I mean that doesn't matter in the slightest. For a black hole that small he would be ripped to shreds by tidal forces long before he even got close since he would be under the pressure of billions of times earth's gravity compared to a supermassives relatively small few hundred.
This is exactly my point. People try to push that it's realistic or a feat or whatever they want to call it using whatever rational to try and make it make sense when it's perfectly okay to say it just looked cool and that's why it happened.
The event horizon is the point where escape velocity at the speed of light is no longer is fast enough to escape the black hole.
Stellar black hole has it's mass compacted into a small radius meaning the event horizon needs much more force to prevent light from escaping. It also means tidal forces will rip you to shreds long before you get close.
Super massive blackholes has it's mass spread across a much larger radius which means at the event horizon it needs barely any force to actually capture light. Theoretically you can actually pass though the event horizon without being ripped to shreds by tidal forces as the gravitational force are barely a few times more than earth.
You are technically correct because standing at the distance of an event horizon of a sellar black hole would be basically the same as standing directly on the singularity of super massive blackholes but I don't think that was the point you were trying to make
I'm not sure if you also have a physics background and are trying to simplify for laymen or if this is just a mistake, but saying that the mass of a supermassive black hole is more spread out is wrong. For all black holes, the mass is infinitely compressed at the singularity (the exact mathematical treatment of the singularity is certainly a hot topic, but I'm not aware of any models that treat the mass of black holes as spread out in any way). The spacetime curvature for stellar black holes is more extreme at the event horizon, yes, but that is just because the event horizon is much closer to the actual singularity.
In any case, your last paragraph was indeed my point (although you wouldn't be in the singularity, simply inside the event horizon). At first I thought you meant in your original comment that swapping the stellar black hole for a supermassive one would make omni man's abilities less impressive (when you said 'compared to a supermassives relatively small few hundred'). This is wrong of course, as at a distance r from the singularity, the gravity and tidal forces of a supermassive black hole would be much stronger (and you'd already be inside the event horizon so doomed anyway).
Looking back at it now, I guess what you originally meant was that you could fly at a distance r measured from the event horizon of a supermassive black hole (instead of measured from the singularity) and experience less gravity, which is true of course, since you'd be on the order of light minutes away from the singularity, in which case a stellar black hole would also just be a distant inconsequential blip.
2.4k
u/steve123410 Jun 06 '26
The number of people in the comments that miss the point that the black hole shot was to look cool is crazy.