File :-(, x, )
ITT: Black Holes Anonymous
Nature's badass
>> Anonymous
>>330886
ITT: Everyone thinks it's an eyeball until they see the subject line.
>> Anonymous
>>330887

I didn't see the eyeball until you pointed it out!
>> Anonymous
What if black holes ARE eyes?
>> Anonymous
>>330983

...

Oh god, I'm never sleeping again.
>> Anonymous
>>330983

HOW THE FUCK WOULD THAT WORK IF THEY'RE BLACK?
>> Anonymous
>>330990
What? Just because something is black, it can't work?
>> Anonymous
>>330990
Easily, dumbass. Look at your pupil. Is it black or white? We can see because light ENTERS our eyes. There are no magic rays coming OUT of our eyes that make us see.
>> Anonymous
>>331011

I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT MY PUPILS DON'T PINCH THE FABRIC OF SPACE AND TIME AND BREAK APART ANYTHING THAT FALLS INTO THEIR HORIZONS.

THEY ALSO DON'T ACTIVELY SUCK LIGHT INTO THEM. THEY ARE PASSIVE AND NOT COMPLETELY BLACK.
>> Anonymous
>>331005
I'm not touching that
>> Anonymous
>>331013
They do when it enters it's vicinity, quite like your eye.

Key word here folks; black
A black sweater will retain heat waves.
>> Anonymous
>>331019

Annoying, but true of dark clothing in general. That's why they tell outdoors sports folk like runners to wear light clothing. It's cooler under the sun.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
>>331011
i lol'd soo hard.

also black holes are awesome. Did you know they give off radiation. Thats how we can see them.
>> Anonymous
>>331113

kinda. the particles give off x-rays as they go across the event horizon.

there is hawking radiation, but that hasnt been observed, and if true means that black holes have temperature and thus entropy, and so will eventually "boil" off which is fucking weird.

Quasars are cooler.
>> Anonymous
>>330983

giving the distortion of space time approaches an infinite gradient near the singularity... would they be able to see forever?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
So, If a black hole actually has space and is affected by time in the sense of it "boiling down," does that mean that the black holes we know of will at one point close?

Also, this is /an/. post a black hole cat or something
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>331206
Black holes are part of nature. Here's one anyhow.
>> Anonymous
>>331206
There is a theory out their that states that black holes leads to white holes in which energy and matter gets shits out. But scientists have not yet found a white hole yet.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
here is a bigger version of OPs pic
>> Anonymous
>>331214
Has anyone ever gotten a picture of a real blackhole?
>> Anonymous
>>331217
What do you mean?
>> Anonymous
>>331211
Blackholes emit hawking radiation, which accounts for everything they eat up. Blackholes do not lead anywhere, they just suck everything up and then slowly evaporate away for the next few billion years.
>> Anonymous
>>331217
you can't take a picture of a black hole

in fact your can't see a black hole

you can only see the surrounding area around a black hole and then conclude that there must be a black hole here/there

but since no one has actually jumped into a black hole, theories are theories
>> Anonymous
>>331234

Theoretical. Like the other anon says, has not been observed, and therefore not proven. Science is still out to lunch on it - all speculation right now, albeit highly intelligent speculation.

For all anyone knows for certain, black holes might lead out the anus of a very large asian man one dimension over.
>> Anonymous
>>331264
damn, if I switch from CS to physics, that black hole theory will be my thesis
>> Anonymous
i hurd black holes dont lyke panic at the disco, we wouldnt hang out ^_^
>> Anonymous
>>331206
animals AND nature means animals and nature, learn to fucking read.
>> Anonymous
>>331287
NATURE
Nature, in the broadest sense, is equivalent to the natural world, physical universe, material world or material universe. "Nature" refers to the phenomena of the physical world, and also to life in general. Manufactured objects and human interaction are not considered part of nature unless qualified in ways such as "human nature" or "the whole of nature". Nature is generally distinguished from the supernatural. It ranges in scale from the subatomic to the galactic.
GALACTIC
omfg your a dumb fuck>>331206
well that can be said of most if not ALL 4chaners regardless of were your from
>> Anonymous
>>331303

>omfg your a dumb fuck
>well that can be said of most if not ALL 4chaners regardless of were your from

>4chaners
>were your from

>omfg your a dumb fuck

Hm.
>> Anonymous
>>331303
lol nice copypasta from wikipedia, you use it to write research papers?

as you can see, no mention of black holes on that page though, for a reason

they are a theory, which is why
>human interaction are not considered part of nature unless qualified in ways such as "human nature" or "the whole of nature"

because for all you know, black holes are the result of every mathematician dividing by zero

or the result of a blank page on God's mspaint waiting for him to make more morons like you!
>> Anonymous
>>331264
>>331255
>>331188
NO!, While right about everything else you said except for black holes not being observable.

Its quantum physics people. Space isnt some devoid calm void. Space is full of jostlating fluxes in particles and energy. If looked at closely, space is VERY VERY turbulent. At any given point in space, energy is being borrowed to create subatomic particles and their counterparts. These particles collide as they are created and resolve themselves returning the energy from whence its borrowed. However, when this occurs on the event horizon, occasionally one particle gets sucked into the black hole, sending the other particle flying off into space.

Thusly, black holes emit radiation and we use this to measure the size and location of black holes.
>> Anonymous
>>330983
>>330990
>>331005
>>331011
Especially 331011.

That was not an excuse to start an argument, are you on drugs?
>> Anonymous
>>331264
Huh, I could have sworn that it was proven. I suppose I might be wrong though. In fact, I probably am.
>> Anonymous
>>331341
>>However, when this occurs on the event horizon, occasionally one particle gets sucked into the black hole, sending the other particle flying off into space.

but what is to say that there is not another reason for this to happen?

our points were that you can't say "This is a black hole AND this is what it does AND this is what it looks like"

because all we know is what is observable

btw, don't the two principle theories of physics contradict each other?
>> Anonymous
>>331341

Two of those posts were referring to Hawking Radiation, not black holes themselves.

>>331373

Nah, just theoretical prediction. See all the hoopla over the large hadron collider. The whole reason possible micro black holes are contentious, is because hawking radiation(one of the things that would save us if such were to form.) hasn't been proven yet.

I think some scientists are hoping they DO get some, just to observe it.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>> Anonymous
Protip: At the center of every galaxy is a black hole.
>> Anonymous
I have this astronomy book, it says that time slows down when you get close to a black hole.
>> Anonymous
>>331408

No, because the theories aren't worded stupidly like "you can't see black holes". Instead, they say something like "the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light after the event horizon".

Besides, the Hawking radiation isn't the only process making black holes visible.
>> 4tran
>>331206
Under current theories, the bigger the black hole, the colder it is. Thus, if its temperature is > CMB, then they will heat up (shrink) towards equilibrium. If its initial temperature is < CMB, then it will evaporate (also why LHC is safe).

>>331486
An outside observer will see your clock slow down, but your clock sure ain't slowing down in your reference frame.

>>331497
"all time like curves within the horizon will inevitably reach the singularity"
>> Anonymous
>>331513
>An outside observer will see your clock slow down, but your clock sure ain't slowing down in your reference frame.

But time itself is slowing down? So if you could somehow hover near a black hole, you'd age slower?
>> 4tran
>>331519
Compared to what? If our entire existence was right next to a black hole, we wouldn't notice a thing; if we left earth, hovered next to a black hole for a century, and returned, then yes, earth will have advanced many, many years more than us.
>> Anonymous
>>331519
Time is relative, it's a dimension. The "speed" of time depends on a lot of time, such as the speed you are traveling at and the distortion of the local space-time. Space-time is infinitely distorted at a singularity, which is what is currently believed to reside beyond the event horizon of a black hole. That means that your subjective time will appear to run at a constant pace but compared to an observer far from the black hole your time would seem to eventually come to a virtual stand-still. If you could somehow survive a visit to the event horizon, hang in there until the black hole evaporates, you should be able to observe pretty much the entire history of the universe play out before your eyes.
>> Anonymous
>>331521
awesome
>> Anonymous
>>331521
That is fascinating.
>> Anonymous
>>331521
>but compared to an observer far from the black hole your time would seem to eventually come to a virtual stand-still

So to them, I appear frozen? Also, since my subjective time is moving along normally, do I age? I don't know much about astronomy, but these things are so interesting.
>> Anonymous
i wish people would stop thinking they know shit about the universe. they dont know shit. its all guess work.

i love science but they dont even know whats up in regards to space. fucking land a man on mars, then we will talk.
>> Anonymous
>>331584

>So to them, I appear frozen?

As you approach the event horizon, everything you do will seem to slow down until the point that you actually cross the horizon. At that point, you'll be "frozen" from the perspective of someone looking at you.

>Also, since my subjective time is moving along normally, do I age?

Yes, you do. But aging is the least of your worries if you cross the event horizon of a black hole.
>> Anonymous
ITT: idiots who think that reading an article from another retard on the internet means they are smart
>> Anonymous
>>331601
>>Butthurt because he doesn't understand the thread.
>> Anonymous
>>331597
Who fucking cares? You're one of those annoying logical people who think they're above speculation and guess work.
>> Anonymous
>>331597
RAAAAAGEEEEE!

Einstein speculated that gravity isn't a force but a distortion of space-time and devised experiments which could prove that. Guess what? He was right.
>> Anonymous
>>331597
Science can't teach us anything. Also, dinosaurs probably lived with cavemen.
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/10/day-4-science-c.html
>> Anonymous
God lives with jesus across the event horizon

prove me wrong
>> Anonymous
>>331633
Can't do it with any human logic. Unless you think otherwise, please kill yourself.
>> Anonymous
>>331638
lol so freezing time IS human logic?

god you are like those kids who think new aircraft are UFOs and the government is covering it up

just because something sounds interesting doesn't make it true
>> Anonymous
>>331639
just because you say something isn't true doesn't mean it isn't

Prove me wrong
>> Anonymous
>>331643
vacuous truth of universal statements
>> Anonymous
>>331643
There is an invisible dragon living my garage. Also, you can walk through him. He's there though. Prove me wrong.
>> Anonymous
>>331651
I don't think you have a garage

enjoy your parent's basement dragon
>> Anonymous
Hawking Radiation was here, black hole's aren't so tough.
>> Anonymous
>>331005
I saw what you did there and laughed so hard I couldn't breath.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
THIS PICTURE PROVES AND ADDS NOTHING TO THE THREAD. I JUST THOUGHT /an/ COULD USE A BREAK FROM ALL THIS THEORETICAL STUFF AND RELAX WITH A PEACEFUL PICTURE OF GOOD OLD TERRA FIRMA.

CAPS LOCK IS FUN.
>> Anonymous
I'd love to jump in one.
>> Anonymous
>>332062
You'd be turned into spaghetti, while time would stop all around you.....
>> Anonymous
>>332065
Not if you jumped into a big enough black hole. Something the size of the supergiant hole at the center of the galaxy would do. The tidal forces would allow you to cross the event horizon and still survive for hours of subjective time before you got too close to the singularity.

Although, nobody really knows if the singularity really is there. According to some new calculations, there is no singularity in the black hole. Instead there seems to be a strange sort of space there that would appear infinite to the person falling in. Falling forever, frozen to the time of the outside universe... I'm not even going to pretend that I understand what that really means.
>> Anonymous
>>331919
>>330886
that would be so cool to go swimming in
>> 4tran
>>332070
It's often said that one could survive going across an event horizon, but I'm starting to have doubts. As you go through, there will be some point in time in which half your brain is outside the horizon, and half is inside. Strictly speaking, these halves become causally disconnected. If it's temporary, you should be able to survive it, but I'm not sure if the two halves can communicate with each other again after entering the blackhole. Anyone know for certain?

The Schwarzchild blackhole already has an infinite spacelike singularity: for a fixed r, theta, and phi, you can integrate across t to find an infinitely long spacelike curve - this is entirely inside the event horizon! As you take the limit of r->0, this curve becomes "longer", or infinity/0. Of course, in the limit, this curve _is_ the singularity. Thus, in a handwavy sense, this singularity is infinitely large.
>> Anonymous
Its gods asshole dickheads.
>> Anonymous
>>332070
You'd crash into other stuff already inside and die anyway. It would be a fascinating way to go though.
>> Anonymous
Spaghettification is the most awesome Scientific term ever.
y/n
>> Anonymous
>>332919
n
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Freak storm at south pole of Saturn.
Brrrrr