It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


First Black Holes Were Lean and Mean

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 05:21 AM
Like the subject title says, they might be small by that doesn't make them less important and able to cause big damage or create great things.

Like many pioneers in new surroundings, the first black holes found scant pickings, according to new simulations that mimic conditions in the early universe. The findings have scientists puzzling over how early black holes grew into the supermassive beasts they are today without a steady diet of gas, dust, stars, and other fodder.

Today's black holes thrive on recycled goods. Most galaxies abound with interstellar gas and dust, the detritus of countless generations of stars. Black holes grow by consuming material that passes too close to their enormous gravity wells. But fodder in the earliest universe was not nearly as plentiful, researchers at NASA; Stanford University in Palo Alto, California; and the Department of Energy's SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory in Menlo Park, California discovered. The team wanted to see how the earliest black holes grew, so they created simulations based on previous work with the earliest stars, many of which collapsed directly into the first black holes.

The simulations showed that the black holes radiated energy so intensely that they heated surrounding gas far into space--as far as 10,000 light-years away (see a movie here ( The heated gas became so diffuse, it could not form nearby stars and solar systems, nor fall back inward to feed black holes. As a result, the team reports online this week in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, the earliest black holes grew less than 1% over 200 million years. It turns out that "a black hole's growth is limited until it is hosted by a larger galaxy," says astrophysicist and co-author John Wise of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland.

The simulations "highlight for me how complex the processes in the early universe were," says astronomer Steven Willner of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Massachusetts. In particular, he says, very little is known about what happened to the first stars or their remnants. "This paper is not the final word" on that process, Willner says, "but it's a very nice start."

Read it and tell me if the LHC experiment is really not important...

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 12:54 AM
I am a beginner in astronomy but I am a scientist studying geology and really love all science. I think that these supermassive black holes are the hosts of the galactic material surrounding them, moreover, I believe they control the motions of its galactic material and always have.

There also seems to be a lot of organization involved in the formation of galaxies and also the distribution of matter within the Universe. This is one of the things that causes me to believe in God. I have beliefs that are different from the big bang. Instead I am working on a cosmic string theory where the Unverse was manifested from certain sounds resonating within these strings and thus forming matter.

In this idea the Universe was formed in a very orderly fasion and also very compressed. I actually believe that the expansion came later on in the existence of the Cosmos. It is my belief at this time, that the very nature of time and space itself has undergone several fundamental changes over the eons. Right now entropy is absolute and should result in the death of the Universe if it remains constant.

Those are my thoughts on this subject and they are quite different than mainstream science of today. i will say that I agree somewhat that early singularities didn't have much fuel to feed on.

posted on Aug, 17 2009 @ 01:06 AM
Of course some theoretical physicists claim that black holes don't actually exist and do not satisfy the equations of general relativity.

new topics

log in