<p>If a black holes gravitional pull is so great that not even light can escape, how can matter possibly be ejected?</p><p>Is the matter ejected from the hole it self or at some position before the event horizion?</p><p>Even before the horizion, wouldnt the matter have to travel faster then the in rushing light etc.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> Also peoples thoughts on colliding black holes.</p><p>Is it theoretically possible that at some stage in the distant future all matter will be concentrated into very massive black holes? or is the expansion of the universe such that this is impossible? ( Would matter ejection prohibit this aswell?) <br /> </p><p>Say that it is possible, </p><p>Could the final result of this be collapse of all matter into a state "Pre big bang" through combining of black holes </p><p> </p><p> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
- Status
<p>Welcome to SDC Dr. Jeckyl! Just as a tip, this question would actually have been better placed over in the space science and astronomy forum. Well, since it's a question it'd probably be best in "Ask the Astronomer". However, it does fit here sorta, so no harm no foul.</p><p>You've just asked what appears to be the question of the month, and we actually have several discussions on this topic. I'll leave it up to you to fish them out, though they should be easy to find in the two astronomy forums (listed above).</p><p> </p><p>You already hit upon the general answer in your post. The ejected matter hasn't actually crossed the event horizon, so it hasn't passed the point of no return, the point at which escape requires faster than light speeds. The matter present in polar jets are near misses, that use the magnetic field and the rotation of the black hole to gain enough energy to escape via a near miss (think a space-craft slingshot maneuver). The magnetic fields then focus most of the matter into into collimated beams/jets along the poles of the magnetic field, instead of just spraying it out in all directions. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p align="center"><font color="#c0c0c0"><br /></font></p><p align="center"><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">--------</font></em></font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">----</font></em></font><font color="#666699">SaiphMOD@gmail.com </font><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">-------------------</font></em></font></p><p><font color="#999999"><em><font size="1">"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- </font></em></font><font size="1" color="#999999">The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>If a black holes gravitional pull is so great that not even light can escape, how can matter possibly be ejected?Is the matter ejected from the hole it self or at some position before the event horizion?Even before the horizion, wouldnt the matter have to travel faster then the in rushing light etc. Also peoples thoughts on colliding black holes.Is it theoretically possible that at some stage in the distant future all matter will be concentrated into very massive black holes? or is the expansion of the universe such that this is impossible? ( Would matter ejection prohibit this aswell?) Say that it is possible, Could the final result of this be collapse of all matter into a state "Pre big bang" through combining of black holes <br />Posted by DrJeckyl</DIV></p><p>There is a notion called Hawking radiation that may permit black holes to lose mass and evaporate. It is a quantum effect. You can find a discussion in Kip Thorne's book "Black Holes and Time Warps." Thorne is a serious physicist, but the book is written for a general audience. It is a great read.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>...Also peoples thoughts on colliding black holes.Is it theoretically possible that at some stage in the distant future all matter will be concentrated into very massive black holes? or is the expansion of the universe such that this is impossible? ( Would matter ejection prohibit this aswell?) Say that it is possible, Could the final result of this be collapse of all matter into a state "Pre big bang" through combining of black holes <br />Posted by DrJeckyl</DIV></p><p>On the other hand, if you are referring to the recent article concerning collision of galaxies and the effect on the black holes at their center, I think that the issue is the ejection of a black hole itself from the merged galaxies. That is not really and ejection of matter from a black hole. In that case the black holes did not quite collide, since if they did one would expect them to meld.</p><p>As to your last question. I dunno.</p><p><br /><br /> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>On the other hand, if you are referring to the recent article concerning collision of galaxies and the effect on the black holes at their center, I think that the issue is the <strong><font size="2">ejection of a black hole itself from the merged galaxies</font></strong>. That is not really and ejection of matter from a black hole. In that case the black holes did not quite collide, since if they did one would expect them to meld.As to your last question. I dunno. <br />Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p>Dude!<img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-surprised.gif" border="0" alt="Surprised" title="Surprised" /> I missed that article could you link it?</p><p> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Dude! I missed that article could you link it? <br />Posted by origin</DIV></p><p>http://www.livescience.com/space/scienceastronomy/080429-black-hole-superkick.html<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>http://www.livescience.com/space/scienceastronomy/080429-black-hole-superkick.html <br /> Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p> </p><p>How amazing is that. From the the link:</p><p><span style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial">"The "kick" the black hole receives is akin to the recoil of a rifle. It can propel the black hole to speeds of up to several thousand kilometers per second, according theoretical simulations. The escaping black hole Komossa and her team observed was racing along at 5,900,000 mph (2,650 kilometers per second)."</span> </p><p> </p><p>I know the matter in the galaxy is dispersed enough that the black hole probably won't distrupt it too much, but imagine that much mass 'plowing' through at those speeds (i'm assuming the speed is relative to the center of the galaxy). That's nearly 1% the speed of light. The energies involved there have to be, well.... astronomical <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-laughing.gif" border="0" alt="Laughing" title="Laughing" />.</p><p>Rogue supermassive black holes... what a concept! </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Is it theoretically possible that at some stage in the distant future all matter will be concentrated into very massive black holes?<br /> Posted by DrJeckyl</DIV></p><p> </p><p>Not likely. Black holes don't suck. They affect surrounding space like any other object with mass. Objects orbiting around a black hole follow the same laws of gravity as the Earth orbiting the Sun. Unless a force acts upon an object that is in a stable orbit about a black hole, it will simply remain in orbit. If the Sun instantly turned into a black hole (ignoring all know physics, of course), the Earth's orbit would remain unchanged as our distance from the center of mass would remain unchanged. The gravitational force follows the inverse square law no matter what the object is. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> Not likely. Black holes don't suck. ... Posted by derekmcd</DIV></p><p>But falling into one would, what with all that ripping and tearing due to the gradient beyond the event horizon.<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>But falling into one would, what with all that ripping and tearing due to the gradient beyond the event horizon. <br /> Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p> </p><p>It's not so bad if you bring some Ragu or Prego with you. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> It's not so bad if you bring some Ragu or Prego with you. <br /> Posted by derekmcd</DIV></p><p>Gotta love the spaghetti jokes. Never mind, I pointed it out and it's not funny anymore. I hate people who point jokes out.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>--____________________________________________--</p><p><font size="1"> Don't be too hard on me...I'm only in PHY 1010 
</font></p><p> </p><p><font color="#339966"> The following goes without saying:</font> </p> </div>
</font></p><p> </p><p><font color="#339966"> The following goes without saying:</font> </p> </div><p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Gotta love the spaghetti jokes. Never mind, I pointed it out and it's not funny anymore. I hate people who point jokes out. <br /> Posted by vastbluesky92</DIV></p><p>The acknowledgement is nice, though. The fact that you 'got it' is a plus. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>If a black holes gravitional pull is so great that not even light can escape, how can matter possibly be ejected?Is the matter ejected from the hole it self or at some position before the event horizion?Even before the horizion, wouldnt the matter have to travel faster then the in rushing light etc. Also peoples thoughts on colliding black holes.Is it theoretically possible that at some stage in the distant future all matter will be concentrated into very massive black holes? or is the expansion of the universe such that this is impossible? ( Would matter ejection prohibit this aswell?) Say that it is possible, Could the final result of this be collapse of all matter into a state "Pre big bang" through combining of black holes <br /> Posted by DrJeckyl</DIV></p><p>Well, I don't really know a lot about this perticular Subject of black holes. One thing I do know is that Stephen Hawkings proved that black holes release a partictle at random times. It has to do with Quantum Mechanics. The math behind it is extremely difficult. Also, Humans have created a black hole here on the earth in the Bern Accelerator in France/Belgium. They accelerated two protons as super high speeds. The effect was a realase of Gravitons (the gravitational particle) which created a black hole. The black hole then release a proton one trillionth of a second later and the black hole 'dispersed'. </p><p>Hope that helped,</p><p>christianboygenius </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Well, I don't really know a lot about this perticular Subject of black holes. One thing I do know is that Stephen Hawkings proved that black holes release a partictle at random times. It has to do with Quantum Mechanics. The math behind it is extremely difficult. Also, Humans have created a black hole here on the earth in the Bern Accelerator in France/Belgium. They accelerated two protons as super high speeds. The effect was a realase of Gravitons (the gravitational particle) which created a black hole. The black hole then release a proton one trillionth of a second later and the black hole 'dispersed'. Hope that helped,christianboygenius <br />Posted by christianboygenius</DIV></p><p>If you have a reference for this I would love to see it. So far as I know, not only has no one ever detected a graviton, there is no established theory of quantum gravity to provide a description of what to look for. I am also unaware of any production of a black hole in any experiment every conducted by man. I would be extremely in seeing evidence to the contrary -- it would be really exciting physics.<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
<p>Where to begin... </p><p>First, welcome to the boards!!! </p><p> </p><p><strong>"Well, I don't really know a lot about this perticular Subject of black holes."</strong> </p><p>Your local library, google and, of course, these forums are generally good places to start some semblance of understanding, but make sure you're capable of discerning the wheat from the chaff. </p><p><strong>"One thing I do know is that Stephen Hawkings proved that black holes release a partictle at random times. It has to do with Quantum Mechanics."</strong></p><p>Stephen Hawking (no 's') has proposed a theory that emits radiation known, oddly enough, as Hawking Radiation. This theory has not been tested, so it can not be said to be proven true or false. The basic principle behind it involves quantum fluctuations of a vacuum in which virtual particles are allowed to briefly exist, borrowing energy from the system which temporarily violates the 1st law of thermodynamics. Normally, these particle/anti-particle pairs quickly annihilate each other and return the energy of the system to its original state so physicists and cosmologists can relax. </p><p>Near the event horizon of a black hole, however, there may be enough energy to separate the 2 before they annihilate. One particle is ejected and becomes a 'real' particle... the other falls into the black hole. The 1st law of thermodynamics dictate that the energy can not be created or destroyed. Since these particles were a random fluctuation allowed by the Hiesenberg Uncertainty Principle and added energy/mass to the system 'out of nothing', the black hole that absorbed the virtual particle is now forced to compensate for that energy by 'shrinking' for lack of a better term. Since neither particle originated inside the black hole, it doesn't actually lose mass, rather it returns the mass that the vaccuum borrowed.</p><p>To an outside observer, it appears as if that particle was ejected from the black hole. </p><p><strong>"The math behind it is extremely difficult."</strong></p><p>That's an understatement <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-smile.gif" border="0" alt="Smile" title="Smile" />. </p><p> </p><p><strong>"Also, Humans have created a black hole here on the earth in the Bern Accelerator in France/Belgium. They accelerated two protons as super high speeds."</strong></p><p>No such thing has happened yet at C.E.R.N. CERN is an organization that operates the LHC (Large Hadron Collider). It is theoretically possilble that the accelerator may be able to create enough energy for this to happen, but it remains to be seen. They haven't even turned the behemoth on yet. I believe, last time I checked, the schedule start date to hit the big green button is May 21. No results will be seen for at least a month or so. Apparently it takes a whille to impart enough energy into these particle to make the collisions worthy of the 6 billion they spent building it. </p><p><strong>"The effect was a realase of Gravitons (the gravitational particle) which created a black hole." The black hole then release a proton one trillionth of a second later and the black hole 'dispersed'."</strong></p><p>Gravitons are a hypothetical particle said to be a force carrier similar to the photon. There is zero evidence, physical or observational, to elevate them into a theory and eventual incorporation into the Standard Model of particle physics. They may or may not exist. I don't believe we have the tools yet to detect gravitons should they exist... and we may never. </p><p> </p><p>Hope that helped <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-wink.gif" border="0" alt="Wink" title="Wink" />. Feel free to snoop around and ask questions. The folks around here are quite helpful. </p><p> </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div><br /><div><span style="color:#0000ff" class="Apple-style-span">"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</span></div> </div>
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
A video made by me about space and the loneliness in the universe- Started by drakotol
- Replies: 54
-
SETI chief says US has no evidence for alien technology. 'And we never have
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 11
-
Sorry, little green men: Alien life might actually be purple
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 1
Latest posts
-
-
Question Recommendations for International Research Competitions- Latest: Andrii Dzygunenko
-
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram