ALMA discovers infant stars surprisingly near galaxy's supermassive black hole

November 28, 2017, National Radio Astronomy Observatory
An ALMA image of the center of the Milky Way galaxy showing the location of 11 young protostars within about 3 light-years of our galaxy's supermassive black hole. The lines indicate the direction of the bipolar lobes created by high-velocity jets from the protostars. The illustrated star in the middle of the image indicates the location of Sagittarius A*, the 4 million solar mass supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy. The next image is a zoom-in to one of the protostars. Credit: ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO), Yusef-Zadeh et al.; B. Saxton (NRAO/AUI/NSF)

At the center of our galaxy, in the immediate vicinity of its supermassive black hole, is a region wracked by powerful tidal forces and bathed in intense ultraviolet light and X-ray radiation. These harsh conditions, astronomers surmise, do not favor star formation, especially low-mass stars like our sun. Surprisingly, new observations from the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) suggest otherwise.

ALMA has revealed the telltale signs of eleven forming perilously close—within three light-years—to the Milky Way's supermassive black hole, known to astronomers as Sagittarius A* (Sgr A*). At this distance, driven by the supermassive black hole should be energetic enough to rip apart of dust and gas before they can form stars.

The presence of these newly discovered protostars (the formative stage between a dense cloud of gas and a young, shining star) suggests that the conditions necessary to birth low-mass stars may exist even in one of the most turbulent regions of our galaxy and possibly in similar locales throughout the universe.

The results are published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters.

"Despite all odds, we see the best evidence yet that low-mass stars are forming startlingly close to the at the center of the Milky Way," said Farhad Yusef-Zadeh, an astronomer at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and lead author on the paper. "This is a genuinely surprising result and one that demonstrates just how robust can be, even in the most unlikely of places."

Double-lobe feature produced by jets from one of the newly forming stars. ALMA discovered 11 of these telltale signs of star formation remarkably close to the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy. Credit: ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO), Yusef-Zadeh et al.; B. Saxton (NRAO/AUI/NSF)

The ALMA data also suggest that these protostars are about 6,000 years old. "This is important because it is the earliest phase of star formation we have found in this highly hostile environment," Yusef-Zadeh said.

The team of researchers identified these protostars by seeing the classic "double lobes" of material that bracket each of them. These cosmic hourglass-like shapes signal the early stages of star formation. Molecules, like carbon monoxide (CO), in these lobes glow brightly in millimeter-wavelength light, which ALMA can observe with remarkable precision and sensitivity.

Protostars form from interstellar clouds of dust and gas. Dense pockets of material in these clouds collapse under their own gravity and grow by accumulating more and more star-forming gas from their parent clouds. A portion of this infalling material, however, never makes it onto the surface of the star. Instead, it is ejected as a pair of high-velocity jets from the protostar's north and south poles. Extremely turbulent environments can disrupt the normal procession of material onto a protostar, while intense radiation—from massive nearby stars and supermassive black holes—can blast away the parent cloud, thwarting the formation of all but the most massive of stars.

The Milky Way's galactic center, with its 4 million solar mass black hole, is located approximately 26,000 light-years from Earth in the direction of the constellation Sagittarius. Vast stores of interstellar dust obscure this region, hiding it from optical telescopes. Radio waves, including the millimeter and submillimeter light that ALMA sees, are able to penetrate this dust, giving radio astronomers a clearer picture of the dynamics and content of this hostile environment.

Prior ALMA observations of the region surrounding Sgr A* by Yusef-Zadeh and his team revealed multiple massive infant stars that are estimated to be about 6 million years old. These objects, known as proplyds, are common features in more placid star-forming regions, like the Orion Nebula. Though the galactic center is a challenging environment for star formation, it is possible for particularly dense cores of hydrogen gas to cross the necessary threshold and forge new stars.

Infant stars, like those recently identified near the supermassive black hole at the center of our galaxy, are surrounded by a swirling disk of dust and gas. In this artist's conception of an infant solar system, the young star pulls material from its surroundings into a rotating disk (right) and generates outflowing jets of material (left). Credit: Bill Saxton (NRAO/AUI/NSF)

The new ALMA observations, however, revealed something even more remarkable, signs that eleven low-mass protostars are forming within 1 parsec – a scant 3 light-years – of the galaxy's central black hole. Yusef-Zadeh and his team used ALMA to confirm that the masses and momentum transfer rates – the ability of the protostar jets to plow through surrounding interstellar material – are consistent with young protostars found throughout the disk of our galaxy.

"This discovery provides evidence that star formation is taking place within clouds surprisingly close to Sagittarius A*," said Al Wootten with the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Charlottesville, Virginia, and co-author on the paper. "Though these conditions are far from ideal, we can envision several pathways for these stars to emerge."

For this to occur, outside forces would have to compress the gas clouds near the center of our galaxy to overcome the violent nature of the region and allow gravity to take over and form stars. The astronomers speculate that high-velocity gas clouds could aid in star formation as they force their way through the interstellar medium. It is also possible that jets from the black hole itself could be plowing into the surrounding gas clouds, compressing material and triggering this burst of star formation.

"The next step is to take a closer look to confirm that these newly formed stars are orbited by disks of dusty gas," concluded Mark Wardle, an astronomer at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia, and co-investigator on the team. "If so, it's likely that planets will eventually form from this material, as is the case for young in the galactic disk."

Explore further: ALMA detects signs of star formation surprisingly close to galaxy's supermassive black hole

More information: F. Yusef-Zadeh et al. ALMA Detection of Bipolar Outflows: Evidence for Low-mass Star Formation within 1 pc of Sgr A*, The Astrophysical Journal (2017). DOI: 10.3847/2041-8213/aa96a2

Related Stories

How multiple star systems evolve

November 1, 2017

Sirius is not a single star at all, but a binary system of two stars. Polaris, the north star, is actually a system of three stars. And Castor, in the constellation of Gemini, actually consists of a whopping six stars. Current ...

ALMA discovers dew drops surrounding dusty spider's web

July 1, 2016

Astronomers have spotted glowing droplets of condensed water in the distant Spiderweb Galaxy – but not where they expected to find them. Detections with the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) show that ...

Explosive birth of stars swells galactic cores

September 10, 2017

Astronomers found that active star formation upswells galaxies, like yeast helps bread rise. Using three powerful telescopes on the ground and in orbit, they observed galaxies from 11 billion years ago and found explosive ...

Recommended for you

Climbing the ladder to life detection

June 25, 2018

In the past two decades, NASA spacecraft have identified potentially habitable environments throughout the solar system and beyond. Spacecraft on Mars have found evidence that lakes and streams once covered the planet, protected ...

Planetary nebula lasers

June 25, 2018

Astronomical masers (the radio wavelength analogs of lasers) were first identified in space over fifty years ago and have since been seen in many locations; astronomical lasers have since been seen as well. Some of the most ...

HESS J1943+213 is an extreme blazar, study finds

June 21, 2018

An international group of astronomers have carried out multi-wavelength observations of HESS J1943+213 and found evidence supporting the hypothesis that this gamma-ray source is an extreme blazar. The finding is reported ...

The Rosetta stone of active galactic nuclei deciphered

June 21, 2018

A galaxy with at least one active supermassive black hole – named OJ 287 – has caused many irritations and questions in the past. The emitted radiation of this object spans a wide range – from the radio up to the highest ...

'Red nuggets' are galactic gold for astronomers

June 21, 2018

About a decade ago, astronomers discovered a population of small, but massive galaxies called "red nuggets." A new study using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory indicates that black holes have squelched star formation in these ...

60 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Tuxford
1.5 / 5 (12) Nov 28, 2017
LOL. Just another inconvenient observation to reconcile for the merger maniacs to maintain their favorite fantasy model.

As I have been saying for years, stars are largely born from the core itself, being ejected therefrom in periodic eruptions of relatively dense material. Moreover, the region nearest the supermassive core naturally accelerates the production of new matter within stars, helping them grow more rapidly in this region.

Another point favoring LaViolette's Continuous Creation model, and another strike against the merger maniacs fantasy. How many strikes is it so far, 50 or more? I lost count.
Chris_Reeve
Nov 28, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
SlartiBartfast
4 / 5 (8) Nov 28, 2017
Article: "The presence of these newly discovered protostars (the formative stage between a dense cloud of gas and a young, shining star) suggests that the conditions necessary to birth low-mass stars may exist even in one of the most turbulent regions of our galaxy and possibly in similar locales throughout the universe."

This is apparently the only answer available when you refuse to question entities which you admit that you cannot even directly observe.


Just fucking stop already.
Chris_Reeve
Nov 28, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Nov 28, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Benni
1.4 / 5 (9) Nov 28, 2017
The ACCRETION DISC of the Milky Way BH would be 99 million km (61.5 million miles) in diameter. These proto-stars are barely the size of our Sun & they have pics of them barely 3 light years from the BH. Our Sun is 1,390,000 km or 865,000 miles in diameter.

If they can take visible pics of these proto-stars so close to the supposed BH, why can they not take pics of the ACCRETION DISC, or it's turbulent effects at least, that is many times larger in size than all these proto-stars only about the size of our Sun.?????
Benni
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 28, 2017
"If they can take visible pics of these proto-stars so close to the supposed BH, why can they not take pics of the ACCRETION DISC, or it's turbulent effects at least, that is many times larger in size than all these proto-stars only about the size of our Sun.?????"

ALMA discovers infant stars surprisingly near galaxy's supermassive black hole November 28, 2017, 6:09 pm 1 SlartiBartfast


I know SB, tough question isn't it? It's easier to 1 Star a tough question than answering it, right?
SlartiBartfast
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 28, 2017
The ACCRETION DISC of the Milky Way BH would be 99 million km (61.5 million miles) in diameter. These proto-stars are barely the size of our Sun & they have pics of them barely 3 light years from the BH. Our Sun is 1,390,000 km or 865,000 miles in diameter.

If they can take visible pics of these proto-stars so close to the supposed BH, why can they not take pics of the ACCRETION DISC, or it's turbulent effects at least, that is many times larger in size than all these proto-stars only about the size of our Sun.?????


Uh oh, a number seems to have fallen right out of your ass. You might want to have a doctor look at that!
Benni
1 / 5 (6) Nov 28, 2017
The ACCRETION DISC of the Milky Way BH would be 99 million km (61.5 million miles) in diameter. These proto-stars are barely the size of our Sun & they have pics of them barely 3 light years from the BH. Our Sun is 1,390,000 km or 865,000 miles in diameter.

If they can take visible pics of these proto-stars so close to the supposed BH, why can they not take pics of the ACCRETION DISC, or it's turbulent effects at least, that is many times larger in size than all these proto-stars only about the size of our Sun.?????


Uh oh, a number seems to have fallen right out of your ass. You might want to have a doctor look at that!
.......this is the best you can do is to become a foul mouthed slob?
SlartiBartfast
4 / 5 (5) Nov 28, 2017
Uh oh, a number seems to have fallen right out of your ass. You might want to have a doctor look at that!
.......this is the best you can do is to become a foul mouthed slob?


Just go on and stuff the number right back up in there. I promise it'll make you feel better!
Benni
1 / 5 (6) Nov 28, 2017
Uh oh, a number seems to have fallen right out of your ass. You might want to have a doctor look at that!
......this is the best you can do is to become a foul mouthed slob?


Just go on and stuff the number right back up in there. I promise it'll make you feel better!
..........just love you neophytes who've never seen a Differential Equation you could solve.

SlartiBartfast
4 / 5 (4) Nov 28, 2017
Uh oh, a number seems to have fallen right out of your ass. You might want to have a doctor look at that!
......this is the best you can do is to become a foul mouthed slob?


Just go on and stuff the number right back up in there. I promise it'll make you feel better!
..........just love you neophytes who've never seen a Differential Equation you could solve.



Here's a perfect example of the KdV equation in action: https://youtu.be/...Ii0?t=15
Benni
1 / 5 (6) Nov 28, 2017
Uh oh, a number seems to have fallen right out of your ass. You might want to have a doctor look at that!
......this is the best you can do is to become a foul mouthed slob?


Just go on and stuff the number right back up in there. I promise it'll make you feel better!
..........
just love you neophytes who've never seen a Differential Equation you could solve.


Here's a perfect example of the KdV equation in action: https://youtu.be/...Ii0?t=15


.......and why do you show us someone else's work & not your own?
Chris_Reeve
Nov 28, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Benni
1.6 / 5 (7) Nov 28, 2017
Benni is thinking.


It's what I get paid for doing, thanks.
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (10) Nov 28, 2017
The standard model faerie tales about all things dark and unseen are falling apart before their disbelieving eyes. It won't stop them from believing their nonsensical mumbo jumbo though because that's not how acolytes behave. They will continue to believe it's all about gravity despite the observations and any iota of common sense. They are the flat earthers of the 21st century.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (4) Nov 28, 2017
If the moment at which a contradiction is observed is not a good time to question the approach and the original hypothesis, when do you propose WOULD be a good time?

Annoying as it is to say, that was a good question...
BTW-
Turbulence is what creates the conditions for stellar gas condensation ...
C'mon, Benni...
Ben Astley!?!?
Whydening Gyre
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 28, 2017
Benni is thinking.

About what?
The next words of that stupid Ben Astley song he linked to?
Whydening Gyre
3 / 5 (2) Nov 28, 2017
Benni is thinking.

About what?
The next words of that stupid Ben Astley song he linked to?

My bad. he didn't provide the link. It's still a stupid song...
Whydening Gyre
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 28, 2017
The standard model faerie tales about all things dark and unseen are falling apart before their disbelieving eyes. It won't stop them from believing their nonsensical mumbo jumbo though because that's not how acolytes behave. They will continue to believe it's all about gravity despite the observations and any iota of common sense. They are the flat earthers of the 21st century.

But, CD...
Even YOU have to admit that it's a matter of scale that determines at which time different forces are in play ...
cantdrive85
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 29, 2017
But, CD...
Even YOU have to admit that it's a matter of scale that determines at which time different forces are in play ...

Yep, and this is far beyond the scale that is relevant for gravity and "tidal forces". Clearly this is a factual statement considering this article, not to mention requirements to validate gravitation on scales where DM is invoked. But don't tell the Gravity Only Society because they will label this heresy.
Captain Stumpy
4.6 / 5 (9) Nov 29, 2017
Benni is thinking.


It's what I get paid for doing, thanks.
somebody is getting ripped off !
Benni
1.7 / 5 (6) Nov 29, 2017
Benni is thinking.


About what?


Entropy, Nuclear Physics, Differential Equations, Special Relativity, General Relativity, Skiing the Backcountry, Doing a Drop D on my guitar for a musical arrangement I'm memorizing, Making fun of you Perpetual Motion Mechanics living here because you have nothing better to do with your life than go on foul mouthed name calling binges .........that's enough for now.

Chris_Reeve
Nov 29, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Nov 29, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Nov 29, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Nov 29, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Chris_Reeve
Nov 29, 2017
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
mackita
3.5 / 5 (4) Nov 29, 2017
Dust cloud ignores Black Hole. A dust cloud (see blobs) recently approach Sagittarius A (the Milky Way's central black hole), Simulations predicted it wld b chewed up w/ fireworks, but it was unaffected. Why?
Benni
1.6 / 5 (7) Nov 29, 2017
http://www.nature.com/news/why-galactic-black-hole-fireworks-were-a-flop-1.15591. A dust cloud (see blobs) recently approach Sagittarius A (the Milky Way's central black hole), Simulations predicted it wld b chewed up w/ fireworks, but it was unaffected. Why?


.......because there is no ACCRETION DISC. If there were The ACCRETION DISC of the Milky Way BH would be 99 million km (61.5 million miles) in diameter & you would be able to view it with the same telescope they used to take pics of those proto-stars that are about the same size as our Sun.

I'd be curious to see what clever narratives the resident asstro-physicists living here would come up with to explain why we can't see an ACCRETION DISC so large, that's a lot of turbulence if these things do what is claimed.

mackita
1 / 5 (3) Nov 29, 2017
Accretion disk is supposed to result just from interaction of infalling matter with black hole. If the black hole would suck interstellar gas, then some glowing accretion disk would create itself. Why there is no accretion disk, after then?
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Nov 29, 2017
Accretion disk is supposed to result just from interaction of infalling matter with black hole. If the black hole would suck interstellar gas, then some glowing accretion disk would create itself. Why there is no accretion disk, after then?


"Giant 'G2' cloud at centre of Milky Way could be falling in a continuous stream, without the spectacle astronomers were hoping for." ...................I'm presuming this is the ACCRETION DISC they're referring to, they don't discuss its' proximity to the centre so you can't be sure, bring up the paper & see what you can find.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (4) Nov 30, 2017
An important clue in all of this is that plasmas -- for some unknown reason -- exhibit a remarkable scaling capability. The fact is that we see similar structures across orders of magnitude. This is an enormously important observation because it will eventually be realized as cosmology's escape hatch.

The logic goes as follows:

If plasmas both dominate and scale, then what we are really looking at here is a sort of fractal. Once a person recognizes this, all of our biases about scale can no longer be ignored. How exactly does a creature within a fractal recognize the "true dominant" force? Well, it would very much depend upon WHERE in the fractal you are, no?

Well, then. By that logic you could say our galaxy was the proton with dark matter being the free electrons...
Whydening Gyre
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 30, 2017
Accretion disk is supposed to result just from interaction of infalling matter with black hole. If the black hole would suck interstellar gas, then some glowing accretion disk would create itself. Why there is no accretion disk, after then?

What do you think the rest of the galaxy is...?
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (4) Nov 30, 2017
The Event Horizon Telescope data are still being evaluated to form images; this is not a quick process. The Sagittarius A radio data taken in April of this year will take a long time to process; the raw data combination from the radio telescopes has only just been completed in October. If we're lucky we'll have a high enough resolution virtual image to see if there's an accretion disk next year or the year after.

It's actually quite small; first, the black hole isn't that big, and second the accretion rate is pretty small. It may not be big enough to form an accretion disk in the first place, which would be why the black hole at the center of the Milky Way isn't an active galactic nucleus.
Benni
1 / 5 (6) Nov 30, 2017
"I'd be curious to see what clever narratives the resident asstro-physicists living here would come up with to explain why we can't see an ACCRETION DISC so large, that's a lot of turbulence if these things do what is claimed."

It's actually quite small; first, the black hole isn't that big, second the accretion rate is pretty small. It may not be big enough to form an accretion disk in the first place, which would be why the black hole at the center of the Milky Way isn't an active galactic nucleus.


Just as I predicted, one of the resident asstro-physicists has finally shown up to splain why the ACCRETION DISC cannot be observed.

Hey, Schneibo, the so-called AD extends far beyond the surface of a BH by 5.5 times the diameter. A 4 million solar mass BH would be much larger in diameter making the AD 61 million miles in diameter. They used a telescope to observe these proto-stars that are less than 1 million miles diameter.

Daunting math, right?

Benni
1 / 5 (6) Nov 30, 2017
V= 4/3 π R³, used to extrapolate the radius when the volume of a sphere changes. Let's see if resident asstro-physicists can figure out why it will be impossible to see an ACCRETION DISC of a BH 4 million times the mass of our SUN. Hint resident asstro-physicists, you don't increase diameter 4 million times, or the radius, but you won't miss seeing the AD created by an object this size.

Da Schneib
4 / 5 (4) Nov 30, 2017
Sorry, @Lenni, I don't know what V= 4/3 Ď� R³ means.

Meanwhile it seems that you're not willing to wait for the data reduction needed to let the EHT data be seen, not to mention totally unskooled in what accretion rate does to any potential accretion disk. You're a #physicscrank, so none of this is a surprise.

Do better, @Lenni.
Benni
1 / 5 (6) Nov 30, 2017
Sorry, @Lenni, I don't know what V= 4/3 ÄŽď�� R³ means.

Meanwhile it seems that you're not willing to wait for the data reduction needed to let the EHT data be seen, not to mention totally unskooled in what accretion rate does to any potential accretion disk. You're a #physicscrank, so none of this is a surprise.

Do better, @Lenni.


You don't know how to read do you? No wonder you have so many problems with the Physics of real science around here.

Benni
1 / 5 (6) Nov 30, 2017
Rather than expect you to solve for the size of a solar mass 4 million times that of our Sun & factor in an AD for 5.5 times that size, thought I'd give you some more help Schneibo: r= ³√3/4π..........but you probably still can't finish it can you?
Whydening Gyre
4.5 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2017
V= 4/3 Ď� R³, used to extrapolate the radius when the volume of a sphere changes. Let's see if resident asstro-physicists can figure out why it will be impossible to see an ACCRETION DISC of a BH 4 million times the mass of our SUN. Hint resident asstro-physicists, you don't increase diameter 4 million times, or the radius, but you won't miss seeing the AD created by an object this size.

Why are you attempting to establish a BH radii as 4m times larger than our sun's? It's the MASS that is 4m times more, not the radius. You use the Schwarzchild solution for that radius.
That they DON'T see an accretion disk for that much mass, is the head scratcher...
You're sounding like an amateur ass-tronomer...

Whydening Gyre
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2017
V= 4/3 ÄŽď�� R³, used to extrapolate the radius when the volume of a sphere changes. Let's see if resident asstro-physicists can figure out why it will be impossible to see an ACCRETION DISC of a BH 4 million times the mass of our SUN. Hint resident asstro-physicists, you don't increase diameter 4 million times, or the radius, but you won't miss seeing the AD created by an object this size.

Why are you attempting to establish a BH radii as 4m times larger than our sun's? It's the MASS that is 4m times more, not the radius. You use the Schwarzchild solution for that radius.
That they DON'T see an accretion disk for that much mass, is the head scratcher...
You're sounding like an amateur ass-tronomer...

Here. Let me help you with that;
https://en.wikipe...d_radius
Benni
1 / 5 (7) Dec 01, 2017
V= 4/3 ÄŽď�� R³, used to extrapolate the radius when the volume of a sphere changes. Let's see if resident asstro-physicists can figure out why it will be impossible to see an ACCRETION DISC of a BH 4 million times the mass of our SUN. Hint resident asstro-physicists, you don't increase diameter 4 million times, or the radius, but you won't miss seeing the AD created by an object this size.

Why are you attempting to establish a BH radii as 4m times larger than our sun's? It's the MASS that is 4m times more, not the radius. You use the Schwarzchild solution for that radius.
That they DON'T see an accretion disk for that much mass, is the head scratcher...
You're sounding like an amateur ass-tronomer...


I see you perpetual motion mechanics are all pretty much alike.......you don't read very well & you don't write very well.
Benni
1 / 5 (7) Dec 01, 2017
Here. Let me help you with that;
https://en.wikipe...d_radius


No, you didn't help me, I put it up before you put up your link, count 4 Comments above this one. You had to look up the math WhyGuy, shame on you that you didn't already know it.

And now, look at Schneibo, he can't even reproduce the equation in his copy & paste responses, or maybe it's just his new way of writing up profanity?
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (6) Dec 01, 2017
For a non-spinning non-charged (i.e. Schwarzchild, as opposed to Reisser-Nordstrom (charged), Kerr (spinning), or Kerr-Newman (spinning and charged)) black hole, the Schwarzchild radius is about

r(s) = 2GM/c²

For a mass of 3.6 x 10⁶ M☉, which is about 7.1604e+36 kg, with G being 6.674×10⁻¹¹ m³⋅kg⁻¹⋅s⁻², and c² being 89875517873681764 m²⋅s⁻², this gives a radius of 10633783510 m or about 10 million kilometers. This is a bit more than 1/15 the orbit of Earth. And that's for 3.6 million times the mass of the Sun.

@Lenni fails the math thing again.
Benni
1 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
For a non-spinning non-charged (i.e. Schwarzchild, as opposed to Reisser-Nordstrom (charged), Kerr (spinning), or Kerr-Newman (spinning and charged)) black hole, the Schwarzchild radius is about

r(s) = 2GM/c²

For a mass of 3.6 x 10⁶ M☉, which is about 7.1604e+36 kg, with G being 6.674×10⁻¹¹ m³⋅kg⁻¹⋅s⁻², and c² being 89875517873681764 m²⋅s⁻², this gives a radius of 10633783510 m or about 10 million kilometers. This is a bit more than 1/15 the orbit of Earth. And that's for 3.6 million times the mass of the Sun.


.....and everything you just put up is all slop & swill math because you first need to prove such stellar bodies exist by observation, and none exists There is absolutely zero evidence for the existence a non-spinning non-charged (i.e. Schwarzchild, as opposed to Reisser-Nordstrom (charged), Kerr (spinning), everything is all about INFERRING properties of infinite gravity that can't exist on a FINITE body.

Benni
1 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
Hey Schneibo, I should explain to you why I do not need to resort to following your Copy & Paste lead when you put up so much Copy & Pasted models of BH math, it's because Perpetual Motion is a violation of the Laws of Physics, you know, like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, but then again how would you know that when you've never studied it in a college classroom like I have.

You're the neophyte who's been here giving lectures that ENTROPY is "consumed", as if it is somehow a consumable commodity. You have yet to get to a 1st semester level of Pjhysics, much less gone on to Thermodynamics........you are just such great ENTERTAINMENT for me with all you notions of BH Perpetual Motion & subjecting Electro-Magnetic Waves to the Laws of Kinetic Energy.
Da Schneib
3.7 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2017
@Lenni, you've been telling this lie for years now. Why drag it out again?

Provide an alternative explanation or admit, whether tacitly or (if you have the courage) actively that you have been lying.
Da Schneib
3 / 5 (2) Dec 02, 2017
I will leave calculations of the angular size of an object that is 1/15 the size of Earth's orbit at some 30,000 light years' distance for anyone who cares to do them.
Benni
1 / 5 (4) Dec 02, 2017
I will leave calculations of the angular size of an object that is 1/15 the size of Earth's orbit at some 30,000 light years' distance for anyone who cares to do them.


Neophyte, you're the one indulging in the land of fantasy & funny farm science, do your own black hole math.
Da Schneib
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
The math is all done, @Lenni. Decades ago. Apparently you forgot. Again.

Just as a reminder:
-m'' + m'n' - m'² - 2m'/r = 0
m'' + m'² - m'n' - 2m'/r = 0
e⁻²ⁿ (1 + m'r - n'r) - 1 = 0
R₂₂ sin² ϕ = 0
Source: http://www.etsu.e...esis.pdf
andyf
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
Small question for you Benni:

Why are you so proud of having solved differential equations?

Sure, it's high school stuff, but so what?

It's a bit like bragging that you designed a three transistor amplifier.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (1) Dec 02, 2017
It's a bit like bragging that you designed a three transistor amplifier.
no offence meant but it's more like bragging about being able to put a new chain on your bicycle

worse still is: he has provided absolutely no evidence that he is capable of differential equations, and more than a little to demonstrate he doesn't even know what they are
See: http://phys.org/n...s_1.html

http://phys.org/n...rse.html

http://phys.org/n...ity.html

http://phys.org/n...and.html

benni basic math fail here: https://phys.org/...als.html

andyf
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
Well CS, I'd say putting a new chain on your bike, designing a three transistor amplifier or solving a differential equation were all pretty comparable.

None of them worth bragging about here.

I'd still like to see Benni respond.
andyf
4 / 5 (4) Dec 02, 2017
None of them worth bragging about here..


I'd make an exception if it was the first time you managed to do it - that's always worth some kudos!
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (4) Dec 02, 2017
...and everything you just put up is all slop & swill math because you first need to prove such stellar bodies exist by observation, and none exists There is absolutely zero evidence for the existence a non-spinning non-charged (i.e. Schwarzchild, as opposed to Reisser-Nordstrom (charged), Kerr (spinning), everything is all about INFERRING properties of infinite gravity that can't exist on a FINITE body.

Once again, I (an "unschooled" artist) have to remind you that YOU are the only one drawing that inference. It is obvious to even me, that "infinite" in this context is only a math value, NOT a real one.
A tool used to calculate an actual value...
Da Schneib
3.7 / 5 (3) Dec 02, 2017
@Whyde, it's like what you do when you get to the edge of the canvas. If you stop painting, everyone goes "wow, cool." If you keep on painting, they all go "wow, insane."

I used to paint the princess; I used to paint the frogs
Now I paint moustaches on dangerous dogs
-Don Henley, "Drivin' With Your Eyes Closed"

Playin' that now... :D I always liked that lick
andyf
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2017
Come on Benni!

Small question for you Benni:

Why are you so proud of having solved differential equations?

Sure, it's high school stuff, but so what?

It's a bit like bragging that you designed a three transistor amplifier.


Thought you'd have answered this by now.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (4) Dec 02, 2017
@Whyde, it's like what you do when you get to the edge of the canvas. If you stop painting, everyone goes "wow, cool." If you keep on painting, they all go "wow, insane."

cool can often = insanity...:-)
I used to paint the princess; I used to paint the frogs
Now I paint moustaches on dangerous dogs
Don Henley, "Drivin' With Your Eyes Closed"

I keep on paintin';
frogs on dangerous dogs - to match their diamonds and moustaches
Moustaches and dangerous dogs on princesses - to match their heterogenous natures
and princesses on frogs - still digging for more heterogeneity and also just to make 'em look better after the French have taken their legs...
And to drive with your eyes closed is just believing in the Force...

Whydening Gyre
3.5 / 5 (4) Dec 02, 2017
Come on Benni!

Small question for you Benni:

Why are you so proud of having solved differential equations?

Sure, it's high school stuff, but so what?

It's a bit like bragging that you designed a three transistor amplifier.


Thought you'd have answered this by now.

Andyf,
He's prob'ly trying to design a DE to provide a solution....

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.