Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Space

Star Spotted Speeding Near Black Hole at Centre of Milky Way (theguardian.com) 99

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
Astronomers have observed a star speeding close to the massive black hole at the centre of the Milky Way for the first time. From a report: The observations, made using the Very Large Telescope in Chile, tracked a star called S2 as it passed through the extreme gravitational field at the heart of our galaxy. As the star approached its nearest point to the black hole on 19 May, it was accelerated to mind-boggling speeds, causing it to be subject to effects predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity. Astronomers had been tracking the star and preparing to make the observations for the past 16 years -- the time taken for the star to complete a single elliptical orbit of the black hole. "We have been preparing intensely for this event over several years, as we wanted to make the most of this unique opportunity to observe general relativistic effects," said Reinhard Genzel of the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics (MPE) in Garching, Germany, who led the international team. The findings can be found here.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Star Spotted Speeding Near Black Hole at Centre of Milky Way More

Star Spotted Speeding Near Black Hole at Centre of Milky Way

Comments Filter:

  • I can see this all ending badly.

  • Wow. Actual news for nerds. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by gordguide ( 307383 ) on Thursday July 26, 2018 @12:00PM (#57013714)

    I don't know what is going on here, somehow /. has managed to post a topic that is something it's members might actually be interested in, instead of squabble-bait. Mods must be off their meds today.

    • What's interesting in the sky with a small telesco (Score:4, Interesting)

      by raymorris ( 2726007 ) on Thursday July 26, 2018 @12:51PM (#57014106) Journal

      Speaking of astronomy being interesting to some here at Slashdot, perhaps some here could suggest things in astronomy that would be interesting to look at with a small telescope?

      My young daughter is very interested in astronomy so I picked up a 114mm reflector telescope off Craigslist. So far we've seen Saturn's rings (which look like one big ring from our location in the suburbs, with that scope), and seen the discs of the other planets.

      There's a lot of light pollution here in the Dallas suburbs and apparently we have to drive an at least an hour to find significantly darker skies. What else can we look at other than the overall color of the planets, and the banding on Jupiter? Any other objects worth seeing?

      --

      A funny story related to this. When I took her outside to look at Saturn, she pointed to a different part of the sky and said "daddy I see Jupiter!" She just turned four years old. How the heck a barely four year old recognizes Jupiter with no assistance, I have no idea. I had to use my sky chart app to confirm she was correct, she had indeed correctly identified Jupiter.

       

      • Re:What's interesting in the sky with a small tele (Score:5, Informative)

        by Geoffrey.landis ( 926948 ) on Thursday July 26, 2018 @01:18PM (#57014332) Homepage

        Don't overlook the moon-- for somebody new to astronomy, the moon is AMAZING.

        Pro tip: DON'T look at the moon when it's full-- the full-on sunlight washes out all the contrast. Look at it first or second quarter.

        This is a great season to spot planets-- you can get Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn in an evening without even staying up very late. Mars, unfortunately, although it's unusually close and bright right now, is in the middle of a hellacious dust storm, so you won't see much features. You should be able to spot the polar cap, though.

        Pro tip: you don't have to wait for sunset to observe Venus. It's actually better to observe it with some skylight, because it's so bright.

        Other than that, if there's light pollution you're not going to seem much in the way of nebulae, but double stars are still interesting. Mizar-- the star at the bend of the Big Dipper-- is easy to find. Some stars where the two components are different colors are interesting. Check this site: https://www.skyandtelescope.co... [skyandtelescope.com]

        • For for all of that. Your comments on Venus and Mars especially were interesting.

          We had our first look at Mars last night, due to her 9:00 PM bed time. It hasn't been visible until late at night. We were a bit disappointed that we didn't see more features, though I knew that since at was near opposition (full moon / full Mars) we wouldn't have the shadows to help us see features. It's good to find out about the dust storm. Maybe we can see more in a month or two.

          Speaking of her bed time, that's also intere

      • While that depends on how easily impressed you are, I'd said there's not a lot to really utterly floor you with, using a small scope, and without the benefit of astrophotography and a motorized equatorial mount, because so few photons arrive to properly stimulate your retinas in real time, particularly the cones which process color. Everything except the moon (which is pretty monochrome anyway), the major planets, and the Orion Nebula will be monochrome. The Orion nebula has a matrix-like greenish tint.
        Whi

        • Thanks for all of that. We'll definitely try looking for the Galilean moons of Jupiter. My 4yo actually said she saw them, but I didn't see them and didn't know they should be visible, so I thought she was wrong.

          This is a weird situation for me - I'm a major nerd, my hobby is studying. Therefore I'm used being "the smartest guy in the room". Finding out my four year old is right I was wrong is weird. She's been doing that lately. She knows all about the dwarf planets. I didn't know there were five of them u

        • Thanks again. I just showed my 4yo the Galilean moons and she was super excited. Even my wife got into it this time.

          Kiddo corrected herself after first identifying one of the moons as Titan. :)

          • You're welcome!
            Kiddo sounds like she's got a future career in astronomy, the Titan whoopsy notwithstanding. I think we can all give her a pass considering she's just 4! That's amazing.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Try M31 (the Andromeda galaxy). I'm not sure how it will appear in the telescope though.
        Stars of different colours, e.g. Rigel (blue) and Betelgeuse (red) in Orion.
        Surface details on the moon.

        A good star chart book should list interesting objects for each constellation. Try checking out galaxies and nebulae. Just one thing to note: Don't expect to see colour except in stars. Nebulae will appear greenish (at least they do to my eye).

      • Try M51 - it's a whirlpool galaxy that can be easily seen from Earth with a small telescope.

    • something it's members might actually be interested in, instead of squabble-bait.

      Don't worry, tomorrow's story will be about Trump announcing the year of the Linux desktop from his Apple phone driving his Tesla to a hyperloop test. Nothing that anyone on here could ever argue about.

    • I don't know what is going on here, somehow /. has managed to post a topic that is something it's members might actually be interested in, instead of squabble-bait.

      Actually, the black hole is a metaphor for Trump, and the star being jerked around it is a metaphor for Congress.

      Sorry, but you got played again.

    • never mind, they managed to purge the summary of any relevant data, filling it with sensationalist 'mind-boggling', 'extreme' and '16 years of preparation'.

  • Albert was right again... (Score:3)

    by bobbied ( 2522392 ) on Thursday July 26, 2018 @12:10PM (#57013804)

    Albert Einstein was right with his theory? Imagine that. I only wish he had lived to see his theories validated like this because he was an exceptional thinker who kept working to within days of his death. He would have loved to see his theories work out such complex problems yet be as simple as they are expressed. I applaud that he was right and I applaud the man, the work ethic and his abilities. We will be lucky to ever know his equal again.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Alypius ( 3606369 )
      We do every once in a while, but their efforts are drowned out by the mob howling [theverge.com] about a shirt his friend made for him.

    • Einstein's theories were thoroughly validated in his own time, but he also made a number of predictions based on those theories, some of which were not verified within his lifetime. And some of what we call "Einstein's predictions" are not predictions by Einstein, but predictions developed by others as a consequence of Einstein's theory. You don't need to weep for Einstein about his predictions based on relativity, you should instead wish that he had managed to discover a theory that explains gravity in te

    • Albert Einstein was right with his theory? Imagine that. I only wish he had lived to see his theories validated like this because he was an exceptional thinker who kept working to within days of his death.

      I understand he was very happy with the observations made during the solar eclipse of 1919. [wikipedia.org]

  • Just go closer to wait less.

  • But the planet Trantor was not so lucky - it got ripped away from the star and crossed the event horizon a few days ago.

  • Now... they should have taken advantage of the wording in the story. Instead of "mind-boggling speeds" it should have been "astronomical speeds". Or, "faster than your standard astronomical speeds". Or something.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Ludicrous speed?

    • 8000 km/s for star is mind boggling. To accellerate a star even a tiny bit uses phenomenal amounts of energy.

      • Is my math right, 2.67% the speed of light? Holy shit!

        From the article:

        As the star made its closest approach to the black hole, at a distance about 120 times the distance between Earth and the sun, it reached a speed of 8,000km/s, or 2.7% of the speed of light.

        I wonder what the mass of that star is. Because the formula for kinetic energy has a square of velocity as one of its factors. It's going to be an insane amount of Joules.
        Kinetic Energy = (m * v^2) / 2

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by meglon ( 1001833 )
          It's estimated to be about 14 solar masses.
    • Would you be OK with "near-plaid"?

    • Now... they should have taken advantage of the wording in the story. Instead of "mind-boggling speeds" it should have been "astronomical speeds". Or, "faster than your standard astronomical speeds". Or something.

      Helmet: "Prepare for ludicrous speed!"

      Sandurz: "But Sir!" ....

      Woooshhh!

      Lone Star: "What was that!"

      Barf: "They've gone to plaid!

  • Who names these things? (Score:3)

    by drew_kime ( 303965 ) on Thursday July 26, 2018 @01:33PM (#57014444) Journal

    "Very Large Telescope"

    I suppose the next will be the "Quite Big, Actually, Telescope".

    • "Very Large Telescope"

      I suppose the next will be the "Quite Big, Actually, Telescope".

      That's a very British sounding telescope. The only Britisher telescope would be the "Oh my, that's rather large, innit, Telescope".

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      "Very Large Telescope" - I suppose the next will be the "Quite Big, Actually, Telescope".

      I got the biggest scope, believe me! I and I alone invented the most tremendous scope the entire galaxy has ever seen. It's even bigger than the objects it observes. So jealous, they are. I can see Russia from Mar-a-Lago and wave to my good buddy Putie! Look, he's wearing Bob Kraft's Superbowl ring; isn't that something. Phones are for looosers with puny scopes. So little & sad. #MSGA!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by SeaFox ( 739806 )

      Probably the same people who named the Large Hadron Collider.

  • Star Spotted Speeding Near Black Hole at Centre of Milky Way

    It was going so fast it dislodged the last two letters in "center."

    We fought a whole war, and traveled across an icy Delaware River on Christmas night to murder people who spell "center" wrong. And no, the trunk of a car is not a boot.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dryeo ( 100693 )

      We fought a whole war, and traveled across an icy Delaware River on Christmas night to murder people who spell "center" wrong.

      Is that when you started murdering your allies? Those damned French, not spelling their own work correctly and helping your war.

      And no, the trunk of a car is not a boot.

      Now that's true, the rear of a car is definitely related to an elephants nose.

      • Is that when you started murdering your allies?

        The British soldiers stationed in the colonists' homes, where the the colonists were taxed without representation and denied their ability to defend themselves or manufacture their own finished goods ... those were not "allies." And that's kinda the point, right?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dryeo ( 100693 )

          You said "murder people who spell "center" wrong." which wasn't the English. Besides Americans don't believe in letting others do those other things. Lots of people in America who are taxed without representation, at that your whole system seems to be setup to not allow various people representation, including many citizens. yYou've been making trade agreements that screw up other countries manufacturing and continue to do it and then there are all the people who you do your best to not allow to defend them

  • It's not the first time the star has been seen, it's been tracked for decades. What's new (the first time seen) is the confirmation of Einstein's GR prediction of change in redshift as the star got closer to the black hole (doppler effect). It matched exactly what was predicted. Once again (as always), Einstein's GR is confirmed correct.... THAT is how scientists do theory.

  • Okay, General Relativity makes it an impossibility to exceed the speed of light because the mass of an object increases as it near's C. Since the mass increases, the amount of energy/force required to accelerate it further also increases -- wash, rinse, repeat.

    Clearly, at some stage (due to the increasing mass of the object), the force required to exceed C becomes infinite(?) and therefore C can not be exceeded under any circumstances.

    But how does this work when the force is provided by gravity?

    Galileo pr

    • General Relativity makes it an impossibility to exceed the speed of light

      Special relativity did it first.

    • at some stage (due to the increasing mass of the object), the force required to exceed C becomes infinite

      There is no such thing as exceeding C, a universal constant. And you don't need to talk about "some stage", we know exactly at which velocity mass becomes infinite: infinity. So accelerating a mass to C requires infinite energy, which is why only a massless particle may travel at exactly C. (And there is only one such massless particle, the photon, that can do it. The only other massless particle, the gluon, is confined to the atomic nucleus, which has mass.)

      if a gravitational field (such as that of a black hole) is creating an acceleration of x meters per second per second, an object should continue to accelerate to and beyond the speed of light

      Where do you get this "beyond the speed of light

    • Galileo pretty much proved that the acceleration of a mass by gravity is unaffected by the magnitude of that mass.

      Galileo was superseded by Newton, [wikipedia.org] and Newton by Einstein.

      Mass is a factor when dealing with large masses at large distances. The earth is too big and we are too close to it to consider everyday objects to be significant.

      To summarize, the laws of physics you are using are simplified and apply only on the earth's surface. On an astronomical scale, more complexity is required.

  • Mind boggling, really? For me, 300 MPH is mind boggling... my mind would absolutely boggle if I could get up to that on the freeway. Mind boggling is really not a term that belongs in a Slashdot summary. It doesn't tell us much. Our minds are sufficiently boggled by matter travelling at relativistic speeds, thank you, could you please say it that way? Oh I forgot, the editor just cut and pasted this from the original article, which was aimed at knuckledraggers.

Slashdot Top Deals

C makes it easy for you to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes that harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg. -- Bjarne Stroustrup

Close