? If the dashed diagonal line is the event horizon arbitrarily powerful thrusters can always save you, right? As long as you're...
It turns out the background grey tone on this forum is the perfect shade for cleaning screens. And assessing the brightness uniformity of your display panel. It lets you spot smudges and imperfections easily. I also spotted a dead pixel on my display that will forever annoy me until the end of...
Thank you for this explanation. I have yet to parse it fully, but let's start somewhere. I am wondering whether this diagram can finally make me understand the nature of gravity as spacetime curvature rather than a force.
So, in Minkowski spacetime (aka flat spacetime?) an unmoving object's...
I have been lied to. Many times, but that one's just the latest instance.
> how does that look like from the perspective of the falling observer.
What I was considering behind that question was, if the black hole evaporates, and we have absurd levels of time dilation, could the falling...
If, from an outsider's perspective it takes an infinite amount of time to cross the event horizon, but a finite amount of time for the black hole to evaporate, how does that look like from the perspective of the falling observer. For that matter, how does it look like from the perspective of the...
I ran into an interesting subreddit recently - r/confidentlyIncorrect
Simple math blunders are quite popular there, after reading dozens of them a pattern emerged.
Usually it's in the form of if you have 600 million dollars and there are 300 million americans, you can give every american 2...
Thank you everyone for the responses!
This makes sense to me. It's also why it made the most intuitive sense in the first place, the video even explicitly demonstrates that (at least with regard to time evolution).
This was exactly the missing piece needed to connect it to my existing mental...
I was watching this video by minutephysics on the No-cloning theorem.
Henry very plainly shows why the no-cloning theorem holds, given the setup.
However, I am no quantum physicist and lack the necessary background to truly understand what's going on there.
What are the origins of the 3...
Oh crud, I did not see the 2 in there and blindly copied your latex... nor in the original equation. 🤦♂️ Things suddenly make a lot more sense now. So the Kerr equation is probably correct and I've been misreading the Schwarzschild variant this whole time.
Tho the "shrinks" part still seems a...
The Kerr equation, from the video is as follows:
##R_e = \frac{2GM}{c^2}(1+\sqrt{1 - a^2})##
and I could not find it in that form on wikipedia.
In the above equation, when a=0 you get ##R_e = \frac{2GM}{c^2}*2##, which is clearly not the same as the Schwarzschild radius. At the same time, on...
I'm a bit confused as to which statements you're adressing.
For the first response it seems fairly clear that you are agreeing the title statement is a mistake.
However for the second, you say the video is correct, without saying which part.
Here are the things that confuse me:
The Kerr...
The title is a direct quote of this video by Dr. Becky Smethurst, an astrophysicist specializing in black hole research.
This is a mistake, right?
Supermassive black holes, for example, don't have tiny radii, compared to stellar mass BHs.
Then there's the equation she presents seconds later...
So that's what that W I've been seeing pop up in W|A results means. Not that I can do much with it.
I reached y=x+ln(x) and that's it. (In other words this operation from the OP: fL*fe) Seems that's the unsolvable part. Doesn't get any simpler than that and the root is apparently x = e(-W(1))...
Preface: I have not done serious math in years. Today I tried to do something fancy for a game mechanic I'm designing.
I've got an item with a variable power level. It uses x amount of ammo to produce f(x) amount of kaboom. Initially it was linear, e.g. fL(x) = x, but I didn't like the scaling...