Thread: Frozen Stars

Do black holes really exist?

From what I understand of the formation of black holes, as the matter collapses into the hole it accelerates to close to light speed and is frozen in relation to the rest of the universe due to Special Relativity.

Does this mean there are no fully formed black holes due to this frozen state?

Originally Posted by DarcgreY

Do black holes really exist?

From what I understand of the formation of black holes, as the matter collapses into the hole it accelerates to close to light speed and is frozen in relation to the rest of the universe due to Special Relativity.

Does this mean there are no fully formed black holes due to this frozen state?

probably yes; BH exist.

look at the BH as part of process by which a star is returned to the universe to become something else. forget for now a BH is anything permanent or is anyway to explain big bang theory. also leave the word frozen out of your thoughts and there is no hole.

very large stars, say about 20 or 25 times ours eventually burn away there fuel. what was in side to cause the fusion is gone and thus the support for this stars outer crust. all this matter then simply heads for a center (no force created to expel outward, so implodes) and as this matter combines toward the center gravity increases. there is no reason to think the speed is near light speed or near it. when all this matter reaches a center point it is very dense and the total of the gravity in this unit (about the size of our sun) is equal to the original star before burn out. now this is the time for what is seen as BH and as the final process of evaporation is has started or will shortly begin to. the process takes a great deal of time from burn out to evaporation and i have seen millions of years estimates. the time its in the BH to evaporation is probably not that long, but seems all the activity to cause confusion is this period.

every definition Ive seen infers this gravity is so strong even light cannot escape. i would question whats in this thing that could produce light. even if a star is pulled into a BH it is as a stream of gas and will lose any capability to produce light, at least that can be seen. as evaporation winds down the BH dissipates and no longer is anything but dust and debris which it time will become some of something else.

If the diameter of hte initial star is 1 light second radius and it accelerates to close to the speed of light it will take about 1 second to collapse, I dont care what that matter's own Perception of time is, for the rest of us the black hole is formed in the blink of an eye.

If you are somehow shot out of a cannon at light speed towards the moon time will stop from your perspective and you will be dead before you know it, but for eveyone else you will reach the moon in a few seconds and colide with it, that time stops from your perspective does not make you suspended between the earth and the moon. You'll be spattered before anyone can say splat.


Thats the way I see it.


(On a different note, travelling at the speed of light and having time stop, relatively speaking, is Not travelling forward in time, you dont cease to exist, you are frozen yourself from your perspective but you continue to exist at every point in the present but just move fast.
Its also imo why the time machine theory with a wormhole with one end moving at the speed of light thus stops in time is total crap, because even if time slows on one end it does not cease to exist in the continuum it always remains in the present. If someone enters one end of the wormhole and goes out the other end he does not arrive in the past, at best he just remains there for a freaking long time end exits in fact after having entered in the non moving end. Being relatively frozen in time does Not make the object remain in the past it stays in the present but it ceases to age.)

again imo (Im not a physicist)

Black holes do exist.
They were predicted to exist from the equations of general relativity.
When a very massive star collapses,it shrinks to a singe point which is
covered by the event horizon.
The event horizon is the ''point of no return''.Once you cross it there is no turning back!!!!Even the light can't escape due to gravity.

For someone who watches the collapse from far away,the star stops collapsing when it reaches the critical radius and thus an event horizon is formed.
Someone who is at the surface of the collapsing star does not notice that time stops and continues to collapse with the star.

For any further conversation on black holes PM me...

Originally Posted by tasos

Black holes do exist.
They were predicted to exist from the equations of general relativity.
When a very massive star collapses,it shrinks to a singe point which is
covered by the event horizon.
The event horizon is the ''point of no return''.Once you cross it there is no turning back!!!!Even the light can't escape due to gravity.

For someone who watches the collapse from far away,the star stops collapsing when it reaches the critical radius and thus an event horizon is formed.
Someone who is at the surface of the collapsing star does not notice that time stops and continues to collapse with the star.

For any further conversation on black holes PM me...

Hi Tasos,
I also think black holes exist. But what evidence is there for them? What you gave above was a theoretical justification followed by a physical description. Can you cite any observational evidence?

If you were searching for black holes, what would you look for?

Why do scientists think that there is a supermassive black hole of 2.6 million solar masses in the center of the Milky Way? How about other galaxies, do they too have supermassive black holes in the center?

Are quasars thought to be powered by black holes? How about active galactic nuclei (AGN)? What's the difference between the two?

:wink:

Cheers,
william

The existence of black holes is only theoretical.
There is no clear evidence that black holes exist.
Of course you can't see a black hole.I think that it would look like a totally black sphere in the space (which is also black).

If I were searching for black holes I would look for its gravitational effect on other things(stars,planets,...).

As for scientists they suppose by making calculations of the gravitational force,that a very massive object could be in the center of the glaxies.Since the only object we know,which can be so massive,is a black hole,we assume that in the center of the glaxies there do exist black holes.

Quasars are thought to be powered by black holes.Black holes store energy in the space around them,in the form of spacetime curvature.
This energy is used by quasars .

Quasars are stellar-type objects(quasi+stellar=quasar)which resemble stars but function differently.They are very far away from us( distance>2 billion light years).
Active galactic nuclei are considered to be the centers of the galaxies,which consist of many stars in a small region of space (high density).The gravity among these stars cause them to collapse and form a gigantic black hole...

Is it possible that accretion disks around black holes can emit x-rays and a bipolar flow? Could we look this and hopefully find that the x-ray source is a binary system? Then could we use Kepler's third law and calculate the mass? And if the mass is greater than 3 solar masses, conclude that the object is probably not a neutron star, thus most likely making it a black hole?

:wink:

Cheers,
william

Also, is it true that quasars and AGNs can fluctuate in brightness in very short periods of time? And that, since we know that for an object to fluctuate in... say in a matter of days... that the object then has to be small since it cannot change brightness in less time than it takes light to travel the diameter of the object? And don't we know that there can be up to several million solar masses confined in this small area, leading us to conclude that it must be a black hole since it has so much mass in such a small area that it must have collapsed due to gravity?

And is the idea that a black hole is in the center of the galaxy also supported by observations of stellar orbits near the center of the Milky Way? And from Kepler's 3rd law, the mass can be calculated, and that it is found to be so much, and confined to such a small area, that it must be a black hole?

:wink:

Cheers,
william