Questions about black holes

[Anonymous No.5327083]

1: What happens (if anything) inside of a black hole? What does it look like inside of one?

2: What would happen if you theoretically "fell into" a black hole?

3: Where do black holes come from?

4: Do they suck everything in as told or do they have things orbiting them?

5: What, in actuality, makes up and IS a black hole?

[Anonymous No.5327109]

Inside of a blackhole things get squished, it doesnt look like anyhting inside of one because no light be seen in one. if you fell in a black hole you are squished, but i have a theory that you would never reach the center due to exelerating faster than the speed of light meaning you are going backwards in time. black holes come from imploded neutron stars. in order to orbit a neutron star you would have had to exelerated very very very very fast in advance, so no nothing is orbiting one yet. a black hole is made up from a very compact piece of star basically, thats all it is, one pinhead of neutron star weighs as much as the worlds largest super tankard boat.

[Anonymous No.5327118]

>>5327083
1: we don't know.
2: you would turn into spaghetti
3: when localized mass exceeds a limit that space-time can bend, and so it bends onto itself. sort of. Large, Dead stars.
4:no more than traditional gravity wells do. their pull is proportional to their mass, after a certain point though so amount of energy will get you away, which is what makes them special.
5:Celestial garbage. dead stars, anything that gets close enough.

[Anonymous No.5327141]

>>5327109
>>5327118

actually, it is theorized that you can survive being pulling into a supermassive blackhole. You would pass through the event horizon and plummet towards the center reletively unharmed. Eventually you would be vaporized by the intense heat near the singularity.

Couldn't tell you what it would look like, though I'm sure it would be strange. You are basically in the middle of where reality breaks down.

[Anonymous No.5327147]

>>5327141

What if all of the theories are wrong, and the inside of a black hole takes you to another universe?

[Anonymous No.5327148]

>>5327141
oh, and to answer 5. blackholes aren't made of anything. The black sphere that is theorized is only the threshold at which light cannot escape. It's just a dark spot, not actual matter.

A black hole is a singularity. AKA an infinitly dense point that takes up precisely no space at all mathematically.

[Anonymous No.5327151]

>>5327147
very possible. I actually think that black holes are literal holes in spacetime. Sucking everything out of this plane of existence. Perhaps into a new plane, or the space between. Who knows?

[Anonymous No.5327154]

>>5327151

My personal theory is that black holes are the result of alien civilizations who reached a technological singularity and literally destroyed themselves with knowledge.

[Anonymous No.5327161]

>>5327154
an interesting idea. do you think knowledge is some fundamental force of the universe then? how do you explain the destruction?

[Anonymous No.5327167]

>>5327161

It is the very core of my theory that knowledge is finite, and a technological singularity occurs when a species (or federation of species, any civilization that works together really) discovers the answer to two questions.

"What caused the big bang?"

"What is reality?"

Answering those two questions breaks the very fabric of reality and time, and created a black hole.

[Anonymous No.5327200]

>>5327167

Interesting, before my brother's best friend killed himself he wrote us a letter, in it he basically told us (our family, he was basically adopted because he had shitty parents and was abandoned early, but that's irrelevant) that he discovered "them", I have a theory that when people with schizophrenia, or people who are crazy in general, who talk about an amorphous "them", are people who have a mental defect that prevents their brains from defending against something that humans have evolved to hide from, people who know what "they" are constantly rant about "them" and say it's safer if everyone else doesn't know what "they" are because then "they" can find you. I've heard of at least two hundred mentally unstable people who have killed themselves because of "them".

I think "they" have something to do with black holes.

[Anonymous No.5327205]

i always thought black holes create a new pocket of space time essentially seeding an expanding universe with matter. like a balloon. So what i mean is black holes are micro dyson spheres.

[Anonymous No.5327211]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pAnRKD4raY

Here it shows how an inside of blackhole looks like

[Anonymous No.5327214]

>>5327200

That's...

Nigga take that shit to /x/

[Anonymous No.5327227]

well see heres the thing, no matter what, you simply cannot get into a black hole, as you near the ever shrinking paramiter time gets shorter & shorter and you essenntially just become an ever smaller 1.11111.....

But essentially there is a possibilty that the very means of how a black hole articulates itself implies that it is beyond space time as to say outside of spacetime
That being noted theres a possibility that `perspective`projects from that and can be related to the collapse of the wave function.

tl;dr I dont know alot about what Im talking about but it would be the sexiest discovery of all time to be able to write a formula for that

[Anonymous No.5327233]

>>5327200
"they" are a species so advanced that we would think them to be gods. they are everywhere. they

they are a species so powerful that we would take them to be gods. they are ancient, they began to evolve into "them" billions and billions of years before the dawn of life on earth. imagine man in a thousand years. now imagine a million. now a billion, then 5 billion, then even more than that.
imagine what we will become. what we will know. the things we will be capable of.
they are the primal fear that comes when you're alone at night and you know something is watching you. the shiver that runs down your spine when your brain doesn't shut out a glimpse of one of them quickly enough. the face staring over your shoulder that you never see, never feel, but sense and fear. not fear like you know, not fear any man can know. known. the fear australopithecus afarensis knew when he was caught between a sheer cliff and a saber-toothed cat.

when a dog growls at nothing or runs from nothing, it's one of them.

one of them is even watching me type this out. i'm not crazy enough to see "them" or hear "them", but sometimes, i catch a glimpse of one reading over my shoulder, or hear them talk when i lie in my bed caught between sleep and waking.

they are formless, shapeless, impossible and dark things. they are whatever they need to be. we evolved to adapt to our environments.
they've evolved to adapt to anything, at any time, at will.
they are made from the fabric of the universe.

they are watching you right now, and you can feel it. you know it but it's so "wrong" to you that you can't know. you filter it because if you couldn't filter it you'd go mad, truly mad, like the schizophrenics. they know and they can't handle the truth.

[Anonymous No.5327242]

>>5327233
>>5327200

>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.5327250]

>>5327233
nice lovecraft there, bro

[Anonymous No.5327266]

>>5327227
>YOU CANT GET INTO A BLACK HOLE

>HOWEVER, BLACKHOLES CAN GROW IN SIZE, EXIST IN THE FIRST PLACE, AND SHRINK

stupid reasoning

[Anonymous No.5327269]

>>5327242
life evolves to become better suited to its environment.
ultimately, it's "environment" is the entire universe.
over billions of years, it adapts perfectly to the universe, so perfectly that it is able to adapt to any possible situation that could arise according to the laws of nature flawlessly and near-instantaneously.
these beings, assuming they exist, are able to survive anywhere under any conditions that can exist.

not /x/, merely the pinnacle of evolution.
are you familiar with the idea of computronium? there is one particular arrangement of matter that is better than any other possible configuration at "being a computer"
"they" are one particular arrangement of matter that is more well-suited for "a self-aware being in a universe governed by this particular set of natural laws" than any other possible configuration of matter.

[Anonymous No.5327271]

>>5327233
>they are made from the fabric of the universe.
>implying that we are not

takes me back

>be 9
>think angels are real being made out of light
>imagine them being scared of black holes
>wonder if black holes are where god put fallen angels
>shiver at the cruelness of the universe

But as we grow up, we stop believing in fairy tales. no, we don't loose the ability to see things that are there, we gain the ability to discern our own imaginations from our observations.

[Anonymous No.5327275]

>>5327266
This.

guys can't into Zeno's paradox

[Anonymous No.5327278]

>>5327269
>there is one particular arrangement of matter that is better than any other possible configuration at "being a computer"
>"they" are one particular arrangement of matter that is more well-suited for "a self-aware being in a universe governed by this particular set of natural laws"
>dat tautology

[Anonymous No.5327284]

/x/ here. We have voted that "they" are the Jews.
I really don't know why but I never know half the stuff going on in /x/phile brains.

[Anonymous No.5327285]

>>5327271
what you said is absolutely silly. a childhood belief about angels is irrelevant.
read my next post. the evolution of any lifeform will eventually come to a point where it cannot progress any further without going backwards. "they" have reached that point, or are damn close.

[Anonymous No.5327290]

>>5327278
shit nigger, this is true of any "thing"
there's one way to make it that's objectively better than any other way.

[Anonymous No.5327294]

>>5327285
>what you said is absolutely silly. a childhood belief about angels is irrelevant.
>absolutely silly. a childhood belief
>Goes on about immaterial beings from the dawn of the universe that have no proof of existing and can not be known
>nothing to do with angels

[Anonymous No.5327300]

>>5327290
define objectively better.

there your problem right there, better is rooted in meaning, and rooted in opinion. A cd is better than a cassete at storing music, unless you happen to like the sound quality, get a kick out of rewinding, or enjoy the nostalgia of using an outdated medium.

There is no "better" computer. There are computers that can do more processing, and those that can do less. If better was measured by what computer took longer to perform a task, an older computer might be better.

There is no ideal configuration for evolution, so stop pushing your opinions about value onto the universe to justify a belief in things that are not there.

[Anonymous No.5327325]

>>5327300
better meaning either "is capable of performing a greater variety of more complex tasks more efficiently, quickly and accurately than another item designed to perform the same tasks" or "able to do one thing with a greater efficiency than other items designed to do the same or a very similar thing"
for example, a solar panel that converts 20% of sunlight into usable energy is better than one that converts only 12%. A swiss army knife with 14 tools is better than one with 8, as long as the tools are made from the same or higher quality material and craftsmanship than the smaller knife and they do not interfere with its operation. a car that can travel 600 miles on 12 gallons of gas is better than one that can only travel 450, once again assuming it is made from materials of equal or better quality and capable of doing everything the less efficient car is.
you can get into this "nothing is better" bullshit to defend your point if you want, and technically be right on the grounds that "well, someone somewhere might consider a slower computer better for some fucking reason"
if given the choice between 2 cars, identical except in color, people would still find one "better" because of personal preference. but, neither one is any better than the other at transporting humans at high speeds.

[Anonymous No.5327337]

>1: What happens (if anything) inside of a black hole? What does it look like inside of one?

Just look around you, we're already in a black hole.

[Anonymous No.5327347]

>>5327266
I never said anything about size, if anything I referenced about being undeffined, and as such not relivant to our time structure, which means that it might as well be totally outside of our existance

stop being so bloody butthurt over an over-your-headiddly proggressive comment

[Anonymous No.5327367]

>>5327083
1) The only thing we know happens in a black hole is that it exerts gravitational pull on objects outside of it; it is also theorized that it exudes Hawkins radiation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation

It would not look like anything, because the gravity is so high light and other EM waves cannot move freely.

2) You would be either ripped apart by tidal forces, or incinerated by the heat.

3) Usually from the aftermath of a super- or hyper-nova. Basically the matter after a supergiant star novas collapses in on itself, but does not have the right circumstances to start a nuclear reaction.

4) Outside of the event horizon: both - it depends on the approach of the item.
Inside of the event horizon we don't have a way to tell.

5) Matter at such an extreme density that it overcomes all other physical forces but gravity.

[Anonymous No.5327374]

>>5327325
>"better" because of personal preference.

The flaw in your arguement is that everything is personal preference. You consider a faster/more complicated/more efficient thing to be better because it serves your needs.

I am not just "technically" correct, i am correct. You assign value onto things in the universe, they do not have value of their own.

To borrow your solar panel analogy: what if producing more energy was not beneficial to the system? Stick a 9v in something that requires a button battery and tell me it is better. "better" is a judgement made on something depending on circumstance, and whether or not we like the outcome.

Tell me again how these imaginary beings are better? The universe doesn't care. We are not moving towards your ideal of what existence is. It remains your ideal and is not some inevitability you do not need evidence for because you personally think it is better.

[Anonymous No.5327402]

how do black holes have entropy?

[Anonymous No.5327408]

>>5327402
They evaporate. Quantum fluctuations on the event horizon causes antimatter to drop into the black hole, while the matter created with it turns into hawking radiation.

[Anonymous No.5327424]

They say the laws of physics break down inside the black hole, so if you can somehow survive the trip without being crushed by infinite gravity, you could become omnipotent.

[Anonymous No.5327444]

>>5327424
they might break down, we don't know. we can't know what's inside the blackhole so any predictions of stuff beyond the event horizon have no validity

[Anonymous No.5327456]

>>5327141
I did see this on the toob recently -- new theories posit that you would accelerate to the speed of light as you approach and because of time dilation would appear to freeze forever at the event horizon (with this weird idea that a hologram of you would be smeared on the event horizon's surface) but your body would pass effortlessly through the event horizon and you could in fact see what is inside. This is all purely theoretical physics at this point though.

A more likely outcome is the traditional idea that the tidal forces would pull you apart into what a previous poster termed "spaghetti" before you reach the event horizon.

[Anonymous No.5327481]

>>5327456
>"spaghetti"

That is actual term used by theoretical physicists, btw. Tidal forces causing "spaghettification". Coming from the same people that brought you flavors of quarks:two of which being strange and charm.

[Anonymous No.5327502]

>>5327424
>god delusion
>>>/x/

Seriously, people that have no idea what they're talking about should not make up shit.

[Anonymous No.5327519]

>>5327456
Those are the same theory actually, dating back to when black holes were first noticed as a solution to the equations of general relativity (except for the hologram bit which is more modern).

From your point of view, you fall in past the event horizon and there's nothing very special there, you just keep falling. However, black holes bend spacetime such that for anything inside the event horizon, their time axis (their "future") actually points radially inwards towards the center of the hole. So once you pass the event horizon it's inevitable that you will be at the singularity soon. In fact all of you will be at exactly the same point. Avoiding it is equivalent to time travel. In between the event horizon and the singularity, there will be gravitational tides which will tend to stretch you radially and compress you in the other two directions, this is the "spaghettification".

From an outside observer, since nothing can escape from inside the event horizon, they can never see you pass it. But that's just because the closer you are to the horizon, the longer it takes light from you to crawl up out of the hole.

[Anonymous No.5327520]

(continued)

The very earliest mathematical investigation of black holes by Schwarzchild did break down at the event horizon, but that turned out to be a mathematical artifact of the choice of coordinate system, not a physical thing that happens there. Hilbert and Eddington worked out coordinate systems that showed that the event horizon would seem like normal empty space to an observer there, and only the singularity at the center is a physical singularity.

[Anonymous No.5327563]

>>5327456
The thing to remember about the even horizon is that when you go past it, it will still appear to be just below you.

[Anonymous No.5327566]

>>5327563
The more massive the black hole, the lesser are the tidal forces at the event horizon. For a supermassive black hole, the tidal forces wouldn't go spaghettification-strong until well inside the event horizon.

[Anonymous No.5327580]

Jesus Christ is the answer you scientific heathen!!!!!

[Anonymous No.5327586]

>>5327083
>2: What would happen if you theoretically "fell into" a black hole?

You would be torn to pieces and sucked down like spaghetti. Also, you would see a blinding flash of light. Fun stuff.

[Anonymous No.5327587]

>>5327580
>scientific heathen
Thank you. That's the best compliment I've heard today.

[Anonymous No.5327588]

>>5327580
Fuck this reminded me of them weeping angels

[Anonymous No.5327589]

>>5327587
SINNER!!!!!!!! Repent! Repent!

[Anonymous No.5327590]

>>5327083

Video of what it would look like to fall into a black hole.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16885-what-would-it-look-like-to-fall-into-a-black-hole.html

[Anonymous No.5327596]

>>5327587
Cool and edgy atheist virgin detected.

[Anonymous No.5327601]

>>5327596
>this philosophy is not 2000 years old
>that is why it is edgy
>and virgin
It's funny how you people can never come up with good refutations, comebacks or insults.

[Anonymous No.5327602]

>>5327596

Angry christian virgin detected.

[Anonymous No.5327606]

>>5327602
>>5327601
Enjoy hell losers.

[Anonymous No.5327608]

>>5327596

The Holy Spirit is a faggot. Just by reading those words you had to say them in your head, and therefore you have committed the unforgivable sin.

[Anonymous No.5327611]

>>5327606

The Holy Spirit is a faggot. You are now imagining yourself shitting in the mouth of Jesus Christ and then having anal sex with Him. Also, God the Father is giving you an oily hand job and licking your balls.

[Anonymous No.5327614]

>>5327606

Enjoy oblivion winner.

[Anonymous No.5327616]

>>5327611

Oh, my sides. My sides! Is God using a twisty hand motion?

[Anonymous No.5327625]

>>5327608

any chrisfag who just read that just slammed their laptop cover down and is staring blankly ahead into space trying to figure out if they are now doomed. blaphemy of the holy spirit is like kryptonite to christfags. it's the ultimate superstition. they just CLEAR the fuck out whenever you insult the holy ghost. so funny. good move anon. good move.

[Anonymous No.5327636]

>>5327625

Based upon how this thread suddenly died I think I caused even the agnostics to abandon ship "just in case!" Fire insurance or something.

[Anonymous No.5327646]

What about the matter that is sucked by the black hole?
Where does it go? Did the black hole blast it in form of blue beam back into space like in OPs pic?
Pls respond

[Anonymous No.5327655]

>>5327646

Some of it gets blasted away in a beam, but not the material that enters. We just do not know what happens to that material. It's a complete mystery for now. Does it keep getting more and more crushed? Does it get pushed into a fuzzy sphere of strings such as speculated by string theory? Does it get pushed into a new universe through a white hole? Does it get blasted into another part of OUR universe through a white hole? We just don't know.

[Anonymous No.5327656]

>>5327646
The matter in the blue beam never entered the black hole. The magnetic fields around it cause a part of the infalling matter to instead be directed into the polar beams.

The matter that goes inside the event horizon...
We don't know what happens.
Some hypotheses are there. One is that it falls into the central singularity and collapses into infinite density. Another is that it is rendered into superstrings and the inside of the event horizon is a superstring fuzzball.

There could be ways to find out, but we're millennia away from the necessary tools, if they are even possible.

[Anonymous No.5327667]

>>5327608

[Anonymous No.5327674]

>>5327266

They can grow in mass, but the "size" of a black hole is the radius of the horizon, not its surface

[Anonymous No.5327696]

>>5327667

>implying evolution is anything more than just a theory lel

[Anonymous No.5327699]

>>5327667

The text balloon doesn't even properly word the point you're trying to make correctly. Pretty stupid.

[Anonymous No.5327707]

>>5327167
>Answering those two questions breaks the very fabric of reality and time, and created a black hole.
So much autism

[Anonymous No.5327723]

>>5327699

[Anonymous No.5327728]

So, what if, in the far far future, a super advanced civilization carefully makes a black hole so that is extremely close to the minimum mass required for a black hole, so that it will "evaporate" within a reasonable timeframe. What happens to the space around when the event horizon vanishes? Am I retarded for even asking the question?

[Anonymous No.5327769]

>>5327728
The black hole dissipates.

The mass of the singularity causes the event horizon, as the mass dissipates due to hawking radiation, the event horizon is diminished.

So the event horizon can't vanish before the singularity does, preventing the occurrence of a naked singularity.

There are other ways to cause a naked singularity to form, though.

Unfortunately, since the naked singularity is a non-standard boundary for spacetime, it's currently impossible to say what would happen.

[Anonymous No.5327781]

>>5327769

Fascinatin to say the least

[Anonymous No.5327807]

>Watch the movie Event Horizon
>Convinced that Black Holes are just gateways to some sort of hell for the rest of my life
>Everytime I see a black hole, even just a simulation picture/gif, I throw a bitchfit in my head and get really fucked spooked
>My fucking face when I found when I went to the bookmaked default black hole location in Space Engine

Fucking hell

[Anonymous No.5327821]

>>5327807

mfw I played alpha centauri as a kid and got this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB46XpnwhrA

[Anonymous No.5327829]

recent research on this

> Complementarity And Firewalls
http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.4090

> Singularities, Firewalls, and Complementarity
http://arxiv.org/abs/1208.3445

same author
> Abstract
> Almheiri, Marolf, Polchinski, and Sully, recently reported a remarkable and very surprising phenomenon involving old black holes. The authors argue that after a black hole has radiated more than half its initial entropy, the horizon is replaced by a \ rewall" at which infalling observers burn up, in apparent violation of one of the postulates of black hole complementarity. In this note I will give a different interpretation of the rewall phenomenon in which the properties of the horizon are conventional, but the dynamics of the singularity are strongly modi ed. In this formulation the postulates of complementarity are left intact. But the reader is nevertheless warned: black holes could be more dangerous than you thought.

[Anonymous No.5327837]

>>5327829
>This paper has been withdrawn because the author no longer believes the firewall argument is correct.

[Anonymous No.5327840]

>>5327837
I just kind of blank googled it sorry. the other one is up and has a section in the end which states why the author is skeptical of the idea.

That's the neat thing about science. It's actually happening right now and you can find out about it.