Skip to comments.
Massive black hole discovered in nearby galaxy (30 million light-years from Earth)
Yaho ^
| 1/10/11
| AFP
Posted on 01/10/2011 5:57:35 PM PST by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
This undated NASA image shows the dwarf galaxy Henize 2-10, seen in visible light by the Hubble Space Telescope. The central, light pink region shows an area of radio emission, seen with the Very Large Array. The area indicates the presence of a supermassive black hole drawing in material from its surroundings. (AFP/NASA)
2
posted on
01/10/2011 6:02:25 PM PST
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard .. Obama: Epic Fail or Bust!!!)
To: NormsRevenge
The NAACP would call this post racist.
3
posted on
01/10/2011 6:14:37 PM PST
by
Dallas59
(President Robert Gibbs 2009-2013)
To: NormsRevenge
Fascinating stuff. This entire black hole business is difficult to get you mind around...something so dense that it creates gravity that even light cannot escape from.
I was reading somewhere recently that several astronomers have evidence of certain black holes devouring whole planets by the beam of energy it creates and spews out millions of light years. The distances involved...
4
posted on
01/10/2011 6:20:59 PM PST
by
Bean Counter
(Stout Hearts...)
To: NormsRevenge
Don’t worry...Barry’ll plug the damn hole...
5
posted on
01/10/2011 6:25:46 PM PST
by
razbinn
(I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,and to the republic for which it ...)
To: NormsRevenge
If it takes light 30 million years to travel from there to earth, and light travels 186,000 miles per SECOND, that is unimaginable distance! When did God create earth again?
To: NormsRevenge
... at least that is where it WAS, 30 million years ago!
7
posted on
01/10/2011 6:30:21 PM PST
by
Mr. Jazzy
(God bless the United States of America and protect her from the enemies of freedom.)
To: Bean Counter
"Fascinating stuff. This entire black hole business is difficult to get you mind around...something so dense that it creates gravity that even light cannot escape from." Black holes are division by zero in a mathematical, gravitational model. Nothing more. Don't make the common mistake of assuming that the model defines reality, which is what is happening wrt 'black holes'.
The universe is filled with plasma (charged particles) which generate magnetic fields when they move in an electric current. The effects interpreted as being caused by a 'black hole' are the result of a 'gravity-only' model of the universe being imposed on common electrical effects observed on a galactic scale.
Properly recognizing the effects as electrical rather than gravitational in nature means that 'black holes' are just as invisible as 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' and will always remain so.
8
posted on
01/10/2011 6:34:19 PM PST
by
GourmetDan
(Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
To: Bridge_toofar
that is unimaginable distance! When did God create earth again?
If the distance is unimaginable, so much more is The Creator of it. The depths of AWESOME ALMIGHTY GOD will never be understood until we are in His Presence.
To: Bridge_toofar
"If it takes light 30 million years to travel from there to earth, and light travels 186,000 miles per SECOND, that is unimaginable distance!" Obviously you have to assume that c has never been anything other than 186,000 miles per SECOND over time frames that are also assumed. GR only requires that c be uniform throughout the universe at any particular time, not that c is unchanged over time.
"When did God create earth again?"
About 6,000 years ago.
10
posted on
01/10/2011 6:39:40 PM PST
by
GourmetDan
(Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
To: NormsRevenge
“US astronomers have discovered a huge black hole, a million times the mass of the sun, IN A NEARBY GALAXY — a finding that could help better understand the origins of the universe.”
I understand the closer something is the easier it may be to study it, but, how far do we want to go being happy about closeness when it comes to these things?
11
posted on
01/10/2011 6:39:55 PM PST
by
John W
(Natural-born US citizen since 1955)
To: NormsRevenge
Naw... that black hole was just obama’s deficit... a reflection.
LLS
To: GourmetDan
Obviously you have to assume that c has never been anything other than 186,000 miles per SECOND over time frames that are also assumed. GR only requires that c be uniform throughout the universe at any particular time, not that c is unchanged over time.
Also assumes 1. that "light" from "a star" is something distinctly different from the star, a "product" of a star, rather than being an intrinsic part of the phenomenon itself and 2. that the moment of creation was when light first started to traverse space outward from each star necessitating a wait of minutes to billions of years before reaching other parts of space.
13
posted on
01/10/2011 6:55:54 PM PST
by
aruanan
To: John W
" how far do we want to go being happy about closeness when it comes to these things?"
I wouldn't want to be any closer than the one in the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.
To: aruanan
The argument of ‘creation with the appearance of age’ is fallacious and tacit agreement that the ‘age’ is empirical and not assumed. ‘Long ages’ are not empirical and are assumed, therefore no argument of ‘creation with the appearance of age’ is necessary.
Using that argument gives the impression that creationists must engage in logical fallacy as argument against empirical evidence when the assumption of ‘long ages’ is fallacious in itself.
15
posted on
01/10/2011 7:29:50 PM PST
by
GourmetDan
(Eccl 10:2 - The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.)
To: Deaf Smith
Meh.
Mass is mass, regardless of density, so I'd worry less about V4641 Sagittarii than one of our nearer stellar neighbors shuffling off their mortal coil in the energetic way some are given to doing so.
16
posted on
01/10/2011 7:42:39 PM PST
by
Hoplite
To: Bridge_toofar
I don’t think terms like “nearby” should apply to other galaxies. Nothing is nearby, even if it is the next galaxy over.
17
posted on
01/10/2011 7:56:24 PM PST
by
Defiant
(There is no line on the march towards marxism that Democrats won't cross. Democrat=CPUSA)
To: GourmetDan
The argument of creation with the appearance of age is fallacious and tacit agreement that the age is empirical and not assumed. Long ages are not empirical and are assumed, therefore no argument of creation with the appearance of age is necessary.
Using that argument gives the impression that creationists must engage in logical fallacy as argument against empirical evidence when the assumption of long ages is fallacious in itself.
Unfortunately, all you've done is to assert something without actually demonstrating anything. The creation of anything results in an appearance that can be interpreted in a variety of ways. And you've missed the point of what constitutes a star. The appearance of age is as inescapable an appearance of an instantaneously-created, functioning universe as is the appearance of descent with modification of a biosphere sharing DNA that exhibits varying degrees of similarity. If, for example, there were forms of life on earth with absolutely different means of life function (say carbon-based versus silicon-based) and inheritance (DNA versus something else) that we knew for a fact were created at the same time by the same creator, they could still be interpreted as having completely separate origins and ancestry by anyone who did not have the specific knowledge of their origins.
18
posted on
01/10/2011 8:31:12 PM PST
by
aruanan
To: Defiant
I dont think terms like nearby should apply to other galaxies. Nothing is nearby, even if it is the next galaxy over. I know what you mean, but the energies involved in some of these relativistic jets, and their highly directional structure, makes the concept of "far away" a little less comforting, even when we're talking in terms of other galaxies.
There have been some high-energy events noted by satellites, some very far from earth, that are awesome in the power levels they imply. Instruments overwhelmed to the point of inducing temporary shut-down for self protection, from events hundreds of thousands of light-years away. These events are "gamma ray bursts," thought to be from collapsing stars, but a beam eminating from a supermassive black hole would be much worse.
If one of these jets should turn our way, even from thousands of light-years away, there could be real effects for life on earth. Not likely, of course. But not impossible.
19
posted on
01/10/2011 8:55:33 PM PST
by
Steely Tom
(Obama goes on long after the thrill of Obama is gone)
To: Dallas59
It’s a Black hole, not a Black Ho.
20
posted on
01/10/2011 8:58:21 PM PST
by
MaxMax
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson