0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
In the same token, our scientists today are sure that matter MUST fall into the accretion disc.
So, they really don't care that so far they couldn't find any matter that falls into the Milky Way' SMBH.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 08/09/2020 20:31:28In the same token, our scientists today are sure that matter MUST fall into the accretion disc.Yes, because we have evidence.
Things fall.It's not complicated.
The only thing we can see from there is the stuff falling in.
black holes don't release hydrogen clouds.
You don't have any plausible mechanism by which the particles emitted by the black hole can form an accretion disk.
That accelerator is called - the accretion disc.
As there were no accretion discs after the Big bang, this Big bang story won't be able to form even a single hydrogen Atom.
What happens when there is no accretion disk yet?
There is no accretion disk after a black hole first forms either. So using your same reasoning, a black hole can't form a single hydrogen atom either.
Those that don't have accretion disc won't create atoms and molecular.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 09/09/2020 06:53:44Those that don't have accretion disc won't create atoms and molecular.So then how do any black holes have accretion disks?
Are you sure that any BH has accretion disc/ring?If I understand it correctly, we see the BHs by their accretion discsHowever, what is the chance that there are many more in the galaxy or even next to us that we can't see as they don't have yet accretion disc?
You misunderstood my question. Since all black holes start out without accretion disks, then how can any of them develop an accretion disk at all?
This is their biggest mistake.They are absolutely sure that things MUST fall in.Therefore, the real observation is none relevant.
However, I don't know for sure how the accretion disk had been developed at the first stage.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 23/08/2020 12:30:45I would like to add the following:If one day the Moon would be disconnected from the earth gravity, it won't orbit around the Sun, but it would surly escape to the open space.No, it wouldn't.Escape velocity from the Sun (starting from near the Earth's orbit) is 42 km/secThe Earth's orbital velocity is 29 km/sAnd the Moon's is about 1 km/sYou can't add 29 and 1 to give an answer bigger than 42.Try doing science; it can be very rewarding.
I would like to add the following:If one day the Moon would be disconnected from the earth gravity, it won't orbit around the Sun, but it would surly escape to the open space.
You have repeatedly insisted that accretion disks can never form by gas or dust falling into orbit around a black hole from an outside source. So that means your model doesn't allow accretion disks to come from the outside. You have also repeatedly insisted that the magnetic field of a black hole is too strong to allow any particles through it and instead it will inevitably force those particles into jets if they try to cross it.
That means your model doesn't allow accretion disks to come from the inside either.
Show us the real evidence of things falling up.
Clear observation for "jets from Sagittarius A*"
Why don't you agree to accept what we really see???
Why do you claim such unrealistic statement.Based on my model the accretion disc MUST come Only from inside.
You have also repeatedly insisted that the magnetic field of a black hole is too strong to allow any particles through it and instead it will inevitably force those particles into jets if they try to cross it. That means your model doesn't allow accretion disks to come from the inside either.
Actually, any first stage is always some miracle.
We can ask how a baby is created at the first stage?
In any case, if you feel that without a clear explanation for the first stage, there is no first stage, than I would try to offer a solution.
What I'm saying is that your model prevents an accretion disk from forming because you have an obstacle in place (the black hole's magnetic field) that prevents one from forming. Remember, you have been absolutely adamant that nothing can get through that magnetic field. You claim that anything that tries to is forced into the polar jets instead. If your model has an obstacle that prevents the formation of an accretion disk, then it has to be wrong because we see accretion disks around black holes in real life.
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on 04/09/2020 21:32:51Don't you agree that as the mass of the Sun is much higher than the earth mass, it surly generates higher magnetic field?That has absolutely nothing to do with the magnetic field strength. Magnetism is not caused by mass. We have machines on Earth that can generate magnetic fields many, many times stronger than the Earth's field, and yet they are obviously many, many times less massive than the Earth.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 04/09/2020 21:32:51Don't you agree that as the mass of the Sun is much higher than the earth mass, it surly generates higher magnetic field?
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on 05/09/2020 12:44:39So, what is the source of the energy that gets into the accretion disc?You always raise the flag of energy conservation.So, how could it be that a falling star or cold gas cloud get to that ultra high temp and high current and be converted to hot plasma?Gravitational potential energy is converted into heat.
Quote from: Dave Lev on 05/09/2020 12:44:39So, what is the source of the energy that gets into the accretion disc?You always raise the flag of energy conservation.So, how could it be that a falling star or cold gas cloud get to that ultra high temp and high current and be converted to hot plasma?
What I'm saying is that our scientists don't have a basic clue how the SMBH works and especially how the black hole's magnetic field works.
As you claim that the Magnetic field of the earth is so weak and we clearly see that the Sun' magnetic field is stronger than the one on Earth, then how can you claim that: "That has absolutely nothing to do with the magnetic field strength. Magnetism is not caused by mass"
We have machines on Earth that can generate magnetic fields many, many times stronger than the Earth's field, and yet they are obviously many, many times less massive than the Earth.
Sorry, at the right conditions, Magnetism is directly affected mass.
In the same token, the Dynamo in the core of the SMBH is much more massive and hotter than the one in the Sun, therefore it generates much more magnetic field than the Sun.
How our scientists could ignore the ULTRA high magnetic field/force of the SMBH???
Magnetic field strength is related to the strength of the electric current used to produce it. Electric current isn't mass.
How do you know that a SMBH even has a core? If it does, how do you know it has electric currents in it? What is it made of?
What keeps it from collapsing under the black hole's gravity?
Quote from: Kryptid on 04/09/2020 18:58:40That ignores the inverse cube law that magnetism obeys. The magnetic field doesn't magically drop to zero just because you are outside of the accretion disk.
You're ignoring it when you claim that a black hole that does not yet have an accretion disk can produce one, so they're in good company. That magnetic field should make all of the particles form into jets because you say it is absolutely impassible. If it's impassible, then particles can't get out to form an accretion disk.
Do you agree that the dynamo at the Sun is more massive than the one on earth and therefore, the Electric current there is higher so it can generate Higher magnetic field?