Gravity waves detected for the first time ever

As I previously said, a very distant galaxy, that has a SMBH at its core in a feeding frenzy, as one would expect at millions or billions of L/years away, hence billions of years ago, getting back to near just post BB.
When they called them quasars, they couldn't even tell a star from a galaxy, because their telescopes were so bad.
 
It doesn't even have to be a suppermassive one. Just a black hole, with a jet.
The jest are theorised to be caused by a rotating charged BH, interacting with the accretion disk, to twist the matter approaching the EH, around via the magnetic field lines, and then up and away at the BH polar regions.
Yes it probably could be a normal stellar BH with jets, but that's not the crux of the debate as I see it.
With QUASARS of course, the SMBH is entirely valid.
 
Having never read that book I have no comment.
You should. It was the best one I ever read on the subject, and you might learn something. Then you can tell the book that it is wrong about everything, instead of me.
 
No, just black hole jets were used to explain quasars. They called them quasars because they didn't know what they were. But, quasars are just black holes with jets.
No, they're accretion disks with jets. Black holes don't have jets.
 
You guys just sound confused about what I said. All I am saying here is that if a suppermassive black hole the size of our solar system can account for all the dark matter in the galaxy, then the average suppermassive black hole would then have to be smaller than that. Not bigger.
You're confusing black holes with dark matter again.
 
I am not confused about it. You are confused about what I said about it. It has been a theoretical possibilities that SMBHs could account for the amount of dark matter in the galaxy. IIf, and that is a big if, it was the only thing responsible for dark matter, then that is how large it would be.
Yes, latter to be more commonly known as just black holes.
You apparently have confused the SMBHs at the centers of galaxies with the theory that dark matter could be black holes in the halo. The halo is outside the visible edges of galaxies, not at the center.
 
Dark matter is a theoretical unknown of an unaccounted for source of gravity. We didn't use to know for sure if black holes existed in the center of galaxies, so it made it a likely candidate for dark matter. If it was the only candidate, then the black hole in the center of the galaxy is the size of our solar system. If it is not the only source of dark matter, then it would be smaller.
 
It means I am raising the BS flag on you, and you are just covering up what you said about spiral dust cloud by saying that black holes can be 60 light years across, which is ridiculous. That galaxy would be sucked into oblivion if that black hole was that big.
http://www.space.com/18668-biggest-black-hole-discovery.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_massive_black_holes

http://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/black-holes/

Considering our solar system is around 4 L/years across from one side to the other, and some SMBH's are thousands of times more massive then our own miserly 3 million solar mass SMBH, then Schneibs is probably correct.
Although I havn't done the maths.

http://www.universetoday.com/104486/how-big-is-our-solar-system/

So maybe you need to eat that BS flag you fly in the name of others. :)
 
Yep. It's true, too. There are accretion disks without black holes. There are even accretion disks with jets without black holes.

Black holes don't have jets.
Mind blown. Wow. So trivial, and yet so amazing. Accretion disk without black holes. Now, that is a new one.
 
Dark matter is a theoretical unknown of an unaccounted for source of gravity. We didn't use to know for sure if black holes existed in the center of galaxies, so it made it a likely candidate for dark matter. If it was the only candidate, then the black hole in the center of the galaxy is the size of our solar system. If it is not the only source of dark matter, then it would be smaller.
Rubbish! :rolleyes:
 
Mind blown. Wow. So trivial, and yet so amazing. Accretion disk without black holes. Now, that is a new one.
Again Schneibs is correct. :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disk

An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffused material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Gravity causes material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material causing the emission ofelectromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those aroundneutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology.[1][2]
 
Back
Top