Ripinator
Old Man with a Hat
So. . . Are you saying black holes suck ?
Voyager 1 and 2 still alive!!!! 38,000 mph!
- Thread starter Turboomni
- Start date
So. . . Are you saying black holes suck ?
jct
Senior Member
They all suck, until they spew
youre right chief.
we imaged it as it was 54 million years ago when it was "feeding" (sucking in local gas clouds and whatever else fell into it). it surely has turned "on/off" countless times over the eons. may have even collided with another galaxy by now.
i always get weak-kneed looking at the sky, day or night. its simply and accurately characterized as looking back in time. sun's out right now ... and it's as it was 8 minutes ago. took that long for the light (traveling at 600 million miles per hour) to get here.
still, safe to say it probably hasn't changed much since then
last science nerd contribution for posterity.
artists rendition of a black hole and relevant defintions. done well before they photographed one last week. notice rendition kinda looks like the photograph
cross section:
The "singularity" .. infinitely small, infinitely dense, infinite gravity. "Infinity" in the math/noun sense -- not an adjective. There is no space, no time, nothing at all we can seem to comprehend. Also, note some scientists think its all a buncha BS -- singularities and the like -- but that's another story and I am not smart enough to sort it out.
The event horizon is the boundary where light cannot escape because of the infinite gravity of the singularity. It looks "black" because NO LIGHT (or any electro-magnetic radition at all) can escape the gravity of the singularity.
As such, nobody knows what's happening INSIDE the diameter of the event horizon .. except that when stuff crosses the event horizon (a star, galactic gas cloud, another black hole gets sucked in), it makes the black hole more massive (some are billions of times more massive than our Sun, like M87).
That in turn increases the diameter of the event horizon .. the black hole got physically "bigger" after it "ate" stuff.
Enough of that .. gotta bus to work on
artists rendition of a black hole and relevant defintions. done well before they photographed one last week. notice rendition kinda looks like the photograph
cross section:
The "singularity" .. infinitely small, infinitely dense, infinite gravity. "Infinity" in the math/noun sense -- not an adjective. There is no space, no time, nothing at all we can seem to comprehend. Also, note some scientists think its all a buncha BS -- singularities and the like -- but that's another story and I am not smart enough to sort it out.
The event horizon is the boundary where light cannot escape because of the infinite gravity of the singularity. It looks "black" because NO LIGHT (or any electro-magnetic radition at all) can escape the gravity of the singularity.
As such, nobody knows what's happening INSIDE the diameter of the event horizon .. except that when stuff crosses the event horizon (a star, galactic gas cloud, another black hole gets sucked in), it makes the black hole more massive (some are billions of times more massive than our Sun, like M87).
That in turn increases the diameter of the event horizon .. the black hole got physically "bigger" after it "ate" stuff.
Enough of that .. gotta bus to work on
I hope not. I always enjoy your posts. Keepem coming!!!
jct
Senior Member
Need more of these types of posts besides sports, political, babes and cars
Science Nerd Alert. I thought starting about another thread this kinda stuff, but there may not be enough of us to stay interested in it. Sorry turboomni -- so I put it here.
Anyway, I had a thought. Got into an argument with another scientist wannabe like me. She had me on the ropes with this one, but I figured it out.
Had to think really hard about it -- ready to google it and then it came to me.
Its a bit of a trick question .. so I warn you in advance of that -- but i has a real, science based answer if you believe in theory of relativity.
You are traveling in your spaceship at the speed of light.
While you are looking through the windshield, into the pitch black of interstellar space, you turn on your super duper halogen space headlights, on high beams, to get a better look at things ahead.
So, how far in front of your spaceship can you see now?
There is a real answer to this one.
Anyway, I had a thought. Got into an argument with another scientist wannabe like me. She had me on the ropes with this one, but I figured it out.
Had to think really hard about it -- ready to google it and then it came to me.
Its a bit of a trick question .. so I warn you in advance of that -- but i has a real, science based answer if you believe in theory of relativity.
You are traveling in your spaceship at the speed of light.
While you are looking through the windshield, into the pitch black of interstellar space, you turn on your super duper halogen space headlights, on high beams, to get a better look at things ahead.
So, how far in front of your spaceship can you see now?
There is a real answer to this one.
My guess is there would be no difference because you are travelling at the speed of light. Pointing your lights ahead of you the light cannot go any faster than you are already going.
jct
Senior Member
I miss futurama
Fratzog
Old Man with a Hat
And in keeping with this board's contrarian tradition I will proceed to stir the pot. In the last several decades cosmology seems to have hit a bit of a rut particularly with conventional physics' inability to explain the 95% of the universe's missing mass and energy. This has resulted in some alternate theories to dark matter and dark energy such as the super fluid and electric universe theories being put forward. As it relates to black holes the electric universe theory postulates plasmoids as an alternative. Super fluid theory proposes negative matter which in turn opens the door to FTL travel. Here's a couple brief videos that explain the concepts and made my head hurt.
assuming fratzog has NOT solved FTL travel, yes, nothing goes faster than light. not even light itself.
your headlights would come on, but the photons would not project any further than the surface of the bulb. there would be no beam ahead of you .. if there were, youd have to add the velocities of the ship and the light ahead of you. that's not possible .. the sum then exceeds "c"
same thing if you tried to shine a flashligh forward on the wall in front of you in the dark. you'd see nothing ahead of you on the wall. you'd see the bulb, but no "beam"
Last edited:
now you're talking boss. friggin' cool "
had not caught of with this reasearch.first, i dont get it fully. neither does Fairnes .. but I think he's on to something. negative gravity and negative mass. why the heck not? the whole universe seems to be constructed this way.
article below may shed additional insignts. dark matter and dark energy: a superfluid. with a "creation tensor" -- and this is where my feeble mind can go no further. i never understood tensors.
https://phys.org/news/2018-12-universe-theory-percent-cosmos.html
Fratzog
Old Man with a Hat
Nope not me and likely not in my time but someone will definitely solve it. Some people very much smarter than me believe it is theoretically possible and have shown a way forward.
commando1
Old Man with a Hat
The bartender says, “We don’t serve time travelers in here.”
A time traveler walks into a bar
A time traveler walks into a bar
Travel time is precisely why I am building a 440 stroker for my Fury III lol
may not do "c" -- but everybody knows a stroked 440 can break the sound barrier at sea level.
Musha and Farnes to my mind have proposed similar things .. the possibility of negative mass/energy relationships. Einstein says at light speed, you achieve infinite mass (positive mass that is) and need infinite energy .. another reason why you really cant (except photons which essentially mass-less) break the light barrier.
Musha jump-drive in essence reduces the mass of the ship, to enable an incredible acceleration, that has a quantum tunneling effect. My knowledge stops at this point .. but if you read critics of Musha and Farnes, they make good points too.
BUT ..
same thing happened to Einstein back in his day regarding relativity. Eminent scientists of his day called him every derisive name you could think of .. until they all had to eat super-massive sh*t burgers when he was proven right.
Same thing might happen here with thesee superfluid theories of dark matter/energy. I too fear it wont be in my lifetime, but somebody is gonna come up with something. we always do.
You and your buddy are hotdoggin' in your stroked hemi spaceships, shooting at space junk, and listening to Van Halen .. loud. You decide to buzz the super--massive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, Sagittarius A*.
Your buddy gets a little to close to the event horizon, and gets drawn in and apparently crosses the boundary into the black hole.
You watched the whole thing from a safe distance. So, from your vantage point, what did you see happen?
This is a hard question actually. I did NOT get it. I almost still DONT get it, but there is a consensus around the answer.
Your buddy gets a little to close to the event horizon, and gets drawn in and apparently crosses the boundary into the black hole.
You watched the whole thing from a safe distance. So, from your vantage point, what did you see happen?
This is a hard question actually. I did NOT get it. I almost still DONT get it, but there is a consensus around the answer.
Similar threads
- Locked
