×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Do Solo Black Holes Roam the Universe?

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the cosmic-nomads-with-eating-disorders dept.

Space 135

sciencehabit writes "Two mysterious bright spots in a disheveled, distant galaxy suggest that astronomers have found the best evidence yet for a supermassive black hole being shoved out of its home. If confirmed, the finding would verify Einstein's theory of general relativity in a region of intense gravity not previously tested. The results would also suggest that some giant black holes roam the universe as invisible free floaters, flung from the galaxies in which they coalesced. Although loner black holes may be an entity that has to be reckoned with, they would still be rare."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

135 comments

YES! And I can prove it... (0, Offtopic)

Shoten (260439) | about 2 years ago | (#40225569)

I was married to one for a while.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225615)

Slashdot used to foster some really insightful discussions. It still does at times, but the fucktard comments far, far outweigh the insightful ones these days. You do know that you get no karma for +1 Funny, right? Not that your comment was terribly funny. It wasn't bad, but I would love to see more first posts that actually spoke to the topic instead of just small penis geeks getting their tiny rocks off.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225657)

I would love to see more first posts that actually spoke to the topic instead of just small penis geeks getting their tiny rocks off.

Not geeks - just hipsters posing as geeks because it's hip to be smart - but lacking the intellect to back their whorish lust for attention within the context they have foolishly chosen.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (2, Insightful)

Shoten (260439) | about 2 years ago | (#40225695)

It's ironic, then, that neither of you have put anything forth to foster the discussion along what you would consider "proper" lines. Oh, and you both posted as ACs, too...

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 2 years ago | (#40228089)

It's ironic, then, that neither of you have put anything forth to foster the discussion along what you would consider "proper" lines.

Having read two comments from you I've yet to discover one single "proper line"

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225809)

Since when has it been hip to be smart? It's hip to *look* smart. *Being* smart will still get you an atomic wedgie (at least until you are able to turn smart into rich - because it is definitely hip to be rich).

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (2)

ichthyoboy (1167379) | about 2 years ago | (#40226419)

And here I thought it was hip to be square... I guess I should stop taking life lessons from Huey Lewis :-(

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40228377)

hahahaha

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

flyneye (84093) | about 2 years ago | (#40228409)

Don't put your life in the hand of a rock and roll band, you'll throw it all away. -- Oasis , Don't Look Back in Anger
Even Huey sings country now.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40229131)

oh man that was good.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (5, Insightful)

The Mighty Buzzard (878441) | about 2 years ago | (#40225691)

Ease off. That was a huge step up from our normal First Posts.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225721)

While true, it also embodies everything worth avoiding about sites such as Reddit. The signal to noise ratio is getting far too out of whack.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (3, Insightful)

Roachie (2180772) | about 2 years ago | (#40227139)

Some guy makes a witty crack, 1 simple, single sentence post.

Then 4000 neckbeards get all pissy about it and chime in to complain about the S/N ratio.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 2 years ago | (#40228119)

Some guy makes a witty crack, 1 simple, single sentence post.

If it's a one-off thing, hey, who is complaining?

Unfortunately, that's not the case

Vast majority of Slashdot articles are laced with mindless fucktard "Foist Post"

I'm getting very, very sick of it !!

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

flyneye (84093) | about 2 years ago | (#40228463)

Dammit, I had +1 laying around here some-damn-where, Someone toss this guy one more for +5 Insightful.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#40226423)

I'm actually surprised that this news post hasn't already sparked more of the racist comments that have shown up here lately.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40228441)

In Soviet Union, first posts YOU, Computers cure PCFIX , Niggers Love You and You moderate Slashdot.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225807)

You do know that you get no karma for +1 Funny, right?

Slashdot isn't some game where you try to score the most karma points. It's a communication forum, and GP wanted to communicate something funny.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (3, Funny)

Tanktalus (794810) | about 2 years ago | (#40226067)

Slashdot isn't some game where you try to score the most karma points.

What? Shit, why have I been wasting all this time here if I can't win?

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (3, Interesting)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | about 2 years ago | (#40226443)

if slashdot isn't a game, then what's up with the achievements? if you don't think it's a game, you are being played. the object of the game is to gain enough karma points that you can troll at will with impunity. mini-games include Make Others Look Stupid, Make Yourself Look Smart, and I'm Sofa King Funny.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

bronney (638318) | about 2 years ago | (#40228535)

The achievement are "psych profile tags" for webdev to quickly categorize us for sale to targetted-ad agencies. Thanks for playing.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

catmistake (814204) | about 2 years ago | (#40228911)

the object of the game is to gain enough karma points that you can troll at will with impunity

I've never been good at games, but I was lucky enough to somehow eternally have excellent karma, regardless of the mod points I have or haven't been awarded. I must say, it is awesome. Though I try not to abuse the privilege, I was recently just awarded my first +3 Troll... didn't last too long, but it felt great. Anyway, welcome to my world.

YMBNH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40227567)

Slashdot isn't some game where you try to score the most karma points

You're so new here that you haven't actually got here yet

Re:YMBNH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40228427)

And you're so new here that you haven't got an account. Neither do I.

If not turning every-damn-thing into a game is wrong, [insert rest of the cliche here].

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225845)

Dude, lighten up. That headline cries out for (mostly bad attempts at) humor.

There should be one about the Eastern District Court of Texas, and how they get their restaurant bills sent to the office...

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1, Insightful)

Nocturnal Deviant (974688) | about 2 years ago | (#40225939)

Well look at his user number...they should have stopped at 1 million and allowed invites only...

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1, Funny)

gmhowell (26755) | about 2 years ago | (#40226095)

Well look at his user number...they should have stopped at 100,000 and allowed invites only...

FTFY.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Nocturnal Deviant (974688) | about 2 years ago | (#40226267)

...I wasn't doing that as a dick swinging contest. More as a "the longer slashdot has gone on, the more idiots have come aboard" It was actually shortly after I joined that I started noticing the downward spiral in comments.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (4, Funny)

Lotana (842533) | about 2 years ago | (#40229203)

It was actually shortly after I joined that I started noticing the downward spiral in comments.

So it was YOU?!

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (5, Insightful)

Loughla (2531696) | about 2 years ago | (#40226453)

Honest Question here - do you really believe that the best way to foster free and open discussion is to severely limit the people that can participate?

Look at my number. It is huge. Yes, I contribute some bullshit every now and then, but I honestly try my best to contribute to this open forum. Why is my number soooo big? Because I chose to lurk first, learn the dynamics and how to do stuff (technical word there), and then post.

It's like this - you want to ride a roller coaster. So, you go to an amusement park. Then you get pissed about waiting in line with the other idiots. What are your options? (a) Build your own rollercoaster; or (b) quit bitching about the line and enjoy the pleasant conversations that do happen, when they happen.

If you are not the owner of a website, who are you to limit, or suggest a limit for that matter, on who can contribute?

Why do I love the internet, and online forums and discussion boards? Because I can hear a...n...y...t...h...i...n...g... on them. If I wanted to have a closed discussion on a topic, I'd go back to yelling at my television. It feels just as good, and is as one-sided as you make it.

In other words, sir or ma'am, I understand that you believe that there were glory days on this site. I'm sure there were. But, limiting who can speak, simply based on how old s/he is comes off as, in my opinion, utter bullshit.

In other words. Learn to ignore the shit. Look for the good. It's there, if you care to be positive. OR, instead of limiting who can post, have a system where you can register your account, but can not contribute until you reach a certain time on the site, or number of articles read paired with time spent reading, or something. I don't know, just quit complaining about it. It's just as annoying as the bullshit posts from user numbers>1,000,000, and contributes nothing to the discussion.

But that is all my opinion. Thank you.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1, Funny)

yurtinus (1590157) | about 2 years ago | (#40226697)

Oh shut up, we all know you've got a three digit UID account. You just made a new one so you could brag about how big your number is.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 2 years ago | (#40228213)

Honest Question here - do you really believe that the best way to foster free and open discussion is to severely limit the people that can participate?

It's not about putting any artificial limit

It's about having users that are courteous enough to not post shit on places like Slashdot

Look, this is not a "community site" like Facebook

This is a site where people are interested in tech, in science, in astronomy, physics etc, sharing information and engage in discussion

There have been too many "First posts" and racist rantings

The noise are overpowering genuine discussions and I can see that users are getting discouraged and many have left

If the Slashdot admin don't do nothing to stop this, Slashdot not be Slashdot anymore
 

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (2)

flyneye (84093) | about 2 years ago | (#40228655)

I can remember worse than this. You gotta figure the number of usual probable participants occupied with "Venus Transit" events, parties and swap meets.

Relax, beer is good, they'll be back.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (2)

Lotana (842533) | about 2 years ago | (#40229271)

There have been too many "First posts" and racist rantings

Honest question: Were you reading Slashdot during the GNAA days?

Honestly, the signal to noise ratio is very good. Trouble is that the signal is no longer tech, but politics. Ever since coverage of 9/11 the community visibly changed. YRO is where all the views are, with tech-oriented articles hardly gets any comments.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

gmhowell (26755) | about 2 years ago | (#40228275)

I only get worked up when newbs arrive with broken sarcasm filters.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 2 years ago | (#40228389)

Many of the oldbies are not coming back

True, some have died, RIP

But those who are still not-yet-dead, many are not coming back to Slashdot due to the shitty "First Post" and the racist-ranting that are overpowering all meaningful discussions

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (2)

flyneye (84093) | about 2 years ago | (#40228555)

Not to interrupt yer moral soapbox special feelings or anything, but my slider to the right says I'm a third down the page and none of you sister boys has said a damn thing pertaining to black holes, galactic feces being flung about, Lawyers, NASA or nothing.

So with that outa the way, I'll introduce a recentish occurence, http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/?IDNumber=PIA13455 [nasa.gov]. I figure if you can venture a ratio of black holes to stars you can figure odds of being affected by one coming our way.

No fear, have a beer. Don't let my low number fool ya baby, No Viagra needed here.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

catmistake (814204) | about 2 years ago | (#40228975)

Honest Question here - do you really believe that the best way to foster free and open discussion is to severely limit the people that can participate?

Well, that is the idea behind representational democracy, and I happen to think it works... uh... well enough. Do you honestly believe that true ideal democracy, Classical-style, is a viable alternative? We have the technology today to actually make it happen even in a society as large as the United States, giving every citizen the ability to have one vote on any consideration on the floor. While a nice idea... I'm not sure it would really work out... I think it would suffer the same deficits that representation democracy suffers from, only on a massive scale, and the rights violations and slipups would also in turn be massive SNAFUs.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (2)

gmhowell (26755) | about 2 years ago | (#40226077)

Ahh, yes, that lovely golden age of slashdot when first posts didn't make fun of exes, but did have recruitment statements for GNAA.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40226573)

Yep, great jokes. The words were the same, it's just that it was a different kind of black hole back then.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Scarletdown (886459) | about 2 years ago | (#40226629)

I would love to see more first posts that actually spoke to the topic instead of just small penis geeks getting their tiny rocks off.

I attempted that a few days ago. Granted, I was going for on topic humorous instead of insightful or informative (something about eating too much space turkey made our galaxy's super massive black hole too lethargic).

Submitted my post, and it was still the only post thus far for the discussion. Hit reload, and it was still the only post. Then a few minutes later, I hit reload again, and it was no longer the first post. For some reason, it was bumped down to 6th position even though it was the only post for a short while.

How did that happen? Doesn't matter really, but it still piqued my curiosity about how postings get prioritized here.

Re:YES! And I can prove it... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40227877)

Oh, shut the fuck up you humorless sack of shit.

We just keep finding more dark matter, no mystery? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225653)

And the other day - turns out tons of hydrogen gas not previously observed in voids. Sooner or later, that obvious bit of "curve over-fitting" that required the mysterious dark matter might just have to go away. That would be cool - it was obviously a bandaid on a cancer in the theory.

Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste (1)

yndrd1984 (730475) | about 2 years ago | (#40226097)

turns out tons of hydrogen gas not previously observed in voids ... the mysterious dark matter might just have to go away

Put your toys away, son. A million, billion, trillion tons wouldn't even show up as a rounding error when it comes to dark matter.

Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste (1)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 2 years ago | (#40227283)

Duh, but that was not the GPs point. They are finding additional %s. Brown dwarfs, extra H2 in the voids etc. Anything is possible, especially something based on 'finaglers constant' (FC=answerwant/answergot) like dark matter.

Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste (3, Informative)

yndrd1984 (730475) | about 2 years ago | (#40227843)

They are finding additional %s. Brown dwarfs, extra H2 in the voids etc.

Right, but none of them have the right properties (no EM interactions, etc) to be dark matter, not to mention that their mass is trivial compared to the amount required.

Anything is possible, especially something based on 'finaglers constant' (FC=answerwant/answergot) like dark matter.

We're a little past that stage. For example, we have observed galaxies colliding in ways that separate the visible mass from the non-visible mass - i.e. the stars, gas etc, interact via EM and slow down, while the majority of the mass (inferred through gravitational lensing) continues on as if it's affected only by gravity. It's hard to ascribe that kind of behavior to dim stars or extra-galactic H2.

Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40227315)

how am I supposed to parse that? As (a million (billion (trillion)))tons or as an expressive statement that not even trillions of tons would count as a rounding error?
    The first one would be (10^6)*(10^9)*(10^12), which is a shitload of tons. The mass of the universe is roughly 3*10^52 to 3*10^54 kg given 1 ton is ~10^3 kilograms that would put that hydrogen as roughly half the mass of the observable universe.
  The second one would be essentially vacuum since those 10^12 tons of gas would be have a density of roughly 1 ton per 9*10^18 LY^3 LY is light year.

Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste (2)

yndrd1984 (730475) | about 2 years ago | (#40227753)

how am I supposed to parse that?

As a joke - albeit one that pointed out that H2 in voids, given our current understanding of course, isn't a candidate for dark matter. Not enough mass, not in the right place, and interacting using photons being three of the main problems with it.

The first one would be (10^6)*(10^9)*(10^12), which is a shitload of tons. The mass of the universe is roughly 3*10^52 to 3*10^54 kg given 1 ton is ~10^3 kilograms that would put that hydrogen as roughly half the mass of the observable universe.

3+6+9+12=30 - so 10^30 kg of H2, or about half of the sun's mass. That's 22 orders of magnitude short, given your own numbers, of being 'half the observable universe' - i.e. not even a rounding error.

Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste (4, Funny)

WCguru42 (1268530) | about 2 years ago | (#40227889)

You obviously don't understand that 10^30 is nowhere near 1/2 of 10^52. It's practically nonexistent on that scale.

Solo black ho's (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225671)

Yes, there is one particular street in my city known for the solo black ho's roaming around there.

You have to ask? (-1, Offtopic)

DigiShaman (671371) | about 2 years ago | (#40225683)

Hell yes they roam the universe. Just look at our national debt. That's one giant black hole right there. So massive the entire world has gotten sucked into the event horizon.

Fantastic (4, Interesting)

dreamchaser (49529) | about 2 years ago | (#40225751)

I find it fascinating that theories developed in the first half of the last century continue to stand up to observation. This fits the predictions of general relativity, and that is almost as exciting as if they discovered something that totally blew away the predictions. The latter would mean we go back to the cutting board, but this is, as I said, almost as exciting. It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

Blowing away the old theories would be better... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225955)

...because the old theories make it WAY too hard to achieve practical interstellar travel and planetary colonization.

Re:Fantastic (1)

yndrd1984 (730475) | about 2 years ago | (#40226149)

It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

I'm gonna guess 'not much'. If there were a lot of them, every once in a while something would run into one, and believe me, we'd notice.

Re:Fantastic (3, Informative)

kanto (1851816) | about 2 years ago | (#40226375)

It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

I'm gonna guess 'not much'. If there were a lot of them, every once in a while something would run into one, and believe me, we'd notice.

If there were lots of them then we'd also see them because of the gravitational lens effect they'd impart.

Re:Fantastic (2)

Gr8Apes (679165) | about 2 years ago | (#40228245)

It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

I'm gonna guess 'not much'. If there were a lot of them, every once in a while something would run into one, and believe me, we'd notice.

If there were lots of them then we'd also see them because of the gravitational lens effect they'd impart.

That would only apply if there were stars on the other side of them (from us) to generate light so that we could see the lens effect. What if these super massive black holes are on the edge of the universe or between the edge and the first lit stars, how would we know? (since the universe is defined by the shockwave expanding outward from the big bang, the other side is considered "nothing" since we have no known measurement or indications of what lies on the other side - think of the universe as a bubble) Heck, while we're pondering, they could be on the other side of the edge, from a previous universe, one that collapsed in on itself and created a new big bang, perhaps even ours. We are just neophytes in understanding our universe, and we certainly do not begin to understand anything outside of it or what was before, we barely think we know what was soon after "the beginning". We cannot even succinctly state if time existed before then, we simply have nothing to observe or measure against.

Re:Fantastic (1)

randall77 (1069956) | about 2 years ago | (#40228867)

> That would only apply if there were stars on the other side of them (from us) to generate light so that we could see the lens effect.

True. That experiment has been done, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_compact_halo_object [wikipedia.org]

There is much wrong with everything else you say. First, black holes can't be only at the edge of the universe. There is no edge - the universe is isotropic, as far as we know. Unless you suggest that the black holes were in the early universe but have somehow vanished over time. But in any case, that is totally irrelevant. We see dark matter effects IN galaxies NEAR us that we can see ALL of. If all the black holes are at the edge of the universe, they aren't affecting the dynamics of the galaxies we can see, and thus can't be cause of the dark matter effect.

Re:Fantastic (2)

Gr8Apes (679165) | about 2 years ago | (#40229065)

There is much wrong with everything else you say. First, black holes can't be only at the edge of the universe. There is no edge - the universe is isotropic, as far as we know. Unless you suggest that the black holes were in the early universe but have somehow vanished over time. But in any case, that is totally irrelevant. We see dark matter effects IN galaxies NEAR us that we can see ALL of. If all the black holes are at the edge of the universe, they aren't affecting the dynamics of the galaxies we can see, and thus can't be cause of the dark matter effect.

Much wrong? Let's start with yours:

Black holes at the edge of the universe - you've been there? You purport to know what happened in the first ms, seconds, minutes, and hours of the universe? Please do enlighten the rest of us. We have absolutely no idea what's further out from the prototype galaxies. We've seen very little if any evidence of the monster stars that gave us all our higher order elements. Each one of those was truly massive, existed for a very short time, and went super nova for lack of a better description, leaving behind... we think, a black hole. Provided of course that the universe started out as a hydrogen plasma as the popular theory has it today and everything was built up through nuclear fusion. I personally am not willing to put a stake in the ground and state that black holes cannot exist beyond the furthest observable galaxies. You may, and you might or might not join a long line of other stake holders (flat earth, earth center of the universe, sun center of the universe, solid earth, etc)

The universe is nearly isotropic [bbc.co.uk]. There are variations. This is not the only reference stating so.

No edge (well, surface actually)? Do you define the universe by the limits of the radiation of the big bang? Or is the universe everything, including things 100 quadrillion light years away, should they exist? I'm curious, because the common definition is everything inside the "edge" (or surface) describing the extent of the big bang, although there are theories that describe things outside our "known" universe. I know the answer to that one is more philosophical at this point, since there is absolutely nothing we can say today about what's even at the limits light has traveled since the big bang. It would all be mere speculation with no way to prove it.

Re:Fantastic (1)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | about 2 years ago | (#40226481)

right. the article did mention that these rogue supermassive black holes are rare. hardly enough to put a dent in the 95% of the universe's "missing" mass.

Re:Fantastic (1)

Loughla (2531696) | about 2 years ago | (#40226503)

believe me, we'd notice.

In the grand scheme of the universe, how long have we been able to notice these things? And, in the grand scheme of the universe, how do we define a lot?

It's all relative, but I'm not an astrophysicist. If there is one in the room, can you please speak up?

Re:Fantastic (1)

yndrd1984 (730475) | about 2 years ago | (#40227987)

In the grand scheme of the universe, how long have we been able to notice these things?

Not for long, but they tend to be obvious. It would be like completely missing a small, dark galaxy that turns hydrogen into X and gamma-rays and distorts the image behind it.

And, in the grand scheme of the universe, how do we define a lot?

Well, since we were talking about them possibly being at least a significant part of the mass of dark matter, I'd say 'a lot' would be enough that they outweigh the visible mass of the universe.

"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? (2)

Greyfox (87712) | about 2 years ago | (#40225771)

You mean, by being sucked into a giant black hole? Unless you have some suggestions on how to make a giant black hole change its course, or how to move your solar system out of the way of a giant roaming black hole, that is...

Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#40226507)

That statement implies that black holes should not be ignored... not that they should be combated.

Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? (1)

Greyfox (87712) | about 2 years ago | (#40228135)

If you have a "problem" black hole, the eventual outcome will be entirely the same whether you ignore it or not! Me, I'm all for hiding my head in the sand and hoping we don't get sucked into a black hole anytime soon. I can't see you, Black Hole! La la la la la!

Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? (2)

boarder8925 (714555) | about 2 years ago | (#40227831)

Sounds like something that could be straight out of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40227881)

Easy. We just need a group of roughnecks led by Bruce Willis and some nuclear warheads. Right?

Solo black hole != Solo supermassive black hole (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225825)

If you mean supermassive, damn well say supermassive; from the headline, anyone would think "Duh, of course they do -- whaddya think happens when a solo star (say, ejected from its galaxy by a close pass) with tens of solar masses collapses..."

Supermassive black holes, generally understood to be found only in galactic cores, are much more interesting.

Do black holes clean their plate? (1)

uslurper (459546) | about 2 years ago | (#40225893)

Couldnt a black hole just consume all the stars in its galaxie to end up a loaner?

Re:Do black holes clean their plate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40225981)

In short: BLACK HOLES DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!

Longer answer: wait for someone with better explanation skills than mine to come along.

Re:Do black holes clean their plate? (4, Informative)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 2 years ago | (#40226281)

No... the stars in a galaxy are orbiting their own collective center of gravity, not the blackhole. It just so happens that this collective center of gravity often attracts enough stars that it collapses into a super massive black hole. The most likely scenario for the blackhole to lose it's galaxy is in a collision with another galaxy (although "Collision" is a bad word since nothing actually hits anything else) The center of mass of the 2 combined galaxies would radically change rather suddenly (in galactic terms) and the Super massive blackhole would begin orbiting the new center of gravity. If it's orbit is too far out, it would get flung off. In most situations stars would get flung out with it. But rarely it could shoot off on it's own.

Re:Do black holes clean their plate? (2)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 2 years ago | (#40226405)

(although "Collision" is a bad word since nothing actually hits anything else)

I like to think of it as merging.

Re:Do black holes clean their plate? (2)

mug funky (910186) | about 2 years ago | (#40227191)

more like a brief merging of heavenly bodies followed by a massive ejection of.. um. stars.

sorry, i was trying to make it filthy but failed to find a plausible way to refer to stars as fluids. i guess they can be modelled as such...

Proving... (0)

grasshoppa (657393) | about 2 years ago | (#40225937)

They can capture the light from a star, but they can't catch a cab.

( sorry )

Re:Proving... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40229175)

hahaha i like your sig, the only reason i know it is you when posting

Rare and dying (1)

dilvish_the_damned (167205) | about 2 years ago | (#40226289)

Although loner black holes may be an entity that has to be reckoned with, they would still be rare."
Without lots of matter to use as a fuel source they would evaporate after a fashion.

Re:Rare and dying (5, Informative)

maroberts (15852) | about 2 years ago | (#40226523)

The theoretical evaporation of black holes is an incredibly slow process; a black hole the mass of the sun would only evaporate after some 10^67 years. which considering the age of the universe is 13x10^9 years (or about 6000 if you're a creationist) means it won't disappear any time soon.

Black holes are hard to see (5, Interesting)

MetricT (128876) | about 2 years ago | (#40226417)

If you were to take the 3 million solar mass black hole in the center of the Milky Way, and plop it into the solar system where the sun is, the Schwartzchild radius would be well within the orbit of Mercury. We wouldn't lose a single planet, though an earth "year" would shrink to roughly 2 hours. Hold your fist at arm's length. That's how big it would appear in the sky.

Now imagine trying to see something like that, from 4 billion light years away, moving faster than galactic escape velocity. The only reason you can see it at *all* is that it's still siphoning galactic gas into its accretion disk. Once it hits intergalactic space, you'll never see it again.

Three million solar masses sounds huge, but is a microscopic fraction of the Milky Way's total mass (1-4 trillion solar masses). Given the quantity of matter orbiting near the center of a galaxy, I'd believe it likely that even if the central black hole were ejected, a new one would form in short (cosmologically speaking) time. So core ejection may not be a one-off, but a common event during galaxy collisions. In which case, there might be enough of them to partly explain dark matter (though certainly not enough to explain it all).

We also know there is a relationship between the mass of the central black hole, and the "tightness" of the arms in a spiral galaxy. But how would core ejection affect this? Given the speed of light, the outer regions of a galaxy would be tightly wound, while the inner region would be loosely wound (after core ejection). Wouldn't that look an awful lot like a barred spiral?

So many interesting questions, so few answers...

Re:Black holes are hard to see (1)

rubycodez (864176) | about 2 years ago | (#40227721)

not lose a single planet? only if you mean cranking up the Earth's kinetic energy to maintain its present orbit. if a straight magical substition happened, the entire solar system's orbits would cross the horizon.

Gravitational lensing against deep field? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40227727)

Solo black holes are hard to see, but supermassive ones flung out fast could have a proper motion detectable by lensing against a deep field background, even when the proper motion of a luminous object at that distance would be far too small to detect. There's a motion magnification vs luminosity tradeoff there.

Although the LSST is aimed at wide rather than deep field acquisition, detection of weak gravitational lensing is one of its many target goals, so the LSST could find the smoking guns and tell deep field observatories where to look.

Re:Black holes are hard to see (2)

Mspangler (770054) | about 2 years ago | (#40228473)

"If you were to take the 3 million solar mass black hole in the center of the Milky Way, and plop it into the solar system where the sun is, the Schwartzchild radius would be well within the orbit of Mercury. We wouldn't lose a single planet, though an earth "year" would shrink to roughly 2 hours."

How high would the tides be? Would the tide just fall into space? Would Earth be outside the Roche radius, or would it disintegrate? If Earth is orbiting at 44% of the speed of light, the meteor shower on the leading face should be pretty intense. Pretty gamma rays instead of pretty lights?

Re:Black holes are hard to see (2)

catmistake (814204) | about 2 years ago | (#40229097)

But how would core ejection affect this?

I can't explain it... and while the science is well understood, in practice it seems to work better than any science can explain, as time and again it has been shown that if you eject the core and fire a few photon torpedos at it, destroying it spectacularly in close proximity to your ship, somehow, even though there really is no shock wave in the vacuum of space to transfer the momentum needed, and even though your WARP drive and main propulsion is now busted, it somehow allows your ship to escape a gravity-well and be on its merry way.

Of course: if stars can be slungshot out (3, Insightful)

yoctology (2622527) | about 2 years ago | (#40226701)

then black holes can be too. We have observed almost a score of so of stars with the 2 million MPH velocity required to escape from a galaxy, which they probably got from proximity to a black hole. There is no reason not to think that a black hole could have the same close orbit. Just much much, rarer.

I'm curious (1)

axlr8or (889713) | about 2 years ago | (#40227387)

Being ejected? Is it possible, that the Black Hole is more like a boat anchor, and the galaxy continues to move on?

Right. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40227713)

Take a look at *this* black hole.

Isn't it funny (1)

Sla$hPot (1189603) | about 2 years ago | (#40227931)

Why can't light escape a black hole while gravity can or at least it's influence.
I know they say that gravity is the curvature of space time, often illustrated by a funnel or a rubber sheet with a heavy metal ball in the center.
But that's a bad example because that is using gravity it self to explain gravity.
Like describing the color red, with a tomato. How do you know that the person next to won't see it as blue.
You can't make a volumetric funnel that leads objects towards the same point in space from all directions.
Things just like to move towards higher spacial densities for some reason.
It's funny that such a fundamental force still today can not be explained.

And they say... (1)

TexVex (669445) | about 2 years ago | (#40228387)

And they say that gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces. Gravity can trap unbelievable amounts of matter until the the heat death of the universe; it can shape the orbits of galaxies that are millions of light-years in diameter; it can create conditions that we simply don't have the math to explain. Gravity is the one force that we don't have a good theory to explain yet.

Pshaw. Gravity sees your Strong Force and raises you a Theory of Everything. :)

Over Eating (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40228659)

Perhaps those bad boys just ate everything in their region. That would leave them lonely and short of a meal.

DEM BLACK HOS BE ALL UP AND DOWN MY HOOD MAN !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#40229213)

So yes, they most certainly do, my good man !!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...