A question of Black holes.

[MeteorWayne]

Finally, we agree on something <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[why06]

He's from some other country...I think theres a problem with translation....?<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[wes86482]

How do BHs deteriorate? i would think that they would either have combined its mass with all other matter in the universe, or that the universe would just fall into the metaphorical "sinkhole" that is created by the BHs.

 

[alokmohan]

Unless you know what is electron degeneratio,you may not understand black holWhile discussing black hole we must not lose track of degeneration of matter.It is due to degeneration that stars become white dwarf,next stage neutron star,next stage black hole.Of course size of the star is most important factor.A sun having 1.4 solar masses ends up in white dwarf,1.4 to 3 upwards becomes black hole.Now we see what is degeneration of matter.In a starwehave gravity pulling it in,radiation pressure pushes it outside.When matter is put in high pressure,electron shells are sqeezed and they have claustrophobia.They shake at randon and creates an out ward force .Degeneration pressure.When the star cools of we dont have thermal radiatiative pressure .We may expectgravityto push it in .This does not happen ,for degenerative force it does not collpse.this is electron degeneration.This is for white dwarf.When the matter keeps on we ultimately reach black hole. e physorg.com

 

[nexium]

Hi alokmohan: I think you ment to type 1.4 to 3 becomes a neutron star. I am not sure of the lower mass limit for a blackhole, but I think it has been revised upward to perhaps 6 solar mass in recent decades. Is there significant concensis for quark stars between 3 solar mass and 6 solar mass? Neil

 

[why06]

Is it true that say a larger body with the same mass as a smaller one will have a greater gravitational effect at larger distance, but a less of the power of the small one at close range becuase space-time bends more sharply and less uniformly a roung the smaller body.<br /><font color="yellow">Here an example:<br /><br /><br /><font color="black">Blackhole:<font color="white"><br />--------------------<font color="orange">gggggg<font color="white"><br />-----------------<font color="orange">gg g g gggg<font color="white"><br />---------------<font color="orange">ggg<font color="white">-----------<font color="orange">g g<font color="white"><br />---------------<font color="orange">ggg<font color="white">----<font color="black">black<font color="white">---<font color="orange">g g<font color="white"><br />---------------<font color="orange">ggg<font color="white">----<font color="black">hole<font color="white">----<font color="orange">ggg<font color="white"><br />----------------<font color="orange">ggg<font color="white">----------<font color="orange">ggg<font color="white"><br />-----------------<font color="orange">gggggggggggg<font color="white"><br />-------------------<font color="orange">gggggggg <font color="white"><br /><br /><br /><br /><font color="black"> Sun:<font color="white"><br />---<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />---------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />--------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />-------------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />------------------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />---------------------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />-----------------------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />------------------------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />-------------------------------<font color="orange">g<br /><font color="yellow">Sun<font color="white">---------------------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />-------------------------------<font color="orange">g<font color="white"><br />----------------------------</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[savor]

I try to answer with my english.<br /><br />If you put yours hands near your body, you are not open energy so much. <br /><br />So, because black hole dont have so much skin, black hole is not open so quicly energy out. black hole energy is very solid and thats why black hole open very solid energywawes, put not quicly and thats why we can realise very energy partickles coming to earth some times.<br /><br />Black holes expanding all a time like atoms, put you have to understund that, black hole and stars moving far a way from galaxy centrum, put they are exanpanding same way, and thats why you cant realise that.<br /><br />Its three way illusion. And thats why we dont need dark matter.<br /><br />Here you can building this new idea with me and with my friends, if you like a idea.<br /><br />http://onesimpleprinciple.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=79 <br /><br /><br />Savor<br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />

 

[weeman]

The blackhole will most definitely have a stronger gravitational pull at closer range than the Sun. Of course, the Schwarzschild radius of a blackhole is not very far at all. With smaller blackholes of only a few solar masses, the Schwarzschild radius might only be several km. <br /><br />We see the Sun having gravitational effects at large distances because it holds our entire solar system together. The Sun is even capable of holding objects in orbit at about 50 AU, by this I mean the Kuiper Belt. <br /><br />When we are talking about blackholes, shouldn't they still impose different gravitational effects at both short and long distance? Their gravitational effects are infinitely strong if it is beyond the event horizon. So, we might conclude that they only have strong gravitational pulls at short distance. But if supermassive blackholes exist at the centers of galaxies, wouldn't this mean that they have extremely long gravitational effects at great distances? Wouldn't these supermassive blackholes hold galaxies together in the same way the our Sun holds the solar system together? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Techies: We do it in the dark. </font></strong></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>"Put your hand on a stove for a minute and it seems like an hour. Sit with that special girl for an hour and it seems like a minute. That's relativity.</strong><strong>" -Albert Einstein </strong></font></p> </div>

 

[why06]

I cant understand anything on that site....<br /><br />What language are you speaking there..<br /><br />And I still can't see how this explains orbits around the sun.<br /><br />If you gave me your language I could try to figure it out...but I would stick out like a bad apple. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[why06]

thanks weeman & Tigerbiten,<br /><br />So my highly elaborate drawing was correct....In other words black holes have steeper slopes, but sun have big gradual ones. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div>________________________________________ <br /></div><div><ul><li><font color="#008000"><em>your move...</em></font></li></ul></div> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

Frankly I dont know about quark stars .Please help out.

 

[kyle_baron]

The simple answer:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark_stars<br /><br />The complicated answer:<br /><br />http://www.astronomycafe.net/qadir/q1401.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="4"><strong></strong></font></p> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

It evolves to a black hole,it is simply above neutron star.But what its mass is?More than 1.5 ,less than 3 solar mass?.

 

[enigma10]

It doesn't evolve into a black hole. It mearly has the capability to, hypothetically. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

It is not black hole,but black hole like thing?Black holes may not exist, there are ifs and buts, .Both are on same footing.

 

[enigma10]

From the link defining a quark star posted earlier.<br /><br /><i><font color="yellow"> A quark star lies between neutron stars and black holes in terms of both mass and density, and if sufficient additional matter is added to a quark star, it will collapse into a black hole.<br /><br />Neutron stars with masses of 1.5 - 1.8 solar masses with rapid spin are theoretically the best candidates for conversion. This amounts to 1% of the projected neutron star population. </font></i> <br /><br /><i><font color="red">This amounts to 1% of the projected neutron star population.</font></i><br /><br /> Soo... not common. Pretty rare occurence. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>

 

[MeteorWayne]

<img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

For sometime past I am reading Kip Thornes book on black hole.There he describes the history of black hole since time of Einstein.Black hole is brain child of Einstein ,but he denied black hole.Chandra was first to suggest that there can be no white dwarf mass greater than2 suns.Bigger things collapse.The star collapses on itself due to degeneration.Scientists were having a belief that matter cannot collapse on itself though it was mathematically proved.Eddington had faith that nature will prevent such collapse to make the star vanish.After long fight we had neutron stars of Zwicky and Wheeler gave us black hole.No where in long history I saw quark star.So I am not easy on quark star.

 

[alokmohan]

f extra dimensions of space exist, they must be smaller than about half the width of a human hair, according to new measurements of the strength of gravity at short distances. Researchers found that the same law governing the gravitational pull between planets continues to work when objects are separated by as little as 56 micrometers. The finding rules out extra dimensions of 44 micrometers or larger, they report in this week's Physical Review Letters.<br /><br />Discovering extra dimensions with the relatively huge size of a few micrometers would offer spectacular confirmation for string theory, the still unproved body of equations that may unify gravity with the normally incompatible realm of quantum physics. "Even though we haven't seen anything, these results put boundaries on what people can legitimately propose," says experimental physicist and study author Eric Adelberger of the University of Washington. "Testing the inverse square law [meaning Newton's law of gravity] is the bombproof way to look for extra dimensions."<br />ADVERTISEMENT (article continues below)<br />60-Second Science Podcast from Scientific American<br /><br />"I'm a big admirer of this class of experiments; I think they're awesome," says theoretical particle physicist Raman Sundrum of Johns Hopkins University. In principle, such tests could effectively rule out theories of micrometer-size extra dimensions, he says. To study such questions researchers would normally expect to use giant particle accelerators, such as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), set to switch on in Geneva later this year.<br /><br />Sundrum says the LHC may still get its shot at large extra dimensions, because the new result leaves the idea some wiggle room. "It's not killing that scenario," he says.<br /><br />With no pressing reason to check, researchers, until a few years ago, had never measured the strength of gravity when objects were separated by much less than a millimeter (roughly the width of a period on this page). But

 

[alokmohan]

Hyperspace is rather important is understanding.

 

[enigma10]

Yes. I'm always hyper about space. <img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /><br /><br /> /kidding <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>

 

[alokmohan]

Atwo dimensional creature will not perceive third dimension.Similarly we three dimensionals can never perceive hyper space.Hyper space is supposed to be three dimensional in whichour three dimensions are embedded.It is not in our space,something we know little of.Unknowable to some extent.At least hyper forthree dimensionals.

 

[enigma10]

Sure. I'll put that in there with the superspace theories. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"<font color="#333399">An organism at war with itself is a doomed organism." - Carl Sagan</font></em> </div>

 

[oscar1]

There are no two-dimensional creatures. Like Hawking explains, they'd fall apart into two pieces due to the digestive tract.

 

[alokmohan]

May insects can perceive two dimensions,not third dimension.I n flat earth theory we dont have scope of third dimension