It's all theory I believe.
If you placed a very large mirror one light year away in space, and then pointed a very large telescope on earth at it, capable of seeing the reflection of earth and telescope in great detail, and waited exactly two years before looking through the telescope, what would you see?
:O
shows about deep space never fail to blow my mind.
was watching one about black holes last night, and apparently the reason they are black is because they are so massive, light does not travel fast enough to escape it.
They believe that at the center of every galaxy is a blackhole. My theory is that every blackhole is like beads of water on a waxed car hood. Over the emmense scale of time, the larger beads (blackholes) suck up the smaller ones until there is just one huge blackhole containing everything, all gas, matter, etc in the universe. In a fraction of a second that blackhole explodes in a BIG BANG and the cycle starts all over again.
It's all theory I believe.
black holes, relativity, quantum fields. physics rules :D
Earth at the time you pointed the telescope at the mirror.
Black holes are not eternal... and you guys should know better than starting to rethink the bigbang theory on this forum.Other stuff that is difficult to comprehend is dark matter and dark energy.
Interesting theory, I like it.I have vague recollections of smoky dorm room discussions of how light has characteristics of mass and, by definition, travels at relativistic speeds. So, does it have infinite mass? Does time stand still? Whoa.
My theory is our entire galaxy, everything we know of and beyond, is
just another little atom that makes up another larger galaxy, that makes
up another etc.
The 'Big Bang' is just somebody finding out about nuclear physics :aok
*Edit
Before anyone gets critical here, no, I don't actually believe in my
theory, but it's something to tease the mind with ;)
They believe that at the center of every galaxy is a blackhole. My theory is that every blackhole is like beads of water on a waxed car hood. Over the emmense scale of time, the larger beads (blackholes) suck up the smaller ones until there is just one huge blackhole containing everything, all gas, matter, etc in the universe. In a fraction of a second that blackhole explodes in a BIG BANG and the cycle starts all over again.
Black holes only suck up what crosses the event horizon. So that wouldn't happen. It couldn't get enough mass to be big enough to suck in another since they are so far apart. Black holes are just too dense.
Black holes only suck up what crosses the event horizon. So that wouldn't happen. It couldn't get enough mass to be big enough to suck in another since they are so far apart. Black holes are just too dense.What about when two galaxies collide? Wouldn't the two eventually unite into one single larger galactic core?
yes because we simply can't see one. the only way to find out is to go to one, and the clossest known black hole is at the center of the galaxy.Milky Way core is in the tens of thousands of LY away. There's closer black holes than Sagittarius @ the core.. Like Cygnus X1 and probably others closer still. Also IIRC there's some funny physics to falling past event horizon... don't recall exactly, but time slows down for at least part of your fall. Not sure if it's at the same time your legs turn to spaghetti.
it would take us nearly 1000 years to get there, and that's at the speed of light
And yet, they claim that Gama ray bursts come out of them, in the same show.Sounds like what matter doesn't get to event horizon but gets caught in the polar jets.
Sounds like what matter doesn't get to event horizon but gets caught in the polar jets.
:O :lol. Jets out of a black hole that nothing can escape?
Oh you think?????
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/39/M87_jet.jpg)
Google sarcasm for me foo ;) That is exactly my point. In the same show the know it all scientists tell us that nothing can escape a black hole and then they go on to show us the Gama ray emissions from it :lol Then they go on to tell us that they only speculate that there is a black hole somewhere because something did not match their calculations. I just think they need more constants that they pull out of you know where and then they will be able to explain everything :lol
Guys come on! Seriously, get your numbers and facts straight I can't stand what I'm reading here!
Our Galaxy's center is ~27,000±1,000LightYears away.
There is a lot of factors to account for when two galaxies collide. Bunch of simulations and observations on that subject. I suggest you look around. M31 Andromeda might not even collide with ours in 3-5Billions years because all we know is that it is closing in on us at 120km/s but following an unknown vector.
Why is it that the more information is available (web, books, TV), the more people speculate and appear less informed when they ask/answer questions?? :headscratch: Since google exists, people don't look for answers anymore its depressing.
Sorry, rant of the month for me. :bolt:
Google is for looking for answers, the trick is not to type in keywords which will bring nothing but trouble (ie, CNN, FOX). You are upset because fewer people look in books for answers, as you did and do. This change frightens you, and this fear is normal but irrational.
The internet is not out to get you, relax. Just because the world is changing doesn't mean that it will go to pieces. You and your generation made the world the way it is today, and your predecessors weren't happy about it either. Let nature run its course, and trust the next generation to carry the torch into the murky unknown of the future.
-Penguin
:O :lol. Jets out of a black hole that nothing can escape?Ded the jet matter doesn't escape the inescapable. Like I said, it did not make it past event horizon.
Some of the stellar-mass black hole candidates have bipolar jets of glowing gas (hydrogen and helium mainly, of course) extending several light-years from them. These jets emerge from close to the candidates at nearly the speed of light (FK-542).http://www.physics.unlv.edu/~jeffery/astro/astro1/lec025.html#jets from black holes (http://www.physics.unlv.edu/~jeffery/astro/astro1/lec025.html#jets from black holes)
The jets stream out along the axis of rotation.
Electric and magnetic fields that form in the accretion disk cause the jets in some way---and that is all we will say about that.
The energy for the jets ultimately comes from the gravitational potential energy of the material spiraling into the black hole candidate.
Some of this gravitational potential energy becomes the heat energy of the accretion disk and gets radiated away as X-rays and some becomes the kinetic energy of the jets.
Although the black holes swallow the matter, a part of matter is ejected from the vicinity of the black holes. Such ejected matter has high-velocity (nearly light velocity) and is collimated, so that it is called black hole jets.http://www.nao.ac.jp/E/release/2010/10/25/hbkj.html
the Gama ray emissions from itWhat do you expect from an astronomically sized train wreck like a black hole's accretion disk? IIRC other massive objects like neutron stars have comparable energy discharges..
What about when two galaxies collide? Wouldn't the two eventually unite into one single larger galactic core?Yes they merge. Stellar-mass black holes (remains of massive stars) binaries also merge. It is the hope that the gravity waves that these events create will be detected in the next decades.
The other alternatives are much more exotic and unlikely.
Tomorrow, the facts will be something else.Sounds like arguing Xenos paradox "impossible 1/2 distances" dynamic in scientific investigation.. That there's an overabundance of possible explanation is a given in principle, and totally established as a trend historically.. Not surprising when you're dealing with a domain of investigation where every answer raises more questions.. And when relatively little of the whole human population actually chips in to scientific investigation.
How is that what it implies?
They don't know but wager on the best explanation, considering everything else taken more or less for granted. IE inference. The illustration is for communication purposes.. Just like the difference between ideation/communication/documentation sketches in engineering.
So, in your opinion they know for sure and understand everything there is to know about the creation and behavior of a black hole?It's conjecture with certainty in various shades of grey, like probably all science.
The pictures imply that because that is what they show. I'd like to see the engineering version then instead of teh cartoon version.The pictures are models. Engineering is even more vulgarized than investigative science. Engineering trend is to not care why something works if it just works. An ideation sketch = napkin scribble. Communication sketch can be napkin sketch but usually more like venn diagrams made a little more realistic looking. When you omit many details, parts, and layers in a full-blown 3D CAD schematic, and color-code some/most of it, that's a communication sketch. Documentation sketch is where you find heads-to-toe precision and accuracy like construction blueprints.
It is the hope that the gravity waves that these events create will be detected in the next decades.
shows about deep space never fail to blow my mind.
was watching one about black holes last night, and apparently the reason they are black is because they are so massive, light does not travel fast enough to escape it. in fact, if you were to get close enough to one, you would not be able to send transmissions on what it is like, because radio waves, which travel at the speed of light, would not be able to make it back to where you're trying to transmit to. as you get pulled in by the immense gravity, since your feet are closer to the black hole than your head, they get pulled in faster, and you get stretched like a peice of taffy, until you are simply squeezed to death. the hypernova explosion that is believed to create black holes is the equivalent to a 100 million-billion megaton nuclear blast, and you can see these explosions from literally across the universe.
mind=BLOWN
i don't know, i thought i would share this with you all, because this stuff never ceases to amaze me.
It's conjecture with certainty in various shades of grey, like probably all science.
I thought it was called a supernova? Did those astronomers change the terminology again? :furious Not the first time I guess Pluto is no longer a planet...it is supernova....but somewhere along the line this supernova picks up a stupid amount of gravity....maybe Moot can chime in more. seems to know more then anyone else here.
This is how I see it happening...
(http://i1211.photobucket.com/albums/cc426/Coogan11/galaxies3.jpg)
Coogan :eek:
I thought it was called a supernova? Did those astronomers change the terminology again? :furious Not the first time I guess Pluto is no longer a planet...Nova, supernova and hypernova are energetic scales for an "explosive" events in a dying star. The different amount of energies involved relate to different processes that produce these events. Nova is a nuclear explosion due to accretion of material onto a compact object like a neutron star. Supernova is the way some stars end their lives and there are several kinds that depend on the exact scenario. Sometimes it destroys the star completely, sometimes it leaves a neutron star. Hypernova is an even more energetic supernova. It is not exactly clear what happens there, but the common idea is that this is how particularily massive stars end their short lives by collapsing straight into a black hole. It is usually under the broad definition of a supernova.
So, in your opinion they know for sure and understand everything there is to know about the creation and behavior of a black hole?The cartoon intent is only to give a rough illustration and combine different pieces of information into one picture we can keep in our heads. The details in it are far from consensus among astronomers, but they agree on the broad picture of it. Astronomy (and science in general) has developed tools to investigate things that cannot be imaged by a camera. In the case of active galactic nuclear (AGN) the elements in the picture represent a large amount of investigations using spectroscopy, timing analysis and statistical surveys.
The pictures imply that because that is what they show. I'd like to see the engineering version then instead of teh cartoon version.
They believe that at the center of every galaxy is a blackhole. My theory is that every blackhole is like beads of water on a waxed car hood. Over the emmense scale of time, the larger beads (blackholes) suck up the smaller ones until there is just one huge blackhole containing everything, all gas, matter, etc in the universe. In a fraction of a second that blackhole explodes in a BIG BANG and the cycle starts all over again.
Nova, supernova and hypernova are energetic scales for an "explosive" events in a dying star. The different amount of energies involved relate to different processes that produce these events. Nova is a nuclear explosion due to accretion of material onto a compact object like a neutron star. Supernova is the way some stars end their lives and there are several kinds that depend on the exact scenario. Sometimes it destroys the star completely, sometimes it leaves a neutron star. Hypernova is an even more energetic supernova. It is not exactly clear what happens there, but the common idea is that this is how particularily massive stars end their short lives by collapsing straight into a black hole. It is usually under the broad definition of a supernova.
The cartoon intent is only to give a rough illustration and combine different pieces of information into one picture we can keep in our heads. The details in it are far from consensus among astronomers, but they agree on the broad picture of it. Astronomy (and science in general) has developed tools to investigate things that cannot be imaged by a camera. In the case of active galactic nuclear (AGN) the elements in the picture represent a large amount of investigations using spectroscopy, timing analysis and statistical surveys.
Example:
Astronomers see broadened spectral lines that indicate velocity dispersion of 1000s km/sec. These must come from "things" close to a very compact gravitational source (nothing else can create such a dispersion) - depicted as clouds in what is called the "broad line region". From analysis of the variation in brightness in time astronomers know the distance between the central bright light source and reflecting clouds around it - echoes of these variations are seen in the reflected light. From the statistics of how many of these objects appear highly obscured and in how many the light reaches us without much in the way we know that there is thick material around the central source that cover a certain fraction of the sphere around it (depicted as a torus in the images). and so on.
Moot, that implies that the gravitational field only exists or is stronger at a disk at the equator and weaker at the poles. How is that possible? Also, how do they know so match and have been able to create illustrations of something they can not see but only speculate that it is there? I am not saying they do not exist. Just asking how could they explain and illustrate something they only "know" it is there by observing the surroundings. This is just everything else. It will be a fact until they discover something else.
Hawking s latest is that black holes eventually disappear and what ever matter they have devoured also disappears with them. Again, no observation. Just speculation using a lot of math and even more made up constants. Tomorrow, the facts will be something else.
penguin, the smartest kids ask the most questions, not try and tell you what they know. just sayin :)
Nova, supernova and hypernova are energetic scales for an "explosive" events in a dying star. The different amount of energies involved relate to different processes that produce these events.From Project Rho (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket)'s Boom Table (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/spacegunconvent.php#Nukes_In_Space~Boom_Table):
| Joules (J) | TNT Equivalent | Notes |
| 0.0 x 1000 | Big Bang (interpretation one) | |
| 1.0 x 1002 | Firecracker | |
| 1.4 x 1003 | kinetic energy of a 3.5 g AK-74 bullet fired at 900 m/s | |
| 3.3 x 1003 | kinetic energy of a 9.33 g NATO rifle cartridge fired at 838 m/s | |
| 4.184 x 1003 | 1 gram | = 1 microton |
| 1.3 x 1005 | 31 grams | Anti-personnel land mine |
| 2.1 x 1005 | 50 grams | Single round of depleted uranium from an A-10 Warthog's GAU-8 rotating cannon (1,800 rpm) |
| 8.4 x 1005 | 200 grams | 1 stick TNT |
| 9.5 x 1005 | 226 grams | Hand grenade |
| 6.1 x 1006 | 1.4 kilogram | 120mm Tank Gun KE Ammunition (KEW-A1) |
| 2.1 x 1007 | 5 kg | Anti-tank mine |
| 3.9 x 1007 | Impact energy of proposed Navy 64 megajoule railgun | |
| 1.2 x 1008 | 28 kg | 1 gallon of gasoline |
| 1.8 x 1008 | 43 kg | 1 microgram of antimatter + 1 microgram of matter |
| 5.3 x 1008 | 127 kg | Battleship Iowa 16 inch shell with 54 kg high explosive charge |
| 8.5 x 1008 | 203 kg | 1 second of output from an average commercial nuclear power reactor (850 MW) |
| 1.9 x 1009 | 454 kg | Tomahawk cruise missile (TLAM-C) |
| 4.184 x 1009 | 1 ton | |
| 8.4 x 1009 | 2 t | = 0.002 kiloton, Oklahoma City bombing |
| 2.0 x 1010 | 4.8 t | Average lightning bolt |
| 3.6 x 1010 | 8.6t | Average tornado |
| 4.2 x 1010 | 10 t | = 0.01 kiloton, Davy Crockett tactical nuclear weapon |
| 5.0 x 1010 | 12 t | yield energy of a MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast) bomb, the second most powerful non-nuclear weapon ever designed |
| 1.8 x 1011 | 43 t | 1 milligram of antimatter + 1 milligram of matter |
| 1.8 x 1011 | 44 t | yield energy of a ATBIP (Aviation Thermobaric Bomb of Increased Power) bomb, the most powerful non-nuclear weapon ever designed |
| 4.184 x 1012 | 1 kiloton | = 1000 tons |
| 1.5 x 1013 | 1 second of the total power consumption of the human world in the year 2004 | |
| 2.0 x 1013 | 1 second of power generated between the surfaces of Jupiter and its moon Io due to Jupiter's magnetic field | |
| 3.6 x 1013 | 1 kt | energy released by an average thunderstorm |
| 4.4 x 1013 | 1 second of total heat flux from earth's interior | |
| 4.6 x 1013 | 11 kt | Relativistic weapon: 1 gram at 75% c |
| 6.3 x 1013 | 15 kt | 1 Hiroshima "Little Boy" |
| 8.8 x 1013 | 21 kt | Nagasaki "Fat Man" |
| 1.2 x 1014 | 29 kt | Relativistic weapon: 1 gram at 90% c |
| 1.8 x 1014 | 43 kt | 1 gram of antimatter + 1 gram of matter |
| 4.2 x 1014 | 100 kt | W76 warhead |
| 5.5 x 1014 | 132 kt | Relativistic weapon: 1 gram at 99% c |
| 6.0 x 1014 | 143 kt | energy released by an average hurricane in one second |
| 1.3 x 1015 | 300 kt | W87 warhead |
| 1.4 x 1015 | 338 kt | Earthquake 6.9 on the Richter scale |
| 1.4 x 1015 | 1 second of total heat flux transported by the Gulf Stream | |
| 1.9 x 1015 | 454 kt | Relativistic weapon: 1 gram at 99.9% c |
| 2.0 x 1015 | 475 kt | W88 warhead |
| 2.0 x 1015 | 477 kt | Earthquake 7.0 on the Richter scale |
| 2.1 x 1015 | 500 kt | Ivy King device (largest pure fission device ever made) |
| 4.0 x 1015 | 1 second of total heat flux transported by earth's atmosphere and oceans away from the equator towards the poles |
| 4.184 x 1015 | 1 megaton | 67 Hiroshimas |
| 5.0 x 1015 | 1.2 Mt | Maximum yield of B83 nuclear bomb (most powerful U.S. weapon in active service) |
| 6.3 x 1015 | 1.5 Mt | Relativistic weapon: 1 gram at 99.99% c |
| 1.5 x 1016 | 3.5 Mt | 1 Barringer Meteor Crater |
| 3.8 x 1016 | 9 Mt | B53 nuclear bomb (most powerful US warhead; no longer in active service) |
| 4.4 x 1016 | 10.4 Mt | Eniwetok |
| 4.6 x 1016 | 11 Mt | Relativistic weapon: 1 kilogram at 75% c |
| 6.3 x 1016 | 15 Mt | Castle Bravo device (Bikini Atoll) (most powerful US test) |
| 6.3 x 1016 | 15 Mt | 1 Tunguska event = 4.3 Barringer Meteor Craters |
| 6.3 x 1016 | 15 Mt | Earthquake 8.0 on the Richter scale |
| 1.0 x 1017 | 24 Mt | total energy output of a Type-I civilization (Kardashev scale) each second |
| 1.1 x 1017 | 25 Mt | 1 "city killer" nuclear warhead |
| 1.1 x 1017 | 25 Mt | Maximum yield of B41 bomb (most powerful US bomb; no longer in active service) |
| 1.1 x 1017 | 25 Mt | Mount St. Helens = 1.6 Tunguskas |
| 1.2 x 1017 | 29 Mt | Relativistic weapon: 1 kilogram at 90% c |
| 1.3 x 1017 | 31 Mt | energy released by an average hurricane in one day |
| 1.7 x 1017 | 42 Mt | total energy from the Sun that strikes the face of the Earth each second |
| 1.8 x 1017 | 43 Mt | 1 kilogram of antimatter + 1 kilogram of matter |
| 2.1 x 1017 | 50 Mt | Tsar Bomba device (USSR, most powerful nuclear test ever) |
| 3.6 x 1017 | 85 Mt | Earthquake 8.5 on the Richter scale |
| 5.0 x 1017 | 120 Mt | Earthquake 8.6 on the Richter scale |
| 5.5 x 1017 | 132 Mt | Relativistic weapon: 1 kilogram at 99% c |
| 6.3 x 1017 | 150 Mt | 1 Krakatoa = 6 Mount St. Helens |
| 7.1 x 1017 | 161 Mt | Earthquake 8.7 on the Richter scale |
| 1.0 x 1018 | 239 Mt | Earthquake 8.8 on the Richter scale |
| 1.9 x 1018 | 454 Mt | Relativistic weapon: 1 kilogram at 99.9% c |
| 2.0 x 1018 | 477 Mt | Earthquake 9.0 on the Richter scale |
| 2.5 x 1018 | 600 Mt | 1 Thera = 6 Krakatoas |
| 2.8 x 1018 | 674 Mt | Earthquake 9.1 on the Richter scale |
| 4.0 x 1018 | 952 Mt | Earthquake 9.2 on the Richter scale |
| 4.0 x 1018 | energy released by the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake (between 9.1 and 9.3 on the Richter scale) | |
| 4.184 x 1018 | 1 gigaton | = 1000 megatons |
| 6.3 x 1018 | 1.5 Gt | Relativistic weapon: 1 kilogram at 99.99% c |
| 1.1 x 1019 | 3 Gt | Earthquake 9.5 on the Richter scale |
| 1.8 x 1020 | 43 Gt | 1 metric ton of antimatter + 1 metric ton of matter |
| 4.184 x 1021 | 1 teraton | = 1000 gigatons = 1e6 megatons |
| 1.5 x 1022 | 4 Tt | total energy from the Sun that strikes the face of the Earth each day |
| 2.5 x 1022 | 6 Tt | 1 Shoemaker-Levy = 10,000 Theras |
| 1.4 x 1023 | 33 Tt | total energy output of Wolf 359 each second (bolometric luminosity) |
| 2.0 x 1023 | 48 Tt | Solar flare |
| 3.4 x 1023 | 80 Tt | = 80,000 gigatons = 8e7 megatons, 1 Dinosaur Killer = 13 Shoemaker-Levys |
| 5.0 x 1023 | 120 Tt | 1 Chicxulub Crater = 20 Shoemaker-Levys |
| 3.0 x 1024 | 720 Tt | 1 Wilkes Land crater = 6 Chicxulub Craters |
| 4.184 x 1024 | 1 petaton | = 1000 teratons |
| 5.5 x 1024 | 1 Pt | total energy from the Sun that strikes the face of the Earth each year |
| 3.2 x 1026 | 77 Pt | Energy required blow off Terra's atmosphere into space |
| 3.9 x 1026 | 92 Pt | total energy output of the Sun each second (bolometric luminosity) |
| 4.0 x 1026 | 96 Pt | total energy output of a Type-II civilization (Kardashev scale) each second |
| 6.6 x 1026 | 158 Pt | Energy required to heat all the oceans of Terra to boiling |
| 4.184 x 1027 | 1 exaton | = 1000 petatons |
| 4.5 x 1027 | 1 Et | Energy required to vaporize all the oceans of Terra into the atmosphere |
| 7.0 x 1027 | 2 Et | Energy required to vaporize all the oceans of Terra and dehydrate the crust |
| 2.9 x 1028 | 7 Et | Energy required to melt the (dry) crust of Terra |
| 1.0 x 1029 | 24 Et | Energy required blow off Terra's oceans into space |
| 2.1 x 1029 | 50 Et | Earth's rotational energy |
| 1.5 x 1030 | 359 Et | Energy required blow off Terra's crust into space |
| 4.184 x 1030 | 1 zettaton | = 1000 exatons |
| 2.9 x 1031 | 7 Zt | Energy required to blow up Terra (reduce to gravel orbiting the sun) |
| 3.3 x 1031 | 8 Zt | total energy output of the Sun each day |
| 3.3 x 1031 | 8 Zt | total energy output of Beta Centauri each second (bolometric luminosity) |
| 5.9 x 1031 | 14 Zt | Energy required to blow up Terra (reduce to gravel flying out of former orbit) |
| 1.2 x 1032 | 29 Zt | total energy output of Deneb each second (bolometric luminosity) |
| 2.9 x 1032 | 69 Zt | Energy required to blow up Terra (reduce to gravel and move pieces to infinity) |
| 4.184 x 1033 | 1 yottaton | = 1000 zettatons |
| 1.2 x 1034 | 3 Yt | total energy output of the Sun each year |
| 4.184 x 1036 | 1 x 1027 tons | = 1,000 yottatons |
| 5.0 x 1036 | 1.2 x 1027 tons | total energy output of the Milky Way galaxy each second (bolometric luminosity) |
| 4.0 x 1037 | 9.6 x 1027 tons | total energy output of a Type-III civilization (Kardashev scale) each second |
| 6.0 x 1037 | 1.4 x 1028 tons | Nova Persei |
| 1.2 x 1038 | 2.9 x 1028 tons | total energy output of the Sun in ten thousand years |
| 4.184 x 1039 | 1 x 1030 tons | = 1,000,000 yottatons |
| 1.0 x 1040 | 2.0 x 1030 tons | one second's worth of output from a quasar |
| 1.0 x 1042 | 2.7 x 1032 tons | Energy in photons from a type I supernova = 0.01 foe |
| 1.0 x 1042 | 2.7 x 1032 tons | total energy output of the Local Supercluster each second (bolometric luminosity) |
| 4.184 x 1042 | 1 x 1033 tons | = 1,000,000,000 yottatons |
| 3.0 x 1043 | 7.0 x 1033 tons | Energy needed to make the local superbubble (Supernova Geminga) = 0.3 foe |
| 1.0 x 1044 | 1 Foe (ten to the Fifty-One Ergs, unit of supernova strength) | |
| 1.0 x 1044 | 2.4 x 1034 tons | Energy in neutrinos from a type I supernova = 1 foe = 2.4 x 1034 tons |
| 1.3 x 1044 | 3.1 x 1034 tons | Total radiant energy from the Sun (approximately ten billion years worth) |
| 3.0 x 1044 | 7.2 x 1034 tons | Energy in photons from a type II supernova = 1.3 foes |
| 1.0 x 1045 | 2.4 x 1035 tons | Gamma-ray burster = 10 foes |
| 1.0 x 1046 | 2.0 x 1036 tons | Energy in photons from a hypernova = 100 foes |
| 3.0 x 1046 | 7.0 x 1036 tons | Energy in neutrinos from a type II supernova = 300 foes |
| 1.0 x 1048 | 2.4 x 1038 tons | Energy in neutrinos from a hypernova = 10,000 foes |
| 2.0 x 1049 | 4.8 x 1039 tons | total energy output of all the stars in the observable universe each second (bolometric luminosity) |
| 3.0 x 1069 | Big Bang (interpretation two) |
I'm smart, but I can't read well between the lines. Would you care to elaborate? Are you saying that I am wrong?
-Penguin
Example:
Astronomers see broadened spectral lines that indicate velocity dispersion of 1000s km/sec. These must come from "things" close to a very compact gravitational source (nothing else can create such a dispersion That we know of) - depicted as clouds in what is called the "broad line region". From analysis of the variation in brightness in time astronomers think theyknow the distance between the central bright light source and reflecting clouds around it - echoes of these variations are seen in the reflected light. From the statistics of how many of these objects appear highly obscured and in how many the light reaches us without much in the way we know that there is thick material around the central source that cover a certain fraction of the sphere around it (depicted as a torus in the images). and so on.
I thought a bolt of lightning was 1.21 Gigawattts? :headscratch:
OK, I ll ask you then. Do you think they know and understand everything that describes a black hole, its creation and its behavior?
OK, I ll ask you then. Do you think they know and understand everything that describes a black hole, its creation and its behavior? And if they do, why can't they come into agreement with each other?The things you edited and bold faced when quoting me (not a nice thing to do unless you explicitly say you edited it) are actually well determined and agreed upon. The are the results of very simple physics, so unless you wish to invoke the "what about the force of aliens from a 6th dimension" argument, we can safely say that we "know" them as much as anything can be known in science.
I think he's trying to say that you're the most annoying know-it-all kid this BBS has seen in a long time (possibly ever).
Maybe that's just my interpretation.
you asked this exact question earlier, and moot answered it for you. why are you asking it again? :headscratch:
Let him speak for himself. ;)
-Penguin
you can probably take it as read that anyone who understands the scientific method would give you the same answer moot did, so yes :)
Would you care to elaborate?
you are each barely much older
I understand that mate! But do you not think I have a fair point?
Lets wait till we produce a published and widely accepted paper before we start deciding who can and who cannot seem 'know-it-all'?
:cheers: cheers!
I think many people share dunnrite's interpretation, Penguin. You're the first teenager I've ever met that I wish would try and act like one. Go outside, get in trouble, chase some girls...
Scientists usualy end up unhappy, unappreciated and dissatisfied with the world they are in.sophomoric crap. What's next, smokers are unkempt misfits? Frenchies smell and don't shave armpits?
Untill then, your words are merely the sum total of studying someone else's theory which could easily count for nothing at the point of the next scientific breakthrough.More sophomoric platonics. What else ? That every post in this thread is "just, like, your opinion, man" ? No kidding. Of course everything everyone posts is their opinion. Dedalos asked a question and it was answered. All you can contribute along with your "know it all" condescension is .. what? No evidence whatsoever to substantiate the dubiousness of those conjectures we referred to, other than some textbook sunday philosophy.
All I am saying is that just because we think penguin is a teenager does not mean he should shut up and listen to the 'proper adults' acting like know-it-alls.Show me where someone in this thread acts like a Know it all. And define that beyond its vague face-value meaning will ya?
you're all giving penguin such a hard time.Show this. Where's the evidence I gave Penguin a hard time in this thread? You brought it up, now back it up.
Chasing girls will only end with broken hearts for all involved, and probably some sort of lawsuit against me.That is a common mistake. Chasing girls is hard and will make you sweat. Trap them instead.
That is a common mistake. Chasing girls is hard and will make you sweat. Trap them instead.
Why does it flatten out to form a accretion disk?Angular momentum conservation and minimum energy state. Gas, unlike stars is collisional (well, stars CAN colide it is just very improbable). The stable orbits for a particle around a central large mass are elliptical, but if they cross each other's paths they will collide. After a few collisions the orbits will start to average out. Since it is very likely that there will be some preference to a rotational direction (initial total angular momentum) this is the rotation plane the gas particles will end in. They will still collide with each other, but the relative speeds will be small (the local temperature). The thickness of the accretion disk will depend on the temperature and turbulence in the disk (these create dispersion in the particle trajectories so they do not all move on a perfect plane.
If matter is totally disintegrated and changed into energy once passing through the event horizon, then what is creating theThe passage though the event horizon is undramatic. If you could survive it, you would still see the the outside world and receive transmissions - but the wavelengths will get shorter and shorter so radio becomes visible light, then X-ray, etc. Your outgoing transmissions will fade into longer and longer wavelength as you approach the horizon and completely fade once you cross it.
gravitation field that warps time-space? The Black Hole is not full of matter. I have not seen anyone explain this to date. Scientist tell us nothing can travel faster than
light, except for the fabric of time space which is expanding and accelerating faster than light speed.
Does a Black Hole really create a Singularity?That depends on what do you call singularity.
The M-Theory mentioned in this post is also very interesting. The Ancients of India had a similar theory.The string theory and all its derivatives is an extremely hyped idea that has not produced a single new measurable prediction. They are currently in the realm of a mathematical exercises. Maybe in the future.
Literally? As in dig a 10 foot hole and fill the bottom with pungee sticks?No no no, this will damage them. They have a lovely skin that you'd want to keep intact. You need something soft at the bottom.
-Penguin
No no no, this will damage them. They have a lovely skin that you'd want to keep intact. You need something soft at the bottom.
That is a common mistake. Chasing girls is hard and will make you sweat. Trap them instead.
"It rubs the lotion on it's skin":rofl :rofl
Earth at the time you pointed the telescope at the mirror.
More sophomoric platonics. What else ? That every post in this thread is "just, like, your opinion, man" ? No kidding. Of course everything everyone posts is their opinion.
If you placed a very large mirror one light year away in space, and then pointed a very large telescope on earth at it, capable of seeing the reflection of earth and telescope in great detail, and waited exactly two years before looking through the telescope, what would you see?
:O
You would see the telescope you were looking through, without you looking through it.
Not really posting your opinion ever, moot, just posting things you have read of someone else's.You mean like my opinion of you, of gameplay in AH, of politics and religion and technology and engineering everytime they came up while they discussing them was allowed in the OC? There's easily more people on here who're less openly opinionated than there are who are more so than I am.
Dedalos asked a simple question and the answer wasn't something you need a PhD to explain.
dedalos, please do your research first, then try to make an argument. I know you're not trying to, but you're behaving like a troll. Yes, this is coming from someone with the exact same problem. This is why I know why you post the way you do. Relax, it's better to close your mouth and be thought a fool than to open it and prove it to the world.Show me where I spoke to Dedalos this way.
Oh who cares?You have no answer except this condescending dodge. Who cares? I dunno, who brought it up in the first place?
It's an age old pastime of philosophers to annoy scientists. I'm sure you have black holes all worked out into Ns to the power of 10s and I'm just thrilled for you.
As far as my good buddy Dedalos ... he LOVES to play the devils advocate and relishes in twisting nipples to see the reaction even when he knows the answer.
Well, that settles it then.
Dedalos twists male nipples. :D
Onward to the next mind altering question, BBS!
Well, that settles it then.
Dedalos twists male nipples. :D
Onward to the next mind altering question, BBS!
Bat ... I don't know where your coming from, but your rush to save the "teenager" from Moot was completely off base from what I read in this whole thread. Moot never took a shot at Penguin and didn't deserve what you dished out.
I have been reading Moot's posts for years now and from where I stand, I have never gotten the impression that he is some snooty know-it-all above the rest of us. What I have found is that he is very knowledgeable in many areas and has a knack for explaining things so that it is easier to understand. If that is what is being perceived as snooty know-it-all ... keep doing what you are doing Moot.
As far as my good buddy Dedalos ... he LOVES to play the devils advocate and relishes in twisting nipples to see the reaction even when he knows the answer.
You have no answer except this condescending dodge. Who cares? I dunno, who brought it up in the first place?