Ton 618. A mind bender

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: TinySickTears

It's not 66 billion times the size of the sun, that's the mass.

A singularity has no spatial size. It is a singularity.

There is no real consensus whether or not a black hole is a real physical singularity, or if even singularities actually exist.

Right now the math says a black hole is infinitely dense, and infinite density — by the math — means a size/volume of zero.

However, when physicists or mathematicians see “infinity” pop up in the math of physics, that raises red flags that their theories and their math are not adequate enough to give a real explanation. Infinity in math is usually a sign that something is wrong with the math being used.

Well, by inference, the collapse of matter into a singularity tends towards a single point, without restraint, it must get there.

a reply to: chr0naut

An ideal black body at thermal equilibrium will emit radiation in all frequency ranges (Rayleigh–Jeans Law). By inference it should emit an infinite amount of energy.

There are limits to how far inference will get you.

a reply to: TinySickTears

makes me wonder what is the point.

what is the point of us?

Maybe the "POINT" of us is so the universe can learn and understand itself..

Do not remember who said that but at the time and in the context it was awesome.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: TinySickTears

It's not 66 billion times the size of the sun, that's the mass.

A singularity has no spatial size. It is a singularity.

A singularity is hypothetical. It may not exist at all. Scientist don't even know if it exists or not.

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: chr0naut

An ideal black body at thermal equilibrium will emit radiation in all frequency ranges (Rayleigh–Jeans Law). By inference it should emit an infinite amount of energy.

There are limits to how far inference will get you.

You made me curious about something. First, know that I am far from an expert on these matters but I do love to think about them.

First:

Is it at all possible there is a form of light/energy 'brighter' (for a lack of words or understanding) than gamma rays that we may not have instruments to observe?

Also:

With black holes, we know light can be affected by gravity yet it doesn't have mass. Still, photons have momentum and a change in that momentum produces a force which means it can interact with matter (I recently read)

Finally:

Not too long ago, we witnessed the brightest light we have so far seen which was the direct effect of a star exploding (*imploding?) and a black hole forming. This light was a few hundred million billion times the brightness of our Sun.
This light was so bright it could have been seen on Earth with the naked eye from a distance of seventeen billion seven hundred fifty-nine million light years! Now that's a bright light! Imagine the size of that star. Imagine the size of that black hole forming. Personally, I don't know if that star/black hole was big by the suns standards or not. I just imagine.

*It numbs the brain when I think of something imploding yet casting off all of that energy away from it's center, while forming a black hole at the same time. This is where I lose all focus of what exactly is happening here. I mean, the energy went out yet it's sucked in? Very confusing.


Conclusion:

All of this together begs to question, my question anyways, is it possible that:

a) Black Holes are created from light itself? Like a whirlpool but an empty hole in the middle (if that makes sense) and all that was destroyed while being sucked in is just the radiation going out of a pulsar?

b) Even through protons are it's only anti-particle, is it possible there is a reversed 'anti-light' that forms the black hole and all matter going in also turns into this 'anti-light' so it can not be seen?

c) Is it possible that there are eddy currents in space made only by space-time or gravity alone, created by momentum?


Personally, I kinda think, without any basis other than my own imagination, that black holes are simply super compressed plasma (from all the matter going in) that has a gravity so great that space-time simply wraps around it so much that what is inside can't be seen because it's hidden in the folds of that space-time. Like the strip of paper inside a fortune cookie! No singularity, just a lot of super condensed plasma.



...end mad ramblings

a reply to: TinySickTears

618? Nah... That's nothing.


Enter: SDSS J140821.67+025733.2

Black Hole Comparison Chart

originally posted by: StallionDuck
Is it at all possible there is a form of light/energy 'brighter' (for a lack of words or understanding) than gamma rays that we may not have instruments to observe?

Gamma rays are anything with higher energy than x-rays. There are detectable due to their high energy. When colliding with matter they cause all kinds of nasty stuff. At 511 keV they have enough energy to produce particles (electron positron pairs) during collisions . At ultra high energies they can produce particles by just passing through a magnetic field.

With black holes, we know light can be affected by gravity yet it doesn't have mass. Still, photons have momentum and a change in that momentum produces a force which means it can interact with matter (I recently read)

If you go with relativity, spacetime is affected by gravity, light is just passing through on a straight line.

a) Black Holes are created from light itself? Like a whirlpool but an empty hole in the middle (if that makes sense) and all that was destroyed while being sucked in is just the radiation going out of a pulsar?

The black hole thing is probably somewhat misleading. What happens is that at some point the star radius drops below the so called event horizon. So it becomes black. The even horizon radius depends on the star mass by the way. So that mass is not lost.

b) Even through protons are it's only anti-particle, is it possible there is a reversed 'anti-light' that forms the black hole and all matter going in also turns into this 'anti-light' so it can not be seen?

The matter and light that goes in adds to the mass of the black hole. It is not lost.

c) Is it possible that there are eddy currents in space made only by space-time or gravity alone, created by momentum?

I remember reading a physicist interpreting black holes as "space waterfalls", space falling into the black hole. You can apparently reformulate the equations in a way to allow such interpretation. I am not sure how useful that view is.

Personally I think our current gravity model is a (low energy) approximation and we need something different to understand what is going on in a black hole and unify it with other forces.

a reply to: TinySickTears

The point is to keep on keeping on.
We don't stop evolving and will grow bigger brains to figure this shhh out, for now, live in the moment!

originally posted by: DrumsRfun
a reply to: CeeWhizzle

Space is a very cool thing...the mind bender for me is that we know more about space than we do our own oceans.
Theres something to think about next time you go swimming in the ocean.

Exactly I reckon that there are some major mysteries and discoveries to be found in our oceans.

Space always blows my mind, the scale of it is incomprehensible for me. Fascinating

D

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: TinySickTears

It's not 66 billion times the size of the sun, that's the mass.

A singularity has no spatial size. It is a singularity.

There is no real consensus whether or not a black hole is a real physical singularity, or if even singularities actually exist.

The question is - what can stop a gravitational collapse (when even quarks can't stop it)?

Maybe there's a scale level (like perhaps the size of quantum fluctuations in vacuum, or Planck size) where gravity simply stops working, and where the collapse stops.

a reply to: moebius

At ultra high energies they can produce particles by just passing through a magnetic field.

This confuses me. How would you get matter from nothing? I mean, it's a particle with no matter but at high energy it creates matter with mass? What does it pull this from?

The black hole thing is probably somewhat misleading.

Oh yeah, that I get. I just was imagining a possibility with light or the lack there of beings it can produce a 'force'. Like a flow of light around a central point, much like a whirlpool that never stops even after the matter or light in this case, is gone. More like the remnants of spacetime itself still following the path, sucking in everything around it.

Maybe it's far fetched. Could spacetime even produce gravity?

I know they're probably silly questions. Either way, thanks for the response!

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: moebius

At ultra high energies they can produce particles by just passing through a magnetic field.

This confuses me. How would you get matter from nothing? I mean, it's a particle with no matter but at high energy it creates matter with mass? What does it pull this from?

The well-known mass-energy equivalence.

E=mc^2

You can convert mass to energy, but you can also convert energy to mass.

a reply to: TinySickTears

Yea it's amazingly big and if Earth would be close to it nights probably would turn to days too just of its brightness

originally posted by: moebius
a reply to: chr0naut

An ideal black body at thermal equilibrium will emit radiation in all frequency ranges (Rayleigh–Jeans Law). By inference it should emit an infinite amount of energy.

There are limits to how far inference will get you.

Yes, infinite energy is also equivalent to infinite mass.

But the singularity is entirely encapsulated within the event horizon at the Schwarzschild radius and gravitation is such that all the energy within the envelope of the Schwarzschild radius is drawn, superluminally, to the singularity, so we'd never know that it was emitting infinite energy because it would be entirely contained in the point singularity, spatially.

It could not emit because it is spatially constrained, there is nowhere for the emissions to go to.