Can a planet orbit a black hole?

>>8707171
Why not?

>>8707171
We are orbiting a black hole you silly billy!

if it's not too close, then sure

>>8707171
dunno, does your mom have any orbiters OP?

>>8707171

Like in Interstellar? A Black Hole causes problems. Gravitation, radiation and all the debris that flies around it. It's certainly not as pleasant to orbit as a star like the sun.

>>8707177

We are orbiting a star. The star is orbiting a black hole. We are going around a black hole but we are orbiting a star.

And yes a planet can orbit a black hole.

>>8707258
>we are going around a black hole
so... we are orbiting it

>>8707171
not in a stable orbit like we have around the Sun, eventually the planet would get sucked into the black hole, its orbit would be a spiral towards the centre of the black hole, unless it or bits at a very far distance

>>8707454
eh, galactic motion isn't a proper orbit because of dark matter

>>8707456
Wrong.

>>8707456
no
no more than the orbit of a planet around a star eventually decays too(all orbits decay)

>>8707460
>all orbits decay

Which is why the moon is slowly getting away from the Earth, right?

>>8707171
It would be really painful.

File: Conic_sections,_orbits,_and_gravitational_potential.jpg (2MB, 3344x2831px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3344x2831px

I know this isn't really related to the thread but does anyone see a man's face in the bottom-left of this picture? I'm not going crazy right? There's totally a man's face in the nebulae of that corner, as if painted there by the artist, but i can't tell if its Pareidolia or not

>>8707474
nah there's no face at all, you must be getting schizophrenic

>>8707474
yes there is a man

>>8707472
You're a big guy.

>>8707223
A black hole of the same mass as the sun would act the exact same way except for the whole light and warmth thing.

File: sir-isaac-newton.jpg (13KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x300px

>>8707474
It looks like Newton

>>8707223

We're discussing the possibility of an orbit, not the possibility of life.

Black holes are not magical space vacuums you popsci retards. They pull with gravity just like any other object, they are just fucking massive and thus orbit would have to be very fast and close, or slower but of a larger orbit radius.

>>8707177
>>8707258
>>8707457
It's not even because of dark matter. The amount of normal matter in the galaxy is enough. The supermassive black hole is only .01% of the mass in the galaxy, while the sun is 99.99% of the mass in the solar system. So the sun isn't orbiting the black hole (at least not in the same way the planets orbit the sun), it's orbiting the COM of the galaxy.

>>8708112
It's kind of a drag effect though. The supermassive black hole drags everything around its immediate vicinity which drags everything in its vicinity which is how you get the spiral shape.

>>8708132
This is completely wrong. The spiral arms are constantly dying and being reborn, it has nothing to do with the black hole dragging anything. Why doesn't this effect create arms in elliptical galaxies, who's supermassive black holes are much heavier than those in spiral galaxies?

File: 1450283561621.png (204KB, 364x336px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 364x336px

>no one is mentioning tidal forces
Armchair astrophysicist, the lot of you.

>>8708187
The Roche limit is the same whether you're orbiting a planet, star, or black hole. Fuck off and learn some actual physics.

>>8708149
Because the gravity is stronger and has a more uniform distribution? Just seemed the logical answer to me.

>>8707474
looks more like a woman than a man

>>8708149
>>8708392
I would have to imagine it might do with the speed at which the black hole itself spins (speculation of course) and the strength of the gravity. A slower spin and the "arms" might be able to catch up leading to elliptical shape.

>>8707474

Looks like Euler. Google "Pareidolia"

>>8708392
>>8708428
You both have no knowledge of galactic physics. Elliptical galaxies are formed from spiral galaxy mergers, it has nothing to do with how the supermassive black hole spins. Spiral galaxies are flat and spirally because they have more angular momentum. Please don't speculate things that can be easily searched on google.

>>8707471
yup

>>8708485
re-read his post, or delete yours

>>8708667

Kill yourself.

File: IMG_0883.jpg (2MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4032x3024px

>>8707223
Does anyone know if interstellar is correct?

Can we cross the event horizon of a really weak black hole to get data?

>>8708707
You can cross the event horizon of a black hole without being harmed (assuming the tidal forces are low and the firewall theory of blackholes is not true, this is still a widely debated subject), but there would be no way to get the data out of it. Remember the only reason Cooper went into the black hole was to act as an exhaust for Brand to be able to get to the third planet with enough fuel. It wasn't until after he went into the black hole and discovered a way to communicate with the outside world (which is not possible) that he got the idea to transmit the data.

File: image.jpg (110KB, 574x573px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 574x573px

Behold
Sag A*

>pic: orbit of prominent stars around Milky Way Supermassive Black Hole
>1995-2008 UCLA / Keck / Ghez et al

>>8708707

It would have to be a very large black hole, a supermassive one like the one at the center of our galaxy. Anything smaller and the tidal forces would atomise you before you could get inside. Once in, you have no possibility of ever leaving, or of sending anything (such as data) out. All you can do is travel to the singularity, whereupon you would annihilated, with a 50/50 chance that it was the singularity in the first hole that annihilated you, or the singularity at the other end of the wormhole.

>>8708739
So the opposite, odd.

>>8708726
But in the movie he ended up getting out of it, still having the data. Disregard the time travel communication.

>>8708755
>But in the movie he ended up getting out of it, still having the data. Disregard the time travel communication.

Yes but this is impossible. Out in normal space, we can move in any of the three regular directions. But inside a black hole, there is only one direction, towards the singularity. There is no direction you could broadcast a message that goes anywhere but into the singularity, and the singularity is just about the most hostile environment possible, where gravity becomes so strong that atoms and particles collapse into themselves.

>>8708755
you forgot to disregard the 4 dimensional beings that don't exist in our universe

>>8708765
But we are talking of crossing a micro blachole not going in it.

>>8709283

Crossing the event horizon is a one-way trip. And if it was a micro hole, like in the movie, it would annihilate you before you got close.

>>8709299
Then why did the movie science advisors let it in?

>>8709304
Because him dying in the blackhole would be the most anticlimactic shit in existence. Literally 2 and a half hours of building up just to die in a black hole? He had to meet Murph at the end, it made the movie 4000x better even though it lost accuracy doing it.

>>8709304

I doubt they did. AFAIK, they were only consulted about the visuals, not the feasibility.

>>8709317
>>8709318
Well how big was the black hole anyway? It had a big time dilation effect on the system so I doubt it was microscopic.

Yes, at a stable orbit

>>8707474
>>8708485
It's obvious the artist intended it.

>>8707171
better question, how many white women can orbit my BBC?

There is no difference between the gravitational forces of a planet of certain mass and a black hole of the same mass, provided the distance from the center of mass of the black hole is greater than the radius of the planet

if NASA can explain it with computer generated images and physics modeling then the answer is always going to be yes.

>>8707171
No planets don't orbit other bodies.

Yes, a planet can orbit a barycentre that is extremely close to something that is more *massive*, and a blackhole is very massive.

>>8711406
listen barry we've discussed this already and you cannot keep adding your name as a prefix to common words and pretend like it means something sciency.

>>8708779
>implying
speak for yourself you 3d ant

If black holes aren't permanent, if we sent something through the event horizon and then destroyed the black hole, could we get the data back?

>>8712353
You eventually get the energy back, but not the data. You'll get random information in the form of radiation.

>>8707520
what would happen to us if the sun suddenly got swapped with a black of hole equal mass?

>>8712429
Nothing would happen for 8 minutes, and then everything would get dark and cold.

>>8707258
>the star is orbiting a black hole

Yes, and us along with it.

>>8712442
How dark would it be?

>>8712429
how cold?

>>8712453
>>8712459
It wouldn't actually get that cold due to radiation emitted from the Earth for quite a while.

It would be extremely painful though.

>>8712519
you mean like radioactive isotopes in the core?

>>8711406
>>8711420
kek

If I'm in a small galaxy do I experience time different than a person in a large galaxy with large black holes in the center?

>>8712583
I think it depends on the strength of the gravitational field at that point

>>8712519
That's a big hole

>>8707171
Yes, but it would suck