Scientists Discover Black Hole 12 Billion Times As Massive As The Sun [Archive]

View Full Version : Scientists Discover Black Hole 12 Billion Times As Massive As The Sun

christian

26th February 2015, 16:46

By Irene Klotz via The Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/26/black-hole-discovered_n_6753828.html)

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla (Reuters) – A black hole 12 billion times as massive as the sun has been found in a glowing quasar that existed when the universe was just a fraction of its current age, scientists said on Wednesday.

The discovery challenges currently held theories that black holes and their host galaxies grew in relative lockstep over the eons.

Found within the distant celestial bodies called quasars, black holes are regions of space so dense with matter that not even light can travel fast enough to escape their gravitational pits. Black holes are detected by effects they have on nearby galaxies, stars and dust.

The newly found black hole contains the equivalent of about 12 billion suns, more than twice the mass of previously found black holes of similar age, said researcher Bram Venemans with the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy in Germany.

By comparison, the black hole lurking at the center of the Milky Way galaxy has about 4 million to 5 million times the mass of the sun.

Scientists cannot explain how the newly found black hole grew so quickly. Theoretically, it could not have fed off surrounding gas as fast and as long as it would have needed to reach its massive size under currently understood laws of physics.

“Our discovery presents a serious challenge to theories about the black hole growth in the early universe," lead researcher Xue-Bing Wu with Peking University in Beijing, wrote in an email.

"It may require either very special ways to grow the black hole within a very short time or the existence of a huge seed black hole when the first generation stars and galaxies formed. Both are difficult to be explained by the current theories.”

Another option is that two massive black holes in the early universe collided, forming an even larger black hole, Venemans said.

Clues may come from the quasar itself, which is glowing brightly enough to illuminate interstellar matter between itself and telescopes on and orbiting Earth. Ancient quasars may provide information about how stars formed in the early universe.

The research is published in this week’s issue of the journal Nature.

panpravda

26th February 2015, 19:14

Where is the proof that black holes are real ... someone, please ???

Atlas

26th February 2015, 19:34

The most massive black holes:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/44908464/black-holes.gif

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_massive_black_holes

panpravda

26th February 2015, 19:41

Saints preserve us! This is supposed to be "proof", just because someone made up a nice table with number in? Where, my friend, is the hard scientific proof that black holes are real?

Atlas

26th February 2015, 19:45

Saints preserve us! This is supposed to be "proof", just because someone made up a nice table with number in? Where, my friend, is the hard scientific proof that black holes are real?
I don't know my friend. Ask NASA, perhaps they can tell you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Chinese astronomers spot brightest, biggest quasar powered by black hole

http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/dynamic/02323/BLACK_HOLE_2323313f.jpg
This artwork shows a star being distorted by its close passage to a supermassive black hole at the centre of a galaxy.

A team of Chinese astronomers has discovered the most luminous super massive quasar, a shining object produced by the black hole, ever found in the distant universe. According to a new study published on Thursday in the British journal “Nature”, the quasar is 12 billion times the masses of the Sun and 430 trillion times brighter than the Sun.

The black hole, which is 12.8 billion light years from Earth, was first spotted through a 2.4 metre telescope in Lijiang in southwest China’s Yunnan Province and its existence was confirmed by follow-up studies in the United States and Chile, state-run Xinhua news agency reported.

“We were so excited when we found such a luminous object just 9 million years after the Big Bang. It will challenge theories on how black holes form and grow,” lead author Wu Xuebing of Peking University here said. “It’s like a child growing to weigh several hundred kilograms in less than ten years. How can we explain it?” Wu said.

Fan Xiaohui, professor from the University of Arizona’s Steward Observatory and a member of Wu’s team, said the discovery “presented a major puzzle” to the theories of black hole growth in the early universe. The researchers believe that this will provide a unique laboratory to study the mass assembly and galaxy formation around massive black holes in the early universe.

“Spotting such a celestial body usually requires a 10 metre telescope. But Chinese astronomers observed it through a 2 metre telescope. It demonstrates their creativity,” said astrophysicist Chen Jiansheng with the National Astronomical Observatories at the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Thanks to certain key technologies Wu and his team have developed in recent years, they were able to select several hundred quasar candidates from over a million celestial bodies, the report said. “It’s like finding a speck of gold dust on a beach. We are lucky to have spotted the quasar and made follow-up observations,” Wu said.

Quasars are believed to be the brightest and most energetic objects in the universe. Since the first quasar was identified in 1963, over 200 thousand quasars have been found.

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/chinese-astronomers-spot-brightest-biggest-black-hole/article6937031.ece

panpravda

26th February 2015, 19:58

Thanks for that, baures. We all know that NASA is an irrelevance when it comes to expecting to be told the truth on things that really matter so, whom are we left with to answer my original, straightforward question? I'd love to hear from anyone here who is brave enough to defend, on a scientific basis, the commonly accepted notions that relate to any of the following ... black holes, neutron stars, magentars, dark energy, dark matter, pulsars, dirty snowball comets, cratering through meteor impacts alone, wandering "ice volcanoes" on Titan and elsewhere, and the thermonuclear model of stars ... and this in an incomplete list, for I could go on! I do appreciate, however, the gesture you made baures, in responding to my original question.

sirdipswitch

26th February 2015, 20:48

Atlas

26th February 2015, 21:29

Black Hole Comparison :blink:

QgNDao7m41M

panpravda

26th February 2015, 21:54

sirdipswitch: Your obvious frustration with the concept of black holes (and perhaps other fairy tales based on gravity?) is classic in those who begin to really look into the issues that stand to destroy the current, gravity-centric model of the universe. While sympathising with your frustration, I can assure you that better astro-science is available; this being based around common sense, logic, and actual laboratory experimentation, and referred to as plasma-electric universe theories. I subscribe to those theories as I consider them to be essentially on-target. And, because you mentioned this yourself ... the centres of galaxies are actually highly compressed (by the electromagnetic force) concentrations of plasma that are normally referred to as plasmoids; these also being referred to in certain cases as active galaxy nuclei or AGNs, and represented within the electric universe model as the birth-places of quasars, which also come into existence as plasmoids.

Those who are prepared to accept the notion of black holes being real, are also accepting that the concept of infinity is okay to use in mathematical calculations. This notion of infinity arose from the strangely and worryingly accepted, schoolboy error of dividing by zero; this being an absolute no-no in the world that I grew up in! In a nutshell ... Einstein was allowed to get away with dividing by zero, and nobody at the time had the nouse or guts to question that. Then, not too long ago the great Stephen Hawking, the man who has been for a very long time at the centre of the black hole discussion, publicly dropped his support for his own original notion of "black holes" having a so-called "event horizon"; this effectively doing away with the complete notion of black holes ... what a farce!

Baby Steps

26th February 2015, 22:13

DeDukshyn

27th February 2015, 01:28

I tend to like things logical. By their very definition of how Black Holes work, they are not logical. So dense that not ebn light can escape them! Huh? Then how come they find them by ALL that "Light" that surrounds them? more-huh? Their cute little immage shows the black hole influencing that star, that is way out beyond all that quasar light, and yet doesn't pull all of that light into. I thought light couldn't escape one. Why is all that light surrounding the. Plus, if there's a black hole at the center of every Galaxy, why don't those black holes just gobble up the galaxy. By definition, black hole get bigger as they gobble up more matter. The bigger they get... the stronger they get... the stronger they get, the more they can pull in. Seems to me that as long as this ol universe has been around, there wouldn't be any Galaxies left. And that light ring around a black hole... really has me confused???!!!

Quasar = Black Hole? Yah and I have some oceanfront property in Arizona, that I would like sell you. chcuckle chuckle.

Gee... maybe I should apply for a grant... to study Black Holes. ccc.

I don't understand the process of how a "black hole" is determined, so I do not have any evaluation on the matter -- it seems you do. Perhaps, instead of saying "I don't know how this is determined, so therefore it is not real", well, that proclamation doesn't really cut it. Do we have any astronomers here who can breakdown how a "black hole" is determined? Perhaps we can scrutinize that specifically, rather than assuming a black hole cannot exist within a quasar, with no info to back that statement up either, etc. Lets evaluate the details not the sweeping statements, in other words.

I have heard the "electric universe" theories, and I do think that perhaps if to believed something about what we believe or have terminology associated with in "black holes" needs to change, but at the same time I don't feel that it writes off the whole concept of a black hole.

From someone who has looked at both sides of this argument ... without bias.

amor

27th February 2015, 03:04

This insight is only slightly related to the above subject of black holes. Our Galaxy is tightly rotating so that the center forms a ball of seemingly crushing gravity. As planets get closer to that thing, all life on them must be squashed out of them. When the force is too great to support the ball, a stream of crushed matter issued from its North and South poles as well as its horizontal plane, being the points of greatest stress. Now if you were a planet with millions of people, presumably of space-faring technology, you would recognize the danger and evacuate all or some of the population to planets farther out into the center of the galactic arms. I believe that is why there are so many human races on earth which did not originate here. Also, that plume of crushed matter flies far upward and downward in the case of the South plume. As the forces of gravity equal out to the force of expulsion, the crushed matter begins to fall back on itself and orbit itself. This eventually becomes suns which nova eventually and form heavy matter forming planets and solar systems, and so on. In vast reaches of time, all the matter of the galaxy will have changed itself to a plane 90 degrees from its former position. I am not an Astronomer, so have a go at this argument.

InCiDeR

27th February 2015, 03:35

Maybe the human thought structure has greatly misinterpreted black holes. They might be more nurturing than destructive... more creative than nihilistic...

ghostrider

27th February 2015, 04:09

The plejaren had a lot to say about black holes , they are at the center of every galaxy , the bigger the black hole , the bigger the galaxy ... 26,000 pages of contact still ongoing to this day for over 73 years and few people read the information the ET's give us about space , life , the future , the past ... http://www.futureofmankind.co.uk/Billy_Meier/Contact_Report_227 scroll to line 21... just an example of some of their information ...

RUSirius

27th February 2015, 08:10

Black holes are just like NASA, a cover story. Black holes probably fall victim to both human definitions and secrecy of actual purpose. Since I've never been face to face with a black hole and cannot attest to their existence through experience, I can only go off of the concept via scientific discovery and study. In other words, what other people say about them. I imagine the structures themselves do exist, just completely misexplained and probably on purpose. We are not big on truth and transparency down here on earth. It would seem if I follow the "logic" route or my "logic" route, that they might play a role in keeping things together at a ridiculously enormous level. I would imagine they might be sentient or self aware or both or much more than that. I just don't see at all, if there are so many of them all over everywhere where definitions cannot begin to truly describe the supposed size and feeding capacity of them why anything would exist at all.

araucaria

27th February 2015, 10:31

QUOTE=buares;937264] 430 trillion times brighter than the Sun[/B].[/QUOTE]
So much light and yet the sky is so dark! Just a few photons getting through to the very latest in telescope technology. It really does seem that some ‘tired light’ scenario must be contributing, although the idea has allegedly been debunked, sorry disproved. If you download the pdf paper at http://www.lyndonashmore.com/ you will read notably the following:

no researchers have previously reported the remarkable coincidence between the Hubble constant and the parameters of the electron (H = hre / me per cubic meter of space). Nor, until now, has anyone derived a possible relationship between the two.

When photons travel through any transparent medium they are continually absorbed and re-emitted by the electrons in the medium. French [13] states “the propagation of light through a medium (even a transparent one) involves a continual process of absorption of the incident light and its reemission as secondary radiation by the medium.” Feynman [14] describes the transmission of light through a transparent medium simply as “photons do nothing but go from one electron to another, and reflection and transmission are really the result of an electron picking up a photon, ”scratching its head”, so to speak, and emitting a new photon.”

Regarding black holes, according to Nassim Haramein, things at every scale have an event horizon, including you and me. As I recall, he comes to this conclusion notably by rejecting the standard renormalization method of dealing with infinities.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renormalization

Baby Steps

27th February 2015, 12:15

Apologies I put this up elsewhere. It provides a hint of what is really going on in the centre of galaxies. It shows how the jets of matter manifest due to magnetic fields

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z67EKcOpjaQ

Atlas

27th February 2015, 12:20

Do Black Holes Even Exist ?

6mdic677K0g

Lifebringer

27th February 2015, 12:24

Perhaps it too feeds off energy. Negative Universal or galaxy negativity of the planet's life forms and are drawn to the negative timelines? Just thinking out loud on the possibility of it's orbital potential and guidance.

I mean if the universes are alive, the planets alive, then what feeds the black hole may be dark energies powering it to consume light. JMO;)

Lifebringer

27th February 2015, 12:37

Have they finally viewed and recorded one from our exploring devices in space? The bending of light has also been detected orbiting dwarf brown stars as they move through their orbits. Perhaps all the time these light shifting while moving was a large planet or star passing and by the heat and light bending, assumed to be a hole, and not just a black charred like a carbon coal ember? Who knows, one day we'll all figure it out. I guess?

araucaria

27th February 2015, 12:56

Do Black Holes Even Exist ?

6mdic677K0g
Paul LaViolette for one would say, Definitely not.

panpravda

27th February 2015, 13:09

Go panpravda!
Macroscopic black holes sound like nihilism to me, I think if too much mass crunches in you start getting very strong repulsive forces and a supernova.

They are just struggling to account for the degree of organisation observed in galaxies, but in fact there are little understood magnetic forces in play.
I prefer the idea of white holes that build galaxies from within. That is no sillier than the Big Bang theory.
They do not know why the recession of galaxies is accelerating. Soon they will be wondering why and how they are putting on mass!

So much to be said, so little time to say it ...

Baby Steps: You, too, seem to have a healthily focussed level of scepticism, however, I hope you don't mind if I give you my personal take on some to the things you have mentioned ... this may also cover some of the other contributor's thoughts and positions on these matters ...

(by the way, this journey into electrical-plasma science theory has no current "absolute conclusions", so anything I say should be taken only as my own developed view of how things are. Even so, I have spent many years studying both standard astro-physics and the Electric Universe model; albeit as a layman in everything to do with science.)

You mentioned ...

Supernovae (and I'll include novae here, too) ... these "events", like all others out there are fundamentally "electrical" in nature, where in this instance, the origin and description of these powerful "explosions" can be described as follows; there also being other electrically driven explanations available. A plasma filament (Birkeland Current 'BC') circuit can develop an area of instability within it. This instability (anomalously complex region) can become, in an electrical charge sense, over-loaded through the continuously additive build-up of charge from dynamic electrical interactions in and around that stupendously charged region of plasma. The end result being that this unstable area can have its build-up of charge reach such a great level that it "blows" like an old wire fuse would do in your house should there be an overload or short-circuit. The energy involved in such events, can also adequately explain one method for producing elements that are atomically heavier than iron, such as gold and uranium, etc.

The organised appearance of (spiral) galaxies -- their morphology -- would be originally achieved through classic magnetic interactions between enormous filaments of dense plasma. Reference the work of Hannes Alfven (Nobel Prize), Eric J Learner, and Anthony Peratt, which explains how the spiral morphologies of galaxies come about; the power sources involved; their resulting homopolar motor (solid disk) behaviour, and the natural spin with which they are endowed; the same explanation for natural spin applying to all rotating objects that are to be found in space, such as stars, planets, and moons.

There are no such things as white holes. These also arise from (to be kind) wishful, Newtonian mechanical and Einsteinian relativistic thinking, plus a large contribution from unrestrained mental athletics.

Yes, the Big Bang theory is bunk for sure; of the first order, actually!

The whole idea around "recession", which is based on "redshift", and also, as that term is applied to galaxies that are judged as moving away from us, has been a case of fundamental misjudgement from day one; see (and study) the work of Halton Arp. The interpretation of redshift, as enumerated by the "z" component, was first assumed by Edwin Hubble to be evidence that most galaxies are moving away from us. This assumption being based on the observation that the wavelength of the hydrogen line of the galaxies in question, were seen as being stretched towards the red end of the normal light spectrum. "This" is the whole basis for objects in space these days, being judged as "moving" on some path away, and indeed, that the universe is somehow expanding. In opposition to this, redshift happens to be made up of two "z" components; one recessional, which is very much the minor component of the two, and the "intrinsic component", which is much greater and actually relates to "the age of the observed object". A high "z" factor indicates "youth", and conversely, a low "z" factor indicates great age. This is born out by the fact that the young quasars that are expelled ("born") from AGNs, have a very high "z" factor, and are observed to be physically "in front" of (parent?) galaxies which themselves have a relatively low "z" factor; where previously (and as is sadly still the case), any object with a high "z" factor was (is) "assumed" to be very far away indeed, where some even claim these things, like quasars, are located at the "edge" of the universe!

Not sure what you mean by "Soon they will be wondering why and how they are putting on mass."? In any case, "mass" should be seen as an "apparent property", not something empirical to be measured on a set of universal, galactic, stellar, or planetary scales. Apparent mass is endowed through the amount of electric charge possessed by an object, no matter how much "matter" that object appears to consist of. This is why comets, due to their unexpected behaviour while orbiting in an elongated fashion around our sun, are judged to be similar in "weight" to a lump of polystyrene, when in fact; they are highly negatively charged rocks (cathodes) on an approach towards a very highly charged, positive sun (anode).

That's enough for now ...

Please note: All that I have said here is in line with plasma-electric theories as they apply to the now, very well known Electric Universe model.

Finally … I have said this before and I will say it once again, and I'll go on saying it ... If you are truly interested in astro-science and believe that it is fundamental to our collective, intellectual development that our children receive the best information we can offer, then please download, read, and think hard on the contents of the free book for beginners to the Electric Universe model that is available here: http://www.newtoeu.com

My best to you all ...

Baby Steps

27th February 2015, 13:31

awesome-thanks for the pointers for further study!