Notices
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Another Black Hole Question

  1. #1 Another Black Hole Question 
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    I was reading a Nature article relating to a compact lenticular galaxy NGC  1277 on how its Black Hole at the center is substantially massive in relation to its host galaxy. Some explanations relate to possibility of galaxy merging. I was wondering if two other explanations may be valid.
    1. This is an old galaxy and it has re-consumed the material it initially ejected.
    2. Binary Black Holes at the center.

    Any thoughts?




    Nature, 2012. DOI:10.1038/nature11592


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    I think they are both potentially valid, though the binary model would mean they have to have a fairly tight orbit around a common barycenter. Interesting thought, though.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Professor arKane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    1,181
    Quote Originally Posted by MrMojo1 View Post
    I was reading a Nature article relating to a compact lenticular galaxy NGC  1277 on how its Black Hole at the center is substantially massive in relation to its host galaxy. Some explanations relate to possibility of galaxy merging. I was wondering if two other explanations may be valid.
    1. This is an old galaxy and it has re-consumed the material it initially ejected.
    2. Binary Black Holes at the center.

    Any thoughts?

    Nature, 2012. DOI:10.1038/nature11592
    I'm sorry but your number 1 question doesn't make any sense to me. You are not suggesting that black holes initially ejected material to form galaxies are you?

    Next SMBH's are only actively consuming when there's enough matter close by. By definition and old galaxy like the Milkyway will always have a relatively inactive BH as all close matter will have been consumed. The only way to activate it again would be a merger of some kind. I would suggest there is another reason for a larger BH than expected for that size galaxy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    Quote Originally Posted by arKane View Post
    I'm sorry but your number 1 question doesn't make any sense to me. You are not suggesting that black holes initially ejected material to form galaxies are you?
    I was suggesting that prior to the super-massive star became a a super-massive black hole, it ejected material while undergoing super-nova.

    Update: As far as I know only an active Black Hole can eject material via Relativistic jets. Possibly caused by an interaction between materials in the accretion disk and magnetic field of the Black hole.

    http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/l...e/smblack.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Professor arKane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    1,181
    Quote Originally Posted by MrMojo1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by arKane View Post
    I'm sorry but your number 1 question doesn't make any sense to me. You are not suggesting that black holes initially ejected material to form galaxies are you?
    I was suggesting that prior to the super-massive star became a a super-massive black hole, it ejected material while undergoing super-nova.

    Update: As far as I know only an active Black Hole can eject material via Relativistic jets. Possibly caused by an interaction between materials in the accretion disk and magnetic field of the Black hole.

    Supermassive Black Holes
    Aah! I see the problem now. There are no stars big enough to create a supermassive BH. Even a star that has a few hundred solar masses can only make a BH that's somewhat smaller than that. SMBH's exist in the cores of galaxies and they either formed shortly after the BB or were already in existence before the BB. Either way they were not created from stars.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,965
    Quote Originally Posted by arKane View Post
    Either way they were not created from stars.
    I'm no expert, but I don't think you can necessarily draw that conclusion. They could have formed by the merger of a large number (a very large number!) of black holes - which themselves, could have been formed by the more massive stars that were, as I understand it, thought to exist in the early universe.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor arKane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    1,181
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by arKane View Post
    Either way they were not created from stars.
    I'm no expert, but I don't think you can necessarily draw that conclusion. They could have formed by the merger of a large number (a very large number!) of black holes - which themselves, could have been formed by the more massive stars that were, as I understand it, thought to exist in the early universe.
    I've heard that theory before and think it total bunk.

    It would have had to happen for every galaxy in the universe. (not very likely) I've done a lot of thinking about the life cycle of a BH and what you are suggesting just doesn't happen in the kind of time frame we are working with here. BH's holes act like every other celestial body in the universe this side of the event horizon. They establish orbits that are going to be stable for billions of years. They just wouldn't be in any hurry to get together in one big SMBH.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    Quote Originally Posted by arKane View Post
    There are no stars big enough to create a supermassive BH. Even a star that has a few hundred solar masses can only make a BH that's somewhat smaller than that. SMBH's exist in the cores of galaxies and they either formed shortly after the BB or were already in existence before the BB. Either way they were not created from stars.
    I wasn't aware of anything being in existence before the BB, is there a citation I could review?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    I was under the impression that SMBH could be formed from Quasi-stars.




    http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.5098

    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor arKane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    1,181
    Quote Originally Posted by MrMojo1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by arKane View Post
    There are no stars big enough to create a supermassive BH. Even a star that has a few hundred solar masses can only make a BH that's somewhat smaller than that. SMBH's exist in the cores of galaxies and they either formed shortly after the BB or were already in existence before the BB. Either way they were not created from stars.
    I wasn't aware of anything being in existence before the BB, is there a citation I could review?
    There is no proof of anything before the BB, but then there is no proof that there wasn't something before the BB either. So what is your point? If the universe is natural it came about as a natural process of a much larger system whatever that may be. I don't believe in a God, so that's out. I also don't believe our universe is a one of a kind event.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Professor arKane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Washington state
    Posts
    1,181
    Quote Originally Posted by MrMojo1 View Post
    I was under the impression that SMBH could be formed from Quasi-stars.




    http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.5098

    Not a widely accepted theory. However, what the hell is a quasi-star? You can't be thinking it's anything that resembles a real star can you? Just saying we have a good theory about how stellar BH's are created, but the same can't be said about SMBH cores of every galaxy in the universe. I can only say I'm not happy with any of the currents theories in the running at this time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Bachelors Degree Kerling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    440
    Hm, Not quite sure on relativistic jets, but I heard they can excrete mass faster then they absorb it via these kinds of systems.

    Anyway, I don't think it is strange they formed. What keeps stars, or mass acquiring entities from collapsing to a black hole, is radiation pressure. Maybe an early star became big, died, and acquired matter ever since. It isn't all that strange these things have been around for a few billion years. If they are at the center at least.
    In the information age ignorance is a choice.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    317
    The more I read about black holes, the more questions I have.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. What if a black hole passes near another black hole?
    By kojax in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: July 25th, 2013, 06:07 PM
  2. black hole and white hole
    By mmmyyydas in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: March 25th, 2011, 02:06 AM
  3. WHAT DOES A BLACK HOLE WITH A WHITE HOLE=?
    By ADAMA in forum Physics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 20th, 2009, 11:42 PM
  4. black hole question
    By MatTron in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: September 13th, 2007, 09:42 AM
  5. Gaping hole could be a black hole scar?
    By MatTron in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: September 2nd, 2007, 08:29 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •