The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: 50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !  (Read 40596 times)

Offline erickejah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Parking? I make my own parking spot!!
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #100 on: 25/03/2009 15:48:19 »
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe






Scientists have determined the mass of the largest things that could possibly exist in our universe.  New results have placed an upper limit on the current size of black holes - and at fifty billion suns it's pretty damn big.  That's a hundred thousand tredagrams, and you'll never get the chance to use that word in relation to anything else.

Black holes are regions of space where matter is so dense that regular physics just breaks down.  You might think physical laws are immutable - you can't get out of gravitational attraction the same way you can get out of a speeding ticket - but beyond a certain level laws which determine how matter is regulated are simply overloaded and material is crushed down into something that's less an object and more a region of altered space.

While there's theoretically no upper limit on how big a black hole can be, there are hard limits on how big they could have become by now.  The universe has only existed for a finite amount of time, and even the most voracious black hole can only suck in matter at a certain rate.  The bigger the black hole, the bigger the gravitational field and the faster it can pull in matter - but that same huge gravitational gradient means that the same matter can release huge amounts of radiation as it falls, blasting other matter further away.

Based on this self-regulating maximum rate, scientists at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Massachusetts, and the European Southern Observatory, Chile, have calculated an upper limit for these mega-mammoth masses.  Fifty billion suns, that's 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 kg, otherwise known as "ridiculously stupidly big" and triple the size of the largest observed black hole, OJ 287.

There are potential problems with this calculation.  Based as it is on the radiation outflow from a black hole, new discoveries could change this estimate - though only from "insanely massive" to "ridiculously ginormous."

Source: the Daily Galaxy

so if we use the mass of the blackhole(M) and the mass of the sun(m) put it into that formula tadadata = the force of gravity, and by having this we might calculate the time that will take the sun to get there. And since the distance from the earth to the sun is almost nothing compare to the distance from the sun to the black hole (assumption ::)) we will get there ~ the same time. :D :D and since that black hole has the biggest force of attraction nothing else would be in our way . ::) or does the time changes because of the speed?? idk Im confuse now [V]
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #101 on: 25/03/2009 17:59:23 »
You mean that by calculating the gravitational force between the sun and Earth we will find out how fast it would take us in time to get to, let's say, our closest BH?
I'm not sure how you think here. So, I'll guess if that's ok with you:)

Are you looking at gravity as a 'propagating force'?
And wondering of how big a black hole would need to be to have the same 'gravitational force' relative Earth, and perhaps if it then would take the same approximate time, as seen from the frame of someone traveling, to get from Earth to that BH (black hole).

To me gravity is what creates the 'geometry' in our 'three dimensions' of 'space', and the least 'energy craving' path would then define the shortest to my eyes. That's how the photons seems to travel as they 'bend' around great masses.

So when you calculate that 'gravitational force' you are in fact looking on how 'space wrinkles'. To have a black hole or a quasar that strong would be quite a feat, and we would all 'fall' into it. We are in fact traveling towards something called the "Great Attractor" at a breakneck speed of 22 million kilometers (14 million miles) per hour. That's our Milky Way traveling btw with tens of thousands of other galaxies too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Attractor

If it is this you were thinking of:)
« Last Edit: 25/03/2009 18:03:20 by yor_on »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #102 on: 25/03/2009 18:58:51 »
I may have got it all backwards then?

Sorry LeeE, I got the impression that you said that the in-falling observer wouldn't get past that EV? But here you seem to say exactly the same as I think too "from their point of view, they will seem to be running at 'normal' time " and so they will, as seen from their frame of reference, just keep falling in. What I reacted on was the statement that "t = 0" at the eventhorizon. How exactly do you see that idea?

Yes, they'll think that time is running normally for them, but at the point where t0 = 0, they'll stop thinking; their rate of thinking will slow and stop, so they won't be aware that they've stopped thinking.
......
....

I think this just actually complicates the issue though.  The actual reason that I think they couldn't reach the event horizon is that it may be infinitely far away in spatial terms, regardless of how time-dilation effects the relative energy that's seen to be expended, say by a battery powered light inside the craft, by both the local and distant observers. 

....
...

Ok LeeE:)
I thought that it was this you said after all, but still, isn't that just a measure of what coordinate system you use? In this one you are using 'Scwarzschild coordinate time' where as you say, according to the equation(s), time will stop to 'zero' at the EV. But it seems to exist other coordinate systems too? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullstrand-Painlev%C3%A9_coordinates.
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #103 on: 25/03/2009 21:19:12 »
I'm not familiar with Gullstrand-Painlev coordinate systems - interesting name though - but as there's an absolute difference in the elapsed durations if the clocks are reconciled when the traveling clock returns to the same reference-frame as the observer, I can't see it making much difference because whatever coordinate system they're in, it will apply to both but won't cancel the difference.

I might have misunderstood you there though.
 

Offline erickejah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Parking? I make my own parking spot!!
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #104 on: 26/03/2009 02:36:50 »
You mean that by calculating the gravitational force between the sun and Earth we will find out how fast it would take us in time to get to, let's say, our closest BH?
I'm not sure how you think here. So, I'll guess if that's ok with you:)

I meant to say that we will be suck by that BH around the same time that the sun(yeah rigth  ;D). idk if we can apply the free falling equations when talking about planets, but if we can get the gravity from the BH-Sun and use it instead of 9.8m/s^2 we can calculated the time in which the sun will bounce the floor(BH).  ::)
Are you looking at gravity as a 'propagating force'?
And wondering of how big a black hole would need to be to have the same 'gravitational force' relative Earth, and perhaps if it then would take the same approximate time, as seen from the frame of someone traveling, to get from Earth to that BH (black hole).

no
So when you calculate that 'gravitational force' you are in fact looking on how 'space wrinkles'. To have a black hole or a quasar that strong would be quite a feat, and we would all 'fall' into it. We are in fact traveling towards something called the "Great Attractor" at a breakneck speed of 22 million kilometers (14 million miles) per hour. That's our Milky Way traveling btw with tens of thousands of other galaxies too. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Attractor

If it is this you were thinking of:)
yeah this is!!  :) :). so is this BH bigger than the GA
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #105 on: 26/03/2009 12:37:35 »
I'm not familiar with Gullstrand-Painlev coordinate systems - interesting name though - but as there's an absolute difference in the elapsed durations if the clocks are reconciled when the traveling clock returns to the same reference-frame as the observer, I can't see it making much difference because whatever coordinate system they're in, it will apply to both but won't cancel the difference.

I might have misunderstood you there though.

I see it as there will be a time dilation too LeeE, between the observer outside the BH and the observer at the Eventhorizon (traveling clock) but that time change depends on them being in different 'spheres' of place and time. And as my view says that 'time' as observed by you, wherever you might be, only can come to a standstill as seen from your own perspective (traveling clock) at 'c' then time can't stop for you, as long as you are made of matter.

Another thing is that, no matter how near 'c' you might put yourself traveling, I still expect you to observe your own frame of reference and time coordinates to behave as usual (biological clock), even though red and blueshift and spatial 'distortions' will appear as observed when comparing 'frames of reference'. And that experience will hold true for a black hole too, as I see it.
 
--
Although when falling into a black hole the gravitational forces will be accompanied by time-dilation and as you there will be in a accelerating system as I understands it your 'biological clock' will be dispersed in a undecidable number of 'time zones' :) So this depends on how you define your system I think. But given a 'clock' small enough one might expect it to be able to 'transit' in between those different 'timezones'. On the other hand, if time is a flow :) then perhaps gravity could be seen so too? And in that case there will be an 'infinity' of 'timezones' to fall through and there will be no possibility to create a smallest 'clock' transitioning those 'timezones' created by the black holes gravitywell.

---
Thinking of why some expect to see that redshifted image of the 'traveling clock' frozen at the Eventhorizon I think they are seeing it as that redshifted light having to traverse out of a gravitywell it also will have to take it a immense time walking back up that 'slope' :) As you could see a redshift depicting a stretched wave in time, looking at it this way its not the wave that becomes longer, its rather the timedimension that 'stretches out' taking the wave with it. But that information received by the redshift is not the object so you could, as I see it, disregard it as a 'optical illusion' caused by time expanding.

---
This one describes both 'metrics' http://www.mysearch.org.uk/pdfFiles/6Science/Schwarzschild.PDF , one might possibly say with a slight bias towards the Schwarzschild metric.
« Last Edit: 26/03/2009 15:12:37 by yor_on »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #106 on: 26/03/2009 13:47:42 »
I think I'm getteing neare to what you think Eric.
You write "if we can get the gravity from the BH-Sun and use it instead of 9.8m/s^2 we can calculated the time in which the sun will bounce the floor(BH)."

The force of gravity on Earth is decided by its mass, if you were standing 'on' the sun your weight would be twenty seven time that amount approximately. http://www.exploratorium.edu/ronh/weight/ . That tells you that the mass of the sun should be around twenty seven Earths put together.

What those two masses do with the space between them is to 'wrinkle' it. Is it this 'wrinkling' you would like to describe as some kind of 'constant'? If so then you just use the objects mass and relative velocity as compared to some other 'frame of reference' (Sun contra Earth).

You will also have to know if it is a 'accelerating' system or a uniformly moving system. A uniformly moving system might be two frames of reference uniformly moving, as when compared to each other, sharing the exact same 'time zone' and physical laws, and so being possible to define together as a 'inertial frame' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertial_frame_of_reference

I don't know if there is some such 'constant' being able to be found, but as spacetime seems a 'sliding system' where everything you do to a parameter seems to affect the others, there just might be one. Perhaps others here have a better suggestion how to search? still, a very nice idea Eric :)
 

Offline erickejah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Parking? I make my own parking spot!!
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #107 on: 26/03/2009 20:52:15 »
Quote
accelerating system or a uniformly moving system.
  :o
:D thanks for the help my knowledge is increasing exponentially!!  :D :D.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11978
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #108 on: 26/03/2009 22:04:19 »
Well Eric, considering that I still don't know if I've been anywhere near what you might think of?
Ah, whatever :)
 

Offline erickejah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Parking? I make my own parking spot!!
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #109 on: 26/03/2009 22:11:47 »
don not worry a table is always good to hide under
 

Offline itisus

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 56
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #110 on: 27/03/2009 03:27:15 »
Serious readers of this forum may want to consider:

1. Evidence from Case Western Reserve University [Science (21 June 2007)] that Black Holes do not exist:


My problem with the referenced article is this statement:
"a passenger inside a spaceship traveling toward a black hole would feel the ship accelerating, "
A passenger inside a spaceship following a geodesic should be weightless.
 

Offline erickejah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Parking? I make my own parking spot!!
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #111 on: 27/03/2009 04:29:35 »
 [xx(]
 

Offline erickejah

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
  • Parking? I make my own parking spot!!
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #112 on: 28/03/2009 00:45:14 »
Sorry Yor On, I think that I really misunderstood the topic and please forgive if I wasted your time. [V]
although I learned about initial frame of reference and the great attractor thanks  :). from now on I will only post concise and understandable questions not cross disciplinary assumptions.  ;)
 

Offline Fortran

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 91
    • View Profile
50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #113 on: 14/05/2009 17:00:57 »
What would that be in elephants or blue whales, the normal units for awfully big things?

Don't be bloody stupid, it's measured in OSSP's these days (Olympic Sized Swimming Pools)  which replaces the Tri-Mega-Litre"
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

50 Billion Suns! -The Biggest Single Object in the Universe !
« Reply #113 on: 14/05/2009 17:00:57 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums