Giant ring of black holes

Feb 09, 2011
X-ray: NASA/CXC/MIT/S.Rappaport et al, Optical: NASA/STScI

( -- Just in time for Valentine's Day comes a new image of a ring -- not of jewels -- but of black holes.

This composite image of Arp 147, a pair of interacting galaxies located about 430 million light years from Earth, shows X-rays from the NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory (pink) and optical data from the (red, green, blue) produced by the Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI) in Baltimore, Md.

Arp 147 contains the remnant of a (right) that collided with the on the left. This collision has produced an expanding wave of star formation that shows up as a blue ring containing in abundance of massive young stars. These stars race through their evolution in a few million years or less and explode as supernovas, leaving behind and black holes.

A fraction of the neutron stars and black holes will have companion stars, and may become bright X-ray sources as they pull in matter from their companions. The nine X-ray sources scattered around the ring in Arp 147 are so bright that they must be , with masses that are likely ten to twenty times that of the Sun.

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.

An X-ray source is also detected in the nucleus of the red galaxy on the left and may be powered by a poorly-fed supermassive black hole. This source is not obvious in the composite image but can easily be seen in the X-ray image. Other objects unrelated to Arp 147 are also visible: a foreground star in the lower left of the image and a background quasar as the pink source above and to the left of the red galaxy.

Infrared observations with NASA's and ultraviolet observations with NASA's Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) have allowed estimates of the rate of star formation in the ring. These estimates, combined with the use of models for the evolution of binary stars have allowed the authors to conclude that the most intense star formation may have ended some 15 million years ago, in Earth's time frame.

These results were published in the October 1st, 2010 issue of The Astrophysical Journal. The authors were Saul Rappaport and Alan Levine from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, David Pooley from Eureka Scientific and Benjamin Steinhorn, also from MIT.

Explore further: Is the universe finite or infinite?

Related Stories

A Black Hole in Medusa's Hair

Mar 11, 2009

This composite image of the Medusa galaxy (also known as NGC 4194) shows X-ray data from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory in blue and optical light from the Hubble Space Telescope in orange. Located above ...

Image: A Galactic Spectacle

Aug 05, 2010

A beautiful new image of two colliding galaxies has been released by NASA's Great Observatories. The Antennae galaxies, located about 62 million light-years from Earth, are shown in this composite image from ...

Image: The Early Cosmos

Jan 24, 2011

( -- Stars are forming in Henize 2-10, a dwarf starburst galaxy located about 30 million light years from Earth, at a prodigious rate, giving the star clusters in this galaxy their blue appearance.

Chandra images torrent of star formation

Jan 13, 2011

A new Chandra X-ray Observatory image of Messier 82, or M82, shows the result of star formation on overdrive. At a distance of only 12 million light years, M82 provides a unique cosmic laboratory for studying ...

Chandra Lifts the Veil on Milky Way 'Hotspot'

Jan 23, 2008

NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory is helping to demystify Westerlund 2, a young star cluster with an estimated age of about one- or two-million years. Heavily obscured by dust and gas, Westerlund 2 has been ...

New Vista of Milky Way Center Unveiled

Sep 22, 2009

( -- A dramatic new vista of the center of the Milky Way galaxy from NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory exposes new levels of the complexity and intrigue in the Galactic center. The mosaic of ...

Recommended for you

Rocky planets may orbit many double stars

1 hour ago

Luke Skywalker's home in "Star Wars" is the desert planet Tatooine, with twin sunsets because it orbits two stars. So far, only uninhabitable gas-giant planets have been identified circling such binary stars, ...

Is the universe finite or infinite?

Mar 27, 2015

Two possiblities exist: either the Universe is finite and has a size, or it's infinite and goes on forever. Both possibilities have mind-bending implications.

'Teapot' nova begins to wane

Mar 27, 2015

A star, or nova, has appeared in the constellation of Sagittarius and, even though it is now waning, it is still bright enough to be visible in the sky over Perth through binoculars or a telescope.

Dark matter is darker than once thought

Mar 27, 2015

This panel of images represents a study of 72 colliding galaxy clusters conducted by a team of astronomers using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and Hubble Space Telescope. The research sets new limits on ...

Galaxy clusters collide—dark matter still a mystery

Mar 26, 2015

When galaxy clusters collide, their dark matters pass through each other, with very little interaction. Deepening the mystery, a study by scientists at EPFL and the University of Edinburgh challenges the ...

User comments : 22

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

2.1 / 5 (22) Feb 09, 2011
The incredible thing about (Halton) Arp objects is that different areas of an object shows vastly different red shifts, Z. Arp was ostracized by the mainstream cosmologists for pushing the red shift issue.

Arp's discovery of a variety Z values in these objects seriously threatens the conventional dogma of Z signifying distance whereas Z really appears to be a measure of the age of the matter being observed.

Something is very fishy if the state of cosmology!
4.1 / 5 (20) Feb 09, 2011
Something is very fishy if the state of cosmology!

You're obviously a BB denier who would rather believe in discredited fringeologists. Arp's so-called theories are ancient (60s) and a lot has happened in the meantime, which totally crushes his ideas.

The fact that he is still digging in his heels and is stubbornly standing by his original notions in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, shows a certain disconnect from the real world, as do you for buying into it.
3 / 5 (2) Feb 10, 2011
Why does the article claim that this discovery is "Just in time for Valentine's Day" when "These results were published in the October 1st, 2010 issue of The Astrophysical Journal"?
1.6 / 5 (7) Feb 10, 2011
theories are ancient (60s)

You do realize that the black hole theory was first promoted in the late 18th century right?

How is the 60s anchient? Dark matter was the 30s I believe.

Now the 60s and 70s was a big advancement period of science where alot of ideas past and current were expounded upon. Arp has simply lost out from other evidence, but he's hardly "ancient".
1.8 / 5 (13) Feb 10, 2011
It looks like a central, massive neutron star fragmented - neutron repulsion:

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel

4.6 / 5 (9) Feb 10, 2011
You do realize that the black hole theory was first promoted in the late 18th century right?

How is the 60s anchient? Dark matter was the 30s I believe.

You need to better understand what I posted, in its entirety, rather than cherry-pick one phrase.

I said his position is ancient because he has not moved with the times, rather then for a specific date when he proposed his theory.

He's basically ignored all the evidence that has been subsequently amassed from sources like modern 10m terrestrial telescopes with advanced imaging detectors, the Hubble space telescope, the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, and any number of other research projects which have conclusively proved him wrong.

So yes, his immutable theories are ancient by these standards.
1.9 / 5 (9) Feb 11, 2011
Arp is a man before his time and threatens the dogma that is big bang. An excellent book for all of you to read Soul of Amber by Alfred M Still. "...what is accepted as true by a particular generation may be classed as gross superstitions by succeeding generations;it can never be absolute truth."
1.5 / 5 (8) Feb 12, 2011
Yep is right.

Arp refused to march lock-step with the consensus scientists who followed the path that former President Eisenhower warned about in 1961:
3.7 / 5 (6) Feb 13, 2011
Yep is right.
If you think HE is right then that is yet one bit of evidence that you are as out of touch as Arp.

Yep is a Plasma Universe Crank. Even YOU don't Crank that way.

Arp sees connections between stars that are BEHIND galaxies that don't exist and he calls that evidence that the VERY distant background objects are part of the foreground galaxies. He is just plain wrong. Exactly like you so it is no wonder that you back the Arps in their refusal to make the connection with MODERN evidence.

Yep its been a while, over 19 months, since you posted under your own handle. What happened? Where the sockpuppets banned?

Still Cranking away I see. Like the Arps and Oliver you don't seem to learn about reality vs fantasy.

1.4 / 5 (9) Feb 16, 2011
The problem is just this: Astronomers have become as dogmatic and irrational in the 20th and 21st Century as the Religionists were in the 16th and 17th Century.

That is the root of the problem.

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo
1 / 5 (7) Feb 16, 2011
Sub:ARP 147- NECK
This is a beutiful Image. I look for Neck regions around ~10^8 LY . In essence ,this forms a Link to Upper-regions to Universe- BRAHMA-ANDA- and Lower regions to Heart or Center of the Universe.A perfect Balance is needed-NOTE-(Halton) Arp objects is that different areas of an object shows vastly different red shifts-This is
in confirmity wiyh my Projections- See details in Essence of Scientific Philophy, Vedic Vision of the Universe and Cosmolgy Revision [my books]
see Cosmology Vedas Interlinks-
3.7 / 5 (6) Feb 17, 2011
Arp objects is that different areas of an object shows vastly different red shifts-This is
Arp is full of crap on that. They are different OBJECTS not the same object.

1.6 / 5 (7) Feb 17, 2011
May I offer two of my favorite quotes about “truthing”:

1. “There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance – that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”
- Herbert Spencer

2. “To know that you do not know is best.
To pretend to know what you do not know is a disease.”
– Lao Tzu
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 18, 2011
Anytime you want to investigate the truth Oliver all you have to do is look at the data from those stacks of iron. Until you do that post is pure hypocrisy.
“It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong”
Richard Feynman
“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.”
Richard Feyman
A learned blockhead is a greater blockhead than an ignorant one.
Benjamin Franklin
Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.
Benjamin Franklin

Go do the work Oliver. Posting irrelevant quotes will not hide your refusal to check the data.


1.6 / 5 (7) Feb 18, 2011
Experimental evidence of neutron repulsion:

And in papers cited there.

Where is Ethel's rebuttal?
3.4 / 5 (5) Feb 19, 2011
I have rebutted that crap many times. And NO ONE, except you, cites that paper.

Where is evidence for neutrons repelling each other. It isn't in your paper. THE CLAIM is in your paper but there isn't any evidence that would support that claim. IF your claim was true there would be no atoms with neutrons at all since YOU also claim that neutron repulsion would stop the formation of Black Holes and that would require a force vastly stronger than the strong force which is what holds the nucleus together.

With neutron repulsion needing to be pushing harder than the strong force is pulling there could be no atoms with neutrons. On top of which neutron repulsion makes no sense in a quark based system of nucleons and that system is pretty solid at the moment.

Where does this magical force come from Oliver. It isn't the strong force as your claim that there are no Black Holes requires an even stronger force.

Where is your explanation for the force you need Oliver.

1.4 / 5 (7) Feb 19, 2011
Neutron repulsion contributes to the rest mass of every nucleus with two or more neutrons.

See: "Attraction and repulsion of nucleons: Sources of stellar energy", J. Fusion Energy 19, 93-98 (2001):
3.6 / 5 (7) Feb 19, 2011
Where is evidence for neutrons repelling each other. It isn't in your paper. THE CLAIM is in your paper but there isn't any evidence that would support that claim.


Omatumr may be a crank but neutron repulsion isn't the weakest link in his theory. Neutrons do repel each other. If you need any evidence of this, consider that neutron repulsion is what prevents a neutron star from collapsing into a black hole. This repulsion comes from the Pauli Exclusion Principle for fermions (of which neutrons are a member). Omatumr did come about this from the wrong direction and in complete ignorance of the fact that the scientific community came upon it many decades before he did.
1 / 5 (7) Feb 19, 2011
If you read the 2001, peer-reviewed paper and view the video, you will see that neutron repulsion - the energy source that powers the Sun and the cosmos - was not recognized earlier.

"Attraction and repulsion of nucleons: Sources of stellar energy", J. Fusion Energy 19, 93-98 (2001):

4 / 5 (8) Feb 20, 2011
It's funny you mention that paper, Omatumr, because I had just been reading it today before you mentioned it. And no, it doesn't show anything novel.
1 / 5 (7) Feb 20, 2011
Sorry, barakn, but you are wrong.

Although the mainstream scientific community would now like to take credit for recognizing the powerful force of neutron repulsion many decades ago, the simple fact is that they did not.

Yes, they observed neutron repulsion - in nuclear fission, in solar energy, and in violent explosions in the cosmos - but they failed to recognize it.

Experimental observations that they ignored are shown in the video:

3.7 / 5 (6) Feb 22, 2011
If you can't make your case in papers geared towards the scientific community then there's no point in watching a video dumbed down for the masses.

Out of curiosity I used the Pauli Exclusion Principle and Fermi momentum (the nonrelativistic equation from this page: to calculate the kinetic energy of a neutron at a density perhaps typical of the inner crust of a neutron star - 10^17 kg/m^3. It came out to 30 MeV. Noting that Omatumr's crude "nuclear cradle" estimate of neutron energy excess is 10-22 MeV - the same order of magnitude - it is obvious that he has wasted the last couple decades of his life reinventing the wheel. The scientific community discovered neutron repulsion due to Pauli Exclusion back in 1939. For a good review of the advanced state of the science as of 1959, see .

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.