PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Bossieman on April 23, 2002, 11:27:23 AM
-
I´m going to present some Ideas that I have. I know most of the people here have accepted the existance of black holes, but all people have not, I´m one of those people.
As a scientist I have to be absolutely sure before I can call something a fact.
When I find things in a theory that makes no sence I have too put all my imagination and knowledge to the test before I can accept the theory.
I have been studying some very basic problems with black holes and I need to post them to all you. I hope nobody flames and tries to make good answers.
Ok, here we go.
A object that has a ecape velocity of c creates a black hole. the equation for the radius of a black hole is v=(2GM/r)^0.5, if v=c we have a black hole.
I´m going to use a black hole with the radius of our solarsystem, the mass of the big hole would be about 3.4E39, the density of the black hole would be 7Kg/m^3, that is a very low number but it doesnt matter.
According to all litterature it would be impossible for anything to escape this object, not even light.
When I bring materia towards the eventhorizon a interesting phenomena appears that I have not been able to find a answer to anywhere.
The object that I bring towards the blackhole has to affect the escape velocity of the blackhole(the escape velocity from earth is lower in the direction of the Moon). A particel(a electron) that is inside the blackhole very close to the event horizon in the same direction as I bring the materia can now escape from the black hole because the escapevelocity is lower than c here. If this object I bring to the blackhole is a giant magnet this magnet could catch the electron. After I have collected the electron the mass of the black holes goes down and we have a big mass that has a escapevelocity below c.
I really would like evidence that this is not true. Belive me I have tried but noone have been able to solve this puzzle.
And what if I bring a "lot"materia close to a black hole, this materia would make the escapevelocity of the black hole way under c and the blackhole would start to shine again.
Copyright Leif Sandvik 2002
Thoughts guys??
-
Wouldn\'t it be impossible to retrieve said materia from the blackhole, if it was in close enough proximity to affect the c?
Wouldn\'t the materia become a part of the blackhole?
-
Originally posted by CygnusXI
Wouldn\'t it be impossible to retrieve said materia from the blackhole, if it was in close enough proximity to affect the c?
Wouldn\'t the materia become a part of the blackhole?
No , not before the materia is behind the eventhorizon.
What I am saying is that I can take out anything from a black hole. The escapevelocity would go under c and no physical law prefents me from picking the electron (or anything) out of the black hole. I know its hard to belive but just think about it.
-
iformation: c= speed of light (299792458 m/s)
escapevelocity: The speed you have to give an object to make the object not falling down again. For Earth the escapevelocity is 11.2 km/s. Anything you throw up in the sky with that speed will necer come down again. If you throw the object with a smaller speed the object will fall down again.
-
Well, I personally know very little about black holes and the like, but I think I can offer solutions that seem possible from just thinking the situation through. A black hole is first created when the escape velocity is equal to c. However, since all matter pulls other matter to it, with each object having some level of gravity, wouldn\'t the escape velocity rise above c as the black hole progresses and more is drawn into it? If so, I\'d think that minor drops in the escape velocity as materia approached the event horizon would not make enough of a difference to stop the black hole from progressing.
I also don\'t see how you would manage to bring materia that close in the matter described. I\'d assume that an object near the event horizon would be moving towards the black hole at a very high speed. Perhaps the object were to momentarily drop the escape velocity to below c as it is just outside the event horizon. It would still be drawn in though, by the gravity of the mass in what was once a black hole, and by it\'s own momentum. Once it is within what had been the event horizon, wouldn\'t the escape velocity return to c, and the black hole would begin once again? That seems possible to me too, since the time it would stop for would be such a small amount of time.
These are just guesses I have based mainly on just my own reasoning. The first one is what I would go with if I had to take a random stab at it. It could be one or the other, or both, or neither.
-
Originally posted by shockwaves
wouldn\'t the escape velocity rise above c as the black hole progresses and more is drawn into it?
No the escapevelocity doesn´t go over c, what happens is that the radius of the blackhole becomes bigger when the mass gets bigger.
I also don\'t see how you would manage to bring materia that close in the matter described. I\'d assume that an object near the event horizon would be moving towards the black hole at a very high speed
It doesn´t matter, if the object I use have bigger mass than the black hole, the black hole would accelerationg towards the mass.
"Perhaps the object were to momentarily drop the escape velocity to below c as it is just outside the event horizon"
This is very true, and during this time a object inside the blackhole can escape, it doesn´t matter if it´s almost impossible, if it works in theory you can do it in practise.[
-
Out of curiosity, are blackholes thought to go on forever? I mean, maybe it is just something like this that stops a black hole from progressing at a certain point.
Also, I thought that mass effects gravity, and gravity effects escape velocity. Unless I\'m missing something, wouldn\'t more mass lead to a higher escape velocity?
-
Well if the object were already moving toward the black hole, and it was trying to escape with the help of another objects gravity, it wouldn\'t work. First of all if both objects are of the same mass, in theory they would meet in the middle of their distance apart, secondly and most importantly, the theory of reletivity. The electron is reletive to the object, just like how you can\'t jump off a falling elevator.
Oh btw, what type of black hole are we talking about? Because if we\'re talking about a Kerr black hole, the event horizon doesn\'t exist, due to the law of conservation of angular momentum, producing a naked singularity. Which means there would be no gravitational pull, up to the singularity.
BTW once again, I\'m just rambling here....
-
Originally posted by shockwaves
Out of curiosity, are blackholes thought to go on forever? I mean, maybe it is just something like this that stops a black hole from progressing at a certain point.
Also, I thought that mass effects gravity, and gravity effects escape velocity. Unless I\'m missing something, wouldn\'t more mass lead to a higher escape velocity?
First question: No a blackhole doesn´t last forever, it loses mass throw a process called Hawking radiation (I dont like the theory but....)
Second question: Mass affects gravity, gravity affects escapevelocity, but escape velocity depends on the radius also.
If we thrink Earth the escape velocity would get higher even though the mass is intact.
-
Originally posted by theomen
Oh btw, what type of black hole are we talking about? Because if we\'re talking about a Kerr black hole, the event horizon doesn\'t exist, due to the law of conservation of angular momentum, producing a naked singularity. Which means there would be no gravitational pull, up to the singularity.
Ok, now the conversation is over my head :( Thanks a lot theomen!
-
Originally posted by theomen
Well if the object were already moving toward the black hole, and it was trying to escape with the help of another objects gravity, it wouldn\'t work. First of all if both objects are of the same mass, in theory they would meet in the middle of their distance apart, secondly and most importantly, the theory of reletivity. The electron is reletive to the object, just like how you can\'t jump off a falling elevator.
Oh btw, what type of black hole are we talking about? Because if we\'re talking about a Kerr black hole, the event horizon doesn\'t exist, due to the law of conservation of angular momentum, producing a naked singularity. Which means there would be no gravitational pull, up to the singularity.
BTW once again, I\'m just rambling here....
You have a little missunderstanding here.
I´m using the object to get the escape velocity below c.
Even if this object is far away from the black hole the escapevelocity would be below c at the blackhole in direction towards the object. This means that the escapevelocity would be under c in direction of the object, this object doesn´t have to move towards the blackhole.
This is not a Kerr black hole BTW.
-
from what I understand from the questions is your saying is we have a (somewhat) stationary object outside of the event horizon, which has mass, and thus a gravitational pull in it\'s own right. It\'s gravitational pull will lower the escape velosity below c, when on the side of said electron, and will allow possible escape from the blackhole.
Well if I have this part right, then I will venture a solution, or idea...
-
Originally posted by theomen
from what I understand from the questions is your saying is we have a (somewhat) stationary object outside of the event horizon, which has mass, and thus a gravitational pull in it\'s own right. It\'s gravitational pull will lower the escape velosity below c, when on the side of said electron, and will allow possible escape from the blackhole.
Well if I have this part right, then I will venture a solution, or idea...
Bingo!! Interesting isn´t ?
-
The only thing I would have to say is that due to the great gravitational pull of the black hole, and frame dragging, that it would be quite difficult to find an instance where you had a some what static body of mass.
BUT, if we had two AGN\'s of the exact same mass, and created at the exact same instant, that were not kerr AGN\'s, and there was a body of mass in the exact middle of both these AGN\'s, this might be possible. But then once again to take into consideration frame dragging, and surrounding stars, and planets, this balance could easily be thrown off. But in theory it COULD happen.
-
Originally posted by theomen
But in theory it COULD happen.
Well, isn´t that a interesting theory I have, I have send the theory to my University and I´m waiting for the responce.
-
Your making me think Bossieman. You are the only one I know that can make me think about science like you can. What if the black hole theory was blown way out of proportion? It could have been exaggerated. Maybe somethings can escape while others can\'t. Maybe they aren\'t as big as we thought. IMO, the only way to be sure is if we launch something to a suspected blackhole site and see what happens (yeah, like in 1000 years when we explore the frontier of space.) I am very interested in space and astronomy. I hope we explore more of space within my lifetime.
-
A few points:
1) Black holes can be any size, the secret is that they have to have mass such that at any point on the surface, light doesn\'t have escape velocity. There are very small black holes, the size of a city, with less mass than our sun. However, they are so dense, that light from the surface cannot escape the event horizon. If you increase the mass, the size may not generally get bigger, but the distance from the center of the hole from which light can\'t escape gets bigger.
2) If you want to explain your example, you need reletivaty (something in which I personally don\'t believe, but here is it\'s explanation): First of all, you can\'t travel at c, or even near c. The equation of relativity says that for matter to travel at c, it must become energy. Anything of substantial enough mass to affect a black hole will never be able to approach and then escape as you said; however, if you had:
a)lets say, a large mass neutron star (10s of km across), that was travelling RELATIVE to a black hole very quickly, say, .5 c, close enough that their gravities would affect each other, far enough that the pass would just change their paths, and a
b)black hole that\'s event horizon was literally just above the surface of the black hole object, then in passing, if the neutron star could allow some of the energy/mass of the black hole to escape the hole (for a short time), then the hole object would become visible until that matter was pulled back in.
c) Because the effect would be short lived from the passing object/star, as soon as it was far away, the black hole, which would still exert a gravitational pull, would probably pull back in it\'s mass. Some light may escape, hence energy, but once it had most of it\'s mass back, it would be a black hole again. Even if the lost energy/bit of mass is enough to turn it back into a non b-h object (one who\'s event horizon would be basically at the surface, for all intents and purposes), the gravity/tidal stresses exerted by passing would generate more energy and heat within it, eventually leading to further compression, and it would soon become a black hole again anyways.
d) It\'s not like a magical equation, visible object, very massive... add 1 kg, and it becomes a black hole. Things get very funky when we look at gravity from objects like this. Relativity can\'t explain it well, but gravity becomes MORE than just a force at these powers and distances. Gravity more than just visible space, but time as well. Objects very close to the threshold of a black hole would have some all might wierd properties.
Dislaimer:
I\'m getting most of this out of an astronomy textbook, from a second year physics/astronomy course at university. I could be mis-reading or mis-understanding parts of it.
I personally don\'t believe that relativity is correct, parts of it have been disproven, and it basically is self-fulfilling (it\'s proof).. but right now, it\'s the most adequate explanation for the universe in terms of examining characteristics on or around the speed of light.
-
OOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHH, those black holes.. whew...
-
Originally posted by Videoholic
OOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHH, those black holes.. whew...
yeah we\'re not talking about Shaniqua, and Takisha down the block.
-
Way over my head then. I now return you to your highly sophisticated craziness. I must leave before my head blows up.
-
Ok im 11......and Im pretty sure they exist I mean arent there pictures? :confused:
Well anyway I belive there are black holes they occur when a star Explodes. They cause a huge gravitational pull in many directions which create the black hole. Thats my theory.
-
Originally posted by cloud345
Ok im 11......and Im pretty sure they exist I mean arent there pictures? :confused:
Well anyway I belive there are black holes they occur when a star Explodes. They cause a huge gravitational pull in many directions which create the black hole. Thats my theory.
they THINK they exist, because of xrays being emitted from them. And also because of frame dragging.
-
What would happen if a Black hole swallowed another black hole? Is that possible? Or what if, say, there were two black holes who\'s event horizon\'s overlapped each other? Would the area in the overlap be negated and end up like normal space or would it cause an entirely different phenomenon?
Also, I can\'t remember exactly where I read this, but I thought that once you crossed the event horizon.. all time stopped. Since even light dosen\'t have an escape velocity great enough to break free, once you approach the speed of light time slows to a stop according to reletivity right? So in essence, if you could somehow survive crossing the event horizon, your body would be instantly crushed and added to the mass of the blackhole.. YET you\'d still exist at the edge of the event horizon exactly as you were when you entered. Is this the frame dragging Theomen was talking about or am I totally off base?
-
Originally posted by SonyFan
What would happen if a Black hole swallowed another black hole? Is that possible? Or what if, say, there were two black holes who\'s event horizon\'s overlapped each other? Would the area in the overlap be negated and end up like normal space or would it cause an entirely different phenomenon?
Also, I can\'t remember exactly where I read this, but I thought that once you crossed the event horizon.. all time stopped. Since even light dosen\'t have an escape velocity great enough to break free, once you approach the speed of light time slows to a stop according to reletivity right? So in essence, if you could somehow survive crossing the event horizon, your body would be instantly crushed and added to the mass of the blackhole.. YET you\'d still exist at the edge of the event horizon exactly as you were when you entered. Is this the frame dragging Theomen was talking about or am I totally off base?
Frame Dragging was an idea Einstein came up with, that the rotation of an object would alter space and time, dragging a nearby object out of position compared to predictions by the simpler math of Sir Isaac Newton.
From what I understand, due to the spinning of a Kerr Blackhole, it will begin to strat spining the closer planets, dragging them so to say. Some scientist believe this is why some spiral galaxies are formed in the way that they are.
As for time stopping, yes that\'s the generally accepted idea, but it\'s a bit more complex than that. Time and distance swap characteristics.
*edit* here I found a nice pic of Frame Dragging (https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.phy.mtu.edu%2Fapod%2Fimage%2F9711%2Fbhdrag_jb.jpg&hash=8f1ea7cf37779090d0ca100ee58adc7392459f88)
-
It is a freaking hole! Who really cares about it if it dosn\'t effect the rotation of earth and therefore our lives. When we start moving towards one I will start to care. And if someone could put this into wal-mart terms so us scientiffically challenged can follow........um, i\'ll shut up now.
-
Originally posted by jinxx
It is a freaking hole! Who really cares about it if it dosn\'t effect the rotation of earth and therefore our lives. When we start moving towards one I will start to care. And if someone could put this into wal-mart terms so us scientiffically challenged can follow........um, i\'ll shut up now.
Actually some scientist believe it does affect, and warp our little world. While it is on a tiny level, it does effect us, because they believe there is a black hole in the milky way! SCARY! well maybe not, but interesting none the less.
-
What I wanna know, is where does the stuff go when its sucked into a black hole.
Everything you said Bossieman went over my head.
-
Well that\'s the same question the scientific worl wants to know. As the first rule of quantum mechanics is information can\'t be destroyed. So if stuff goes is, what happens to it?
One idea is that it get\'s mashed down, for lack of a better word, until it reaches a level where it explodes. Think of it this way, universe starts off with the big bang, universe gets sucked up into a black hole, then explodes all over again, and continues to do so over and over. Also some scientist say that the same things take place over and over, example is when the next big gang happens, I\'ll be typing this post all over again.
Another theory is the idea of a White Hole, which would be the opposite of a black hole. Instead of having matter go into it, matter would come out. Kind of like a portal.
But no one knows for sure what happens.
BTW, I think these forums need a science board, that way Bossieman and I can ramble all day long!