• You still have a chance to win a Celestron Telescope! Click here to learn more!

This New Monster Black Hole Discovery Is Too Big for Theories to Handle

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
The report points out that LB-1 is 13,800 light-years distance but Gaia suggest 7,000 light-years distance. The black hole mass shrinks too as reported. Other reports I read indicate the radial velocity method used to detect. Radial velocity method is used in exoplanets studies too, currently 864 confirmed exoplanets via radial velocity method. The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia I prefer Gaia astrometric distance - if accurate.
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
We have only 10 years until it collapses our entire galaxy.
Okay, you give us *only 10 years* to live until the *end*, it seems :). How much mass is there in the galaxy, how much dark matter halo mass too (assuming dark matter is real)? What is the annual rate of mass consumption that will accomplish this in 10 years?
 
Dec 2, 2019
2
1
15
Reading this article. Very first thing that comes to my mind is, can it be a merged black hole?

Like three big black holes collided to form 1 Super Stellar Black hole?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rod
Dec 2, 2019
1
0
10
Okay, you give us *only 10 years* to live until the *end*, it seems :). How much mass is there in the galaxy, how much dark matter halo mass too (assuming dark matter is real)? What is the annual rate of mass consumption that will accomplish this in 10 years?
So is this true that it will consume our Galaxy in 10 years or are we safe from it?
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
So is this true that it will consume our Galaxy in 10 years or are we safe from it?
FYI, someone else said we had 10 years remaining before the collapse of our galaxy :) This is not in the space.com report. I plan to continue enjoy stargazing using my telescopes :)
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
Reading this article. Very first thing that comes to my mind is, can it be a merged black hole?

Like three big black holes collided to form 1 Super Stellar Black hole?
Perhaps but I feel more modeling is needed and more follow up observations. I previously noted, The report points out that LB-1 is 13,800 light-years distance but Gaia suggest 7,000 light-years distance. Issues like astrometric measurements and distance is critical to the interpretation of the observations including the mass and orbital period determined by the radial velocity method, a method with good success in detecting exoplanets too. In the mean time, I will continue enjoying stargazing this winter.
 
Dec 2, 2019
1
0
10
Black Holes are simply a "theoryi" not a fact. You can not find, what does not exist. And in fact Black Holes are absurd, there is no other description.
Is it not true, that the known universal gravity force is what holds atoms together? That is well know garden variety "gravity" must be present or you don't have any physical objects. It is that simple.

And the theory has been around long enough, for them to have come up with something that takes it out of the absurd catagory.

But that's not necessary to them. Just keep saying you've found another one. and another one and another one. No, you just keep seeing the same data from long distances away, from which nothing can be established as being true, except the obvious. So what?. Here on earth, we have a zillion bits of data, that repeat themselves but we do not have a clue as to what they represent.

And now there is a steady stream of these maybes, whose sole purpose is to try and have research grants renewed ..... that have prove nothing but the data has repeated itself. But simply saying, renew our grant, we have found more instances of the same data?

But of course, you have not said anything you didn't say before then so why renew the grant? But they don't they say we have found another Black Hole, that is "we have learned something new. No .... you just repeated what we already know, the data exist.

And showing as real, artist's drawing of nothing we have never seen, but what he chooses to put on the canvas...... is an intentional deception.
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
Black Holes are simply a "theoryi" not a fact. You can not find, what does not exist. And in fact Black Holes are absurd, there is no other description.
Is it not true, that the known universal gravity force is what holds atoms together? That is well know garden variety "gravity" must be present or you don't have any physical objects. It is that simple.

And the theory has been around long enough, for them to have come up with something that takes it out of the absurd catagory.

But that's not necessary to them. Just keep saying you've found another one. and another one and another one. No, you just keep seeing the same data from long distances away, from which nothing can be established as being true, except the obvious. So what?. Here on earth, we have a zillion bits of data, that repeat themselves but we do not have a clue as to what they represent.

And now there is a steady stream of these maybes, whose sole purpose is to try and have research grants renewed ..... that have prove nothing but the data has repeated itself. But simply saying, renew our grant, we have found more instances of the same data?

But of course, you have not said anything you didn't say before then so why renew the grant? But they don't they say we have found another Black Hole, that is "we have learned something new. No .... you just repeated what we already know, the data exist.

And showing as real, artist's drawing of nothing we have never seen, but what he chooses to put on the canvas...... is an intentional deception.
Given the position here, should astronomy still be teaching the geocentric universe because the scientific method, could not test and show the heliocentric solar system to be true?
 
Dec 2, 2019
2
0
10
Maybe the theories are all wrong? Plasma Cosmology would explain this as electrical phenomena quite well. The reported photos of a Black Hole earlier this year are exactly as described by Plasma Cosmology; a central dielectric voidence, surrounded by a plasma torus. Over and over again we are seeing reports of the impossible (according to gravity centered theory) from observatories. Large scale structure and order (the cosmic web with nodes, voids, and streams) instead of chaos, magnetic fields across 'empty' space, spin aligned galaxies (as they should be when accounting for large scale electrical currents), spin aligned stars, galactic centers with axial energy beams ejecting matter (quasars), and galactic spin rates that defy gravity but are accounted for EM. Stars are not made of gas they are liquid hydrogen which can not collapse. Their energy is produced in the plasma shells, Pulsars defy known physics and mechanics but are accounted for as electrical discharge phenomena. etc. etc. Birkland, Alvin, Perat et. al. for the Plasma Cosmology answeres
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
Are we safe from this monster black hole? I get paranoid thinking about it
The space.com report shows the black hole could be 68 solar masses but also 10 solar masses using Gaia distance from Earth - much closer near 7,000 light-years. Please define *monster black hole*?
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
Maybe the theories are all wrong? Plasma Cosmology would explain this as electrical phenomena quite well. The reported photos of a Black Hole earlier this year are exactly as described by Plasma Cosmology; a central dielectric voidence, surrounded by a plasma torus. Over and over again we are seeing reports of the impossible (according to gravity centered theory) from observatories. Large scale structure and order (the cosmic web with nodes, voids, and streams) instead of chaos, magnetic fields across 'empty' space, spin aligned galaxies (as they should be when accounting for large scale electrical currents), spin aligned stars, galactic centers with axial energy beams ejecting matter (quasars), and galactic spin rates that defy gravity but are accounted for EM. Stars are not made of gas they are liquid hydrogen which can not collapse. Their energy is produced in the plasma shells, Pulsars defy known physics and mechanics but are accounted for as electrical discharge phenomena. etc. etc. Birkland, Alvin, Perat et. al. for the Plasma Cosmology answeres
There is a Wikipedia article on plasma cosmology, it gives a negative review of the model. Is the plasma cosmology on equal or better scientific verification than the heliocentric solar system that resulted in the overthrow of the geocentric model of astronomy? In the geocentric universe, Earth was immovable and the Sun moved around the Earth. That view collapsed because of rigorous observations and testing.
 
Dec 3, 2019
2
0
10
The space.com report shows the black hole could be 68 solar masses but also 10 solar masses using Gaia distance from Earth - much closer near 7,000 light-years. Please define *monster black hole*?
This does not answer my question of if we are safe or not? Would it be far enough away??
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
The space.com report shows the black hole and star, LB-1 are some 13,800 light-years distance from Earth and the Gaia astrometric data suggest 7,000 light-years away - both distances very, very, far away. There is nothing in the report by space.com indicating a catastrophic event is coming from this new black hole report, so I plan to continue enjoy my stargazing :). Some may find this NASA ADS report of interest and the attached, PDF full report at the link. It shows the black hole detected via radial velocity method in LB-1 spectrum. Many exoplanets are detected like this too so gravity is used in the calculations. Folks who reject gravity in astronomy, to be consistent should throw out all exoplanets detected via radial velocity method (presently near 900). Here is the link, The Formation of a 70 Msun Black Hole at High Metallicity From what I can gather digging a little deeper into some reports, the concern is LB-1 class B star near 8 solar masses and problems in stellar evolution theory explaining how a 68 solar mass black hole could form in a binary system like this starting off as two ZAMS stars together (zero-age main sequence) and then slowly aging over time, evolve into the present system observed. If LB-1 is only 7,000 light-years away, the black hole mass is then 10 solar masses and fits better with stellar evolution theory but placing LB-1 on the H-R diagram seems a problem when using 7,000 light-years from Gaia vs. 13,800 light-years.
 
Dec 2, 2019
2
0
10
There is a Wikipedia article on plasma cosmology, it gives a negative review of the model. Is the plasma cosmology on equal or better scientific verification than the heliocentric solar system that resulted in the overthrow of the geocentric model of astronomy? In the geocentric universe, Earth was immovable and the Sun moved around the Earth. That view collapsed because of rigorous observations and testing.
Wikipedia is nice and all but far from being an expert or a good judge. Very much a status quo prescriber. Fact is that what is talked about in Plasma Cosmology is being seen in observations over and over again. Birkland currents are real, not just with the Earth but other planets and are now being seen in the galaxy and others. The model fits the observations nicely, meanwhile standard cosmology is very much unproven and running into countless problems with theorists solving them by sticking their fingers in the holes in the dam that is about to burst.
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
This report on the *Monster Black Hole* is getting plenty of reads and interest. I keep in mind how this discovery was made and reported. "A 70 Msun black hole was discovered in Milky Way disk in a long period (P=78.9d) and almost circular (e=0.03) detached binary system (LB-1) with an 8 Msun B star companion. The metallicity of the B star is near solar (Z=0.02)." ""The LB-1 was discovered by the 4-meter class telescope LAMOST and the spectroscopic orbit was confirmed by the 10-meter class Gran Telescopio Canarias and Keck telescopes. Chandra non-detection places X-ray emission at the very low level < 2x10^31 erg/s. An H alpha emission line was observed, however, and since it follows a BH (small accretion disk around the BH from the B star wind) the double spectroscopic orbital solution was obtained..." ref - The Formation of a 70 Msun Black Hole at High Metallicity

My note - this binary system is weighed and measured by the radial velocity method, same used to detect many exoplanets and this does use gravity. We have the star LB-1 visible with an unseen companion in an orbital dance that is much heavier than the star. How this binary system (LB-1) formed is the problem using H-R star diagram and stellar evolution theory. When it comes to news sites reporting titles like *Monster Black Hole*, I need to ready a bit further and study a bit more too on the announcement :)
 

rod

Oct 22, 2019
183
14
85
FYI for those reading this discussion. I think this abstract is a bit easier to read about the discovery and method of mass measurement in the LB-1 binary system. "When the black hole is not accreting gas, it can be found through radial-velocity measurements of the motion of the companion star. Here we report radial-velocity measurements taken over two years of the Galactic B-type star, LB-1.", ref - A wide star–black-hole binary system from radial-velocity measurements
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts