Celestia Forums

Posted: **21.09.2005, 21:56**

As all of you are aware of a black hole is a deceased star that has lost all it's fuel and instead of emitting energy it sucks in energy. Also you know a galaxy is a massive point of gravity that houses nebulas which forms stars, asteroids, planets and many more celestial bodies. Theoreticly the center gravitational point (I like big words

) of the galaxy is usually a gathering of stars forming a nucleus right? Not always. Scientist by measuring the orbit of the stars in the nucleus of M31 and the Milky Way aswell, have proven that since the orbit is so rapid that, the only thing able to great such gravity is a very, very, VERY, large black hole. The black hole would be so large, that it would create all the gravity that binds together the galaxy. Theoreticly both M31 nad the MW posses this super massive black hole. If you to learn more just ask, im tired of typing

Posted: **21.09.2005, 22:44**

Hunter Parasite wrote:...im tired of typing

Uhmmm... too bad...

Hunter Parasite wrote:If you to learn more just ask...

Yes, more, more, more, please...

:wink:

Posted: **21.09.2005, 23:28**

ElChristou wrote:
Hunter Parasite wrote:...im tired of typing

Uhmmm... too bad...

Hunter Parasite wrote:If you to learn more just ask...

Yes, more, more, more, please...

Very well.

There are also theories about the fact that M31 Milky way are close enough that in a few billion years the gravity created by the to SMBH's(Supermassive black holes) of both galaxys will eventually suck eachother together thus fusing the galaxys together and destroying great amounts of both galaxys. The two SMBH's will form one great UMBH(Ultramassive Black hole) and if our solar system is lucky we will be jetisoned out of the fused galaxy, or we will sucked into the UMBH. That's all I know now

Posted: **22.09.2005, 03:26**

Hunter Parasite wrote: ...and instead of emitting energy it sucks in energy.

Well, I for one wouldn't put it that way. Sucking energy suggests an active search for energy (like a vacuum cleaner); black holes deform space in a way that energy (as light or matter) just happen to move towards it.

Quoting the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy:

"In Relativity, Matter tells Space how to curve, and Space tells Matter how to move."

Hunter Parasite wrote: ...a galaxy is a massive point of gravity

And I also wouldn't put it that way: a black hole could be considered as a point, as it dimensions wouldn't be really relevant, only it's mass. A galaxy, however... if you're talking about planets, nebulas and stars, then a galaxy is a really, really big thing (and not point-like).

Hunter Parasite wrote: ...and destroying great amounts of both galaxys.

If you consider the fact that galaxies are made of matter (no, seriously, wait me finish) then they would not be destroyed by the collision. So what if a few stars (really few of them would really colide) get blown up? They would turn into new nebulas, that would condensate into new stars. Some of the galaxy's matter could, of course, be flung into deep space, thus torning it apart, but not really destroying it.

Hunter Parasite wrote: If you to learn more just ask, im tired of typing

And I would not put that that way, either. If you make a quick search through the posts on this forum, you'll probably find all of these things you said (wrote) explained in a much more detailed way. As we say over here: C?? n??o t?? com essa bola toda.

Posted: **22.09.2005, 22:19**

Heh, I like the Hitchhikers guide....

Anyways.... I'm glad you pointed out my errors, which infeact were quite obvious, but still with the collision damage thing, when the stars and such collide, yes they will become nebulas but, they will most like be absorbed by the immense power of the UMBH.

Posted: **22.09.2005, 22:46**

Wow, does everyone here like the Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy book? (haven't seen the movie yet but it looks like they compressed all 5 books into one short movie :cry:

)

Posted: **22.09.2005, 23:00**

No, they did not compress it... they've only used the very end of the 'trilogy' to wrap it up (the earth mark 2 part, except for the 'so long and thank you' bowls)

But as for the galaxy being 'eaten' by the black hole, that's not being destroyed as well, if you're thinking about matter. Just remember Hawking's evaporating black holes. (it's like when a kid eats a coin: if it came in, it has got to come out) :roll:

Posted: **22.09.2005, 23:20**

Still, would be better if they would do 5 movies for the books.

Black holes pull matter towards them then when the matter reaches the black hole itself the matter is crushed into an infinitly dense space. When the black hole eventually evaporates, radiation is released.

Posted: **23.09.2005, 00:23**

The movie was funny, hehe :lol:

anyways, well, how do we know for sure that the matter doesn't get destroyed?(That statement just went against my black hole warping theorie)

Posted: **23.09.2005, 00:29**

Law Of Conservation. When a black hole evaporates, the matter crushed in it turns into radiation, which is why expired black holes give off radiation.

Posted: **23.09.2005, 00:38**

WildMoon wrote:Law Of Conservation. When a black hole evaporates, the matter crushed in it turns into radiation, which is why expired black holes give off radiation.

true, but the matter is no longer stays in it's original state and thats technicly taking away from the galaxy.

Posted: **23.09.2005, 00:49**

well, that is true

hmm, also if energy is compressed enough it'll turn into an matter and antimatter pair. But the matter and antimatter would instantly cansel each other out creating pure energy. But what if this happened to energy pull into the black hole, could the matter and antimatter pair instantly be converted into radiation before canceling each other out?

Speaking of antimatter, when the big bang occured radiation was constantly being converted to matter-antimatter pairs which would then cancel each other out and form pure radiation yet somehow there was enough matter left over the form our universe today. but what happened to the antimatter? At some point I think that something made the matter and antimatter separate when the matter-antimatter pairs were created. But what happpened to the antimatter? Could it be that the dark matter observed in our universe is really clumps of antimatter?

Posted: **23.09.2005, 03:26**

WildMoon wrote:well, that is true

Don't think it is actually. IIRC black holes don't actually remove anything from the universe (well, beyond putting it behind an event horizon) and when they evaporate they should release the same amount of energy that corresponds to the mass that they have absorbed over their entire evaporation lifetime.

hmm, also if energy is compressed enough it'll turn into an matter and antimatter pair. But the matter and antimatter would instantly cansel each other out creating pure energy. But what if this happened to energy pull into the black hole, could the matter and antimatter pair instantly be converted into radiation before canceling each other out?

um, no. IIRC black holes lose energy because virtual matter/antimatter pairs are created naturally in space anyway. But when the pair straddles the event horizon of a BH, one goes into the hole and the other goes into the universe outside, and that takes energy out of the hole somehow (I'm fuzzy on the details, it's been a while since I read about this).

Speaking of antimatter, when the big bang occured radiation was constantly being converted to matter-antimatter pairs which would then cancel each other out and form pure radiation yet somehow there was enough matter left over the form our universe today. but what happened to the antimatter? At some point I think that something made the matter and antimatter separate when the matter-antimatter pairs were created. But what happpened to the antimatter? Could it be that the dark matter observed in our universe is really clumps of antimatter?

No, because we'd be able to detect radiation emitted from it as it interacted with normal matter around it (eg interstellar gas). Plus, there's no reason why we wouldn't be able to detect it if it was antimatter. If there is anything made of antimatter in the universe, we haven't seen it yet.

As for what happened to the antimatter, it got annihilated at the start. We're made of matter because there was a bit more matter than antimatter at the beginning. The antimatter annihilated with all the matter that it could and was depleted, leaving behind the excess matter.

Posted: **23.09.2005, 05:54**

But I thought all matter and anitmatter were created in equal pairs?

Posted: **23.09.2005, 06:19**

WildMoon wrote:But I thought all matter and anitmatter were created in equal pairs?

Well if it did, we wouldn't be here - all the matter would have annihilated with the antimatter and you'd just have energy in the universe and that's it.

Posted: **23.09.2005, 19:19**

The BBC TV version of the Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy is far, far better than the recent film in my opinion, although the film did have a few good moments in it

BBC TV series:- Better than a Pan-Galactic Gargle Blaster!

Recent movie:- Mostly Harmless.

Posted: **25.09.2005, 20:09**

Yeah too bad I only got to see 2 episodes of the BBC version of the Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy. But I notcied it too was missing a few things. Atleast in it Zaphod has 2 heads like he's supposed too. Also Marvin looked funny in the BBC version, though I don't know which Marvin, from BBC or movie, looks better. Either way I think he's an awesome character.

Also why would energy not form equal matter-antimatter pairs?

Posted: **01.10.2005, 03:53**

Well, the effects for the Infinite Improbability Drive were what really made me read the books... awesome...

Also why would energy not form equal matter-antimatter pairs?

Well, if it did, we would not be here discussing this, would we? It's like one of those Things That Happen. (Not very scientific, though)

Posted: **02.10.2005, 03:09**

This'll go on my "List of Things to Find Out" when I become an astronomer.

Celestia Forums

Supermassive Black Holes

Supermassive Black Holes

Re: Supermassive Black Holes

...

Re: Supermassive Black Holes

...