18 Billion Solar Masses -Biggest Black Hole in Universe Discovered

Huge Black Hole 18 Billion Solar Masses Larger than a galaxy

It has a smaller super massive black hold orbiting it that is 100 million solar masses. It has a decaying orbit and will end up being swallowed by the larger one in about 10,000 years.

Adding another 100 million solar masses to an existing 18 billion solar mass black hole, this thing will have an effect on the shape of the universe around it I would guess. This is space time and mind bending stuff to think about. Imagine the physics you gain from watching this thing for a while. Perhaps these things they want to make with the super hadron collier are already being made in this thing and we can just point our instruments at this thing and record everything. I can not believe that there are not collisions going on in that region of space that would have greater power than anything we could create on Earth. If they were long lived enough of course we might see some strange matter from this thing.


I know I repeat the word "thing" an awful lot but think about it. What better word for it?

[

[edit on 5/10/2009 by UFOTECH]

Nice post, starred/flagged.

This worries me a little bit, i know the absolute mindboggling size of the universe, but surely the sheer size of this must give it unparalleled gravitational power. Surely this thing will have some sort of effect on us?

Creepy!

Originally posted by Longy4eva

Nice post, starred/flagged.

This worries me a little bit, i know the absolute mind boggling size of the universe, but surely the sheer size of this must give it unparalleled gravitational power. Surely this thing will have some sort of effect on us?

Creepy!

I second that

My first reaction was thinking way back to that old 1979 movie The Black Hole where they are falling into the black hole. It was bending time and space and it was of course a small one of about 6 or 8 solar masses or so.

Imagine how time and space are bending around this dancing pair of super massive black holes. It is just Creepy indeed.

3.5 billion light years doesn't seem far enough.

really?

so, where is the proof?

can they show us any photo of this 'black hole'?

is there any direct proof that any of the black holes exist in the first place?

no, there is only bad mathematics with infinity and a lot of bad astronomy by astrophysicists...

reply to post by donhuangenaro


uhm.. Black holes suck in everything, time, space even light. don't think you could see it . But! I know where you're coming from.. i think they'd have to use the infra-red spectrum, or are probably using satellite equipment that can read the gravitic pull.

That thought crossed my mind too, how can you measure something you can't see... and have nothing to compare it to?

BUT! (here's where all those physics lessons at A-level come in handy )

Things like black holes and dark matter obviously can't be seen, with no visible light given off and stuff, we can't see them. but through influences on near stellar bodies (ie the 'wobble') of stars, they can work out the strength of these things, and if they find thousands of stars with the same wobble, circulating a dark point in space.. all fingers would point to this.

It's the same way they work out if a star has planets. They can't see, but its the same as if you hold a rubber block on string and swing it with your arm. the kinetic force will cause your arm (metaphorically the star) to pull towards it.

That's just an educated guess, there may be other methods or maybe it's all been made up! Still, if it's true.. i'm scared. 100 billion lightyears wouldn't be far enough!!!

reply to post by Longy4eva


Among other observations they can detect the gravity and thus the mass of the object by seeing how light bends around the object in the local group and by the speed of rotation and mass of other near by objects.

Large gravity bodies distort space and by doing that they create what is called gravity lensing of their local area of space. This can be measured to compute the mass.

Originally posted by Longy4eva

Nice post, starred/flagged.

This worries me a little bit, i know the absolute mindboggling size of the universe, but surely the sheer size of this must give it unparalleled gravitational power. Surely this thing will have some sort of effect on us?

Creepy!

Sure it has... ...but just like anything with mass produces gravity...

There are much nearer, more massive objects to us than this. I have to mention the Andromeda Galaxy which weighs in at 710 billion Solar mass.

..And all black holes regardless of size have unquantifiable gravitational force at the singularity, and a strong enough gravity force to prevent light from escaping in the Event Horizon farther away from the singularity...

Nothing to be worried about or at least, nothing more to be worried about. Even nothing to jump about, it's just a much bigger black hole with a singularity and an Event Horizon just like any black hole. Maybe it's good because it's probably the 'safest' black hole to attempt crossing the Event Horizon due to least tidal forces

[edit on 10-5-2009 by ahnggk]

Hi,

Originally posted by Longy4eva
uhm.. Black holes suck in everything, time, space even light. don't think you could see it

. But! I know where you're coming from.. i think they'd have to use the infra-red spectrum, or are probably using satellite equipment that can read the gravitic pull.

As far as i know black holes can in fact 'decay' over time as they are not in fact as perfect sinkholes as often believed.

That thought crossed my mind too, how can you measure something you can't see... and have nothing to compare it to?

BUT! (here's where all those physics lessons at A-level come in handy

)

As you correctly point out the existence of black holes if infered , and proven to exist under our current understanding, by their gravitational effects on nearby bodies. The earlier poster probably tried to point out one of the seemingly inherent contradictions that black holes exposes in that light doesn't escape their gravitational effect ( well if you will) but that the gravitational effects would then have to propagate faster than the speed of light to be able to affect other stellar bodies; gravity propagates at faster than light speeds and according to some calculations it must be nearly instantaneous.....

Here's one possible answer but in my opinion it just appeals to other fields that are not in my lay opinion without their own contradictions.

imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov...

There are many other such contradictions ( if you agree with this one) but this is certainly one of the simpler seeming/obvious one's.

Stellar

At the end of the day, there's no way to actively confirm the reality of what a black hole is or why (Last i looked into it anyway, few years ago now). Black holes are still theoretical aren't they? Not necessarily their existence, but their actions and stuff.

A good point here would be the theory of the HERC suspected to find a number of other dimensions. Just like all these sci-fi films, it could be possible that there is no singularity, but (don't really like this term) portal.

I have little to no knowledge of quantum physics, and i'm limited on astrophysics.. but would the law of pressure equalisation apply? If you have a dimension void of absolutely everything, matter light etc. would it not cause the reverse reaction to osmosis? you know, pressure equalisation?

Just some ideas to throw out there.. probably way off the mark though

reply to post by donhuangenaro


I'm with you man. I still have difficulty with black holes, dark matter/energy, the big bang and all those mathematical costructs.

Another fine note on black holes from Lawrence Krauss:

"Hawking’s riddle is a trick question. Due to the relative nature of time under Einstein’s general theory, time should stop at the event horizon. Anything that approaches, therefore, should come to a halt before it falls into the black hole, effectively preventing the black hole from forming in the first place."

bend your mind on this

Originally posted by KrisFromGenk
"Hawking’s riddle is a trick question. Due to the relative nature of time under Einstein’s general theory, time should stop at the event horizon. Anything that approaches, therefore, should come to a halt before it falls into the black hole, effectively preventing the black hole from forming in the first place."

bend your mind on this

But this doesn't negate the fact that whatever fell into the Event Horizon still has its gravity intact, it will add to the already enormous gravity a Black Hole has.

Also if a Black Hole formed Supernova-style. There has to be something in the middle because, it's would be originally a star that collapsed unto itself.

Such condition may be formed according to your description if the Black Hole directly formed from gigantic gas and dust clouds coming together under their own gravity without first becoming a star and evolved directly into a black hole. A condition astronomers theorize galactic birth.

Regarding the formula to calculate time dilation vs gravitational gradient, it's not been proven experimentally yet, especially in the vicinity of a Black Hole's Event Horizon. It's still uncertain if time will actually stop at the Event Horizon.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by ahnggk]

Originally posted by ahnggk.

It's still uncertain if time will actually stop at the Event Horizon.

[edit on 13-5-2009 by ahnggk]

I would like to take this a step further if you don't mind:

It's still uncertain if black holes even exist

[edit on 13/5/2009 by KrisFromGenk]

Good article

In about 10,000 years or so we will know what happens when two black holes merge... Question if it takes so many billions of years for light too reach us and what we see could already be possibly dead stars... Then how do we know it will happen in 10,000 years and by the time we see it does that mean it already happend like so many billions of years ago? Sorry just a question it might seem very laymen to some who understand Astrophysics but its got me wondering

reply to post by donhuangenaro


There's no proof what so ever, just assumption built on assumption, who's paying these guys anyway? oh yeah...
Funny how they praise Einstein yet Einstein himself did not believe in black holes.

Alright, I felt compelled to ad this.

First of all they are not detected by infrared. They are detected by X-Ray telescopes that can see it's emitted radiation. Giant fountains of X-Rays pour out of the black hole from both sides.

I'm going to let Carl handle this for a second. Please Watch.



Here is a graph with the energy difference of spinning as opposed to static black holes.

Despite its invisible interior, a black hole can reveal its presence through interaction with other matter. A black hole can be inferred by tracking the movement of a group of stars that orbit a region in space which looks empty. Alternatively, one can see gas falling into a relatively small black hole, from a companion star. This gas spirals inward, heating up to very high temperature and emitting large amounts of radiation that can be detected from earthbound and earth-orbiting telescopes. Such observations have resulted in the general scientific consensus that, barring a breakdown in our understanding of nature, black holes do exist in our universe.[2]

Wikipedia article

Link

And it is true, in some cases we can literally see the gasses from stars being sucked into these things. We can see the X-Rays they emit. We can see the gravitational effects of them on nearby stars. They exist, what they are no one knows, but they do exist.

Want to see them?







This is (like the one above) a Hubble photo. You can obviously see the Jet in both.



An image below of the galaxy NGC 1275 and its network of filaments (in red). The center of the galaxy hosts a giant supermassive black hole.



The next few

The schematic diagram of velocity measurements of a rotating disk of hot gas shows a plot of the spectrographic evidence for a supermassive black hole at the center of the elliptical galaxy M87. Gas near the center of the galaxy is moving at 550 km/sec, thus a very large mass must exists to keep the gas from flying off.

STIS Records a Black Hole's Signature in M84

Credit: Gary Bower, Richard Green (NOAO), the STIS Instrument Definition Team, and NASA

The colorful "zigzag" on the right is the signature of a supermassive black hole in the center of galaxy M84, discovered by Hubble Space Telescope's Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS). The image on the left, taken with Hubble's Wide Field Planetary and Camera 2 shows the core of the galaxy where the suspected black hole dwells. Astronomers mapped the motions of gas in the grip of the black hole's powerful gravitational pull by aligning the STIS's spectroscopic slit across the nucleus in a single exposure.

Feasting Black Hole Blows Bubbles

Credit: NASA and Jeffrey Kenney and Elizabeth Yale (Yale University)

A monstrous black hole's rude table manners include blowing huge bubbles of hot gas into space. At least, that's the gustatory practice followed by the supermassive black hole residing in the hub of the nearby galaxy NGC 4438. Known as a peculiar galaxy because of its unusual shape, NGC 4438 is in the Virgo Cluster, 50 million light-years from Earth.

The source below contains much information about black holes. If you are interested in the subject you might find it to be a pretty nice read.

Source For Above

Oh yes black holes are inferred by the movement of the surrounding matter based on an assumption that gravity is the only force at work.
This assumption has led to the birth of not only black holes but dark matter simply because they are required by the assumption otherwise galaxies would fly apart. Mythical Forces are invented to maintain this assumption.

There is more evidence to suggest that galaxies are formed by electromagnetic forces, this is suggested by both experiment and observation. This can explain the jets , x-rays and the filamentary structures indicative of electric currents flowing through the plasma medium. How do we create X-rays here on Earth? with electricity of course.

The jets were never predicted by black hole theory, ad hocs were needed to maintain the theory. Oh and now the say they've spotted water vapor being emitted.

My stance is based on the history, common sense and a little awareness of the challenging theories. I don't understand the Math behind it. However a mathematician, a fellow Queenslander I'm proud to say, has challenged the black hole assumption based upon the very solutions they use to invoke them.

Stephen J. Crothers claims lay unanswered as far as I'm aware.

He recently gave a lecture at the Conference of the German Physical Society, Munich, March 9-13, 2009.

Some of his points clarified-

• “Schwarzschild’s solution” is not Schwarzschild’s solution. Schwarzschild’s actual solution does not predict black holes. The quantity ‘r’ appearing in the so-called “Schwarzschild solution” is not a distance of any kind. This simple fact completely subverts all claims for black holes.

• Despite claims for discovery of black holes, nobody has ever found a black hole; no infinitely dense point-mass singularity and no event horizon have ever been found. There is no physical evidence for the existence of infinitely dense point-masses.

• It takes an infinite amount of observer time to verify the presence of an event horizon, but nobody has been and nobody will be around for an infinite amount of time. No observer, no observing instruments, no photons, no matter can be present in a spacetime that by construction contains no matter.

• The black hole is fictitious and so there are no black hole generated gravitational waves. The international search for black holes and their gravitational waves is ill-fated.

• The Michell-Laplace dark body is not a black hole. Newton’s theory of gravitation does not predict black holes. General Relativity does not predict black holes. Black holes were spawned by (incorrect) theory, not by observation. The search for black holes is destined to find none.

• No celestial body has ever been observed to undergo irresistible gravitational collapse. There is no laboratory evidence for irresistible gravitational collapse. Infinitely dense point-mass singularities howsoever formed cannot be reconciled with Special Relativity, i.e. they violate Special Relativity, and therefore violate General Relativity.

• General Relativity cannot account for the simple experimental fact that two fixed bodies will approach one another upon release. There are no known solutions to Einstein’s field equations for two or more masses and there is no existence theorem by which it can even be asserted that his field equations contain latent solutions for such configurations of matter. All claims for black hole interactions are invalid.

• Einstein’s gravitational waves are fictitious; Einstein’s gravitational energy cannot be localised; so the international search for Einstein’s gravitational waves is destined to detect nothing. No gravitational waves have been detected.

• Einstein’s field equations violate the experimentally well-established usual conservation of energy and momentum, and therefore violate the experimental evidence.

In an audience of theoretical physicists there was stunned silence—and not a single question.

www.holoscience.com...

And still resounding silence.

Check this thread about Stephens work, the critics change their tune when Stephen actually takes part in the thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 15-5-2009 by squiz]

i would just like to add in that there would never be any need to worry about a 'black hole'. This is because by your own scientists theory of the black hole, when being sucked, in time would begin to slow & would eventually end up stopped, Ergo, there would actually be a point where time would stop & you would not actually be 'swallowed' by the hole. However this is only by your scientists theories, they may well be wrong yet ;-)

[edit on 16/5/2009 by AmmonSeth]

Originally posted by Santaniel

Good article

In about 10,000 years or so we will know what happens when two black holes merge...

Question if it takes so many billions of years for light too reach us and what we see could already be possibly dead stars... Then how do we know it will happen in 10,000 years and by the time we see it does that mean it already happend like so many billions of years ago? Sorry just a question it might seem very laymen to some who understand Astrophysics but its got me wondering

You are correct. The black holes should have already merged several billion years ago. We just will not witness it for 10000 more years. It will take that long for the energy of the merge to cross the space to us so we can measure it.

Even the light from our sun happened 8 minuets ago. If the Sun blew up right now we would not know it for 8 minuets.

The light from your computer screen takes some amount of time to reach your eyes so you are even viewing your own computer's past.

Originally posted by AmmonSeth
i would just like to add in that there would never be any need to worry about a 'black hole'. This is because by your own scientists theory of the black hole, when being sucked, in time would begin to slow & would eventually end up stopped, Ergo, there would actually be a point where time would stop & you would not actually be 'swallowed' by the hole. However this is only by your scientists theories, they may well be wrong yet ;-)

[edit on 16/5/2009 by AmmonSeth]

Actually, the scientists are 'semi correct'. I had to say 'semi' because they did experimentally proved, gravity does slow down time, however, they have yet to prove that time actually stops or almost near a BH's Event Horizon.

You are 'semi wrong' in your knowledge that time stops at the Event Horizon. You are right that time stops - to an outside observer... But to you, time will tick normally... If it has to take a few minutes for your to reach the 'surface' of the Black Hole by Newtonian Physics, Then you will only have to wait a few minutes... But rather a few agonizing minutes...