Huge Black Hole

[Jamo]

That's better.

[bomelia]

Originally Posted by Sharroll Celby

Maybe someone is on the OTHER side of the black hole, and sees all this planetary "stuff" come flying out of HIS black hole, and wonders "Where is all this stuff coming from?"

I'm just sayin'...!

Of course! But, then, did you ever hear about any researcher talking about a spot in space where stuff seems to be spewing out of nowhere? But then again, there is this mystery concerning "dark matter". NO, I think this "thing" we call a black hole is nothing more than a "planet" of incredible mass. Eventually, it gets so dense that ANY atom will eventually become "fusible" and cause an enormous nuclear reaction. Prolly what Quasars are. If I got my astrophysics correct, they are considered the most energetic things in the universe. Maybe they are the end result of a collapsing "black hole".

Mike

[HI Cobra]

Sounds like cosmic recycling at its purest form!

[Ron61]

Ok, when I posted this it was a scientific discussion and the words Black Hole have been used ever since I can remember. I am not going to change them to suit a few of the so called P.C. and racist minded people. That was the reason for the last line in the first post that it wasn't that kind of Black Hole.
I happen to be very interested in space and these holes existed long before the human race did. If you must start your normal P.C. and racist remarks please do so elsewhere as I am tired of everything I post being used to get me into trouble.
This is a huge Black Hole in space and it will continue to be there long after any of us are around.

Thank you for your expected cooperation on sticking to the subject of the post.

Jamo, that is the best I can do. I do not have the power of God to control who posts what on any thread. I have been reading it with interest except the P.C. crap and find other peoples views interesting. If you feel you must lock the thread by all means do it.

Ron

[Maurice Johnson]

Ron,

Stand in a dark room, and shine a thin beam of light at the far wall. Any dust particles in the beam of light will show (planets,etc). Place a mirror in the beam almost parallel to it, and deflect the light slightly. The spot on the wall where the light originally hit is now a dark hole.
What made the spot exist, (light), is no longer present, but the wall still exists, we just can't see it.

This was one of Einstein's early theories, wasn't it?

Me,--- I still get goosebumps when I see NCC-1701 switch on her Port and Starboard running lights. I guess its the earthbound, salt-water sailor in me.

Live long, and prosper

[Ron61]

Maurice,

I do believe that was one of Einstein's theories but he had so many that I am not positive. He had many which were fascinating to me. Space has always been one of my big interests and I wish that I was young enough to get into that field now. I would love to be able to go to Mars and beyond and actually land on the planet and see what it is like.

Ron

[bomelia]

OK Ron, I stand sufficiently b!tch slapped over this... but I do believe I had already corrected my errant ways.

Mike

[Wes Tausend]

...

I hesitate to start this post and then get called to work minutes later. Curse work when there is philosophy to be done..

I think that quasars were finally determined to be powerful distant galaxies rather than a single star. Perhaps confused with pulsars which are pulsing neutron stars remaining after a Super Nova. Large neutron stars (larger than 40 solar masses?) collapse into black Holes because their gravitational force exceeds the ability of the neutrons to have any atomic space between them, whatsoever.

Black Holes have been described an outer planetary edge (or radius) where no light can reflect back out. The size or look of a planetary surface of a Black Hole is very tiny. At the center of a black hole the singularity point has zero volume and infinite density.

When Einstein was imagineering his General Theory, the theory that included not just matter and light (E=MC²) but also gravity, he imagined two scientists in an elevator being drawn up from gravity-free space at an accelerated rate of 32 ft per sec per sec. In this situation, the scientists, unable to see the exterior, would assume they are in a gravitational field identical to earth. From that simple assumption, during a thought experiment, Einstein built the mathematics to describe gravity as a pure acceleration that causes space to appear curved. The moon orbits us in a straight line (momentum makes it go straight) but the curvature of space makes the orbit appear round. Furthermore, a light beam shining straight through a hole in the side of the elevator will hit the wall slightly lower because of the acceleration and the time light takes to travel to an observer. Gravity will bend light. That is confusing to our senses.

I did find a way to make it appear simpler to myself.
But it further violates our innate belief that we are standing still, to an even greater ridiculous degree than finding out we are not the center of the universe.

What I imagined is that: suppose two elevators accelerate away from each other with a pair of scientists each, two Americans and two Chinese. Now each thinks they are in earths gravitational field. If they did look out, they would see that they are rapidly moving away from one another and the spell would be broken. But suppose matter has a natural, built-in accelerating explosion. Like a constant humongous bang. One would first think that the atoms of such matter would become jumbled beyond disarray. But think about atoms again. They are mostly open space. The nucleus and relative electrons, if they were the size of pencil dots, would be about 10 miles apart. And yet these sparse dust clouds maintain their integrity. Absolutely amazing. So, I say, whats a little controlled expansion thrown in?

So now, when our scientists look out of the elevator, they may be both moving apart, yet maintain their relative size appearance as though they were standing still. As long as the elevator is being drawn up. Or is it necessary? See, in this instance, if the elevators were foot-to-foot, the expansion itself would create an acceleration. An acceleration identical to gravity, perhaps. Nobody would know the difference. How could they measure it? With a ruler at Absolute Rest, whatever that is.

It does not take long to realise that the acceleration apart would soon exceed the velocity of light. So it seems it couldn't happen. But then think about light. If one were to shine a flashlight at a nearby wall, we assume, and observe, the light comes out of the flashlight and strikes the wall. But light has a peculiar property. At the velocity of light itself, time stands still according to the first Special Theory. So the light beam, in effect, arrives at the wall in no time at all in it's own observation. One could say, then, that the light really has no separate source and destination qualities. It can be said to travel either way. Or the walls could be moving.

So here's my theory. Light stands Absolutely Still and matter expands at observable velocity C. Matter expands faster and faster, but can never be observed to be faster than C. It can be slower, as Mike (bomelia) has pointed out concerning light, but never faster. Even the formula, E=MC², in it's simplest terms, basically says that energy and matter are related by a constant accelerating velocity. Otherwise it would read E=MC.

Here's my evidence. We know that we live in a four dimensional world (up, down. sideways and time) but it looks like a three dimensinal world. Or does it? Imagine you are touring a skyscraper with your grandchild. The child is asking, "Grandpa (or Grandma), why do people on the ground look so small?" You can say, "It's because everything we view is slightly historic because of the limited speed of light (or matter). Matter is expanding so fast that stuff close looks big. And stuff far away looks small because it was, a longer moment ago. The different history (time) taken to see it is the fourth dimension in all its glory. The expansion has become so fast, even slightly earlier, everything was a singularity. I read this in the Lounge, little one, so it must be true."

Of course, I have found an unmentionable flaw in it. But nothing is perfect. And time travel would really suck. Yet, it's my theory (and a few others) and I'm sticking to it. Or it is sticking to me. I have tried to shake it, really.

Rats. The phone rang. I'm called to work on an empty coal bucket.

Wes

...

[Jamo]

Ron61...I don't know why you have a problem reading plain English. I already turned it back...it was not an invitation to come in and moderate/***** slap anyone (that's our job, thankyouverymuch) and belabor the issue.

The point was to get you to come on and continue the discussion that you started.

Either do that...or it's going to be closed.

No further remarks by anyone about the moderation.

[Jamo]

Wes...that was good. I took one astronomy class in the midst of my political science major. When I walked into class, all I saw were Asians with huge TI calculators. I made a deal with the professor and wrote a term paper about black holes (on their political significance if they could be harnessed)...which got sucked into the faded memory of increasing age after 3+ decades.

[Ron61]

Wes,

Actually an easy example of magnetism, which is the same as gravity when taken in that context, has been bending light since the first TVs were invented. Around the neck of the old CRTs were the big magnets that would pull the light beam across and up and down the screen as it in a simple explanation painted the picture on the screen.

I have always thought of Black Holes in somewhat the same as a Worm Hole. Whatever goes into one must come out somewhere. However the worm holes they have now managed to actually observe don't seem to be stable and stay in any place long.

I saw on of the scientists trying to explain the workings of a worm hole and he took a piece of paper and drew a dot on each end. He then asked the class that was the closest distance between the two dots. They all said a straight line and he told then they were wrong. He then proceeded to fold the paper so the two dots were touching and stuck a pin through them and said that was a simple explanation of how space and time are bent through worm holes. Basically there is no distance if you can have a stable worm hole, it would be much like deciding you want to go to Mars and just stepping off Earth and onto Mars. He then said it was their theory that Black Holes would work the same way except they have so much gravitational pull that anything entering them would be torn to pieces before being ejected on the other side. However since they have no way of knowing if anything is ejected on the other side, that leaves another interesting scenario. If everything pulled into them is crushed and drawn to the center spot where the magnetic field is the greatest, what happens as the pieces of planets, asteroids and such build up to a huge amount. Is there another explosion that would then blow them out into space again and actually eliminate that black hole?

Ron

[Buzz]

Wes Tausend
Here's my evidence. We know that we live in a four dimensional world (up, down. sideways and time) but it looks like a three dimensinal world. Or does it? Imagine you are touring a skyscraper with your grandchild. The child is asking, "Grandpa (or Grandma), why do people on the ground look so small?" You can say, "It's because everything we view is slightly historic because of the limited speed of light (or matter). Matter is expanding so fast that stuff close looks big. And stuff far away looks small because it was, a longer moment ago. The different history (time) taken to see it is the fourth dimension in all its glory. The expansion has become so fast, even slightly earlier, everything was a singularity. I read this in the Lounge, little one, so it must be true.

Good stuff, Wes. Right up to this part which, while interesting from a theorizing for the fun of it point of view (and it IS fun), seems to me a gross over-complication of a very simply explained phenomena. I can just picture the blank stare from your grandkid after that explanation.
Firstly, given the speed of light at the relatively tiny distance we're talking about, any historical variation in mass or size would be way too small to be observed. The objects appear smaller simply because the path of light basically radiates outward through the pupil from the small spot on the back of your retina. As distance from the eye's pupil increases, so does the field of view. Distant objects appear smaller just because they take up a proportionally smaller percentage of the overall field of view. I will run this by the next kid I see and I'm sure they will nod and say "Got it."

Back to the black hole, though - one other point I disagree with is your idea that matter drawn in must exit the other side somewhere. In generally accepted theory, it doesn't. It is all drawn in towards center where the massive gravitational forces condense - not "tear apart" - everything into an unimaginably dense state. In a worm hole, however, where (theoretically) two black holes are close enough in proximity that their event horizons (basically, the "outer boundary layer" of a black hole or the distance from center beyond which nothing including light can escape or reverse their motion towards the center) merge or interact, there exists the theoretical possibility of motion or passage through compressed or, as in your folded paper example, "folded" time/space.

The whole concept of the black hole blows the mind and rocks the imagination partly because of the absurdly staggering numbers they generate. For example, they can vary in mass from relatively tiny to millions, even billions of times the mass of our sun. A theoretical lower limit of mass for a BH to remain stable is roughly the mass of our moon, which is about 7.35x10^22 kg. Thats the number 735 followed by 20 zeros. At that mass, the size of the black hole would be about 1/10ths of a millimeter!!! Folks - putting that in perspective - matter at the center of a stellar black hole the size of -say- a golf ball is so awesomely dense that it would weigh billions of tons!!

Amazing stuff.

[bomelia]

Damn Wes! That is some good stuff! Unfortunately I am into my third Scotch and my eyes are twirling right now. But I WILL read this again tomorrow. Thanks Ron for starting such an interesting thread.

Mike

[HI Cobra]

Buzz,
This stuff does make your mind stretch - now imagine the golf club to
whack that golf ball! OK, time for bed for me.

[Art Burtt]

Hmmm, I thought the term was black hoe,silly me!

[Maurice Johnson]

GADZOOKS!!! Methinks rocket scientists walk among us, disguised as 60's technology villians.

Great thread Ron, keep it coming guys

[Ron61]

Coincidence I would imagine, but I was watching a History Channel show yesterday and they were talking with some scientists and a Quantum Physicist about black holes. There seems to be some differences of opinion on just what does happen to the matter that is drawn into them, but they had some pictures that were taken by some probe that was very far out in space, and said they think they are the remains of a black hole exploding. The big difference of opinion seemed to be that a black hole couldn't explode, but with all of the matter drawn into it, eventually something has to happen and the one person said it was basically a smaller version of the Big Bang theory. Eventually far off in time the Earth and all planets will burn out and contract into very small pieces of dense matter and that will group together and another huge explosion will create more planets. At least that is what they all seemed to agree on. They didn't totally agree on whether any of the matter drawn into a black hole could be ejected on the other side or if it would just continue to build a huge base around the core until it exploded and blew everything apart and most likely would form more planets to replace the ones that had been eaten. Interesting, but I wish they could actually send a probe into one to see just what happens but nothing could survive much past the Event Horizon.

Ron

[Maurice Johnson]

Lots of different theories.
Reminds me of a day we were fishing for marlin off Bermuda's south side, and some of the guys were discussing the reason we humans are here. Slow day for marlin!!
Stinker opined that we were a food source put here to multiply, and one day we would be scooped up and eaten by aliens.
Tommy asked "You mean something is going to eat me whole?"
Stinker said "No, Tommy, when they get to that part, they'll spit it out". LMFAO

Meanwhile, back at the ISS---

[4RE KLR]

Ron,
This is very interesting. I have often wondered about these and have watched the History Channel several times when these shows come on.

I do understand the "theory" but I just can't imagine them having so much gravity that even light cannot escape. I suppose if light cannot escape then there would be no use in sending, say a satellite into one and let it send out images. At least it would send images until it got too deep into the mass.

Makes you wonder what is on the other side.

[Buzz]

There is, technically no "other side" to a "conventional" or non-charged, non-rotating black hole as all forces pull inwards towards the singularity creating a non-constant but generally spherical event horizon. Any matter that reaches the event horizon is generally agreed to be pulled irreversibly towards the singularity. Matter cannot "pass center" and be ejected out the other side, and though no one knows for sure what happens at singularity, you can be assured that due to the awesome storm of speed, radiation, pressure and distortions in space and time itself experienced on the way in, any matter that crosses the event horizon would not in any way resemble itself by the time it reaches or approaches singularity.

BIG HOWEVER, though - in the event that we encounter a charged, rotating black hole, there is some glimmer of hope for you space-warp cadets and time-travel adventurers. In this type of BH, there can exist the possibility of "voids" in the time/space or, effectively - a worm hole. In theory, if one can avoid the other singularity and traverse the wormhole, one will emerge in a totally disconnected reality, universe or dimension. Even more spectacularly, as you accelerate to an infinite, time-warping velocity, if you could continue to observe what's going on outside of the hole, you would be able to see both backward and forward in "time" and watch the universe evolve from beginning to end! Make sure you have travel insurance before embarking, though, because acceleration to "infinite velocity" would be accompanied by an infinite shift towards the blue end of the light spectrum and a corresponding massive dose of radiation.

As for the eventual "explosion" of a black hole, they meet their demise in quite the opposite fashion. Instead of continually gorging itself on matter until it bursts, a black hole starved of new matter is more likely to very slowly shrink or "evaporate" to below a critical threshold of mass (roughly in the order of one lunar mass, as mentioned in my prior post) at which point it rapidly implodes in on itself in a blinding flash of light and a burst of gamma radiation.

I will do some research to see if there is anything new out there as I'm sure some theories may have changed as science gains a greater insight into this incredible phenomenon.

EDIT: Ron - the very nature of a black hole as we currently "understand" it probably precludes the possibility of any kind of probe. Even if one could survive briefly after passing the event horizon, it wouldn't be able to transmit anything back out.

EDIT 2: De political post by de Capell seems to have thankfully been de leted so please disregard de heading of dis post.