Black Holes May Mature Early In Galaxy Evolution 63
masterwit writes "From Scientific American: 'An accidental find in a star-forming dwarf galaxy shows that black holes may mature early in galaxy evolution.' Also, 'if giant black holes in star-forming dwarf galaxies prove to be common — that is, if Henize 2-10 is not an outlier but a representative of a larger population — they may have much to tell about the formation of primordial black holes and galaxies in the early universe.'"
what do you mean "if?" (Score:5, Interesting)
The first time astronomers found a supermassive blackhole at the center of a galaxy they decided to check the results against a typical quiet galaxy and found the same thing. The observations continued and it became clear pretty quickly that blackholes in galaxies were common. So common in fact, that I am unaware of a galaxy that didn't have one. The mass of the supermassive blackhole strongly correlates with the mass of the galaxy. A typical galaxy is about 200 times the mass of its supermassive blackhole which suggests a link between supermassive blackhole formation and the creation of galaxies. Whether they act as seeds for a galaxy to form in the first place or are the inevitable result isn't yet clear.
Re:I have heard about black holes and their threat (Score:4, Interesting)
This likely will not affect us in any immediate fashion outside our continued pursuit of knowledge of the universe... but on another note:
Barbie dress up games
Looks like you need to clean up your computer and online browsing settings! (Unless you meant to post that link following your comment)
So are galaxies just black hole accretion disks? (Score:2, Interesting)
n/t
Re:what do you mean "if?" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:black holes don't exist (Score:5, Interesting)
Science is about forming a testable hypothesis, testing it, and looking at the data. If your hypothesis was wrong, admit it and move on to the next thing. Infinite densities are only forbidden in the sense that they don't fit nicely in the models framework, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the model should be shelved. What you are suggesting is throwing away the experimentalists evidence for black holes because it doesn't fit perfectly with our contrived explanations. You're doing it wrong.
Since relativity and bending of light due to space-time curvature has been experimentally confirmed, meaning light's path can be 'changed' in the sense that we view it (it turns out that the light never really 'curves', but instead it follows a straight line in a curved space, but its all relative, right?), what would you call an area of mass so dense in which light could not escape [wikipedia.org]?
Re:black holes don't exist (Score:5, Interesting)
And I recommend you actually deal with what the majority of cosmologists and physicists actually talk about. I know you probably think yourself quite hip by accepting a contrary view, and doubtless contrary views are important, but being contrary just so you can feel yourself superior is the sign of stupidity.
We have a theory that predicts what we ought to detect from a black hole. We have multiple cosmological sources that match that description. Alternative explanations have other serious issues, so, the weight of the evidence is towards the existence of black hole. Beyond that, Einsteinian physics, being classical in nature, will naturally have a number of singularities, which is why we seek to unite classical physics with quantum mechanics, and not simply declare that at every point that classical physics fails that that amounts to "that's impossible!"
This idea of yours that physics is proscriptive, as opposed to descriptive, suggests to me that you are pretty much a scientific illiterate.
[OT] Spam factories (Score:5, Interesting)
Barbie dress up games
Looks like you need to clean up your computer and online browsing settings! (Unless you meant to post that link following your comment)
That was probably one of the manual-labor spam factories that seem to be sprouting like weeds recently -- they pay people to register on a forum, read the forum, and post comments (with spam links, of course) that make just enough sense to attract real readers' attention.
On the one hand, I guess it means that spam-detecting tech has advanced far enough that it's no longer very profitable to send out machine-generated spam. On the other hand, this makes it harder for us humans to tell the difference. (But then again, xkcd [xkcd.com] has a point too.)
Re:black holes don't exist (Score:5, Interesting)
"Infinite densities are only forbidden in the sense that they don't fit nicely in the models framework, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the model should be shelved."
More to the point, one shouldn't mistake the mathematics for the physics. Just because a mathematical model indicates infinite density does in no way imply it need exist physically. For that to happen, the mathematics would have to completely describe the physical situation. It might, but we cannot ever know that. All we can do is claim consistency up to a certain epsilon of measurement.