Do Events Inside Black Holes Happen? | Space Time | PBS Digital Studios


[MUSIC PLAYING] I’m sure you’ve read, seen, and
heard a lot about black holes. Well, today, I’m
going to try to make you rethink all of it, down
to what the term “black hole” even means. [THEME MUSIC] Today’s episode, we’ll
only talk about black holes from the perspective of
classical general relativity. That means no Hawking
radiation, no string theory, and no quantum
anything– baby steps. Trust me, if I do this right,
it’ll be mind blowing enough. Now, it’s a lot
harder to say what I want to say about
black holes if I make this video self-contained. To treat gravity Einsteinially
rather than Newtonianially from the outset,
it will help a lot if I can rely on technical
terms like “geodesic” or “flat spacetime” and if I can draw
a spacetime diagram or two. We all need to be on the same
page with this vocabulary. So if you need a refresher, go
watch our relativity playlist. And finally, to minimize
miscommunication, I need a favor from you. I need you to put
your preconceptions about black holes aside and
for the next few minutes, become “tabula rasa” and let
me tell you a story about me, a pony, and a very
acrobatic monkey. Suppose that I’m very
far from a black hole and there’s a pony
orbiting the black hole. She’s close, but not
that close to the hole. Don’t worry. Fact– events that
happen at a normal rate, as far as the pony is concerned,
will happen in slow motion according to me. A day for her might
be months for me. This is called
gravitational time dilation and the same thing
happens around Earth, just to a lesser degree. Atomic clocks in
high-altitude orbit will get ahead of
clocks on the ground by a few microseconds
each day, which is tiny, but GPS doesn’t
function properly if you don’t take
this into account. OK. Now suppose that I
send a tumbling monkey falling radially
toward the black hole. As he tumbles on, I
see his rotation rate become more slow
motion, but I also see him pick up
translational speed, just as I would if he
were falling toward Earth. That is, until he gets really
close to the black hole– see, eventually, the monkey will
cross the black hole’s edge without him noticing
anything unusual. But that’s not what I see. I see him weirdly
slow down his progress until he’s floating right
outside the black hole’s edge. At a certain point, I see
him in suspended animation, not rotating, not
progressing, just frozen. And the pony agrees with me. So does another pony that’s
using powerful rockets to hover much closer to
the black hole’s edge. In fact, so would any observer,
inertial or otherwise, who is always outside
the black hole’s edge. Even if the ponies and I
were immortal, all of us would agree that the monkey’s
life just doesn’t progress past this frozen moment. The monkey knows he
crosses the edge. I mean, he was there. But everyone else
insisted he never does, even after
an infinite amount of time on any of our clocks. Do you get how freaky this is? The monkey is saying that
certain events happen, but everyone else
outside the black hole says that those events
never happen, ever. In other words, there are
apparently events that according to us out here
cannot consistently be assigned a “when.” From our frame of reference
outside the black hole, those events just don’t
occur, even if we wait an infinite amount of time. OK, you got all that? Here’s the thing– a black
hole is that set of events. According to observers like the
monkey who are at those events, those events take place
at spatial locations inside that black blob
we see in the sky. But the blob, the black hole,
is not just a set of locations. It’s all the events that
have ever or will ever take place there,
according to observers who are physically there. The black hole is not a region
of concurrent happenings with the outside world that
the pony and I are just unable to see. It’s not a visibility issue. Instead, the black hole is
the collection of happenings that we say don’t happen at all. And that black blob
you see in the sky is just what it ends up looking
like in ordinary spatial and temporal terms when you
delete entire occurrences from every external observer’s
self-consistent record of the history of the universe. By the way, for every particle
that enters the black hole, some event on its
world line is always the last event that
makes it into my movie of the history of the
world out at time infinity. OK, this final batch of
events for all objects that enter that black
void taken together is called the event
horizon of the black hole. The horizon is not just a
spherical surface in space. It’s not a shroud. It’s a surface in spacetime. It represents the
last events to which you can even assign a “when.” So if a black hole
is a bunch of events, then why do we talk about
it as if it’s an object? Here’s why. For simplicity of
presentation, let’s pretend that the Sun
is a perfect sphere. It determines the spacetime
geometry in its neighborhood, the resulting geodesics
of which correspond to things like radial
freefall, orbits, et cetera. Now, if I replace the Sun
with a spherical black hole that’s around six
kilometers across– and I’ll tell you later
how I got that number– the geodesics beyond
where the Sun’s edge used to be remain unchanged. Earth will freeze, of
course, but its orbit won’t be any different. So as far as Earth is
concerned, that black hole generates the same
spacetime geometry out here that the Sun does. In that respect, the
black hole certainly behaves like an object, an
object with the Sun’s mass. So we associate one solar mass
with the black hole itself. In fact, if I give you a
spherical object of any mass M, a spherical black hole
with this special radius, called the Schwarzschild
radius, will leave the spacetime that’s
originally external to that object unchanged. A black hole that mimics the
Sun has a Schwarzschild radius of 3 kilometers. One with the mass of
Earth would have a radius of just under 1 centimeter. But hold on a second. A black hole is a
bunch of events. So is that collection of
events somehow mimicking mass or does it actually have mass? Is there even a difference? Hold that thought,
because first, I want to debunk a few
black hole misconceptions and then we’ll come
back to this question. Misconception one, that black
holes suck stuff in– they don’t do that. They’re not vacuum cleaners. You can orbit them just fine. I think this idea
of suckage is rooted in a misunderstanding
of the region that used to be inside the Sun but
is still outside the black hole. See, spacetime geometry in
this region is very foreign. For example, that is an allowed
planetary orbit in that region. That region also has
a cutoff radius inside of which there are no
circular geodesics anymore. So a freefalling observer inside
that cutoff, like the monkey, will go radially inwards. But it’s not because
he’s being sucked in any more than the Earth
sucks in a falling apple. He’s just falling. As long as he stays
outside the horizon, he can use rockets to hover
or move radially outward just like on Earth. Misconception two–
black holes are black because not
even light can escape their gravitational pull. That’s not the
reason, but here’s my guess about how this
unfortunate metaphor started. In Newtonian
gravity, a projectile on the surface of
a planet or a star needs a minimum speed called
the escape velocity in order to get really far and
not turn back as it’s pulled by the planet’s gravity. If a planet’s radius equals
the Schwarzschild radius of the equivalent-mass
black hole, it turns out that the escape
velocity is the speed of light. But that’s just a
numerical coincidence. In general relativity, remember,
gravity is not a force at all. So even though it’s true that
everything inside a black hole, including a photon, will
always move radially inward, it’s not being “pulled.” Instead, the insane
curvature there has made geometry so
weird that radially out is simply not an
available direction. Loosely speaking,
it’s like being in an episode of “The Twilight
Zone,” in which no matter which way you turn, you’re
always facing inwards. Now, that’s really freaky,
but it’s not the reason black holes are black. Remember, from
our point of view, there are no photons inside. A laser pointer
carried by the monkey never enters the black hole,
as far as we’re concerned. Because of time dilation, we
would detect any laser pulse that the monkey sends with
a lower frequency, i.e. a redder color, than
whatever the monkey emits. So just before the monkey
freezes from our perspective, the time dilation is so
severe that any light he emits gets redshifted to
undetectably low frequencies. That means that to
external observers, black holes are black because
light that gets emitted just outside the horizon is
redshifted into invisibility. So even though my story
about the monkey is correct, I shouldn’t really have
used the verb “see,” because the infinite
redshift keeps me from seeing him at all. Misconception three,
that all black holes are super dense–
this kind of depends on what you mean by “density.” If you know that
it’s the black hole mass divided by the volume
inside the horizon, then no. More massive black holes
can have very low density. For instance, the 4 million
solar mass black hole at the center of the Milky Way
is about as dense as water. Strangely, the Schwarzschild
radius criterion is based on circumference,
not on volume. By the way, bigger
black holes also have smaller tidal effects
near their horizons. So even though a
solar mass black hole would spaghettify you
from pretty far away, you could enter a billion
solar mass black hole completely unscathed. But maybe that’s not what
you mean by “density.” Maybe you mean that
all black holes are infinitely dense
because all the stuff that goes into the black
hole collapses to an infinitely dense
point called the singularity at the center, right? Again, we have to be careful. Misconception number three
actually brings us full circle back to the mass question
that I raised earlier. Astrophysically,
a black hole can form when a sufficiently
massive object, typically a very heavy star,
collapses and becomes more compact than its
own Schwarzschild radius. In this situation, the
mass of the precursor star and the associated
mass of the black hole will indeed be the same. However, the horizon forms first
in the interior of the star and then expands. So to external observers,
most of the matter never crosses the horizon. Remember, it’s all frozen. So in this scenario,
we can kind of sidestep the whole mass issue. To us, it’s not
inside the black hole. But here’s the problem. The Einstein equations also
allow for an empty universe that has an eternal black hole
that didn’t form from anything, a spacetime that
has an event horizon even though there’s
no stuff anywhere, including behind the horizon. This is the prototypical
Schwarzschild black hole and I’ve always
felt that whatever we’re going to say a black
hole’s mass is the mass of, it should apply equally well
to astrophysical black holes and to these
idealized black holes. And in this
circumstance, what are we supposed to assign the
black hole’s mass to? Remember, there’s
no stuff anywhere. So is the mass a property
of the singularity? Personally, I don’t
think that works. You see, the
singularity also isn’t a thing or a place or an event. It’s like a hole that’s been
punched out of spacetime. So the geodesics
terminate because there’s no way for them to continue. So where’s the mass? Is it associated with the
curvature of spacetime, with all of spacetime? I’m not sure what the right
answer is to interpretational questions like this or even
if there is a right answer in vanilla general relativity. But this may just
be my ignorance. My goal today was
just to correct some common misconceptions
and to highlight some of the philosophical
subtleties associated with thinking about
black holes as “things.” Of course, I’ve only scratched
the surface of black holes. There’s tons more
to learn about them. There’s rotating black holes,
charged black holes, black hole evaporation, what goes on
around black holes, how you form supermassive black holes,
tons of stuff, some of which you might hear about,
but from someone else. I didn’t realize how much
of an impact I and this show were having on you
until I read some of the lovely things you
guys said after I announced that I was leaving. I haven’t responded
to those comments because I don’t really know
how, but I have read them all and I want to say that I
was really touched by them. Nevertheless, I have
other places I need to go. So even though I will be back
next week with the answer to the challenge questions, this
is officially my final episode of “Space Time.” Our last full episode dealt
with misconceptions about what causes ocean tides on Earth. You guys had a lot to say. hauslerful and Andrew Brown said
that I should tone things down, take myself less seriously,
and not fixate so much on one versus another metaphor. I can be accused of many things,
but taking myself seriously is not one of them. And in case there
was any confusion, I’m not claiming to be the
harbinger of some new insight into the mechanism of tides. This is how tides
have been known to work since the early 18th
century, when Euler and Laplace worked out the details. But it doesn’t change the
fact that a lot of people, including physicists and
physics teachers, as you’ve seen in our comments,
and me had this mechanism wrong in our heads for
a variety of reasons. And I just wanted to make sure
that a correct representation of the mechanism was
out there in video form. Ivan or Ivan Chagas,
ErgoCogita, and Arthur Withheld all asked how
contemporary students of physics and
teachers of physics could get this
information so wrong. All I can say is it happens
and it happened to me. Science Asylum actually
gave a really good answer to this question. He’s a physics teacher
and he said, look, there are some
things that we just don’t focus on in our
training because they seem kind of trivial. And unless we have a specific
reason to look at them in more depth, we just don’t. He, for example, never thought
about why cups of coffee don’t have tides because
no one ever asked him. It happens. Romesh Srivastava–
I hope I pronounced that right– and shoofle
both asked whether there are some more mathematical
resources or papers that I could give you explaining
the same thing. There are. I dug some up. And remember, this
has been known since the early 18th century,
but I gave you a few more contemporary resources. I added them into
the Description area under the tides video. You can check them out. Madhu Sujan Paudel– hope
I pronounced that right– and gottabweird both asked
whether Earth’s atmosphere then has tides. It does. There are gravitational
effects from the Sun and Moon that do the same thing, but
they’re highly, highly masked by the much more dominant
effect of temperature variations and pressure variations on
the atmospheric distribution around the Earth. Finally, Tim VanBuren and Dox
both insisted that the Great Lakes do have tides. No, they don’t. Well, they do, but they’re
only a few centimeters between high and low tide,
like I said in the episode. What you are
mistaking for tides is seiching in those
bodies of water, namely resonant
oscillations of the water due to the shape of the lakes. It’s easily mistaken
for tides and sometimes even has approximately the same
period, but it’s not tides. And I’ve added a link in
the description of the tides episode from Noah
explaining the distinction.


  1. ,because they are still lying, you are not ashamed, that those of us who know the truth see you, the ridiculous that you are watching, that they are still lying,!

  2. Seeing as our entire universe exists inside a black hole, I’d say yes, things do happen. Like you reading this post.

  3. Watch for the upcoming episode in which another scientist offers "definitive corrections" to our misconceptions about black holes taught to us in this one. I know scientific method operates as a self-correcting body of knowledge, but do scientists espousing the latest claims have to come off sounding so damn arrogant?

  4. Actually black holes "devours" even time, so all the futures possible for any person who "falls" into the black hole are dragged into it too.

  5. This episode was your last episode produced for PBS Digital Studios. It is still on the internet, even though you have moved on. Ergo, jobs are event horizons. Thanks for your contributions. This, in particular, was an outstanding presentation.

  6. It is most sad to hear you are leaving. Please enjoy your new endeavors and I hope you find much success. (Apologies for my poor writing. I am Japanese and still learning English) .

  7. Spaceteam to ground control – brain fuck initiated. Estimated time to complete meltdown 14min and 24 seconds.

  8. One way to assign a mass to an idealized black hole is to use the way it warps spacetime at distance. It behaves roughly like a star far away from the center, right, so let's say that the mass of the black hole is the mass of the star that would cause the same gravitational effects. Is there a problem with this?

  9. If, from our perspective, it appears that the monkey never crossed the event horizon, even given an infinite amount of time, then there should be the appearance of an infinite amount of monkeys at and around the event horizon from all the previous events of monkeys crossing the event horizon and therefore, the appearance of a really big object made of imaginary monkeys.

  10. Black Holes only exist on paper. They have never been observed and cannot be proven. Quite the opposite, there are several ways to disprove Black Holes. They do not exist. What is at the center of the galaxy is a plasmoid. and is the shape of a torus. So your Black Hole is nothing more than empty space.

  11. I think the galaxy's form becouse the blackholes pulls all the gas the stars and clusters tours him and form the disc that make look like we said galaxy is actually a black hole eating. Scientists are goign to find out soon

  12. yes, something does happen inside a black hole. the breakdown of information into its smallest unit. an atom's information is decompiled to subatomic particles the basic units of information. since information cannot be destroyed but it can be reset to basic units so higher level information is gone, you will never know what elements fell in the hole if you could take a core sample and analyze it. information is transformed into its smallest unit that's what's happening.

  13. What would happen to the monkey if you were immortal and observed it until the black hole vanished from hawking radiation? Would it be fine if it were also immortal?

  14. I've got a favor to ask of you…. Forget all the misconceptions you THINK you know about Hitler and go watch "The Greatest Story Never Told".
    Or, if you sincerely believe you can look at evidence objectively without emotions and bias getting in the way, check this out:

    Think about why you believe Hitler was so bad and why the holocaust killed millions of jews….because you were told, right? That's it… Well, what if the people who told you were told incorrectly?
    Is it so hard to believe that most of it is exaggerated beyond belief for propoganda? War propoganda and lies have been around as long as man kind.

    Would you believe the US put Japanese into concentration camps during ww2 also?
    Would it surprise you to find out the US and Britain purposefully bombed civilian populations ON PURPOSE for years nonstop in Japan and Germany?

    Hitler did this one time in the battle of London, and we act like it's a major war crime but he did it in direct response to repeated bombings on citizens in Germany.

  15. The search should be on for White holes which may distort our space time, by leaking cold/hot matter into our universe, or even antimatter. There may be parts of our universe that cannot be entered, or even seen, but their presence will be detected by the displacement of matter as it flows past or round the distortion.

  16. Just as it is not possible to enter a black hole, nor would it be possible to enter a white hole. That's not to say in the future we will not send a marker through a black hole in the vain hope in finding that marker in the future. There are particles we could engineer to send through a black hole.

  17. Something bothers me here…. He makes the statement that black holes do not "suck" things in and that things can orbit it. So what exactly would happen to the monkey if he was sent into an orbit that is just past the event horizon? Does the monkey orbit just underneath the horizon until the eventual evaporation decreases the horizon to the point that the monkey all of a sudden exists?

  18. Tbh all the theories that are given and tests conducted are basically based on our understanding of how they work because nobody has gone in and come back, who's to say that the spaghettification effect actually happens or whether there is a much density in a black hole, it's all based on our understanding and don't we only see things in 3d or is it less 2.5 maybe and we only have access to 4% of our brains, thing I have wondered is if we had 100% access would we have abilities like telekinesis and control over aging , things like those, I don't mean silly things like invisibility or invincibility as we are not playing doom here.

  19. Time doesn't exist inside a black hole. There's a trade off between time and gravity. The more you have with one the less you have with the other.

  20. Anti matter is matter on the other side of a black hole. Matter here is anti matter on the other side of the black whole from which all matter here came from

  21. the only reason why the outside observers do not see the monkey cross the event horizon is because at that point the light bouncing off the monkey is also being pulled back towards the event horizon and thus the monkey appears to outside observers to be frozen at the edge … but in reality this is only an optical illusion and the monkey has crossed the horizon

    so no there are not two realities .. there is one reality .. that happens to contain an optical illusion ..

  22. wow there are so many morons idots and fucktrads n the comments section .. makes me fearful of the future if these are the dumbfucks that will be running things ..

  23. Can you explain how can you see the monkey for so long if it’s not there anymore? Where is the light bouncing from????

  24. 7:10 so you're saying that, even though Newton's gravity is thought of by pretty much all physicists as an approximation of GR, it's a "numerical coincidence" that those two gravity equations yield the same results in this instance.
    Why am I not convinced?
    Yeah, in GR gravity isn't a force. So what? It certainly behaves like a force. Again, there's a reason law of gravitation is thought of as an approximation of GR.


  26. 8:20 Bro photons get sucked in the black hole cuz the curvature of space-time is so profond that it can get to the other like if there is a hole in spacetime withought an end.We know that light folow the curvatures(by general relativity) so we cant see it becuz the light cant get over the curvature becuz it is so steep and very deep could be infinit.So sorry to tell u u r wrong about the black color of the black hole but ur information was indeed a good reasoning and in fact it IS really one of the blackness of the black hole.Before publishing any information try to give the full information not the one u wanted to make a video

  27. 8:20 Bro photons get sucked in the black hole cuz the curvature of space-time is so profond that it can get to the other like if there is a hole in spacetime withought an end.We know that light folow the curvatures(by general relativity) so we cant see it becuz the light cant get over the curvature becuz it is so steep and very deep could be infinit.So sorry to tell u u r wrong about the black color of the black hole but ur information was indeed a good reasoning and in fact it IS really one of the blackness of the black hole.Before publishing any information try to give the full information not the one u wanted to make a video

  28. the mass is in the event horizon _ a sphere made of planck-scale-spacetime-areas that each have the maximum mass spacetime can have

  29. Here's a fun fact: no matter what we do, no matter what unimaginably powerful quantum supercomputer we'd ever devise that would perfectly simulate a black hole from a mathematical standpoint, we'd always have to ASSUME that we know what's going on inside a black hole. We'll NEVER be able to empirically prove it, cause it's physically impossible to go inside it and send out the information we've gotten. We could construct a giant research station at Sagittarius A* and observe the black hole for a million years, it just wouldn't matter. This ofcourse barring any sort of "spacetime isolation bubble" that would allow us to enter the black hole without having to care about the warped spacetime, but that can safely be banished to the realm of fantasy.

  30. Events inside the Black hole can only be theorized in accordance with the general theory of relativity. However, outside of the black hole's event horizon, this is where the real action is. Recently the Milky Way's black holes event horizon flash out light to greater than 75% its normal brightness.I would expect that the increased brightness had to do with an increase in the disintegration of matter as it interacts with the event horizon of the black hole. As mass is squeezed upon its own gravitational acceleration, liken to the spaghettification effect, its matter changes to allow for its disintegration via transmutation and the massive release of photons due to alpha decay and beta decay. This is the effect wherein mass is collected within the event horizon, into a plasma, increasing its photon density. The effect is like squeezing out the dark matter from mass, allowing for the baryonic matter to be reduced to its smallest constituent components. The dark matter is then absorbed into the black hole, and the remnant of baryonic matter is radiated out at high velocity back into the cosmos.It appears dark matter is the complement of baryonic matter, wherein the creation of baryonic matter induces a displacement in the dark energy medium of the space-time fabric. This displacement is known as dark matter, and it would appear that it provides baryonic matter with the ability to bond. And if the black hole is nothing but dark matter, it would also follow that dark matter can be accumulated, separate of baryonic matter. Or at least that is how it is presented in the book, The Evolutioning of Creation: Volume 2.

  31. Gravity isn't a force? The warping of spacetime would somehow create gravitational attraction. However, as Brian Greene has pointed out, the fact that spacetime is curved can't BY ITSELF explain why objects fall toward massive objects. Without a (negative-energy?) "force" of gravity, then the Earth would presumably follow the same (slightly curved) path near the Sun as would a photon at the same distance.

  32. Astrophysicist Brian cox said that blackholes are still stars
    But this guy says black holes aren't even objects
    I believe this guy
    But who's right?

  33. Do events happen?
    Contradiction in the Premise.

    When your theory concludes something completely illogical or impossible then your theory needs tweeking.

    Or trash it and go back to Albert's original concept. No silly stuff if you do that.

  34. Black holes suck.
    White holes expell.
    They are connected.

    You can't see black holes (or white holes) because they are made completely of gravity strings, which emit no electromagnetic radiation.

  35. Half truths taken to logical conclusions will yield ridiculous results.

    Perfect examples here.

    Not his fault. He is a product of a broken system.

  36. In other words, don't try to understand anything about black holes. No matter what this guy says, or how he says it, your punie human brain is incapable of any comprehension.

  37. so spacetime have a feature if a heavy body is in it then it curves aroud it and when a big star goes supernova its puncures a hole in spacetime where space and time just flowing into the hole creating another universe and inside that universe many more black holes are created and those also create more universes…its like a infinite sinchole. we are in a black hole which came from another black hole from a different universe….etc etc

  38. so if the light is redshifted there should still be detectable radiation which can be decoded into visual stimuli via electronics

  39. Why black holes don't collapse inwards? I mean:
    If a star runs out of it's current fusion fuel,
    it collapses and ignites next fusion reaction. In the next step, radiation pressure expands the volume again.

    What makes the black hole having a volume at all? Should't it be more point-like?

    The only radiation black holes generate is Hawking radiation if I am not wrong, is this the reason for a black hole to have a volume? This can't be really it either, as the radiation is generated at the event horizon and not inside the black hole.
    This is hard stuff.

    If any expert is ripping his/her hair off because of major misconceptions in my comment: I am sorry

  40. WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SPEAKING SO FAST? ISN'T THE PURPOSE OF THIS VIDEO TO INFORM OR MAYBE EDUCATE? Sorry for the caps lock. Fuck off! On a second though I'm not sorry for the CAPS LOCK. FUCK THE FUCK YOU! Sorry…

  41. I think this is all wrong. It is the light from the monkey that you see stop. The monkey keeps going and spagettifies on his way in.You are making way too mush of this.

  42. You make no sense and are longwinded. You talk in a tone of voice in which you expect people to understand you, they don’t.

  43. How close do the suns orbiting the super massive black hole at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy and how long will those suns continue to orbit it before they fall into it?

  44. Sounds like a black hole then, is rather a place and time, or rather a lack if space and time, where the laws of the universe according to those outside the black hole, do not exist. So then properties of every black hole may differ, or at least it terns of where it is located in the normal universe.

  45. What is a black hole 🕳?

    A neutrino with no space. Dark matter particles Ickes trepidation and split in neutron star. Host and lower millstone are the poles and expansion is a no space totally vacuumed that squeezes and bonds table of elements are created in black holes.

    Neutrino is so wrapped that there is no space remains inside the neutrino.

    What you see in the black hole is a opened neutrino.

    Like space is having sexual relationship into a dark matter.

    Deuteronomy 24:6
    Verse Concepts
    "No one shall take a handmill or an upper millstone in pledge, for he would be taking a life in pledge.

    Matthew 18:6
    Verse Concepts
    but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

    Job 41:24
    Verse Concepts
    "His heart is as hard as a stone, Even as hard as a lower millstone.

    Revelation 18:21
    Verse Concepts
    Then a strong angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, "So will Babylon, the great city, be thrown down with violence, and will not be found any longer.

    Isaiah 47:1-2
    "Come down and sit in the dust, O virgin daughter of Babylon; Sit on the ground without a throne, O daughter of the Chaldeans! For you shall no longer be called tender and delicate. "Take the millstones and grind meal Remove your veil, strip off the skirt, Uncover the leg, cross the rivers.

    Jeremiah 25:10
    Verse Concepts
    'Moreover, I will take from them the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the sound of the millstones and the light of the lamp.

    Revelation 18:22
    Verse Concepts
    "And the sound of harpists and musicians and flute-players and trumpeters will not be heard in you any longer; and no craftsman of any craft will be found in you any longer; and the sound of a mill will not be heard in you any longer;

  46. But when nothing ever passes the event horizon, how do black holes grow in 'mass'?

    And wouldnt I be correct if I said that you'd never see your body entering the black hole if you go inside the black hole, feet first?

  47. I would like to ask science a question, what would happen to the selestial bodies of the galaxy? if the black hole in the center of the galaxy was destroyed or disappeared from its position. In this life and the next stay in the light. Ramon Sandoval.

    Me gustaría hacer una pregunta a la ciencia, que pasaria con los cuerpos selestiales de la galaxia? si el hoyo negro del centro de la galaxia fuera destruido o desapareciera de su pocision. En esta vida y la siguiente quedate en la luz. Ramon Sandoval.

  48. All I wanna know is if I went in a black hole what happens. Do you just fall through the universe is so where do you go. I think a person would die but ya who’s to say maybe just fall forever towards the middle of know where…..?


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here