On 24 Apr, 08:40, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > Quasars are believed to be powered by > accretion</wiki/Accretion_(astrophysics)> of > material into supermassive black holes </wiki/Supermassive_black_hole> in > the nuclei of distant galaxies, making these luminous versions of the > general class of objects known as active galaxies </wiki/Active_galaxies>. > Since light can't escape the supermassive black holes that are at the center > of quasars, the escaping energy is actually generated outside the event > horizon </wiki/Event_horizon> by gravitational stresses and immense > friction</wiki/Friction> on > the incoming material.[3] <#cite_note-jstor.org-2> Large central masses (106 > to > 109 Solar masses) have been measured in quasars using 'reverberation > mapping'. Several dozen nearby large galaxies, with no sign of a quasar > nucleus, have been shown to contain a similar central black hole in their > nuclei, so it is thought that all large galaxies have one, but only a small > fraction emit powerful radiation and so are seen as quasars. The matter > accreting onto the black hole is unlikely to fall directly in, but will have > some angular momentum around the black hole that will cause the matter to > collect in an accretion disc </wiki/Accretion_disc>. Quasars may also be > ignited or re-ignited from normal galaxies when infused with a fresh source > of matter. In fact, it has been theorized that a quasar could form as > the Andromeda > galaxy </wiki/Andromeda_galaxy> collides with our own Milky > Way</wiki/Milky_Way> galaxy > in approximately 3-5 billion years >
Thus the concept that quasars may form from the collisions of the central black holes of colliding galaxies. > Most quasars are known to be farther than three billion light-years away. > Although quasars appear faint when viewed from Earth, the fact that they are > visible from so far away means that quasars are the most luminous objects in > the known universe. The quasar that appears brightest in the sky is 3C > 273</wiki/3C_273> in > the constellation </wiki/Constellation> of Virgo</wiki/Virgo_(constellation)>. > It has an average apparent magnitude </wiki/Apparent_magnitude> of 12.8 > (bright enough to be seen through a small telescope </wiki/Telescope>), but > it has an absolute magnitude </wiki/Absolute_magnitude> of -26.7. From a > distance of about 33 light-years </wiki/Light-year>, this object would shine > in the sky about as brightly as our sun </wiki/Sun>. This quasar's > luminosity </wiki/Luminosity> is, therefore, about 2 > trillion</wiki/1000000000000_(number)> (2 > × 1012) times that of our sun, or about 100 times that of the total light of > average giant galaxies like our Milky Way </wiki/Milky_Way>. However, this > assumes the quasar is radiating energy in all directions. An active galactic > nucleus </wiki/Active_galactic_nucleus> can be associated with a powerful > jet of matter and energy; it need not be radiating in all directions. In a > universe containing hundreds of billions of galaxies, most of which had > active nuclei billions of years ago and would be seen located billions of > light-years away, it is statistically certain that thousands of energy jets > are pointed toward us, some more directly than others. In many cases it is > likely that the brighter the quasar, the more directly its jet is aimed at > us. > Agreed! > and i have seen others theories over the years,, and they have also located > in white dwarfs.. and they are not black holes.. > Sorry? Located 'what' in white dwarves? Quasars? I think not. Nor would I expect a black hole to be 'in' a white dwarf, it makes no sense. I think you left something out of that statement somewhere after 'located' and 'in white dwarfs'(sic). Let me know, please, what I missed. Thanks!! > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 2:02 PM, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 23 Apr, 11:07, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Pat you asked what the speed of light has to do with it. actually quite > > a > > > bit.. with a directional speed of the speed of light ,, there is little > > to > > > no light traveling in other directions beyond the event horizon. With > > all > > > light locked into rotation.. there is none avaliable to escape. > > > Allan > > > Yet Quasars seem to be super massive black holes that emit matter/ > > energy. So our empirical observation shows that there must be some > > exception to the rule you describe. What I attempted to do was to > > offer an explanation FOR that exceptional experience. Namely, that, > > deep within such a black hole, there is an area/volume that cannot > > contain any more matter/energy, therefore, it MUST emit any matter > > coming towards that area, as there is no other 'place' for it to go. > > > > On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Pat <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > On 21 Apr, 16:16, Drafterman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 16, 11:44 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello All, > > > > > > I was thinking about quasars this week and what they might be > > and > > > > > > stumbled across something interesting that I thought I might share > > > > > > with you. Firstly, my thought was that a quasar might just be a > > black > > > > > > hole with a white hole at the centre. Probably NOT a new thought, > > but > > > > > > it led me to work out what a white hole MIGHT be. I thought that, > > > > > > perhaps, a white hole is an area of space that is completely > > filled. > > > > > > But how could that happen? Well, if the pressures inside the black > > > > > > hole are strong enough to compress the energy inside to the > > smallest > > > > > > wavelength possible, that of the Planck length, then THAT would > > > > > > completely fill that area of space-time with tiny, but incredibly > > > > > > powerful photons. > > > > > > SO, here's some of the maths: Start with the speed of light: > > > > > > 299,792,458 metres per second. Now, divide that number by the > > Planck > > > > > > length of 1.616252^-35. That comes out to a frequency of > > 1.8548621^ > > > > > > +49 Hz. () Now, assuming that area is a bog-standard "black > > body", > > > > > > it would produce a temperature of 5.3749609522385^+39 degrees > > Kelvin. > > > > > > And THAT, my friends, is, technically, the hottest temperature > > > > > > allowable in this universe and, thus, the opposite end of the > > Kelvin > > > > > > scale. Well, at least the highest temperature one could expect to > > > > > > find in THIS universe. > > > > > > So, if a white hole, as described above, were to exist inside > > a > > > > > > super-massive black hole, when any matter from the black hole's > > > > > > accretion disc fell into the black hole, it would approach the > > white > > > > > > hole and get thrown out at right angles (i.e., the matter would > > spew > > > > > > from the poles, as black holes are spinning) and THAT seems to fit > > the > > > > > > observations we see of what quasars do. Any thoughts, anyone? > > > > > > There is a relationship between quasars and black holes and there > > > > > *may* be a relationship between black holes and white holes (if the > > > > > latter even exists). > > > > > > As matter falls into a black hole, it heats up and emits radiation. > > In > > > > > the case of super-massive blackholes, as is sometimes found in the > > > > > centers of galaxies, this reaction produces a lot of energy which we > > > > > then interpret as quasars. > > > > > > Like black holes, white holes are a theoretical consequence of > > general > > > > > relativity but, unlike black holes, have yet to be empirically > > > > > observed. > > > > > Yup. Just like Hawking Radiation. Shows why he never got a Nobel > > > > Prize. Although, I'm all for giving him a Nobel Prize for Sci-Fi > > > > Literature. His theories are great on paper, just so long as you > > > > completely disregard reality as we know it. At least I try to keep > > > > within the framework. Whereas he demands us to accept that the laws > > > > of physics can break down and sho no evidence of that (example, his > > > > theoretical wavelengths that are shorter than the Planck Length). I > > > > don't care much for singularities, either. Which is why my definition > > > > of a 'white hole' is just an area/volume of space-time that is > > > > completely filled (and in complete accordance with the laws of physics > > > > as we know them), rather than some black hole turned inside-out. > > > > Perhaps white holes haven't been empirically observed because they, as > > > > I purport, only can exist insode of super-massive black holes and the > > > > surrounding blackness prohibits us from observing the whiteness...if > > > > you see what I mean? > > > > > >While there are many hypotheses floating around that > > > > > establish relationships between black holes and white holes (such as > > a > > > > > black hole creating a "Big Bang" which creates another universe which > > > > > would, from its point of view, interpret that as a white hole) I > > > > > haven't seen anything that establishes a direct relationship betwen > > > > > white holes and quasars. From what I've seen the consensus is that > > the > > > > > energy of a quasar comes from *outside* the black hole. > > > > > The truth, I'm afraid, might elude us for some time, as it's bloody > > > > dangerous to get too close to one; plus, they're all fairly far away > > > > and would take scores of generations to reach one, and we just don't > > > > have the technology for that. So we'll have to settle for seeing what > > > > we can see from our relatively safe distance. > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > > > Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > > > [email protected]<minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > > <minds-eye%[email protected]> > > > > . > > > > > > For more options, visit this group athttp:// > > > > groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en. > > > > > > -- > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups > > > > ""Minds Eye"" group. > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
