Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
But I wasnt able to figure out where the sun and where the black hole is in that video....some arrows + explanation would be nice. Universe ... crazy thing.
Right at the beginning, look at the left side. The little white dot which is moving is the sun, and the blackhole is that little blue dot. The white dot (the sun) moves to the blue dot(the black hole) and gets ripped apart. Actually most of the sun is eaten by the blackhole. The rest you can see in red color is the rest of the sun. I hope the explanation was ok Actually the black hole is black, so you can't see it. I think they made the position blue just for us to know where its exact position is.
By the way, in the center of our milky way, is a giant black hole with the mass of several millions suns. But it is more or less quite there at the moment , because the black hole has nothing to eat at the moment. But it will change in the future
btw, doit, do you know Harald Lesch? His videos are amazing. He explains many things about the universe in a very easy and cool way. Look up some videos
For the first time, astronomers could observe a black hole eating a sun LIVE (probably a giant red sun)
Sure that's not just a computer simulation vs an OBSERVATION??? If is is an observation where did it occur and when was it observed? Also, what proof is there that the massive object is not something other then a black hole such as nuetron star or white dwarf or other? Far as I know black hole existance is still mathematical model based theory, NOT an observable fact of nature (that is until we observe an event horizon devouring accretion material). Also at the center of ours and other galaxies, the theoretical "super massive black hole" might actually be tons of black holes orbiting a common center of gravity rather then a single object. Because of the incredible distances true observation of these events are technologically a long ways off for us....or so I assumed.
Of course this is a computer simulation. The galaxy in which this black hole is , is 2.7 Billion light years away. It was observed in this year and the data just went public But the data is the same as shown in this simulation, so this is not just a made up simulation The black hole is a super massive black hole like the one in the center of our milky way.
As for the proof for black holes: Astronomers have looked inside our own galaxy and followed the movement of some stars right in the center of our galaxy. Check out this video
So there in the middle must be a black hole, otherwise the movement of those stars wouldn't be like that. There must be something invisible with the power of gravitation of millions of suns. And the only explanation is a black hole
Ricardo, Please don't get in the way of fantasy with your logic. Next thing you could be debunking conspiracy theories about all kinds of things proven by science!
what do you mean with fantasy estabanana? is it fantasy that the big bang happened? in such a world where big bang happens, what is a black hole in comparison? nothing special. just another thing we don't understand, but is there
Arash, I have a natural sciences grounding from college, Oceanography, Geology, Paleontology, Anthropology......blah blah - I'm being sarcastic because I hear otherwise smart people saying crazy stuff every day about the environment or science.
I'm sarcastic not because I think I'm superior, but because it stuns and scares me that everyone from elected officials to people I see everyday make dangerous and ignorant pronouncements about science without even knowing how scientific method works, or peer reviewed journals etc.
I was only meaning to say Ricardo applies logic.....and kills the fantasy speculation. But he really went at it.....
Excuse my sarcasm and back to your regularly scheduled Black Holes.....
Also at the center of ours and other galaxies, the theoretical "super massive black hole" might actually be tons of black holes orbiting a common center of gravity rather then a single object.
"tons of black holes" First you say there is no proof for black holes, then you say there could be tons of (little) ones?
It doesn't make any difference how big a black hole is. If there are many little ones, big ones are also possible
Arash, I have a natural sciences grounding from college, Oceanography, Geology, Paleontology, Anthropology......blah blah - I'm being sarcastic because I hear otherwise smart people saying crazy stuff every day about the environment or science.
I'm sarcastic not because I think I'm superior, but because it stuns and scares me that everyone from elected officials to people I see everyday make dangerous and ignorant pronouncements about science without even knowing how scientific method works, or peer reviewed journals etc.
I was only meaning to say Ricardo applies logic.....and kills the fantasy speculation. But he really went at it.....
Excuse my sarcasm and back to your regularly scheduled Black Holes.....
I don't know what you mean with "dangerous" pronouncements.
Hundreds of years ago, people thought we are the center of the world. Today we know with proof that there are billions of (visible) galaxies, each containing billions of stars, each of this stars could have planets (and in fact we found many planets). In such a world there is everything possible. We have proof for Quasars, Magnetars, Pulsars, etc. So a black hole is nothing impossible and i am pretty sure we will have (visible) proof in some years
I don't know what you mean with "dangerous" pronouncements.
Hundreds of years ago, people thought we are the center of the world. Today we know with proof that there are billions of (visible) galaxies, each containing billions of stars, each of this stars could have planets (and in fact we found many planets). In such a world there is everything possible. We have proof for Quasars, Magnetars, Pulsars, etc. So a black hole is nothing impossible and i am pretty sure we will have (visible) proof in some years
Arash,
I agree with you here. What I'm saying is that despite all this information and scientific inquiry we are still living in a world of people who will use this information in ignorance or to keep other ignorant.
Case in point is the way American politicians and or conspiracy theorists twist scientific fact and inquiry to suit their own agendas. An example would be Sarah Palin running for vice president in 2008 going around saying that global warming science is "junk science". Many people in America will accept that at face value and believe it.
I think we are on that same side of the issue of science. I'm explaining that here there is a popular current of people in power, whether it be media or political, who manipulate the image of science to make science appear to be elitist. They exploit an idea planted by some political factions that intellectual inquiry is not to be trusted. Or worse, conspiracy theorist who use science in a non objective way to put forth a paranoid agenda about the government.
I see you live in Germany and perhaps these types of anti science rhetorical shenanigans have not been a problem there in recent years. Here in the U.S. it has been a problem because it has become a political issue whether or not to actually believe in scientific method or to respect scientific inquiry. We have lots of media bloviators ( Rush Limbaugh for example, one of the prime idiots and cultural underminers in our entire history as a nation.) who would like to take those NOVA science programs off the air if they are publicly funded.
There are those in people in this country who would like to see defunding of general public access to good credible science programming on television. To me as an American that is undermining the reasons and culture that allowed us to thrive so much in the 20th century. It concerns me as an American who grew up watching both science programming, the American space science programs and Sci-Fi on TV to see science being taken out of context or misunderstood for political reasons. It scares me, it concerns me and as a remedy to my fears, I get sarcastic about it from time to time.
The photo is for an episode of Star Trek from around 1968, I remember watching this on TV as a child. it was a time when on one channel you could have watched Star Trek and on another channel an Apollo moon orbit or landing. We understood the importance of science as a country then and we looked forward to science in our future. We could discern between science fiction and scientific research, and we often used the science fiction programs like thought experiments. Then the thought was: What if we really could use satellites to transmit communications? And now we have it.
The photo of the horn shaped object is a still from an episode of Star Trek called The Doomsday Machine. It's a pretty famous episode because it was so outlandish, yet it had us pinned to edges of our seats. This horn shaped thing went around swallowing galaxies and destroying worlds, it was terrifying, and funny. It was classic science fiction. the Doomsday thing was a paper maiche' cone about three feet long, a model that was filmed to look like a planet killer. At about the same time that was being filmed for a Star Trek episode in 1968 there was a small minority of people who were saying the actual U.S. space program was also being filmed on a sound stage as government propaganda. Seriously. At the time we laughed it off, but it represented a form of anti science paranoia that still has a small foot hold in the popular consciousness.
I don't know all the reasons why there is a strain of science denouncing culture here. Some left leaning people will tell you it was fabricated and foisted on the country by the right. But it is more complex than that. We have long history, or short history, of science having to fight its way into public acceptance. We had a national spectacle of a criminal trial in the 1920's when a science teacher was harassed and brought up on charges for teaching evolution in public schools. By the time I was in grade school in the early 1970's this was a passe' issue. Oh yes we thought back then, we did have those backward thinkers who were afraid of scientific inquiry, but today in 1972 we are on the moon, Mark Spitz has won seven gold medals in swimming in Munich and Dr. Louis Leakey has shown us our ancestral fossils in Olduvai Gorge. The Scopes Monkey trial of the 1920's was water under the bridge, we were on the verge of launching the 21st century.
Enter Sarah Palin and other factions in Congress who want to defund public science education on public television....because some home schooling paranoids who vote for them want to make sure their children learn about their God first, and that their God is more important than the intellectual health of the nation.
I guess I'm not really scared, but vigilant, and occasionally sarcastic that science is not taken seriously enough in America today. If the country backslid into having to go through more versions of the Scopes Monkey trial, and this has happened in California in the 1990's, it makes one wonder just how many steps back we could be pushed until we became even mild type of political theocracy. Can you think of any countries that backslid into theocracy in the last 35 years? Countries that formerly were well rooted in modern scientific principle?
I'm not saying be paranoid, just watchful. if that is not too mystical that is the longest stretch of words I've ever used to explain a joke. Did you finally get the punch line?
btw, doit, do you know Harald Lesch? His videos are amazing. He explains many things about the universe in a very easy and cool way. Look up some videos
I will. The universe was always somehow very interesting to me.
Estabanana, first thanks for explaining. Sorry i am not american so some things i didn't know. Now i understand you.
yeah, well things seam to be different in US. For instance i saw a documentary about Creationists in US. It was shocking. Seams like a huge percentage of americans believe in that. (i mean that god created the world in 7 days and that there was no evolution, etc) But i don't blame politicians or conspiracy theorists. Its the people who (want?) to be stupid and ignorant. If you are really after science, you can learn it , from everywhere, without watching **** tv. US is really a mystery to me. It has the best scientists in the world and also the most stupid people in the world. A country full of contrasts.
Of course i know those countries you mentioned. One of them my country. I don't want to defend shah or something, he was probably a dictator too, but at least we didn't have religious motherf.kers with an IQ of 16 points. But at least we fight against them, americans don't fight anymore. They are happy
btw, doit, do you know Harald Lesch? His videos are amazing. He explains many things about the universe in a very easy and cool way. Look up some videos
I will. The universe was always somehow very interesting to me.
It is probably the most interesting thing in the world. I am astonished that not everyone is interested in it. Because there are the only unsolved mysteries in the world.
Of course this is a computer simulation. The galaxy in which this black hole is , is 2.7 Billion light years away. It was observed in this year and the data just went public But the data is the same as shown in this simulation, so this is not just a made up simulation The black hole is a super massive black hole like the one in the center of our milky way.
As for the proof for black holes: Astronomers have looked inside our own galaxy and followed the movement of some stars right in the center of our galaxy. Check out this video
So there in the middle must be a black hole, otherwise the movement of those stars wouldn't be like that. There must be something invisible with the power of gravitation of millions of suns. And the only explanation is a black hole
Dont get me wrong man, I like the idea of black holes and all implications, but my point is the language used is mis leading "must" for example if very definitive and factual sounding. IN your vid at 12:11 the narrator admits that it CAN be argued that non wobble is not proof of a black hole existing. There are so many unknowns and history shows that observation often changes our view of the universe. My point is to be careful with the language we use sharing things like this SIMULATION OF DATA.
A black hole does not exisit without a singularity. That is what defines the thing. A singularity however is a non logical concept in physics and math. So there is a problem....same problem we have with Standard Model vs General Relativity, the mysterious dark matter that (coincidentally relates to methods of "prooving" black holes exist) is assumed to exist due to gravity effects, dark engergy that is governing the expanse of universe, etc etc....by percentages I say we actually understand about 10% of what is going on with the universe. 90% of "darkness" and mystery to be revealed in the future is the potential. Merging concepts of partical physics with Comsmological effects of gravity is the key to filling in some important blanks, and gets to the heart of what defines a black hole as an actual object in our reality. At present, there are just so many discrepancies. Telescopic viewing of an actual event horizon will help to know if were are even on the right track. Mean while we should still be careful using terms like "it can't be anything else, MUST be black hole" IMO.
Here's one funny thing, there is a Creation Museum in Kentucky that we mainly laugh at, but it is kinda sad. They have exhibits which show man and dinosaurs living in the same geologic epoch. Here are some nice "vegetarian"raptors and an early human in one of the exhibits. Pure anthropologic fiction, but this is taken seriously by several million Americans.
I feel so sorry for children who get indoctrinated with this misinformation. My own grandmother was a born again christian who spoke in tongues and when to Pentacostal churches. As a child I had an interst in dinosaurs and early humans, I went on school trips to archeological digs in the California desert. Even my grandmother, (who was really a Jew!) had the wisdom in that era of the 1960's and 70's to tell me to explore my own ideas about the relationship between the bible and the fossil record and science. In other words I was to come to my own conclusions based on my own free will. Today I see many parents of children who grow up in fundamentalist christian homes that do not have these choices.
Not long ago I talked with a childhood friend who told me she did not agree with my views about the age of the Earth. It had come up in conversation that she had visited the Grand Canyon. The conversation veered to geology and somehow we got on the topic of the age of the grand Canyon. I can tell you she told me in all earnestness that the Grand Canyon in the range of 5000 years old, because she had studied the reports and teaching of modern born again Christian scholars who have dated the Grand Canyon by events in the bible. First I laughed my head off and then I realized she was serious. She then told me her children go to a christian school and that they have studied the same information. She said she would love for me to debate her children on the topic of the age of the Earth. She said her children were very intelligent high school age kids and liked to debate this topic with non believers.
I declined of course. I could only imagine that these debate scenarios are pre scripted designed to anticipate a person who has a normal scientific public school education.
I agree with Ricardo that language is important when explaining science. You have to keep in mind how scientific method works when you express something. Scientific language tends to be spoken in the passive rather than the active. Before you should say something is absolute it has to be proven by a repeatable experiment. The language should be - The working theory is- or: we speculate because we have observed this...otherwise you are asking the other person to have faith in your inquiry instead of allowing them to come to a conclusion based on exposition of facts. The Creation Museum in Kentucky is not a science museum because it is not based in following the objectivity of scientific method.
I had an astronomy teacher who once caught the great Carl Sagan in a momentary scientific faux pas: I don't remember the context, Sagan offhandedly stated evolution is fact, Homer, my teacher corrected the statement by saying evolution is a theory. Even in science things that look pretty darned certain should not be taken as unquestioned fact. Which is ironic because that concept of always looking objectively, even at things we take as "scientific truths" or a priori ideas, is one of the entry points for those who want to manipulate scientific work to their own agenda.
Not to steer the conversation from astrophysics... back to Red Giants.
I can tell you she told me in all earnestness that the Grand Canyon in the range of 5000 years old, because she had studied the reports and teaching of modern born again Christian scholars who have dated the Grand Canyon by events in the bible.
The ignorance of such people knows no bounds. They are fond of saying that the Theory of Evolution is just that, a "theory." They do not understand the difference between a "theory," which has withstood repeated testing, registering the same result without exception, and "hypothesis," which is what the ignorant mean when they say "theory."
Unfortunately, we have many school boards in the States who, either because they actually believe it or because they are spineless in the face of fundamentalists, dictate that "creationism" must be taught alongside evolution, under the laughable assumption that both are equally valid "theories."
And we wonder why our high school students trail much of the advanced world in science!
Cheers (although not much to be cheerful about on this subject!)
Bill
_____________________________
And the end of the fight is a tombstone white, With the name of the late deceased, And the epitaph drear, "A fool lies here, Who tried to hustle the East."
ORIGINAL: Ricardo A black hole does not exisit without a singularity. That is what defines the thing. A singularity however is a non logical concept in physics and math.
Ummm...not exactly. Counter-intuitive in some respects, perhaps, but not "non-logical".
My high school trigonometry teacher didn't talk much about it, but there are singularities in the tangent function at intervals of n*pi/2 where n is an odd integer. More interestingly, much of the theory of functions of a complex variable deals with singularities in a perfectly rigorous and logical way. Much of this was developed in the 19th century.
The existence of a singularity at the center of a black hole leads to some conclusions that may be quite foreign to our ordinary experience, but so do relativity and quantum mechanics--both rigorously logical theories. In fact it is logic that leads us to counter-intuitive conclusions that, in the case of relativity and quantum mechanics, have been verified experimentally.
So far, the interiors of black holes--if indeed they exist--have been inaccessible to experiment.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread