Corpus evidence — top 10 passages

Most-relevant passages from the entire indexed corpus (67,286 paragraph chunks across YouTube transcripts, PubMed, arXiv, archive.org, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, OpenAlex, and more) ranked by semantic similarity (bge-small-en-v1.5).

1. 01 · _intake0.934

   > this transition black hole you don't have to go to infinity like a lot of my colleagues love to do right now why because they after all always assume

   _intake/claims-allbranch/curated-low/black-hole/002-this-transition-black-hole-you-don-t-have-to-go-to-infinity-.md

2. 02 · _intake0.783

   > then in effect, that isn't true anymore. So the paths always have to be finite. So it's as if time stops. So what you end up with is what in a black hole is this physical path stopping, in meta-mathematics is the proof stops. So QED is like a singularity. Yes. QED in the sense of at the end of the proof. Right. And so then it gets even funkier because in general relativity, we know

   _intake/claims-allbranch/curated-low/relativity/010-then-in-effect-that-isn-t-true-anymore.md

3. 03 · yt0.778

   That when stuff  falls into it, it changes its whole character.  So by contrast with the horizon of a  black hole, which is highly stable,   you perturb it and it vibrates a bit and then  settles back down. It's just so stable. You can't   blast it apart. By the contrast, what's going  on down beneath there is highly unstable. And   when stuff falls in, the gravity of the  stuff that falls in completely changes   what's going on down inside the black hole. So as best we understand it today, and this is   part of th…

   yt/PTs--eFrzGo-greatest-mysteries-of-gravity-brian-greene-kip-thorne-world-/transcript.txt

4. 04 · yt0.765

   Brian: And so as I recall, I think in the late 30s,   Einstein even wrote a paper where he tried to  specifically model a bunch of masses that would be   in some spherical configuration. They were moving,  and he tried to model them collapsing inward. Kip: Well, he moved   them in slowly. He didn't have the wherewithal, he  hadn't even asked the question about a dynamical   collapse. He said, let me shrink it smaller  and smaller. And once it got down to something   a little bit larger than this Schwarzschild  radius, h…

   yt/PTs--eFrzGo-greatest-mysteries-of-gravity-brian-greene-kip-thorne-world-/transcript.txt

5. 05 · yt0.761

   Very annoying to me as a modern professional physicist. One of the points that he made was what we now call conservation of momentum. It wasn't exactly in a modern vocabulary. You can debate whether it really counts as conservation momentum in the modern sense, but it was a crucial step along the way because what even Cena mentioned was that really the reason why the bottle of water stops moving isn't because of the fundamental nature of motion. It's because there's a force that is acting on it by the stool that it's sitting on. And he made the point that if you thought there was such a thing …

   yt/rqezWO5Yba8-sean-carrol-the-big-picture-on-the-origins-of-life-meaning-a/transcript.txt

6. 06 · yt0.761

   Is that correct?   Or is it the case that if you ever have  a Cauchy horizon, a place from which you   can't evolve further, that that means  you do not ever have a Cauchy surface? Yeah, I'm getting kind of tangled up here, but  a Cauchy horizon is only going to arise if it is   possible to extend, but not extend in a way that's  going to keep that surface a Cauchy surface.   So the Cauchy surface, as I said, if there's  a Cauchy surface, it's necessarily globally   hyperbolic. So I think the way to think about  th…

   yt/iGOGxaZZHwE-it-s-not-that-we-don-t-know-it-s-that-we-can-t/transcript.txt

7. 07 · yt0.761

   Suppose you evolve up until a point where you  can't evolve further, and let's further suppose   that global hyperbolicity isn't a necessary  condition of our physical universe. That our   physical universe may have solutions  that are not globally hyperbolic. Now,   I know that's anathema to some people who  think that Malament-Hogarth space-times,   for instance, are pathological or what have  you. Okay, we don't know that a priori.   Black holes were thought to be pathological, a  priori, quote-unquote, by Einst…

   yt/iGOGxaZZHwE-it-s-not-that-we-don-t-know-it-s-that-we-can-t/transcript.txt

8. 08 · yt0.760

   So, this if you're watching, if you're listening, you're missing. You really should be watching as well. So, we've got this ball and it dense and it indents the plane. And we have a ruler and we can have a watch too that measures it. I thought that this was the paradigm that displays how we actually traveling through spaceime reinvisioning gravity not as a force but as a curvature on this higher dimensional manifold. You can put this back. Thank you for the demonstration. Thank you. I'm an experimental physicist so you know I love to do demonstrations. What what is wrong with that? I mean I th…

   yt/BVkUya368Es-why-people-are-terrified-of-eric-weinstein-s-geometric-unity/transcript.txt

9. 09 · yt0.759

   And so you will be under tension from being in the vicinity of a black hole which sounds you know pretty uncomfortable and certainly as you get toward the center of a black hole it will become very uncomfortable become deadly. But the question is if you have a big black hole and the gravitational force at the event horizon is relatively small could you cross it without feeling that spaghettification? The answer is absolutely yes. Absolutely yes. In principle, right now, a moment ago, we all could have just passed through the event horizon of a black hole. If it was big enough, we would not not…

   yt/I3_me7RqteE-ask-brian-greene-live-q-a-world-science-festival/transcript.txt

10. 10 · yt0.758

    Then are you learning about part of the universe that you're supposedly unable to access by virtue of the entangled partner on the other side? And the most conventional answer from general relativity is yes, right? So if you measure that entangled member on the outside and it's spinning up, then you will have learned that the one on the inside is spinning down. Now, that doesn't actually violate any insights. What black holes really stipulate and they're defined by is a better way of saying it is that a light beam can't escape. Nothing can escape. When you do this, nothing's escaping. You're l…

    yt/nH8c60ZbSgw-live-q-a-with-brian-greene-world-science-festival/transcript.txt