Live data from Hacker News

Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

vox.com

51–60 of 167 posts

Re: Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

#51
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, black holes are topological holes. It's a mathematical abstraction, not merely a cognitive metaphor.

I'm pretty sure every "mathematical abstraction" is a "cognitive metaphor".

I don't know what a cognitive metaphor is and whether it's applicable to mathematical abstractions. I was responding to the claim that:

> Because we found no better analogy, we named them "holes" despite the fact that they are basically the opposite

Which is false.

Re: Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would prefer if black holes were called "Dark Stars". Because that really is what they are. A weird star that is so massive, its gravitational field distorted the fabric of its local space, that not even light can escape it. It is theoretically possible that the black hole is still performing fusion, and emitting light and heat, like a regular star. But its gravitational field is so intense, that even light cannot…

> then you will only see the star as pitch black, since light can't even escape it Would it be black? Right above the event horizon is flaming relativistic matter.

That's true but afaik time dilation makes it rather dim infrared radiation.

Re: Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

#54
post #24

Black holes are an excellent example for so called "cognitive metaphors". Because we found no better analogy, we named them "holes" despite the fact that they are basically the opposite: an object with enormous mass. This influences our thinking and our language when we discuss problems concerning black holes. We talk about "inside the black hole", "light cannot escape the black hole" or "spitting things out of the b…

Great comment -- but while I agree w/ your point about metaphors, I respectfully mildly disagree about this one in particular. For context, I associate it with the popular analogy of timespace as an elastic "sheet" of sorts, with marble-like objects resting on (and sinking into) its surface, with their mass dictating how "deep" their gravity "well" is. With that metaphor in mind, black holes really do approximate holes in the sheet.

Re: Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would prefer if black holes were called "Dark Stars". Because that really is what they are. A weird star that is so massive, its gravitational field distorted the fabric of its local space, that not even light can escape it. It is theoretically possible that the black hole is still performing fusion, and emitting light and heat, like a regular star. But its gravitational field is so intense, that even light cannot…

> It is theoretically possible that the black hole is still performing fusion, and emitting light and heat, like a regular star. I don't think that's a useful picture. It's closer to the truth to say that from the outside perspective, all the information and energy sits on the border and there is not even an inside to speak about. In other words, it's the edge of the universe and what's past the event horizon is anot…

To me, the concept that there is another universe, beyond the Event Horizon, is a little silly.

However, for fun, I once thought of a science fiction scenario for a novel.

I thought a Black Hole, can be used as the instrument for a wormhole in space. An Einstein-Rosen Bridge, that connects our universe to another universe, in the multiverse.

But there are a lot of plot holes in this idea. If light cannot escape the black hole, then you somehow need to go faster than light, to traverse the wormhole, and to escape it, when you cross over to the other side. So, once you exit the black hole, then you land at the other side, and there is a whole other universe there, with its own set of stars.

But, this will also allow other people from another universe, to cross into our universe, via this black hole.

Then how does such a black hole form?

It starts with a very massive star, more massive than a Neutron Star, that roams around our universe. Then, in an adjacent universe, another very massive star is wandering around also. Think of our universe as a bubble, and the adjacent universe is another bubble. These two massive stars, will distort the fabric of their bubbles, at the edges. The two stars will gravitationally attract each other, and they will basically punch a hole through each bubble. And when they collide, the mass from each star will form the structure of the wormhole. They won't explode on contact, but instead, it will now form a bridge between two universes.

For millions of years, they will dance around each other, until they finally find a stable orbit, where both are spinning around each other.

Think of this as a binary star system, where the two stars are rotating around each other, so fast, that it forms this virtual wall. This virtual wall, is the structure of the Einstein-Rosen bridge. And in the middle, it is gravitationally neutral.

And this wormhole structure, will now allow regular spacecraft, that can travel faster than light, to traverse the wormhole, and emerge on the other side.

Next, I just have to add the other parts of the story, like the bad guy, the love story and love triangle, and some good guy that is searching for himself. And with that, I'll have a blockbuster novel that I can turn into a live action movie.

Re: Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

#56

If nothing can escape a black hole how can it have massive jets?

1. Energy does actually escape black holes

2. The jets are not matter originating inside the black hole. They are are matter that is accelerated by the black hole then slung away. It’s a similar mechanism to how we accelerate some of our spacecraft (by flying them close to the mooon or Jupiter) but with much higher energy levels!

Re: Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would prefer if black holes were called "Dark Stars". Because that really is what they are. A weird star that is so massive, its gravitational field distorted the fabric of its local space, that not even light can escape it. It is theoretically possible that the black hole is still performing fusion, and emitting light and heat, like a regular star. But its gravitational field is so intense, that even light cannot…

> It is theoretically possible that the black hole is still performing fusion, and emitting light and heat, like a regular star. I don't think that's a useful picture. It's closer to the truth to say that from the outside perspective, all the information and energy sits on the border and there is not even an inside to speak about. In other words, it's the edge of the universe and what's past the event horizon is anot…

> From the outside perspective, all the information and energy sits on the border

Are you sure that's known? What kind of experiment would settle that?

Re: Most images of black holes are illustrations. Here’s what our telescopes capture

#60
post #4

Keep in mind as well that no observation has yet distinguished between a neutron star and a black hole. i.e. all those photos of super massive objects could be neutron stars, and we would not be able to tell the difference. They are assumed to be black holes because of the mass, but if there is something in the law of physics that prevents black holes from forming we would not know. We do not have a theory on quark d…

Aren't the detected gravitational waves evidence that black holes exist?

I mean, don't the waves measure a merge up to the point that both black holes are inside a single Schwarzschild radius? And if so, isn't that very strong evidence that the things merging are black holes?

Post reply on HN