New Data Shows Black Holes Are Bigger Than Expected

Smooth Operator

New member
Oct 5, 2010
8,162
0
0
Well one must consider that gravity is not an attractive force, it is a force that bends dimensions themselves, and not just those we can observe or theorize but everything that might exist beyond our knowledge.
Mix that with the unimaginable forces that would occur within a 10-100 billion solar mass collapse... we could be looking at anything from extra-dimensional rifts straight down to monsters from the id.
 

SomeLameStuff

What type of steak are you?
Apr 26, 2009
4,291
0
0
Not one Supermassive Black Hole reference yet?!

Okay then...

Glaciers melting in the dead of night
And the superstars sucked into the supermassive
Supermassive Black HOOOOOOOOLE!
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
told you these holes are bigger and eat more than you think. you argued, but you were wrong, again. galaxy is more scary than you think.
 

silver wolf009

[[NULL]]
Jan 23, 2010
3,432
0
0
Jynthor said:
The universe is a scary, scary place...

What if:
Black Holes are evil gods who do nothing but feed on the rest of the galaxy And grow, and grow until nothing is left but evil fat space gods!
Then considering their general lack of movement, they're not doing the best job they could be doing to satisfy their hunger.

OT: Just another friendly reminder of simply how small you are in the universe. Carry on gents, and hold this message to heart.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Jynthor said:
The universe is a scary, scary place...

What if:
Black Holes are evil gods who do nothing but feed on the rest of the galaxy And grow, and grow until nothing is left but evil fat space gods!
So Azathoth does have extended relatives... That's not exactly what I'd call a comforting notion.
 

insanelich

Reportable Offender
Sep 3, 2008
443
0
0
Alandoril said:
Extra-dimensional matter. That accounts for the size.

Or perhaps they are universal remnants still attached to their former realities via the singularity.
What do you mean "remnants"?

Looking at the data, the chance that our entire universe is one black hole... is actually pretty darn high.
 

NeutralDrow

New member
Mar 23, 2009
9,097
0
0
In short, scientists have no idea how these black holes came to be so large, given that their diet is largely restricted by the size of their host galaxy, current models don't do well predicting black holes of these masses. While there were some predictions of ultramassive black holes prior to the study, the fact that there are so many of them is still somewhat astonishing. Once the findings have been verified, they will have "important ramifications for understanding the formation and evolution of black holes across cosmic time."
o_O

I think I'm gonna curl up in a ball and alternately recite the Bene Gesserit mantra against fear and Douglas Adams' paragraph about the size of space.

Richardplex said:
[sub]I'm a physics student, this is what I do, stop judging me[/sub]
I'm just glad someone beat me to that equation (and I wouldn't have thought of figuring out the gravitational attraction). I think I programmed the Schwarzchild radius formula into a graphing calculator in high school once, but once I hit university, I inexplicably shifted from physical sciences to social sciences.
 

Richardplex

New member
Jun 22, 2011
1,731
0
0
NeutralDrow said:
In short, scientists have no idea how these black holes came to be so large, given that their diet is largely restricted by the size of their host galaxy, current models don't do well predicting black holes of these masses. While there were some predictions of ultramassive black holes prior to the study, the fact that there are so many of them is still somewhat astonishing. Once the findings have been verified, they will have "important ramifications for understanding the formation and evolution of black holes across cosmic time."
o_O

I think I'm gonna curl up in a ball and alternately recite the Bene Gesserit mantra against fear and Douglas Adams' paragraph about the size of space.

Richardplex said:
[sub]I'm a physics student, this is what I do, stop judging me[/sub]
I'm just glad someone beat me to that equation (and I wouldn't have thought of figuring out the gravitational attraction). I think I programmed the Schwarzchild radius formula into a graphing calculator in high school once, but once I hit university, I inexplicably shifted from physical sciences to social sciences.
My graphical calculator has the original wolfenstein, far more practical use for it.

And it's fine, it's not like one could sneak up on us and rip us out of orbit without anyone noticing *checks calculations* oh no wait, that's exactly what could happen.
.
*curls into ball*

ExtraDebit said:
What happens if two black holes collide?
Um, you'd get 2 singularities that rotate around each other in a disc, which causes it to become a kerr black hole (a black hole with angular momentum - singularities are points, and thus can't rotate, but two singularities could have a centre of mass, while the whole thing is rotating), and then time travel becomes a thing. If the angular momentum is high enough, then the event horizon disappears, giving you naked singularities, and then everyone who knows to do general relativity calculations break down into tears because oh god how is that even possible. And then be happy because they can directly observe a singularity (which we can't currently do because event horizon prevents light with information escaping from around the singularity. And then break down again because oh god how are singularities even possible. Neil DeGrasse Tyson explains it a bit:

[sub]I like how everyone always wants to know what would happen if two black holes collided (including me of course)[/sub]
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
albino boo said:
I suggest a name for the 100 billion star mass black hole should be a Gabe.
Will it have a monopoly and billions of fanboys as well?
Undoubtedly, the fanboys will be sucked in with promises of a new half life game until they cross the event horizon ane enter valve time.
 

Keneth

New member
Oct 14, 2011
106
0
0
I am fascinated with Physics and Science in general. (Mostly because I'm a "Medium-Core" Star Trek geek.) I've always considered it to be reverse-engineering the Mind of God. It turns out God is pretty messed up. The implications of interactions with Time, Space, Gravity, and Relativity when dealing with black holes is truly mind boggling.

As is the sense of scale involved. ONE HUNDRED BILLION SOLAR MASSES!! Holy F***ing S*** Batman! o_O

My brain can't even begin to comprehend things that massive. Hell, I have trouble conceptualizing one PLANETARY mass.
 

mxfox408

Pee Eye Em Pee Daddy
Apr 4, 2010
478
0
0
This is an amazing discovery, so what does this discovery actually mean? Jack shit, because until interstellar space travel is acquired, all these billions of dollars is wasted on just looking out to space. They should invest that money in FTL research or human advancements, so forgive my negativity but I'd rather our tax dollars be put to use more effectively in advancements instead of speculations. We are way to far from this research actually meaning something, let's spend this cash on better space advances in order to get to that point.
 

Vegosiux

New member
May 18, 2011
4,381
0
0
mxfox408 said:
This is an amazing discovery, so what does this discovery actually mean? Jack shit, because until interstellar space travel is acquired, all these billions of dollars is wasted on just looking out to space. They should invest that money in FTL research or human advancements, so forgive my negativity but I'd rather our tax dollars be put to use more effectively in advancements instead of speculations. We are way to far from this research actually meaning something, let's spend this cash on better space advances in order to get to that point.
See there's two kinds of research, the basic and the applicative research.

Basic research is focused on discovering new things, it incurs a lot of sunk costs and its worth is only evident after a while. Yet without it, we'd still be hitting stones together to produce sparks and arguing about bananas. It's hit and miss, you never know what you'll get, but once you get something, you know you can actually base some concrete advancements on it.

What you want is applicative research, the kind of research that gives results NOW because of MY MONEY!!!? but truth is, no applicative research can be done unless science advances the basic research to the point where it can at least comprehend the fundamental components on which to build the practical applications.

You say you want FTL. You say you want interstellar travel Yet you also say you want scientists to stop wasting your money? on research that would show us if FTL is even possible in the first place and the research that would let us see how we can even hope to practically embrace interstellar travel.

I'm sorry, but we're not getting a jetpack that won't turn our butt and legs into crunchy crispy cannibal food in our life, nor are we getting a charter to Sirius B. These things take a lot of time, resources and first and foremost, a lot of failure after which science picks itself back up and tries again.
 

mxfox408

Pee Eye Em Pee Daddy
Apr 4, 2010
478
0
0
Vegosiux said:
mxfox408 said:
This is an amazing discovery, so what does this discovery actually mean? Jack shit, because until interstellar space travel is acquired, all these billions of dollars is wasted on just looking out to space. They should invest that money in FTL research or human advancements, so forgive my negativity but I'd rather our tax dollars be put to use more effectively in advancements instead of speculations. We are way to far from this research actually meaning something, let's spend this cash on better space advances in order to get to that point.
See there's two kinds of research, the basic and the applicative research.

Basic research is focused on discovering new things, it incurs a lot of sunk costs and its worth is only evident after a while. Yet without it, we'd still be hitting stones together to produce sparks and arguing about bananas. It's hit and miss, you never know what you'll get, but once you get something, you know you can actually base some concrete advancements on it.

What you want is applicative research, the kind of research that gives results NOW because of MY MONEY!!!? but truth is, no applicative research can be done unless science advances the basic research to the point where it can at least comprehend the fundamental components on which to build the practical applications.

You say you want FTL. You say you want interstellar travel Yet you also say you want scientists to stop wasting your money? on research that would show us if FTL is even possible in the first place and the research that would let us see how we can even hope to practically embrace interstellar travel.

I'm sorry, but we're not getting a jetpack that won't turn our butt and legs into crunchy crispy cannibal food in our life, nor are we getting a charter to Sirius B. These things take a lot of time, resources and first and foremost, a lot of failure after which science picks itself back up and tries again.
That's exactly what im talking about, I don't want instant results, what I'd like to see is advancements to help us get there. Yes lots of failures help us learn to create better than the failed experiment. I'd rather us do that than waste billions on just telescopes that allow us to see further without a means to get there, unless ofcourse its all to plot and map it for future exploration, but I definitely prefer to see failed attempts over doing nothing but looking, atleast the failures will help get us closer to success.