# Black Holes



## Drone (Sep 24, 2011)

So no wimps for today I guess...



> “We know that about 25% of the matter in the universe is dark matter, but we don’t know what it is,” Michael Kesden tells PhysOrg.com. “There are a number of different theories about what dark matter could be, but we think one alternative might be very small primordial black holes.”



Yeah small but darn heavy



> When many of us think about black holes, we think of a huge cosmic event, sucking in everything around it. However, there is also the possibility of small black holes. “Einstein’s theory of relativity allows for black holes,” Kesden explains, “but doesn’t stipulate a size. It’s very possible that the early universe produced very small black holes. These would gravitate like massive black holes, floating through the universe and clustering.”
> 
> Kesden worked with Shravan Hanasoge, from Princeton University and the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, to work out method of using solar oscillations to determine whether a small, primordial black hole passed through a star. If the data can show that these small black holes formed near the beginning of the universe do exist, they might make good candidates for dark matter.



More ...



> “Our approach is to consider what happens if you have dark matter made of primordial black holes passing through the sun,” Kesden says. “It’s been thought of before, but no one has actually done the calculations that we have.”
> Kesden explains that the sun creates energy from the nuclear fusion at its center: “There is a balance between the outward pressure gradient due to the energy released by fusion and the inward force of gravity. If the sun, or any star, is perturbed it would shake a little.”
> “A small, primordial black hole would be the size of an atom but have the mass of an asteroid,” he points out. “Its strong gravitational field, as it cut through the sun, would squeeze it, then release, and cause the sun to oscillate before ultimately settling down.”
> The idea is to measure the oscillation, and determine what would cause it. “Shravan Hanasoge wrote a program to help us with a simulation to see what the sun would look like if a primordial black hole passed through. The smallest mass detectable is 10^21 grams,” Kesden continues.



They think that a tiny primordial black hole could move through the sun ....



> Now that Kesden and Hanasoge know what to look for, it is possible to measure the oscillations of different stars. Since these primordial black holes are thought to be moving through the universe, it should be observable in different stars. “By inferring the total amount of dark matter in the universe, it should be able to determine how often a primordial black hole would pass through the sun – if it’s dark matter,” Kesden says. Unfortunately, dark matter would only pass through the sun every millions of years. “That’s a long time to stare at our sun, waiting for the event.”



... every millions of years. I guess I'd get bored to wait so long but ...



> Instead of waiting millions of years for a primordial black hole to pass through our sun, it is possible to monitor millions of stars; one of these stars would likely encounter a primordial black hole every few years. Kesden points out that current and future space missions could collect the needed data. “It is possible to look at the data collected from asteroseismic missions for these events, now that we know what to look for. Someone could even look through data collected in the past to try to spot these oscillations.”



Would be funny if those oscillations were spotted but nobody thought it was tiny nasty black holes. But there's a hope ...



> “At the Large Hadron Collider, some scientists are trying to determine if supersymmetry is dark matter,” Kesden says. “But if it isn’t found at the LHC, people will begin looking for other alternatives, and primordial black holes might be the answer to the outstanding question of what dark matter is.”



Atm it all adds only confusion.


----------



## Inceptor (Oct 4, 2011)

I can't see dark matter being primordial black holes.
It's well established that dark matter surrounds galaxies, galactic clusters, and superclusters.  This has been observed simply from inferring gravitational interactions with the visible galaxies.
It has to be WIMPS in some form or other.  Primordial black holes would not survive billions of years in cosmically significant numbers to gravitationally influence galaxies without announcing themselves with gamma ray and x-ray emissions as they coalesce and merge (not gamma ray bursts, those are supernovae).  Furthermore, those primordial black holes (if they were that numerous) would have merged into a lesser but still massive number of black holes with billions of solar masses, in order to gravitationally influence 'visible' baryonic matter.

I'm sure there are innumerable primordial black holes out there, but they can't account for all the mass of 'dark matter'.


----------



## Drone (Oct 4, 2011)

Inceptor said:


> It has to be WIMPS in some form or other.  Primordial black holes would not survive billions of years in cosmically significant numbers to gravitationally influence galaxies without announcing themselves with gamma ray and x-ray emissions as they coalesce and merge (not gamma ray bursts, those are supernovae).  Furthermore, those primordial black holes (if they were that numerous) would have merged into a lesser but still massive number of black holes with billions of solar masses, in order to gravitationally influence 'visible' baryonic matter. I'm sure there are innumerable primordial black holes out there, but they can't account for all the mass of 'dark matter'.



Nice. I believe in WIMPS too. I think they claim this because atom-sized black holes are just hard to detect as wimps. But I dunno _what if_ black holes are made of wimps (or superwimps).


----------



## Inceptor (Oct 4, 2011)

Drone said:


> But I dunno what if black holes are made of wimps (or superwimps).



WIMPs are Weakly Interacting Massive Particles; which implies they're all floating around out there, and don't interact with normal matter or with each other much at all; so gravitationally coalescing into black holes is ruled out.   Imagine large cluster spanning clouds of dark matter particles (WIMPs) gravitationally affecting the visible matter in a galaxy or cluster of galaxies.

Here's some reports on it:
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2008/01/images-of-dark-matter-distribution-in-a-supercluster.ars

http://home.slac.stanford.edu/pressreleases/2006/20060821.htm


----------



## Drone (Oct 4, 2011)

I know what wimps are. Weak is still interaction.



Inceptor said:


> don't interact with normal matter or with each other much at all; so gravitationally coalescing into black holes is ruled out.



http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/GLAST/science/dark_matter.html

When supersymmetic neutralinos (aka wimps) interact with each other they annihilate and create secondary particles (leptons, bosons, quarks) and gamma rays. I wasn't talking about "gravitational coalescence". Just interaction. And second: I was talking about *WIMP matter* and a question whether black holes were made up of WIMP matter or regular matter.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2002Obs...122..199A


----------



## Inceptor (Oct 4, 2011)

That's interesting stuff, but it's all theoretical and speculative.
I first read about WIMPs and MACHOs 25 years ago, and all that can be said, so far, is that MACHOs can possibly account for a very small percentage of what we call dark matter.  The problem is that we have no way of knowing, at this point, what MACHOs really are.

Also, I have to point out that a black hole, being the remnant of a massive star, composed of baryonic matter, collapsed down to a point that is at most Planck length in diameter... that's all we can know about it.  Physics can't tell us anything about what happens in there; it's just a massively compressed soup of energy, as to details... who knows?  There are no particles, just energy.  No dark matter in a normal black hole, just energy.

Dark matter stars and dark matter black hole analogs?  Interesting but not proven.


----------



## Drone (Oct 4, 2011)

Inceptor said:


> That's interesting stuff, but it's all theoretical and speculative.
> I first read about WIMPs and MACHOs 25 years ago, and all that can be said, so far, is that MACHOs can possibly account for a very small percentage of what we call dark matter.  The problem is that we have no way of knowing, at this point, what MACHOs really are.


You're right. We don't have enough knowledge of that. All these things are so hard to detect/observe and it breeds a lot of speculations. (atm I'm reading the links you posted above). Many scientists even introduced wimp-less models (with much lighter particles than wimps, I bet you've heard about that theories). You can see it here: http://www.physorg.com/news148316483.html. They say what if there are other kinds of interactions we don't know about. Sounds so crazy. They also talk about shadow world.   



> Also, I have to point out that a black hole, being the remnant of a massive star, composed of baryonic matter, collapsed down to a point that is at most Planck length in diameter... that's all we can know about it.  Physics can't tell us anything about what happens in there; it's just a massively compressed soup of energy, as to details... who knows?  *There are no particles, just energy*.  No dark matter in a normal black hole, just energy. Dark matter stars and dark matter black hole analogs?  Interesting but not proven.


Very interesting (supersymmetry) points. This once again reminds of shadow world. Maybe at the end of the day there are other forms of interactions and many undetectable particles. In this case I think humanity will ought to re-examine all their models and knowledge. I hope quantum physics will move forward so humankind will have more knowledge about all this process.

And back to black holes. I don't like to quote wiki but however:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter 



> Primordial black holes may have formed shortly after the big bang when the *energy density was great enough to form black holes directly from density variations, instead of from star collapse.* In vast numbers they could account for the missing mass necessary to explain star motions in galaxies and gravitational lensing effects.



The other day I remember one person (as a joke) said that what if there's no missing mass in the universe, and it's just the lack/absence of *anti-gravitational forces/interactions*. Lol now what if it's like that for real. And now I wonder are black holes just collapsed stars or they were created in some other process. Or there are different kinds of black holes and their origins. If scientists can ever generate a black hole maybe that will explain everything.


----------



## Drone (Oct 9, 2011)

> The Nobel Prize for Physics was awarded this week to Adam Reiss, Saul Perlmutter and Brian P. Schmidt for *their discovery of the accelerated expansion of the universe*. Current theory holds that this is evidence for dark matter, though the Nobel committee was wise to award the prize for the discovery and not its inferred meaning.


 Heh nice news. Congrats Adam Reiss, Saul Perlmutter and Brian P. Schmidt. I gotta read more about their work.

edit: I rather put this in the new thread

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2419800#post2419800


----------



## micropage7 (Oct 9, 2011)

i dunno
the universe is too big to think about


----------



## Drone (Oct 19, 2011)

I continue the topic about the dark matter. Here's some news:

NASA’s Fermi Team located 1873 new sources and 1/3 of them is a mystery. It emits gamma rays but they have no idea what is this. As always dark matter rears its head again.


----------



## hat (Oct 19, 2011)

What about "normal" black holes that are created today? Couldn't those be considered dark matter as well, then?


----------



## Inceptor (Oct 20, 2011)

hat said:


> What about "normal" black holes that are created today? Couldn't those be considered dark matter as well, then?



No.  "Normal" black holes aren't created in large numbers.  You need a supernova explosion (or coalescing neutron stars), and there are only a handful of those every year in a galaxy the size of ours (which is a fairly large sized galaxy).  So, the number of black holes 'born' every year, throughout the universe, while large, is still a miniscule amount of mass compared to the 'invisible mass' of dark matter.  
Anyway, I think that estimations of total black hole mass are part of the 'visible matter' percentage totals.

Edit: Maybe a 'handful' of supernovae per year in our galaxy is a bit too much, but it's a single digit number/year.


----------



## scoutingwraith (Oct 21, 2011)

Hmm....an interesting theory. Always thought that Dark matter is the product that existed outside before the big bang. Although havent read upon it a lot because i have no time do so. (will look up some papers though)


----------



## Drone (Nov 21, 2011)

*Birth of Famous Black Hole Unraveled*

Don't wanna create a new thread so here it goes:



> Using several telescopes, both ground-based and in orbit, the scientists unraveled longstanding mysteries about the object called *Cygnus X-1*, a famous binary-star system discovered to be strongly emitting X-rays nearly a half-century ago. _The system consists of a black hole and a companion star from which the black hole is drawing material._ The scientists' efforts yielded the most accurate measurements ever of the black hole's mass and spin rate.









That suckah is big. Literally.



> "Because no other information can escape from a black hole, knowing its mass, spin, and electrical charge gives a complete description of it. The charge of this black hole is nearly zero, so measuring its mass and spin make our description complete.
> Said Mark Reid, of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.



Just like a big big Black Box ...



> Their team used Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA), a continent-wide radio-telescope system, to make a direct trigonometric measurement of the distance. VLBA observations provided a distance of *6070 light-years*, while previous estimates had ranged from 5800-7800 light-years. Armed with the new, precise distance measurement, scientists using the Chandra X-Ray Observatory, the Rossi X-Ray Timing Explorer, the Advanced Satellite for Cosmology and Astrophysics, and visible-light observations made over more than two decades, calculated that *the black hole in Cygnus X-1 is nearly 15 times more massive than our Sun and is spinning more than 800 times per second*.


800 RPS, wow!



> "We now know that Cygnus X-1 is one of the most massive stellar black holes in the Milky Way," said Jerry Orosz, of San Diego State University. "*It's spinning as fast as any black hole we've ever seen*," he added.


Lol that's for sure

And finally this ...



> In addition to measuring the distance, the VLBA observations, made during 2009 and 2010, also measured Cygnus X-1's movement through our Galaxy. That movement, the scientists, said, is too slow for the black hole to have been produced by a supernova explosion. Such an explosion would have given the object a "kick" to a much higher speed.
> 
> "*There are suggestions that this black hole could have been formed without a supernova explosion, and our results support those suggestions*," Reid said.



Dark matter anyone? Anyone at all?

Anyway it's kickass and very important news.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111117144045.htm


----------



## Inceptor (Nov 21, 2011)

Could be dark matter born, I guess.
But it could just have been a free floater, kicked in some direction by its supernova blast, at some point, and gravitationally captured by its companion.  Unlikely, but possible, considering how many stars there are out there.
OR the result of a neutron star merger that was gravitationally captured by the companion star.
OR it was _made_ by someone or something a long long time ago.


----------



## scoutingwraith (Nov 23, 2011)

Inceptor said:


> Could be dark matter born, I guess.
> But it could just have been a free floater, kicked in some direction by its supernova blast, at some point, and gravitationally captured by its companion.  Unlikely, but possible, considering how many stars there are out there.
> OR the result of a neutron star merger that was gravitationally captured by the companion star.
> OR it was _made_ by someone or something a long long time ago.



If it was a Neutron star collapsing wont there be any traces left of it. (like residual radiation or on the x-ray spectrum) ?


----------



## Inceptor (Nov 23, 2011)

scoutingwraith said:


> If it was a Neutron star collapsing wont there be any traces left of it. (like residual radiation or on the x-ray spectrum) ?



If it was a neutron star merger, the two neutron stars would merge, then gravitationally collapse creating a black hole, and in the process release a massive gamma ray burst that apparently would 'sterilize' the surrounding region, a few thousand light years in all directions.  But after the formation of the black hole, there would be no emitted radiation we could detect (aside from the radiation emitted from the material spiraling into the black hole).

I kind of like the idea of it being a black hole formed from dark matter.


----------



## hat (Nov 25, 2011)

Drone said:


> stuff



15 times more massive than the sun, huh? I thought black holes were created through starts hundreds or thousands of times more massive than our sun when they die in a supernova. I guess there are other ways for black holes to be made...?


----------



## Drone (Nov 25, 2011)

If you have read the whole article you'd know that this black hole got nothing to do with supernovae


----------



## twilyth (Dec 1, 2011)

Drone said:


> Don't wanna create a new thread so here it goes:
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111117144045.htm


There's a great series of documentaries on black holes on the science channel.  Here are some interesting facts from memory.

The milky way has about 10,000 black holes in the galactic center and the largest is several million solar masses.

All galaxies have black holes at their center.

The mass of a galactic black hole is always about 1.5% of the total galactic mass.

Andromeda has a black hole that is 30 million solar masses.

M87 has one that is 1 billion solar masses.


----------



## Drone (Dec 9, 2011)

*Kepler (NASA satellite, launched in March 2009 to orbit the Sun) could reveal if PHB (primordial black holes) are dark matter*. 

Well ... the problem is scientists don't know how PHBs got formed and they don't know how massive they can be. Basically they just want to "weed out" some crap to narrow down the range of possible PHB mass. If they succeed they can say is PHB dark matter or not, if they fail they just eliminate useless factors. Let's say it's a win win situation.



> PBHs are thought to have formed during the early universe from density perturbations that may have resulted from a variety of factors, such as inflation, phase transitions, and possibly even the collapse of string loops.



"Collapse of string loops" I haven't heard about this. Gotta read when I find some info about that. If anyone has a link, please post it.

​







> Kepler's photometer could be used to detect small amounts of gravitational lensing(microlensing), which is the bending of star light as it travels through nearby space. According to general relativity, the bending is due to the gravity of an invisible mass that acts like a “lens” and lies between the light source (star) and observer (satellite). This lens could be a PBH or another type of massive compact halo object (MACHO) as well as mini halos, all of which are dark matter candidates.



As always gravity is they key. So MACHO or PHB? Let's see:



> According to the scientists' calculations, Kepler could detect microlensing events caused by masses in the range between 5 x 10^-10 and 10^-4 solar masses, which means it could potentially rule out about 40% of the mass in the PBH dark matter window, if it doesn't detect anything. If it does detect microlensing events, then of course the implications would be much more exciting: PBHs could be dark matter.



However scientists ain't too optimistic about this. Sure, we still couldn't find dark matter in entire space nor in LHC, but on the bright side, Kepler's photometer with its extreme precision has a chance to detect a thing or two and maybe they can solve this 50 year old mystery. I hope  

http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-12-nasa-satellite-reveal-primordial-black.html


----------



## GSquadron (Dec 9, 2011)

The dark matter is no more in physicists discussion after the neutrino speed.
It is like using einstein's law to find infinitely something which you don't even know.
Either neutrino is right or wrong for the speed part, dark matter is not and has nothing to do
with einstein law's. It was found out, as something which cannot be explained.


----------



## Inceptor (Dec 10, 2011)

The Kepler mission has a limited lifetime.
The chances of it being used to specifically look for microlensing events is small, planet hunting is sexier and has more public visibility.  Especially with the news that detecting the transits of Earth analogues will require a lengthening of the mission in order to attain more statistical certainty.
Unless the dark matter researchers can use the same data sets for their analysis.


----------



## Drone (Dec 14, 2011)

Inceptor said:


> The Kepler mission has a limited lifetime.
> The chances of it being used to specifically look for microlensing events is small, planet hunting is sexier and has more public visibility.  Especially with the news that detecting the transits of Earth analogues will require a lengthening of the mission in order to attain more statistical certainty.
> Unless the dark matter researchers can use the same data sets for their analysis.



I don't think that one can hinder other. Because:



> Kepler's mission goal is to categorize the frequency with which stars harbor planets, especially Earth-size planets.



If dark matter plays a big part in this then it's even more important.


----------



## Drone (Jan 1, 2012)

> Dark matter came into existence at the moment of the Big Bang. Within its confines, galaxies formed and evolved. If you add up all the parts contained within any given galaxy you derive its mass, yet its gravitational effects can only be explained by the presence of this mysterious subatomic particle. It would be easy to believe that the larger the galaxy, the larger the amount of dark matter should be present, but new research shows that isn't so. Dwarf galaxies have even higher proportions of dark matter than their larger counterparts.



http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-12-galaxies-big-dark.html


----------



## Drone (Jan 10, 2012)

*Astronomers have mapped dark matter on the largest scale ever observed*

Good news:



> An international team of researchers lead by Van Waerbeke and Heymans achieved their results by analysing images of about 10 million galaxies in four different regions of the sky. They studied the distortion of the light emitted from these galaxies, which is bent as it passes massive clumps of dark matter during its journey to Earth.



Those tiny distortions in the images of distant galaxies, called *cosmic shear*.

And here's Dark Matter map and the full moon to scale. 







The observations show that dark matter in the Universe is distributed as a network of gigantic dense (light) and empty (dark) regions, where the largest dense regions are about the size of several Earth moons on the sky.






The densest regions of the dark matter host massive clusters of galaxies. To get these accumulated images over five years scientists used the wide field imaging camera MegaCam, a 1 degree by 1 degree field-of-view 340 Megapixel camera on the CFHT in Hawaii.



> Galaxies included in the survey are typically six billion light years away. The light captured by the telescope images used in the study was emitted when the Universe was six billion years old – roughly half the age it is today.



The scientists are optimistic:



> Professor Ludovic Van Waerbeke, from the University of British Columbia, said: "It is fascinating to be able to 'see' the dark matter using space-time distortion. It gives us privileged access to this mysterious mass in the Universe which cannot be observed otherwise. Knowing how dark matter is distributed is the very first step towards understanding its nature and how it fits within our current knowledge of physics."





> Dr Catherine Heymans, a Lecturer in the University of Edinburgh's School of Physics and Astronomy, said: "By analysing light from the distant Universe, we can learn about what it has travelled through on its journey to reach us. We hope that by mapping more dark matter than has been studied before, we are a step closer to understanding this material and its relationship with the galaxies in our Universe."
> 
> Professor Lance Miller, from Oxford University said: "This result has been achieved through advances in our analysis techniques which we are now applying to data from the Very Large Telescope's (VLT) Survey Telescope in Chile."
> 
> Professor Koen Kuijken, from Leiden University, said: "Over the next three years we will image more than 10 times the area mapped by CFHTLenS, bringing us ever closer to our goal of understanding the mysterious dark side of the Universe."



http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-01-astronomers-universe-dark-unprecedented-scale.html

http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-01-clearest-picture-dark-energy.html

The bigger more accurate and better Dark Matter map they get the better we will understand our Universe. It will shed some light on dark energy as well.



> Gravity tends to pull matter together into dense concentrations, but dark energy acts as a repulsive force that slows down the collapse. Thus the clumpiness of the dark matter maps provides a measurement of the amount of dark energy in the universe.



I just hope there will be more and more of new tools available to physicists in their study so we could get more info. 








> Teams from Fermilab and Berkeley Lab used galaxies from wide-ranging SDSS Stripe 82, a tiny detail of which is shown here, to plot new maps of dark matter based on the largest direct measurements of cosmic shear to date.


----------



## jihadjoe (Jan 10, 2012)

hat said:


> 15 times more massive than the sun, huh? I thought black holes were created through starts hundreds or thousands of times more massive than our sun when they die in a supernova. I guess there are other ways for black holes to be made...?



There are no such stars.
The most massive star, a blue giant called R136a1 is only about 250-320 times the mass of our sun.
The biggest stars, like VV Cephei or VY Canis Majoris may be 2000 times the radius of our sun, but they have just 30-40 times the mass. These stars are literally less dense than even the uppermost part of the Earth's atmosphere.

Supermassive black holes are by necessity also primordial, and were essentially formed at the same time the universe was created. The law of conservation of angular momentum limits the speed at which matter can fall into a black hole, and essentially means the age of the universe isn't enough time for any stellar mass black hole to grow to such a size.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Jan 10, 2012)

"Dark matter" is whatever is located at the center of galaxies that hold the galaxy together (much like stars hold solar systems together).  For the Milky Way, it is likely Sagittarius A*.

I think a better word for it than "black hole" is a "fission star"--that is, a star composed mostly of extremely heavy metals like uranium and plutonium (but likely substantially heavier).


----------



## Drone (Jan 10, 2012)

jihadjoe said:


> Supermassive black holes are by necessity also primordial, and were essentially formed at the same time the universe was created. The law of conservation of angular momentum limits the speed at which matter can fall into a black hole, and essentially means the age of the universe isn't enough time for any stellar mass black hole to grow to such a size.


Can you post a source for this info?


----------



## jihadjoe (Jan 11, 2012)

http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/701/2/L133
Here's an interesting paper on accretion of matter into early stellar-mass blackholes, and details many of the limiting factors to black hole growth. Novel mechanisms are also explored which would account for possible growth of a stellar mass black hole into a massive entity, but not a true supermassives such as those found in galactic centers.

IMO the elephant in the room is that we have data for a lot of stellar mass black holes of up to 30 or more solar masses, and then we have supermassives but there are no intermediate mass black holes at all. If stellar mass black holes were slowly accreting matter and growing into supermassives, then we should see plenty of black holes in the 1000M range, but there aren't any. We basically go from 0-33, and then skip right into the supermassive range. This suggests a completely different method of formation for the two black hole classes.


----------



## jihadjoe (Jan 11, 2012)

http://iopscience.iop.org/1538-4357/701/2/L133
Here's an interesting paper on accretion of matter into early stellar-mass blackholes, and details many of the limiting factors to black hole growth. Novel mechanisms are also explored which would account for possible growth of a stellar mass black hole into a massive entity, but not a true supermassives such as those found in galactic centers.

Here's a quote from the abstract:


> We study remnant black hole growth through accretion, including for the first time the radiation emitted due to accretion, with adaptive mesh refinement cosmological radiation-hydrodynamical simulations. The effects of photoionization and heating dramatically affect the large-scale inflow, resulting in negligible mass growth.



IMO the elephant in the room is that we have data for a lot of stellar mass black holes of up to 30 or more solar masses, and then we have supermassives but there are no intermediate mass black holes at all. If stellar mass black holes were slowly accreting matter and growing into supermassives, then we should see plenty of black holes in the 1000M range, but there aren't any. We basically go from 0-33, and then skip right into the supermassive range. This suggests a completely different method of formation for the two black hole classes.


----------



## Widjaja (Jan 11, 2012)

I believe there are other names needed other than 'Dark Matter' for these things we see.

I personally consider dark matter to be a substance which the galaxy is kept within rather than what IS any sort of black hole.


----------



## twilyth (Jan 11, 2012)

I just want to say that the first person with this idea was Roger Penrose - sort of.  OK, he ascribed the circular patterns in the CMBR to "leaks" from the last big crunch, but it seems that this theory lines up with his original idea.



> In Nov. 2010, British physicist Roger Penrose went on the record to say that it was by his reckoning that there were patterns in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) -- the "echo" of the Big Bang. Penrose's theory is that gravitational waves -- "ripples" in spacetime -- leaked through from the pre-Big Crunch universe, imprinting the CMBR with detectable rings.
> 
> Although Penrose's idea was heavily criticized (cosmologists familiar with the CMBR said that Penrose was seeing shapes and patterns in the random temperature "anisotropies" and not seeing what he thought he was seeing), could Carr and Coley's pre-Big Bang black holes be detected?
> 
> Possibly.


----------



## trickson (Jan 11, 2012)

If black holes suck every thing in including light , Then why is it that jets can come out of the center of them . I mean if the gravity is so intense as to suck in light and every thing then why are jets of hot gas and radiation allowed to escape ?


----------



## qubit (Jan 11, 2012)

trickson said:


> If black holes suck every thing in including light , Then why is it that jets can come out of the center of them . I mean if the gravity is so intense as to suck in light and every thing then why are jets of hot gas and radiation allowed to escape ?



The jets don't come out of the black hole - nothing can get out.

They're caused by the motion of the disc of gas and dust falling in and the intense gravity. I don't think that scientists have quite figured out how the jets at 90 degrees to the plane of the discs are formed though.


----------



## Drone (Jan 11, 2012)

trickson said:


> If black holes suck every thing in including light , Then why is it that jets can come out of the center of them . I mean if the gravity is so intense as to suck in light and every thing then why are jets of hot gas and radiation allowed to escape ?



qubit is right but there's also another kind of radiation:


Black holes have energy and they always emit it as photons. So Black Holes constantly lose their energy and eventually they will evaporate. It's called *Hawking radiation*. You ask how it happens? There's *quantum tunnelling* (See here: http://phys.educ.ksu.edu/vqm/html/qtunneling.html). Non-quantum (classic) objects can't escape but quantum objects (wave–particle duality of matter and the Heisenberg uncertainty principle can explain this easily) can use quantum tunnelling to break the "barriers" and escape the Black Hole. BTW quantum tunnelling also occurs in the nuclear fusion of Sun or any other star.

So Black Holes are not "some big suckers that don't ever emit". Close to event horizon of a black hole there's strong gravitational field which generates pairs of particles and anti-particles. See the pic below:






Some can *escape to infinity*, some can *annihilate* and some can get sucked in.






http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/hawk.html


----------



## Inceptor (Jan 11, 2012)

FordGT90Concept said:


> "Dark matter" is whatever is located at the center of galaxies that hold the galaxy together (much like stars hold solar systems together). For the Milky Way, it is likely Sagittarius A*.



As I understand it, if Sagittarius A* is offset slightly, but still within the small 'region' of the black hole at galactic center (as it would have to be in order for stars to appear to be orbiting it and the black hole), there is no way to know what it is without a clever astrophysicist coming up with clever mathematical inferences, based upon observations, that they would be willing to publish.

It could be a massive clump of dark matter, I suppose.  But still less massive than the central black hole, which it seems to be closely orbiting.

I think it's more likely to be another black hole in close orbit, the old core of a galaxy devoured by the Milky way sometime in the distant past.  Which it probably is, if the central black hole is showing a slight 'wobble'.  Which would not be good for future life in our galaxy, depending on how close they are to merging.
Or, a supernova remnant (black hole or neutron star) doing its own post-death death-spiral into the massive black hole.  
Or, superheated plasma in the region around the massive black hole -- which could produce radio emissions.


----------



## trickson (Jan 11, 2012)

Ok so if a black hole dies what is left then ? Shouldn't there be some thing like a ball of iron ? After all it is a sun burn all them elements and making iron that leads to the end of the star then creating the black hole right ? Then once it has died shouldn't there be some thing left after the death of the black hole ?


----------



## Drone (Jan 11, 2012)

^  The crust of a neutron star is made of iron. And eventually neutron stars quantum-tunnel and become black holes. Yes, there's a theory that everything in the universe after *10^1500* years (can you imagine all those zeros) will lose the energy, cool down and turn to iron because iron has the nucleus with the least binding energy. But after *10^10^26* (lol all these zeros, this is the last time I promise) years all that iron collapse into black holes. But this will happen if *proton decay* won't occur before this.

Some interesting thoughts here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_an_expanding_universe

and especially here:

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/end.html

The end of the universe will be dark and cold, really cold (literally). But as always take this with a grain of salt. No one knows yet how the real *END* will look like.


----------



## trickson (Jan 11, 2012)

Drone said:


> ^  The crust of a neutron star is made of iron. And eventually neutron stars quantum-tunnel and become black holes. Yes, there's a theory that everything in the universe after *10^1500* years (can you imagine all those zeros) will lose the energy, cool down and turn to iron because iron has the nucleus with the least binding energy. But after *10^10^26* (lol all these zeros, this is the last time I promise) years all that iron collapse into black holes. But this will happen if *proton decay* won't occur before this.
> 
> Some interesting thoughts here:
> 
> ...



Mind boggling !


----------



## Drone (Feb 16, 2012)

*Intermediate-mass black hole*



> Astronomers using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope have found a cluster of young, blue stars encircling the first intermediate-mass black hole ever discovered. The presence of the star cluster suggests that the black hole was once at the core of a now-disintegrated dwarf galaxy. The black hole weighs in at 20,000 solar masses and lies towards the edge of the galaxy ESO 243-49, which is 290 million light-years from Earth.








http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-black-hole-shredded-galaxy.html

The fate of this black hole ain't too optimistic.


----------



## qubit (Feb 16, 2012)

Drone said:


> The fate of this black hole ain't too optimistic.



Black holes are indestructible, so I'm not sure what you mean by that?


----------



## Drone (Feb 16, 2012)

^



> The future of the black hole is uncertain at this stage. It depends on its trajectory, which is currently unknown. It's possible the black hole may spiral in to the center of the big galaxy and eventually merge with the supermassive black hole there. Alternately, the black hole could settle into a stable orbit around the galaxy. Either way, it's likely to fade away in X-rays as it depletes its supply of gas.



And no, they are not indestructible


----------



## qubit (Feb 16, 2012)

Drone said:


> ^
> 
> 
> 
> And no, they are not indestructible



Yes, it is. Black holes can only merge with each other to make a bigger one. All the article is saying is that it doesn't know where it's going and that it won't be detectible when the x-rays from infalling gas dry up.


----------



## Drone (Feb 16, 2012)

Black holes evaporate as they lose their energy


----------



## qubit (Feb 16, 2012)

Drone said:


> Black holes evaporate as they lose their energy



That's splitting hairs. For anything other than a teeny tiny one, they'll take longer than the age of the universe to evaporate. And anyway, the effect is overridden because it's really really small and there's always something for a black hole to munch on and it doesn't have to be much, either, just a little gas and dust will do. 

So, consider a black hole as existing forever for all practical purposes. And once again, the article said nothing about the black hole dying.


----------



## Drone (Feb 16, 2012)

It's not. Getting "owned" by other bigger black hole is the same as dying. Because other black hole will use smaller black holes energy. The article says that it can happen. Reminds me how bigger corporations eat up smaller corporatrions.


----------



## qubit (Feb 16, 2012)

Drone said:


> It's not. Getting "owned" by other bigger black hole is the same as dying. Because other black hole will use smaller black holes energy. The article says that it can happen. Reminds me how bigger corporations eat up smaller corporatrions.



No, it's just a merge, ragardless of size - they eat each other you could say, I guess. And honestly, no one knows what happens at those singularities and we may never will. Bummer.  I love science and I really want to know.


----------



## Inceptor (Feb 17, 2012)

To get back to the Dark matter conversation thread:

The ESA's Planck mission which is going to be measuring the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation to higher degrees of accuracy than previously achieved, discovered something while observing the 'foreground' in order to subtract it from its main observations --- a 'haze' of microwaves in a 35 000 ly region around the core of the Milky way.



> The latest announcement from the European Space Agency involves a haze of microwaves that is not yet understood. Coming from the region around galactic center, the haze appears to be synchrotron emission, produced as electrons accelerated in supernovae explosions pass through magnetic fields. So far so good, but this synchrotron emission does not fall off as rapidly at increasing energies as the synchrotron emission that can be observed elsewhere in the Milky Way.
> 
> *What Planck has found is an enormous field of haze spanning some 35,000 light years.* The problem: Supernovae don’t make enough electrons and positrons at high energy to fill the volume taken up by the Planck haze, according to Gregory Dobler (UC Santa Barbara):
> 
> ...



There ya go, possible annihilation of dark matter particles.

http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=21757


----------



## Drone (Feb 22, 2012)

> *IGR J17091* - a binary system in which a sun-like star orbits the black hole. It is found in the bulge of the Milky Way galaxy, about 28,000 light years away from Earth. Observations with Chandra have clocked the *fastest wind ever* seen blowing off a disk around this stellar-mass black hole at about 20 million miles per hour. The wind, which comes from a disk of gas surrounding the black hole, may be carrying away much more material than the black hole is capturing and could be variable over time.








Contrary to the popular perception of black holes pulling in all of the material that gets close, 95% of the matter in the disk around IGR J17091 is expelled by the wind. And other interesting fact is production of winds can stifle radio jets. 



> *Astronomers believe that magnetic fields in the disks of black holes are responsible for producing both winds and jets.* The geometry of the magnetic fields and rate at which material falls towards the black hole must influence whether jets or winds are produced.



They said this because jet from the black hole was not present when the ultra-fast wind was seen, although a radio jet is seen at other times. Fascinating!

http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-chandra-fastest-stellar-mass-black-hole.html


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Feb 22, 2012)

Inceptor said:


> As I understand it, if Sagittarius A* is offset slightly, but still within the small 'region' of the black hole at galactic center (as it would have to be in order for stars to appear to be orbiting it and the black hole), there is no way to know what it is without a clever astrophysicist coming up with clever mathematical inferences, based upon observations, that they would be willing to publish.


It gushes out x-rays which is what a fission star would do and Hawking theorized black holes would as well.


----------



## qubit (Feb 22, 2012)

Drone said:


> http://cdn.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/hires/2012/1-nasaschandra.jpg
> 
> Contrary to the popular perception of black holes pulling in all of the material that gets close, 95% of the matter in the disk around IGR J17091 is expelled by the wind. And other interesting fact is production of winds can stifle radio jets.
> 
> ...



Indeed, this is really fascinating. I happened to read the same article over at TG Daily just before seeing your post.

I just wish I could overclock my PC to 20 million mph!


----------



## Drone (Mar 15, 2012)

> Two teams of astronomers have used data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and other telescopes to map the distribution of dark matter in a galaxy cluster known as Abell 383, which is located about 2.3 billion light years from Earth. Not only were the researchers able to find where the dark matter lies in the two dimensions across the sky, they were also able to determine how the dark matter is distributed along the line of sight









Interesting discovery

http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-astronomers-dark-3d-abell-galaxy.html


----------



## Drone (Mar 28, 2012)

*Ordinary black hole discovered 12m l.y. away!*



> *An international team of scientists have discovered an ‘ordinary’ black hole in the 12 million light year-distant galaxy Centaurus A. This is the first time that a normal-size black hole has been detected away from the immediate vicinity of our own Galaxy.*



Fascinating!



> The lowest-mass black holes are formed when very massive stars reach the end of their lives, ejecting most of their material into space in a supernova explosion and leaving behind a compact core that collapses into a black hole. There are thought to be millions of these low-mass black holes distributed throughout every galaxy.



But it's really hard to detect black holes because they don't emit light but when matter is dragged into a black hole it heats up in the process and emits X-Rays.



> The team used the orbiting Chandra X-ray observatory to make six 100,000-second long exposures of Centaurus A, detecting an object with 50,000 times the X-ray brightness of our Sun. A month later, it had dimmed by more than a factor of 10 and then later by a factor of more than 100, so became undetectable. This behaviour is characteristic of a low mass black hole in a binary system during the final stages of an outburst and is typical of similar black holes in the Milky Way. *It implies that the team made the first detection of a normal black hole so far away, for the first time opening up the opportunity to characterise the black hole population of other galaxies.*








_The yellow arrow identifies the position of the black hole transient inside Centaurus A. The location of the object is coincident with gigantic dust lanes that obscure visible and X-ray light from large regions of Centaurus A. Other interesting X-ray features include the central active nucleus, a powerful jet and a large lobe that covers most of the lower-right of the image. There is also a lot of hot gas. In the image, red indicates low energy, green represents medium energy, and blue represents high energy light._

http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-ordinary-black-hole-million-years.html


----------



## qubit (Mar 28, 2012)

Keep the black hole stuff coming, this was fascinating!


----------



## twilyth (Mar 28, 2012)

12 million light years?  OMG OMG - that's practically next door.  

We're doomed - Doomed I say - Ahhhhhhhh!!!!


----------



## m1dg3t (Mar 28, 2012)

Bring on the physics! I'm an idiot but this still interest's me


----------



## Drone (Apr 12, 2012)

Another great discovery:



> The newly discovered galaxy cluster is called the *Musket Ball Cluster* (located about 5.2 billion light years away from Earth). It is similar to the *Bullet Cluster*, *the first system in which the separation of dark and normal matter was observed*. However, this newly discovered system is older and slower than the Bullet Cluster.








You can spot a lot of galaxies there and intergalactic gas. Optical emission reveals the presence of *dark matter* through the effect of gravitational lensing (blue). 

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-discovery-musket-ball-cluster.html


----------



## Drone (May 7, 2012)

Another black hole activity








> An optical-IR image showing a galaxy that suddenly brightened when the supermassive black hole at its center shredded and absorbed a star that wandered too close.



Rest in pieces unlucky star ...



> In May of 2010 Pan-STARRS telescope spotted what appeared to be a flare from a previously inactive, Milky-Way-sized supermassive black hole in a galaxy about two billion light-years away. Detailed modeling of the light led the team of astronomers to conclude that the black hole is about two million solar masses, and that the object it devoured was probably an evolved star (about 5 billion years old) whose mass was about 0.2 solar masses.



http://phys.org/news/2012-05-black-hole-flare.html


----------



## qubit (May 7, 2012)

Wow, that's quite some brightening there. I'd love to be able to see a proper image of this thing up close as it happens. It would be fascinating. Interestingly, it's not just a tiny spec of a dot, but has an actual size and the other stars look bigger - our telescopes are getting better.

Drone, keep these posts coming!


----------



## Drone (Jun 5, 2012)

bump time








> Astronomers have found strong evidence that a massive black hole is being ejected from its host galaxy (CID-42) at a speed of several million miles per hour. New observations from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory suggest that the black hole collided and merged with another black hole and received a powerful recoil kick from gravitational wave radiation.



Gravitational wave recoil ... now that's what I call force!



> "It's hard to believe that a supermassive black hole weighing millions of times the mass of the sun could be moved at all, let alone kicked out of a galaxy at enormous speed," said Francesca Civano of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who led the new study. "But these new data support the idea that gravitational waves - ripples in the fabric of space first predicted by Albert Einstein but never detected directly - can exert an extremely powerful force."



Look at the speed of that thing ....



> More optical data from the ground-based Magellan and Very Large Telescopes in Chile supplied a spectrum that suggested the two sources in CID-42 are moving apart at a speed of at least 3 million miles per hour.



http://phys.org/news/2012-06-giant-black-hole-home-galaxy.html


----------



## Drone (Jun 27, 2012)

Gas cloud will collide with our galaxy's black hole [known as Sagittarius A* (or Sgr A*)] in 2013. Go, check your calendars. This is the first time ever.



> Scientists have determined a giant gas cloud is on a collision course with the black hole in the center of our galaxy, and the two will be close enough by mid-2013 to provide a unique opportunity to observe how a super massive black hole sucks in material, in real time. This will give astronomers more information on how matter behaves near a black hole.



Yeah it seems our galaxy doesn't like guests lol. That gas cloud is doomed, its days are numbered.
That's how Sgr A* welcomes guests.



> By June of 2012, the gas cloud is expected to be just 36 light-hours (equivalent to 40,000,000,000 km) away from our galaxy's black hole, which is extremely close in astronomical terms. Astronomers have determined the speed of the gas cloud has increased, doubling over the past seven years, and is now reaching more than 8 million km/h. The cloud is estimated to be three times the mass of Earth and the density of the cloud is much higher than that of the hot gas surrounding black hole.








Can't wait to see that!



> No one really knows how the collision will unfold, but the cloud's edges have already started to shred and it is expected to break up completely over the coming months. As the time of actual collision approaches, the cloud is expected to get much hotter and will probably start to emit X-rays as a result of the interaction with the black hole.



http://phys.org/news/2012-06-gas-cloud-collide-galaxy-black.html


----------



## D007 (Jun 27, 2012)

Seems to me common sense dictates, once u get enough mass you wouldn't need an explosion. Just a coalescing of that mass, until it becomes so large it is a blackhole.. Idk why you would need some kind of massive explosion.. Typical science jumping to conclusions...lol..


----------



## Drone (Jun 27, 2012)

What explosion you're talking about? Supernovae? 
_In a nutshell_: When a star reaches the end of its life it runs out of Hydrogen or other fuel. When this happens the balance (between heat pressure and gravity pull) gets broken. Outer region gets blown off, core region contracts. That's how "BOOM" happens.

See the links below:

http://planetfacts.org/supernova/
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l2/supernovae.html


----------



## D007 (Jun 27, 2012)

Drone said:


> bump time
> 
> http://cdn.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/2012/giantblackho.jpg
> 
> ...



only 3 million mph? Meh I can do that on a moped..


----------



## Drone (Jul 2, 2012)

*Hunderds of black holes!!!!*

A bunch of black holes has been found! Scientists were using the technique VLBI [Very Long Baseline Interferometry]. Their team made measurements at different radio wavelengths over a period of 17 years. 



> Astronomers have found evidence of *hundreds of black holes* in the centre of Arp 220 (a galaxy 250 million light years away). The discovery, made with a worldwide network of radio telescopes, gives scientists a new way to find out how black holes are created.








It's obvious: jets created by black holes are sending out radio signals. 



> Jets from black holes are visible at this distance only if they are pointing right towards us. Probably there are many more systems like this in this galaxy, but their jets point in other directions.



Jets blow the cover.



> *“We believe we are seeing radio emission from binary star systems in which one star has already exploded and left behind a black hole. The black hole “eats” gas which it draws from its companion, producing powerful jets that emit radio waves”*, says Fabien Batejat, astronomer @ Chalmers, who led the study.



What a leecher! Suckah!



> The galaxy Arp 220 is already famous for creating new stars at a furious pace. Previous research by the same team has also demonstrated that there are many supernova explosions in the galaxy, up to *250 times more* than in our galaxy. Supernovae and black holes are related. _Astronomers believe that black holes are created when stars with masses more than about 20 times the sun explode._
> 
> This discovery in Arp 220 gives astronomers hope to soon be able to put this idea to the test. Only a dozen black holes of this type are known in the Milky Way, and only a few are known in other galaxies.



That galaxy is pretty busy. Stars, supernovae, binary systems, rare types of black holes (microblazars). 



> These objects, known to astronomers as microblazars, were theoretically predicted over a decade ago. Astronomers believe microblazars are scaled-down versions of the cosmic beacons known as blazars. In a blazar, a supermassive black hole feasting on dense gas at the centre of a galaxy creates powerful jets which can be observed from Earth if they are directed towards us.


 
It seems that galaxies like Arp 220 can contain very large numbers of microblazars. 

http://phys.org/news/2012-07-galaxy-harbors-star-snacking-black-holes.html


----------



## qubit (Jul 2, 2012)

I thought I was interested in black holes, but damn Drone, you're _heavily_ into them. 

Great find. Hundreds of black holes, Jesus H f* Christ...


----------



## Drone (Jul 2, 2012)

Hah, thanks qubit. Black holes are very interesting objects. There are so many theories about them.
One of them says that every black hole contains another universe

http://phys.org/news/2012-05-black-hole-universe-physicist-solution.html
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/05/17/every-black-hole-contains-new-universe/


----------



## Drone (Jul 6, 2012)

*bump*

Newly found black hole.








> Galaxy ESO 243-49, about 300 million light-years away, is home to the newly found black hole called HLX-1



This is the first discovered intermediate mass black hole. It was discovered by accident and they have no clue how it has come to exist.



> HLX-1 has been described as being discovered almost by accident, as the research team at the time was instead focused on its host spiral galaxy. Black holes are generally more likely to sit at the center of galaxies such as the one that is believed to exist at the center of our own Milky Way. But HLX-1 was found, uncharacteristically, out in the spiral. It came to notice only because it was spewing a lot of x-rays and radio flares.



Peekaboo, I see you. It's about 90000 times heavier than our sun or something like that.

http://phys.org/news/2012-07-evidence-intermediate-size-black-hole.html


----------



## Inceptor (Jul 9, 2012)

*Dark matter detector*

I thought this was probably better off in this thread, rather than a new one:

A group of physicists and biologists are planning a DNA-based dark matter detector.
The plan is to detect the 'dark matter headwind' coming from the direction of the constellation of Cygnus (that is the direction that the Sun is travelling in, in its orbit around the galactic center).

Posting from the *MIT Tech review* from the _Physics arxiv blog_


----------



## Drone (Jul 12, 2012)

Crazy stuff!



> Using observations from telescopes in space and on the ground, astronomers gathered the most direct evidence yet for this violent process: a supermassive black hole shredding a star that wandered too close.



That suckah is a killah! 



> The galaxy where the supermassive black hole ripped apart the passing star in known as PS1-10jh and is located about 2.7 billion light years from Earth. Astronomers estimate the black hole in PS1-10jh has a mass of several million suns, which is comparable to the supermassive black hole in our own galaxy.



http://phys.org/news/2012-07-image-black-hole-caught-stellar.html


----------



## m1dg3t (Jul 14, 2012)

Cheers Drone! Still trying to wrap mah head around all of this but keep 'em comming!


----------



## Drone (Aug 3, 2012)

Here's a beautiful animation showing the awakening of a distant galaxy's dormant black hole as it shredded and gobbled up a passing star. The galaxy is so far away that light from the event had to travel 3.9 billion years before reaching Earth. So far, so violent, so beautiful *drools*












> The star experienced intense tides as it reached its closest point to the black hole and was quickly torn apart. Some of its gas fell toward the black hole and formed a disk around it. The innermost part of this disk was rapidly heated to temperatures of millions of degrees, hot enough to emit X-rays. At the same time, through processes still not fully understood, oppositely directed jets perpendicular to the disk formed near the black hole. These jets blasted matter outward at velocities greater than 90 percent the speed of light along the black hole's spin axis. One of these jets just happened to point straight at Earth.



That's a sexy X-Ray shower there. 



> As hot gas in the innermost disk spirals toward a black hole, it reaches a point astronomers refer to as the innermost stable circular orbit (ISCO). Any closer to the black hole and gas rapidly plunges into the event horizon, the point of no return. The inward spiraling gas tends to pile up around the ISCO, where it becomes tremendously heated and radiates a flood of X-rays. The brightness of these X-rays varies in a pattern that repeats at a nearly regular interval, creating the QPO (quasi-periodic oscillation) signal.



Mesmerizing process. These QPOs send us information from the very brim of the black hole, which is where the effects of relativity become most extreme.



http://phys.org/news/2012-08-star-heralds-era-relativity.html


----------



## Drone (Aug 30, 2012)

> WISE (Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer) identified about *2.5 million* actively feeding supermassive black holes across the full sky, stretching back to distances more than 10 billion light-years away.



Umm ... can you imagine that?






Now that's a lot of them!

http://phys.org/news/2012-08-wise-survey-uncovers-millions-black.html

WISE scanned the whole sky twice in infrared light, completing its survey in early 2011. And that's not all...  Astronomers have identified about 1000 *hot DOGs* (*dust-obscured galaxies*). That's one of the main goals of their mission.



> Hot DOGs are powerful and brightest galaxies, they can pour out more than *100 trillion* times as much light as our sun. They are so dusty, however, that they appear only in the longest wavelengths of infrared light captured by WISE.



That darn cosmic dust *shakes fist* ... but anyway this all is so amazing incredible and unbelievable.


----------



## qubit (Aug 31, 2012)

Drone, this is especially for you. 

The Strangest Black Holes in the Universe

So, just how immense is the gravity of the first black hole with an event horizon five times the size of the orbit of Pluto! I can't even begin to comprehend it.


----------



## Drone (Aug 31, 2012)

Well done, Qubit  *goes to read*

It's fascinating how gravity - the weakest force of nature can be so powerful. 

Cheers!


----------



## 3870x2 (Aug 31, 2012)

I have never understood this about Quasars (and other materials of the like)

If nothing can escape the gravitational field of a black hole, how do these? (they shoot out both ends of a black hole, most predominantly at the center of galaxies.)


----------



## qubit (Aug 31, 2012)

They take shortcuts with the wording - indeed nothing can come out from the event horizon. Ever.

Somehow, an infalling accretion disc can generate right angled jets of matter close to the event horizon. It doesn't make sense to me how this can happen though, because the matter has to physically change direction, which takes "work" and I've never seen it adequately explained.


----------



## 3870x2 (Aug 31, 2012)

Care to expound upon this Drone?


----------



## Drone (Aug 31, 2012)

qubit said:
			
		

> It doesn't make sense to me how this can happen though, because the matter has to physically change direction, which takes "work" and I've never seen it adequately explained.





			
				3870x2 said:
			
		

> Care to expound upon this Drone?



There's a "good" explanation for that process. By good I mean how scientists understand that lol.

In a nutshell: *The spin of the black hole powers the jets via magnetic fields in the accretion disk*. 

You can see these links:

http://phys.org/news/2012-01-black-hole-jets.html
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/flaring-jets-exposed/


----------



## 3870x2 (Aug 31, 2012)

Drone said:


> There's a "good" explanation for that process. By good I mean how scientists understand that lol.
> 
> In a nutshell: *The spin of the black hole powers the jets via magnetic fields in the accretion disk*.
> 
> ...



The Quasars are actually produced beyond the event horizon maybe...


----------



## Drone (Aug 31, 2012)

Most likely. Nothing seems to escape the event horizon except for Hawking Radiation (which was never detected). All this process is a big mystery that's for sure. Nobody knows all the processes that can happen there, maybe there can be some other forces that mess with matter. And I'm not even talking about the black hole interior. What happens inside can never be described by physics. All our (I mean entire humankind) knowledge seems so limited and incomplete lol,


EDIT:

I've found another very interesting snippets:

<The magnetic coupling process can transfer energy and angular momentum from a rotating black hole to its surrounding disk>.

<Magnetic fields in the vicinity of an accreting, rotating black hole could become twisted, enabling them to carry away energy as an electromagnetic jet>


----------



## Drone (Sep 5, 2012)

Maybe Dark Matter exists ...

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-mystery-dark-deciphered.html



> The Planck satellite, which was launched in 2009, has extremely sensitive instruments that can map microwave radiation in the entire sky with great precision. *The latest data from the Planck mission reveals unusual radiation from our own galaxy*, which open a new direction in understanding the most fundamental properties of the space, time and matter in the Universe.



So we have it









> The image shows emission from the centre of the Milky Way, detected by PLANCK satellite. The black zone mask is emission from the galactic disk, the blue-red-white zone in the centre of the map is the *new abnormal radiation*.



What could it be?



> Dark matter may consist of very heavy particles that are around 10 times as heavy as the Higgs particle, that is to say, 1,000 times heavier than a proton. But they have very unique properties and do not interact with 'normal' matter particles. Dark matter particles are also usually very scattered and do not interact with each other.



So they say:



> But we know from theoretical predictions that the concentration of dark matter particles around the centre of galaxies is very high and we have a strong argument they can collide there and in the collision electrons and positrons are formed. These electrons and positrons start to rotate around the magnetic field at the centre of the galaxy and in doing so produce this very unusual synchrotron radiation.



So if their theory works then it's indeed mysterious Dark Matter



> "The radiation cannot be explained by the structural mechanisms in the galaxy and it cannot be radiation from supernova explosions. We believe that this could be proof of dark matter. Otherwise, we have discovered absolutely new (and unknown for physics) mechanism of acceleration of particles in the Galactic centre".


----------



## Inceptor (Sep 8, 2012)

3870x2 said:


> The Quasars are actually produced beyond the event horizon maybe...



A quasar is either the jet of a supermassive black hole, in an active galactic nucleus, pointed towards us, or just a massive starbirth and stardeath event in and around an active galactic nucleus, due to the massive amounts of gas swirling in those regions.  Or both those things.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2012)

Haven't posted in a while but this stuff is postworthy:



> Researchers from Cardiff University have discovered a new property of black holes: their dying tones could reveal the cosmic crash that produced them.



That's interesting, I haven't heard about that before.



> Two black holes orbiting around each other emit gravitational waves and lose energy; eventually they come together and collide to produce a black hole that is initially highly deformed. Gravitational waves from a deformed black hole come out not in one tone but in a mixture of a number of different tones, very much like the dying tones of a ringing bell. The frequency of each tone and rate at which the tones decay depend only on the two parameters that characterize a black hole: its mass and how rapidly it spins. By comparing the strengths of the different tones, it is possible not only to learn about the final black hole, but also the properties of the original two black holes that took part in the collision.



So basically they say that it would be possible to weigh two black holes after they've collided and merged. I hope that advanced gravitational wave detectors will be built in the future. I can't even imagine how sensitive they must be.

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-spacetime-ripples-dying-black-holes.html


----------



## Drone (Oct 5, 2012)

More interesting news:

Two stars S0-102 and S0-2 orbit our galaxy's supermassive black hole in much less than a human lifetime. S0-102 orbits our Galaxy's supermassive black hole with a period of just 11.5 years. And S0-2, which is 15 times brighter than S0-102, will go through its closest approach to the black hole in 2018. You say who cares and why is this important? Here's why:



> The exciting thing about seeing stars go through their complete orbit is not only that you can prove that a black hole exists but you have the first opportunity to test fundamental physics using the motions of these stars. Showing that it goes around in an ellipse provides the mass of the supermassive black hole, but if we can improve the precision of the measurements, we can see deviations from a perfect ellipse - which is the signature of general relativity.
> 
> As the stars come to their closest approach, their motion will be affected by the curvature of spacetime, and the light traveling from the stars to us will be distorted.



They have a chance to see whether Einstein's theory of general relativity is valid near a black hole, where this theory has never been tested before. The deviation from a perfect ellipse is very small and requires extremely precise measurements. I hope they can do it.

I found that article in Science Magazine.


----------



## 3870x2 (Oct 5, 2012)

A bit off topic, but here is a good question:

If we can take high resolution photos of things 13.2 billion LY away, how is it so difficult for us to get a good image of pluto?

My educated guess:  There is a gap in what distance instruments can measure, and pluto is in that gap.


----------



## patrico (Oct 5, 2012)

3870x2 said:


> A bit off topic, but here is a good question:
> 
> If we can take high resolution photos of things 13.2 billion LY away, how is it so difficult for us to get a good image of pluto?
> 
> My educated guess:  There is a gap in what distance instruments can measure, and pluto is in that gap.



i think its because pluto is so tiny and when we look back we are looking to things that are many light years across, that my interpretation of why not, but hey i may not be totally correct 


And hey,
 has anyone watched a set of films (theres two of them) by scientists called "THE BIG BANG IS WRONG"? its very good and has some good arguements against the big bang theory, after all is just a theory.


----------



## Inceptor (Oct 6, 2012)

patrico said:


> i think its because pluto is so tiny and when we look back we are looking to things that are many light years across, that my interpretation of why not, but hey i may not be totally correct
> 
> 
> And hey,
> has anyone watched a set of films (theres two of them) by scientists called "THE BIG BANG IS WRONG"? its very good and has some good arguements against the big bang theory, after all is just a theory.



So, because that video says that a Quasar _looks_ like it is somehow connected to a much closer galaxy, the _verifiable _and _reliable_ redshift measurement is somehow wrong?  That's pathetic reasoning, no, that's _not even reasoning_, it's just foolish thinking.


----------



## Drone (Oct 6, 2012)

*Astronomers discover a new black hole in our galaxy*

Yay! There's another one, far away from us, close to the center of the Milky Way. X-ray outbursts revealed its location.  



> On Sept. 16, NASA's Swift satellite detected a rising tide of high-energy X-rays from a source toward the center of our Milky Way galaxy. *The outburst, produced by a rare X-ray nova, announced the presence of a previously unknown stellar-mass black hole.*
> An X-ray nova is a short-lived X-ray source that appears suddenly, reaches its emission peak in a few days and then fades out over a period of months. _The outburst arises when a torrent of stored gas suddenly rushes toward one of the most compact objects known, either a neutron star or a black hole._
> 
> Named Swift J1745-26 after the coordinates of its sky position, the nova is located a few degrees from the center of our galaxy toward the constellation Sagittarius. While astronomers do not know its precise distance, they think the object resides about 20,000 to 30,000 light-years away in the galaxy's inner region. *The pattern of X-rays from the nova signals that the central object is a black hole*.
> ...



http://svs.gsfc.nasa.gov/vis/a010000/a011100/a011108/


----------



## eidairaman1 (Oct 6, 2012)

Drone said:


> *Astronomers discover a new black hole in our galaxy*
> 
> Yay! There's another one, far away from us, close to the center of the Milky Way. X-ray outbursts revealed its location.
> 
> ...




this is cool so the visible center of our galaxy is near view my astrological constellation sign of Saggitarius.


----------



## patrico (Oct 6, 2012)

Inceptor said:


> So, because that video says that a Quasar _looks_ like it is somehow connected to a much closer galaxy, the _verifiable _and _reliable_ redshift measurement is somehow wrong?  That's pathetic reasoning, no, that's _not even reasoning_, it's just foolish thinking.



if you had watched both of the vids its not just the Quasar issue, 
but im not saying that its true, 
but that there are many differing theory's about how the universe works, 
and when observations dont match the big bang theory they just make some thing to fit what they think is going on, 
like dark enery and dark matter thats just scientist way of saying they dont know whats going on, 
i dont think we should be so set in our views, as always as new tech opens up new corridors of research and old theorys change as our understanding of the universe deepens


----------



## Drone (Oct 8, 2012)

Suppermassive black hole (called *ULASJ1234+0907*) has been found:



> In the new study, the team from Cambridge used infrared surveys being carried out on the UK Infrared Telescope (UKIRT) to peer through the dust and locate the giant black hole.



It's amazing what infrared can do, it simply peers through the dust so we're able to "see" what's been unseen.








> ULASJ1234+0907, located in the direction of the constellation of Virgo, is so far away that the light from it has taken *11 billion years* to reach us, so we see it as it appeared in the early universe. The monster black hole has *> 10 billion times the mass of the Sun* and 10,000 times the mass of the supermassive black hole in our own Milky Way, making it one of the most massive black holes ever seen.



That thing is really massive and so far away! Yet they were able to detect it.

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-giant-black-holes-lurking-survey.html


----------



## douglatins (Oct 8, 2012)

I frigging love black holes


----------



## qubit (Oct 8, 2012)

Black hole simulation laser closer to testing. Simulates a white hole inside a black hole!



> In a laboratory in Scotland, a revolutionary kind of laser is taking shape – the first one to be made out of an artificial black hole.
> 
> Once complete, the device could help confirm mounting evidence that real black holes, despite their name, emit light. A black-hole laser could also find practical uses in devices that probe a material's properties without damaging it.
> 
> ...



New Scientist

So, imagine if a black hole and a white hole of equal mass were to meet. Their gravities would be equal and opposite so they'd pass right through each other _as if they had no gravity_, wouldn't they? Regardless, the physics would be extremely weird and just as fascinating.


----------



## Drone (Oct 8, 2012)

qubit said:


> This is a consequence of quantum theory, which says that a vacuum is not truly empty, but fizzes with fleeting pairs of particles and their antimatter counterparts. Normally, these pairs rapidly annihilate and disappear again, but if a pair of photons pops out too close to a black hole, one falls in – and the other escapes.


Not a pair of photons but a *pair of virtual particles*. (because photon is an antiparticle of itself). Or did they mean something else?


----------



## qubit (Oct 8, 2012)

Drone said:


> Not a pair of photons but a *pair of virtual particles*. (because photon is an antiparticle of itself). Or did they mean something else?



I'd never heard of photons being referred to as antiparticles before. You could be right about the virtual particles though. However, if they're virtual, then how could you ever see the black hole glow?

For what it's worth, I can't see the singularity being a point of infinite density. I reckon it only looks that way with general relativity because the theory is incomplete in such an extreme environment. I'll bet it fizzes madly with enornous energy dictated by quantum mechanics and is of a definite size. How this thing would look or behave, of course, I have no idea. I'll bet time is bent totally out of shape there too and would be unrecognizable. That's my 2 cents worth, anyway.


----------



## Drone (Oct 8, 2012)

qubit said:
			
		

> I'd never heard of photons being referred to as antiparticles before. You could be right about the virtual particles though. However, if they're virtual, then how could you ever see the black hole glow?


You can see this post. Hawking radiation deals with a pair of electron and positron. They don't actually glow but they emit waves.

And photon is not the only particle which is own antiparticle. For example neutral pion is its own antiparticle. Here you can read about it, it's from a book Richard Feynman wrote:

Photons look exactly the same in all respects when they travel backwards in time...so they are their own anti-particles.

Gravitons, and some WIMPs are believed to have this property too.



> For what it's worth, I can't see the singularity being a point of infinite density. I reckon it only looks that way with general relativity because the theory is incomplete in such an extreme environment. I'll bet it fizzes madly with enormous energy dictated by quantum mechanics and is of a definite size. How this thing would look or behave, of course, I have no idea.


Some scientists believe that true singularity doesn't exist at all. They say when neutrinos get packed too close they turn to super-fluid substance which won't let further collapse happen, and hence they prevent the singularity.


----------



## Drone (Oct 12, 2012)

I'm not even sure how many times I re-watched this video


----------



## qubit (Oct 12, 2012)

Drone said:


> I'm not even sure how many times I re-watched this video



Hehe, the narrator sounds like the G-man out of Half-life!


----------



## Drone (Oct 23, 2012)

"What's this?" you may ask. The jet known as PKS 0637-752, a two million light year long structure. Much longer than Milky Way 

It looks strikingly similar to the afterburner flow of a fighter jet, except in this case the jet engine is a *supermassive black hole* and the jet material is moving at nearly the speed of light. Holy cow 



> The jets are produced when material falls onto a supermassive black hole at the centre of a galaxy, but many details beyond that remain unknown. Massive jets like this one have been studied for decades, since the beginning of radio astronomy, but astronomers still don't understand exactly how they are produced or what they're made of. This particular jet emits a lot of X-rays, which is hard to explain with current models.



The more we see the less we know .....

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-astronomers-million-year-extragalactic-afterburner.html


----------



## 3870x2 (Oct 23, 2012)

Drone said:


> two million light year long structure[/U




An immature joke about ones member could be made using this statement.

Thx for news Drone!


----------



## qubit (Oct 23, 2012)

So, is this the longest member in the known universe then?


----------



## Nordic (Oct 23, 2012)

A member with the power of a thousand suns!


----------



## btarunr (Oct 23, 2012)

Theories, theories, and more theories. You'd think that with the amount of money, human, and natural resources world governments spend of defense (against each other, no less), we'd have an NX-01 by now.


----------



## Drone (Oct 23, 2012)

qubit said:


> So, is this the longest member in the known universe then?



There's always a bigger member. Black holes seem to love them (I mean relativistic jets) so much 






But seriously it's amazing that jets can be so big (mega light years long) and fast (with relativistic speeds).

http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Sept02/Mirabel/Mirabel1.html

______

*Pic of the day*:

A Black Hole in Medusa's Hair






__________

*Pic of the Day #2*

Brightest X-ray flare ever observed in our galaxy's black hole (Sagittarius A*)






__________

*Pic of the Day #3*






The *Cartwheel Galaxy*, also known as ESO 350-40 has an *unusually large number of blackholes* along its outer borders giving off X-rays.
__________

Video of the day


----------



## Drone (Oct 25, 2012)

Wow I've posted so many times here  I even forgot some of the older news/posts, I'll re-read them now  It's exciting that scientists discover more and more. Anywho more new stuff:

Possibly the _lowest mass nuclear black hole_ ever has been identified.








> The black hole is located in the middle of the NGC 4178 (a galaxy located about 55 Mly from Earth) shown in this image from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey. A known relationship between the mass of a black hole and the amount of X-rays and radio waves it generates was used to estimate the mass of the black hole. This method gives a black hole mass estimate of less than about *200 000* times that of the sun.



As always scientists noticed inconsistency in their theoretical model. Because they thought that galaxies without bulges are unlikely to host supermassive black holes but NGC 4178 is a bulgeless galaxy. It may suggest that more than one mechanism is at work in forming supermassive black holes. Nothing is certain lol...

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-revealing-mini-supermassive-black-hole.html


----------



## Drone (Oct 29, 2012)

__________________________

*Picture of the day #4*






Glowing galaxy 3C 305 with a central supermassive black hole.


__________________________


*Picture of the day #5*






NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory has discovered an extraordinary outburst by a black hole in the spiral galaxy M83, located about 15 million light years from Earth.


__________________________


*Picture of the day #6*






PKS 0745-19 cluster has the *ultramassive* black hole at its center


----------



## Nordic (Oct 29, 2012)

So this member is making a big bubble?


----------



## Inceptor (Oct 30, 2012)

Isn't it heartening to know that one of the most massive members of our local supercluster is so inhospitable?


----------



## Drone (Nov 9, 2012)

http://news.discovery.com/space/nustar-spies-a-black-hole-flare-121024.html



> NASA has used its X-ray eyes in the sky, those on the Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array (NuSTAR), to get a good look at the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy called Sagittarius A*. And it caught some interesting activity. Our typically mild-mannered black hole recently flared up, and NuSTAR saw all the action.



Yeah, even our Galaxy's humble black hole can be active sometimes. It's a waking season. More activity to come. Just wait till 2013


----------



## qubit (Nov 28, 2012)

*Out-of-proportion black hole is a rare cosmic fossil*

I love the way black holes are always throwing curve balls at us. 



> A supermassive black hole that is bigger relative to its host galaxy than any measured before could be the fossil of a burned-out quasar that existed at the dawn of time. These black-hole-powered beacons were once among the brightest objects in the universe, and it is a mystery how they got so large and powerful so soon after the big bang.
> 
> Remco van den Bosch at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Heidelberg, Germany, and colleagues looked at the galaxy NGC 1277 with the Hubble Space Telescope and the Hobby-Eberly telescope in Texas. They found that stars move slowly in the galaxy's outer regions, but gyrate rapidly around the inner core.
> 
> ...



New Scientist


----------



## Drone (Nov 28, 2012)

^Thanks for posting, qubit. Today is the day of extremes. The most massive black hole with mass of 17 billion Suns and now scientists found a black hole with the most powerful outflow ever observed.



> Quasars are the intensely luminous centres of distant galaxies that are powered by huge black holes. Many blast huge amounts of material out into their host galaxies, and these outflows play a key role in the evolution of galaxies.



Ok, now let's take a look at the numbers lol ....



> Scientists have discovered the most energetic quasar outflow known to date. The rate that energy is carried away by this huge mass of material ejected at high speed from SDSS J1106+1939 is at least equivalent to *two trillion times the power output of the Sun*. This is about 100 times higher than the total power output of the Milky Way galaxy.



That's a helluva outflow!



> The newly discovered outflow lies about a thousand light-years away from the supermassive black hole at the heart of the quasar SDSS J1106+1939. This outflow is at least five times more powerful than the previous record holder. The team's analysis shows that a mass of approximately 400 times that of the Sun is streaming away from this quasar per year, moving at a speed of 8000 km/s.



That's really impressive.



> Many theoretical simulations suggest that the impact of these outflows on the galaxies around them may resolve several enigmas in modern cosmology, including how the mass of a galaxy is linked to its central black hole mass, and why there are so few large galaxies in the Universe.


----------



## Drone (Nov 30, 2012)

Scientists found another supermassive blackhole with relativistic jets and stuff! 












> Some 2 billion ly away, the yellowish elliptical galaxy Hercules A is roughly 1000 times more massive than the Milky Way and harbors a *2.5-billion-solar-mass central black hole* that is 1000 times more massive than the black hole in the Milky Way. Emitting nearly a billion times more power in radio wavelengths than our Sun, the galaxy is one of the brightest extragalactic radio sources in the entire sky.



That thing looks powerful and heavy.



> The jets are very-high-energy plasma beams, subatomic particles and magnetic fields shot at nearly the speed of light from the vicinity of the black hole. The innermost parts of the jets are not visible because of the extreme velocity of the material, which causes relativistic effects that beam the light away from us. Far from the galaxy, the jets become unstable and break up into the rings and wisps.


----------



## Drone (Dec 12, 2012)

Astronomers found a stellar-mass black hole. It's about ten times more massive than the Sun. Bright radio emission makes it detectable. 






> For the first time, astronomers have found a microquasar - a black hole devouring material from a companion star - in a galaxy beyond Milky Way. The object, pumping out X-rays and bright bursts of radio waves, was found in M31 (Andromeda Galaxy), 2.5 million ly from Earth.



Its companion is a middle-sized, rather than a giant, star.



> In this microquasar, a black hole pulls material from its companion star into a rapidly-rotating disk. The disk surrounding the black hole can become so hot it emits X-rays. The disk also propels narrow jets of subatomic particles outward at speeds nearing that of light. The jets generate strong bursts of radio emission.



Obscuration within our Galaxy makes it difficult to study the disks of these microquasars in the Milky Way, but finding one in a neighboring galaxy means physicists probably can find many more. 

Source


----------



## Drone (Jan 8, 2013)

Angry black hole:








> The *4C +71.07* galaxy was discovered as a source of strong radio emission in the 1960s. High-energy flares were detected in the 1990s. In early November 2011, at the height of the outburst, the galaxy was more than 10,000 times brighter than the combined luminosity of all of the stars in our Milky Way galaxy.



It's amazing that scientists can discover more and more facts about this distant galaxy and its supermassive black hole and gamma-ray emission. But there's still a long way to go ...



> Located in the constellation Ursa Major, 4C +71.07 is so far away that its light takes 10.6 billion years to reach Earth. Astronomers are seeing this galaxy as it existed when the universe was less than one-fourth of its present age. At the galaxy's core lies a supermassive black hole weighing *2.6 billion times the sun's mass*. Some of the matter falling toward the black hole becomes accelerated outward at almost the speed of light, creating dual particle jets blasting in opposite directions. One jet happens to point almost directly toward Earth. This characteristic makes 4C +71.07 a blazar, a classification that includes some of the brightest gamma-ray sources in the sky.



_Theorists always expected gamma-ray outbursts occur only in close proximity to a galaxy's central black hole_. But this gamma-ray emission originated about *70 ly away from the galaxy's central black hole*. Go figure ... *shrugs*


ScienseDaily





____________

Blazing Black Holes in IC 342 






Spiral galaxy IC 342 (Caldwell 5) lies 7 million ly away in the Camelopardalis constellation. *The two magenta spots are blazing black holes* first detected at lower-energy X-ray wavelengths by NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory.


----------



## Drone (Jan 18, 2013)

Three interesting videos (especially the *first one* and the third one) about the black holes




























Black Holes: Infographic


----------



## Drone (Jan 27, 2013)

> *A powerful jet from a supermassive black hole is blasting a nearby galaxy* in the system known as 3C321, according to new results from NASA. This galactic violence, never seen before, could have a profound effect on any planets in the path of the jet and trigger a burst of star formation in the wake of its destruction.


----------



## Drone (Jan 30, 2013)

Scientists found a black hole in the very center of the NGC 4526 galaxy 






NGC 4526's central black hole weighs ~450 million times the mass of the sun. Astronomers used molecular gas observations to measure black hole's mass.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 30, 2013)

btarunr said:


> Theories, theories, and more theories. You'd think that with the amount of money, human, and natural resources world governments spend of defense (against each other, no less), we'd have an NX-01 by now.



I love all these theories. We can't predict weather patterns here on Earth with 100% accuracy yet we can say how old things are billions of miles away? Please.


----------



## 3870x2 (Jan 30, 2013)

It is interesting to note we could be blasted away by a black hole blazar at any moment with no warning.


----------



## Drone (Mar 7, 2013)

So many discoveries in so short time:

Black Hole Collision May Have Sparked Celestial Fireworks in the Milky Way Several Million Years Ago

Curtains Down for the Black Hole Firewall Paradox

Milky Way's Black Hole to Gobble Space Cloud This Year

Cutting through the spin on supermassive black holes

Amazing read. Black hole is a place where space itself moves faster than light.


----------



## Drone (Oct 27, 2013)

> *The Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) successfully captured a detailed image of high density molecular gas around an active galactic nucleus harboring a supermassive black hole.* The observations at the highest ever achieved reveal a unique chemical composition characterized by enhancement of hydrogen cyanide (HCN) around the black hole. A research team thought a high temperature affected by the black hole caused this peculiar chemical properties. The team expect that this unique chemical properties can be used to find black holes hidden behind dust.


----------



## qubit (Oct 27, 2013)

Just wondering about something that I've never seen addressed anywhere.

Since the event horizon is simply the point at which escape velocity is faster than light, would a spaceship with an FTL Alcubierre warp drive like in Star Trek theoretically be able to pass through the event horizon and out the other side. Note that the ship would not go through the centre of the black hole for the obvious reason of the singularity, but if it went in at a shallow angle, could it come out again? Note that for a really big monster black hole, the tidal forces are quiet gentle, even at the event horizon. It's the "little" ones that tear you apart from a great distance.

Of course, one of the big questions here is that time stops at the event horizon from our perspective. I wonder if a physicist could answer such a question?


----------



## Drone (Oct 27, 2013)

That "warp drive" stuff is fishy. Even if that happens it seems that Alcubierre warp drive will annihilate the black hole and it shall not pass like Gandalf says. However others say that 'warp drive' concept is promising than ever before. Read here.


----------



## lyndonguitar (Oct 27, 2013)

Dark matter is not black holes: Black holes are gravity lenses that bend light. Astronomers do not see enough lensing events to account for the amount of dark matter that must exist. That's what i've read, and If I understand your post correctly, Primordial black holes have weaker lensing? so they are just black holes after all?



Drone said:


> That "warp drive" stuff is fishy. Even if that happens it seems that Alcubierre warp drive will annihilate the black hole and it shall not pass like Gandalf says. However others say that 'warp drive' concept is promising than ever before. Read here.



I really hope to be alive when we perfect the warp drive tech and use it for propulsion on manned or unmanned space travel like we use rockets today, I wish China and India would hasten up the development of Space Exploration Technologies to kickstart a new Space Race (it can provoke US and Russia to increase their budgets)

Current estimates says that we can get to this kind of tech in 100 to 1000 years, It could be way earlier though

On Oct. 9, 1903, the New York Times wrote:
“The flying machine which will really fly might be evolved by the combined and continuous efforts of mathematicians and mechanics in from one million to ten million years.”


----------



## Drone (Oct 27, 2013)

lyndonguitar said:


> Dark matter is not black holes: Black holes are gravity lenses that bend light. Astronomers do not see enough lensing events to account for the amount of dark matter that must exist. That's what i've read, and If I understand your post correctly, Primordial black holes have weaker lensing? so they are just black holes after all?


Black holes bend light's path and create rings and multiple false images of a single object. The article in my OP is just an alternative theory (alternative to the LSP). Neither LSP nor primordial atomic size black holes were ever found, it's just a theory. 

Gravitational lensing proved right many times and you're right gravitational lensing of dark matter alone is not well studied/understood yet. 



> I really hope to be alive when we perfect the warp drive tech and use it for propulsion on manned or unmanned space travel like we use rockets today, I wish China and India would hasten up the development of Space Exploration Technologies to kickstart a new Space Race (it can provoke US and Russia to increase their budgets)
> 
> Current estimates says that we can get to this kind of tech in 100 to 1000 years, It could be way earlier though
> 
> ...



I don't know what to say about that warp drive I'm more into wormholes, they're more fascinating. If humankind spent more money on science instead of wasting it on military and surveillance crap this world would've been a better place.


----------



## Drone (Oct 29, 2013)

New Zinger Space Image of *3C353* From Chandra's X-Ray Archives










> *In the center of this image is a galaxy powered by a supermassive black hole, which is transmitting energy across the expanse*. Radiation is visible in X-rays from Chandra (purple) and radio from the Very Large Array (orange.)


----------



## Drone (Oct 30, 2013)

This image shows a giant jet of particles that has been shot out from the vicinity of supermassive black hole (quasar) called 3C273. The jet is enormous, stretching across more than 100000 ly of space - a size comparable to our own Milky Way galaxy.

A kaleidoscope of colors represents the jet's assorted light waves. X-rays, detected by Chandra, are the highest-energy light in the image are seen at far left in blue (the black hole itself is well to the left of the image). Moving from left to right, the light diminishes in energy, and wavelengths increase in size.


----------



## Drone (Nov 4, 2013)

Another black hole discovered!

*A team of researchers discovered the first examples of black holes in globular star clusters in our own galaxy, upsetting 40 years of theories against their possible existence.*



> Globular star clusters are large groupings of stars thought to contain some of the oldest stars in the universe. The stars can collide with one another in that environment. The old theory believed that the interaction of stars was thought to kick out any black holes that formed. They would interact with each other and slingshot black holes out of the cluster until they were all gone. While the theory may still be displaced, it might still be somewhat true. Black holes might still get kicked out of globular star clusters, but at a much slower rate than initially believed.



Fascinating!








Radio image (left) and x-ray image (right). *The yellow circle shows the black hole found in the M62 star cluster (which is 23000 ly away from Earth) in our Galaxy.* The red circle denotes a neutron star close by.


----------



## Drone (Nov 13, 2013)

Amazing discovery:

Heavy atoms help give black hole jets their power



> A team of scientists has evidence that the jets of an ordinary black hole – known as 4U1630-47 – contain heavy particles, such as iron and nickel. It helps explain why black hole jets are so powerful. They are powerful enough to recycle matter and energy into space and can affect when and where a galaxy forms stars.
> 
> The discovery also suggests that jets are powered by the black hole’s accretion disk – a belt of hot gas swirling around the black hole – and not by the spin of the black hole itself, which would be more likely to produce jets containing only light particles, these scientists said.



Here's a diagram






And more:



> An iron atom is about 100,000 times more massive than an electron. When a massive particle is moving it carries more energy than a lighter particle moving at the same speed.
> 
> Gamma rays and neutrinos should be generated when black holes’ fast-moving jets, containing heavy particles, smash into matter in space.


----------



## Drone (Nov 15, 2013)

Researchers have ruled out a range of primordial black holes as dark matter, but have not ruled them out completely.



> Until now, researchers had eliminated the chances that black holes that are approximately the mass of the moon could make up dark matter. Kepler's data show no evidence of black holes between 5 and 80% of the moon's mass, suggesting these black holes could not constitute most dark matter.
> 
> _However, even smaller primordial black holes, ones less than 0.0001% the mass of Earth's moon, could still make up the entirety of dark matter_.


----------



## W1zzard (Nov 15, 2013)

Drone said:


> Researchers have ruled out a range of primordial black holes as dark matter, but have not ruled them out completely.



I think most scientists ruled out Black Holes long ago. If we had so much matter in black holes than is needed to account for Dark Matter, we'd be able to see the gravitational effects through lensing, or the radiation if stuff is falling in (which has to happen at some point, somewhere, with so many BHs around it should be a uniform radiation).

Anyone know if there are any solid theories for what happens if DM falls into BHs ? It should be able to, right? Because it interacts with gravity.


----------



## Drone (Nov 15, 2013)

W1zzard said:


> Anyone know if there are any solid theories for what happens if DM falls into BHs ?



Same what happens to normal matter. BH doesn't give a damn if it's normal or dark matter. Once it crossed the event horizon it's gone.


----------



## Drone (Nov 21, 2013)

Amazing news!



> Astronomers have found strong evidence Sgr A* (supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way) is producing a jet of high-energy particles. The jet appears to be running into gas near Sgr A*, producing X-rays detected by Chandra and radio emission observed by the VLA.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 21, 2013)

You know, uranium and most other extremely dense metals naturally give off x-rays (Henri Becquerel discovered this).  Sagittarius A* is undeniably very dense.  It stands to reason that it would have x-ray emissions regardless if it is or isn't a black hole.

Black holes still don't explain how spiral galaxies can work.  Dark matter has to be involved in that phenomena.


----------



## Drone (Nov 22, 2013)

lmao you really think that there are gazillions of tons of uranium there? Sgr A* emits every kind of radiation including radio waves, it's definitely a supermassive black hole.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Nov 27, 2013)

No, I did the math and uranium isn't dense enough.  I don't remember the number I came up with but it really isn't that much denser than uranium.  I think it was closer to an atomic weight of 300'ish.


----------



## qubit (Dec 7, 2013)

How to kill a black hole, err, sorta, not quite, hypoothetically.


> Be afraid of the dark. Black holes, the insatiable monsters of the universe, are impossible to kill with any of the weapons in our grasp. The only thing that can hasten a black hole's demise is a cable made of cosmic strings, a hypothetical material predicted by string theory.



Read the rest at New Scientist


----------



## Drone (Jan 24, 2014)

> The black hole in galaxy cluster RX J1532.9+3021 keeps all gas for itself and _stops trillions of stars from coming to be_. You can see data above from NASA’s Chandra X-ray Observatory (purple) and the Hubble Space Telescope (yellow). The drama is taking place ~ 3.9 billion ly from Earth.
> 
> Supersonic jets blasting from the black hole shove the gas in the area away, forming cavities on either side of the galaxy. These cavities, by the way, are immense - at 100000 ly across each, this makes them about as wide as Milky Way.
> 
> Perhaps the black hole is “ultramassive” (10 billion times of the sun) and has ample mass to shoot out those jets without eating itself up and producing radiation. Or, the black hole could be smaller (a billion times that of the sun) but spinning quickly, which would allow it to send out those jets.



Whatever that selfish stuff is, it looks so cool.


----------



## qubit (Jan 24, 2014)

I can't get over the scale that these things happen over. It really is mind boggling.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 24, 2014)

Drone said:


> Perhaps the black hole is “ultramassive” (10 billion times of the sun) and has ample mass to shoot out those jets without eating itself up and producing radiation.


Jets are not from inside the event horizon of the black hole. They are from matter falling into the black hole, so they do not reduce its energy/matter.


----------



## Drone (Feb 20, 2014)

Astronomers see huge clouds of gas orbiting supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies. Once thought to be a relatively uniform, fog-like ring, the accreting matter instead forms clumps dense enough to intermittently dim the intense radiation blazing forth as these enormous objects condense and consume matter.

Conceptual computer animation.










Looks pretty cool


----------



## Drone (Feb 28, 2014)

New black hole!

Team of Australian and American astronomers have been studying nearby galaxy M83 and have found a new superpowered small black hole, named MQ1






*MQ1 is a stellar mass black hole and was likely formed when a star died, collapsing to leave behind a compact mass. It's classed as a microquasar - a black hole surrounded by a bubble of hot gas, which is heated by two jets just outside the black hole, powerfully shooting out energy in opposite directions, acting like cosmic sandblasters pushing out on the surrounding gas.*

That's really cool. It ain't big but so powerful! As a comparison, the most powerful microquasar in our galaxy, known as SS433, is about 10 times less powerful than MQ1!

*Although the black hole in MQ1 is only about 100 km wide, the MQ1 structure - as identified by the Hubble Space Telescope - is much bigger than our Solar System, as the jets around it extend ~ 20 ly from either side of the black hole.*


----------



## Drone (Mar 5, 2014)

*The spin rate of a supermassive black hole has been measured for the first time
*






X-ray observations of quasar RX J1131-1231 (located six billion ly away from Earth) show it's whizzing around at almost *half the speed of light*!!!




“We estimate that the X-rays are coming from a region in the disk located only about three times the radius of the event horizon - the point of no return for infalling matter,” stated Jon Miller, an associate professor of astronomy at the University of Michigan and a co-author on the paper. “The black hole must be spinning extremely rapidly to allow a disk to survive at such a small radius.”


----------



## scoutingwraith (Mar 13, 2014)

I was about to post that article. It is amazing how fast it is spinning.


----------



## arskatb (Mar 14, 2014)

http://www.nature.com/news/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes-1.14583


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Apr 3, 2014)

Finally, some physics make sense when looking at the black hole problem.  The classic definition of them...it doesn't pass the logical test.  "Apparent horizon" does.

I still contest that black holes cannot form from dying stars.  I suspect they formed not long after the "big bang" itself.  Without black holes, how do the gases coalesce  to form stars and stars eventually aid the formation of planets?  The gases would likely spread out to become as distant as galaxies are today.  As such, I believe black holes aren't "star stuff," they're "big bang" stuff.  Physicists can theorize all they want about black holes but I think, when we actually get the chance to poke and prod one, we'll have to throw out virtually everything we _know_ about them.  I think they're altogether alien and no experiments performed on Earth are going to explain their nature.

We have a pretty good grasp of atoms and radiation yet, quantum mechanics baffle and confuse.  What if black holes are the opposite of quantum mechanics--what if they are made of the stuff that exceeds mass and radiation?  What if they are the product of everything in the universe compressed into a small space?  Would it be mass, radiation, or governed by quantum mechanics or would it be something entirely different?  What we need to find out is what happens when two galactic cores (black holes) merge--or do they?  Maybe they're solid bodies and they form a non-spherical object.  That may also explain why galaxies can take on different shapes than your typical "spiral" galaxy.

In a lot of ways, I don't think theoretical physicists are asking the right questions about black holes.


Still, I think Hawking is on to something here.  Black holes could be the furnace heavy metals are forged in.


----------



## Drone (Apr 5, 2014)

This is old news but fascinating nevertheless



> Using radio telescope, astronomers have produced one of the best images ever made at the lowest frequencies of giant bubbles produced by a supermassive black hole. The observations were performed at frequencies ranging from 20 to 160 MHz which are normally used for communications by airplane pilots. *The picture shows what looks like a giant balloon filled with radio emitting plasma, which exceeds the size of an entire galaxy.*
> 
> 
> Some black holes actively accrete matter. Part of this material does not fall into the black hole but is ejected in a narrow stream of particles, traveling at nearly the speed of light. When the stream slows down, it creates a tenuous balloon that can engulf the entire galaxy. Invisible to optical telescopes, the bubble is very prominent at low radio frequencies.








_The result is of great importance. It provides compelling evidence of the close ties between black hole, host galaxy, and their surroundings. Like symbiotic species a galaxy and its central black hole lead intimately connected lives, the galaxy providing matter to feed the black hole, and the black hole returning energy to the galaxy_.

The image was made during the test-phase of LOFAR, and targeted the giant elliptical galaxy M87, at the center of a galaxy cluster in the constellation of Virgo. This galaxy is 2000 times more massive than Milky Way and hosts in its center one of the most massive black holes discovered so far, with a mass 6 billion times that of our Sun. Every few minutes this black hole swallows an amount of matter similar to that of the whole Earth, converting part of it into radiation and a larger part into powerful jets of ultra-fast particles, which are responsible for the observed radio emission.




> What is particularly fascinating is that the results also provide clues on the violent matter-to-energy conversion that occurs very close to the black hole. In this case the black hole is particularly efficient in accelerating the jet, and much less effective in producing visible emission.


----------



## kwangso123 (Apr 8, 2014)

What if...there's a paradise on blackhole...where physics law doesn't need to apply


----------



## Drone (Jul 7, 2014)

Rare Triple Supermassive Black Hole System

Einstein’s General Relativity predicts that merging black holes are sources of gravitational waves. Astronomers have managed to spot three black holes packed about as tightly together as they could be before spiraling into each other and merging.

Galaxy SDSS J150243.09+1111557.3 contains a triple system with a very compact double supermassive black hole *J1502S* (_E&W_) and *J1502P*.


----------



## D007 (Jul 7, 2014)

Neat. 
Going there on my next vacation!


----------



## Drone (Aug 19, 2014)

Astronomers have uncovered rhythmic pulsations from a rare type of black hole 12 million ly away by sifting through archival data from NASA's Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer satellite. The signals have helped astronomers identify an unusual midsize black hole called *M82 X-1*. By going over past RXTE observations, the astronomers found specific changes in brightness that helped them determine M82 X-1 measures around *400 solar masses*.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2014)

*The relatively nearby dwarf galaxy M60-UCD1 may house a **supermassive black hole** at its heart equal in mass to ~ 21 million suns.*










It lies ~ 54 million ly away from Earth and orbits M60, one of the largest galaxies near the Milky Way, at a distance of only ~ 22000 ly from the larger galaxy's center, closer than the sun is to the center of the Milky Way!

The scientists calculated the size of the supermassive black hole that may lurk inside M60-UCD1 by analyzing the motions of the stars in that galaxy, which helped the researchers deduce the amount of mass needed to exert the gravitational field seen pulling on those stars. The stars at the center of M60-UCD1 zip at speeds of ~ 370000 km/h, much faster than stars would be expected to move in the absence of such a black hole.

The supermassive black hole at the core of the Milky Way has a mass of ~ 4 million suns, taking up less than 0.01% of the galaxy's estimated total mass, which is ~ 50 billion suns. In comparison, the supermassive black hole that may lie in the core of M60-UCD1 appears five times larger than the one in the Milky Way, and also *seems to make up about 15% of the dwarf galaxy's mass*, which is ~ 140 million suns. That's pretty amazing, given that the Milky Way is 500 times larger and more than 1000 times heavier than M60-UCD1.

The researchers suggest M60-UCD1 was once a very large galaxy, with maybe 10 billion stars, but then it passed very close to the center of an even larger galaxy, M60, and in that process, all the stars and dark matter in the outer part of the galaxy got torn away and became part of M60. That was maybe as much as 10 billion years ago.

Eventually, M60-UCD1 may merge with the center of M60, which has a monster black hole in it, with 4.5 billion solar masses (>1000 times bigger than the supermassive black hole in our galaxy!). When that happens, the *black hole** in M60-UCD1 will merge with that monster black hole*.

The astronomers suggest the way stars move in many other ultra-compact dwarf galaxies hints that they may host supermassive black holes, as well. All in all, the scientists suggest that ultra-compact dwarf galaxies could double the number of supermassive black holes known in the nearby regions of the universe. The researchers are participating in ongoing projects that may provide conclusive evidence for supermassive black holes in 4 other ultra-compact dwarfs.


----------



## VulkanBros (Sep 22, 2014)

Monster Black Hole Found in Dwarf Galaxy video :


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 26, 2014)

Not a peer-reviewed article but: Back-reaction of the Hawking radiation flux on a gravitationally collapsing star II: Fireworks instead of firewalls


> We find that the star stops collapsing at a finite radius larger than its horizon, turns around and its core explodes.


In layman terms, black holes can't form from dying stars.


----------



## Drone (Oct 9, 2014)

Astronomers have discovered a black hole that is consuming gas from a nearby star 10 times faster than previously thought possible. The black hole P13 lies on the outskirts of NGC 7793 ~ 12 million ly from Earth.






P13 rotates around a supergiant 'donor' star (20 times heavier than our Sun) in 64 days. Scientists worked out that the *black hole must be <15 times the mass of our Sun*


Size don't always matter XD


----------



## Drone (Jan 6, 2015)

Astronomers found a black hole in KA1858 galaxy (located 100 million ly away).

BYU scientists estimate that this black hole has a mass of approximately 8 million times the mass of our sun.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 6, 2015)

I think someone should start a campaign to rename Black Holes because they arent actually holes.


----------



## FireFox (Jan 6, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> I think someone should start a campaign to rename Black Holes because they arent actually holes.


What are they?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 6, 2015)

Imagine a big black ball rather than a big black hole.


----------



## FireFox (Jan 6, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Imagine a big black ball rather than a big black hole.


My imagination shows me this:


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 6, 2015)

Nice one.


I like that.


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Jan 6, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Nice one.
> 
> 
> I like that.



Yeah, I would say a worm hole is more of a "hole." not only that but a little more interesting in what they do.

Anyone see the movie Interstellar?


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 6, 2015)

Imagine something the size of earth but a billion times heavier so all that mass is in a very small space.

Then think about Earths gravity and how a fighter pilot might experience 4 or 5 g,s (or 4 times gravity) in a turn

Consider then the gravitational force an object a billion times more massive might have. What would your face look like if you pulled a billion g,s
 


So a big black ball in space. Whatever is sucked in by its gravitational pull will probably end up as an incredibly thin smear equally spread over its whole surface. Possibly.


----------



## twilyth (Jan 6, 2015)

Wormholes are proposed as means of solving the black hole firewall problem - http://blogs.scientificamerican.com...es-may-save-physics-from-black-hole-infernos/



> Maldacena and Susskind, following Van Raamsdonk, posit that any time two quantum particles are entangled, they’re connected by a wormhole. They then go on to say that the wormhole connection between particles inside a black hole (the infalling virtual particles) and the particles outside of a black hole (the Hawking radiation) soothes out the entanglement problems enough so that we can avoid the firewall at the event horizon.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 6, 2015)

phew.


----------



## Drone (Jan 9, 2015)

A new high-energy X-ray image from NASA's Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array [NuSTAR] shows two colliding galaxies, collectively called Arp 299, located 134 million ly away. Each of the galaxies has a supermassive black hole at its heart. The black hole on the right is, in fact, the hungry one. As it feeds on gas, energetic processes close to the black hole heat electrons and protons to about hundreds of millions of degrees, creating a superhot plasma, or corona, that boosts the visible light up to high-energy X-rays. Meanwhile, the black hole on the left either is "snoozing away," in what is referred to as a quiescent, or dormant state, or is buried in so much gas and dust that the high-energy X-rays can't escape.


----------



## Drone (Jan 13, 2015)

NGC 3115

Using the Chandra data, the flow of hot gas toward the supermassive black hole in the center of this galaxy has been imaged. NGC 3115's black hole has a *mass of ~2 billion times that of the Sun*.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 13, 2015)

i Just cant get my head round some of these numbers.

2 billion times the mass of the sun. Thats BIG.

Keep the pics coming please.


----------



## xvi (Jan 13, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Consider then the gravitational force an object a billion times more massive might have. What would your face look like if you pulled a billion g,s


OOH! OOH! OOH! There's a really excellent series on YouTube called Vsauce, one video from which is on black holes. It's very, very relevant here!


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 13, 2015)

Thankyou for that. 

Its all speculation of course.  Book me on the first flight and i will pm you when i get there .


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 13, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> i Just cant get my head round some of these numbers.
> 
> 2 billion times the mass of the sun. Thats BIG.
> 
> Keep the pics coming please.


 
Except, keep in mind, we're talking MASS, not size.  Black holes, or more correctly Black Blobs of Matter, are compact and extremely dense.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 13, 2015)

Yes i understand the difference, even so the scale is immense.

One teaspoon full =,s mass of the earth or something mad like that.


----------



## xvi (Jan 13, 2015)

There's a little flash project that HTwins put together called Scale of the Universe 2. I found that, for me, it puts some things in to decent perspective. Still boggles the mind if you're not careful though.



rtwjunkie said:


> and extremely dense.


I think I had a couple old friends who were black holes.


----------



## Drone (Jan 19, 2015)

Scientists proposed new idea. They think that primordial gas in the very early universe directly collapsed into small black holes. And these black holes can grow into a supermassive black hole in only millions of years. Black holes on steroids ... how sweet


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 19, 2015)

Drone said:


> Black holes on steroids ... how sweet





LMFAO


----------



## ste2425 (Jan 19, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> One teaspoon full =,s mass of the earth or something mad like that.



Wonder what that would taste like in my tea? Hmmm


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Jan 19, 2015)

ste2425 said:


> Wonder what that would taste like in my tea? Hmmm




Heavy Man .


----------



## Drone (Feb 11, 2015)

Unexpected 'storm' in the 'Teacup'







A supermassive black hole is explosively heating and blasting around the gas [accelerated to speeds up to ~1000 km/s] in the Teacup galaxy [located ~ 1.1 billion ly from us] and, as a result, is transforming it from an actively star-forming galaxy into one devoid of gas that can no longer form stars. Observations showed that the galaxy has "bubbles" extending from 30000 to 40000 ly on each side of its core, along with smaller jet-like structures ~2000 ly in size.


Black hole growth may precede the growth of bulges in some galaxies






Hen 2-10 is a dwarf starburst galaxy ~ 30 million ly from us. A black hole at its center has a mass about one million times that of the Sun. Since Hen 2-10 does not contain a significant bulge of stars in its center, these results show that supermassive black hole growth may precede the growth of bulges in galaxies.


----------



## xvi (Feb 11, 2015)

Drone said:


> Hen 2-10 is a dwarf starburst galaxy ~ 30 million ly from us.


I think now is an opportune time to point out not only how far away this is, but how long ago this happened.

Time? Lightyears. As in this happened 30 million years ago and we're just hearing about it now. Want to know what happened on Earth 30 million years ago? The landmass of India ran in to Asia. Earliest sightings of Sperm Whales were found about here. A giant snake later named Yurlunggur lived, believed to be the genetic tie between snakes and lizards. Yep. That's what Earth was up to and we know everything after that up to the present. What's happened to this black hole since 30 million years ago though? No idea.

Distance? Well, if you were able to wrap a huge telescope once around the Earth to look at the back of your head (pretend for a second that this would work), it would take light approximately 129 milliseconds to bounce off the back of your head, go through the telescope, and be picked up by your eyes. A little over 1/10th of a second to go _all_ the way around Earth. Give it a full second and it'll wrap around Earth a little more than 7 times. Something that goes that fast took 30 million years to get here.

..and all that is over 30 times closer to us than the supermassive black hole that was mentioned first.


----------



## Drone (Feb 11, 2015)

^ That's true. And the funny thing is .. in astronomy 30 million [light] years is "not that much". Young Universe needed ~ 550 million years to form first stars.


----------



## Caring1 (Feb 26, 2015)

http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/techa...-of-our-sun-found/ar-BBhYBQv?ocid=mailsignout
This ones big, i'm not sure if it has been posted already.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Feb 26, 2015)

Beautiful avatar. 

Massive black hole indeed
@Knoxx29


----------



## FireFox (Feb 26, 2015)

Maybe one day it will be possible to visit the Black Holes


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Feb 26, 2015)

Knoxx29 said:


> Maybe one day it will be possible to visit the Black Holes
> View attachment 62964



I think it might hurt a bit though.


----------



## FireFox (Feb 26, 2015)

CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> I think it might hurt a bit though.


No body knows


----------



## Animalpak (Feb 26, 2015)

Knoxx29 said:


> No body knows



and nobody will ever tell us if he know what happen when he entered the black hole


----------



## FireFox (Feb 26, 2015)

Animalpak said:


> and nobody will ever tell us if he know what happen when he entered the black hole


That's for sure.


----------



## BiggieShady (Feb 26, 2015)

While we are talking about black holes, I saw a discussion about 'holographic universe' which basically suggests that all matter surrounding the black hole (essentially the whole galaxy around the central black whole) is encoded as an information on the event horizon of a black hole - or the state of the matter is linked to changes in the black hole horizon almost as the matter is a holographic projection of the black hole.
It does sound silly, but it is fun* to watch:









* very broad definition of fun


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Feb 26, 2015)

BiggieShady said:


> While we are talking about black holes, I saw a discussion about 'holographic universe' which basically suggests that all matter surrounding the black hole (essentially the whole galaxy around the central black whole) is encoded as an information on the event horizon of a black hole - or the state of the matter is linked to changes in the black hole horizon almost as the matter is a holographic projection of the black hole.
> It does sound silly, but it is fun* to watch:
> 
> 
> ...



tucking that one away for later .  ta.


----------



## BiggieShady (Feb 26, 2015)

Apparently there are black holes discovered recently which existence and growth rate can't be explained with currently accepted scientific model.
So far 40 quasars were discovered that have super massive black hole in their center, with 39 of them black holes are around 1 billion times mass of the sun (center of our galaxy is only 4 to 5 million times mass of the sun) ... and one quasar among them has a black hole with mass 12 billion times the mass of the sun.
They originated when universe was young (only 900 million years old).
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v518/n7540/full/nature14241.html
http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-sdss-j01002802-record-breaking-quasar-02539.html


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Mar 28, 2015)

Black holes cause BLASTS in the cores of galaxies: Supermassive objects lead to thousands of stars forming every year.








Many galaxies blast outward from their centers huge, wide-angled flows of material — pushing to their outer edges enough dust and gas each year to otherwise have formed more than a thousand stars the size of our sun. Astronomers have sought the driving force behind these massive molecular outflows, and now a team led by University of Maryland scientists has found an answer.

a short interesting read 
http://www.umdrightnow.umd.edu/news/supermassive-black-hole-blasts-star-making-gas-galaxy’s-core


----------



## DinaAngel (Mar 28, 2015)

If you want to create a black hole. Then if under 10 trillion Tonnes of mass needs to be squeezed into a 25 mm by 25 mm by 25 mm ball. Also if it's 25 meters ball then u need much more starting mass.
I believe that our sun will be 25 cm ball if it goes to that

It's said that the space time layers are connected like webs, 1 and 2 and -1 and -2 in space time layers usually are black and white holes. Black holes can only suck in negative particles and matter can be made out of both positive and negative particles. So often there's a ring around black holes made out of positive particles.

stable time layers that I know of is 7 8 17 18 32 48 82 87 88 97 98 there's probably millions even between these As something can be stable in the decimals. The tip of the key might not be stable but the rest might

White holes are supposed to suck only positive particles and not negative. Some scientist joked that the white version could be out of morphed suns as they might be stuck instead of dragged in. just because the layer is much more stable time wise. Less glitches.

Generally when energy go to super proposions it starts to glitch and leak energy since it's not perfect and physics starts to be altered. The way with fusion reactors is that they gain more energy than put into it. Due to energy leaks from something close time wise that is glitching allready

My favorite topic is energy in quantum physics.

This is my opinion based of knowledge accumulated over my lifespan


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

_Entangled by gravity and destined to merge_ the candidate black hole duo (called PG 1302-102) in a distant galaxy (located 3.5 billion light-years away) appears to be locked in an intricate dance. The black holes are the tightest orbiting pair detected so far, with a separation not much bigger than the diameter of our solar system. *They are expected to collide and merge in less than a million years, triggering a titanic blast with the power of 100 million supernovae*.

The smaller of the two black holes gives off more light. While the black holes themselves don't emit light, they accumulate and heat up surrounding gas, which then radiates light. The reason the smaller black hole gives off more light is that it is orbiting farther from the center of mass and closer to the surrounding gas disk, allowing it to gather up most of the gas as it orbits. The result is that the more massive central black hole is starved of gas and doesn't glow as brightly.

*The brighter black hole is traveling at nearly 7% the speed of light*. (though it takes the black hole 5 years to orbit its companion). At speeds as high as this, which are known as relativistic, the light becomes boosted and brighter.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 17, 2015)

What gives them the impression two black holes colliding causes an explosion?  You'd think it would be no different than two stars colliding.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

Conservation of energy/momentum


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 17, 2015)

That would assume a direct collision; they're in each other's gravity well, spinning around each other.  I picture it more like two marbles slowly approaching each other until they uneventfully make contact and become indistinguishable--effectively one mass.  If it were head-on collision, it would be very energetic but two massive objects locked in the gravity each other can't have a head-on collision unless it is with a third body moving at high velocity.

FYI, the same thing is predicted to happen with the Milky Way and Amdromedia in 4 billion years (Sol will be dying by then).  It is a "relatively common" event, yet, the skies aren't full with blindingly bright explosions; hence, why I'm a skeptic.  Here's an interesting PDF about it and their respective galactic cores (again, generally uneventful):
http://acme.highpoint.edu/~afuller/PHY-1050/resources/GreatMilkyWayAndromedaCollision.pdf


> Large galaxies also contain supermassive black holes in their centers. During a merger, the two black holes sink to the center of the newly formed elliptical, creating a tight binary that loses orbital energy as the pair gravitationally ﬂings passing stars into higher orbits. When the black holes come within a light-year of each other they are destined to merge through the emission of gravitational waves (August issue, page 16). *Gas dumped onto the new monster black hole can form an accretion disk that shines as an incredibly luminous quasar or a more modest active nucleus (July issue, page 40).* All of these amazing phenomena will occur when the Milky Way and Andromeda merge, and the Sun will have to ride it out.


No "blast."


Also:


> The brighter black hole *is* traveling at nearly 7% the speed of light.


And:


> located 3.5 billion light-years away


"Is?"  It happened 3.5 billion years ago.  Yeah, I'm nitpicking but seriously, that puts things into context.  We're seeing an event that occurred as Sol was forming.  It is *ancient*.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

*le sigh*



> If a binary black hole forms with initial separation that is not too large then they would inspiral due to the emission of gravitational radiation and eventually merge emitting a fantastically large amount of radiation.
> 
> For instance, the radiation emitted during the final second before the two black holes merge could be 5% of the total mass of the system. This makes black hole binaries emit in gravitational waves more energy than a star of comparable mass emits in optical radiation throughout its billions of years of life-time.



The merger will result in a highly deformed single black hole which rids itself of its deformity by emitting gravitational radiation that is characteristic of the mass and spin of the final black hole. This is called the quasi-normal mode or the ring down signal.

If you don't know what ringdown is then read it here


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Sep 17, 2015)

Drone said:


> *le sigh*
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Cardiff University saves the day !!!!!


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 17, 2015)

Drone said:


> *le sigh*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That sounds much more realistic and consistent with other sources.

It was confusing because it compared the gravitational wave blast with that of a supernova and mechanically, they're nothing alike.


----------



## qubit (Sep 17, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> What gives them the impression two black holes colliding causes an explosion?  You'd think it would be no different than two stars colliding.


Gravitational waves when they merge. The orbiting material might well explode however.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 17, 2015)

Doubtful unless it was very, very close to the galactic core.  Imagine getting pinched between two permanent magnets while being on fire...that's about what it is like. XD

Gravitational waves going outward should decrease the likelihood of masses colliding outside of the galactic core.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> I picture it more like two marbles slowly



Slowly? Hmh ... Velocity of one of those black holes in PG 1302-102 is already 7% of the speed of light. When they'll be really close their speeds will be close to the speed of light. Amplitude and frequency will rise like in this graph









> http://acme.highpoint.edu/~afuller/PHY-1050/resources/GreatMilkyWayAndromedaCollision.pdf



I know about Milkomeda. Our own Milky Way most likely "ate" some of its neighbors alive in the past. But everything that is further than 3 million light years is receding from us.




CAPSLOCKSTUCK said:


> Cardiff University saves the day !!!!!



Can't help myself. I really love Manic Street Preachers.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

qubit said:


> Gravitational waves when they merge. The orbiting material might well explode however.


That's right. Gamma ray bursts


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 17, 2015)

Drone said:


> Slowly? Hmh ... Velocity of one of those black holes in PG 1302-102 is already 7% of the speed of light. When they'll be really close their speeds will be close to the speed of light. Amplitude and frequency will rise like in this graph


Oops, yeah.  I was speaking/thinking in relativistic terms.  If you were on one of those black holes, it would appear everything else was in slow motion.



Drone said:


> I know about Milkomeda. Our own Milky Way most likely "ate" some of its neighbors alive in the past. But everything that is further than 3 million light years is receding from us.


It merged with at least three dwarf galaxies relatively recently (or in the process of doing so anyway) but it has never merged with a galaxy of similar or larger size because it is still spiral.  The merger with Andromeda is thought to make an elliptical galaxy.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It merged with at least three dwarf galaxies relatively recently (or in the process of doing so anyway) but it has never merged with a galaxy of similar or larger size because it is still spiral.  The merger with Andromeda is thought to make an elliptical galaxy.




Correct. That process will take "some" time though. No simulations/models can predict/visualize it with 100% accuracy. Andromeda has its own satellite dwarf galaxies and our Milky Way has them too (Magellanic clouds for example). Just imagine how complex all equations would be. It's called *n-body problem* in astronomy.

 It'd be really nice to have some quantum supercomputers to solve these problems.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 17, 2015)

Is it worth solving though?  What is gained by simulating it other than a pretty video? XD


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

Every problem that got to do with dynamical systems is worth solving. To know how Universe works is really important. Just because all those things are far away doesn't mean we should ignore them. You can't just say that knowing dynamics of star clusters, planetary systems or even galaxies is useless.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Sep 17, 2015)

A pair of supermassive black holes circling each other at the centre of a distant galaxy are heading for an enormous collision that will trigger one of the biggest explosions in the universe.

The black holes are orbiting each other in a space not much bigger than our own solar system at nearly seven per cent of the speed of light.

Astronomers studying the pair said they are expected to collide together in less than a million years, triggering a blast 100 million times more powerful than a supernovae.






The binary black holes, known as PG 1302-102, were first spotted in January this year when astronomers noticed an unusual bright spot of UV light coming from the centre of a galaxy.

Scientists have now used ultraviolet light data from Nasa's Galaxy Evolution Explorerer (Galex) and Hubble Space Telescope to track the light patterns over the past 20 years.

GALEX






They found the black holes are giving off a bizarre cyclical light pattern as one of them is absorbing more matter than the other, heating up the surrounding matter to emit energy.

The researchers found that this black hole orbits the other once every five years.

They said they hope that by studying the final moments of these black holes – in galactic time frames – will help them search for gravitational waves.

The two black holes will spin closer and closer to each other in a 'death spiral' like ice skaters, sending out ripples in space and time.

This would help to prove theories about gravity first proposed by Albert Einstein around 100 years ago.

Professor Zoltán Haiman, an astronomer at Columbia University in New York who led the project, said: 'We are strengthening our ideas of what's going on in this system and starting to understand it better.'

The entangled dance of the two black holes is also releasing a strange light signal that appears to brighten every five years.

This is because of the 'blue shifting' effect, in which light is squeezed to shorter wavelengths as it travels toward us in the same way that a police car's siren squeals at higher frequencies as it heads toward you.

Another reason has to do with the enormous speed of the black hole.

The brighter black hole is traveling at nearly seven percent the speed of light – around 47 million miles per hour.

At these speeds, which are known as relativistic, the light becomes boosted and brighter.

Daniel D'Orazio, an astronomer at Columbia University and lead author of the study which appears in the journal Nature, and his colleagues modelled this effect and predicted how it should look in ultraviolet light.

They determined that, if the periodic brightening and dimming previously seen in the visible light is indeed due to the relativistic boosting effect, then the same behaviour should be present in ultraviolet wavelengths, but amplified 2.5 times.

Mr D'Orazio said: 'It's as if a 60-Watt light bulb suddenly appears to be 100 Watts. As the black hole light speeds away from us, it appears as a dimmer 20-Watt bulb.'

It is now hoped the findings will help astronomers understand merging black holes elsewhere in the universe.

in the journal Nature

*BLACK HOLES ARE NOT PRISONS *
The widely-held assumption is that anything sucked into a black hole is gone forever.

But Professor Stephen Hawking has called this assumption into question.

The theoretical physicist claims to have discovered a mechanism 'by which information is returned out of the black hole,' - meaning they may not be as black as first thought.

In fact, his new theory suggests that information lost in black holes could be stored in alternative universes.

Speaking to a group of scientists at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Professor Hawking talked about finding a solution to one of science's most difficult questions - what happens to the information about the physical state of things swallowed up by black holes, and is it retrievable?

The laws of quantum mechanics demand that it should be, but that presents a paradox for our current understanding of black holes, known as the 'information paradox.'

'I propose that the information is stored not in the interior of the black hole as one might expect, but on its boundary - the event horizon,' he said.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 17, 2015)

Drone said:


> Every problem that got to do with dynamical systems is worth solving. To know how Universe works is really important. Just because all those things are far away doesn't mean we should ignore them. You can't just say that knowing dynamics of star clusters, planetary systems or even galaxies is useless.


Those resources would be better spent figuring out FTL travel.  Why?  Because FTL enables you to literally travel through time.  If you can travel 1 light year at a time, you could pick a galaxy and jump towards it--every jump is a frame.  You could observe how it happened, nevermind simulating it.  Making models that accurately account for how an event happened are far more valuable than designing computer models that theorize what could happen.


----------



## Drone (Sep 17, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Those resources would be better spent figuring out FTL travel.  Why?  Because FTL enables you to literally travel through time.  If you can travel 1 light year at a time, you could literally pick a galaxy and jump towards it--every jump is a frame.  You could literally observe how it happened, nevermind simulating it.  Making models that accurately account for how an event happened are far more valuable than designing computer models that theorize what could happen.


FTL is physically impossible or you mean shortcuts/wormholes? Einstein and de Sitter whole their lives tried to figure out how it works. No luck.
No amount of resources will help mankind unless another brilliant genius appears and changes the world.

At the moment building quantum computers seems much "easier" than unifying quantum theory and general relativity.


----------



## Drone (Sep 23, 2015)

Milky Way's Black Hole Shows Signs of Increased Chatter​


> The new study reveals that Sgr A* has been producing one bright X-ray flare about every ten days. However, within the past year, there has been a ten-fold increase in the rate of bright flares from Sgr A*, at about one every day. This increase happened soon after the close approach to Sgr A* by a mysterious object called G2.



Hmmmm the bubble of my interest is growing. Have to wait and see if it's really G2's fault lol. Interesting news nonetheless. Is G2 a real binary star or just a gas cloud. So many questions .... no answers.
​


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 24, 2015)

Why do they still illustrate Sgr A* as a giant black hole?  1) it is tiny and 2) it is surrounded by very bright, very hot gases making it doubtful it is even possible to see the "blackness" of the "black hole."



> This increase happened soon after the close approach to Sgr A* by a mysterious object called G2.


Have they considered the possibility that G2 is a dwarf galaxy?


----------



## Drone (Sep 24, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> Why do they still illustrate Sgr A* as a giant black hole?  1) it is tiny and 2) it is surrounded by very bright, very hot gases making it doubtful it is even possible to see the "blackness" of the "black hole." Have they considered the possibility that G2 is a dwarf galaxy?




1) They didn't say it's giant, they said it's *supermassive *(its exact mass and size are unknown). It's not tiny, it's radius *xx* million km.
All sources have different numbers

http://starburstfound.org/sqkblog/?p=115
http://www.constellation-guide.com/sagittarius-a/
https://www.e-education.psu.edu/astro801/content/l8_p7.html

That's right, the core of the Milky Way is bright. To deduce mass and size with current equipment is not possible.


G2 can't be dwarf galaxy, it's too small. If it was dwarf galaxy it'd mess with stars in the vicinity of Sgr A*, which is not the case.


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 24, 2015)

Drone said:


> 1) They didn't say it's giant, they said it's *supermassive *(its exact mass and size are unknown). It's not tiny, it's radius *xx* million km.


It's bigger than the sun? 



Drone said:


> G2 can't be dwarf galaxy, it's too small. If it was dwarf galaxy it'd mess with stars in the vicinity of Sgr A*, which is not the case.


I guess it could be a really big star that's moving way too fast (has no satellites).

I'm really missing scale here.  How big is G2 compared to Sgr A*?


----------



## Drone (Sep 24, 2015)

FordGT90Concept said:


> It's bigger than the sun?
> 
> 
> I guess it could be a really big star that's moving way too fast (has no satellites).
> ...



Yes (around the distance between Sun and Mercury).

Actual scale of G2 is unknown, it got stretched after encounter but it survived. Some astronomers think it might be a *double star* so you can go from there. Here's the picture (lol from that we can't really tell, better radio telescopes are required).





Btw thanks for interesting questions.



Some more news, now from the other galaxy spiral galaxy located approximately 13.5 million light-years away in the direction of the constellation Reticulum:

A team of astronomers has found evidence for an intermediate-mass black hole (5000 Times Mass of Sun) in the spiral galaxy NGC 1313 (also known as the Topsy Turvy Galaxy).

Astronomers identified two repeating flares, each flashing at an unusually steady frequency. One flashed about 27.6 times per minute and the other about 17.4 times per minute. Comparing these two rates yields a nearly perfect 3:2 ratio.

The 3:2 ratios can also provide an accurate measure of a black hole’s mass. Smaller black holes will flash at a higher frequency, while larger black holes will flash less often


----------



## FordGT90Concept (Sep 24, 2015)

What about the power?  Inverse relationship?  The bigger the black hole, the less frequent the flares but the more powerful it is?


----------



## Drone (Sep 24, 2015)

I couldn't find any info on that. Black hole business is getting even weirder. Usually astronomers are concerned about mass and spin (just like in particle physics).

I know that Schwarzschild radius is proportional to the mass of the black hole. It can be 5 km for stellar mass black hole or the radius of a solar system for SMBH.

And other correlation is: the more massive the black hole, the broader the emission line.


----------



## Drone (Sep 29, 2015)

This is what the merger of two black holes would look like.


Gravitational radiation is incredibly difficult to measure. The ripples cause atoms to ‘bob’ about to just 1 part in 10^21. Building a detector to notice this is like measuring the distance from Earth to the Sun to the accuracy of the size of a hydrogen atom.

The merger of small black holes, each about a few times the mass of the Sun, will create high-frequency gravitational waves that could be seen from the ground. But the giant black holes that sit at the heart of galaxies with masses of a million times that of the Sun will generate gravitational waves of much lower frequency. These cannot be detected with ground-based systems because seismic interference and other noise will overwhelm the signals. Hence, spaceborne observatories are needed.


----------



## Drone (Oct 1, 2015)

Astronomers "Weigh" a Galaxy's Black Hole by Studying the Einstein Ring Phenomenon








In this Einstein Ring system, there are in fact, two galaxies: the foreground galaxy, which is 4 billion light years away, and the background galaxy, whose light has taken 12 billion years to reach us. The gravity of the massive foreground galaxy deflects the light from the background galaxy and creates the ring structure.

By analyzing the high-resolution data and modeling the gravitational lensing effect, astronomers determined that the massive lensing galaxy contains over 350 billion times the mass of the sun within the ring. Lensing theory predicts that the central image of a lensing system is very sensitive to the mass of a supermassive black hole in the lens galaxy: the more massive the black hole, the fainter the central image. From this, they calculated that the supermassive black hole, located very close to the center of the SDP.81, may contain over *300 million times the mass of the Sun*.


----------



## Drone (Oct 15, 2015)

Interesting graph and article


----------



## Drone (Oct 21, 2015)

Exciting news:










Binary VFTS 352 whose two huge, hot surfaces are touching as they dance rapidly around. Whether as a gamma ray mega-burst or twin supernovae leaving binary black holes disrupting space-time, there's no way this ends well.










The event occurred near a supermassive black hole estimated to weigh a few million times the mass of the sun in the center of PGC 043234, a galaxy that lies ~ 290 million ly away. During the tidal disruption event, filaments containing much of the star's mass fall toward the black hole. Eventually these gaseous filaments merge into a smooth, hot disk glowing brightly in X-rays. As the disk forms, its central region heats up tremendously, which drives a flow of material, called a wind, away from the disk.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 23, 2015)

Astronomers have spotted a black hole in the process of pulverising a star 290 million light years away. 

The phenomenon occurs when a star comes too close to a black hole, and the intense gravity of the black hole causes tidal forces that can rip the star apart.

In these events, called tidal disruptions, some of the stellar debris is flung outward at high speeds, while the rest falls toward the black hole. This causes a distinct X-ray flare that can last for years.

Scientists say that the event is the closest tidal disruption discovered in about a decade. 





Pictured is an artist's impression on Nasa's new findings about how a star would be ripped apart if it came too close to a black hole.  In these events, called tidal disruptions, some of the stellar debris is flung outward at high speeds, while the rest falls toward the black hole

'These results support some of our newest ideas for the structure and evolution of tidal disruption events,' said study co-author Coleman Miller, professor of astronomy at University of Maryland and director of the Joint Space-Science Institute. 

'In the future, tidal disruptions can provide us with laboratories to study the effects of extreme gravity.'

The optical light All-Sky Automated Survey for Supernovae (ASAS-SN) originally discovered the tidal disruption, known as ASASSN-14li, in November 2014. 

The event occurred near a supermassive black hole at the centre of the galaxy PGC 043234. 

Further study using Nasa's Chandra X-ray Observatory,




http://chandra.si.edu/photo/2015/tidal/

Nasa's Swift Gamma-ray Burst Explorer




http://swift.gsfc.nasa.gov/

 and the European Space Agency's XMM-Newton satellite




http://sci.esa.int/xmm-newton/

 provided a clearer picture by analysing the tidal disruption's X-ray emissions.

'We have seen evidence for a handful of tidal disruptions over the years and have developed a lot of ideas of what goes on,' said Professor Jon Miller,from the University of Michigan.

'This one is the best chance we have had so far to really understand what happens when a black hole shreds a star.'





This illustration of a recently observed tidal disruption shows a disk of stellar debris around the black hole at the upper left. A long tail of stellar debris extends to the right, far from the black hole

After a star is destroyed by a tidal disruption, the black hole's strong gravitational forces draw in most of the star's remains. 

Friction then heats this debris, generating huge amounts of X-ray radiation.

Following this surge of X-rays, the amount of light decreases as the stellar material falls beyond the black hole's event horizon - the point beyond which no light or other information can escape.

Gas often falls toward a black hole by spiraling inward and forming a disk. 
But the process that creates these disk structures, known as 'accretion disks', has remained a mystery. 

By observing ASASSN-14li, the team of astronomers was able to witness the formation of an accretion disk as it happened, by looking at the X-ray light at different wavelengths and tracking how those emissions changed over time.

The researchers discovered that most of the X-rays are produced by material that is extremely close to the black hole. 

In fact, the brightest material might actually occupy the smallest possible stable orbit.

*WHAT IS A TIDAL DISRUPTION? *
When a star comes too close to a black hole, the intense gravity of the black hole results in tidal forces that can rip the star apart. In these events, called tidal disruptions, some of the stellar debris is flung outward at high speeds, while the rest falls toward the black hole. This causes a distinct X-ray flare that can last for years.After a star is destroyed by a tidal disruption, the black hole's strong gravitational forces draw in most of the star's remains. Friction heats this debris, generating huge amounts of X-ray radiation.

Following this surge of X-rays, the amount of light decreases as the stellar material falls beyond the black hole's event horizon - the point beyond which no light or other information can escape. Gas often falls toward a black hole by spiraling inward and forming a disk. 

But the process that creates these disk structures, known as 'accretion disks', has remained a mystery. Researchers have determined that most of the X-rays are produced by material that is extremely close to the black hole. In fact, the brightest material might actually occupy the smallest possible stable orbit.

But astronomers are equally interested to learn what happens to the gas that doesn't get drawn past the event horizon, but instead is ejected away from the black hole.

'The black hole tears the star apart and starts swallowing material really quickly, but that's not the end of the story,' said study co-author Jelle Kaastra, an astronomer at the Institute for Space Research in the Netherlands. 'The black hole can't keep up that pace so it expels some of the material outwards.'

The X-ray data also suggest the presence of a wind moving away from the black hole, carrying stellar gas outward. However, this wind does not quite move fast enough to escape the black hole's gravitational grasp. A possible explanation for the low speed of this wind is that gas from the disrupted star follows an elliptical orbit around the black hole, and travels slowest when it reaches the greatest distance from the black hole at the far ends of this elliptical orbit.

'This result highlights the importance of multi-wavelength observations,' explained study co-author Assistant Professor Suvi Gezari. 

'Even though the event was discovered with an optical survey telescope, prompt X-ray observations were key in determining the characteristic temperature and radius of the emission and catching the signatures of an outflow.'

Astronomers are hoping to find and study more events like ASASSN-14li so they can continue to test theoretical models about how black holes affect their nearby environments, while learning more about what black holes do to any stars or other bodies that wander too close.

The findings were published in the journal Nature.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Oct 23, 2015)

LOL, @CAPSLOCKSTUCK  Did you make that first picture up?  Look at 3 and 4 in the 1 thru 6 image!  No way NASA distributed that with a straight face.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Oct 23, 2015)

@rtwjunkie
an artists impression.................. perhaps a "piss artists" impression ?

Maybe we are viewing a potential birth rather than a death, especially when you consider what it is aiming for in picture 5 and the outcome in picture 6 looks positively cosmosgasmic


----------



## Drone (Nov 6, 2015)

Interesting lecture


----------



## R-T-B (Nov 6, 2015)

rtwjunkie said:


> LOL, @CAPSLOCKSTUCK  Did you make that first picture up?  Look at 3 and 4 in the 1 thru 6 image!  No way NASA distributed that with a straight face.



Get your mind outta the gutter boy.


----------



## Drone (Nov 17, 2015)

The yellow-hued object at the center of the frame is an elliptical galaxy *Hercules A* (aka *3C 348*). It lies ~ 2 billion ly away. It is one of the brightest sources of radio emission outside our Galaxy. Red-pink jets of material (*high-energy plasma*) can be seen billowing outwards from the galaxy.







Hercules A's black hole (*2.5 billion times the mass of the Sun*) heats material and accelerates it to nearly the speed of light. These highly focused jets lose energy as they travel, eventually slowing down and spreading out to form the *cloud-like lobes* seen here.

The multiple bright *rings and knots* seen within these lobes suggest that the black hole has sent out numerous successive bursts of material over the course of its history. The jets stretch for ~ 1.5 million ly ~15 times the size of the Milky Way.


----------



## Drone (Feb 3, 2016)

Galaxy Pictor A, located ~ 500 million ly from us, contains a supermassive black hole at its center. A huge amount of gravitational energy is released as material swirls towards the event horizon. This energy produces an enormous jet of particles traveling at nearly the speed of light into intergalactic space.






The jet [to the right] in Pictor A is the one that is closest to us. It displays continuous X-ray emission over a distance of 300000 ly. By comparison, the entire Milky Way is ~ 100000 ly in diameter. Because of its relative proximity and Chandra's ability to make detailed X-ray images, scientists can look at detailed features in the jet and test ideas of how the X-ray emission is produced.

In addition to the prominent jet seen pointing to the right in the image, researchers report evidence for another jet pointing in the opposite direction, known as a "counterjet". While tentative evidence for this counterjet had been previously reported, these new Chandra data confirm its existence. The relative faintness of the counterjet compared to the jet is likely due to the motion of the counterjet away from the line of sight to the Earth.

The detailed properties of the jet and counterjet observed with Chandra show that their X-ray emission likely comes from electrons spiraling around magnetic field lines, a process called *synchrotron emission*. In this case, the electrons must be continuously re-accelerated as they move out along the jet. How this occurs is not well understood.

The researchers ruled out a different mechanism for producing the jet's X-ray emission. In that scenario, electrons flying away from the black hole in the jet at near the speed of light move through the sea of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR) left over from the hot early phase of the Universe after the Big Bang. When a fast-moving electron collides with one of these CMB photons, it can boost the photon's energy up into the X-ray band.

The X-ray brightness of the jet depends on the power in the beam of electrons and the intensity of the background radiation. The relative brightness of the X-rays coming from the jet and counterjet in Pictor A do not match what is expected in this process involving the CMB, and effectively eliminate it as the source of the X-ray production in the jet.


----------



## qubit (Feb 3, 2016)

@Drone A 300K ly yet? Frigging _Mindblowing!_


----------



## Drone (Feb 3, 2016)

qubit said:


> @Drone A 300K ly yet? Frigging _Mindblowing!_


It's really hard to imagine but in 2007 scientists found even longer one

Intergalactic particle beam stretching for more than a million light years (1.5 million ly to be exact)

And here it is:






That's a big ass particle accelerator Universe threw at us, I don't know but I guess they can be even longer than that.


----------



## Drone (Feb 17, 2016)

No way this thread is on the page 2. Discoveries won't let it happen! Yeah yeah, new black hole!







A jet from a very distant black hole, called B3 0727+409, has been found using the Chandra X-ray Observatory. The light from this jet was emitted just 2.7 billion light years after the Big Bang when the Universe was only 1/5 its current age. *The length of the jet is at least 300 000 ly*.

As the electrons in the jet fly from the black hole at close to the speed of light, they move through the sea of CMBR and collide with microwave photons. This boosts the energy of the photons up into the X-ray band to be detected by Chandra. If this is the case, it implies that the electrons in the B3 0727+409 jet must keep moving at nearly the speed of light for hundreds of thousands of light years.


----------



## Drone (Feb 18, 2016)

An illustrated version of Prof Stephen Hawking's second BBC Radio 4 Reith lecture (February 2016), Black holes ain't as black as they are painted.

Video is here

Edit: oopsie daisy and part 1 is here


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Feb 19, 2016)

Scientists believe these mysterious rings could exist in a universe with five or more dimensions.
Now, a new study of five-dimensional black holes has provided an insight into how these objects could evolve with gravity so intense the laws of physics break down.











The research claims that, should this type of black hole form, it would lead to the appearance of something known as a 'naked singularity' - and could ultimately break Einstein's theory of relativity.
Stephen Hawking once said that 'nature abhors a naked singularity', because it would throw out everything we think we know about the universe.
No one has ever found evidence of a naked singularity, but the latest research suggests that they could exist.
The researchers, from the University of Cambridge and Queen Mary University of London, have simulated a black hole shaped like a very thin ring using computer models.
The ring gives rise to a series of 'bulges' connected by strings that become thinner over time.
These strings eventually become so thin that they pinch off into a series of miniature black holes, similar to how a thin stream of water from a tap breaks up into droplets.
Ring-shaped black holes were 'discovered' by theoretical physicists in 2002, but this is the first time that their dynamics have been successfully simulated using supercomputers.
This would cause the equations behind general relativity to break down.


----------



## Drone (Feb 26, 2016)

Astronomers have accurately detected a structure in the innermost region of the accretion disk of the lensed quasar *Q 2237+0305* through gravitational microlensing at a distance of > 5 billion ly from us.

A quasar emits its energy due to a disk of hot matter orbiting around a *supermassive black hole* at high speed, and whose *mass is the equivalent to a billion stars*. Said disk's size is comparable to that of our Solar System.

In particular, the researchers have managed to measure the inner edge of the accretion disk orbiting around the quasar Q2237+0305 (aka "Einstein Cross") through the study of the _changes in the brightness of four different images of said quasar_.


----------



## Drone (Feb 29, 2016)

An unprecedented image of the *jet emanating from the supermassive black hole at the center of M87*.


----------



## Drone (Mar 2, 2016)

Magnificent lecture by Prof. Kip Thorne.

(starts around 6 mins)

Warped side of the Universe, Colliding Black Holes, Gravitational Waves, Naked Singularities, Wormholes ....

Absolutely brilliant


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2016)

A black hole called *V404 Cygni* _emitted dazzling _*red flashes*_ lasting just fractions of a second_, as it blasted out material that it could not swallow.






The inset shows one still image of a red flash observed from the black hole V404 Cygni located 7800 ly from Earth. The flashes are incredibly short and last < 1 sec, with some of them being even faster than 1/40th of a second. *The flashes are equivalent to a luminosity of ~ 1000 times the Sun's power*. The background image shows a region of the sky in the Cygnus constellation, with the Cygnus Loop supernova remnant on the bottom left.

Rutherford Fellow in the University of Southampton's Astronomy Group, comments: “*The very high speed tells us that the region where this red light is being emitted must be very compact. Piecing together clues about the colour, speed, and the power of these flashes, we conclude that this light is being emitted from the base of the black hole jet. The origin of these jets is still unknown, although strong magnetic fields are suspected to play a role.*

*"Furthermore, these red flashes were found to be strongest at the peak of the black hole's feeding frenzy. We speculate that when the black hole was being rapidly force-fed by its companion orbiting star, it reacted violently by spewing out some of the material as a fast-moving jet. The duration of these flashing episodes could be related to the switching on and off of the jet, seen for the first time in detail*."


----------



## Drone (Mar 17, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Mar 19, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Apr 7, 2016)

*Supermassive Black Hole Weighing 17 Billion Suns Discovered In Unlikely Place*


Fuck this shit 


Read and/or watch

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2016/12/full/


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 7, 2016)

So.... how many Suns have they weighed again? 
I take it they approximate the size of the black hole as they can't actually see them, then assume density, and calculate weight, so basically they are guessing.


----------



## CAPSLOCKSTUCK (Apr 7, 2016)




----------



## Caring1 (Apr 7, 2016)

One of the things that intrigues me is how they spin, what causes the rotational forces, do they all spin the same direction and what happens in a binary situation where two black holes come in close proximity, do the rotational forces cancel each other out?


----------



## Drone (Apr 7, 2016)

Gravitational forces (warped space-time) / conservation of momentum make all astronomical bodies rotate on their axis. For example Pluto and Charon:









When it's a tight binary black hole system black holes will merge because they lose gravitational energy. When they're extremely close their event horizons' surface will change from sphere to lobe. Black holes like all stars possess magnetic fields and that fact plays its role too:


----------



## Drone (Apr 14, 2016)

*Weighing a supermassive black hole* by CAASTRO

Galaxies have a supermassive black hole at their heart. In some galaxies that black hole is actively consuming nearby gas. In such Active Galactic Nuclei the gas heats up enormously as it's accelerated in, and the light it emits ionizes the surrounding region. The bigger the black hole the hotter the gas, and the larger the ionized bubble. So if we can measure the size of the bubble (by measuring how long it takes for light to traverse it before reflecting of the surrounding gas and dust clouds) we can measure the mass of the black hole!










*Astronomers Perplexed By Rare Alignment Of Supermassive Black Holes* by RAS


----------



## Drone (Apr 20, 2016)

This visualization shows gravitational waves emitted by two black holes of nearly equal mass as they spiral together and merge. Orange ripples represent distortions of space-time caused by the rapidly orbiting masses. These distortions spread out and weaken, ultimately becoming gravitational waves (purple).

Hawking @ Harvard
At packed Sanders Theatre, theoretical physicist and cosmologist tackles the contradictory qualities of black holes










It's said that fact is sometimes stranger than fiction, and nowhere is that more true than in the case of black holes. Black holes are stranger than anything dreamed up by science fiction writers, but they are clearly matters of science fact.

Apart from mass, angular momentum, and electrical charge the black hole preserves no other details of the object that collapsed. For example, the final black hole state is independent of whether the body that collapsed was composed of matter or antimatter, or whether it was spherical or highly irregular.

This created a paradox about the nature of black holes. One theory suggested that black holes with identical qualities could be formed from an infinite number of different types of stars; another suggested that the number could be finite. This is a problem of information.

If the information about the bodies that form black holes is not lost, then black holes contain a lot of information that is hidden from the outside world. If the amount of hidden information inside a black hole depends on the size of the hole, one would expect, on general principles, that a black hole would have a temperature and would glow like a piece of hot metal. But that was impossible because, as everyone knew, nothing could get out of a black hole - or so it was thought.

In early 1974, Hawking began to challenge that axiom when he discovered particles emitting from a black hole at a steady rate.

That outflow, later dubbed Hawking radiation, was among the key ideas that revolutionized science's understanding of black holes by suggesting that at least some energy could be emitted by the mysterious phenomena.

What happens to all the particles that fell into the black hole? They can't just emerge when the black hole disappears. The particles that come out of a black hole seem to be completely random and bear no relation to what fell in. It appears that the information about what fell in is lost, apart from the total amount of mass and the amount of rotation.

If that information is truly lost, Hawking said, that strikes at the heart of our understanding of science.

For more than 200 years, we have believed in the science of determinism. If information were lost in black holes, we wouldn't be able to predict the future because the black hole could emit any collection of particles.

It might seem that it wouldn't matter very much if we couldn't predict what comes out of black holes — there aren't any black holes near us. But it's a matter of principle. If determinism — the predictability of the universe — breaks down in black holes, it could break down in other situations. Even worse, if determinism breaks down, we can't be sure of our past history either. The history books and our memories could just be illusions. It is the past that tells us who we are. Without it, we lose our identity.

To understand whether that information is in fact lost, or whether it can be recovered, Hawking and colleagues are currently working to understand “supertranslations” to explain the mechanism by which information is returned from a black hole and encoded on the 'event horizon'.

Following the lecture, Hawking answered three questions from audience members, including one about his recently announced Breakthrough Starshot project, which aims to send probes to the nearest star system, Alpha Centauri.










“The Solar System contains nowhere that is as favorable to human life as the Earth,” Hawking said. “The moon is small and has no atmosphere. Mars is also smaller than the Earth. It has a thin atmosphere, but it is not enough to breathe or protect us from cosmic radiation, so astronauts will have to live underground. To find somewhere like the Earth, we have to boldly go to the stars.”


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 21, 2016)

I'm not sure how flying a kite in space is going to help get there.


----------



## Drone (May 1, 2016)

Nothing really new but not too bad either











The Information Paradox: Do Black Holes "Bleach" Cosmic History?

Pretty informative video with Christophe Galfard










Extremely interesting and breathtaking brand new video about quasars and accretion disks by *American Museum of Natural History*


----------



## Drone (May 4, 2016)

*Three merging galaxies 1.8 billion ly away form a black hole 3 billion times the mass of the Sun*

*Monster black hole is 750 times bigger than the black hole at the center of the Milky Way*

*Cosmic gas in merging galaxy is moving at ~ 600 km/s [~500 times the speed of a rifle cartridge]*

Black holes grow by drawing in material including other black holes that venture too close, and in this case the black holes from the three galaxies have merged.

Dr Lisa Harvey-Smith from CSIRO Astronomy and Space Science and her team knew of a strong source of radiowaves, known as an astrophysical maser, in the group and pointed the array of antennas toward it. Knowing the speed of the gas they were able to directly measure the mass of the black hole that was causing the gas to swirl.

Source


----------



## Drone (May 5, 2016)

ALMA Measures Mass of Black Hole with Extreme Precision​

A black hole can form after matter, often from an exploding star, condenses via gravity. Stars can come close to a black hole, but as long as they're in stable orbits and moving fast enough, they won't enter the black hole. Scientists think every massive galaxy, like the Milky Way, has a massive black hole at its center. The ubiquity of black holes is one indicator of the profound influence that they have on the formation of the galaxies in which they live.







Combined image of NGC 1332 (73 million ly from Earth) shows the central disk of gas surrounding the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy. New ALMA observations traced the motion of the disk, providing remarkably precise measurements of the *black hole's mass: 660 million times the mass of our Sun *[This is ~ 150 times the mass of the black hole at the center of the Milky Way]. The box in the upper left is from the Hubble Space Telescope and shows the galaxy's central region in infrared light and the _dusty disk appears as a dark silhouette_. The ALMA image, upper right box, shows the rotation of the disk. The red/blue region in the ALMA image represents emission that has been red/blue -shifted by gas rotating away from/toward us.

To measure NGC 1332's central black hole, scientists tapped ALMA's high-resolution observations of carbon monoxide emissions from a giant disc of cold gas orbiting the hole. They also measured the *speed of the gas (> 500 km/s)*.


----------



## Drone (Jun 7, 2016)

How does a black hole form? 

A Moment of Science with Brian Greene












An interesting idea by Stephen Hawking:

An article for the American Physical Society explains that *soft hairs on the black hole's horizon are composed of photons which get excited when a charged particle falls into the black hole. As such, these outer extensions would keep the equivalent of a virtual log of the objects that have fallen in.
*


----------



## jaggerwild (Jun 7, 2016)

I can go to the corner of my street ask one of them how they became a black hole?  OH SPACE!


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jun 7, 2016)

So my question will be at tha end part of this post but kind of related to the subject of thread. Drunk as I was I asked my cat what are its chances of beeing struck or passed trough by a high energy parcticle originated by a Novae causing a cancerous development in sayd cat, of course the cat did not reply. So of all the proxy stars any candidate for a Nova?
not sure how to phrase it but it had a component wich was a saying in popular folklcure I think that sounded like "starlight giving cancer"

I would think of it as no such survey made on all star data collected compiled etc has been made, if made results were about threat irelevant because unlikely?
edit before post I see two question marks, I should theres not egnouh R-OH, Good night.


----------



## Drone (Jun 7, 2016)

I'm not sure what you're all talking about but if you're asking what is the near-Earth potential supernova the answer is IK Pegasi aka HR 8210.
Here's the reaaaaaaaaaaaaly old article (2002).

Since then internet was full of speculation about that star. Lots of speculations, theories and good old bullshit


----------



## dorsetknob (Jun 7, 2016)

Nothing to worry about and if there was nothing we can do apart from kissing our Ass's

people Can speculate all they want but seeing as that's all it will be

Nearest Star ( after our own Sun ) is *Proxima Centauri* ( just over 4 light years away )
so if by chance it went bang ToDay ( nova/Supernova ) we wont know for 4 years ( nova and super nova are detected by light burst ).

Some people have Speculated that Betelgeuse A Red Giant may already have collapsed and gone Nova,
well find out in about 400 to 500 years if that has happened
http://earthsky.org/brightest-stars/betelgeuse-will-explode-someday


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jun 16, 2016)

Not that I was worried,nor am I, just that I was wandering if all sort of data has been studied , computed, compiled, what have you...., also you'z 'guys" didnt catch the catch diference between nova-supernova-hypernova if such diferences exist, sure they do but if theyr within 10%of eachother I got confused by them, therefore snap the trap did as I fell into.
I was wandering if there was such candidate was, (hypernovae at about 1Bly away coldnt care, supernovae at 10Mly couldnt care, novae 1000ly away ?and drifting and drifting, but not like thiss noob, cant find picture but there was an bmw e30 with the front wheels way outside the car like 1/2 foot past fenders, it was so ridiculous one could speel anything with room to spare. for example Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewb!
Sorry I cant contribute to thread with this post.
edit:misplaced "w" in newb; lack of dot at end of sentence.


----------



## Drone (Jul 4, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Jul 8, 2016)

This artist's impression shows the orbits of stars around supermassive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way. In 2018 one of these stars, S2, will pass very close to the black hole and present the best opportunity to study the effects of very strong gravity and test the predictions of Einstein's general relativity in the near future.

The GRAVITY instrument on the ESO Very Large Telescope Interferometer is the most powerful tool for measuring the positions of the S2 star in existence and it was successfully tested on the S2 star in summer 2016. The orbit of S2 is highlighted in red and the position of the central black hole is marked with a red cross.


----------



## Drone (Aug 1, 2016)

A 30-year-old mystery about black holes has just been solved! 

Black Holes Twist Space-Time Like Taffy


----------



## Drone (Aug 8, 2016)

Nice top10 video


----------



## Drone (Aug 8, 2016)

New interesting theory by researchers at the Institute of Corpuscular Physics in Valencia:


One of the biggest problems when studying black holes is that the laws of physics as we know them cease to apply in their deepest regions. Large quantities of matter and energy concentrate in an infinitely small space, the *gravitational singularity*, where space-time curves towards infinity and all matter is destroyed.

Valencian physicists treat singularity as an *imperfection in the geometric structure of space-time*.

This study is based on one of the simplest known types of black hole, *rotationless and electrically-charged*.


“We resolve the problem of the singularity, since *there is a door at the center of the black hole, the wormhole, through which space and time can continue*”, says Gonzalo Olmo.

*The wormhole predicted by the equations is smaller than an atomic nucleus, but gets bigger the bigger the charge stored in the black hole. So, a hypothetical traveler entering a black hole of this kind would be stretched to the extreme, or “spaghettified“, and would be able to enter the wormhole. Upon exiting they would be compacted back to their normal size.
*
Matter wouldn't be lost inside the singularity, but rather would be expelled out the other side through the wormhole at its center to another region of the Universe.

Another problem that this interpretation resolves is the need to use _exotic_ energy sources to generate wormholes. In Einstein's theory of gravity, these “doors” only appear in the presence of matter with unusual properties (a negative energy pressure or density), something which has never been observed. “In our theory, the wormhole appears out of ordinary matter and energy, such as an electric field” (Olmo).

**********

A bunch of nice videos you might like: (gravitational waves, black holes, wormholes)

Top 5 and explanations:


----------



## Drone (Aug 11, 2016)

BBC News and The Guardian made short compilations of Stephen Hawking's theory


----------



## Drone (Aug 23, 2016)

I can watch this forever  Literally


----------



## Drone (Aug 30, 2016)

Latest findings:


----------



## Drone (Sep 2, 2016)

*Black Hole breakthrough found on Earth*


----------



## Drone (Sep 4, 2016)

New research reveals hundreds of black holes hiding in NGC 6101​

Computer simulations of a spherical collection of stars known as NGC 6101 reveal that it contains hundreds of black holes, until now thought impossible

Recent observations already found black hole candidates in similar systems, with this research enabling astrophysicists to map black holes in other clusters

These systems could be the cradle of gravitational wave emission, 'ripples' in the fabric of spacetime


----------



## Drone (Sep 14, 2016)

First glimpse of a black hole being born from a star's remains​When massive stars run out of fuel, they die in a huge explosion, shooting out high-speed jets of matter and radiation. What's left behind collapses into a black hole.

The red supergiant star *N6946-BH1*, which is ~ 20 million ly from Earth, was once ~ 25 times the mass of our Sun. Scientists found that for some months in 2009, the star briefly flared _a million times brighter than our Sun_, then steadily faded away. _It has disappeared in visible wavelengths_, but a fainter source in the same spot is detectable in the IR, as a warm afterglow.

This should happen when a star that size crumples into a black hole. First, the star spews out so many neutrinos that it loses mass. With less mass, the star lacks enough gravity to hold on to a cloud of hydrogen ions loosely bound around it. As this cloud of ions floats away, it cools off, allowing the detached electrons to reattach to the hydrogen. This causes _a year-long bright flare – when it fades, only the *black hole* remains_.

There are two other potential explanations for the star's disappearing act: it could have merged with another star, or be hidden by dust. But they don't fit the data: a merger would shine more brightly than the original star for much longer than a few months, and dust wouldn't hide it for so long.

"It's an exciting result and long anticipated", says Stan Woosley at Lick Observatory in California.

"*This may be the first direct clue to how the collapse of a star can lead to the formation of a black hole*", says Avi Loeb at Harvard University.


----------



## Drone (Oct 5, 2016)

What Happens When Black Holes Collide?


----------



## Drone (Oct 9, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Oct 28, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Nov 4, 2016)

*Astronomers using the super-sharp radio vision of the National Science Foundation's Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) have found the shredded remains of a galaxy that passed through a larger galaxy, leaving only the smaller galaxy's nearly-naked supermassive black hole to emerge and speed away at > 2000 km/s.*


----------



## Drone (Nov 9, 2016)

Kip Thorne

Wormholes explained in under 3 minutes


----------



## Drone (Nov 17, 2016)

A lecture about Black Holes with professor Joseph Silk @ Gresham College

Transcript and 1080p video can be downloaded here


----------



## Drone (Nov 26, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Nov 28, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Dec 1, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Dec 6, 2016)




----------



## Drone (Dec 9, 2016)

Event horizon, singularity, Penrose diagram, light cones and more in this new video:


----------



## Drone (Jan 3, 2017)

*When Black Holes Collide*

a new video by American Museum of Natural History


----------



## Drone (Jan 5, 2017)




----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jan 5, 2017)

Thanks!
I also bounced to another video from the first one you ppsted 
https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PL...fM-&params=OAFIAVgN&v=7KDB96goRsY&mode=NORMAL

Sure I took it with two entangled pinches of salt or otherwise,yet it makes sence in a bunch of wierd ways ,philosophicly speaking.


----------



## Drone (Jan 15, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Jan 15, 2017)

Latest news:

New Research Offers Alternative For How Super-Massive Black Holes Are Formed










The Experimental Side of Gravity










How to See Black Holes


----------



## Drone (Jan 20, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Jan 26, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Feb 3, 2017)

Latest videos and news:




















*Our Supermassive Black Hole Could Be 'Supercharging' Stars' Magnetism*


----------



## Drone (Feb 6, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Feb 11, 2017)

Kip Thorne: Long Haul, Towering Discovery


----------



## Drone (Feb 16, 2017)

LIGO Detection full movie


----------



## Drone (Mar 6, 2017)

Latest news:




























*A new study suggests that the gravitational waves detected by the LIGO experiment must have come from black holes generated during the collapse of stars, and not in the earliest phases of the Universe.

This study implies that it's not at all probable that black holes with masses between 10 and 100 times the mass of the Sun make up a significant fraction of the dark matter.*


----------



## Drone (Mar 13, 2017)

Latest discoveries:

Radiation from Nearby Galaxies Helped Fuel First Monster Black Holes

X9 in 47 Tucanae: White Dwarf Discovered in Closest Known Orbit Around A Black Hole


----------



## Drone (Mar 21, 2017)

More discoveries:


----------



## Drone (Mar 24, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Mar 27, 2017)

Janna Levin rocks


----------



## twilyth (Mar 30, 2017)

Black hole kicked out of galaxy by gravity waves.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/supermassive-black-hole-gets-kicked-galactic-curb



> “This is a very nice candidate for a recoiling supermassive black hole,” says Francesca Civano of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass. Recoiling black holes are created when two monster black holes from different galaxies merge, says Civano, who was not involved in the new study. If the black holes have different masses and rotate at different rates, the collision can generate gravitational waves more strongly in one direction, booting the newly merged black hole the other way.
> 
> A radiation-gushing supermassive black hole called quasar 3C 186 and its host galaxy, about 8 billion light-years from Earth in the constellation Lynx, tipped off Chiaberge and colleagues to the recoiling black hole. The team noticed that the quasar wasn’t at the center of the galaxy, where it typically should be. “We knew this was clearly weird. It was clearly different than all of the other quasars and galaxies we were seeing,” Chiaberge says.


----------



## Drone (Mar 30, 2017)

twilyth said:


> Black hole kicked out of galaxy by gravity waves.



NASA's video is in post 295


----------



## twilyth (Mar 30, 2017)

Thanks but I don't watch videos if I can avoid it.  It's faster and easier to read something.


----------



## Drone (Apr 3, 2017)

Brilliant talk w/ Janna Levin

It's 2011 video and it's amazing because their mathematical models were correct even before they found gravitational waves and colliding black holes in 2015-2016


----------



## Drone (Apr 4, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Apr 6, 2017)

*Gazing Into the Abyss*
Astronomers are set to peer into the event horizon of a black hole for the first time.

Source: The Atlantic

Go ALMA!   It's time to see Sgr A * up close.


----------



## Drone (Apr 19, 2017)

New mind blowing BH infographic by ESO   They're really close, I bet ALMA will catch an image of Sgr A* in 2018


----------



## Drone (Apr 19, 2017)

New videos!

The Arrhythmic Beating of a Black Hole Heart and more ...


----------



## Drone (May 4, 2017)

New blogpost


----------



## Drone (May 6, 2017)




----------



## alucasa (May 6, 2017)

The bigger question would be, what is outside of the universe?

I try not to think too hard on matters related to the universe because ... there are just too much unknown.


----------



## Drone (May 6, 2017)

alucasa said:


> The bigger question would be, what is outside of the universe?
> 
> I try not to think too hard on matters related to the universe because ... there are just too much unknown.


Those questions are equally big:

What's inside electrons

What lies beyond event horizon

What lies beyond observable Universe

What was before the inflation

You always bump into infinities and singularities when you try to solve these problems


----------



## Drone (May 11, 2017)

Astronomers Pursue Renegade Supermassive Black Hole


----------



## Drone (May 25, 2017)

Star Gives Birth to Possible Black Hole in Hubble and Spitzer Images


----------



## Drone (Jun 1, 2017)

*LIGO detects merging black holes for third time*

Nearly 3 billion light years from Earth, the black holes are the farthest ever detected.

Gravitational Wave was produced by the collision of two heavy, stellar–mass black holes, one estimated to be ~ 31 times, and the other 19 times, as massive as the Sun.

Source: MIT / Caltech


----------



## Drone (Jun 10, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Jun 17, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Jun 25, 2017)




----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jun 25, 2017)

what's a bit puzzling to me it's how come a black hole's gravitational field strength ness is not uniform omnidirectionally as it's being depicted in concepted picture's, considering its near infinite density no two objects have been observed having tangential orbits with respect to radius.
le: misspreemptivellyclickedpostreply


----------



## Drone (Jun 25, 2017)

Black holes, just like any other chunk of matter/energy, warp spacetime around themselves, plus they *spin*. (that creates orbital plane, just like around stars/planets). This torsion can't be uniform because spacetime is filled with "stuff" and because black holes lose energy via Hawking radiation. There are no ideal non-spinning black holes. There's nothing ideal in this Universe. Universe itself exists because of imperfections after the big bang.


----------



## FYFI13 (Jun 25, 2017)

Drone said:


> Those questions are equally big:
> 
> What's inside electrons
> 
> ...


What if there is nothing? What if whole universe is a big, let's say, a computer simulation? Maybe we're something like in game characters and we can only see as far as "the map" goes and there is nothing at the end of it?
What happens to game characters when they die? Nothing, they just stop their existence. Perhaps it's same with us?

Wrong thread for such discussions, but after i saw your post could not reply


----------



## Drone (Jun 25, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> What if there is nothing? What if whole universe is a big, let's say, a computer simulation? Maybe we're something like in game characters and we can only see as far as "the map" goes and there is nothing at the end of it?
> What happens to game characters when they die? Nothing, they just stop their existence. Perhaps it's same with us?
> 
> Wrong thread for such discussions, but after i saw your post could not reply



That's interesting and pretty popular hypothesis  Conventional supercomputers can simulate some regions of the Universe and it looks really cool, now imagine what quantum computers could build. They could simulate physics, but two things are hard to simulate: chemistry/biology and consciousness. Like Roger Penrose says I don't believe that they're just some computational stuff and can be simulated. And if this is simulation then those "programmers" must be living in the "real" Universe. Lol so many questions and no answers.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jun 27, 2017)

Shall I add as a +1  to a runnaway petri dish universe, may I? (nothing personal of course) :


Drone said:


> Black holes, just like any other chunk of matter/energy, warp spacetime around themselves, plus they *spin*. (that creates orbital plane, just like around stars/planets). This torsion can't be uniform because spacetime is filled with "stuff" and because black holes lose energy via Hawking radiation. There are no ideal non-spinning black holes. There's nothing ideal in this Universe. Universe itself exists because of imperfections after the big bang.


.  
torsion of what from what, it ain't like I'M m viceing one end of a mild steel rod and clampd  twisting the other end, just nitpicking at supposedly "matter" needing to spin at near infinite density; some dynamo effect as a result might seem depicted versus almost improbable observation of tangential orbits.


----------



## Drone (Aug 24, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Sep 2, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Sep 20, 2017)




----------



## jboydgolfer (Sep 20, 2017)

FYFI13 said:


> What if there is nothing?



 What if you're seeing what's there but,are  unable to (really) _see_ what's there. For example: like a YouTube video of a dog or cat looking at a tablet with interactive fish in a fish tank or pond. They know that when they (pets) touch the screen something happens ,a splash, the fish move, so they feel like they're interacting with it and have a basic/general understanding of it and whats going on ,but really (hypothetically since we cant know for certain what a pet is truly thinking) they think it's a real pond, with real fish and real water. They seem to have a basic understanding that it's not quite "real" but that basic understanding of something being "off" is nowhere near the reality of the matter ... The reality being that the image they're seeing is a two dimensional generated graphic interaction/simulation, with so much technology behind it and so many things "going on" that they(pet) could never possibly hope to comprehend it's actual complexity/reality.

this is how i tend to see how human comprehend most everything , including the inconceivable i.e time, space, etc.


----------



## Drone (Dec 12, 2017)




----------



## Drone (Dec 29, 2017)




----------



## Norton (Jan 24, 2018)

Pretty decent *Nova *episode on Black Holes here:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/black-hole-apocalypse.html

http://player.pbs.org/viralplayer/3008168895/

premiered on Jan 10th


----------



## Drone (Feb 22, 2018)




----------



## Drone (Mar 1, 2018)




----------



## Drone (Mar 4, 2018)




----------



## Drone (Mar 14, 2018)

Friends and colleagues from the University of Cambridge have paid tribute to Professor Stephen Hawking, who died today at the age of 76.
Professor Hawking broke new ground on the basic laws which govern the Universe, including the revelation that black holes have a temperature and produce radiation, now known as Hawking radiation.




























Gone but not forgotten


----------



## StrayKAT (Mar 14, 2018)

What's inside a black hole seems like a pointless question, since nothing with "consciousness" would survive such abuse anyways.

edit: Err.. what I'm getting at brings a Sagan quote to mind. "We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself." The wonders of the universe are complete when our own perception is finally a part of the experience. But the damn Black Hole is one place consciousness can't go.. it'll never know this place.

But then, perhaps a Black Hole is not part of the Cosmos anyways, and therefore it's appropriate that we can't know it.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Mar 14, 2018)

Sad news indeed, but as child hearing from telly I did not get the fuss about Prof. Stephen Hawking and merely saw the portraying as a gimmicky pr stunt and what not.
le: @StrayKAT; I have pictured a way in which a black hole is a way (maybe only way) a higher entity can observe the " Universe" in one if my Petri dish universe
type scenario.


----------



## Drone (Mar 18, 2018)

@StrayKAT 

Have you heard of Vyacheslav I. Dokuchaev's theory *Is there life inside black holes?*
He implies that advanced civilization may exist within supermassive black holes like the one at the center of our Galaxy.

Lee Smolin in his paper *Cosmological Natural Selection* assumes that the Universe was born inside of a black hole.

See videos:


----------



## StrayKAT (Mar 18, 2018)

Drone said:


> @StrayKAT
> 
> Have you heard of Vyacheslav I. Dokuchaev's theory *Is there life inside black holes?*
> He implies that advanced civilization may exist within supermassive black holes like the one at the center of our Galaxy.
> ...



Well, that was interesting... I'm speechless. And I'm not saying that's positive or negative


----------



## Drone (Mar 18, 2018)

Lol I see.  

It's quite speculative but Kip Thorne, Stephen Hawking, Joseph Polchinski and other cosmologists have theories that one can survive beyond the event horizon. But nobody has any idea how to test these theories. It all involves Cauchy horizon, anti-de Sitter space and equations of General Relativity.

I _sort of_ understand math part of these theories but QM and GR aspects went over my head


----------



## quirky (Mar 19, 2018)

StrayKAT said:


> What's inside a black hole seems like a pointless question, since nothing with "consciousness" would survive such abuse anyways.
> 
> edit: Err.. what I'm getting at brings a Sagan quote to mind. "We are a way for the Cosmos to know itself." The wonders of the universe are complete when our own perception is finally a part of the experience. But the damn Black Hole is one place consciousness can't go.. it'll never know this place.
> 
> But then, perhaps a Black Hole is not part of the Cosmos anyways, and therefore it's appropriate that we can't know it.


I don't agree with you. I think that black holes can be survived and I deeply believe that extraterrestrials use it for interstellar traveling.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Mar 19, 2018)

Could it be that I do not agree with you, too wich I say if "we"(as humans, permitedly) haven't musterd it does not meant an other has not.


----------



## Drone (Apr 2, 2018)




----------



## Drone (Apr 5, 2018)

New Study Suggests Tens of Thousands of Black Holes Exist in Milky Way's Center

Read


----------



## Drone (May 16, 2018)




----------



## jihadjoe (Jun 4, 2018)

So I got to watch that PBS Nova documentary (with Niel Degrasse Tyson!) mentioned at the top of this page.

It seems experts pretty much agree with the "direct collapse" scenario for the creation of supermassives at the centres of galaxies. Huge gas clouds collapse straight into a black hole, skipping star formation entirely could bypass the Eddington Limit which would normally make black holes of such mass impossible at this point in time.

Rather happily the PBS website for the film has a transcript, making quotes easy!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/black-hole-apocalypse.html



> _JANNA LEVIN:_ Some scientists are now asking, "What if there's a way to create a black hole that's already much more massive from birth, giving it a head start?"
> 
> _PRIYAMVADA NATARAJAN:_ If there was a physical mechanism that would allow you to make a black hole seed, which was much more massive from the get-go, then the timing crunch is not as much of an issue and the growing problem is not as acute.
> 
> ...


----------



## Drone (Aug 10, 2018)




----------



## lexluthermiester (Aug 29, 2018)

StrayKAT said:


> it'll never know this place.


Not true. While we can not directly observe such an object, we can work out what happens inside of one. We only need to put the pieces of that puzzle together. We'll get there..


----------



## Drone (Sep 29, 2018)

Fun stuff:


----------



## Dinnercore (Sep 29, 2018)

Can I spread some love for neutron-stars here too? The close-but-not-quite black holes.

What fascinated me about them is the fact that they are already so dense and have such a strong gravitational pull that they heavily deform the path of light, but light can still escape from them. This means if you were looking at one, you could see more then 50% of its surface:


----------



## lexluthermiester (Oct 24, 2018)

raavi17 said:


> Kesden worked with Shravan Hanasoge, from Princeton University and the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research, to work out method of using solar oscillations to determine whether a small, primordial black hole passed through a star. If the data can show that these small black holes formed near the beginning of the universe do exist, they might make good candidates for dark matter.


That is a very interesting theory.


----------



## Drone (Jan 18, 2019)




----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Black holes do not exist.
White dwarf stars, a product of Type II supernova, are confused for these made up stellar objects.
Due to motion in the ultra high-speed range, white dwarf stars exhibit anti-gravity "forces."
Only once the ultra high-speed motion of the constituent atoms is sufficiently abated does the white dwarf become visible.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Black holes do not exist.
> White dwarf stars, a product of Type II supernova, are confused for these made up stellar objects.
> Due to motion in the ultra high-speed range, white dwarf stars would exhibit anti-gravity "forces."


What's at the centre of most large galaxies, then?


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> What's at the centre of most large galaxies, then?



Depends on if your definition of galaxy fits alternative definitions of a galaxy, one in particular that I'm thinking of...

That being said, at the center of most galaxies depends on the period in the evolutionary life cycle... could be multiple proto-stars still working their way to Red Giant globulars/stars in preparation for entrance into Main Sequence... could be an array of white dwarf remnants (exhibiting anti-gravity)... or a combination of the two including stars anywhere in the Main Sequence.

I'll show this again:


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Black holes do not exist.


Sure they do. They have been observed in several places throughout the our galaxy and elsewhere in the universe.


FCG said:


> White dwarf stars, a product of Type II supernova, are confused for these made up stellar objects.


That is incorrect. White dwarf stars are aptly named. Supernovae remnants are generally neutron stars or singularities. It is physically and mathematically impossible for a supernova to leave behind a white dwarf.


FCG said:


> Due to motion in the ultra high-speed range, white dwarf stars exhibit anti-gravity "forces."
> Only once the ultra high-speed motion of the constituent atoms is sufficiently abated does the white dwarf become visible.


Anti-gravity forces?


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

@lexluthermiester
Q: "Black holes" are or are not X-ray emitters.

P.S. I find your avatar ironic.  Don't forget to stay in the Matrix


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Q: "Black holes" are or are not X-ray emitters.


First, that's not a question. Second, singularities themselves do not emit anything. However the matter falling into them does emit XRay's and other EMR as friction build up near the event horizon.


FCG said:


> P.S. I find your avatar ironic. Don't forget to stay in the matrix


Lose the insults, makes you look like a child.


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> First, that's not a question. Second, singularities themselves do not emit anything. However the matter falling into them does emit XRay's and other EMR as friction build up near the event horizon.



Does this help to establish as a question?:
Q: "Black holes" are or are not X-ray emitters*?*

Your answer is they emit X-rays (or rather the matter falling into them does - OK, sure, whatever you say).
How is it that the X-rays are not themselves lost in the Black Hole?
Explain to me as if I were a child.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> How is it that the X-rays are not themselves lost in the Black Hole?


Simple, those emissions came from matter that has not entered the event horizon of the singularity said matter is in orbit around. Therefore those emissions can escape and reach us to be observed.


FCG said:


> Explain to me as if I were a child.


Really? I think you're done here.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

Accretion disk (torus) around black holes emit energy, that energy isn't lost because it's outside event horizon. Black holes themselves emit Hawking radiation and they emit gravitational waves when they merge with each other. EM and gravitational waves from black holes are 100% confirmed and detecting Hawking radiation is just a matter of time.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> Black holes themselves emit Hawking radiation


That was never proved. Hawking never finished his work in that area because he couldn't resolve a few issues. Therefore "Hawking Radiation" is only a theory.


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> Accretion disk (torus) around black holes emit energy, that energy isn't lost because it's outside event horizon. Black holes themselves emit Hawking radiation and they emit gravitational waves when they merge with each other. EM and gravitational waves from black holes are 100% confirmed and detecting Hawking radiation is just a matter of time.



Hawking was a fraud.

Help me out here... you're saying that a black hole has what is referred to as an event horizon, which I can only take as to mean a maximum distance from the point of singularity for which the inward motion exists... but I thought gravity went on forever?  Shouldn't a singularity consume EVERYTHING?  What would balance this inward force (especially considering that the inward gravitation of the black hole should continue to increase as it consumes more and more matter)?


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> That was never proved. Hawking never finished his work in that area because he couldn't resolve a few issues. Therefore "Hawking Radiation" is only a theory.


Hawking's work was continued by Roger Penrose and few other extremely awesome physicists. They all agree that Hawking radiation does exist.


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> Hawking's work was continued by Roger Penrose and few other extremely awesome physicists. They all agree that Hawking radiation does exist.



X-ray emissions from just-formed white dwarfs (a.k.a. black holes) do exist but not for the reason Hawking or others argue.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Hawking was a fraud.
> 
> Help me out here... you're saying that a black hole has what is referred to as an event horizon, which I can only take as to mean a maximum distance from the point of singularity for which the inward motion exists... but I thought gravity went on forever?  Shouldn't a singularity consume EVERYTHING?  What would balance this inward force (especially considering that the inward gravitation of the black hole should continue to increase as it consumes more and more matter)?



Hawking is the real scientist. Nuff said.

Singularity means "laws of General Relativity" break down because spacetime curvature tends to infinity (what is slower than stopped time?).










(rewind to 20:30 or something when Kip explains singularity and event horizon)

Beyond event horizon time and space swap places but beyond Cauchy horizon they get back on track. What's beyond singularity is mystery.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> They all agree that Hawking radiation does exist.


But they also agree that General and Special Relativity are perfectly correct, yet none of them can explain in any reasonable way why the universe seems to be defying the laws of physics by continuing to expand and accelerate in that expansion. So either we as a historically flawed human community are incorrect(or partly incorrect) about our understanding of the laws of physics, or the universe is misbehaving(bad universe! naughty universe!). Which do you think is more likely?

Hawking Radiation does not exist. Two reasons. 1. Matter inside the event horizon is not physically a part of the singularity that is causing said event horizon. 2. Once a any particle enters a singularity, it does not come out until released by a certain type of event.

The process Hawking described can take place with particles inside the event horizon but not the singularity itself, this means that the area between the event horizon boundary and the singularity itself can have matter extracted using the Hawking principle, but only if matter is present in that area.


FCG said:


> X-ray emissions from just-formed white dwarfs (a.k.a. black holes) do exist but not for the reason Hawking or others argue.


Good grief you need to stop..


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> Hawking is the real scientist. Nuff said.
> 
> Singularity means "laws of General Relativity" break down because...



All stop.
NATURAL laws can't be broken.
Don't confuse man's law with Natural Law.
This argument is ridiculous on its head.
This means either "the law" is not a law or the explanation is incorrect (or both).


----------



## dorsetknob (Mar 16, 2019)

In the Spirit of FCG posting


FCG said:


> Black holes do not exist.





FCG said:


> Explain to me as if I were a child



I will   Neil deGrasse Tyson proved Black holes do indeed exist






unfortunatly he was arrested for mooning


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Can we please drop Hawking?

http://milesmathis.com/hawk3.pdf

http://mileswmathis.com/hawk4.pdf

http://milesmathis.com/hawk5.pdf


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Can we please drop Hawking?


No. Hawking maybe wrong about a few things, but he was non-the-less brilliant *and contributed much to science*. His theory about Black Hole Radiation doesn't work because it doesn't account for a number of problems. However it does open the possibility for those problems to be resolved as his work highlights the areas of science needing refinement and resolution.


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> Beyond event horizon time and space swap places but beyond Cauchy horizon they get back on track. What's beyond singularity is mystery.



Close.
What is beyond the unit boundary is the Time Region (of the atom).
Where all motion is in time not space.



lexluthermiester said:


> No. Hawking maybe wrong about a few things, but he was non-the-less brilliant *and contributed much to science*. His theory about Black Hole Radiation doesn't work because it doesn't account for a number of problems. However it does open the possibility for those problems to be resolved as his work highlights the areas of science needing refinement and resolution.



My take-away here would be that modern astronomy has spent at least the last 100 years on this boondoggle... inventing crazier and crazier theoretical explanations, only to later recognize the implications which do not fit any basis of theory... well, let's just invent some more crazy stuff and see what sticks... rinse, repeat.

At some point you have to stop, turn around, and note just how far over the precipice you've built a (seeming) foundation into nowhere.

Black holes are your bridge to nowhere.

P.S. I'm planting red pills (lol!)


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Close.
> What beyond the unit boundary is the Time Region (of the atom).
> Where all motion is in time not space.


That only highlights your misunderstanding of what "Time" is. It isn't just the motion of matter from one moment to the next. It's not just a "force".


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> But they also agree that General and Special Relativity are perfectly correct, yet none of them can explain in any reasonable way why the universe seems to be defying the laws of physics by continuing to expand and accelerate in that expansion. So either we as a historically flawed human community are incorrect(or partly incorrect) about our understanding of the laws of physics, or the universe is misbehaving(bad universe! naughty universe!). Which do you think is more likely?



General/Special relativity are incomplete, even Einstein himself said that. But general relativity explained expansion of the Universe via Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric. It just didn't reveal the nature of cosmological constant.



> Hawking Radiation does not exist. Two reasons. 1. Matter inside the event horizon is not physically a part of the singularity that is causing said event horizon. 2. Once a any particle enters a singularity, it goes not come out until released by a certain type of event.
> 
> The process Hawking described can take place with particles inside the event horizon but not the singularity itself, this means that the area between the event horizon boundary an the singularity itself can have matter extracted using the Hawking principle, but only if matter is present in that area.


 
Information about matter/energy that was lost in singularity is encoded on the black hole's surface ("holographic principle"). Black holes aren't made of matter but warped spacetime. You might say that's it's just a theory but Holographic Principle can be tested (in the future).


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> That only highlights your misunderstanding of what "Time" is. It isn't just the motion of matter from one moment to the next. It's not just a "force".



We have a fundamental disagreement as to the nature of time, of this I am sure.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> But general relativity explained expansion of the Universe via Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker metric.


It explained the expansion vector, but not the acceleration. Therefore, it is incorrect.


Drone said:


> Information about matter/energy that was lost in singularity is encoded on the black hole's surface ("holographic principle").


That is also a theory which doesn't work as it has many problems that are unsolvable.


Drone said:


> Black holes aren't made of matter but warped spacetime.


Also incorrect. And on two levels. Singularities(Black Holes) are made up of the ultra compacted matter that they consume. The concept of "warped spacetime" is only that, a concept and not a very good one. Again only a theory.


Drone said:


> Holographic Principle can be tested (in the future).


It can not be tested. The principle itself is flawed as it does not contain the variables needed to function.


FCG said:


> We have a fundamental disagreement as to the nature of time, of this I am sure.


Clearly. The basic problem with your perspective is that it is observationally incorrect.


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Clearly. The basic problem with your perspective is that it is observationally incorrect.



Wasn't it you that stated there is more than the observable?
The clearest example of which would be the electric (1D), magnetic (2D), and gravitational (3D) "force" (i.e motion intersecting with a conflicting motion) fields.
Of course, you must first define your reference frame...


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Also incorrect. And on two levels. Singularities(Black Holes) are made up of the ultra compacted matter that they consume. The concept of "warped spacetime" is only that, a concept and not a very good one. Again only a theory.



No. Singularity at the center of a black hole is not the black hole itself. And it definitely isn't matter, and neither is the black hole surrounding it. Warped spacetime is a 'thing' and was confirmed by Gravity Probe B (spacetime vortices created by Earth's rotation) and LIGO experiments (black holes distorting spacetime).

Ultra compact matter is inside quark stars. Do you mean that black holes are actually quark stars?
https://futurism.com/have-quark-stars-been-discovered


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> No. Singularity at the center of a black hole is not the black hole itself. And it definitely isn't matter, and neither is the black hole surrounding it. Warped spacetime is a 'thing' and was confirmed by Gravity Probe B (spacetime vortices created by Earth's rotation) and LIGO experiments (black holes distorting spacetime).



It would be cosmic matter a.k.a. "anti-matter"

White dwarf being atoms comprised of motion FTL would cool and expand (in space; heat and grow in time) eventually moving into visible spectrum (LF light) and were previous X-ray emitters (HF EM) in the ultra high-speed range.  At the center is the point at infinity (the reciprocal of our plane at infinity which we see in all directions as we look out in "space").  Being motion in time rather than motion in space, this would be viewed as inverted from our perspective from across the unit boundary. i.e. we would see an inverted density gradient in space in which the highest density would be at the boundary (surface of the star) with a decreasing density going inward.  Of course, with our limited perspective we would assume the reciprocal (there it is again!) and believe that a high density at the surface must provide for a fantastically-high density at the core!  The relation of matter to FTL matter would provide for some amount of anti-gravity motion.



Drone said:


> Ultra compact matter is inside quark stars. Do you mean that black holes are actually quark stars?
> https://futurism.com/have-quark-stars-been-discovered



"Black holes" are newly formed white dwarf stars.  One-half of the bi-product of Blue Giant supernova being the temporal explosion in 3D time, the other being the (observable) spacial explosion in 3D space.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> "Black holes" are newly formed white dwarf stars.  One-half of the bi-product of Blue Giant supernova being the temporal explosion in time, the other being the explosion in 3D space.


 Where did you get that from?  Blue giants end their lives (after supernova) as neutron stars or black holes.


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> Where did you get that from?



Inductive logic brought to you by Reciprocal System of theory with further enhancements as to understanding with RS2.
Expand your horizons. (Watch the top banner... it moves every 10 seconds or so.)

See also and especially the continuation of this (although I do attest you will need to first set a foundation in Larson's original work):
*RS2: **http://www.reciprocal.systems/*



Drone said:


> Blue giants end their lives (after supernova) as neutron stars or black holes.



Where did you get that from? 

Haha... just having fun.  Again, your "black hole" is a white dwarf that is not yet emitting radiation in the visible/IR  spectrums (clue: but it is an X-ray emitter!).  So, yes, Blue Giants will "end" their life in a "black hole" (white dwarf).  Also the explosion in space will eventually reverse (due to gravitational motion) and re-form a new proto-star (and with sufficient density achieve some level of fission due to lowering of the magnetic ionization level) -> Red Giant -> Orange Giant -> Main Sequence... Blue Giant -> another supernova.  This time the White Dwarf (cooling and expanding in space; heating and condensing in time due to temporal gravity) is nearby to feel the full force of the next supernova blast!...

Houston... we have planets!

P.S. You're standing on an inside-out star (white dwarf remnant core) with low-speed (1-x) matter having accumulated on the surface over time. *

* this note assumes you are reading/posting from planet Earth or any of the other inner three (total of 4) "rocky" planets.  Bonus points if you are in another solar system.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Haha... just having fun.  Again, your "black hole" is a white dwarf that is not yet emitting radiation in the visible spectrum (clue: but it is an X-ray emitter!).  So, yes, Blue Giants will "end" their life in a "black hole" (white dwarf).  Also the explosion in space will eventually reverse (due to gravitational motion) and re-form a new proto-star -> Red Giant -> Orange Giant -> Main Sequence... Blue Giant -> another supernova.  This time the White Dwarf (cooling and expanding in space; heating and condensing in time due to temporal gravity) is nearby to feel the full force of the next supernova blast!...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_star

There are some interesting alternatives to a black hole that deny the possibility of a singularity (especially Magnetospheric eternally collapsing objects and gravastars) but white dwarfs are too small to have such a powerful gravitational field.


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> ...white dwarfs are too small to have such a powerful gravitational field...



Small in space, large in time.
We are viewing (being material observers in space) from the inverse (reciprocal) perspective.
Go re-read what has already been posted.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> Small in space, large in time.
> We are viewing (being material observers in space) from the inverse (reciprocal) perspective.
> Go re-read what has already been posted.


I got it, you're reciprocal system supporter but what you makes believe it's true?


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> I got it, you're reciprocal system supporter but what you makes believe it's true?



20 years of study in application of chemistry, physics, including nuclear physics as well as various engineering application with a focus on electrical and nuclear power production proves it right.  It continues to provide for a rational basis of explanation where even modern-day astronomy fails.  This is also true for chemistry, quantum physics, relativistic difference (i.e. Lorentz), thermodynamics, etc.  A big one for me was the true nature of radiation and basis for breakdown of the compound nucleus.  What is taught is pure bunk top to bottom.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

FCG said:


> 20 years of study in application of chemistry, physics, including nuclear physics as well as various engineering application with a focus on electrical and nuclear power production proves it right.  It continues to provide for a rational basis of explanation where even modern-day astronomy fails.  This is also true for chemistry, quantum physics, relativistic difference (i.e. Lorentz), thermodynamics, etc.  A big one for me was the true nature of radiation and basis for breakdown of the compound nucleus.  What is taught is pure bunk top to bottom.


And what is the most famous achievement of this theory? The strongest evidence for it?


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> And what is the most famous achievement of this theory? The strongest evidence for it?



Reality.  You are not asked to throw away all existing empirical result in favor of this system of theory. (Specifically speaking: none.)
You are instead asked to re-consider the base hypothesis that this is a universe of matter ("stuff") inside a container of vacuum ("space") in favor of consideration of motion in and of itself (or change) as both manifest reality and the origin of the various "forces" (electric, magnetic, gravitational).
Most of the difficulty I find is the critical need to unlearn a lot of what I have been previously taught (told)... that and this new way of thinking is very anti-materialistic and so being unperceived in its own right, challenging at first to comprehend.  Or, you could take the blue pill and go back to sleep.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 16, 2019)

Anyone watched / like the move "Interstellar" ? They had a theoretical physicist as an advisor to make it as close to scientifically accurate as possible. 

Black hole "Gargantua" from the movie: (might contain spoilers so be careful!!)






Awesome movie btw. It even explores "time dilation" exhibited near the black hole, as space time itself is warped by the gravity; on the planet near the black hole, something like a minute of time translates to several years passed on the ship in orbit. Very cool movie and amazing sound track.^^


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> Anyone watched / like the move "Interstellar" ?



Been wanting to watch this for a while now.  It's a 3 hour marathon though and once we get the kids in bed it's all over.
My interest resides in some chat I've heard regarding some (as of yet to be determined/confirmed) similarity to some of the stuff I am attempting to introduce to this audience.  You may have just re-affirmed my need to watch this and provide comment.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

@FCG
But why unlearn quantum mechanics or general relativity? They've been proven right billions of times. They're incomplete but so is everything else (most of the numbers in number theory are uncomputable numbers like Turing said). Until "theory of everything" (maybe there is no theory of everything after all) is found GR and QM all the way. 



Christopher Nolan refused to use Kip's original idea about Wormholes and Bulk so script for Interstellar (film) was severely dumbed down. Contact is a more interesting film.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> @FCG
> Christopher Nolan refused to use Kip's original idea about Wormholes and Bulk so script for Interstellar (film) was severely dumbed down. Contact is a more interesting film.


Awh. But it is a really cool film nonetheless. I might have to watch Contact...


----------



## FCG (Mar 16, 2019)

Drone said:


> @FCG
> But why unlearn quantum mechanics or general relativity? They've been proven right billions of times.



The math's been shown to work a billion times is not the same as a proper explanation.
What exactly would have to be demonstrated to you from the perspective of RS2 to entice you take a look?
How about the Lorentz Factor: https://reciprocalsystem.org/paper/rs2/the-lorentz-factor
Although it really would serve you better to start at the beginning.


----------



## Drone (Mar 16, 2019)

@AmioriK
Yes Interstellar is good (could've been better with original idea about hyper dimensions). Btw Carl Sagan asked for Kip Thorne's advise for Contact, that's why I compare them  

@FCG
Maths works, it's a separate world (together with physical and mental worlds)


----------



## witkazy (Mar 17, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> Awh. But it is a really cool film nonetheless. I might have to watch Contact...


Man, You want to watch Contact  this flick.


----------



## Bones (Mar 17, 2019)

witkazy said:


> Man, You want to watch Contact  this flick.



I'll have to check it out one day.

I'll say much of what we know is actually in theory only, that is we speculate from the evidence gathered and reach what we perceive to be a logical conclusion and that's OK. However as knowlege is further gained some of these theories are either proven more-so as fact or debunked.

Even some of Einstein's theories/ideas are now coming under scrutiny because of new knowlege that's been gained. There is nothing wrong with re-evaluating a long held idea of something, esp if there is evidence that does suggest the idea/theory could be wrong - In fact it's one's duty to explore such a thing if said evidence is found.

Not long ago concerning the long held theory that blackholes themselves have such an intense gravity field _absolutely nothing_ can escape, recent evidence has shown otherwise. Not long ago I watched a program that stated blackholes actually do emit/eject energy at times, this being observed, investigated and positive evidence of it being found.

The effect was described as it keeps eating and eating, then like someone at the dinner table it will "Burp" and expel this energy in a fashion somewhat like a quasar/pulsar does.

I found it fascinating to watch to say the least.

Now....
Understand -  It's just speculation on my part but I believe blackholes aren't that complex, more along the lines of them being simple enough.

I'm thinking it's simply an ultra-massive object that's grabbed so much material it's gravitational field has become strong enough that even light cannot escape BUT all the mass it's pulled in is still there and yet it also maintains a magnetic field around it too because the recent evidence found supports this.
It's suprising to see it does that and would mean magnetic forces associated with it ARE POWERFUL to the point it can erect and hold this field above the surface of it inspite of the blackhole's gravity well, otherwise the energy it's comprised of would get sucked in too.
It was said when it "Burps" the energy of this burst is magnetically based and that in itself gives an indication of just how powerful it's magnetic field must really be.

I've always thought of one possibly being that way and now with the evidence these CAN expel energy I'm thinking there is something to this, you cannot have gravity without an object comprised of mass in the first place and blackholes certainly have the gravity portion covered. You can't get a magnetic field from nothingness either, _something_ of mass/matter has to be there in order for this field to even be there in the first place too or it coudn't be generated at all.

I'll have to see if I can't recall and find the name of the program I watched but it was interesting to say the least.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 17, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> Awh. But it is a really cool film nonetheless. I might have to watch Contact...


Do, it's a fun adventure and there's a decent amount of real science in it, though it is still definitively SciFi.


----------



## hat (Mar 17, 2019)

Bones said:


> I'm thinking it's simply an ultra-massive object that's grabbed so much material it's gravitational field has become strong enough that even light cannot escape BUT all the mass it's pulled in is still there and yet it also maintains a magnetic field around it too because the recent evidence found supports this.



I've often wondered the same thing myself. I wondered: what if black holes really aren't _holes_ at all, but simply an object so incredibly dense that light cannot escape? When something falls in, that object, too, is added to the black "hole"'s mass. 

Pressure alone affects the state of matter. Take basic water, for example, which freezes at 32F (on Earth). If you had water on the moon, where gravity is far less than on Earth and atmospheric pressure is non-existent, water can continue to be liquid water well below 32F. It will have to be quite cold for water to freeze on the moon.  Conversely, under extreme pressure, that same water can become solid even at high temperatures. So what happens when you subject matter to the most extreme gravity and pressure in the universe?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 17, 2019)

hat said:


> what if black holes really aren't _holes_ at all, but simply an object so incredibly dense that light cannot escape?


Almost right. A "Black Hole" is made up of two parts. The first is the singularity, the object where the mass of anything falling into it's gravity well will be compacted down to where no particles have any empty space between them. The second part is the event horizon, the boundary of which is defined by several variables such as the gravity intensity of the mass of the singularity object and the rotational vector of that object. The event horizon is what we can observe. Though nothing can escape the event horizon itself, we can directly observe EMR being warped around the Black Hole due to gravitational lensing and through the friction induced EMR given off as matter falls into the event horizon.


hat said:


> When something falls in, that object, too, is added to the black "hole"'s mass.


This is correct.


----------



## witkazy (Mar 17, 2019)

Interesting read guys ,thanks a lot for Your service


----------



## FCG (Mar 17, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Almost right. A "Black Hole" is made up of two parts. The first is the singularity, the object where the mass of anything falling into it's gravity well will be compacted down to where no particle has any empty space between them. The second part is the event horizon, the boundary of which is defined by several variables such as the gravity intensity of the mass of the singularity object and the rotational vector of that object. The event horizon is what we can observe. Though nothing can escape the event horizon itself, we can directly observe EMR being warped around the Black Hole due to gravitational lensing and through the friction induced EMR given off as matter falls into the event horizon.



*Q*: Gravitational "forces" (scalar outward rotational in time; scalar *inward linear in space* -> i.e *towards all other points in space*) do or do not go on to infinity?

Fg = Gm1M2/r^2 (wrong, but included here for conventional discussion purposes).  BTW, have you checked out the units on G?  Absurd.
As r -> inf, Fg -> 0 asymptotically (but never quite reaching zero)

What balances this out?
Only a crazy person (a.ka. the Hawking impostor) would come up with the idea of the singularity.
That's not how nature works.  This universe is a beautiful, continuous attempt for balance in the silence of unity (*1*).
There was no "Big Bang" and there will be no final entropic heat death.  Rubbish, all of it.  (Forever and ever...)

*A*: No, gravitational "forces" reach a limit wherein the net inward motion becomes a net outward motion (the natural progression of the universe at "c" rate).  We have a name for this; we call it the *Hubble Expansion* and we see ALL the galaxies flying away from us at SPEEDS NEARING THE "SPEED OF LIGHT!" (Whhhhaaaaa??!?!)  This is outward *scalar *motion as can be observed from our gravitationally-bound 3D spacial coordinate system (and conversely does not mean to imply that our solar system is the exact middle of an expanding universe, rather ALL points are moving outward away from ALL other points).  Space "out there" does not work the same way as space "here."

Doppler / Red shift is a measure of movement in 3D coordinate time. 

Bonus comment: We have never measured an EM field outside of a gravitational system.

@Drone


> Maths works, it's a separate world (together with physical and mental worlds)



I assume you're referring to QED with this comment.
If you like the idea of studying mental worlds and the true nature of time, then please go check out Reciprocal System (RS/RS2).
You will learn of the existence of the Cosmic sector (originally named as being the origin of Cosmic Rays) as well as the region inside of the atom known as the Time Region.  The region is reversed in the reciprocal and so there is also the Space Region on the cosmic side (being the region inside the unit boundary of "anti-matter").

Photons are then the "sheer layer" interface between these two sectors.

Across any unit boundary (as in, where motion is unitary: 1/1) geometry inverts.  We have rectilinear-Euclidean in 3D space and polar Euclidean in 3D time (or counterspace).  Speed (s/t) and energy (t/s) as well... everything.  It's like trying to turn your brain upside-down, inside-out, and backwards at the same time... hey, we have a name for that too!  It's called a quaternion!

I'm being too general.  Go check it out.

P.S. For you video enthusiasts out there: quaternions are used all the time in 3D game development (go talk to Nvidia about quaternions...) because they can be converted to what are called homogeneous coordinates which are necessary for the development of a 3D reality (Projective -> Affine -> Metric -> Euclidean).  _I loves me some BF4..._



Bones said:


> I'm thinking it's simply an ultra-massive object that's grabbed so much material it's gravitational field has become strong enough that even light cannot escape.



Pretty close... how about instead super-massively dense on the outside and increasingly less dense as you go towards the center; inverted as the constituent atoms are moving FTL; moving outward in time, again FTL (greater than unity) and so the spacial position of the object (white dwarf start) is essentially being "overcome" by time as it expands outward in a scalar fashion... light cannot escape and so appears as a dark area in space (with nothing around it).  That region around it is NOT matter sucked in.... it's low-speed (1-x) matter PUSHED AWAY (due to the anti-gravity properties of motion FTL).  The "Event Horizon" is the (anti-)gravitational limit (continuous boundary) of the 2-x intermediate speed motion of the atoms of the star!

The 2-x (FTL; "light speed" = c = 1) region (i.e. between 1 and 2 times the "speed of light") motion is created when the inner, heavier layers of the Type I (thermal limit --> BOOM) or Type II (age limit --> *BIG *BA'DA BOOM) supernova explode outward in time (inward in space --> "Black Hole") whilst the outer, lighter layers explode outward in space (yep, we can see that part).

Time and space, baby.  Time and space... one in the same.  Two halves of a coin.  A box... can't have a box without an inside AND an outside... yin/yang... whatever you prefer.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 17, 2019)

FCG said:


> There was no "Big Bang"


Incorrect. Based on observations, when we track the motions of all observed objects backward through time, everything tracks back to a single, unobservable, point in space. This means that all matter in the observable universe came from that single point, from an object that can only be classified as an ultra-massive singularity. The big bang happened, is still happening and we are all along for the ride of the continuing blast wave.


FCG said:


> and there will be no final entropic heat death.


True. There will be a point when the outward rushing blast of the big bang meets the in-falling boundary of the event horizon that surrounds us. When that happens in 30 billion years or so, said event horizon will dissipate and those intelligent beings whom exist at that time inside this universe will be able to observe and interact with the rest of the cosmos outside our universe.


----------



## FCG (Mar 17, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Incorrect. Based on observations, when we track the motions of all observed objects backward through time, everything tracks back to a single, unobservable, point in space. This means that all matter in the observable universe came from that single point, from an object that can only be classified as an ultra-massive singularity. The big bang happened, is still happening and we are all along for the ride of the continuing blast wave.



Pfffffffffffffftttttttttttt.... show me the write up.

You're along for the ride of the natural progression of the universe.  The central datum (and natural rate) = 1 = c = "speed of light." Stop and ponder on that for a minute.... Michelson and Morley showed us something very important... *no matter the reference frame*, light moves at the speed of c...

Space is expanding scalarly outward at all points at the "speed of light."  Gravitational systems reverse the direction in space (to inward) for the spacial aspect but have no affect on the "flow of time" outward.  Space/time is motion, or change.  Everything you see as a distance are a speed displacement from unity (the measuring stick).  One of the jobs of your consciousness is to set time to unity in order to create what is called extension space. (Conversely, if you could in your mind set space to unity you would see the Cosmic sector in 3D coordinate (extension) time with clock space!)  Do you like my avatar?

Did you get a chance to read Plato's The Allegory of the Cave from Republic?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 17, 2019)

FCG said:


> (a.ka. the Hawking impostor)


FYI, if you're going to call Hawking a fraud, you must also question the observations and work of others such as Edwin Hubble, Einstein, Sagan and many others.


FCG said:


> show me the write up.


Go research the work of the aforementioned Edwin Hubble and Carl Sagan. You'll discover the real world instead of that near-flat-earther nonsense you keep spouting.


----------



## infrared (Mar 17, 2019)

FCG said:


> Oh... someone's butthurt.
> double infraction
> 
> 1) Appealing to the sanctimony of the gods of astronomy (dare ye not question the word of the gods, ye underling!)
> ...


You're the one that's going to end up with an infraction in a moment, I think it's time you take a break from the computer for a bit and clear your head.


----------



## Bones (Mar 17, 2019)

Uh - Nevermind.
I did find it but ATM it's kinda interwoven with other subjects because the program is so recent.

I'll leave the link here anyway, what's in the link is very interesting in itself and could be what I was trying to show is in it somewhere.


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 18, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> FYI, if you're going to call Hawking a fraud, you must also question the observations and work of others such as Edwin Hubble, Einstein, Sagan and many others.
> 
> Go research the work of the aforementioned Edwin Hubble and Carl Sagan. You'll discover the real world instead of that near-flat-earther nonsense you keep spouting.


One of mankinds failings is the refusal to accept differing opinions and belittling those people, just as scientists have for centuries, until proven wrong.
Please approach all things with an open mind and remember it is your choice as to what you believe.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 18, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> One of mankinds failings is the refusal to accept differing opinions and belittling those people, just as scientists have for centuries, until proven wrong.
> Please approach all things with an open mind and remember it is your choice as to what you believe.


Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But nobody is entitled to be stupid.

Some guy on a forum has significantly less credibility than one of the most respected theoretical physicists that ever lived.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 18, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> One of mankinds failings is the refusal to accept differing opinions and belittling those people, just as scientists have for centuries, until proven wrong.


Evidence is an important thing. It's how we've made progress and advanced to where we are currently. Feelings and nonsense are why we were stuck in the middle-ages for so long..


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 18, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> Some guy on a forum has significantly less credibility than one of the most respected theoretical physicists that ever lived.


So you are saying because you don't know him, he must be stupid?
Personally I have never understood the hype about Hawking, who has been proven wrong in the past, just as Einstein was not always correct.
Having a paper published doesn't mean you are smarter, just crave attention.



lexluthermiester said:


> Evidence is an important thing. It's how we've made progress and advanced to where we are currently.


I agree with this part, but sometimes feelings or hunches lead to speculation that alters theories. Sometimes it just needs an inquiring mind thinking outside the box, someone not indoctrinated in current teachings.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 18, 2019)

No, but I have the utmost respect Stephen Hawking, who has dedicated his entire life to science and this subject, and seeing him being called a fraud by someone who is very likely objectively less informed, irks me a bit.

Is it trendy to accuse well respected professors in the field as doing it'for attention'. Science hipster? Lol



Caring1 said:


> I agree with this part, but sometimes feelings or hunches lead to speculation that alters theories. Sometimes it just needs an inquiring mind thinking outside the box, someone not indoctrinated in current teachings.


Do you honestly think Hawking has never 'thought outside the box'? One guy on a forum's rambling about how black holes don't exist means nothing. What if I told you the earth is flat and there is evidence to suggest that moon is only 4km away? Will you respect my alternative thinking too?


----------



## MrGenius (Mar 18, 2019)

Sounds like someone has a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is. It's not science unless it can be proven wrong. That is a primary defining characteristic of science. If it can't be proven wrong it's religion. Which is based on beliefs. As such, beliefs have nothing to do with science, or facts for that matter. Science is not about being right, or believing you're right. It's about building a strong case to show things are very likely a certain way. It should never say for sure they are that way. That's religious belief's job.

Beliefs allow the mind to stop working.

I'd rather have questions I can't answer. Than answers I can't question.

The more you claim to know, the less you really do.

I myself...KNOW NOTHING!!!


----------



## metalslaw (Mar 18, 2019)

Ok, here is my theory. It incorporates black holes within the line of thinking.


Think of a universe as a sphere, that comes from a point (big bang).

Now think of several sphere universes, all overlapping.

Now think that our own 'observable universe', here on earth, occurs within several overlapping spheres, such that we are somewhat equally distanced to the center of each universe sphere's start point. But we are absolutely nowhere near the middle of any of them. Maybe we can't see even into the non overlapping parts.

Now think that each sphere is collapsing in on itself, caused by the inverse singularity that super massive black holes are, that are millions of times bigger that what we have ever observed. These occurring at the center of all universe spheres, of the multiverse, of overlapping sphere universes.


To us, we see our 'universe' accelerating away from us. Current thinking says to explain it as dark energy...

Because we think there is only one universe, which spawned from one point...


My theory about super-super-super massive black holes, and overlapping universes, explains why dark energy might not exist. Everything is accelerating in towards the center of each of these universe spheres.

But, it also breaks all maths in regards to how the 'universe' works. i.e. several universes overlapping, all accelerating into their own points, negates 'dark energy' theory.


Food for thought 

Anyway, I'm not a renowned scientist, and I'm not going to try to prove this theory. It is my own, and I believe it is more likely than dark energy theory. Flame away..... (I posted this in another space thread ages ago, and the post was deleted. Apparently, it wasn't on topic.)


----------



## FCG (Mar 18, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> One of mankinds failings is the refusal to accept differing opinions and belittling those people, just as scientists have for centuries, until proven wrong.
> Please approach all things with an open mind and remember it is your choice as to what you believe.



Hear, hear.

The science wasn't settled for the past 5000 years... why is it suddenly settled now?

*I am the Uncommitted Investigator.*



AmioriK said:


> Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But nobody is entitled to be stupid.
> 
> Some guy on a forum has significantly less credibility than one of the most respected theoretical physicists that ever lived.



Appealing to another's credibility for that sake alone is a grave logical misdeed.
Do not argue with names, argue with reasoned thought and response.

Newton was a pretty big hot-shot before Einstein came along (also wrong about curved space-time... how can you curve nothing?)

If Carl Sagan told you to drink the red Kool-aid, would you?  It seems I may know your response already.

Let's get back to the topic at hand, shall we?



AmioriK said:


> No, but I have the utmost respect Stephen Hawking, who has dedicated his entire life to science and this subject, and seeing him being called a fraud by someone who is very likely objectively less informed, irks me a bit.
> 
> Is it trendy to accuse well respected professors in the field as doing it'for attention'. Science hipster? Lol
> 
> ...



Suggest what ever you like.
I would recommend you back it up with reasoned, empirical evidence for such.

Kepler was one man.  Copernicus was one man.  Copernicus "rambled" so much he was thrown in prison by the Holy Roman Catholic Church and nearly put to death!  Look where we are now... lol.

Also, Hawking had ALS... he died in 1984-1985 RIP
(Note: BEFORE the release of A Brief History of Time in 1988)


----------



## dorsetknob (Mar 18, 2019)

FCG said:


> Also, Hawking had ALS... he died in 1984-1985 RIP
> (Note: BEFORE the release of A Brief History of Time in 1988)



Jusu Christi you need to enema your Brain (Swirlys help here )


> Stephen William _Hawking_ (1942 - 2018) was the former Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge and author of A Brief History of Time ...



"Re the Swirly" a pic for you


----------



## FCG (Mar 18, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> Jusu Christi you need to enema your Brain (Swirlys help here )
> 
> 
> "Re the Swirly" a pic for you



That's not a picture of the real Hawking. ^^^^

This is the real Hawking and again a few years later.  Notice he's turning gray.  And those teeth....whew!







Here he is fully gray.  Notice his teeth looks as though they have been nearly chipped/ground away.


----------



## dorsetknob (Mar 18, 2019)

YES it is   he also Cameo'ed himself on the TV Show "The Big Bang Theory
.


----------



## FCG (Mar 18, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> YES it is   he also Cameo'ed himself on the TV Show "The Big Bang Theory
> .



Again, not Hawking in your picture.  Hawking passed in 1984-1985 from complication due to pneumonia and very advanced ALS.
Take a look at the pictures of Hawking that I have posted from the 70s and 80s.  Compare and contrast with those of "Hawking" above.  The teeth are a dead giveaway.

Big Bang.  Lol


----------



## dorsetknob (Mar 18, 2019)

Again Your WRONG


FCG said:


> Hawking passed in 1984-1985



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15555565


----------



## FCG (Mar 18, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> Again Your WRONG
> 
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15555565



* You're

That's just, like, your opinion, man.

EDIT: Can we please stay on topic re: "Black Holes."
I am happy to take the Hawking conversation elsewhere if that is really desired.


----------



## dorsetknob (Mar 18, 2019)

*Stephen Hawking laid to rest between graves of Sir Isaac Newton and ...*

https://www.telegraph.co.uk › News


15 Jun 2018 - On Friday afternoon, thousands gathered to see the ashes of Prof _Hawking_, who died in March at the age of 76, buried between those of Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Charles Darwin in an entirely earthly thanksgiving service at Westminster Abbey. ... Alongside the scientist’s family ...


----------



## FCG (Mar 18, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> *Stephen Hawking laid to rest between graves of Sir Isaac Newton and ...*
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk › News
> 
> 
> 15 Jun 2018 - On Friday afternoon, thousands gathered to see the ashes of Prof _Hawking_, who died in March at the age of 76, buried between those of Sir Isaac Newton and Sir Charles Darwin in an entirely earthly thanksgiving service at Westminster Abbey. ... Alongside the scientist’s family ...



Again, fake Hawking.
Real Hawking died in 1984-1985.
You're not getting the point.
All of this about "Hawking" post-1985 is BS.

76-years-old with ALS.... OK, pull my other leg
Born in 1942
Diagnosed in 1963
Lives to 2018 (total of 55 years to ripe old age of 76)

From The ALS Association (let me due a screen grab in case this gets fiddled with all of the sudden):





https://www.google.com/search?q=ALS+average+survival+time

Oops... anything past say 25 years would be a statistical fluke already and worthy of further investigation.
This guy pulled off 55 years... more than twice the far end of the curve... wow!

What's the need to so vehemently defend the image that is Hawking, anyway?
Would the whole "black hole" theory fall apart if you were to discover that in reality there is another masquerading as the brilliant man that WAS Hawkings?  I should hope not as that's not how we do science (or at least, shouldn't).

Ready to jump back on subject now?


----------



## Tatty_One (Mar 18, 2019)

Please take any off topic banter to PM's please, this is not a chat room.


----------



## FCG (Mar 18, 2019)

metalslaw said:


> To us, we see our 'universe' accelerating away from us. Current thinking says to explain it as dark energy...



This is nothing more than the natural progression of the universe.

Space is expanding scalarly outward in all directions from all points.  Same for time (from all planes) although the geometry is inverted (inside-out, backwards, and upside-down).  Simply put, s/t = 1.  The ratio of space to time is the "speed of light" or what we call c.
C (little "c" or the speed of light) is not a limit; it's a *constant*.

Space is REAL; Time is IMAGINARY (complex, complex complex makes quaternion, or even complex complex complex in the case of octonions.)
Space and time are reciprocal and any differences are merely due to the inherent bias created by your particular frame of reference.

Dark Energy is nothing more than a kludge explanation for the progression and being in the opposite scalar direction than gravity (inwards, towards unity), would be what we would label as "anti-gravity" motion (outward, away from unity).

We call the outward expansion IN ALL DIRECTIONS AWAY FROM US the *HUBBLE EXPANSION *(you guys still like Hubble, right?)  And everything is approaching the SPEED OF LIGHT every way we look and even formed what I think was the basis for the documentary _The Principle_ (right observation, wrong conclusion).  This is how we observe scalar motion from the POV of our fixed 3D spacial coordinate reference system.
There was not an initial (Big?) Bang... this is the continuous natural MOTION of the universe. And it will never stop.

*The Secret of Light is that light (or any motion that does not have a net effect outside the unit boundary) remains in the same absolute location in the natural reference frame *(but not in YOUR reference frame where you consider YOURSELF and everything about you still, and insofar as light remains in the same absolute location in the natural reference frame and free from interaction with matter, this is true).  *YOU *(and everything around you) are gravitating ("imaginary": rotationally outward in time, real: linearly inward in space).

The outward spacial scalar expansion is arrested and reversed around "mass" creating what we call a gravitational field.  This field has a limit (that being a function of the net outward rotational motion in time) and creates what could be described as a bubble of 3D space.  Outside this bubble, i.e. outside the gravitational limit (let that sink in, there is a limit), would be a region of net outward scalar progression (vs. net inward scalar gravitation).  This means (being inside a gravitational limit now) you are scalarly condensing inward at the "speed of light" as to allow for the creation of said fixed reference frame.

You imagine that photons are buzzing by at the "speed of light;" not quite, YOU just gravitated into the photon at the "speed of light."  This goes for any "light-speed" EM radiation that does not occupy all 3 dimensions of SCALAR space/counterspace (i.e. at least one free dimension to allow for the progression).

For example: uncharged electrons (whaaaa? conventional science says everything is charged) also move at "the speed of light", i.e. what we call electric current (s/t), but not charged electrons, what is often referred to as "static electricity" or electrostatics.  The uncharged electron is the "hole" (a rotating unit of space and is really a cosmic quaternion structure, note also we model current flow in the opposite direction of electron/"hole" flow), the charged electron having 3 scalar dimensions of motion (base 2D magnetic bi-rotation in time... that's the electron + 1D electrical rotation in space... that's the "charge") does gravitate and so has a position in our fixed 3D spacial coordinate system... we see it as a point particle.  Rotation in space -> structure in space; wave in time.  Rotation in time -> structure in time; wave in space.

As an analogy to the scenario discussed wherein the inward and outward scalar motions reached equilibrium: you step on a treadmill and proceed north.  The treadmill is energized and promptly proceeds south (opposite your direction of walking).  No matter how fast you move, so long as the treadmill is set even, you're going nowhere.  This is 1-dimensional (scalar) motion in equilibrium.  1D because I only need a single variable to describe the motion... I'm going x speed, direction non-specified because the treadmill is going x speed in not "that direction."

This is also what we recognize as an "orbit," that being a balance between the inward scalar motion of gravity and the ever-present outward scalar progression of the universe.  This is not possible with the conventional explanation: gravity is a positive-feedback system, i.e. if the distance between the two masses increases, the gravitational "attraction" goes down... for stability, an increase in distance would need to be counteracted by an increase in inward pull to restore the mass to the original orbital position.  Conversely, bringing the two masses closer together results in an increased pull.  There can be no stability.

We see this all the time in the "orbits" (not true orbits) of satellites about the Earth... eventually they all come down... but not the moon!  Not the planets!  Those orbits aren't decaying.  Those orbits do move over clock time as the system ages but they are certainly what we would consider stable.  Man cannot achieve a stable orbit, only nature can do this.  *This is worth exploring.*

Scalar: Push/Pull... no direction... a push plus an equal pull... gravity, being a function of distance (but not in the manner currently taken as accepted) in balance with the progression (not a function of any location) would find an equilibrium position and LOCK INTO POSITION of zero net speed... Houston, we have stability!

The very same mechanism presented above that locks planets/moons into orbits is the mechanism that also provides for all the various types of molecular bonding.  Only the scale changes and the "direction" of gravitation/progression reverses as we cross a unit boundary.  As above, so below...

Ionic bond: net speed balanced as close to zero (unity motion) as possible (scalar relationship... we call these "positive" and "negative" charge...)

Because the phase of each wave in space or time are locked to the progression, all space waves are in phase and all time waves are in phase, but out of phase with each other 180 degrees, as measured from the natural reference frame.

When two like-charged particles are placed nearby, it is said they repel one another.  This can be shown to be the simple result of the motion due the natural progression.  Keep in mind we have never measured an EM field outside of a gravitational field and so inside a gravitational field we already have one net unit of motion inward (-1).

When two like waves of LIKE phase (charge) interact this causes constructive interference:
1 + 1 = 2 - 1 (gravitational motion inward) = +1 (outward away from all points on the Real number line)... REPULSION

When two like waves of UNLIKE (opposite) phase (charge) interact, this causes destructive interference:
1 - 1 = 0 - 1 (gravitational motion inward) = -1 (inward towards all points on the Real number line)... ATTRACTION

Thus it can be seen that the concept of "positive" and "negative" charge and the *illusion of "attraction" and "repulsion"* are really just primary motion of the universe and its animus motion (gravity).

Covalent bond: orientation in space/time (geometry-driven... think lattice/shell in 3D space or 3D time where pieces fit together like a puzzle)

Van Der Waals forces: gravitation

"Dark energy" will *never* be found (i.e. measured) as there is NOTHING to measure as a delta from the natural reference frame.
The progression IS the clock and is the default speed of the universe ("c" or light speed) in all unused dimensions from which all other speeds are measured as displacements, either in space or time.  Any unused dimension will progress at the natural speed and so that motion (sub-atomic particle) will be carried at the "speed of light." The natural datum for any measurement is one (1), not zero.

EDIT: Sure cleared out fast in here.  Anyone wanna talk science?





lexluthermiester said:


> Evidence is an important thing. It's how we've made progress and advanced to where we are currently. Feelings and nonsense are why we were stuck in the middle-ages for so long..



No one is asking you to throw out empirical result... none of it.
You are being asked to consider a mode of reality outside of what you have been taught regarding the materialistic (or rather; not) nature of this universe.
I'm not arguing feelings.  I am not appealing to your base emotion.  I'm not sure where you get this impression from but I am not projecting such.


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 19, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> What if I told you the earth is flat and there is evidence to suggest that moon is only 4km away? Will you respect my alternative thinking too?


You, are just being facetious and ridiculous.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 19, 2019)

FCG said:


> Again, fake Hawking.
> Real Hawking died in 1984-1985.
> You're not getting the point.
> All of this about "Hawking" post-1985 is BS.
> ...


Are you being serious? 

I'm done with this thread if you're going to be so utterly preposterous. Can't have a proper discussion about science with someone like you, sorry.


----------



## Bones (Mar 19, 2019)

Don't get overwhelmed by the massive wall of text - I can do that too and overload one's thought process while reading if I want but there is no point to it.

I can't say he's wrong and he's obviously intelligent but I will also say to remember there is more to intelligence than just mathematical formulas or all else that can be had from a book - Some of the smartest people I have ever known coudn't begin to comprehend all this but in other ways were simply genius.

What one man knows another could learn if they really want.

I prefer to keep my explanations K.I.S.S. and that's just how I think - It's also true some of the most profound things are also the simplest too.

Do remember even with all the above including the mathematical stuff, the data it's based on is still incomplete as in we still don't have all the facts yet and the equasion will change as new data is introduced into the formula.
That's why I say it as "I Think", not that it "Is" because "Is" states it as being an absolute fact like so many others have before only to be proven wrong later.

I understand the difference in semantics used and sometimes we say "Is" anyway as a matter of expression - That's just the truth of it.

We can observe and then draw conclusions based on said observation(s) using what we've learned in the past to guide us but in this case, it being the subject of a blackhole we will never REALLY KNOW until we get there to gather even more data to help _complete the formula_ - Which BTW I seriously doubt we ever will.

And don't forget that past data, possibly being wrong itself and used to base future theories on could introduce an error into the formula that (As said about the cosmos) keeps expanding and growing larger with each iteration.
We've all had that happen in math class at some point as we carried on a computation - And got the wrong answer. 
Done that too many times myself.

I still believe a blackhole isn't that complicated of an object.
I also believe our observations (what we think we know) aren't "Perfect" for the former reasons - Not entirely wrong but not entirely correct either.
We're always learning and that's what science is all about.


----------



## witkazy (Mar 19, 2019)

From point of view of sci-fi fan this thread rocks and as to who is right or wrong ...i'll wait untill i can pick jar of delicious black holes from the shelf in tesco and read label on back.
ps.( Anti gravity jar, patent pending) .


----------



## Drone (Mar 19, 2019)

How science works:


----------



## FCG (Mar 19, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> Are you being serious?
> 
> I'm done with this thread if you're going to be so utterly preposterous. Can't have a proper discussion about science with someone like you, sorry.



That Hawkings is or is not who he claims to be is irrelevant to the conversation at hand. That you would voluntarily leave the conversation thread because the idea Hawings is not who he claims to be is childish and hyperbolic. Fine, censure yourself. Good day, sir.



Drone said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_star
> 
> There are some interesting alternatives to a black hole that deny the possibility of a singularity (especially Magnetospheric eternally collapsing objects and gravastars) but white dwarfs are too small to have such a powerful gravitational field.



Newly-formed *white dwarf* stars are small to our perception as they are mainly motion FTL and are only beginning to COOL and EXPAND in space as they HEAT and CONDENSE in time due to temporal gravity (gravity in 3D time, not 3D space).  Multiple, intense magnetic fields (2D motion) are created as thermal motion extends into a second dimension of equivalent space.

As the white dwarf cools and expands in space it moves from being a net X-ray emitter (HF EM) to an emitter of EM radiation in the visible light, IR, and RF spectrum (LF EM). This trend continues over a period of clock time.

EM radiation given off depends on which side of the unit speed boundary from which the motion occurs (from the observer's point of view). As the zone of isotopic stability flips (2Z + G -> 2Z - G) for FTL motion, atoms must go through a series of radioactive decay processes before they are to achieve stability in their new environment. X-rays, having a waveduration, not a wavelength like other LF EM, are this means of achieving isotropic stability in this region (speed, not location).  Note: gamma ray emission is similar in that gamma is HF EM and so also has a waveduration (wave in time, structure in space). Gamma rays are emitted when ultra high-speed (3-x) matter drops below FTL speeds. Dependent on the magnitude of the supernova, some matter may be accelerated to ultra high-speed and so gamma ray radiation may also be observed as individual atoms (of motion) drop back to the low speed region.

*Outward explosion in time has as its reciprocal an INWARD explosion in space* (we call this an implosion). As you and I are material observers we observe the equivalent inward in 3D space (we cannot directly observe 3D coordinate time.... bummer) and so the object appears to us as to be a massively dense point in space that appears... "not there" (what we erroneously take to be a “black hole.")

The inner, heavier layers, being confined in space, IMPLODE in space (out in time) with the heavier elements closer to the plane of explosion (the new surface of the supernova'ed star, really the core in time) with the lighter elements more abundant going inward. A reverse density gradient... inside-out from a typical "star."  If Sol-like stars are Yang, then the White Dwarf star is all Yin, baby.

FTL motion would be observed as anti-gravity motion. White dwarf stars don’t suck, they blow.
(As they say, there’s no gravity, the Earth sucks! That's a joke.)

EDIT: Attachment (1) from Etidorhpa; Or, the End of Earth: The Strange History of a Mysterious Being and the Account of a Remarkable Journey: Chapter XXVI. Motion From Inherent Energy.—“Lead Me Deeper Into This Expanding Study.”  No copyright due to time since publishing.  Fascinating...


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 19, 2019)

I have too much BS going on in my life. I don't watch the news because it upsets me too much, and i get "triggered" super quickly. So yeah I'm done. I'm actually pretty clueless when it comes to science and my IQ is like 50 so my contribution won't be much good anyway. I'mn ot even being sarcastic lol... anyway Childish or whatever I have no mind for your wacky conspiracy theories, good day to you too sir


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Mar 19, 2019)

FCG said:


> That Hawkings is or is not who he claims to be is irrelevant to the conversation at hand. That you would voluntarily leave the conversation thread because the idea Hawings is not who he claims to be is childish and hyperbolic. Fine, censure yourself. Good day, sir.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's one of those moments, you're dancing around the edges of theoretic physics with your theory and there are sections that would be very very hard to dissprove , despite going against convention.
However real proven ,science has been done to back up conventional science so i think it is unlikely to be all wrong.

I have a theory on many things that don't fully align with consensus but it has to be said most of science seams solid to me, i do take issue with dark energy and matter since the amount of matter, that astounds scientists with it's unexpected existence, each year has me perplexed.
and i personally theorise the increasing expansion of the universe to be due to variations in the foam of the universe ie the flow of galaxys seams to be around voids in a foam like strucure of nothingness, (again Bs as its clearly one hell of a black hole that blew out the bubble in the early universe).

But in these voids of matter time would go faster making a smaller inertial change exaggerated.
 To explain it imagine a man, no a nuclear robot who is running in a straight line, down a hypothetically never ending path for 200 light years at a constant speed.

 You should be able to work out the time it takes easy ,,but in my head, the space between here and there runs at varying time based speeds, meaning only the robot could ever know that math's of how long it would take and only from his perception , gravitational based time dilation is proven at planetary scales ,imagine the effect at galactic scales.


----------



## FCG (Mar 19, 2019)

witkazy said:


> From point of view of sci-fi fan this thread rocks and as to who is right or wrong ...i'll wait untill i can pick jar of delicious black holes from the shelf in tesco and read label on back.
> ps.( Anti gravity jar, patent pending) .



That's just the thing.  You can buy a bag of hammers, or a jar of acetone.
You cannot buy a pack of speed 1/2... 1 unit of space per 2 units of time (or 1/2 the speed of light)

What we call matter is a 3D temporal rotational displacement from unity (scalar rotationally outwards in time, scalar linear inward in space).
There are no gravity waves and there is no graviton or other inter-mediating particle of force.  Merely the establishment of "mass" creates the inward motion in space which we call gravity.  This is why we can't block gravity like we can shield electrical or magnetic fields... gravity is the inherent equivalent space motion as a result of the reciprocal motion on the other side of the unit boundary in the Time Region of the atom.

Our outward motion in time is observed as inward motion in space (gravity) due to our spacial vantage point.

What is thermal motion?  Thermal motion is a linear vibration within the Time Region of the atom.  We measure this effect as *temperature*.  As 1/2 of the linear vibration is co-incident in the direction of the natural reference system (outward from unity), it is non-effective; only the inward 1/2 of the vibration is effective.  Inward in time is outward in space (reciprocal: s/t = 1) and so as *thermal motion increases* the effect is to *push matter apart in space* (really the progression is increasing in expression, being the default state of everything).

We see this in the various phase transitions for what we call solid, liquid, and gas, all of which can only exist in the low-speed region (1-x) found within a gravitational limit.  To wit: if we heat a solid we eventually reach a transition temperature (really a range as the property of an aggregate that we call "state" is really a property of each individual atom which comprises that aggregate) that we label as the melting point.  At this point the thermal motion is sufficient to partially nullify the inward force of gravity result in an additional (scalar) dimension of freedom... our 3D aggregate has become 2D with one dimension progressing at the speed of light.  We call this the liquid state.  We were to further heat (increase thermal motion) of the atom we will eventually nullify a second (scalar) dimension of inward gravitational motion (2D -> 1D) resulting in an additional dimensional degree of freedom (heat of latent vaporization... energy level).  We call this the gaseous state.  We even model the force of "attraction" between the individual atoms in a gaseous state as a 1-dimensional, two-headed ball-and-stick! Wiki _can't _be wrong, right?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas

That all mass is moving inward scalarly to the same point in space does not mean to imply that matter "attracts" other matter.  If you were driving from Orlando, FL to Dallas, TX, and your buddy was driving from Sacramento, CA, to Dallas, TX, would you say the two of you are being attracted to one-another simply because you both are headed to the same place?  Preposterous... both have the same destination (in this case, Dallas = inward towards unity), and so it could be easily confused for some sort of mutual force of attraction which will result in a meeting in Dallas, no "force" or medium of transport of said "force" required.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 19, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> my IQ is like 50


I know this is off topic, but deserves saying; I promise, your IQ is much higher than 50.


FCG said:


> *Outward explosion in time has as its reciprocal an INWARD explosion in space* (we call this an implosion).


Except that such a concept, and that's all it is, doesn't work in the real world.


----------



## FCG (Mar 19, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Except that such a concept, and that's all it is, doesn't work in the real world.



Is this really anymore unbelievable than the creation of singularity in both space and time? 

I'm suggesting our understanding of what we think is a "black hole" is fundamentally flawed.  It DOES work in the "real world..." what you are calling a black hole is in actuality a newly-formed white dwarf star, one half the bi-product of a supernova of a Main Sequence star.

As well, let's please not forget... "Black Holes" are but a theoretical concept, too:
From the almighty Wiki of the Sky (_oh, bless us, oh Wiki of all knowledge and truth_): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole

"A *black hole* is a region of spacetime exhibiting such strong gravitational effects that nothing—not even particles and electromagnetic radiation such as light—can escape from inside it.[1] The *theory *of general relativity *predicts*..." (emphasis mine)


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 19, 2019)

FCG said:


> Is this really anymore unbelievable


Yes, it is.


FCG said:


> than the creation of singularity in both space and time?





FCG said:


> As well, let's please not forget... "Black Holes" are but a theoretical concept, too


Oh, that's where your understanding of a Black Hole is flawed. We know they exist. Their presence has been observed.


----------



## FCG (Mar 19, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Oh, that's where your understanding of a Black Hole is flawed. We know they exist. Their presence has been observed.



An affect is observable, with an accompanying theoretical explanation...
Well, put this one in your pipe and smoke it.


----------



## Drone (Mar 19, 2019)

Black holes are giant stars that underwent implosion (like Kip Thorne said 'back in the day they said collapse, now we say implosion')  and gravity won.
Some astronomers believe there might be black holes that were created directly from giant gas clouds (without intermediate giant star phase).

There are other hypothetical types of black holes
1) *Mini black holes*, aka quantum mechanical black holes (introduced by Stephen Hawking)
2) *Planck particle* - a tiny black hole whose Compton wavelength is equal to its Schwarzschild radius and its mass ≈ Planck mass

Normal black holes definitely exist (Ligo, Lisa and Event Horizon confirmed/will confirm their existence).
Mini black holes and Planck particles? Dunno, maybe they exist or even can be created


----------



## Frontino (Mar 19, 2019)

FCG said:


> You imagine that photons are buzzing by at the "speed of light;" not quite, YOU just gravitated into the photon at the "speed of light." This goes for any "light-speed" EM radiation that does not occupy all 3 dimensions of SCALAR space/counterspace (i.e. at least one free dimension to allow for the progression).


I'm not following: if photons are still, how is a light source emitting omnidirectionally?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 19, 2019)

Frontino said:


> I'm not following: if photons are still, how is a light source emitting omnidirectionally?


He's a troll. Just ignore him.


----------



## FCG (Mar 20, 2019)

Frontino said:


> I'm not following: if photons are still, how is a light source emitting omnidirectionally?



Scalarly outward in the natural reference system has no inherent direction in equivalent space except to say outward from all other locations.
In other words, outward has no preferred direction. Due to the law of probability, this becomes all directions.
Similarly you ask, which way is scalar inward in space?  To which the answer is: all directions... inwards towards all other mass... all mass wants to get together as all mass is heading in the same direction... INWARD!



Drone said:


> Black holes are giant stars that underwent implosion (like Kip Thorne said 'back in the day they said collapse, now we say implosion') and gravity won.



This is not far from the truth.... although gravity doesn't "win."
The inner layers of the star, at the nickel-colbalt-iron layer are confined in space during the supernova blast and are accelerated FTL.
The inner, hotter layers containing the heavier elements explode in TIME (outward in time -> inward in space).
The lighter, relatively coolers layers explode in SPACE (*outward in space* *** WE *OBSERVE* THIS PART*** -> inward in time).

Just as (spacial) gravity eventually re-condenses the matter in 3D space, forming a new proto-star (which then begins to work back into and up the Main Sequence) -> Red Giant, Orange Giant, Yellow, Yellow-white (Sol is here and is becomes more white by the day it seems), White, finally Blue Giant... *temporal gravity* also re-forms the white dwarf *in 3D time*.  As the white dwarf (at this point, what looks like a black hole due to the intense anti-gravity which will have *pushed *(sorry, no sucking here) all other low-speed matter away in space) appears as a dark position in the cosmos.  X-rays and possibly gamma rays are also emitted as ultra high-speed (3-x) and intermediate speed (2-x) atoms fall back into the low speed range (1-x).






A thought occurs to me... there is no familiarity with this concept of SCALAR MOTION AS SPEED as the reader is likely only familiar with vectorial motion.  Scalar motion has no inherent direction in space. It is critical that we first discriminate between coordinate dimensions and scalar dimensions of motion.  To this end I have attached* Fundamentals of Scalar Motion for reference... this is a must read.*

There are two limits which can trigger a supernova.

Type I supernova occur when the star reaches a thermal limit.
Type II supernova occur when the atoms that are the star begin to reach their age limit (compound motion rotation in time reaches an isotopic mass limit, becomes unstable, and essentially flies apart as radiation by-products)
Type I supernova occur when a Blue Giant (end of life) class stars reach a thermal limit (a limit to the ability for thermal motion to be expressed)

Type II supernova can occur when a star is anywhere in the life cycle which is the Main Sequence.

Type II supernova are far, far more energetic than Type I supernova.



Drone said:


> Normal black holes definitely exist (Ligo, Lisa and Event Horizon confirmed/will confirm their existence).



The affect observed which you and many others have attributed to the "black holes" exists,  yes... not sure why you keep making the leap to the conclusion this means that "black holes" definitely exist.

They ("black holes") are an _attempted *theorized *_explanation (and not a very good one at that).  There are other (better) explanations... I am attempting (not so successfully it seems) to introduce another possibility for consideration. 

I'm not trying to tell you that the affect that you call the "black hole" is not observed... I am telling you your reason for believing so is fundamentally flawed.  There is no "black hole," its a newly-formed white dwarf star.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 20, 2019)

FCG said:


> I am telling you your reason for believing so is fundamentally flawed. There is no "black hole," its a newly-formed white dwarf star.


Next you'll be telling us all about the benefits of over-unity generators.


----------



## FCG (Mar 20, 2019)

Tesla understood all of this, at least from an electrical perspective.
Nowadays Tesla is just a joke of a car manufacturer.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 20, 2019)

FCG said:


> Tesla understood all of this, at least from an electrical perspective.


Tesla was brilliant certainly, but he did not understand the universe the way we do now.


FCG said:


> Nowadays Tesla is just a joke of a car manufacturer.


That is your opinion. Electrically driven and powered vehicles are the future and Tesla is pioneering many of the technologies needed to make that future a reality. Hardly a joke.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 20, 2019)

Maybe when they take a picture of a black hole you will accept they exist? So how does a White Dwarf star consume nearby matter if it pushes it away? 

Are you saying the gravitational force at the centre of spiral galaxy is a star? again the EHT will disprove your theory lol


----------



## Bones (Mar 20, 2019)

Already done - Scientists have already confirmed that a "Black Hole" lies at the center of our galaxy and others too.


FCG said:


> The affect observed which you and many others have attributed to the "black holes" exists,  yes... not sure why you keep making the leap to the conclusion this means that "black holes" definitely exist.
> 
> They ("black holes") are an _attempted *theorized *_explanation (and not a very good one at that).  There are other (better) explanations... I am attempting (not so successfully it seems) to introduce another possibility for consideration.
> 
> I'm not trying to tell you that the affect that you call the "black hole" is not observed... I am telling you your reason for believing so is fundamentally flawed.  There is no "black hole," its a newly-formed white dwarf star.


Gotcha on the above - NASA themselves state Black Holes DO exist - The thing you refer to going from White to Black is in reference to a Dwarf, not a Black Hole so a Black Hole as it's known is not what you said it was.
It depends on the evolutionary path the star takes as it nears the end of it's life cycle.
https://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/educators/lessons/xray_spectra/background-lifecycles.html

Wanna contradict?
Take it up with NASA, it's their info - I'm just posting the reference link to it.


----------



## AmioriK (Mar 20, 2019)

Bones said:


> Already done - Scientists have already confirmed that a "Black Hole" lies at the center of our galaxy and others too.
> 
> Gotcha on the above - NASA themselves state Black Holes DO exist - The thing you refer to going from White to Black is in reference to a Dwarf, not a Black Hole so a Black Hole as it's known is not what you said it was.
> It depends on the evolutionary path the star takes as it nears the end of it's life cycle.
> ...


NASA? Pffffft. they'are all frauds. Imposters like Stephen Hawking!

/s


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 20, 2019)

Perhaps "Black Hole" is a misnomer, but it is what they have named the unknown quantity which they are still trying to quantify.
So far nobody knows if it is a hole in the true sense, or some force or body which we know nothing of.
Time will tell, but maybe not in our generations.


----------



## Frontino (Mar 20, 2019)

FCG said:


> Scalarly outward in the natural reference system has no inherent direction in equivalent space except to say outward from all other locations.
> In other words, outward has no preferred direction. Due to the law of probability, this becomes all directions.
> Similarly you ask, which way is scalar inward in space? To which the answer is: all directions... inwards towards all other mass... all mass wants to get together as all mass is heading in the same direction... INWARD!


Like, if I turn on a lightbulb in a room, if light diffuses, reflects and refracts it's because the room and everything inside is collapsing at the speed of light?


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 20, 2019)

Frontino said:


> Like, if I turn on a lightbulb in a room, if light diffuses, reflects and refracts it's because the room and everything inside is collapsing at the speed of light?


Maybe you better start with "Electricity for Dummies" 
Welcome to TPU.


----------



## Frontino (Mar 20, 2019)

FCG said:


> all mass wants to get together as all mass is heading in the same direction... INWARD!


1. So, for this Recyprocal System Theory, light is massless?
2. Is it possible to digitally simulate a small scale universe with the Recyprocal System Theory?
3. What's the shape of the universe for the RST?


----------



## hat (Mar 21, 2019)

FCG said:


> View attachment 119098



This... doesn't make any sense. Stars do not begin life as red supergiants and then get smaller and hotter later in life. And Sol, being a main sequence star right now, doesn't go straight to white dwarf. In time, as Sol is in the final stages of its life, it will begin to run out of "fuel" (hydrogen) to fuse in the core, and fusion of heavier elements, such as helium, begins. This causes the star to swell in size, yet "burn" cooler, resulting in a red giant stage. Sol is not large enough to fuse heavier elements beyond a certain point which would cause a rapid collapse (nova), so when it runs out of fusible fuel, it simply fades into a white dwarf - the white hot leftover core of the star.

Supernovas occur in much larger stars than Sol. They appear blue due to the higher energy given off by, well, more fusion happening simultaneously. But, these stars are powerful enough to fuse elements heavier than Sol can at the end of their life. Eventually, fusion of iron begins... which, interestingly, results in energy being consumed rather than released. As there is no more energy keeping this massive star from collapsing in on itself, it does so with a bang (supernova). In this spectacular heat and pressure, the heaviest elements are fused and born, and what's left is either a neutron star, or a black hole.

This image here defies all logic. How does a red supergiant suddenly stop fusing heavier elements and begin fusing hydrogen again to become a main sequence yellow star, and furthermore suddenly have the capacity to burn enough of it at once to become a blue giant?


----------



## Bones (Mar 21, 2019)

I believe the entire thing from him has been a running joke all along. 

"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit" is the approach used in his posting. 

Best thing to do is pay him no mind from this point foward because you'll only get more of the same baffling from him.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 21, 2019)

Bones said:


> Best thing to do is pay him no mind from this point foward because you'll only get more of the same baffling from him.


Not so much baffling as it is just bizarre.


----------



## Bones (Mar 21, 2019)

Bizzare is as bizzare does. 
Not gonna read any further into it.


----------



## witkazy (Mar 21, 2019)

All this black hole talk got me curious enough to start wondering what would happen if one tried to overclock black hole 
i guess merging two black holes oughta give nice boost 
http://hubblesite.org/explore_astronomy/black_holes/encyc_mod3_q6.html


----------



## Bones (Mar 21, 2019)

Just imagine - With it's "Beyond insane magnetic field" one could possibly harness all that energy to generate power like a dynamo because (In theory) that's what it would be. 

I dunno - Let a couple of cables hang down and power up?


----------



## Drone (Mar 21, 2019)

witkazy said:


> All this black hole talk got me curious enough to start wondering what would happen if one tried to overclock black hole
> i guess merging two black holes oughta give nice boost
> http://hubblesite.org/explore_astronomy/black_holes/encyc_mod3_q6.html


Strange, they didn't update the link. LIGO detected and confirmed 5 events. All of them are stellar mass black holes. LISA (space analog of ligo) will be able to detect heavier black holes.
Two black holes merge and this leads to ringdown. Models predict that if there are 3 black holes then two of them will merge and slingshot the third one. This process is more peculiar than simple ringdown.


----------



## witkazy (Mar 21, 2019)

Now that would be something to write home about ,but seriously, two black holes is plenty for me ;p


----------



## Drone (Mar 21, 2019)

witkazy said:


> Now that would be something to write home about ,but seriously, two black holes is plenty for me ;p


This is mindboggling indeed lol. iirc Euler once said that integral for "three-body problem" does have closed form just nobody could ever find it. Henri Poincare tried but failed, he just found approximation. Simulations on todays computers use approximations, but true solution exists, we just need new Newton or Einstein lol

2 black holes simulation is perfect though. Kip Thorne explained that he and his team spent years but finally did it (geometrodynamics) before they actually observed real black hole-black hole collision.

4 black holes even more fun. They merge in pairs and then slingshot each other in opposite directions. Astronomers detected super fast black holes hurling through intergalactic space maybe it was one of that processes.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 22, 2019)

Drone said:


> Models predict that if there are 3 black holes then two of them will merge and slingshot the third one.


Not always. It depends on the orbits and the rotation of each.



Drone said:


> we just need new Newton or Einstein lol


Sooner or later that's going to happen.


----------



## Bones (Mar 24, 2019)

A little more on something I mentioned earlier. 
NASA Saw Something Come Out Of A Black Hole For The First Time Ever


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 24, 2019)

Bones said:


> A little more on something I mentioned earlier.
> NASA Saw Something Come Out Of A Black Hole For The First Time Ever


That was likely to be a small asteroid type object on close trajectory to Markarian 335 and very close(but not close enough to be pulled in), was then ripped apart, super-heated(which would cause the high energy EMR emissions) and sling-shot away a high speed. It is *very unlikely* to have been something escaping from within the event horizon.


----------



## hat (Mar 24, 2019)

Bones said:


> I believe the entire thing from him has been a running joke all along.
> 
> "If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit" is the approach used in his posting.
> 
> Best thing to do is pay him no mind from this point foward because you'll only get more of the same baffling from him.





lexluthermiester said:


> Not so much baffling as it is just bizarre.



I mean, they said the same thing about Galileo. New ideas are popping up all the time, some of which threaten to tear down our current understanding of things as we know it. Looking back, we laugh at the idea of the geocentric solar system, but 500 years ago, that was solid science and the idea of a heliocentric system, to those people long ago, seemed equally ridiculous. 

What I simply can't wrap my head around are such ideas that black holes are white dwarf stars, which somehow exist in space as black holes, but exist in "time" (as if time is some alternate plane of existence which we can't observe) as white dwarfs. And his ideas about how light works are even more impossible for me to understand. How is it that I, the observer, am somehow gravitating at the speed of light towards the light source, when light appears to radiate in all directions? Wouldn't that mean the Earth should be hurtling into the Sun at the speed of light? Wouldn't our planet have been barbecued billions of years ago if that were the case? How is my body not being ripped apart by this incredible force? And, what if there are multiple light sources? Surely I can't be gravitating towards hundreds of visible stars in the night sky, while still standing on the Earth. I would imagine, given the force of all this gravity and my body moving towards all these light sources (at the speed of light, no less) I observe every day, I would be a very, very dead man.


----------



## Bones (Mar 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> That was likely to be a small asteroid type object on close trajectory to Markarian 335 and very close(but not close enough to be pulled in), was then ripped apart, super-heated(which would cause the high energy EMR emissions) and sling-shot away a high speed. It is *very unlikely* to have been something escaping from within the event horizon.



I really can't say one way or the other myself, just found it and posted the link to the article.



hat said:


> I mean, they said the same thing about Galileo. New ideas are popping up all the time, some of which threaten to tear down our current understanding of things as we know it. Looking back, we laugh at the idea of the geocentric solar system, but 500 years ago, that was solid science and the idea of a heliocentric system, to those people long ago, seemed equally ridiculous.
> 
> What I simply can't wrap my head around are such ideas that black holes are white dwarf stars, which somehow exist in space as black holes, but exist in "time" (as if time is some alternate plane of existence which we can't observe) as white dwarfs. And his ideas about how light works are even more impossible for me to understand. How is it that I, the observer, am somehow gravitating at the speed of light towards the light source, when light appears to radiate in all directions? Wouldn't that mean the Earth should be hurtling into the Sun at the speed of light? Wouldn't our planet have been barbecued billions of years ago if that were the case? How is my body not being ripped apart by this incredible force? And, what if there are multiple light sources? Surely I can't be gravitating towards hundreds of visible stars in the night sky, while still standing on the Earth. I would imagine, given the force of all this gravity and my body moving towards all these light sources (at the speed of light, no less) I observe every day, I would be a very, very dead man.



I realize all that but it's not exactly what was said but in HOW it was said.
I've already said in a previous post things we understand and perceive as what it "Is" will change over time as more, better data is discovered. I don't have a problem with alternate theories being presented at all because some things as you said that seems crazy at the time it's suggested may well sound loony but be close to if not the truth. However we now live in a time where (Unlike back then) we can and do expect the odd and bizzare to possibly be true.

As an example when searching for Earth-like planets they did find one that seems to defy what anyone would have ever found. According to the data gathered on it the entire planet is made of carbon and they believe it's actually a huge honkin diamond in space!

Stick that on the wife's finger. 

However..... That's what current methods of reseach and the data gathered from this research says.
You can only learn so much from a distance as we are from it and that goes for black holes too.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 24, 2019)

hat said:


> I mean, they said the same thing about Galileo. New ideas are popping up all the time, some of which threaten to tear down our current understanding of things as we know it.


To be fair, in Galileo's time most of the civilized world thought the earth was either flat, the center of the universe or both. We have gained an exponential amount of knowledge and evidence since that time. Our understanding of the universe is now much less about feeling and ego-based mumbo-jumbo and more about logic based evidence collection. This will continue.


----------



## hat (Mar 24, 2019)

Sure, but I'm sure in 500 years time, if humans are still around, people then will look back on us now and think the same of us. I mean, we might not just believe random crap without any supporting evidence, but I'm sure we're pretty dumb right now compared to what we would be like 500 years in the future.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 24, 2019)

hat said:


> Sure, but I'm sure in 500 years time, if humans are still around


We've been around in more or less our current form for the last 500,000 years. Chances are we'll be here in 500.


hat said:


> people then will look back on us now and think the same of us.


Entirely likely. Hopefully they will think the same of us as we do of past scholars.


hat said:


> I mean, we might not just believe random crap without any supporting evidence, but I'm sure we're pretty dumb right now compared to what we would be like 500 years in the future.


Again, possible.


----------



## hat (Mar 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> We've been around in more or less our current form for that last 500,000. Chances are we'll be here.



Well, as our knowledge expands, so does our ability to kill eachother. We sure didn't have nukes 500 years ago. We're also facing a bunch of new problems we didn't have 500 years ago... though we don't have the same problems they did then. In my opinion, we're gonna need a few miracles to survive for any meaningful length of time at this point.


----------



## Frontino (Mar 24, 2019)

hat said:


> And his ideas about how light works are even more impossible for me to understand. How is it that I, the observer, am somehow gravitating at the speed of light towards the light source, when light appears to radiate in all directions?


I also have a hard time understanding what he writes, but that's because I can't visualize in my head this "scalar motion" he mentions.

Now, if this scalar dimension was, somehow, a completely reversed image of our universe, say, like when in the movie Interstellar, Cooper's Ranger is entering 



Spoiler



Gargantua and we see the cosmos looking like a wormhole,


 maybe that's what this scalar reference frame could be: some sort of mirror dimension where the edge is at the center and the core is around it?

Ok, maybe I figured it out.

If space was expanding at lightspeed, but anything which had mass was dragging itself back, it would collapse into various types of celestial bodies (stars, planets, ...), but anything without mass would be dragged by the expansion of space at lightspeed (light).
This way, light is not really moving on its own, but pulled by the expanding space, and we get hit by light because we're way slower than space, due to our mass.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 24, 2019)

Frontino said:


> If space was expanding at lightspeed, but anything which had mass was dragging itself back, it would collapse into various types of celestial bodies (stars, planets, ...), but anything without mass would be dragged by the expansion of space at lightspeed (light).


Except that there is but one problem with that logic; The universe has been observed to be expanding at a rate greater than the speed of light, by more than double. The logic proposed by "scalar motion" does not and can not account for that single observed behavior of the universe, let alone the rest of the problems with observations made of the universe. Of course, General/Special Relativity does not explain those mysteries either. This is why Hawking couldn't resolve his Black Hole theory and why it doesn't work. That's not to say that his work wasn't brilliant, only that until the big five mysteries are solved, we will not be able to resolve how certain things work.


----------



## hat (Mar 24, 2019)

Yeah, there's definitely some problems with anything moving at over twice the speed of light... perhaps our understanding of the speed of light is flawed, or our observation is flawed. Perhaps there's some sort of space/time dilation not (correctly) accounted for?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 24, 2019)

hat said:


> perhaps our understanding of the speed of light is flawed


That's not it, we understand the speed of light well. It's the motion of light through the medium of the universe that needs better understanding.


hat said:


> Perhaps there's some sort of space/time dilation not (correctly) accounted for?


Possible and very likely.


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 25, 2019)

Frontino said:


> Ok, maybe I figured it out.
> 
> If space was expanding at lightspeed, but anything which had mass was dragging itself back, it would collapse into various types of celestial bodies (stars, planets, ...), but anything without mass would be dragged by the expansion of space at lightspeed (light).
> This way, light is not really moving on its own, but pulled by the expanding space, and we get hit by light because we're way slower than space, due to our mass.


Except the expansion of space is accelerating, it's not a constant.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 25, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> Except the expansion of space is accelerating, it's not a constant.


Exactly. General/Special Relativity predict that the universe should be slowing down and even contracting at this point in history, but that is not what we observe.


----------



## hat (Mar 25, 2019)

I often wonder if the Big Crunch theory still isn't valid. How do we know the Universe still isn't in its infancy, and the expansion will _eventually _slow down, until we have contraction instead?

Of course, there's other theories for the end of the Universe. I recall reading about the Big RIp, where expansion becomes so fast that everything begins to fall apart at the atomic level. Not nice. There's also the Big Chill, where the Universe basically burns out. I suppose a fancier term for this one is "heat death".

I still feel we are quite insignificant. Each of our lives are like a spark emitted by a much greater flame. Probably less than that. The Universe is so inconceivably massive, with as many galaxies separate from our own as there are stars in our own galaxy. I find it a bit odd we think we can begin to understand how this works.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 25, 2019)

hat said:


> I often wonder if the Big Crunch theory still isn't valid. How do we know the Universe still isn't in its infancy, and the expansion will _eventually _slow down, until we have contraction instead?


The acceleration. If the "Big Crunch" were a thing, the universe would already be slowing down under it's own mass.


hat said:


> with as many galaxies separate from our own as there are stars in our own galaxy


Actually, many more. There are tens(perhaps hundreds) of trillions of galaxies in the universe. There are only upwards of 300 billion stars in the Milky Way.


----------



## hat (Mar 25, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> The acceleration. If the "Big Crunch" were a thing, the universe would already be slowing down under it's own mass.



How can we be certain of this?



lexluthermiester said:


> Actually, many more. There are tens(perhaps hundreds) of trillions of galaxies in the universe. There are only upwards of 300 billion stars in the Milky Way.



I figured someone would say that. I didn't mean that literally, but you make a fair point.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 25, 2019)

hat said:


> How can we be certain of this?


Common logic based observation. If the universe were going to contract at any time in the future, it would not still be accelerating, therefore contraction is not "in the stars". (Pun intended.)


----------



## hat (Mar 25, 2019)

Unless it is. The Universe has been around for quite a while already, and I expect it to be around for quite a while longer. Who knows what's in store in the future?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Mar 25, 2019)

hat said:


> Unless it is. The Universe has been around for quite a while already, and I expect it to be around for quite a while longer. Who knows what's in store in the future?


Here's the thing. It really isn't possible. If we were to throw time in reverse, everything we can observe in the universe retracts back to a single point in space(a point beyond our observational range, yet specifically definable point). The universe is expanding with such force and acceleration that the chances of something halting and reversing that expansion are infinitesimally small. To put it in perspective, a snowball has a better chance of staying frozen for one minute on the surface of a type "O" star than the "Big Crunch" ever taking place at any point in the future.


----------



## Dinnercore (Apr 10, 2019)

https://eventhorizontelescope.org/b...ent-horizon-telescope-be-presented-april-10th

Just dropping this here, we will see the first 'direct' picture of a black hole soon. Hopefully.

Or check in on the livestream 9 a.m. EDT  https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/blackholes/


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 10, 2019)

Dated April 1st hmmmmm


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 10, 2019)

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/tec...iverse/ar-BBVMH7r?li=BBoPWjQ&ocid=mailsignout


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 10, 2019)

Dinnercore said:


> https://eventhorizontelescope.org/b...ent-horizon-telescope-be-presented-april-10th
> 
> Just dropping this here, we will see the first 'direct' picture of a black hole soon. Hopefully.
> 
> Or check in on the livestream 9 a.m. EDT  https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/blackholes/


It is going to be very interesting!
As a pretext, anyone curious should watch the following from Veritasium;








He gives an excellent explanation of how things work.


----------



## delshay (Apr 10, 2019)

Here's the youtube Link


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 10, 2019)

So we've went from this image the Hubble Space Telescope snapped back on July 6, 2000.






Now we have this image.




The first image of the environment around a black hole. As a matter of fact, it's not all dark.

https://arstechnica.com/science/201...-gives-us-first-images-of-what-its-named-for/


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 10, 2019)

Hubble didn't had enough resolving power.
The minimum angle that we can see is dictated by the size of the collecting device (and wavelength/frequency captured).
Hubble has a 2.4m mirror and captures light (short wavelength).
This new result is equivalent to a capture device several thousand miles wide, but capturing radio signals, so it could resolve the actual hole while not being obscured.


----------



## Animalpak (Apr 10, 2019)

well at the end the hollywood movies and documentaries they where right with the design.


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 11, 2019)

So when you watch something fall into a black hole what do you see? Supposedly you see whatever it is get closer and closer to the event horizon. Moving slower and slower the closer it gets. Until when it reaches the event horizon it totally stops moving from your perspective. And even given an infinite amount of time to observe it, you will never see it move through the event horizon. It's stuck there forever. From your point of view anyway. While it has not actually stopped moving, but instead has actually passed through the event horizon from its perspective. And the reason for the discrepancy regarding what you observe has something to do with light travelling from the object taking an infinite amount of time to reach your eyes once it's passed the event horizon. So you can't ever actually see that happen. Which I sort of understand. What I don't understand is how a black hole is black then. How is it not a permanent collage of the images of everything that's ever fallen into it? When you look at it, you should still be able to see everything frozen at the event horizon then. Right? 

But what happens when the black hole gets bigger? The event horizon expands? Or does it not? What happens to the things you're not able to ever see go through the event horizon then? Does the event horizon move outward past them? Or do they move outward with the event horizon?

There's never a shortage of WTF when it comes to black holes.


"It's a good thing to keep an open mind. But not so much that your brain falls out."


----------



## hat (Apr 11, 2019)

Nice most @MrGenius. You raise some excellent points. 

They say this black hole in particular is approximately the size of the solar system? That's nuts. Must have been one hell of a star to leave behind such a large black hole.


----------



## biffzinker (Apr 11, 2019)

hat said:


> They say this black hole in particular is approximately the size of the solar system? That's nuts. Must have been one hell of a star to leave behind such a large black hole.







https://xkcd.com/2135/


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 11, 2019)

hat said:


> They say this black hole in particular is approximately the size of the solar system? That's nuts. *Must have been one hell of a star to leave behind such a large black hole.*


That's actually a misunderstanding. It started out as a generally standard "size"(mass) black hole and has gained mass through matter absorption and merging with other black holes over many billions of years.


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 11, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> So when you watch something fall into a black hole what do you see? Supposedly you see whatever it is get closer and closer to the event horizon. Moving slower and slower the closer it gets. Until when it reaches the event horizon it totally stops moving from your perspective.


That doesn't make sense to me.
Logic dictates that the further away an object is from the black hole, the less effect it would have, and therefore it would move slower.
It's like watching water go down a sink, the outer edges are slow in the whirlpool, the inner edge the fastest.
reaching the event horizon shouldn't make an object appear to stand still, in fact it should just "go over the edge" and disappear.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 11, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> Until when it reaches the event horizon it totally stops moving from your perspective. And even given an infinite amount of time to observe it, you will never see it move through the event horizon. It's stuck there forever. From your point of view anyway. While it has not actually stopped moving, but instead has actually passed through the event horizon from its perspective. And the reason for the discrepancy regarding what you observe has something to do with light traveling from the object taking an infinite amount of time to reach your eyes once it's passed the event horizon. So you can't ever actually see that happen.


That actually isn't the way it works. What you are talking about is the dilation of time by the effect of the gravity well. Matter appears to slowdown from the perspective of the outside observer when in fact matter accelerates to nearly the speed of light as it moves closer to the center of the gravity well. The event-horizon is not an actual object. It is a boundary. A distance threshold away from the actual black-hole mass object. Any particle moving inward toward the gravity well beyond that boundary will not be able to escape and will no longer be observable from outside of said boundary. This boundary is not a set distance away from the actual mass object. As the back-hole gains mass, the gravity well become stronger and as an effect the boundary moves further outward and away from the mass object creating it.

So as matter approaches the event horizon boundary, it appears to slow down from the perspective of outside observer. This is of course not happening. The matter in question simply continues moving inward toward the black-hole object until it is absorbed. This motion does not stop as it crosses the event-horizon boundary. All that changes is the ability to observe such motion from beyond the boundary. The matter falling in just keeps going. 


Caring1 said:


> That doesn't make sense to me.
> Logic dictates that the further away an object is from the black hole, the less effect it would have, and therefore it would move slower.
> It's like watching water go down a sink, the outer edges are slow in the whirlpool, the inner edge the fastest.
> reaching the event horizon shouldn't make an object appear to stand still, in fact it should just "go over the edge" and disappear.


While this is true, gravity has the effect of dilating(or slowing) time. So from the perspective of the outside observer, things(matter & energy) appear to slow down as they approach the event-horizon, but this is only an illusion. As described above, there is no "edge" to go over. Just a boundary from which there is no escape velocity fast enough to move beyond. The irony of a "Black-Hole" is that it is only "black" from the outside of the boundary of the event-horizon. Inside that boundary it is actually extremely bright and intensely hot. This is because all of the EMR has no where to go except orbit the mass object at the center until it is absorbed, which takes a lot of time. The intensity is so great that if you were to manage getting inside the event-horizon in one piece, you would be ripped apart within trillionths of a seconds from effects of intense EMR.


----------



## kapone32 (Apr 11, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> That doesn't make sense to me.
> Logic dictates that the further away an object is from the black hole, the less effect it would have, and therefore it would move slower.
> It's like watching water go down a sink, the outer edges are slow in the whirlpool, the inner edge the fastest.
> reaching the event horizon shouldn't make an object appear to stand still, in fact it should just "go over the edge" and disappear.




Theoretically speaking a black hole should behave in the same way as our sun in relation to objects being closer orbiting faster. The main difference being that instead of stable, the gravity well from the black hole would initially slow down the objects orbiting it by pulling them in until they reach the point where they begin to accelerate. Super Massive Black Holes like the one in the centre of our galaxy are not usually found anywhere other than the centre of galaxies and as such act the same way as the sun does to cause whatever is around it to orbit as evidenced by the spin of our galaxy even if it is on a scale that no one alive can actually see. Even the Sumerians could not have seen a different night sky than what we see today.


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 11, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> That doesn't make sense to me.
> Logic dictates that the further away an object is from the black hole, the less effect it would have, and therefore it would move slower.
> It's like watching water go down a sink, the outer edges are slow in the whirlpool, the inner edge the fastest.
> reaching the event horizon shouldn't make an object appear to stand still, in fact it should just "go over the edge" and disappear.


Watch this.









Then check this one out @ around 7:00, for another explanation of why.


----------



## Bones (Apr 11, 2019)

Just bear in mind everything we "Know" is based on observation from where we are relative to a Black Hole and it's mostly speculation, not fact at this point.

I'll be honest, anyone that says "This and that" is happening within a Black Hole doesn't truly know much of anything about it. The only _real _way to know and confirm things as fact is to go in and see firsthand, at least we _do_ know the outcome of such an attempt.

As to what we really know, well...... We're still learning about things here on Earth too.

No way we could possibly know all that about something so far away based on pure observation and theory alone because you can discover only so much that way, much of it IS speculation and nothing else. I do agree to speculate isn't a bad thing but you still have to remember the circumstances in which said observations and such are made. The only true way to know would be to go there and see it all firsthand, a good example is when Pluto had it's first visit from a probe just a few years ago.....

Look at all the things we didn't know before about Pluto that's known now, and even with that there is still so much we've yet to discover about it.
All I'm saying here is keep it real.


----------



## MatGrow (Apr 11, 2019)

AmioriK said:


> What's at the centre of most large galaxies, then?



I don't believe in that first image of black hole. I don't believe it's real one.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 11, 2019)

Here's another vid that is really interesting.


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 12, 2019)

MatGrow said:


> I don't believe in that first image of black hole. I don't believe it's real one.


Some people refuse to believe in reality. Doesn't make it any less real.

"When it's them, it's them, it's them...it's really you." 

If everything is lies and conspiracies, it's because you need it to be that way. You can't accept that someone else knows something that you don't. So you just insist it can't be true. Problem solved? Nope. Problem created.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 12, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> Some people refuse to believe in reality. Doesn't make it any less real.
> 
> "When it's them, it's them, it's them...it's really you."
> 
> If everything is lies and conspiracies, it's because you need it to be that way. You can't accept that someone else knows something that you don't. So you just insist it can't be true. Problem solved? Nope. Problem created.


Actually, I think MatGrow meant that the image itself was computer generated. I don't think he was saying that Black-Holes don't exist.


----------



## MatGrow (Apr 19, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> Some people refuse to believe in reality. Doesn't make it any less real.
> 
> "When it's them, it's them, it's them...it's really you."
> 
> If everything is lies and conspiracies, it's because you need it to be that way. You can't accept that someone else knows something that you don't. So you just insist it can't be true. Problem solved? Nope. Problem created.



I agree with you. 
But to believe it or not doesn't change your life.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 19, 2019)

MatGrow said:


> I agree with you.
> But to believe it or not *doesn't change your life.*


Maybe not, but this is amazing progress and equally fascinating. Science marches on.


----------



## FCG (Apr 21, 2019)

Frontino said:


> I also have a hard time understanding what he writes, but that's because I can't visualize in my head this "scalar motion" he mentions.
> 
> Now, if this scalar dimension was, somehow, a completely reversed image of our universe, say, like when in the movie Interstellar, Cooper's Ranger is entering
> 
> ...



Behold. A man opens his eyes and for the first time sees.

Can’t say this is perfect although you have set a foundation.

Gravitational “direction” is inward in space (outward in time). As light does not move relative to the moving natural reference frame, gravitating objects (matter) overtake these locations in time. I see light.



lexluthermiester said:


> Exactly. General/Special Relativity predict that the universe should be slowing down and even contracting at this point in history, but that is not what we observe.



It will reach c, the “speed of light,” the default speed of the universe.

We are observing outward scalar motion between all points from the perspective of a fixed 3D spacial reference frame that we call reality.  We are inside a gravitational limit. That motion is scalarly away from ALL points (conjugate of gravity).

Again, we have a name for this. The Hubble Expansion



lexluthermiester said:


> Except that there is but one problem with that logic; The universe has been observed to be expanding at a rate greater than the speed of light, by more than double.



This has been addressed. Doppler shift, Red shift, same principle, are explained by motion in time in addition to motion in space.

I would suggest you stop arguing why something can’t be and start asking ‘HOW can this be?’


----------



## Drone (Jul 12, 2019)




----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 12, 2019)

FCG said:


> It will reach c, the “speed of light,” the default speed of the universe.


This is incorrect. Light speed is the default speed of EMR.


FCG said:


> We are observing outward scalar motion between all points from the perspective of a fixed 3D spacial reference frame that we call reality. We are inside a gravitational limit. That motion is scalarly away from ALL points (conjugate of gravity).


That statement assumes that gravity is the fundamental force of the universe. It is not.


FCG said:


> This has been addressed. Doppler shift, Red shift, same principle, are explained by motion in time in addition to motion in space.


That statement assumes time is a constant and that it is consistent. It isn't and is not.


FCG said:


> I would suggest you stop arguing why something can’t be and start asking ‘HOW can this be?’


That statement assumes that such a postulation has not taken place. It has. It also assumes that General and Special relativity are perfectly correct. They are not.


----------



## Drone (Sep 12, 2019)

Mid-Mass Black Hole Hurls Star Across the Milky Way






						Mid-Mass Black Hole Hurls Star Across the Milky Way – W. M. Keck Observatory
					

The Keck Observatory telescopes on Maunakea in Hawaii, are the world’s largest optical and infrared telescopes. Keck Observatory's vision is to advance the frontiers of astronomy and share our discoveries with the world.




					www.keckobservatory.org
				




@lynx29  might like this slingshot


Black Hole at the Center of Our Galaxy Appears to be Getting Hungrier






						Black Hole at the Center of Our Galaxy Appears to be Getting Hungrier – W. M. Keck Observatory
					

The Keck Observatory telescopes on Maunakea in Hawaii, are the world’s largest optical and infrared telescopes. Keck Observatory's vision is to advance the frontiers of astronomy and share our discoveries with the world.




					www.keckobservatory.org


----------



## Drone (Sep 25, 2019)

for lulz


----------



## witkazy (Sep 26, 2019)

Is it time to get under the table or duck at least? No wait ,triplets are like bilion light years away so no sweat


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 26, 2019)

witkazy said:


> Is it time to get under the table or duck at least? No wait ,triplets are like bilion light years away so no sweat


LOL! Yeah, they're a bit far away to be of any worry for the people of planet Earth.


----------



## kapone32 (Sep 26, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> LOL! Yeah, they're a bit far away to be of any worry for the people of planet Earth.



The only things i worry about in terms of Space is a non discovered asteroid hitting us from the influence of Jupiter, a comet coming from the Keiper belt and hitting us or (not really a concern for me as I use landmarks) a CME destroying the GPS satellites that so many people depend on for navigation...especially those self driving cars.


----------



## Drone (Sep 26, 2019)

witkazy said:


> Is it time to get under the table or duck at least? No wait ,triplets are like bilion light years away so no sweat


Haha true. Few billion years from now our galaxy and Andromeda will merge and so will their central black holes. Shame, we won't be there to see it.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Sep 26, 2019)

kapone32 said:


> a CME destroying the GPS satellites


And that is very likely to happen. Solar Flares are a very serious threat to Earth and hit us regularly. Unfortunately going to take one from us to learn our lesson, but I imagine it will only take that once.



Drone said:


> Shame, we won't be there to see it.


THAT would be a sight to see!


----------



## kapone32 (Sep 26, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> And that is very likely to happen. Solar Flares are a very serious threat to Earth and hit us regularly. Unfortunately going to take one from us to learn our lesson, but I imagine it will only take that once.
> 
> Yep the sun even sent us a flare a couple of weeks that you could see from Toronto Canada which is 2917 miles south of the North Pole. I totally agree with you that modern society is addicted to the convenience of technology but something like GPS being destroyed would force a refresh back to lack of a better word analog or actually using your eyes and memory for navigation.


----------



## Drone (Sep 26, 2019)

Latest black hole news /NASA video


----------



## kileymi (Oct 19, 2019)

Black holes are really fascinating. It's gravitational force are so strong and it's very scary to have even a very tiny blackhole within our solar system. I hope the scientists will get to have more information about the mysteries surrounding this space matter.


----------



## Eskimonster (Nov 10, 2019)

Dear Anton with some news


----------



## Drone (Dec 14, 2019)




----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Jan 25, 2020)

Yes as fascinating as black hole bodies seem to be , even math has a hard time decrypting such celestial bodies.
I got as far as Plank density.


----------



## Drone (Feb 11, 2020)

Spacetime 'Echoes' From Quantum Black Holes Could Soon Change Physics Forever


----------



## Drone (Mar 2, 2020)




----------



## Drone (Mar 19, 2020)

This sounds so cool!






						There Are Infinite Rings of Light Around Black Holes. Here's How We Could See Them
					

A year ago, history was made.




					www.sciencealert.com
				







> If a passing photon is a bit too close, it will get trapped in orbit around the black hole. This creates what is called a "photon ring", a perfect ring of light predicted to surround the black hole, inside the inner rim of the accretion disc, but outside the event horizon.
> Models of the black hole's surroundings suggest the photon ring should create an intricate substructure consisting of infinite rings of light.
> Each successive ring becomes increasingly sharper because its light orbited the black hole more times before reaching the observer.
> Hence, in an idealized setting with no absorption, each subring contains a separate, exponentially demagnified image of the entire Universe, with each subsequent subring capturing the visible Universe at an earlier time. Together, the set of subrings are akin to the frames of a movie, capturing the history of the visible Universe as seen from the black hole.


----------



## Drone (Apr 7, 2020)

Event Horizon Telescope Images of a Black-Hole Powered Jet



			https://www.almaobservatory.org/en/press-release/event-horizon-telescope-images-of-a-black-hole-powered-jet/


----------



## Drone (Apr 16, 2020)

New discovery


----------



## Drone (Apr 29, 2020)

Spitzer Telescope Reveals the Precise Timing of a Black Hole Dance
					

The recently retired infrared observatory was the only telescope to spot a far-off flash of light that holds clues about the physical characteristics of these cosmic mysteries.




					www.jpl.nasa.gov
				













The OJ 287 galaxy hosts one of the largest black holes ever found, with > 18 billion times the mass of our Sun. Orbiting this behemoth is another massive black hole. Twice every 12 years, the smaller black hole crashes through the accretion disk surrounding its larger companion, creating a flash of light brighter than a trillion stars.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 30, 2020)

Drone said:


> Spitzer Telescope Reveals the Precise Timing of a Black Hole Dance
> 
> 
> The recently retired infrared observatory was the only telescope to spot a far-off flash of light that holds clues about the physical characteristics of these cosmic mysteries.
> ...


The interesting thing about that galaxy is that because of these events chemical based life is very unlikely as the EMR pulses would ionize the atmosphere(not to mention literally cooking the surface and boiling bodies of water) of any planets within 30,000ly(approx) radius and saturate space with gamma and xrays for another 25,000ly(approx) making the inner areas of that galaxy uninhabitable. OJ287 is a larger galaxy than the MilkyWay, so the outer areas might still have the possibility of life.


----------



## Drone (Apr 30, 2020)

@lexluthermiester  Yes, galactic centers and regions close to supermassive black holes are quite extreme. Regions around giant stars and star clusters aren't really nice either. However, type 2 and 3 civilizations might have technology to withstand all that craziness and even harness that energy.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 30, 2020)

Drone said:


> However, type 2 and 3 civilizations might have technology to withstand all that craziness and even harness that energy.


Possible of course. However, the intensity of that kind of radiation can not be understated.


----------



## the54thvoid (Apr 30, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> Possible of course. However, the intensity of that kind of radiation can not be understated.



I have to chime in with that and remind myself that we get cancer from a little too much sun, let alone the extremes of a galactic centre. Space is a hostile environment, that's for sure.


----------



## Drone (Apr 30, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> Possible of course. However, the intensity of that kind of radiation can not be understated.


There's awesome hard-sci-fi book called Dragon's Egg. It's about intelligent creatures inhabiting neutron star. They're made of neutron matter and can withstand enormous gravity and radiation. 
We don't know much about consciousness but imagine if such creatures can exist and they have consciousness and they can live anywhere in the galaxy. I know I digress but hypothetically that'd be pretty awesome.


----------



## Drone (May 12, 2020)




----------



## Drone (Jul 16, 2020)

Latest BH news









						Runaway Star Might Explain Black Hole's Disappearing Act
					

The telltale sign that the black hole was feeding vanished, perhaps when a star interrupted the feast. The event could lend new insight into these mysterious objects.




					www.jpl.nasa.gov


----------



## Drone (Sep 3, 2020)

Extremely exciting black hole/gravitational waves discovery:

*A “bang” in LIGO and Virgo detectors signals most massive gravitational-wave source yet.
A binary black hole merger likely produced gravitational waves equal to the energy of 8 suns.*

https://news.mit.edu/2020/ligo-virgo-gravitational-wave-0902


----------



## biffzinker (Oct 12, 2020)

This animation depicts a star experiencing spaghettification as it’s sucked in by a supermassive black hole during a ‘tidal disruption event’. In a new study, done with the help of ESO’s Very Large Telescope and ESO’s New Technology Telescope, a team of astronomers found that when a black hole devours a star, it can launch a powerful blast of material outwards.









						outflow powers the optical rise of the nearby, fast-evolving tidal disruption event AT2019qiz
					

ABSTRACT. At 66 Mpc, AT2019qiz is the closest optical tidal disruption event (TDE) to date, with a luminosity intermediate between the bulk of the population an




					academic.oup.com


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 23, 2020)

Since most if not all galaxies have a supermassive blackhole in the center, is it thought that its existence is necessary for the galaxy to exist? Seems like some sort of symbiosis must exist. Does the supermassive black change the curve of space/gravity for all layers of the galaxy? 

Trying to wrap my head around some stuff, but it is difficult.


----------



## Drone (Oct 23, 2020)

@lynx raised important question: Do galaxies grow *outside-in* or *inside-out*? Astronomers assume that *galaxies grow inside-out*. Star formation starts at the core of the galaxy and spreads outward. For example NGC 3377 galaxy. It is also assumed that our Milky Way may have formed inside-out.

Biggest part of the galaxies is dark matter so black hole is not the main player there. Together they shape galaxies. Black hole is the core, dark matter is the scaffolding.


----------



## Space Lynx (Oct 30, 2020)

Drone said:


> When many of us think about black holes, we think of a huge cosmic event, sucking in everything around it. However, there is also the possibility of small black holes. “Einstein’s theory of relativity allows for black holes,” Kesden explains, “but doesn’t stipulate a size. It’s very possible that the early universe produced very small black holes. These would gravitate like massive black holes, floating through the universe and clustering.”



Is it possible Dark Matter is just a bunch of tiny black holes 'clustering' together?


----------



## Drone (Oct 30, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> Is it possible Dark Matter is just a bunch of tiny black holes 'clustering' together?


Yup some scientists believed that micro black holes predicted by Stephen Hawking can be candidate for dark matter, but later other scientists kinda disproved that and showed that dark matter is some kind of unknown particle.  But atm neither new particles nor tiny black holes are found.


----------



## dorsetknob (Oct 30, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> Is it possible Dark Matter is just a bunch of tiny black holes 'clustering' together?


Current physic's theory suggest that clustering Black Holes (small or large) would (be) merging into a larger black hole and its not sure if gravity effects Dark matter


----------



## lexluthermiester (Oct 30, 2020)

lynx29 said:


> Is it possible Dark Matter is just a bunch of tiny black holes 'clustering' together?


No. Black Holes require a specific level of gravity to maintain a compressed state. Without that minimum gravity level an event-horizon can not be maintained and matter expands back out to it's normal physical dimensions.


Drone said:


> Yup some scientists believed that micro black holes predicted by Stephen Hawking can be candidate for dark matter


Unfortunately Hawking never finished that theory and he couldn't finish it because the theory of General and Special Relativity(which is a base for all of Hawkings theories) have flaws. Therefore his predictions, while brilliant conceptually, have no merit.


dorsetknob said:


> and its not sure if gravity effects Dark matter


If "dark matter" existed, it would.


----------



## Drone (Nov 26, 2020)

Earth just got 7 km/s faster and about 2000 light-years closer to the supermassive black hole in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. But don’t worry, this doesn’t mean that our planet is plunging towards the black hole. Instead the changes are results of a better model of the Milky Way Galaxy based on new observation data, including a catalog of objects observed over the course of more than 15 years by the Japanese radio astronomy project VERA.







Based on the VERA Astrometry Catalog and recent observations by other groups, astronomers constructed a position and velocity map. From this map they calculated the center of the Galaxy, the point that everything revolves around. *The map suggests that the center of the Galaxy, and the supermassive black hole which resides there, is located 25800 ly from Earth*. This is closer than the official value of 27700 light-years adopted by the International Astronomical Union in 1985. The velocity component of the map indicates that *Earth is travelling at 227 km/s as it orbits around the Galactic Center*. This is faster than the official value of 220 km/s.


----------



## delshay (Nov 26, 2020)

Drone said:


> Earth just got 7 km/s faster and about 2000 light-years closer to the supermassive black hole in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. But don’t worry, this doesn’t mean that our planet is plunging towards the black hole. Instead the changes are results of a better model of the Milky Way Galaxy based on new observation data, including a catalog of objects observed over the course of more than 15 years by the Japanese radio astronomy project VERA.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Err if that's the case, then the moon should also be effected by this.


----------



## Drone (Nov 28, 2020)

Nice stuff:


----------



## Drone (Feb 19, 2021)

The first black hole ever discovered is more massive than previously thought. Cygnus X-1 is the heaviest stellar black hole observed without using gravitational waves.






*The new observations suggest that Cygnus X-1 is ~ 7200 ly (9.5 trillion km) from Earth, rather than the previous estimate of ~ 6000 ly. This implies that the star in Cygnus X-1 is even brighter, and therefore bigger, than astronomers thought. The star weighs ~ 40.6 suns, the researchers estimate. The black hole must also be more massive in order to explain its gravitational tug on such a massive star. The black hole weighs ~ 21.2 suns — much heftier than its previously estimated 14.8 solar masses.*

The first black hole ever discovered is more massive than we thought | MIT Technology Review


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 19, 2021)

Drone said:


> The first black hole ever discovered is more massive than previously thought. Cygnus X-1 is the heaviest stellar black hole observed without using gravitational waves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I almost wonder if blackholes are what creates the big bang eventually... so the ever expanding theory and the universe dies a cold death has always made no sense to me because if time is linear like that we probably wouldn't be here. My new guess is that black holes become so giant, merge with other black holes, and over billions of years their mass and gravity sucking power becomes so extreme they collapse everything back in and BOOM new big bang, so a big bang cycle makes more sense to me. I don't know.

So let's say the ever expanding theory is true, well eventually the heat runs out and it all dies a cold death, so that would allow plenty of time for black holes to still be roaming about and merging together... hmm.


----------



## Drone (Feb 19, 2021)

When something is extremely energetic and dense (Big Bang) or extremely dispersed ('last days' of the Universe when all black holes congealed and evaporated) big/small/time/space have no meaning. It means Universe can start anew (Conformal Cyclic Cosmology). In other words spacetime can exist when "stuff" exists. Therefore, the end of one aeon is the beginning of the new one.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 19, 2021)

Drone said:


> when all black holes congealed and evaporated



is there evidence this is what happens to black holes? from everything I have read they just get bigger and bigger.


----------



## Drone (Feb 19, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> is there evidence this is what happens to black holes? from everything I have read they just get bigger and bigger.


Like actual evidence? Nope, because largest black holes will take *10^106 years* to evaporate, and Universe is about *10^10* years old so you'll need to wait that long and see.
But theory (Hawking radiation) is as true as it can get.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 19, 2021)

Drone said:


> Like actual evidence? Nope, because largest black holes will take *10^106 years* to evaporate, and Universe is about *10^10* years old so you'll need to wait that long and see.
> But theory (Hawking radiation) is as true as it can get.



I find it hard to believe something so large can evaporate into nothing. Black holes are not for me though, we just don't know enough about them yet imo. Is there proof that anything can evaporate into nothing? even when I sweat, that sweat is evaporated but its not nothing


----------



## Drone (Feb 20, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> Is there proof that anything can evaporate into nothing?


Yes there's direct and irrefutable evidence such as Vacuum Energy, Virtual Particles, Unruh Effect and so on. And there's _indirect_ evidence that *mass eventually fades out*.

The Big Bang and its Dark-Matter Content: Whence, Whither, and Wherefore | SpringerLink

Snip: in the hugely long-term future, mass eventually fades away


----------



## oobymach (Feb 20, 2021)

I also find it difficult to believe that the most destructive force in the galaxy could evaporate into nothing. Einstein gave up on black holes, his math describes everything else in existence, and imo Hawking is no Einstein. 

All evidence is circumstantial because we are sitting on a planet all our calculations and observations are biased from our perspective, but I'm no Einstein either, though I would trust his math over any other theory regarding matter and the universe in general.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 20, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> is there evidence this is what happens to black holes? from everything I have read they just get bigger and bigger.


In short, no. Hawking Radiation is only a theory, he could never prove it, mathematically. In fact he never resolved the problems in several parts of his black-hole theory in general. Some if the physics predicted by General and Special Relativity have actually been disproven as observation of behaviors displayed by the universe itself contradict those predictions. Black-Holes only consume, they do not radiate. The idea of the "great rip" or the universe stretching itself out far enough to evaporate all matter is only a theory and not a very good one.


Drone said:


> Yes there's direct and irrefutable evidence such as Vacuum Energy, Virtual Particles, Unruh Effect and so on. And there's _indirect_ evidence that *mass eventually fades out*.


That is not evidence, as such. It is theory based on other theories. None of those postulations explain where the universe came from, why the Big Bang happened, nor how it happened. It's all based on General & Special Relativity, the math of which breaks down and is unsolvable when any mass object collapses into a black hole. Our universe sprang forth from an ultra massive black hole. G&SR can't not mathematically resolve those problems. So therefore, it is either partly or completely incorrect. It just so happens to predict some things correctly, however that is likely to just be coincidence.


----------



## Space Lynx (Feb 20, 2021)

I wonder if it's possible that a big bang even occurs when everything else has separated so far apart from everything else - I keep imaging the pictures of the General Theory of Relativity that are really famous, where you place the Moon or Earth or the Sun in space, and you "imagine" it sitting and it creates a funnel type thing as seen below... well what if this isn't just imagination but truly like a fabric of some kind, and even though the distances are to great to measure any curve from say one galaxy to the next, they still act as like say buttons on this fabric, and a slight curve is present from galaxy A to B but its just slight its impossible to measure - then I wonder - what if galaxy A and B keep separating further and further apart - until boom the fabric simply can't take it anymore, and the buttons unbutton and gravity collapses in on itself, and the entire cosmos is warped in to a single tiny dense center - this could also explain how the big bang is able to condense everything into such a small area before the actual explosion takes place - all of that happening instantaneously... hmm. interesting. or perhaps I have lost my mind, who knows such things. an infinite cycle. as I mentioned earlier the sweat that evaporates off me does not become nothing - perhaps even in a scenario like this black holes themselves are instantly decimated, well yes they would in this scenario - and all that was becomes one, instantly - and since that is insane - it explodes in big bang. and 13.8 billion years later life starts to form again or eventually, statistically in a certain range anyway. quite beautiful if that is the case.

@R-T-B thoughts?


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 20, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> @R-T-B thoughts?
> 
> View attachment 189203


Frog god will consume all.


----------



## qubit (Mar 23, 2021)

https://www.space.com/moving-supermassive-black-hole


----------



## xrobwx71 (Mar 23, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> I wonder if it's possible that a big bang even occurs when everything else has separated so far apart from everything else - I keep imaging the pictures of the General Theory of Relativity that are really famous, where you place the Moon or Earth or the Sun in space, and you "imagine" it sitting and it creates a funnel type thing as seen below... well what if this isn't just imagination but truly like a fabric of some kind, and even though the distances are to great to measure any curve from say one galaxy to the next, they still act as like say buttons on this fabric, and a slight curve is present from galaxy A to B but its just slight its impossible to measure - then I wonder - what if galaxy A and B keep separating further and further apart - until boom the fabric simply can't take it anymore, and the buttons unbutton and gravity collapses in on itself, and the entire cosmos is warped in to a single tiny dense center - this could also explain how the big bang is able to condense everything into such a small area before the actual explosion takes place - all of that happening instantaneously... hmm. interesting. or perhaps I have lost my mind, who knows such things. an infinite cycle. as I mentioned earlier the sweat that evaporates off me does not become nothing - perhaps even in a scenario like this black holes themselves are instantly decimated, well yes they would in this scenario - and all that was becomes one, instantly - and since that is insane - it explodes in big bang. and 13.8 billion years later life starts to form again or eventually, statistically in a certain range anyway. quite beautiful if that is the case.
> 
> @R-T-B thoughts?
> 
> View attachment 189203


I think this has been observed through *gravitational lensing*.


----------



## Caring1 (Mar 23, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> I wonder if it's possible that a big bang even occurs when everything else has separated so far apart from everything else - I keep imaging the pictures of the General Theory of Relativity that are really famous, where you place the Moon or Earth or the Sun in space, and you "imagine" it sitting and it creates a funnel type thing as seen below... well what if this isn't just imagination but truly like a fabric of some kind, and even though the distances are to great to measure any curve from say one galaxy to the next, they still act as like say buttons on this fabric, and a slight curve is present from galaxy A to B but its just slight its impossible to measure - then I wonder - what if galaxy A and B keep separating further and further apart - until boom the fabric simply can't take it anymore, and the buttons unbutton and gravity collapses in on itself, and the entire cosmos is warped in to a single tiny dense center - this could also explain how the big bang is able to condense everything into such a small area before the actual explosion takes place - all of that happening instantaneously... hmm. interesting. or perhaps I have lost my mind, who knows such things. an infinite cycle. as I mentioned earlier the sweat that evaporates off me does not become nothing - perhaps even in a scenario like this black holes themselves are instantly decimated, well yes they would in this scenario - and all that was becomes one, instantly - and since that is insane - it explodes in big bang. and 13.8 billion years later life starts to form again or eventually, statistically in a certain range anyway. quite beautiful if that is the case.


That assumes the fabric is attached to those galaxies and it stretches, if the galaxies pass over the fabric the curve moves with the galaxies.


----------



## Drone (Mar 24, 2021)

Holy shit!! New image reveals supermassive black hole's swirling magnetic field
















This is the first time astronomers have been able to measure polarization, a signature of magnetic fields, this close to the edge of a black hole.










Astronomers image magnetic fields at the edge of M87’s black hole | ESO


----------



## Drone (Apr 29, 2021)




----------



## Space Lynx (Apr 29, 2021)

Dr. Becky posted this today... also I have a crush on her... she is epic beyond belief LOL


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 30, 2021)

lynx29 said:


> Dr. Becky posted this today... also I have a crush on her... she is epic beyond belief LOL


Actually, that is an incomplete list. There are more than 5 types and each has many stages of compression/collapse. But yeah, she's a smart person!


----------



## Ahhzz (Apr 30, 2021)

lexluthermiester said:


> Actually, that is an incomplete list. There are more than 5 types and each has many stages of compression/collapse. But yeah, she's a smart person!


Really? Everything I'm finding shows only the 5 types recognized by astrophysicists. What are the others?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 30, 2021)

Ahhzz said:


> Really? Everything I'm finding shows only the 5 types recognized by astrophysicists. What are the others?


That actually depends on who you talk to and/or reference.
The standard set of 3 is generally: Stellar mass, Super Massive and Intermediate mass. Others include the description Dr Becky made about "primordial" black holes which are very theoretical, though technically possible. However, the same principles apply to Micro mass black holes. Then there are Quasars which are just super massive black holes in a state of consuming a great deal of material and emitting intense EMR as a result of friction.

However, there are several more types of black holes that physics predict should exist. These are non-baryonic mass black holes(black holes that are made up of mass that does not contain or interact with baryonic matter, otherwise referenced as dark matter black holes), anti-matter black holes(it's a bizarre idea but physics says it should work and should be present in the universe) and the last is a form of black hole that exists in quantum physics and is so small that it can not consume normal matter even though it can interact with it.


----------



## Ahhzz (Apr 30, 2021)

Interesting. I'll have to do some more searching


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 30, 2021)

Ahhzz said:


> Interesting. I'll have to do some more searching


You're in for a lot of reading...


----------



## Drone (Apr 30, 2021)




----------



## Drone (Jul 2, 2021)

Physicists observationally confirm Hawking’s black hole theorem for the first time | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 3, 2021)

Drone said:


> Physicists observationally confirm Hawking’s black hole theorem for the first time | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology


Hawking came up with a lot of theories. The one discussed here is the Gravity Wave theory.


----------



## Drone (Jul 28, 2021)

Stanford astrophysicists report first detection of light from behind a black hole


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 29, 2021)

Drone said:


> Stanford astrophysicists report first detection of light from behind a black hole


Damn, ninja'd again!! LOL!


----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 29, 2021)

Drone said:


> Stanford astrophysicists report first detection of light from behind a black hole



do you think this is evidence that black holes are merely the equivalent of garbage disposals in a kitchen sink? just making everything smaller so it can start anew again someday?


----------



## Drone (Jul 30, 2021)




----------



## Space Lynx (Jul 31, 2021)

Drone said:


>



I hope you are a part of the notification squad. If you are not, shame on you good sir!  Dr. Becky to the moon!!!!


----------



## heliosgnosis (Jul 31, 2021)

Drone said:


> I know what wimps are. Weak is still interaction.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And gravity is just a by product of a much more powerful and many would say that warping of space itself is gravity due to gravity just so happening to be a by product of it,  but with anything that causes force/effect onto any level no matter how massive or macrocosmic in size is a force but it does not deserve to be taught like it is so taught.  That being a powerful force, it is not,  experiment's and observation's after all these centuries we so have is proof enough to say Newton really should be dethroned and we call gravity like it is,  a weak bi product of the means that envelope's all the cosmos or rather planetary systems, star clusters, nebula clusters etc etc etc,   no warped space no gravity pure and simple,  yet we still hold fast to old out of date ideas and ideals sadly.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 31, 2021)




----------



## Drone (Aug 5, 2021)




----------



## Drone (Aug 20, 2021)

Black Hole Megastructures May Be Powering Alien Civilizations, Scientists Say (vice.com)


----------



## Space Lynx (Aug 20, 2021)

Drone said:


> Black Hole Megastructures May Be Powering Alien Civilizations, Scientists Say (vice.com)



everyone and their mom has been talking about that theory these past two weeks.  yawnfest 2021 imo.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 21, 2022)

Paul M Sutter recently did a video that offers food for thought.


----------



## Bomby569 (Jun 22, 2022)

Black holes, white holes, white holes inside black holes. Blew my mind but in oposition to some inside theories out there (the multiverse is an idiotic theory), this one actually makes some sense


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jun 23, 2022)

Bomby569 said:


> this one actually makes some sense


Except that it really doesn't. It would not explain many of the big mysteries of the Universe. It's a fun theory and an excellent thought experiment, but that's all it will ever be.


----------



## Bomby569 (Jun 23, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Except that it really doesn't. It would not explain many of the big mysteries of the Universe. It's a fun theory and an excellent thought experiment, but that's all it will ever be.



it isn't supposed to a general theory, it's just a thought experiment.


----------



## Bones (Jul 21, 2022)

Just had a thought - I mean think about it for a sec concerning the magnetic field of a blackhole and how strong it is. 
If anyone wants to attempt a close pass to a blackhole to study it, just make sure there is nothing comprised of ferrous materials onboard or the ship itself isn't comprised of it to any extent.

Any and all ferrous materal onboard would probrably get pulled right through/out of the hull and you know what that means, even if you could avoid the event horizon itself.


----------



## Bomby569 (Jul 21, 2022)

Bones said:


> Just had a thought - I mean think about it for a sec concerning the magnetic field of a blackhole and how strong it is.
> If anyone wants to attempt a close pass to a blackhole to study it, just make sure there is nothing comprised of ferrous materials onboard or the ship itself isn't comprised of it to any extent.
> 
> Any and all ferrous materal onboard would probrably get pulled right through/out of the hull and you know what that means, even if you could avoid the event horizon itself.



i'm not in the field but 2 things, wouldn't the gravitational field be always a bigger problem, you would never get a magnetic field force bigger then a gravitational force on a black hole, it should be countless times higher

And wouldn't it depend on the orientation of the magnetic field?


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 21, 2022)

Aren't magnetars the universe's Uber magnet?


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 21, 2022)

Also if the magnetic field is that strong your going to have trouble with several metals that are paramagnetic as well... but yeah gravity would most likely crush you first.


----------



## Bones (Jul 21, 2022)

R-T-B said:


> Also if the magnetic field is that strong your going to have trouble with several metals that are paramagnetic as well... *but yeah gravity would most likely crush you first.*


While possible, I'm not so sure it would be because any magnetic field surrounding a blackhole is already overcoming the hole's gravity just to be there as an indicator of it's strength.
What I'm saying is the _effect_ of such a field vs the gravity itself may be stronger.
While it's obvious either effect would lead to the same result, I'm thinking if there were a way to separately measure the effects of each, magnetism of that magnitude may well be a stronger force than gravity alone in this instance.

However as said, since it does end in the same it's not anything to argue about.
I was thinking about how a magnetic field that can emanate from a blackhole could be stronger since it's already opposing and winning this fight to be above and around the hole at all. The field's energy has to come from the hole meaning it's coming through and out of the event horizon because the hole IS the source of it's energy and the hole itself is beneath the event horizon.

There is also the proven fact at least some blackholes can "Burp" out a blast of energy at times, this being observed in recent times.
When they use the term "Bizzare" they aren't kidding about it here.

This is a link I used earlier here but since it's been updated (According to the present article's date) which is why I'm posting it again:
NASA Saw Something Come Out Of A Black Hole For The First Time Ever - The Space Academy


----------



## Bomby569 (Jul 21, 2022)

there's lots of sources for this, but the magnetic field decreases it's force (the further apart you are from it) much faster then gravity

"However, as two objects get far apart, the gravity between them goes down by a factor of four when you double the distance, but the magnetic force goes down by (at least) a factor of sixteen. On the scale of the solar system, with planets far apart, gravity is much more important than magnetism."








						Gravity vs. Magnetism | Physics Van | UIUC
					






					van.physics.illinois.edu


----------



## Bones (Jul 21, 2022)

That makes sense but I'm sure you can understand why I was thinking that.
Still fascinating to think about.


----------



## Shrek (Jul 21, 2022)

R-T-B said:


> Also if the magnetic field is that strong your going to have trouble with several metals that are paramagnetic as well... but yeah gravity would most likely crush you first.



The tidal forces at the Event Horizon of a gargantuan black hole can be quite mild.




Bones said:


> Just had a thought - I mean think about it for a sec concerning the magnetic field of a blackhole and how strong it is.
> If anyone wants to attempt a close pass to a blackhole to study it, just make sure there is nothing comprised of ferrous materials onboard or the ship itself isn't comprised of it to any extent.
> 
> Any and all ferrous materal onboard would probrably get pulled right through/out of the hull and you know what that means, even if you could avoid the event horizon itself.



Even spinning black holes don't have a magnetic field.


----------



## Bones (Jul 21, 2022)

Shrek said:


> The tidal forces at the Event Horizon of a gargantuan black hole can be quite mild.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If I understand you correctly, are you saying all blackholes don't have a magnetic field?

Ultrapowerful magnetic fields revealed in 1st ever image of a black hole | Live Science


----------



## Shrek (Jul 21, 2022)

Ultrapowerful magnetic fields revealed in 1st ever image of a black hole
					

The magnetic field may kick a huge jet of matter and energy out of the black hole.




					www.livescience.com
				



"The magnetism results from the hot gas circling the black hole."

Not the black hole itself.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 21, 2022)

the54thvoid said:


> Aren't magnetars the universe's Uber magnet?


Yes. There's a bit of a catch to that. Black Holes can be surrounded by the strongest magnetic fields in the Universe. Explaining that would take a while, but just know that Black Holes can be the cause of magnetic fields far stronger than what a Magnetar can generate.


----------



## R-T-B (Jul 21, 2022)

Shrek said:


> The tidal forces at the Event Horizon of a gargantuan black hole can be quite mild


What makes you think that?  That's literally the point at which light can no longer escape.  Sounds anything but mild.


----------



## Shrek (Jul 21, 2022)

One is in free fall, so the only force one feels is the difference between head and foot, so called *tidal* forces.


----------



## Bones (Jul 22, 2022)

Shrek said:


> Ultrapowerful magnetic fields revealed in 1st ever image of a black hole
> 
> 
> The magnetic field may kick a huge jet of matter and energy out of the black hole.
> ...


I understand why you say that but the blackhole is still the actual energy source. 

The very reason gas circles the hole, moves or whatever else, it's all driven by the blackhole's gravity. The power to generate a magnetic field of anykind has to come from somewhere, even if the effect is indirect like it causes the gases to swirl, which in turn causes the field to be created. 

The blackhole is the true source of all that it takes for it to happen.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 22, 2022)

Bones said:


> I understand why you say that but the blackhole is still the actual energy source.


Not true. Nothing escapes a Black Hole object, even magnetic energy. The information in Shrek's statement is correct. Magnet's fields generated at Black Holes are not generated by the Black Holes themselves but by the matter spiraling around them. If there is no accretion disk, there is no magnetic field.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 22, 2022)

Shrek said:


> Ultrapowerful magnetic fields revealed in 1st ever image of a black hole
> 
> 
> The magnetic field may kick a huge jet of matter and energy out of the black hole.
> ...


Not everyone makes this distinction.

If anyone wants to truly study gravity, go stand on Jupiter. Its closest you're gonna get to the gravity of a black hole without having to get as close.


lexluthermiester said:


> Not true. Nothing escapes a Black Hole object, even magnetic energy. The information in Shrek's statement is correct. Magnet's fields generated at Black Holes are not generated by the Black Holes themselves but by the matter spiraling around them. If there is no accretion disk, there is no magnetic field.


so static electricity caused it from matter rubbing up and down itself there?

electron charge aligned by motion and gravity, like a wire without the wire.

I'm still waiting for the day they can see how a black hole affects dark matter.


----------



## the54thvoid (Jul 22, 2022)

To some of the above: I think the point @Bones is trying to make is that there would be no accretion disk without the black hole. In other words, although the disk is the direct source of the field, that disk itself is created by the gravitational pull of the singularity.


----------



## Bones (Jul 22, 2022)

That's what I'm saying.

I'll just say reread the previous from me, I can't really state it any clearer.
The magnetic field, accretion disc, "As Is" or anything else about it gets it power from the blackhole, whether directly or indirectly.

No blackhole, no disc, field, or anything else to even discuss about it.

And here's more weird stuff about them to read, some of the articles are old(er) but still posted for the sake of reading.

This Black Hole's Jets Wobble Like Crazy Because It's Warping Space-Time | Space

A Dozen Black Holes Are Mysteriously Spewing Energy In the Same Direction

Strange but True: Black Holes Sing - Scientific American

Black hole caught spewing jets into space at nearly the speed of light (video) | Space

Monster black hole spotted 'giving birth' to stars | Live Science

Black Holes May Actually Be Fuzzballs: String Theory Explained


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jul 23, 2022)

DeathtoGnomes said:


> Not everyone makes this distinction.


We physicist's do. We have to, it's part of the math.


DeathtoGnomes said:


> so static electricity caused it from matter rubbing up and down itself there?


Kinda-sort-of. All the friction generates massive eletrical and magnetic energy's. It's very complex and intense. In addition to magnetic fields, Xray's and even gamma ray burst's have been detected.



the54thvoid said:


> To some of the above: I think the point @Bones is trying to make is that there would be no accretion disk without the black hole. In other words, although the disk is the direct source of the field, that disk itself is created by the gravitational pull of the singularity.





Bones said:


> That's what I'm saying.


Those are fair points.


----------



## DeathtoGnomes (Jul 23, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> We physicist's do. We have to it's part of the math.


Expected, you fall outside the parameter of "not everyone".


----------



## Bones (Oct 19, 2022)

Check this out for some black hole weirdness.

Black hole spews out material years after shredding star -- ScienceDaily

Black hole is 'burping out' a star it devoured years ago | Space


----------



## Shrek (Oct 20, 2022)

Could it be that the part it threw out took years to return?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Oct 20, 2022)

Bones said:


> Check this out for some black hole weirdness.
> 
> Black hole spews out material years after shredding star -- ScienceDaily
> 
> Black hole is 'burping out' a star it devoured years ago | Space


Please keep in mind that the event in question is in a galaxy 665million light years from Earth. There are no telescopes built by man that can observe that event with enough detail to work out exactly what is going on. No offense to you at all! It is a fascinating event for sure.



Shrek said:


> Could it be that the part it threw out took years to return?


Very possible. It's also possible that a non-stellar mass, such as a large planet or even a red/brown dwarf cool enough to be masked by the surrounding galactic radiation is now falling in. It could also be a mass object being sling-shot ejected around, but not into, the event horizon.

We're too far away to know for sure.


----------



## xrobwx71 (Oct 20, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Please keep in mind that the event in question is in a galaxy 665million light years from Earth. There are no telescopes built by man that can observe that event with enough detail to work out exactly what is going on. No offense to you at all! It is a fascinating event for sure.
> 
> 
> Very possible. It's also possible that a non-stellar mass, such as a large planet or even a red/brown dwarf cool enough to be masked by the surrounding galactic radiation is now falling in. It could also be a mass object being sling-shot ejected around, but not into, the event horizon.
> ...


Perhaps they'll find Dave from 2001:A Space Odyssey.


----------



## Bones (Oct 20, 2022)

lexluthermiester said:


> Please keep in mind that the event in question is in a galaxy 665million light years from Earth. There are no telescopes built by man that can observe that event with enough detail to work out exactly what is going on. No offense to you at all! It is a fascinating event for sure.


Just note I described it as "Weirdness" not as a fact or having any factual basis on my part. 
Anything that is discovered later can literally re-write what we _think_ we know to be fact(s) about black holes.


----------

