[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/sci/ - Science & Math



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.




File: image.jpg (404 KB, 1030x1030)
404 KB
404 KB JPG
What the fuck is the universes problem?
>>
What is the matter, little boy? Schared of a tight, little black hole
>>
How big did that fucking star have to be?
>>
>>9998033
The event horizon exists to hide the singularity from the universe.
>>
>>9998829
It's probably many black holes combined.
>>
>>9998033
Black holes terrify me, as well as white holes (are as they may be)
>>
>>9998033
Does anything exist outside the universe? Asking for a friend
>>
>>9998996
More universe
>>
>>9998033
YOU, OP.
>>
>>9998996
your mom
>>
>>9998994
i'm super interested by them, but whenever i use programs like space engine or universe sandbox2 i get super spooked whenever i zoom in on one
i have no fucking idea why, but they are one of the only things that scare me
>>
>>9998829
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-star
>>
>>9998840
>The event horizon exists because of the extreme space time curvature caused by such a high mass density at the singularity

ftfy
>>
>>9998996

define
>exist

Time and space were literally created with the big bang. So the universe is all of space and all of time there is.

What is existence if you try to place it beyond space and time?
>>
That one quasar is okay, there is one that is a lot, lot more massive
>>
what would happen if you got close enough that you chould throw rocks at it? would the rocks bounce off?
>>
>>99988999
>>
>>9999849
The implicate order as defined by Bohm.
>>
>>9999845
Only if cosmic censorship is 100% true.
Otherwise you can theoretically have naked singularities.
>>
>>9998033
That is really insane
>>
>>9999853
>fly ship close enough to throw rocks
>have to be really deep in the space-time curvature
>have to be going really fast to maintain orbit
>throw rock
>notice that the universe is experiencing heat death because of time nearly stopping for you relative to the rest of the universe

nope... just stay the fuck away from black holes.
>>
>>9998033
You
>>
>>10000485
>fly ship within 1 parsec, throw rock
>become spaghetti or part of accretion disk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4PfBF3OD70
>>
99.9 % sure I don’t know
>>
What's written in the middle?
>>
>>10000496
no i only look like spaghetti from your frame of reference. to me you already died billions of years ago.
>>
>>10000496
>posting this retard unironically
>>
>>9998994
>>9999722
why the fuck is it that whenever a black hole is mentioned, someone has to pop in and tell us that they terrify him?

I mean even if one was traveling straight for Earth at the speed of light, it wouldn't reach us within your lifetime. It is literary impossible for a black hole to harm you.
>>
>>10000549
they refer to the existential terror of massive things looming over their concept of the world, not afraid that they'll be destroyed by a black hole
>>
>>9998994
I mean it's not that weird when it's by far the most destructive force in the universe while also shitting on physics
>>
>>9998033
Wasn't event horizon of this thing fucking small?
>>
>>10000529
No you are actually spaghetti because the gravity gradient is so sharp that your hand throwing the rock is accelerating towards the black hole faster than the rest of you. The force of gravity will physically stretch you out. Then the force of gravity will be stronger than the electromagnetic forces holding your body together and you will stop being a human and be more like just a cloud of organic molecules orbiting a black hole.
>>
>>10000485
Supermassive black holes's have much weaker tidal forces than stellar mass black holes.
Get a big enough black hole and the tidal stress would be relatively mild.
Of course if you were that close to S5 0014+81 you'd probably have bigger concerns since its the most energetic thing in the observable universe that we've seen.
If you got close enough to a Blazar to throw a rock in, you'd be blasted apart by gamma and x rays.
>>
>>10000677
see this here >>10000933
>>
>>9999853
you could watch the rock forever and it wouldn't hit
it would just keep getting slower and dimmer
>>
>>10000532
90% of this board is pop-sci retardation, science nigger would fit in here very well if it weren't for the anti-reddit contrarianism.
>>
>>9999849
>Time and space were literally created with the big bang.
we don't know that
>>
>>10000677
Tidal forces scale with 1/r^3 and linearly respective to mass, while the radius of a black hole grows linearly with mass. Therefore, as you increase mass, the tidal force near the event horizon of a black hole actually becomes weaker. In fact, you wouldn't even notice much when passing through the event horizon of a SMBC, just like you don't feel much while falling in an elevator.
>>
>>9999761
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-star
i swear to god, Quasi-stars have to be the most retarded theory to come out of astronomy over the last couple of years
>>
>>10002066
And you base your claim on what? Your annulus?
>>
>>9998033
>implying black holes exist
>>
>>9998033

so if a black hole is that big, then its just a really heavy ball?. its not a hole, its not a singularity where everything collapses to a point, its a huge sphere not a point it seems

?
>>
>>10002328

Depending on your perspective a huge sphere is just a point. Think about that anon.
>>
>>9998829
SMB's in galactic centers draw other dense objects towards them. Black holes merge and accrete along with more mundane matter that falls in.
The one in OP's pic is abnormally large, and resides in an equally oversized galaxy.
>>
>>10002328
>its a huge sphere
The event horizon is. But you have to be careful when you're talking about black holes in general because a lot of the pop sci shit that gets flung around is misleading, or oversimplified.
The event horizon is just the point at which the curvature of spacetime is so steep that there's no way out unless you can travel at superluminal speeds. Beyond that to the singularity it's just space that's bent so far out of shape that common sense starts to break down. Your time vectors become spacelike, and vice versa.
As far as the singularity goes, no one really knows since a singularity is genuinely a symptom of your maths breaking down. Its a point at which we have no meaningful way to describe what is happening, and no theories we can test and verify. It's generally accepted that you'd probably need quantum gravity to describe what is happening, but we're still not there yet.
>>
>>9998033
I wonder if this is why we live in the middle of a cosmic void, and that we're surrounded by a fuckton of invisible black holes.
>>
>>10002660
This, singularity literally means "math breaks down because some infinity appeared"
>>
File: FB_IMG_1520602597145.jpg (45 KB, 720x523)
45 KB
45 KB JPG
>>9998033
Could have infinite problems. Could have zero problems. Pic related.
>>
>>10002660

but why cant it just be really dense matter at the center?
>>
>>10002278
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-star
As I understand it, the main thing pushing the rest of the star from falling in would be the momentum of the light emitted by the accretion disk. Those might be early-population stars made of light elements, but a lot of the radiation pressure would just go right through the layer of star material, or even worse, be refracted such that there's also radiation pressure going inward.

The only other accelerations that might be acting outward would be matter that escapes from the accretion disk, which would be concentrated around the equator and result the quasi-star just turning into an accretion disk, and the spin of the star about its axis, which would allow the poles to collapse and therefore turn the quasi-star into an accretion disk.

There is no stable arrangement in which a quasi-star can exist. Maybe that's why they give it a lifetime of a million years, less than a hair's width on the cosmic scale of time. I wouldn't glorify that with a name; a hollow celestial body is just what happens when a black hole winds up in its center. It wouldn't be worth mentioning to anyone who specializes in astronomy as anything except a discrete part of a sufficiently massive supernova's life cycle.
>>
>>10002631
kek
>>
>>10000549
because they're materialist retards that think these things actually have existential significance rather than being the meaningless background noise of consciousness that we apply names to.
>>
>>10006069
Beautifully executed post
>>
Black holes will be the last things left in the universe for a long time. The universe is making a long term investment on them.
>>
>>10000549
>I mean even if one was traveling straight for Earth at the speed of light, it wouldn't reach us within your lifetime
traveling from where exactly?
>>
>>10006578
Well, seeing how there isn't a black hole within 100 light years of earth in any direction, I guess it doesn't really matter, does it?
>>
>>10006665
>seeing how there isn't a black hole within 100 light years
lmao
there could be one half way to proxima centauri and we wouldn't know
and rogue black holes can cross those kinds of distances in a decade
>>
>>10006796
Call me crazy, but I'm a man of probability.
>>
>>10006813
>'literary (sic) impossible'
>non-zero probability
>I'm a man of probability
Hmm, it seems instead you're actually retarded.
>>
File: tenor1.gif (219 KB, 220x307)
219 KB
219 KB GIF
>>10002660
The event horizon isn't actually a sphere. It's a 2D surface that we perceive as 3 dimensional.
>>
>>10004189
Because there is no matter that can generate an outward pressure against that kind of gravitational density. According to the Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems, a singularity must form whenever an event horizon does. This is due to the fact that spacetime curves in on itself within the event horizon. Below the event horizon any path you take, no matter what it is, will eventually lead to a single point, aka the singularity. This is actually the real reason you can never escape the event horizon of a black hole, not the light-speed escape velocity.

Any matter that falls in reaches the singularity and gets added to its mass, extending the region of spacetime it curves. What exactly the singularity is is totally unknown, as relativity breaks down at that point, since infinities start popping up everywhere.
>>
>>10008689
You've miss read the Penrose diagrams if you think an even horizon must always be accompanied by a singularity. FTL movement creates an even horizon that is relative to the object in motion. Our observable universe is bounded by an event horizon, caused by the FTL expansion of space time over large distances.
>>
>>9999722
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6qw5_YA8iE
>>
>>9998996
no one knows. could be OP's mom or could be nothing. Could also be another universe.
>>
>>9998033
Cosmic goatse

Slaanesh wants a bigger hole for his/her clit-dick.
>>
what would happen if u got shot by a proton moving at 9000 times the speed of light
>>
>>10011526
You'd be blasted across the room at 4500 times the speed of light and the proton would stop dead in its tracks
>>
>>10011527
then i die? :(
>>
>>10011530
If you hit something, yeah probably
>>
>>10011532
i dont want to do that anymore .
>>
>>10008502
A sphere is a surface. No one talked about embeddings in 3d.
>>
>>9998840
I, too, watched Diebuster.
>>
>>9998996
The Platonic forms.
>>
>>10004306
>I, an anon with no formal training in astrophysics, am right while all those dumb-dumb astrophysicists are wrong! Witness my superior intellect as I BTFO them with a post on a Hungarian basketweaving forum!
Literally kill yourself.
>>
File: stock.jpg (20 KB, 620x310)
20 KB
20 KB JPG
>>10002299
>implying gravity exists
>>
>>10011703
Sycophant
>>
>>10004306
>There is no stable arrangement in which a quasi-star can exist. Maybe that's why they give it a lifetime of a million years,
Even a few million years, which is the lifetime of conventional big stars anyway.
>I wouldn't glorify that with a name;
Yes, we can always to refer to a common observable phenomenon with something like "that bright thing over there"
>>
>>9998996
no, because if the big bang theory (not the shitty tv show) is true (which it pretty much is at this point) then the universe is everything in existence. asking what's outside the universe is like asking what's south of the south pole - not only is it nothing, but it kind of doesn't make sense.
>>
File: 1385305063685.jpg (88 KB, 848x472)
88 KB
88 KB JPG
>>9998994
>Black holes terrify me, as well as white holes (are as they may be)
In simple terms
>Black holes steal things
>white holes create things
What did God mean by this?
>>
>>10000664
Define small
>>
>>10013138
>Define small
Your peepee, small :P
>>
>>10012968
If there's nothing "outside" the universe, then that means there's nothing "inside" the universe either, correct?
>>
>>10008737
>FTL movement creates an even horizon
Strictly speaking, ANY acceleration, no matter how small or brief, will create a horizon behind you.
>>
>>10012968
Not necessarily. Plenty of theories about manifold and branching universes. The big problem is we can't utilize the energy levels required to test the next level theories.
>>
>>10013143
Damn nigga
>>
>>9998996
Define what you mean by universe.
The observable universe, or the theoretical universe outside the observable.
>>
>>10006069
imbecile
>>
File: DECEPTION.png (643 KB, 960x960)
643 KB
643 KB PNG
explain picture. We've been deceived or I'm retarded. Possibly both
>>
>>10015194
((((they)))) really did us dirty like that.





Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.