The actual model is just that, a model. It says that our universe can be described the same way as we describe the information systems around an event horizon, and in many cases in physics, if a system can be described using the same model it is often related, connected or the same in some way.

It's not sensationalist, but it's highly misinterpreted and turned into sensationalism.

It doesn't really give us anything meaningful that we can use or understand the universe better just yet, but maybe someday someone will figure out something that helps us better understand where the universe came from. That's all. It's a very convincing theory if you learn about entropy and Planck-scales and event horizons around black holes, but it's not even sensational on its own.

I mean technically the sentence structure says that:

• Fact: NASA has done something
• That something: potentially discovering that we are in a black hole

So in a sense there is no contradiction there with the words "fact" and "potentially". Although there is a relevant possibility for confusion of what is being stated as a fact, so your point stands. I just like nitpicking on technicalities :D

It's for the folks plagued by existential dread that need to know where we came from. Well son, it's black holes the whole way down.

As I often do, I disagree with Tyson, the model may help us understand the origin or nature of the universe someday. It's just a model, but when a model can be tested or studied in some way, we generally tend to learn new, grand things about everything.

It's not sensational, because it doesn't say anything radical, other than show a very similar relationship between information systems in event horizons and the way our whole universe can be modeled as an information system.

Are you saying that he said that about this in particular or that it's a quote he says about loads of things? xD

On a side note: I don't think we should hate on DeGrasse Tyson, because hating on him seems to be a meme that's just gone too far. Isn't it rooted in a literal 4-chan greentext? But I think he's polite, nice, and the things people interpret as disingenuity are just his presenting quirks. Like the "tweeting the same mirror joke every month" actually has a more neat explanation.

Isn't matter the whole issue

And then punch your landlord in the face. They are a landlord, they probably deserve it.

If you mean entering a black hole, well, parts of you will probably make it in. After the spaghettification.

Anyone trying to frame this idea as worrying is trying to grift using science.

The idea in itself will never impact you personally. Most likely.

See, it's just a model for understanding how information systems work, and you can model the entire universe as an information system which could be identical to what happens around event horizons. It could be a big deal for people trying to understand how all this formed and where we came from, if you're curious about that kind of thing and have learned a bit about entropy and time and space and event horizons it's a pretty remarkable idea.

But the most realistic thing that will come from it is just more questions, even if it's true.

Best case: we learn that there are connections in time/space that we never were aware of or can use this model to predict particular kinds of spacetime effects and could figure out things like why space is expanding. Wildly best case: we figure out something about gravity we never considered and you get your goddamn hoverboards. Better late than never.

I, for one, would like to see the cafeteria menus in advance so parents can adjust their dinner menus accordingly. I don't like the idea of Milhouse having two spaghettification meals in one day.

time to spagettify spaghettis, lets create hyperspag

Here's a summary

It's by no means confirmed. It's one theory out of many. The JWST data shows galaxies have a significant preference to all spin the same way. Mathematicians say this would be evidence in favor but not fully confirm the black hole theory (also called the Swarthschild theory if you want to DDG more). Some suspect it's bias from the rotation of our own galaxy affecting the data and they plan to calibrate more

It's not a thing. Or, like, this theory ("black hole cosmology") has been around for ages, it's not broadly accepted and I can find no evidence of NASA publishing anything explicitly in support of it. The pop-sci articles are all linking back to this study which decidedly does not make the conclusion the universe might be inside a black hole.

https://www.space.com/space-exploration/james-webb-space-telescope/is-our-universe-trapped-inside-a-black-hole-this-james-webb-space-telescope-discovery-might-blow-your-mind

https://ipropertymanagement.com/research/average-rent-by-year

Your life just got worse. You're paying rent inside of a black hole.