redpill me on black holes

they're not black

>>718351134
They don't actually exist, they are mathematical constructs that cannot form in our physical universe

>>718351134
that image is bullshit no lensing at all

>>718351134
its a meme

>>718351134
left wing jewish conspiracy propagated by marxist millenial furries in the BLM movement

>>718351452
back to >>>/sci/ with you

>>718351134
They are hellgates. Fueled by sodomy from the other side. That's why it's a hole.

>>718351640
l would say back to /x

What do you want to know about them

>>718351134
They are dyson spheres gone wrong.

>>718351733
do they exist?

>>718351713
Yeah but he's obviously from /sci/ because over there literally everything is a meme

>>718351792
no

>>718351792
yes

>>718351134
They are remnants of the previous universe that didn't roll down the donut cosmos.

File: mining for joo gold.jpg (82KB, 612x587px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 612x587px

>>718351134

they are the jews of the universe - they take everything but give back nothing

>>718351256
they're african american holes, you fucking racists

>>718351792
Watch this
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e-P5IFTqB98

It's really educationale suitable for beginners

>>718351835
so what is in the centre of our galaxy?
http://astro.uchicago.edu/cosmus/projects/UCLA_GCG/smaller.gif

File: 1365953723354.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x200px

read everything on this site http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/schw.shtml
and on the new site that it links to

>>718351134
More prone to criminal activity than white holes.

>>718352095
Sagittarius A*

>>718352035
Spacists*

>>718352216
and why we cant see it?

>>718352245
kek

>>718352321
we can see radiowaves with certain instruments

>>718351134
black hoes
not holes

but...
black holes
definitely nut holes

>>718352095
A construct that is similar to a black hole, but that does not actually have a singularity because singularities cannot form in a finite amount of time. Everything that we have in the universe that are "black holes" are just approximations of them, probably black holes in the process of forming, but they will never actually form because that would take forever and therefore there are no actual black holes.

>>718352035
fuck em, i call it as i see it

>>718352082
Fuck, I was about to post this. I love this channel

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nHBGFKLHZQ

>>718351452
topkek

>>718352676
as you should, anon. as you should

>>718351134
It's a lot like your ex's vagina. Everything comes in and nothing gets out.

>>718351358
Yet they do

>>718351134
They are holes. They are dark. They Fuckyouup. You be smushed.

>>718352028
Save Hawkin's radiation that gives you lateral amyotrophic sclerosis instead of cancer

>>718353560
No they don't see, see >>718352674

>>718352674
is it possible that we just haven't found the ones in our galaxy? or they are too small to matter? i thought spaghettification would make it so you could fit through any black hole no matter the size? or is it that they don't have the "suction" i guess to properly send you through?

>>718354175
they dont really suck they behave like stars
they got a certain mass and thats the force they are "sucking" with

>>718353725
Stick to the old theories before the new ones become proved. Scientific method biatch

>>718354175
What the fuck are you talking about? This isn't about whether or not we found them, this is about the mathematical implications of Einstein's theory of general relativity. Singularities (which is the center of a black hole, an infinitely small, infinitely dense concentration of mass) take an infinite amount of time to form. So either black holes don't exist or Einstein is wrong. But everything we've tested suggests general relativity is correct so the former is the more likely at this point. The size of the black hole is irrelevant, no black hole of any size can form. So what we likely have in the real universe is something that is on its way to becoming a black hole. But it will never actually be a TRUE black hole in the Einstein sense of the word. That being said, they are still objects of immense gravitational power and so affect surrounding objects similar to how an actual black hole would

Another thing... Even if they did exist, nothing actually ever goes into a black hole from outside perspective. Time is dilated heavily by gravity, meaning if we threw something into a black hole, we would just see it getting closer and closer to the event horizon but it would never actually cross the event horizon because this would take an infinite amount of time. From our outside perspective that

>>718354680
You don't see them forming because light lasts an eternity to reach you, but in their wrapped space-time they already exist (traveling in time to the past beyond the event horizon becomes possible, so they exist in the past too)

File: 1438043418822.jpg (274KB, 650x592px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 650x592px

>>718351358
Scientists followed the movement of around 15 stars orbiting the Galatic Core over a period of several weeks. They found that the stars were moving quite literally millions of miles an hour. These stars were much bigger than our sun, they did some math and calculated that only a super massive black hole could fling big stars around like that.

Your just being a stupid nigger.

>>718354608
Are you retarded? I'm talking about the conclusions of Einstein's general relativity, this isn't a "new" theory. The mathematical implications of the singularity taking infinite time to form is something determined in the early 1900s when the paper was realized, long before we actually had any evidence of "black holes" existing. As I said, no physicists actually thinks the real black holes predicted by general relativity exist, we just call the approximations "black holes" since explaining all of this to the general population would be a rather futile and annoying exercise

>>718354680
so how do we know that a black hole is forming? what's a good guess to how long it would theoretically take to form one? and how would you arrive at such a conclusion? also thanks btw seems like you know your stuff and i appreciate you taking the time to answer some of my dumb questions

>>718354923
You have no idea what you're talking about

>>718354925
Maybe you should actually read the thread you fuckwit >>718352674

>>718355138
Theoretically a black hole with a singularity (aka a true black hole) would take an infinite amount of time to form, according to General Relativity. Trying to explain how that conclusion was arrived at mathematically is way beyond my ability but feel free to Google it.

The reason we know a black hole is forming is because the object in question behaves similarly to how a real black hole would behave. But since real black holes cannot ever form, it is only logical that it is probably one on its way to becoming a black hole. It could be 99.9999% of the way there, but it will never actually become one.

>>718355470
For an external observer

>>718355470
sounds so crazy that something could be 99% complete and we would never be able to see it or interact with it or have a way to know that it's even there. quite mind boggling

>>718355675
Correct, which in this case is the rest of the universe. From the perspective of the black hole, it will form in finite time, but an infinite time will have passed in the universe, which from a logical standpoint isn't really feasible to consider so I don't really care to mention it. Anything that takes an infinite amount of time to occur is pretty much worthless in terms of considering how that would play out because it won't, it's just mathematical rambling

>>718355929
There's lots of ways we know it's there, mostly by gravitational influence on surrounding objects, but also by radiation from the accretion disk surrounding the black hole. And theoretically black holes emit Hawking radiation, although detecting this would be virtually impossible.

Regardless, it is very mind boggling to consider which is why I find it so interesting

>>718355973
True, but saying "that thing" is 99,9999999% like a black hole, but it isn't a black hole would be like saying that 1 =/= 0.99999999999999999

I'm not going to enter that debate

File: 1465564560605.jpg (25KB, 350x441px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 350x441px

The Core is ultra dense and crushed onto a very small point so that the gravity around it is so powerful it can even attract light to it, it is almost like a core of a star still trying to fuse anything it can so you still get radiation expunged from it but no light, its kind of like a neutron star where the core of the start is left behind and is so dense a spoon full of it would weigh an incredible amount, so basically the idea is they are formed from ultra massive stars who's cores have just become too dense, as we know old stars were much larger than newer stars and as it sucks things into it, it becomes even more dense, although i have a theory that speculates that eventually when it has drawn in enough matter the amount of gravity gained wont be enough to keep it all stable within it self and it will explode into a new big bang aka Big bangs are formed from black holes.

we're actually inside of a blackhole

look it up

http://bigthink.com/think-tank/we-may-be-living-inside-a-black-hole

>>718356222
Not at all the same, because we're talking about the formation of a singularity, an infinitely dense point of mass. What you're saying is that something really really really really dense might as well be infinite, but that's wrong; it doesn't matter how high the figures are, comparing a finite number to infinity can never happen, because no matter how big it is, it will always be infinitely smaller.

Of course, if somebody just mentions in conversation that NASA discovered a black hole I'm not going to debate over semantics, but we're discussing precise definitions here, which is why the topic of the thread said "redpill me on black holes".

>>718356561
It doesn't attract light, it distorts the space so much that light traveling in a straight line ends inside of the black hole, no matter in which direction it is traveling

>>718356561
>although I have a theory

Oh boy...

File: dk-plot-jokerplan.jpg (42KB, 500x268px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 500x268px

>>718356832
the black hole actually has a gravitational pull so strong that light that travels close enough to it begins getting bent around the event horrizon or even sucked into the center

>>718357292
This shit again...

Light travels in a straight line in a non-euclidean space into the black hole

>>718357616
Light can be bent off its course, this has been proven many times and even seen in nature, gravity is a force that is also capable of bending light.

>>718357796
gravitational lens if i remember correctly

>>718357796

gravity bends and warps the actual fabric of space-time - not so much the objects themselves, but the literal universe

>>718357796
You are still reaching the same conclusion even though you don't realize that gravity doesn't affect light in a newtonian way


Newtonian physics
- Gravity is a force that affects objects with mass

General relativity
- Gravity distorts spacetime and everything traveling through it (light included)

>>718358374
and yet there are other ways to bend light which is my point, light can be bent and a black hole is bending light upon other things, i don't understand why this is up for debate.

>>718358205

gravitational lensing is when gravity bends space in such a way that light we would not normally be able to see can be seen because the path it is taking is now curved in our direction where as without the gravity it would not have gone in our direction

>>718357616

light travels along the curvature of space-time actually, so not technically a "straight line"

>>718358699
From a local point of view, it is a straight line
Externally, it doesn't

Both things are correct

>>718358575

black holes don't bend light, black holes bend the space around them which light then follows into its event horizon

it isn't up for debate, black holes bend space not the light itself.

think of a piece of paper...draw a line on that piece of paper...that line is light....now hold that paper parallel with the ground...pretend your foot is a black hole and bend on half toward the floor....the light did not bend...the light stayed on its course...the paper (space) bent

where does gravity come from? is it simply being a mass that spacetime curves around? am confused

>>718359030

no one knows where gravity comes from or even how it works

is it waves? is it particles (graviton?)

does it exist as one single force throughout a multiverse?

no one knows, its still just "the theory of gravity"

we know its there, but not how it works. Kind of like evolution. We know its a thing, but we only have theories on how it works

File: gancoo.jpg (59KB, 634x475px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 634x475px

>>718358960
do you ever step back and think it bends both the light and the space? i am not denying it bending the space around it, i am telling you it is also bending the light aswell and we know bending light is possible so why are you debating that the light doesn't at all get bent from any source including a black hole just the space around it gets bent, everything around a black hole is being bent, it is that dense, but you guy's can go on believe what ever you want, its not a difficult concept when you actually understand it instead of getting information confused out of a book.

>>718354680
>The "Black Hole" is an event horizon.
>Event horizons are formed from mass or energy being compressed below its schwarzschild radius.
>The "singularity" is just the geodesics all pointing to the hole.

Basically the black hole is literally a hole in spacetime and you're retarded.

>>718359228
something like instead of the core of the earth pulling us towards itself, it's actually the fabric of spacetime pushing us downward. but that gravity releases if you can break through the atmosphere? idk

>>718359420
The only other way to "bend" light is refraction, and that requires matter to begin with.

>>718359030
the way its mostly explained is, when an object is dense enough or in simple terms, heavy enough, it begins to bend the space around it sort of like if you put a bowling ball on a trampoline and then objects get pulled towards that point, there are many points that are dense so things begin to sort of pull around them selves, i speculate the waves are essentially echos from the bending of points in space which will either push or pull objects that receive the waves.

>>718359609

gravity is a force and just like the other 3 forces (electromagnetic, strong and weak nucleic) it can be broken

we need those massive rockets to "beat" gravity and escape its grip to leave earth's atmosphere.

you can pull apart two magnets yourself if they are small enough

and nuclear bombs are all about breaking the nucleic bond/forces between atoms.

but for all we know, maybe it is space pulling us down....we really only have theories on how gravity works.

>>718359729
ever notice on a hot day when light begins distorting or when you are grilling? yeah black holes give off energy and even matter, look at quasars, anyway i'm done here, have fun.

>>718360008

that has to do with light refracting through the atmosphere man

File: niggersun.jpg (9KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 480x360px

>>718351792
they are nigger stars

>>718360008
Good luck seeing that on the Moon (even though the moon has a very very very faint atmosphere)

>>718359831
>>718359929
guys like you are the reason that i keep coming back here. actual help and information among the chaos. hats off to you

protip: they aren't holes, they aren't warps to some other galaxy. They are just objects like any other - made of matter. The only difference is that these objects have mass beyond a certain threshold where weird things start happening, like light not being able to escape. Nothing magical or wormholey about them. Just objects.

>>718351134
niggers create them when they move to YT's
neighborhood and immediately bring down
property values

>>718359549
>a hole in spacetime

Right, because that makes sense. Black holes are not event horizons, that's retarded. Black holes HAVE event horizons, just as event horizons exist in many other places in the universe that don't involve black holes. Black holes are the singularity at the center, just because the name "black hole" refers to the area defined by the event horizon doesn't mean that's what it actually is. I never said event horizons don't exist, I said black holes don't exist. Because a black hole is a singularity, and singularities cannot form in finite time. As I said before, physicists agree that actual black holes as predicted by Einstein do not exist, we just use the term for practical reasons

>>718361219
Except at their very core, beyond the event horizon, all their mass is compacted in a single mathematical spot, with no volume at all.

>>718351134
they're big holes that are black, what more do you want?

>>718361219
Black holes are defined as such because of their density, not mass. A black hole with the mass of the Earth would be the size of a golf ball or something like that

>>718361594

they're actually really tiny single points of dense material

>>718361908
/thread

>>718354925
Said scientist observed the stars and the blackhole's effect on its surrounding, not the black hole itself. we can only suppose they exist although we have no way of explicitely demonstrating they exist.

File: Black_hole_lensing_web.gif (714KB, 240x192px) Image search: [Google]

714KB, 240x192px

>>718361908
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_singularity

Interesting read

>>718361403
>Right, because that makes sense.
It makes sense if you're not a degenerate animal.

>Black holes are not event horizons. Black holes HAVE event horizons.
The event horizon IS the black hole, because that's what it is, a hole in spacetime. Since it's a hole in spacetime, and space and time is relative, it makes sense. You have your shit backwards because you're an ape. Go watch Duck Dynasty, Normie.

>>718354680
And then you realize that impossibility of detection equals non-existence.
Things indeed disappear if thrown into a black hole, simply because the redshift becomes infinite, hence detection becomes impossible, hence the schwarzschild radius is reached because it IS the border of detection itself.

Also, what appears as a black hole is the schwarzschild-radius itself, and it manifests itself whenever a mass collapses below its very own schwarzschild radius.
Simply put, whenever the gravitational pull of a given mass reaches ( possibly even exceeds) lightspeed, a black hole is formed, making the detection of objects inside and on that specific radius impossible, hence "rendering" any such object non-existent. What stays is it's former mass, but no method of pinpointing its position inside this radius is possible, hence it's a "mathematical" singularity.

If you were speaking about particle singularities themselves, you'd be right. But you don't. You mix up mathematical and particle Singularities with the Schwarzschild radius, postulating that somehow black holes can't exist based on that retarded convolution of terms, even tho we can detect and observe Black Holes.
Hence your argument is invalid.

Have a nice night.

>>718361219
You are 100% fucking wrong, they are holes in spacetime.

>>718354925
Why is the hebrew backwards?

>>718361908
no they're actually not

Woah there is nothing inside dude woah like we don't even know dude black holes woah dude

File: 1479737631148.gif (2MB, 265x308px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 265x308px

>>718351662

File: 352511633.jpg (16KB, 384x400px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 384x400px

>all this retards in this thread that don't know that black hole (a sun with such a high gravity that doesn't allow light to come out of it) and worm hole (no one knows what exactly it is) are entirely different things

>>718364698
I blame the movie Event Horizon.
And No Man's Sky.
Fuck No Man's Sky!

>>718364698
nah dude you're wrong, black hole is a synonym for worm hole

File: 1471651372823.jpg (23KB, 334x500px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 334x500px

>>718354925

"Your" just being a stupid nigger.

Himself is not amused.

>>718364988
Bleach.
Drink it.
Even if just for the sake of Humanity.

>>718365144

Haha says the brainlet

Pick up a book sometime and maybe you won't embarrass yourself so much

They're two words for the same thing

>>718365303
Citation needed.
(As if the outcomes wouldn't be obvious already)

You must combine spirituality and science if you want to get true answers. Language is dark matter because you can quickly convey ideas through words but would you rather find the answer about black holes yourself or through words from someone else. It's a touchy subject talking about black holes anyway, it's all about what's actually remembered anyway

>>718352035
I'm just sick of 'em constantly demanding reparations from white holes for stuff that happened hundreds of space years ago

>>718365607
>You must combine spirituality and science if you want to get true answers.
Stoppend reading there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP4abiHdQpc

>>718365558
>citation needed
>can't use fucking google

So dumb, I can't even

>>718351358

Black holes are an anomaly. They don't exist but we do acknowledge them. Nothing is not a thing, it is literally no-thing.

>>718366035
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=black+holes+worm+holes+are+the+same
K.

>>718365805
>space years
>HURR DURR

>>718366303

Same as man-made global warming.

>>718365607
The red pill on black holes really comes down to yourself. Let's say you're a universe inside you. All potential outcomes within your life exists with yours and others who know you. What's happens if you're a universe and you die? Well if you die without finding light you become basically a black hole cause there's no light coming from your consciousness anymore. So all potential aspects of you become black or bend in on themselves into blackness and then you die. So black holes are actually consciousness bent in on itself but it can't see itself.
>>718365826
I'm speaking from the spiritual side. I'm sure science will be able to explain consciousness one day and really explain black holes in an actual equation

>>718366329

lol how about you give me an actual source what the fuck is that website that is not a source

Jesus Christ dude at least try

>>718366540
>I'm speaking from the spiritual side.
Stopped reading there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9gqk49ShMQ

>>718366682
>pretends anon can't use google
>actually can't use google himself
>doesn't realize I take his b8 because I'm bored.
kek.

>>718365805
they will never be satisfied. the hunger of the black holes will never be satiated. and the swarming tide of hostile holes will encompass the universe in cold ignorance for generations and generations to come.

File: 1477121989775.jpg (137KB, 540x540px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 540x540px

>>718367089

You can't ruse me I was born rused

File: 060[1].png (80KB, 500x475px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 500x475px

>>718367425

File: 3e91debdb1a093ddaedf0fe06d91b310eedb3add77f6948dad1e397bb79dfe03.jpg (61KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 640x480px

>>718367662

Leave me alone OR ELSE

>>718361403
>As I said before, physicists agree

Cite your sources nigger

>>718351134
dont you hate it when people give info on something they cant fathom ?

File: blackhole.jpg (156KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 640x480px

>>718351134

Here I have an infographic that will clarify things for you.

>>718351134
they were incredibly large fucking suns before, and then they collapsed under it's own weight and created a domino effect resulting in so much accelerating gravity that it eventually absorbs its own light.

wheres the proof that these things exist? why aren't I deep within a black hole right now ?

>>718368857
Because we are in the matrix instead?

>>718369010
fuck your fore play. I need a nut bitch!

>>718368835
>large fucking suns

>>718368857
see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNgIl-qIklU

>>718368835
Bless you, a little knowledge but a big heart. Aaaw.

>>718351134
there's a massive black hole in the center of each galaxy

>>718352035
Holes of color you degenerate

>>718369218
this doenst prove anything that they exist. how do we know theyre not making this up?

>>718351792
TBH Shouldn't have come to /b/ for legit answers, you gotta separate from the memes

>>718351358
Incorrect.
They do exist, but they're not quite what you think. They are supermassive and have tremendous gravity, but they don't actually suck everything in like people used to think. Once they grow beyond a certain mass, matter that's being pulled into the black hole is moving too fast to actually stick to it and is shot out in streams perpendicular to the rotation of the black hole. There is even a sub-category of supermassive black holes called "blazars" that shoot out bursts of ejecta which explode almost like fireworks. Then there are micro-black-holes which are created during high-energy particle collisions at the upper layers of the atmosphere where a very tiny amount of matter is momentarily condensed into a really really really really really really really small space but they come apart really quickly (which is why they don't grow and swallow the earth all the time).

File: gABCoZy.jpg (34KB, 349x353px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 349x353px

"black holes" is a racist term created by white supremacists. Why aren't they called white holes? Makes you think, huh.

>>718352082
i dont get it, it talks about particles escaping the black hole. but i thought nothing could escape em

>>718370887
youre late.

File: black hole.jpg (193KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 1280x960px

this is /b/

137 replies and this hasn't been posted yet

i am disappointment