From NASA Goddard:
Behemoth black hole found in an unlikely place
Astronomers have uncovered a near-record breaking supermassive black hole, weighing 17 billion suns, in an unlikely place: in the center of a galaxy in a sparsely populated area of the universe. The observations, made by NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope and the Gemini Telescope in Hawaii, may indicate that these monster objects may be more common than once thought.
Until now, the biggest supermassive black holes – those roughly 10 billion times the mass of our sun – have been found at the cores of very large galaxies in regions of the universe packed with other large galaxies. In fact, the current record holder tips the scale at 21 billion suns and resides in the crowded Coma galaxy cluster that consists of over 1,000 galaxies.
“The newly discovered supersized black hole resides in the center of a massive elliptical galaxy, NGC 1600, located in a cosmic backwater, a small grouping of 20 or so galaxies,” said lead discoverer Chung-Pei Ma, a University of California-Berkeley astronomer and head of the MASSIVE Survey, a study of the most massive galaxies and supermassive black holes in the local universe. While finding a gigantic black hole in a massive galaxy in a crowded area of the universe is to be expected – like running across a skyscraper in Manhattan – it seemed less likely they could be found in the universe’s small towns.
“There are quite a few galaxies the size of NGC 1600 that reside in average-size galaxy groups,” Ma said. “We estimate that these smaller groups are about 50 times more abundant than spectacular galaxy clusters like the Coma cluster. So the question now is, ‘Is this the tip of an iceberg?’ Maybe there are more monster black holes out there that don’t live in a skyscraper in Manhattan, but in a tall building somewhere in the Midwestern plains.”
The researchers also were surprised to discover that the black hole is 10 times more massive than they had predicted for a galaxy of this mass. Based on previous Hubble surveys of black holes, astronomers had developed a correlation between a black hole’s mass and the mass of its host galaxy’s central bulge of stars – the larger the galaxy bulge, the proportionally more massive the black hole. But for galaxy NGC 1600, the giant black hole’s mass far overshadows the mass of its relatively sparse bulge. “It appears that that relation does not work very well with extremely massive black holes; they are a larger fraction of the host galaxy’s mass,” Ma said.
Ma and her colleagues are reporting the discovery of the black hole, which is located about 200 million light years from Earth in the direction of the constellation Eridanus, in the April 6 issue of the journal Nature. Jens Thomas of the Max Planck-Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics, Garching, Germany is the paper’s lead author.
One idea to explain the black hole’s monster size is that it merged with another black hole long ago when galaxy interactions were more frequent. When two galaxies merge, their central black holes settle into the core of the new galaxy and orbit each other. Stars falling near the binary black hole, depending on their speed and trajectory, can actually rob momentum from the whirling pair and pick up enough velocity to escape from the galaxy’s core. This gravitational interaction causes the black holes to slowly move closer together, eventually merging to form an even larger black hole. The supermassive black hole then continues to grow by gobbling up gas funneled to the core by galaxy collisions. “To become this massive, the black hole would have had a very voracious phase during which it devoured lots of gas,” Ma said.
The frequent meals consumed by NGC 1600 may also be the reason why the galaxy resides in a small town, with few galactic neighbors. NGC 1600 is the most dominant galaxy in its galactic group, at least three times brighter than its neighbors. “Other groups like this rarely have such a large luminosity gap between the brightest and the second brightest galaxies,” Ma said.
Most of the galaxy’s gas was consumed long ago when the black hole blazed as a brilliant quasar from material streaming into it that was heated into a glowing plasma. “Now, the black hole is a sleeping giant,” Ma said. “The only way we found it was by measuring the velocities of stars near it, which are strongly influenced by the gravity of the black hole. The velocity measurements give us an estimate of the black hole’s mass.”
The velocity measurements were made by the Gemini Multi-Object Spectrograph (GMOS) on the Gemini North 8-meter telescope on Mauna Kea in Hawaii. GMOS spectroscopically dissected the light from the galaxy’s center, revealing stars within 3,000 light-years of the core. Some of these stars are circling around the black hole and avoiding close encounters. However, stars moving on a straighter path away from the core suggest that they had ventured closer to the center and had been slung away, most likely by the twin black holes.
Archival Hubble images, taken by the Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer (NICMOS), supports the idea of twin black holes pushing stars away. The NICMOS images revealed that the galaxy’s core was unusually faint, indicating a lack of stars close to the galactic center. A star-depleted core distinguishes massive galaxies from standard elliptical galaxies, which are much brighter in their centers. Ma and her colleagues estimated that the amount of stars tossed out of the central region equals 40 billion suns, comparable to ejecting the entire disk of our Milky Way galaxy.
###
For more information, visit:
http://www.nasa.gov/hubble http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2016/12/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
So this if from 200 millions years ago. I’m not worried.
Black hole with the mass of 17 billion suns discovered.
And…?
We need more funding to study effects of Black Holes on Climate Change.
Or maybe this object is actually just some dark matter, and not a black hole at all?
Black holes may be able to help astronomers detect otherwise invisible dark matter:
http://www.astronomy.com/news/2015/06/nasa-simulation-suggests-black-holes-may-make-ideal-dark-matter-labs
There’;s no such thing as dark matter. There’s just a force yet to be discovered. As with so-called black holes, dark matter is a linguistic signpost warning that we don’t know. How it became official religious Science! is anybody’s guess.
One only has to look at the images from hubble, the millions of stars all clustered together, and 0 light distortion.
Light does not bend in the vacuum of space because space time is not a fabric, it is imaginary.
For gravity to exist you need Newton, Einstein takes care of the Macro, job done, but the rest.. lol.
If there are not two bodies there is no gravity, there is no exchange of information, and no exchange of information means no physics, nothing.
With Space time curvature, only one body need exist to create a distortion. Yet in physics, if something does not exchange information with anything else it for all intents and purposes does not exist.
Mark,
Light has been observed bending. That’s a fact that confirmed Einstein’s hypothesis.
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/light_deflection
Gravity isn’t created by two bodies. Jupiter distorts space-time and affects the orbits of all the planets and other bodies in the observable solar system.
http://www.einstein-online.info/spotlights/geometry_force
“Light has been observed bending. That’s a fact that confirmed Einstein’s hypothesis.”
All stars are surrounded by corona with density variation by distance. Never been able to find where the refraction index for observed distant starlight passing near a star and through the corona was corrected for during the “light bending” experiments. Can you point to any??
Seriously, BFL? That’s on the same order as questioning cellular theory or the existence of the electron.
And gravity flows at the speed of light. They managed to measure a gravitational wave earlier this year. Seriously. There is being skeptical and then there is being nonsensical.
Light is observed bending by refraction and diffraction as well – altering paths as it enters and leaves different media (or atmospheres) in agreement with ordinary optical physics.. Just the other day I was messing around with a diffraction grid making some colours when it occurred to me that the lunar eclipse didn’t behave correctly compared to the physics of gravitational light bendy theory and it got my wondering if gravitational lensing wasn’t in fact simply refraction or diffraction.. as you do.
Then I came across this:
https://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2015/11/26/lensing-by-refraction-not-gravity/
seems I’m not the only one to have this thought. Everything attributed to gravitational lensing (when it works) is correct for refraction (which always behaves it’s self just like a good physical property should). I know black holes and massy light help equations balance to suit theories, but when the theories fail to produce actual results then I do wonder if they’re sound. (attributing mass to light is also convenient for keeping ‘black holes’ hidden)
I also liked:
‘The search for dark matter is more than 80 years old. The presence of all the known, observable, detectable, normal matter cannot account for the gravitation “observed” according to General Relativity. Despite abject failure to find dark matter, General Relativity theorists are convinced it is out there.’
benofhouston writes “And gravity flows at the speed of light. They managed to measure a gravitational wave earlier this year”
Lots of stuff in the news and on the web about gravity waves.. most of it saying stuff like ‘scientists found..’ or ‘scientists detect’ or ‘observe’.. comments like ‘for the first time we have direct evidence’ or ‘direct
observations have been made’
very very few use the terms ‘indirect observations..’, mostly those are in the core articles. The guts of it is there were no direct observations – none of the gravity measurey thingies measured anything, nor was any device pointed at anything specific – there was only ‘ooh looky, the measurey thingy here wobbled!’ – the indirect observation was made by a pair of lasers at right angles which wiggled a bit, they were hoping for this to happen – it suggested something warped the planet for a short moment. Since they were looking for gravity waves, they concluded it must be gravity waves.
(now they want to build more of them so they can triangulate the source – that’s reasonable, also no surprise grasping-for-funding-wise) – though now I’ve written my screed and looked for similarly contrary opinions, it seems apparently there’s murmurs from within the LIGO mob that they can’t rule out the signal being a glitch.. but hey, the media got hold of it now so ‘popular’ science commentators will be hyperventilating into microphones about it for months to come..
back to LIGO
they concluded these were gravity waves – they already had a wobble happening (the low notes they are talking about in the press releases) and the high frequency rise apparently meant a kaboom somewhere in the universe.. and they concluded that the gravity waves were propogated at the speed of light. Thing is, it didn’t coincide with anything. If the light from a star/hole/whassit travels at Xm/s and gravity waves travel at Xm/s then they should reach here at the same time – but nothing happened out there that we saw.. Had it been coincided with some event then sure by all means, I’d be happy that the two must have been or at least could have been related – but there was only the signal – nothing else.
Not only that, the black holes that apparently emitted this gravitational wave thump is the ‘evidence’ they’ve been looking for that black holes/dark matter actually exists!
So a signal is detected originating from regions unknown and it both proves gravity waves exist and are propogated at the speed of light .. and it proves black holes exist (because only a black hole density increases could make gravity waves of this magnitude.. which are propagated at the speed of light)
if you have gravity waves proving black holes exist, then black holes can prove gravity moves in waves at the speed of light just as theorized.. yay! proof!
We still don’t know how gravity interacts, this ‘observation’ proves nothing. The gravity detector LIGO is also reasonably theorized (by physicist Eric Morganson- mentor to the LIGO team) to detect a shift in
gravity on earth as the earth and the moon change position, and this should exist as a period wave pattern – a sine wave of 1 period and also 1/2 period (no surprises) .. interestingly Morganson, who realized LIGO should detect this and who modeled the waveform still has not had any direct data from the LIGO team as to whether this period/half period gravity pattern had been detected.. he’s been waiting for quite some time for the data (1997).. But for LIGO to work, the lunar/earth gravity cycle has to be modeled into the LIGO data along with the sun/earth and other orbital periods to eliminate any background (local) gravity effects – which by rights should swamp any distant signals. Still no word on whether the earth/moon data has been found.
If they didn’t add this in then the rise in frequency all the physicists are currently whistling could be nothing at all beyond a periodic event or worse, nothing – only ongoing observations will tell…
If gravity flows at the speed of light, why does the earth orbit the instantaneous center of the sun and not where it was 8 minutes ago? Gravity does not flow at the speed of light, it surpasses it almost infinitely…except for those times we say it doesn’t in order to make our theories work.
‘ Never been able to find where the refraction index for observed distant starlight passing near a star.’
No index, but – every massive body bends the space time around itself.
Light always follows a strait line, near a massive body that line is a curve.
“…every massive body bends the space time around itself. Light always follows a strait line, near a massive body that line is a curve.” The latter does not at all confirm the former – bent light no more proves space-time than a pencil in a glass of water does. That’s refraction. Space-time gets thrown around a lot, notwithstanding that it’s a misnomer when and where relativistic space must be stripped of properties in order to refute aether. You can have one but not both. “Space-time” is as much a Hollywood fantasy as a scientific veracity. Light-bending stars have refractive properties not at all indicative of this relativistic light-bending space-time, the presumed void of zero aether. Nothing cannot have an effect on something.
Mark: an astronomer specializing in celestial mechanics shows that gravity speed is greater than 2×10^10 c. Of course the usual way to reconcile with Einstein’s perceptions is to start adding fudge factors much like they do in quantum mechanics.
http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp
And here are 2 more, with more explanations and showing (partially) what a consummate plagiarist Einstein also was:
http://ldolphin.org/vanFlandern/
http://milesmathis.com/merc.html
Karl April 11, 2016 at 8:30 pm
For all you information which you have obviously read about you have a massive blindspot. The Earth moon will indeed produce a cyclical gravitational wave, now guess what the frequency of that wave will be.
Now go look at the cutoff filters on LIGO and you should see the big problem here.
Both you and physicist Eric Morganson are going to be waiting until hell freezes over if you expect to see that gravitational wave it is well outside the lower cutoff frequency of LIGO …. end of story … now go read.
LdB – Eric Morganson was the mentor for the LIGO team.
Here’s his work on LIGO from the beginning “Developing an Earth -Tides Model for LIGO Interferometers”
https://dcc.ligo.org/public/0029/T990181/000/T990181-00.pdf “The gravitational pull of the Sun and the Moon causes tidal strains on the LIGO interferometers which changes the distance between the mirrors and the largest background effect removed by LIGO’s servo mechanisms”
yus, it seems the servos eliminated the anticipated movement, but movement there was.. as to how much – well, the MENTOR of the program was still waiting for the data..
So while the mathematical constructs and oddly interpreted findings are interesting, much of it doesn’t stack up upon proper logical dissemination in plain English.
Maybe it is not very big.Let us not overlook the possibility that we are unusually small.
Good one!
Well it does take two black holes to break each other apart to form a galaxy or two, I thought NASA believed if you reversed back in time a galaxy would end up as a dust cloud and then condense into a galaxy? lol
Black hole with the mass of 17 billion suns?
Not In My Back Yard!
Sorry, black holes were banned in NY out of an abundance of caution for public health.
Why can’t they get the Governor to go down to the sea and command it to stop rising?
Probably he would retend to have done so twice a day.
When I type into Google “who wants to live in wyoming”, I only get three hits. Am I spelling it wrong?
[actually, I probably would live there, based on the people I met when I visited]
I got 14 million.
“I got 14 million.”
You’re spelling it wrong, G.M. ;o)
I’ve always been a mediocre speller.
I blame spell checker GM 😀
Interesting. I entered it again today, exactly as shown above, and got the same result.
2 more – Obama and wife – just miss the ass word
Talking about astronomically large numbers, here is the problem I have:
Given –
1. Human DNA consists of the 23 Chromosomes, the ~3.1 Billion Base Pairs which have ~56 million total variations. [The variations are not the same for each Chromosome though – Wikipedia has a decent guestimation though.] Although one of my degrees is in Applied Mathematics I would dare not even attempt to calculate the number of iterations, permutations and combinations of those variables.
2. If you were able to buy one lottery ticket every second, it would take you more than nine years to buy every combination. And that’s optimistic: That is based upon the fact that there are 6 choices of 49 numbers, that is over 14 million tickets. However, 14 million is based upon the fact that the number chosen can be in any order, thus you need considerably fewer choices than the theoretical maximum number of combinations to win. The actual number of combinations is expressed by this equation: 49! /(49-6)! This works out to a very large number, 10,068,347,520, over 10 Billion which is about 900 times larger than 14 million. That means it would take you 900 times that 9 years or 8,100 years to write out all of the combinations.
Problem: How many years would it take for first “life” of any “life” on earth that could lead or evolve into Homo sapiens and to evolve to the present life form called Humans? You must assume that the “life form” had a change, mutation, in one or more chromosome(s), that mutated life form lived, procreated, and the process continued. Thus, the gestation period and time to bare off-spring must be accounted for in this calculation. (Approximately 6 months (gestation) and six years (off-spring) for most monkeys.)
I will let you draw your own conclusions about the answer. Keep in mind, Earth is only 4.543+ Billion years old.
Usurbrain,
We have 23 pairs of chromosomes. That’s one pair less than the standard great ape genome, because two small chromosomes are fused in humans to make our Number Two.
Genetics doesn’t work the way you imagine. The whole genome isn’t reshuffled randomly at each and every base pair.
The genomes of various organisms differ in size, but much of every genome is stable, since mutations in certain critical areas are often lethal rather than neutral or beneficial. But OTOH, mutations arise from a variety of causes at each generation. Every human carries an average of about four of them.
It’s possible for a single point mutation, such as by a passing cosmic ray, to make a big difference in evolution, as for instance with the alteration of sugar-eating bacteria into nylon-eating microbes. A major source of genetic variation is duplication, often of the whole genome. That happened at least twice in human evolution. In plants, perhaps as many as 80% of species have evolved in a single generation through such polyploid events. Not all speciation occurs gradually over many generations via natural selection.
It appears that a single mutation caused the rapid increase in brain size in our ancestors about 2.7 million years ago. Millions of years before that, our ancestor’s upright walking probably was facilitated by that gross chromosomal fusion I mentioned.
http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_1.htm
As for the origin of life, which is a different process from evolution, although related, RNA self-assembles in various environments, such as liquid water pockets in ice, and when catalyzed by such ubiquitous organic chemicals as PAHs, out of constituent components common in meteorites, hence on asteroids and throughout the universe.
RNA has the further wonderful property of being both a catalyst for peptide assembly and a storehouse of genetic info, hence being capable of both metabolism and replication. The creation of polypeptides, ie proteins, would have been the next step. Cell membranes are made of two lipid layers which also self-assemble naturally. The next step would have been to DNA replacing RNA in the information storage role, although parasitic retroviruses still use RNA to direct the host cell to make its DNA. Hence, “retro”.
“As for the origin of life, which is a different process from evolution …”
This is just a shell game to me, using the several meanings of the word ‘evolution’ to avoid facing the need for life to have “evolved” from non-life, because there’;s no credible way for that to have have occurred.
“RNA self-assembles in various environments…”
What are talking about? A tiny amount of an acid? You NEED productive CODE to get from non-life to life, not just some traces of (unstable) acid in ice . .
This is the real God of the Gaps in (imaginary) action, I say. The great God of bit by bit . .
Black holes should not be dismissed lightly.
Bruce Cobb on April 11, 2016 at 4:02 pm
Black holes should not be dismissed lightly.
– smile –
Lol no one knows how old the earth is.
It’s just a guess. No body can seriously testify to the earth being 4.5 billion years old and the Universe 13 billion.
All theories atop each other, Relativity, inflation theory, big bang theory, Red Shift theory.
Again I dont have a problem with relativity, only the fantasy world created from the abuse of it.
To give an example of how out of touch with reality theoretical mathematicians can get, they divided mass by 0 to get infinite density. That is far down the rabbit hole, a dead end, a failed equation, and it was called a singularity.
Yes we have moved on, but you dont get to create the theory on hocus pocus and replace it with more plausible sounding maths logic later on.
All these studies are a shot to nothing, because no one can prove them wrong. Reminds me of another field.
*No one can AFFORD to try prove them wrong.
Mark,
The age of the earth is not a guess. It’s an observation. The best material for dating, ie measuring, the age of the earth comes from meteorites, ie asteroids. The results are consistent with the less plentiful material from earth itself and moon. These findings are confirmed by solar observations.
The age of the earth is an educated guess. End of story, it is not an observation, it is born of observations and their interpretations which stem from Relativity, the religiously conceived big bang theory, inflation theory and red shift.
Red Shift is observed, there is no observation that determines the earth’s age, unless we carbon dated some rock from the earth’s core.
You confuse interpreted results as direct observation of a metric
” there is no observation that determines the earth’s age, unless we carbon dated some rock from the earth’s core.”
No, they carbon dated meteorites, and found the age of the stuff left over from the formation of the solar system.
I just laugh and walk away at this guy, Mark, Laugh and walk away.
Gloateus, you’re a patient soul to try and educate this guy, which is clearly not possible. I enjoy your educated comments, thank!
So that’s where my money has gone.
Why is it that regardless of which direction we look — all X, Y, Z axis directions — that the limit of our observations of the Universe is 13.8+ Billion years? How can that be possible? If we see 13.8 Billion light years in any and every direction we look that implies to me that we are in the exact center of the Observable Universe. However, since the Universe is 13.8+ Billion years old, that fact also implies that we are in the exact Physical center of the Universe! How can that be possible? How can the Earth be the center of the Universe? Why do we not have difficulty seeing the “edge”of the Universe in one direction and in essence determine that we have gotten to the end, i.e. “run out of galaxies, stars, etc,” only see the effects (or see more) of the “Big Bang,” etc. in another direction?
Is this another effect of the “Space Time Warp?” Or is this another indication that “Life” is all in our mind?
The age of the universe is guesstimated by at least two factors.
One the rate of expansion aka the Hubble constant. Next how much matter exists in the universe.
I seem to remember that the age of the universe higher in the 1980s. Theories change, new information comes to light.
Also I was told the gravity bends the “space” that light travels through rather then bending the light itself.
michael
But if space time is the fabric, it is a medium between endpoints, if planets must ride this geoces, then so should light.
You cant have it both ways, Gravity to Newton is attractive force between two bodies. relativity says it is a geoces created by one mass, with Newton you need to bodies, with Einstein you need one.
Except there is no gravity when only one mass exists, purely because there is nothing else to detect any gravitational field.
To add, if there is only one mass, there is no physical interactions. It is one homogeneous lump of mass, sucha thing cannot exist it it does not exchange information with anything else, that is physics, information exchange. If nothing exchanges information with it’s surrounding world it does not exist to it’s surrounding world.
So Dark Matter does not exchange information, we cant see it and cant detect it. so for all phsycial intents and purposes it does not exist except in mathematical theory, and as I keep saying, these mathematicians keep making stuff up from maths and applying real physical properties to it. That does not make it real in physical terms, absolutely not.
But there is a big clue for people, when someone tries to explain this, they cant do so without switching to newton, which you cant do because Newton and Einstein disagree. Relativity does not and cannot understand force. So you cant use Newton to explain Einstein’s gravitational propagation and be rational at the same time.
” But if space time is the fabric, it is a medium between endpoints, if planets must ride this geoces, then so should light.”
And it does.
” Except there is no gravity when only one mass exists, purely because there is nothing else to detect any gravitational field.”
You plop a large mass in spacetime and it distorts space. Since there no way to have a single object in the universe, there are other objects to interact with.
Space is a human concept, it is a point, a set of coordinates.
This misconception is how a singularity was created, because a singularity was a point, no volume.
Then someone added physical properties (that were anathema to actual physics)
There is no 4th dimension as I heard space time called, because to travel, you’d need a fourth coordinate in a 4 dimensional space.
Wormholes are just as ludicrous, science fiction. Again follow the maths and it leads you down rabbit holes.
Now people might say we moved on since then, this was only 10 years ago!!
usurbrain on April 11, 2016 at 6:03 pm
Why is it that regardless of which direction we look — all X, Y, Z axis directions — that the limit of our observations of the Universe is 13.8+ Billion years?’
Because the universe expanded, inflated – like a blown up balloon.
It did 13.8 bill years – so that’s the distance in any direction.
And it did NOT expand 2 * 13.8 because speed of light is just 1 times – nothing can happen faster than with speed of light.
” It did 13.8 bill years – so that’s the distance in any direction.
And it did NOT expand 2 * 13.8 because speed of light is just 1 times – nothing can happen faster than with speed of light.”
This is not correct, inflation has expanded space in the time since the time that cmb was created. The visible universe is some 40-150 B lyr in diameter, and since the cmb has a red shift of ~1,100 and the farthest galaxies have a redshift of about 14, it is possible the whole universe if finite is some 700 times bigger.
usurbrain on April 11, 2016 at 6:03 pm
Why is it that regardless of which direction we look — all X, Y, Z axis directions — that the limit of our observations of the Universe is 13.8+ Billion years?’
Because the universe expanded, inflated – like a blown up balloon.
It did 13.8 bill years – so that’s the distance in any direction.
? center everywhere circumference nowhere because it (whatever space is) expanded??
Then that implies the edge is 13,8 Billion light years away from any point in the Universe. Which in turn implies the Universe is infinite.
My point is: If the Earth were on one side of the Universe and the Universe has only existed 13,8 Billion years It would NOT be possible to see now what is 26 Billion light years away! However, Every description I have seen. read, documentary on TV shows material (e.g. the immediate after effects of the Big Bang. The heat of the big bang and the pattern of this “Big Bang heat, etc.) at a distance 13.8 Billion miles from the Earth and explain that it took 13,8 billion years to reach us. Thus the Earth must be in the center. HOW can the Earth be at the center of the Universe? Why is the Earth at the center of the Universe?
” HOW can the Earth be at the center of the Universe? ”
Because the entire universe inflated, and it inflated to a lot bigger than what we can see.
Imagine floating in space, and the space if full of fog, and you have a light that lights up that fog. The space you’re in is 100 light years across, and the only think you know is your not near an edge. Now imagine all of the fog burned off in an instance, while at the same time the space you’re in expands a few billion times.
A year after the fog dissappears, what you would see is the edge of the fog, one light year away in all direction times however much it expanded in that first year, 10 years later the edge of the fog would be 10 light years away, times expansion.
But everywhere you look the fog is the same distance away. And so on.
As long as your are not on the edge (if there’s even an edge at all), no matter where you started in the original volume, you would always look to be in the center.
But hey…they can detect the ‘gravity waves’ from the Big Bang!
Yea, right.
Charles,
No. Scientists have detected gravity waves from black holes much, much younger than the Big Bang.
SOME scientists SAY they’ve detected gravity waves. And as with reams of scientific findings in our times from CERN to relativity to dark red bang shifting matter holes to cometary physics, in a month or six they’ll be correcting themselves.,
I would have to agree with you there!
Some Black hole theory has black holes as eternal, which is diametrically opposed to a big bang universe.
Some big bang universe theory claims infinite universe, other theory says it is finite.
There is no one black hole theory, and no single big bang universe theory, there are several for both and they dont all fit together by their very theories.
How do you have an eternal black hole in a finite linear expanding universe.
Doesn’t add up sorry.
‘SOME scientists SAY they’ve detected gravity waves.’
At the CERN they detected the Higgs Boson, representing gravity. Every atomic particle holds one.
Till today nobody disproved them.
At the CERN they detected the Higgs Boson, representing gravity. Every atomic particle holds one. Till today nobody disproved them.”
Hadron detected what merely manifests as the HB, whatever that may be, however its mass then disproved both the multiverse and big bang universes which tends to punch quite a hole through the king gravity presumption. It’s as if God parked its mass right between the two “scientific” theories. Later the HC was converted into a big bang-disprover – about the time Hawking refuted big bangism for awhile, as I recall – having not exactly found the God Particle in the way practicioners of Magic Science had presumed. The HB could be said to “lend mass” to a universe of particles but that it “represents gravity” is wordplay. It’s just another place-holder for a Force in the pantheon of force phenomena that cannot be proved as “scientific” mechanisms because only their *manifestations* can be somewhat vaguely measured. Through a glass darkly. Apparently the rules change once you go quantum.
” Force in the pantheon of force phenomena that cannot be proved as “scientific” mechanisms because only their *manifestations* can be somewhat vaguely measured. ”
The manifestation of gravity is hardly vague.
“The manifestation of gravity is hardly vague.” Glad you could extract that and make it an issue when my meaning, I thought, was somewhat more illustrative: Gravity IS variable, and it is also a relatively very weak force. Depending on whose theory you prefer, it has the magical property of lightspeed AND nearly instantaneous interaction, and to top it off, nobody knows what it is. Why, it’s almost like it’s quantum, hence vague, at least by understanding…
That was the BICEP2 team, their claims have been retracted.
because they spent so much on the research, they really resisted admitting to be wrong, and even when proven wrong they said they “were not wrong they just over interpreted data” LOL
Now this milti million dollar experiment is claiming success, like there was ever going to be any other outcome.
Another perfect example of this cost vs result, the Quartz Gyroscopes they sent up on satellites, it cost a fortune, and was a failure, the Gyroscopes were subjected to forces unforeseen, and unquantified.
Did they admit failure? no, they adjusted their data for 5 years then claimed success. That is what happens when you spend million and years on a project, scientists just dont want to accept they were wrong and wasted millions of tax payer money.
All of this science is useless junk, we should be focusing our efforts on earth and advancing humanity.
NASA cant even build decent rockets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Richard Feynman said NASA over sold the Challenger shuttle knowing it was a piece of crap, to get more funding, and this maniac science cost the lives of several astronauts
Isn’t it a gray hole?
In any case, they have observed signals, which are mixed with liberal assumptions of uniformity and composition of “space”, in order to infer or interpret them as patterns to fit models.
Science is a frame-based philosophy which implicitly acknowledges that accuracy is inversely proportional to the product of time (or just space) and space offsets from an established reference.
Well it is not grew or black, because no light escapes it has no colour, simply put.
All I’ve ever seen is a model of a black hole !!
When you read stuff like this, it really makes it hard to believe that the universe was created by an “expansion” of sub-atomic particles that wiz in and out of existence, ( and no explanation provided as to where the particles originated).
If E = mc^2 and this one black hole has the mass of 17 billion suns, and now you consider the mass of all the other stars, planets, “dark matter,” dust, black holes, etc., etc., in the universe, which all added up have the mass of ???? billion billion billion suns, the magnitude of “E” required to generate this mass seems, well, too large to be created by an expansion of sub atomic particles that just randomly appear out of nowhere.
Now, I could believe that a super duper large black hole with a mass of say, a few trillion trillion trillion stars literally exploded (maybe it sucked in so much stuff it could not take any more and it just all went to hell) and that created the universe. At least in this scenario, you can imagine enough mass and energy to get things going.
Of course, the question that remains unanswered is “from where did this black hole come?”
“Of course, the question that remains unanswered is “from where did this black hole come”
Indeed, rum this over… https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/04/11/black-hole-with-the-mass-of-17-billion-suns-discovered/comment-page-1/#comment-2188557
I do like commentary on such general science issues on WUWT it’s an eyeopener.
Thankfully what the layman public think and believe is about as meaningless as it gets, science is not a democracy and they don’t get a vote.
Black holes and Gravitational waves are now a fact to the science community and two more detectors will be online next year (Italy (VIRGO) & Japan (KAGRA)) and probably a few more in the years after (India, China??) as every country scrambles to get involved.
The GW observatories are currently being connected to around 72 traditional telescope so they can try and get both GW observation and traditional observation of the same events.
It would have been interesting to be around when Scientists built the first radio telescope and see how many layman accepted that they worked. It might be interesting to ask some of those involved in comments above do they believe radio telescopes work and how do they know?
It will be funny watching the comments from some of those above as there will be report after report in the years to come from these detectors which according to many above don’t work and/or black holes don’t exist. It will be interesting to see how long they hold out or if they hold the faith.
Gravity waves were fact in 2010 and 2012 until they proved not to be, this latest proof will stand or fall in time. I think however it’s a fine thing others are being built as triangulation will help a lot (or eliminate the method as viable.. time will tell)
Re your radio telescope example and laymen, It would also be interesting to review how many scientists at the time did not believe radio telescopes would work 😉
But I know what you mean about faith.. I took the mass of an electron on faith – until I performed a few experiments to determine it’s mass while at university studying physics..
I also took black holes on faith too as so many Great Thinkers appeared to believe in them. Then I developed a few doubts, then I came up with some alternate theories and found others, physicists, felt the same way. I’m still learning as I hope we all are. After all, how many thousands of years was (is) God a fact to the masses?
Karl April 12, 2016 at 12:36 am said
“yus, it seems the servos eliminated the anticipated movement, but movement there was.. as to how much – well, the MENTOR of the program was still waiting for the data..”
That is rather a crazy answer lets give it you in a formal sense that works for sound, electricity or any form of wave you like. We have a high pass filter to a monitoring circuit and you are asking us to tell you what the level of a really low frequency signal before the high pass filter is … HMMM OK.
So lets put your knowledge to the sword. What is the lowest harmonic of the Earth/Moon 28 day cycle that could get past the frequency filter of LIGO at around 1Hz. If the Earth/Moon system is a perfect sine wave like you described it won’t contain any harmonics. So lets make it a square wave the moon now jumps from one side of the earth to the other every 14 days to give us maximum harmonics …. so now calculate how far down the lowest harmonic that can pass the high pass filter.
The harmonics of a square wave is on entry on square wave in wikipedia if you need.
So now lets give you the real problem the detected signal changes frequency rapidly something your harmonic can’t do unless we make the moon jump backward and forward faster at an alternating rate. You see how stupid this gets.
The real answer is LIGO will never give that answer, because a group of smarter people than your so called MENTOR worked out how to remove the problem. You and the Mentor will be waiting until hell freezes over.
If you want to cut fast to an answer it was given in a paper in 2006 look at figure 3
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060014034.pdf
The moon gravitational wave as seen on Earth is shown in Red. The more interesting planetary gravity wave is Deimos which is shown in blue. It is far closer to being able to detected and there are moves to go after that signal.
LBD .. you do know what a mentor is right? the guy who supervises and oversees the program. The team – the LIGO team.. who work under his supervision..
He wrote in the article overseeing LIGO , concluding ” While Melchior’s model has been validated experimentally, there is currently no experimental data to check the model as applied to the LIGO sites at Hanford or Livingston. The Love numbers have an uncertainty of about ten percent. Since they are linear coefficients in the Earth tides model, there is an uncertainty of approximately ten percent in any calculations made with the model… Experimental data will be needed to firmly establish the validity of the model’s predictions for Earth tides at the LIGO sites”
he has some nice graphs showing the period too.. with constructive and destructive oscillations.
By all means, in your theoretical model whack in a high pass filter – but when there *should be* a low frequency signal and you can both calculate it .. and use it to calibrate the device against the signal – why ignore it? That’s like building a clock and deciding you have the period of a second bang on accurate, while totally ignoring the day night cycle and pretending it does not exist.
curious too how you decide on a 14 day period stating ‘the moon now jumps from one side of the earth to the other every 14 days’ .. this planet rotates .. placing the gravitational period wave at considerably less that I read you as suggesting (1 and 1/2 per day seems closer to right 😉
This is actually not true at all, black holes and gravitational waves are still theoretical, sorry.
Remember they “found” gravitational waves already with BICEP2, and it turned out to be bunk, they were not wrong apparently according to the BICEP2 team, they “overinterpreted data” apparently.
But your argument as well as NASA’s falls down on a simple fact, gravity cannot supply the energy to sustain itself, it needs mass. No mass no gravitational field according to Einstein.
Gravitational waves have no mass to create the geoces in space time.
I guess you have not learned from all the theories that have been proven wrong to date, including previous claims of discovering gravitational waves.
Let me point out something which should be obvious, the signal they detected, yes a signal, not black holes, but a signal interpreted through dogma, that signal is so much weaker than foreground gravity that they could not have possibly detected it, you cant detect a signal 1000 times weaker than the noise, unless you A have A Priori knowledge of that signal or you control that signal.
One might wonder how they have removed all the gravitational distortion between earth and the source?
” But your argument as well as NASA’s falls down on a simple fact, gravity cannot supply the energy to sustain itself, it needs mass. No mass no gravitational field according to Einstein.”
You’re wrong, gravity warps space, earth sits in a “slope” in spacetime from the Sun, the Sun sits in a slope of spacetime from the mass of the milky way, the milky way sits in a slope of spacetime with Andromeda and the rest of the local group, ligo detected ripple in spacetime from a pair of orbiting blackholes somewhere in the milky way, who’s ripples had a large disturbance when they collided.
What was detected was a signal, that matched a model of the signal that 2 such massive objects colliding might create.
Now, I do agree that 1 such signal in the noise is still a preliminary confirmation of the science.
Here’s the big difference though, they are not asking all of society to spend 100’s of trillions retooling our energy sources based on such a finding.
The only black hole that exists is the funding one.
I have learned over the years to take all and every part of the standard models of physics and the universe with a pinch of salt.
My inner self rebels against a lot of it.
The national debt was found?