It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Black hole spewing material?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
External Article at Space.com


A jet of gas spewing from a huge black hole has mysteriously brightened, flaring to 90 times its normal glow.

For seven years the Hubble Space Telescope has been watching the jet, which pours out of the supermassive black hole in the center of the M87 galaxy. It has photographed the strange phenomenon fading and then brightening, with a peak that even outshines M87\'s brilliant core.

Scientists have dubbed the enigmatic bright blob HST-1, and are so far at a loss to explain its weird behavior.


How is it possible that a black hole can emit gas? It is interesting that the material is ejected perpendicular to the black hole itself.

Perhaps it has consumed too much and is burping. Anyway, an interesting read for sure.

(title spelling)

[edit on Thu Apr 16 2009 by Jbird]




posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Stockburn
 


The black hole isn't "emitting" material so much as it is ejecting material that got close to the event horizon within the accretion disc, but never crossed it. Such "polar jets" are not the exclusive domain of black holes, but are the most spectacular from black holes.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
It's this kind of woolly thinking that amazes me.
The definition of a "Black Hole" is as follows:
It's an object that has a gravitational field of such intensity that nothing can escape it.
Not even light, once it is caught in the gravitational field.

If this be the case, then how can anything be emitted from it?
Including so-called "Hawking Radiation" and these jets of gas.

Either it is what the cosmologists say it is, or they are wrong, wrong, wrong.
It's also peculiar, isn't it, how so much seems to keep causing their supposed "laws" to keep getting rewritten.

Nonsense, my friends, nonsense.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by neil wilkes
It's this kind of woolly thinking that amazes me.
The definition of a "Black Hole" is as follows:
It's an object that has a gravitational field of such intensity that nothing can escape it.
Not even light, once it is caught in the gravitational field.

Not once it is in the gravity field, only once it crosses the event horizon.


If this be the case, then how can anything be emitted from it?
Including so-called "Hawking Radiation" and these jets of gas.

Nothing is emitted, these jets of gas are ejected before they cross the event horizon. Hawking radiation consists of hypothetical pairs of self-annihilating particles - one falls in while the other narrowly escapes, thus requiring nature to subtract mass from the black hole to compensate for the escaped particle. Hawking radiation is speculative though.



posted on Apr, 16 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Quasars appear to be only a light-year across, compared with the one hundred thousand light years of a galaxy and the ten thousand light-years cell-size of his stimulation.
In 1989, however, new evidence developed which will probably doom the black-hole hypothesis. Gas and plasma near the center of galaxies has always been observed to move at a high velocity, up to 1500 km/sec for our own galaxy, and similar or higher values for others. These velocities are generally treated as evidence for a black hole whose powerful gravitational field has trapped the swirling gases. But the two scientists at the University of Arizona, G.H and M.J. Rieke, carefully measured the velocities of stars within a few light-years of the center of our galaxy, and found the velocities are no higher than 70km/sec, twenty times slower than the plasma velocities measured in the same area. since the stars must respond to any gravitational force, their low velocities show that no black hole exists. The high-speed gases must therefore be trapped only by a magnetic field, which does not affect the stars.


See the Quasars and Black Holes section.


This guy has a consistent no for black holes in this area, so for no lovers
or contra main stream science lovers, he is your guru.



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by TeslaandLyne
 


Newer and more accurate work sheds a clearer light so to speak on the subject.

a little about the black hole at the center of the galaxy from a newer set of studies.
From a Sci Am article

Ghez's team focused on S2, a relatively bright star with a short orbit around the black hole, whereas Gillessen's group determined the orbits of 28 stars, including S2. "It really is amazing to see that we can describe the motions of that many stars" by assuming one massive central anchor, Gillessen says. "The stars fly around wildly, in all directions, at different radii. But all that governs that is simply Newton's law."

The motion of S2, Gillessen says, gives an outer boundary to the central object, which, combined with its inferred mass, helps prove that it is a black hole. "Having four million solar masses sitting there, not shining...and being confined by [the orbit of] the star S2 is really a convincing case," he says. In 2002, Gillessen says, S2 passed within 16 light-hours of the black hole's event horizon, or point of no return; two years earlier, another star passed even closer, around 11 light-hours.

Sheperd Doeleman, an astrophysicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Haystack Observatory in Westford, Mass., says that pinning down the black hole's parameters is important work and notes that both groups analyzed mounds of data "with particular attention paid to careful error analysis." At the same time, he says, the studies refine rather than redefine prior understanding of the nature of the galactic center.

the Sci Am article
www.sciam.com...


I would assume that the brightening of the polar jets is attributed to large amounts of matter crossing the event horizon.
Or maybe its getting ready to blow and sterilize the whole galaxy. That'd be a bummer.

[edit on 17-4-2009 by punkinworks]



posted on Apr, 17 2009 @ 11:56 AM
link   
I think the black hole or neutron star has to be spinning
to make jets.

I not think it has enough gravity to control a galaxy.

There is electrical conduction toward the galactic center but
do not see any reference in the link on quasars.

Plasma patterns in the form of galactic arms started the
controversy but I see no further info or links that explain
how the jets develop in that system either.
Or make jets from the poles.

Electrical forces can be greater the gravity but a charge
and motion and magnetic activity is needed.
One interesting idea is the combination of gravity and charge
such that gravity pulls in gases and charge faster and
faster and makes a huge electrical generator.




top topics



 
1

log in

join