A singularity is quite literally the name of the impossible: it’s the point within a black hole that quantum physics breaks down. So you’re correct in that event horizons contradict them. EVERYTHING contradicts them, yet there they are.

And so yes, when Hawking was theorizing black hole decay, he was specifically trying to figure out what a singularity was. He collaborated on different theories just trying to understand singularities, whether black holes had them or not, and how they might be formed. They basically confirmed that, “yep, some spooky shit happens in there we don’t have the tools to understand yet.”

Looking forward to hear Scott Manley on yt elaborate on that.

The challenge with all colonization is the motivation. In theory, your idea makes sense. But that's a long way to go unless colonization is heavily motivated. To build so far away, even with future tech that allows us to get there in say a couple months, the builders would need a huge reason to go for it. I'm thinking Earth becoming uninhabitable or certain groups being under threat if they remain on Earth. I cannot think of a grand reason why we would go so far unless Venus cloud cities are proven useless, Mars isn't workable, and the Moon is for whatever reason off the table.

But if we're building orbital stations, then what does it matter where we put them? And if gravity isn't a factor for an orbital station, why do we care about the surface gravity of the body we are orbiting?

I like your idea a lot, cool premise for a story, I can't think of a reason it would ever come to pass.

I share your fascination. I don't think the universe exists for our comprehension, we exist within it regardless of our best description of it.

Our whole earth orbit only swings the distance by ~2AU, it's at about ~5.1 AU. So we're looking at 4.1AU vs 6.1AU. I guess that is about 50% further away at the furthest, and technically both planets have non circular orbits so maybe it is a little closer than that even.

I started doing this math expecting to give OPs skills credit but maybe a lot of this is the orbit... Of course over two years we should see it get bigger and smaller. Tough to say. Either way love the pictures. I really oughta get a telescope...

The universe isn't here for us, we're just a byproduct of it searching for better ways to increase entropy - which life is quite excellent at, since the whole concept of life is that it actively seeks out available energy gradients to ride, and cracks stored energy out of local minima.

That there's unimaginable mountains of available energy out there for us to do something interesting with is nice for us and nice for the universe - but it really doesn't care if we're the ones to go get it, or if it eventually burns some other way.

I want to have a nice time, so I definitely think we should go out there and grab it - but I also think we should do the most interesting things possible with it rather than squandering it, and if ever we find anyone else out there helping the universe with its goal of increasing entropy and being interesting, hopefully we can increase how complex society is in association with them rather than do something stupid and wasteful.

And fwiw, damaging our ability to increase entropy by riding the energy gradients on this planet too hard before we get sustainable space colonies going is definitely under the banner of 'stupid and wasteful' in my book - but at the same time we shouldn't be so careful that those space colonies and further leveraging of energy gradients available elsewhere never happen.

It would be wonderful if we can restore the environment here to a more pristine state for our species' psychological health, but the universe doesn't care about that - that's all on us.

I enjoy the fact that none of the great questions about life have been answered. So for me, it bodes well that we are in for a pretty cool surprise. Almost like being ants and wondering why these giants we see ocassionally walk by never stop and tell us what it's all about. I hope one day we'll be big enough.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Shut up

Hello u/Poise-on, your submission "How to make a model of dark matter and energy?" has been removed from r/space because:

• Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

Hello u/ClassicSpurzy, your submission "How big was the point of dense energy before the Big Bang?" has been removed from r/space because:

• Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

Hello u/WhoStalledMyCar, your submission "Recently Correlated Black Hole Mass and Dark Energy Questions" has been removed from r/space because:

• Such questions should be asked in the "All space questions" thread stickied at the top of the sub.

Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.

Lmao I was thinking the same. It wasn't done to spite you 😂😂

[deleted]

There's no answer to your question, per se, because there wasn't anything deciding where to place things in the universe. Our perspective is what it is, because earth has had life supporting conditions long enough for life to form, and long enough for us to evolve into beings which can observe and wonder why.

Why is there so much water in the ocean if we can’t possibly explore it all?

What happens after death? 《Insert your question》

《 No fucn clue》

Indeed. I think that's its main role for us, other than dedicated scientific pursuits.

>Why is there so many Stars around us if we can't reach any?

Because the universe wasn't built for us. This is a very self centered take on the cosmos.

It hasn’t been “proven” because it hasn’t been experimentally observed.

But most models treat it just as a subatomic particle that only interacts with gravity

is why really a valid question in regards to the existence of anything in the natural world?

I think you forgot something.

I think you misheard what that guy said, because the leading theory is still 100% an unknown subatomic particle, and I would hazard to guess that 90-95% of physicists in a field involving dark matter believe that it is just that— matter that only interacts with gravity, or interacts extremely weakly with the other known interactions.

Most of the debates around dark matter are around the question of “what TYPE” of matter is it and there is really only one fleshed out alternative theory— MOND and it’s various offshoots— and it’s clunky and overly complex due to initial failures, and it still fails fully resolve the initial issues that led to the need for dark matter.

A universe filled with a cold subatomic particles that ONLY interact with gravity (not even itself) not only fixes most of the problems that required dark matter in the first place, but people are using it in other areas (universal structural evolution and such) and it works there, too.

Until dark matter is experimentally observed, it is still an open area of research…. But given decades of failures of alternative theories and cutting edge research discounting other theories, it’s getting harder to treat the cold WIMP theory as anything but accepted.