[Bored chemist]

As you reject the clear message from that article, then what do you understand?

That's a big question from the man who didn't understand the title.

Anyway...
" causing near free-fall of gas towards the black hole. "

[Dave Lev (OP)]

As you reject the clear message from that article, then what do you understand?

That's a big question from the man who didn't understand the title.

Anyway...
" causing near free-fall of gas towards the black hole. "

Sorry, the gas that falls towards the Black hole is coming from the accretion disc itself.

You have just copy few words from the full explanation which is as follow:

"The redshifted absorption arises in a column of highly ionized matter close to the black hole, with a line-of-sight velocity, v ∼ 0.3c, inconsistent with the standard picture of a plane circular accretion disc. This may represent the first direct evidence for chaotic accretion in an AGN, where accretion discs are generally misaligned to the black hole spin. For sufficient inclinations, the Lense–Thirring effect can break the discs into discrete rings, which then precess, collide, and shock, causing near free-fall of gas towards the black hole. The observed accretion rate for the reported infall is comparable to the hard X-ray luminosity in PG1211+143, suggesting that direct infall may be a significant contributor to inner disc accretion."

It is stated clearly that the accretion disc could be break to discrete rings that collide with each other:

"This may represent the first direct evidence for chaotic accretion in an AGN, where accretion discs are generally misaligned to the black hole spin. For sufficient inclinations, the Lense–Thirring effect can break the discs into discrete rings, which then precess, collide, and shock, causing near free-fall of gas towards the black hole"

The impact of that internal collisions between the rings could "causing near free-fall of gas towards the black hole"

So, the whole idea is that the in falling gas is coming from the accretion disc itself!
Therefore, this ultrafast inflow doesn't represent a matter that falls from outside into the accretion disc, but from the accretion disc into the SMBH.
It is even specifically highlighted that the in falling matter is coming from the inner side of the accretion disc:
" suggesting that direct infall may be a significant contributor to inner disc accretion."
If this is not enough, we also need to focus on the velocities of that gas which is close to the BH:
"The redshifted absorption arises in a column of highly ionized matter close to the black hole, with a line-of-sight velocity, v ∼ 0.3c"
So, the 0.3c is the velocity of the  highly ionized gas/matter in the accretion disc which is close to the BH.

That 0.3c represents the innermost ring velocity as the outflow is coming from the outermost accretion ring that its velocity is 0.1c:
"Blueshifted absorption lines in the X-ray spectra of an active galactic nucleus (AGN) show that ultrafast outflows with typical velocities v ∼ 0.1c "

Hence:
The inflow of gas into the SMBH is coming from the innermost accretion ring while the outflow is coming from the outermost accretion ring.
Actually we have discussed before about that kind of discrete rings in the accretion disc.

Therefore, there is no observation for matter that falls from outside into the accretion disc!
On the contrary, we have clear observation of gas and matter that are ejected outwards as UFO from the outermost accretion disc!
Is it finally clear to you?

[Bored chemist]

Sorry, the gas that falls towards the Black hole is coming from the accretion disc itself.

That's obviously absurd.
Where did the BH come from?

[Bored chemist]

It is even specifically highlighted that the in falling matter is coming from the inner side of the accretion disc:
" suggesting that direct infall may be a significant contributor to inner disc accretion."

Do you realise that "infall" means stuff is falling in?
It's falling from teh disk into the hole.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

It is even specifically highlighted that the in falling matter is coming from the inner side of the accretion disc:
" suggesting that direct infall may be a significant contributor to inner disc accretion."

Do you realise that "infall" means stuff is falling in?
It's falling from teh disk into the hole.

That is correct
The matter is falling from the innermost side of the accretion disc into the SMBH.
However, on the other side of the disc which is the outermost, the matter is ejected outwards at that ultrafast outflow.
It seems to me that all you care is "inflow"
You don't care about the outflow from the accretion disc as it contradicts the BBT.
So, it is quite clear to me that you would continue to hold the flag of the Inflow and ignore the outflow as you don't care about the real observation/science.
You only care about the BBT and any observation that contradicts the BBT should be ignored from your side.
Therefore, it is clear that I waste my time on "scientist" that has no willing to accept any  observation that contradicts the BBT.

[Bored chemist]

OK.
Now you realise stuff does fall down...

Where did the BH come from?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

OK.
Now you realise stuff does fall down...

I have realized it from the first moment that you have offered that article.
However, in that same article it is also stated that matter from the outer side is ejected outwards as UFO (Ultra fast outflow.
However, it seems that you have very selected ability to read and understand ONLY the meaning of UFI (inflow). Unfortunately, when it comes to the UFO you just can't read it.

So, let me try to help you in this reading:

In the article that you have offered (Published: 03 September 2018)
https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/481/2/1832/5090165
They start the article with the highlight of the outflow:
"ABSTRACT
Blueshifted absorption lines in the X-ray spectra of an active galactic nucleus (AGN) show that ultrafast outflows with typical velocities v ∼ 0.1c are a common feature of these luminous objects."
They clearly highlight that this Blueshifted ultrafast outflows is quite common.
So, they see that matter from the outermost accretion ring is ejected outwards in many other galaxies.

If you still have difficulties to understand it, please do not hesitate to ask.
My job is to help you in this difficult reading process..
I highly advice you to take your time and read it at least 100 times before you give up.

If finally you understand that the meaning of the UFO is Ultra Fast Outflow from the outer side of the accretion disc than just confirmed this message.
If you still have some difficulties, please advice and we will do whatever is needed to help

Where did the BH come from?

It is very difficult for you to understand the basic meaning of UFO so how can we already jump to so difficult question?
Please let's verify first that the UFI Inflow/UFO outflow activates at the accretion disc is clear to you.
Let me know if you if you finally understand that the matter from the inner side of the accretion disc is falling into the SMBH as UFI while at the same time the matter from the outer side of the same disc is ejected outwards as UFO.
Good Luck

[Bored chemist]

In Dave Lev world, if you demolish a building, and some of the dust is blown higher than the roof, the building falls up.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

In Dave Lev world, if you demolish a building, and some of the dust is blown higher than the roof, the building falls up.

Sorry, if you would have to demolish a building then would never do so as you ignore all the observations.
So, how can you demolish something that you can't see although it is there in front of your eyes?

In your imagination world any observation that contradicts the BBT theory has no meaning and should be ignored.
You clearly have some basic knowledge in English and you clearly know the meaning of UFO.
Unfortunately for all of us, that UFO observation contradicts the BBT theory.
Therefore, you and all the other BBT scientists totally ignore it.

Starting of 2001 we observe the UFO (and only UFO) in this galaxy.
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8150586
"We report two new XMM–Newton observations of PG1211+143 in 2007 December, again finding evidence for the fast outflow of highly ionized gas first detected in 2001. "
However, as expected our scientists totally ignore that outflow as they wanted to find inflow. Therefore they have totally ignored that outflow and continue to look for inflow..
Finally only in 2018 they have observed some kind of inflow at a galaxy which is located ONE BILLION LY Away.
Just think how many galaxies exist in that one Billion LY radius.
Can we assume that at least one billion galaxies are their?
So out of all those billion galaxies you have finally found one single galaxy with "INFLOW"
BRAVO for all of you!!!
Now you have observed "inflow" at the Ultra far away galaxy.
However, this inflow is from the innermost accretion disc into the SMBH and not from outside into the accretion disc.
At the same time our scientists still clearly see the outflow of matter from the outermost accretion ring into the Central bulge.
But who cares.
You have an inflow and that's all you need.
Actually our scientists clearly see that kind of outflow at almost any available galaxy including our MW galaxy.
They observe those 100 gas clouds as they are ejected outwards from the core of the Milky way.
They also see all of those molecular jet stream as they are boosted outwards from the galaxy.
They see that activity at any galaxy.
But, they have neglected all of those observations.
They wanted inflow and they have got the "golden inflow" at that far away galaxy!
So, now you and the whole science community can finally celebrate your "inflow" success.
So, just before you start your last winning dance, do you confirm that our scientists still see the outflow from that far away accretion disc?
If you accept the clear observation that the accretion disc at that galaxy still ejects the UFO and you hide his info from your eyes and mind, then for me you are a LAIR.
Not just you. Any scientist that read those articles and clearly understand the meaning of the UFO, and ignore that observation can't call himself as scientist.
Science must be based on real observation.
You can't ignore the clear UFO from Billions accretion discs and based the whole theory on one inflow at that far away galaxy (while even in this observation there is no evidence for matter that falls into the accretion disc -Only from the inner side of the accretion disc to the SMBH).
If you were really scientist that are looking for real science you have to ask yourselves:
How could it be that in the same accretion disc you see UFI that falls into the SMBH and UFO that ejected outwards from the same accretion disc?
However, as expected you don't care about real science.
You all only care about the lovely BBT imagination!
Therefore, you and all those 10,000 BBT scientists carry the name of science for nothing!
Shame on you all of you!

[Bored chemist]

Unfortunately for all of us, that UFO observation contradicts the BBT theory.

Not if you understand it.
Please see my comment about dust and demolition.

[Bored chemist]

So out of all those billion galaxies you have finally found one single galaxy with "INFLOW"

That is one more bit of data than you have found.
You have ZERO evidence.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 11:32:53
Unfortunately for all of us, that UFO observation contradicts the BBT theory.

Not if you understand it.

Your understanding is clearly based on BBT
So what do you understand from the following:

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8150586
"We report two new XMM–Newton observations of PG1211+143 in 2007 December, again finding evidence for the fast outflow of highly ionized gas first detected in 2001. "

What is the meaning of: "again finding evidence for the fast outflow of highly ionized gas "?
What do you understand from:

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/481/2/1832/5090165
Over the past 15 yr, observations with a new generation of X-ray observatories (Jansen 2001; Mitsuda 2007) have revealed ultrafast outflows (UFOs), probably launched from regions of the disc accreting"

Where those "ultrafast outflows" comes from?

Some more:
1. It is stated:
"UFOs appear to be a common component of luminous AGNs "
So what is the meaning of "common component of luminous AGNs"?
2. It is stated:
To further explore the properties of this powerful UFO"
What is the meaning of powerful UFO?
Do you mean that based on your understanding it has no power?
3. It is stated:
" While all previous UFO detections report a single velocity,"
So, what is the meaning of "all previous UFO DETECTIONS?"
Do you understand that we have never detected that UFO?
4.It is stated:
"For that reason, all current UFO discoveries essentially rest on the detection of blueshifted Lyman"
What is the meaning of Blueshift? Is it an inflow from outside into the accretion disc, or outflow outwards from the accretion disc?

[Bored chemist]

Your understanding is clearly based on BBT

Yes.
My understanding is based in well supported science.

What is the meaning of: "again finding evidence for the fast outflow of highly ionized gas "?

It's very obvious what it means.
Why are you asking?
Is it because you don't understand that- like the collapsing building- the stuff coming up is a consequence of the much larger amount of stuff going down?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Yes.
My understanding is based in well supported science.

Thanks for this honest answer.
Now we all know that you really don't care about the observations.
You and all your 10,000 BBT scientists wish to force the Universe to work according your BBT nonsense.

As you already started with honest answer, would you kindly offer also honest answer for the following:
Please read again the following messages and let me know if we really see an outflow from the accretion disc of this galaxy?

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/481/2/1832/5090165
Over the past 15 yr, observations with a new generation of X-ray observatories (Jansen 2001; Mitsuda 2007) have revealed ultrafast outflows (UFOs), probably launched from regions of the disc accreting"
Where those "ultrafast outflows" comes from?
Some more:
1. It is stated:
"UFOs appear to be a common component of luminous AGNs "
So what is the meaning of "common component of luminous AGNs"?
2. It is stated:
To further explore the properties of this powerful UFO"
What is the meaning of powerful UFO?
Do you mean that based on your understanding it has no power?
3. It is stated:
" While all previous UFO detections report a single velocity,"
So, what is the meaning of "all previous UFO DETECTIONS?"
Do you understand that we have never detected that UFO?
4.It is stated:
"For that reason, all current UFO discoveries essentially rest on the detection of blueshifted Lyman"
What is the meaning of Blueshift? Is it an inflow from outside into the accretion disc, or outflow outwards from the accretion disc?

If the answer is yes, do we see an inflow from outside the galaxy into the accretion disc or we only see an inflow from the accretion disc into the SMBH.

So, please offer honest answer to the following:
Do you confirm that:
1. We clearly see an outflow from the accretion disc
2. We have NEVER EVER see any inflow from the outside into the accretion disc (I would like to remind you that you have already confirmed that issue)

Yes or no please!
Don't waste my time for nothing...

[Bored chemist]

We have NEVER EVER see any inflow from the outside into the accretion disc (I would like to remind you that you have already confirmed that issue)

Being a scientist, I will change my opinion when presented with evidence.
So this twaddle" (I would like to remind you that you have already confirmed that issue)" is irrelevant, isn't it?

Having looked at the paper I can confirm that I was mistaken.
There is direct evidence of stuff falling into the BH.

You can not see through a black hole.
The article refers to radiation that is red shifted and to radiation which is blue shifted.
That confirms that some material is moving away from us and some is moving towards us.

So some is falling in and some is coming out.



What you still have to show is any support for your physically impossible idea that material is being made in the accretion disk.

[Bored chemist]

Don't waste my time for nothing...

The one wasting time here is you.
You are welcome to stop.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Is it because you don't understand that- like the collapsing building- the stuff coming up is a consequence of the much larger amount of stuff going down?

If something collapse as a building it is expected to see it quite clearly even if stuff is coming up in this process.

However, when it comes to the accretion disc we only observe the outflow from this disc, while we have NEVER EVER seen any matter that falls from outside into the accretion disc.
Only if you are totally blinded with that BBT theory you would assume that this clear outflow is an outcome of inflow which you have never ever observed!!!

Having looked at the paper I can confirm that I was mistaken.
There is direct evidence of stuff falling into the BH.

You keep on with the observation that stuff falls into the BH from the accretion disc while you totally ignore the observation that we have NEVER EVER observed any matter that falls into the accretion disc.

You can not see through a black hole.

If we can see a matter from the accretion disc that falls into the BH there is no limitation why we can't see a matter from outside that falls into the accretion disc.

The article refers to radiation that is red shifted and to radiation which is blue shifted.
That confirms that some material is moving away from us and some is moving towards us.

Our scientists clearly specify what is what.
It is stated that the redshirt is from the accretion into the BH while the Blueshift is from the accretion outwards.

So some is falling in and some is coming out.

Yes, some matter from the inwards side of the accretion disc is falling into the SMBH and some matter from the same accretion disc is coming out from the outer side  of the disc.

What you still have to show is any support for your physically impossible idea that material is being made in the accretion disk.

If we clearly see that the accretion disc supply matter to the SMBH and at the same time it also ejected matter outwards, then the ONLY one option for that activity is as follow:
New matter must be created at the accretion disc in order to supply matter to the SMBH and also eject some matter outwards at the same time
It is absolutely difficult for you to accept or understand this simple observation as you totally blinded with the BBT imagination.
Please try to take out that BBT imagination from your mind and you would easily understand the real meaning of the OBSERVATION.
If you can't do it, then I can't help you anymore.

[Bored chemist]

It is stated that the redshirt is from the accretion into the BH while the Blueshift is from the accretion outwards.

That's what I said.
Please try to keep up.

If something collapse as a building it is expected to see it quite clearly even if stuff is coming up in this process.

No.
That's not what is expected. You normally can't see anything much of the structure because of the dust.

Why did you say that?
Did you not realise that you did not know what you were talking about?

New matter must be created at the accretion disc in order to supply matter to the SMBH and also eject some matter outwards at the same time

No.
Because more falls in than comes out.

If you can't do it, then I can't help you anymore.

You ae not helping anyone, or anything.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 18:11:28
It is stated that the redshirt is from the accretion into the BH while the Blueshift is from the accretion outwards.

That's what I said.

Let's verify that we fully agree on the Observations:
1. In the section between the accretion disc to the SMBH:
In this section matter from the inner side of the accretion disc is falling into the SMBH as Ultra fast Inflow.
In this section that matter from the accretion disc is falling into the SMBH as Ultra fast Inflow.
We have first observe this UFI in 2018
There is no observation of matter that ejected upwards from the SMBH into the accretion disc.
2. In the section between the accretion disc all the way outwards to the center of the Bulge
In this section that matter from the accretion disc is ejected outwards to the center of the Bulge as Ultra fast outflow.
We observe this UFO for more than 20 Year.
There is no observation of matter that falls from the center of the Bulge into the accretion disc.
3.  In the section between the center of the Bulge outwards
We clearly see gas clouds that are ejected outwards from the Bulge. I have offered the article about the 100 gas clouds that are moving away from the SMBH and also the the Molecular jet steam.
Do you confirm and agree with the above observations?

In this section that matter from the accretion disc is ejected outwards to the center of the Bulge as Ultra fast outflow.
We observe this UFO for more than 20 Year.
There is no observation of matter that falls from the center of the Bulge into the accretion disc.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 18:11:28
If something collapse as a building it is expected to see it quite clearly even if stuff is coming up in this process.

No.
That's not what is expected. You normally can't see anything much of the structure because of the dust.

So, you compare the outflow from the accretion disc as a dust that comes out due to a collapse.
However, we have NEVER EVER see any collapse while we see a constant flow for more than 20 years of that dust.
If something collapses it is expected that the dust outflow would decrease over time till it stop.
However, the outflow from the accretion disc is very stable for all of this long time.
Therefore, I would compare it to smoke and not to dust.
If you have a fire, than the smoke would come out as long as the fire is working.
Hence, that outflow of matter is comparable to the smoke from the fire in the accretion disc.
Therefore, there is no need for matter to fall the accretion disc as it disc generates the smoke (which is actually new matter in the fire that takes place at that accretion disc.

Because more falls in than comes out.

This is a pure LIE
How can you lie and say something that contradicts the observation s badly?
We have NEVER EVER observed any matter as Star, Gas cloud or even atom that falls from outside into the accretion disc.
So why do you lie on something so important?
You may wish that something falls, but unfortunately for you and for all the BBT scientists the accretion disc doesn't want to eat any matter from outside. For the moment that we have the technology to observe the accretion disc, we have NEVER even seen any matter that falls in.
We ONLY see a constant and stable outflow.
So please - do not lie about "more falls" while we have never observed even one atom as it falls.

Please answer the following:
What is needed for you to understand that nothing really falls into the accretion disc?
What kind of evidence or observation would convince you that the accretion disc itself generates all the matter that falls into the SMBH as UFI and in the same time it also generates all the matter that it ejects outwards as UFO?

[Origin]

Please answer the following:
What is needed for you to understand that nothing really falls into the accretion disc?

A traumatic brain injury, possibly?

What kind of evidence or observation would convince you that the accretion disc itself generates all the matter that falls into the SMBH as UFI and in the same time it also generates all the matter that it ejects outwards as UFO?

I think, for me at least, to completely rewrite some of the basic pillars of physics it would take more than the hand waving of some uneducated guy on the internet.