[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]

2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

File: 29 KB, 600x372, new-supernova_10392_600x450.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Mar 12 17:32:16 2012 No.4458598 [Reply] [Original]

Could there be something like a mini black hole in the core of stars that drives the stellar fusion process?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 17:33:22 2012 No.4458604 Nope.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 17:33:22 2012 No.4458602 File: 42 KB, 423x358, no.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >doesnt understand how black holes work <<<

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 17:35:39 2012 No.4458611 Nah. Stars can exist stably up to the Chandrasekhar limit, and any star with a black hole in it will quickly cease to be a star as it falls into the black hole. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar_limit

>>	Lawlhwut Mon Mar 12 17:35:39 2012 No.4458612 3/10

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 17:35:39 2012 No.4458613 no there are accretion discs around stellar black holes that periodically undergo fusion. and around supergiant black holes that's basically what a quasar is

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 17:35:39 2012 No.4458609 File: 22 KB, 493x402, 1312188381084.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Mar 12 17:38:02 2012 No.4458628

>>4458611
Though to be clear, neutron stars can be heavier than that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_star
>In general, compact stars of less than 1.38 solar masses – the Chandrasekhar limit – are white dwarfs
>Gravitational collapse will usually occur on any compact star between 10 and 25 solar masses and produce a black hole.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:14:10 2012 No.4458789 >>4458613 but if a micro black hole was in the core then its accretion disk could drive fusion...plus sunspots could be where matter is failing into the core

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:15:26 2012 No.4458796 File: 65 KB, 600x439, new-solar-observatory-telescope-sunspot-close-up_25024_600x450.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] they look like giant whirlpools to me

Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:15:26 2012 No.4458797

>>4458789
>plus sunspots could be where matter is failing into the core
lol

The modeling and physics and experimental observation that goes into stellar dynamics is so far beyond the thoughts you're having ATM that it's really just a waste of your time. Take a course in stellar astrophysics and you'll gain a lot more from your time investment.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:16:26 2012 No.4458800 >>4458796 >whirlpool >no hint of circular motion about the center

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:18:50 2012 No.4458809 >>4458796 It looks more like a giant gaping anus.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:19:50 2012 No.4458810 File: 94 KB, 600x450, derp-derp-derp-derp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4458796

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:20:50 2012 No.4458815 File: 134 KB, 1152x864, the-eye-of-sauron.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4458796

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:21:59 2012 No.4458822 File: 48 KB, 350x191, 350px-NASA_54559main_comparison1_strip.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4458797 and sunspot cycle period is 22 years, covering two polar reversals of the solar magnetic dipole field

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:23:22 2012 No.4458836 File: 15 KB, 300x197, the_more_you_know-300x197.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4458822 its actually only 11 years, then it starts again with the polarities swapped over, (but for all intensive purposes its still exactly the same)

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:25:38 2012 No.4458849 >>4458836 >pedal stool >etc getting annoying now

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:26:38 2012 No.4458850 File: 73 KB, 366x360, Tachocline.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] and at the tachocline the rotation abruptly changes to solid body rotation in the solar radiation zone

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:29:02 2012 No.4458865 >>4458849 grow a pear

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:29:02 2012 No.4458866 What? No. Why would you think that?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:31:19 2012 No.4458876 File: 406 KB, 790x878, solar-dynamo-process.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:45:54 2012 No.4458936 bump

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:52:42 2012 No.4458973 File: 336 KB, 575x347, sun-object.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] what's that?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 18:57:22 2012 No.4458990 will someone with some real knowledge on solar dynamics please comment on this?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:01:47 2012 No.4459000 File: 132 KB, 484x484, 159.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4458973

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:02:55 2012 No.4459004 File: 2.16 MB, 1920x1080, _galaxie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4458611 the galaxies aren't sucked up by the super-massive blackholes in their centers

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:03:03 2012 No.4459011 >>4458990 That's because the stars are orbiting the galactic center, not touching the black holes it contains.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:04:11 2012 No.4459014 >>4459004 That's because the stars are orbiting the galactic center, not physically touching the black holes it contains.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:05:11 2012 No.4459019 >>4458990 Some already have. Answer is no.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:07:26 2012 No.4459027 >>4459014 ... this makes no sense on ao many levels

Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:08:43 2012 No.4459032

>>4459027
I'm sorry to hear that.

A black hole that is physically inside a star is going to consume the star. A black hole doesn't exert any more gravity on things outside it than a star of the same mass, though. If the sun turned into a black hole (somehow, and without a supernova), Earth's orbit would not be affected.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:11:59 2012 No.4459044 File: 21 KB, 600x450, black-hole-swallows-star_36618_600x450.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4459014 they don't have to be touching to be consumed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3Z5AS3TTS4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galactic_Center

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:12:06 2012 No.4459046 >>4459044 True. Tidal forces be wack, yo.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:19:54 2012 No.4459065 >>4459032 >If the sun turned into a black hole (somehow, and without a supernova), Earth's orbit would not be affected. Wait, what? Why? Doesn't the black hole exert a greater gravitational force?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:23:19 2012 No.4459088 >>4459065 gravitation <> mass Only if the blacj hole was heavier than the sun (which it must be, but argh... somebody else who actually knows about this should probably answer)

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:23:19 2012 No.4459094 I have a question, If blackholes are at the center of a galaxy, why are the stars not getting sucked in it? I know it's not literally a hole but why are the stars not pulled to it outright?

Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:23:19 2012 No.4459093
File: 21 KB, 860x343, Black_Hole_Entropy_(reduced).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4459032

the suns gravity would come from the tolat mass of the sun....the micro black hole would just be a small % of that

and a blackholes entropy is proportional to its horizon area - it wouldnt be able to just suck up the star

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:25:35 2012 No.4459103 >>4459094 same reason we don't get pulled into sun they orbit around it

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:26:42 2012 No.4459111 >>4459094 Stars are orbiting the black holes. Very fast. The same principle like our solar system. >inb4 derp why is the earth not falling into the sun

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:28:59 2012 No.4459114 >>4459103 >>4459111 Hivemind.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:29:59 2012 No.4459117 >>4459093 >and a blackholes entropy is proportional to its horizon area - it wouldnt be able to just suck up the star no it would, the black hole would grow though.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:31:14 2012 No.4459126 >>4459111 Is dat some centripetal forces?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:31:14 2012 No.4459127 >>4459111 But if the sun's gravity is so great, why arent the planets getting sucked in too?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:31:14 2012 No.4459129 >>4459127 because of orbits

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 12 19:33:30 2012 No.4459138 >>4459129 retard, god holds on to the planets

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]