phee Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Oh Phee... you forgot soemthing... as something approaches the speed of light it also gains mass at an exponential rate. So, at the speed of light it's not only going at infinite speed... it's also standing still at infinite mass. Indeed.... Part of the whole E=MC squared equation.... Its interesting, one way of looking at it is if you were to be an observer falling into a black hole, time would appear to accelerate faster and faster around you... and concievably you would see the universe come to an end before you actually dissapeared, as you would be moving so fast that you would see the end of time.... The only particals (that I have heard of) that move faster then light (and I am not going into string theory at this time) are tacions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Why does spaghettification happen in non-rotating/uncharged BH and not rotating/charged? I never really fully understood that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Why does spaghettification happen in non-rotating/uncharged BH and not rotating/charged? I never really fully understood that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaf The Horse With Tears Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Why does spaghettification happen in non-rotating/uncharged BH and not rotating/charged? I never really fully understood that. Tidal forces. They change faster in the case a non-rotating/uncharged BH. Say you are falling at a Black Hole feet first. X Unit of Matter in your foot is going to experiance a higher Gravitational pull than a like unit in your head. It's going to weight more and "fall" faster. near a charged BH or a Super Massive BH, those Tidal forces are... spread out... so to speak. So, all the X units of matter in your body are going "weigh" the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Tidal forces. They change faster in the case a non-rotating/uncharged BH. Say you are falling at a Black Hole feet first. X Unit of Matter in your foot is going to experiance a higher Gravitational pull than a like unit in your head. It's going to weight more and "fall" faster. near a charged BH or a Super Massive BH, those Tidal forces are... spread out... so to speak. So, all the X units of matter in your body are going "weigh" the same. So the non rotating/ non-charged BH are more ellipsoidic in shape? Is that the reason for heavier tidal force? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaf The Horse With Tears Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 It has to do with... well, spacial... flux? I am doing this from memory, so bare with me. The space around it is... no... Think of it as a well with sloped sides. It bends space... the deeper the incline... the gradiant of gravitational pull bends with it. The "space"between x=1 and x=1.5 is closer... I wish I could draw a diagram... Yes I can... So you are falling into a Black Hole... You travel along the black line in "percieved space". To you, you are going in a straight line. Space on the other hand follows the Red Line to the BH. It's bent by the mass of the BH. The Yellow line is the event horizen... the point of no return. So, as you follow the Red line of bent space... your mass changes... The closer you are to the bottem of the well.. the more mass... Your feet are closer than your head... and fall faster... stretching you and pulling you apart. Near the EH... it tears apart atoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Also Maxamillion Schell is crushed by big screens while his army of zombies that used to be the former crew do nothing to save him and he floats around into his big pet monster robot ironically named Maxamillion..... er.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 It has to do with... well, spacial... flux? I am doing this from memory, so bare with me. The space around it is... no... Think of it as a well with sloped sides. It bends space... the deeper the incline... the gradiant of gravitational pull bends with it. The "space"between x=1 and x=1.5 is closer... I wish I could draw a diagram... Yes I can... So you are falling into a Black Hole... You travel along the black line in "percieved space". To you, you are going in a straight line. Space on the other hand follows the Red Line to the BH. It's bent by the mass of the BH. The Yellow line is the event horizen... the point of no return. So, as you follow the Red line of bent space... your mass changes... The closer you are to the bottem of the well.. the more mass... Your feet are closer than your head... and fall faster... stretching you and pulling you apart. Near the EH... it tears apart atoms. Yes, the barycenter of the BH. ::lightbulb goes off in head::: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 Also Maxamillion Schell is crushed by big screens while his army of zombies that used to be the former crew do nothing to save him and he floats around into his big pet monster robot ironically named Maxamillion..... er.... Phee, your silly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaGa Posted July 25, 2008 Report Share Posted July 25, 2008 *random troll* yup i think you all need some beer. it will slow your perception of time, and thought to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 *random troll* yup i think you all need some beer. it will slow your perception of time, and thought to I could use a newcastle right about now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reaper Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 *walks into what seems to be a scene from Revenge of the Nerds, turns around and quietly walks back out* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaGa Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 *walks into what seems to be a scene from Revenge of the Nerds, turns around and quietly walks back out* yup science is good and all. but sometimes, things get a little to trippy. imagine reading all of this and having a dream of phees description of the boxcar. im sure you whould freak out a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 yup science is good and all. but sometimes, things get a little to trippy. imagine reading all of this and having a dream of phees description of the boxcar. im sure you whould freak out a bit Oh dear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaGa Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Oh dear i take it you already had that dream/nightmare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 i take it you already had that dream/nightmare that one? no.... the one with the camel in the lamaz class.... maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaGa Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I'm confused. I read the first article all the way through, but I had thought that this was relatively old news in the physics/cosmology department. What I am curious of is how they can be sure that only some galaxies have black holes. If all galaxies on a grand scale function nearly the same way and differ only in density, shape, age and velocity: does this mean that the central black holes make little to no difference in the behavior of these bodies? Perhaps instead, supermassive black holes are a necessity for all galaxies? This is a cosmological question from a layman. My expertise lies in literature, but I doubt I will read an article about a discovery of a new play by Chekhov anytime soon. but eh the sun supernova should happen before we get sucked up bye a black hole. unless we can utilize energy bye any of the descoveries Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I'm confused. I read the first article all the way through, but I had thought that this was relatively old news in the physics/cosmology department. What I am curious of is how they can be sure that only some galaxies have black holes. If all galaxies on a grand scale function nearly the same way and differ only in density, shape, age and velocity: does this mean that the central black holes make little to no difference in the behavior of these bodies? Perhaps instead, supermassive black holes are a necessity for all galaxies? This is a cosmological question from a layman. My expertise lies in literature, but I doubt I will read an article about a discovery of a new play by Chekhov anytime soon. There are 4 types of Galaxies: Spiral, Lenticular, Elliptical, and Irregular.... The artical is mainly talking about ones like our Milky Way (Spiral). It is a safe assumption that the "Black Hole In The Middle" type would most likely include Spiral, Lenticular, maybe Eliptical (although they don't really contain all that much matter so it is hard to say) and probably not Irregular.... The Spiral and Lenticular types both rotate around an axis (Indicating a strong central force of gravity in the middle, like a black hole) the other two do not. However the Eliptical ones may have been spirals at one point and there is some small evidence that they still maintain some features of what they were. Hope that helps a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 but eh the sun supernova should happen before we get sucked up bye a black hole. unless we can utilize energy bye any of the descoveries Our sun is not massive enough for a supernova or a black hole.... it will most likely turn into a low powered red giant, and then burn out.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I'm confused. I read the first article all the way through, but I had thought that this was relatively old news in the physics/cosmology department. It is old news. What I am curious of is how they can be sure that only some galaxies have black holes? That whole truth of that is that THEY CAN'T. However in theory, mostly in the Hawkins radiation theory (which Gaf mentioned earlier), It is believed black holes lose mass and eventually evaporate completely. Hence there could have been a black hole earlier on in the galaxies life span, but it has already evaporated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 BTW. I heart Phee! On ward with the space talk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 It is old news.That whole truth of that is that THEY CAN'T. However in theory, mostly in the Hawkins radiation theory (which Gaf mentioned earlier), It is believed black holes lose mass and eventually evaporate completely. Hence there could have been a black hole earlier on in the galaxies life span, but it has already evaporated. this is true.... and it is also made much more difficult by the fact that one cannot actually "see" a black hole through conventional scientific observation.... most theoretical black holes are detected/located (still theory) by what they distort or move around.... Hawkins so far has had the only way to "see" a black hole and that is by picking up on the EXTREMELY FAINT "Hawkins Radiation" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Megalicious Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 Our sun is not massive enough for a supernova or a black hole.... it will most likely turn into a low powered red giant, and then burn out.... I find this so said, but true. Its sad to think of something as wonderful/beautiful as the sun, will one day drift through space as a cold, burned out cinder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phee Posted July 26, 2008 Report Share Posted July 26, 2008 I find this so said, but true. Its sad to think of something as wonderful/beautiful as the sun, will one day drift through space as a cold, burned out cinder. It sounds like you have dated in the area before as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.