Newborns or survivors? The unexpected matter found in hostile black hole winds

January 30, 2018 by Kayla Stoner, Northwestern University
Newborns or survivors? The unexpected matter found in hostile black hole winds
Credit: Northwestern University

The existence of large numbers of molecules in winds powered by supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies has puzzled astronomers since they were discovered more than a decade ago. Molecules trace the coldest parts of space, and black holes are the most energetic phenomena in the universe, so finding molecules in black hole winds was like discovering ice in a furnace.

Astronomers questioned how anything could survive the heat of the energetic outflows, but a new theory from researchers in Northwestern University's Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Exploration in Astrophysics (CIERA) predicts that these are not survivors at all, but brand-new molecules, born in the winds with unique properties that enable them to adapt to and thrive in the hostile environment.

The theory, published in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, is the work of Lindheimer post-doctoral fellow Alexander Richings, who developed the computer code that, for the first time, modeled the detailed chemical processes that occur in interstellar gas accelerated by radiation emitted during the growth of supermassive black holes. Claude-André Faucher-Giguère, who studies galaxy formation and evolution as an assistant professor in Northwestern's Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, is a co-author.

"When a black hole sweeps up gas from its host galaxy, the gas is heated to high temperatures, which destroy any existing molecules," Richings said. "By modeling the molecular chemistry in computer simulations of black hole winds, we found that this swept-up gas can subsequently cool and form new molecules."

This theory answers questions raised by previous observations made with several cutting-edge astronomical observatories including the Herschel Space Observatory and the Atacama Large Millimeter Array, a powerful radio telescope located in Chile.

In 2015, astronomers confirmed the existence of energetic outflows from supermassive black holes found at the center of most galaxies. These outflows kill everything in their path, expelling the food - or molecules - that fuel star formation. These winds are also presumed to be responsible for the existence of "red and dead" elliptical galaxies, in which no can form.

Then, in 2017, astronomers observed rapidly moving new stars forming in the winds - a phenomenon they thought would be impossible given the extreme conditions in black hole-powered outflows.

New stars form from molecular gas, so Richings and Faucher-Giguère's new theory of molecule formation helps explain the formation of new stars in winds. It upholds previous predictions that black hole winds destroy molecules upon first collision but also predicts that new molecules - including hydrogen, carbon monoxide and water - can form in the winds themselves.

"This is the first time that the molecule formation process has been simulated in full detail, and in our view, it is a very compelling explanation for the observation that molecules are ubiquitous in winds, which has been one of the major outstanding problems in the field," Faucher-Giguère said.

Richings and Faucher-Giguère predict that the new molecules formed in the winds are warmer and brighter in infrared radiation compared to pre-existing molecules. That theory will be put to the test when NASA launches the James Webb Space Telescope in spring 2019. If the theory is correct, the telescope will be able to map black hole outflows in detail using infrared radiation.

Explore further: Black hole research could aid understanding of how small galaxies evolve

More information: Alexander J Richings et al. The origin of fast molecular outflows in quasars: molecule formation in AGN-driven galactic winds, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (2017). DOI: 10.1093/mnras/stx3014

Related Stories

Stars born in winds from supermassive black holes

March 27, 2017

Observations using ESO's Very Large Telescope have revealed stars forming within powerful outflows of material blasted out from supermassive black holes at the cores of galaxies. These are the first confirmed observations ...

Recommended for you

Matter waves and quantum splinters

March 25, 2019

Physicists in the United States, Austria and Brazil have shown that shaking ultracold Bose-Einstein condensates (BECs) can cause them to either divide into uniform segments or shatter into unpredictable splinters, depending ...

How tree diversity regulates invading forest pests

March 25, 2019

A national-scale study of U.S. forests found strong relationships between the diversity of native tree species and the number of nonnative pests that pose economic and ecological threats to the nation's forests.

36 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Tuxford
2 / 5 (8) Jan 30, 2018
these molecules are not survivors at all, but brand-new molecules, born in the winds with unique properties that enable them to adapt to and thrive in the hostile environment

Yes, but where does all that new matter come from in the first place, given the presence of the massive outflows in the energetic winds destroying the quiescent conditions needed for star formation?? Obviously, the conventional notions of the merger maniacs are still blowing in the winds, while fancying the existence of the illogical black hole with infinite density.

How much longer will the math fairies prevail in the face of such contra-evidence? Our matter is largely born in the centers of galaxies, and distributed therefrom, growing galaxies from the inside out, rather than the reverse.
cantdrive85
1.6 / 5 (7) Jan 30, 2018
How much longer will the math fairies prevail in the face of such contra-evidence?

As long as we keep funding their Ponzi science schemes.
rrwillsj
4.6 / 5 (9) Jan 30, 2018
Tf and cd8, the difference. Your lot read fairytales in comicbooks and insist that there is THE FINAL AND COMPLETE TRUTH!!" Ta-daa!

Scientists develop experiments and evolve technology to gather evidence to try and make sense out of this meshugaas reality.

Striving to discover unrealized analysis of natural phenomena. Correct errors and rework misunderstood concepts.

Nothing is beyond question. Until there are multiple verification of results.

Tf and cd8, what you advocate is not the scientific method. And your peers judge you guilty of crankery and bombastic nonsense.
Tuxford
1.5 / 5 (8) Jan 30, 2018
Clearly, the scientific method is flawed in this field, as it precludes investigation too far afield of accepted dogma. It thereby inhibits breakthroughs, instead insisting that any progress step not too far forward. Thus, the method has led to fantasy, with decades of supporting arguments for nonsense. Congratulations merger maniacs. Very impressive. You should be proud!
rrwillsj
4.2 / 5 (5) Jan 31, 2018
Tf, you are correct about one thing. One solitary thing out of all your comments. Merger Maniacs should take pride in how all their hard work and dedicated efforts are paying off with repeatable experimentation and verified accumulations of results.

Tf and the rest of the fairytail bunch? Those Still waiting for the thundermug tossing, flying unicorns on their electrifried aether propeller beanie saucer to show up?

And once they do?

Gosh we will all be so impressed at the unrealized insight shown an uncaring world, of you True Believers. Who kept the faith in the face of public scorn and deliberate suppression by the Men In Black.

Oh, wait. Those were the Men In White dragging you back to your padded cells.

Never mind....
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (5) Feb 03, 2018
From the above article:
...new molecules - including hydrogen, carbon monoxide and water - can form in the winds themselves.
I now remind IMP-9, RNP and all those who may have missed/forgotten that I have been pointing out for them (for years now) what the above 'mainstream' group are only just realizing, ie: that PRECISELY THIS kind of 'recycling process' (of older/evolved/complex material/molecules/dust etc, creates 'pristine' Hydrogen etc ALL THE TIME; which newly reformed 'pristine looking' material eventually aggregates into 'new' clusters/galaxies having the 'appearance of being primordial', but are actually newly created from RECYCLED material that MIMICS the 'pristine-looking' material that has too often been INCORRECTLY interpreted/assumed to be 'primordial' which has existed since some ALLEGEDLY BB BEGINNINGS 'era'.

In my following posts, I will remind of you all of my most recent observations proving my longstanding comprehension of all this.

cont...
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Feb 03, 2018
cont...

From thread...

http://phys.org/n...ery.html
...in discussion with @antialias_physorg:
...
Various 'peer criticism' responses to BICEP2 and other CMB 'papers' clearly supports my long-stated view that 'space' is a 'mixmaster' of 'localized/extended recycling' processes which, across the eons and across vast space regions, is perfectly capable of producing BOTH the locally observed CMB AND 'elemental abundance forms/ratios'.

Variously scaled galaxy/blackhole POLAR JET processes/ejections of 'deconstructed matter' from accretion discs over eons locally and into intergalaxy/intercluster space is COMMONPLACE. Hence the 'mix' of 'old' & 'pristine' gas/features observed.

Eternal recyling at all scales makes 'one BBang' unnecessary. Remember Occam's Razor! Cheers. :)
As you can now see, I have been 'connecting the dots' on this (and many other things) long before 'mainstream has gotten round to doing the same. :)

cont....

RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Feb 03, 2018
cont...

And from thread...

http://phys.org/n...-up.html

...in discussin with @Da Schneib:
...
See the 'pristine/recycled energy-space' hydrogen atom 'gas/plasma' content predicted by SS but only now being 'unexpectedly found' in deepest space by BBers?

Why posit 'Dark Energy' to BBang 'fix'; when Ocam's Razor-SS-predicted, ubiquitously distributed low levels of 'recycling energy-space-matter' will do? :)
Again, you can see that I have been consistent and ahead-of-the-curve when pointing out the naive/simplistic assumptions/categorizations and mis-interpretations of observations which obviously are recycled/reformed matter aggregating into NEWER, but MISLEADINGLY 'pristine-looking', stars/clusters/galaxies and deep space gases/molecules/dust (as the above PO 'mainstream' work is now, belatedly, confirming me correct about). :)
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Feb 03, 2018
cont...

And from:

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

..in discussion with @BloodyOrphan, @DarkLordKelvin, @Mimath224:
...
It is likely much 'deconstructed matter' (reduced to electrons, protons) mass ejected via polar jets eventually 'reconstitutes' to 'pristine' (not alleged 'big bang primordial') atomic/molecular hydrogen in each quasar/galaxy 'hemispheres' region, and also in deep intergalactic space, where it may form 'older looking stars'. Cheers.
Yet again, you can see what I have long been pointing out for antialias, RNP, IMP-9; and all those who have been depending/waiting on SLOW/INCORRECT 'mainstream' to do their THINKING, and 'connecting-the-OBVIOUS-dots', for them, instead of doing it for themselves, as I have been urging all along.

Anyhow, I trust that those who have been attacking ME (instead of doing what I urged them to do/see for themselves) while I have been correct all along, will now listen instead of insult. :)
RNP
4 / 5 (8) Feb 04, 2018
@Realitycheck
What utter nonsense. All the claims in the self-aggrandising posts above have been soundly debunked numerous times before and serve only to emphasise your lack of understanding of the subject. E.g.

THIS kind of 'recycling process' (of older/evolved/complex material/molecules/dust etc, creates 'pristine' Hydrogen etc ALL THE TIME.....


Utter tosh! The DEFINITION of "pristine" is that the material has NOT been recycled through stars and therefore does NOT contain metals IN ANY FORM. You really should learn the meaning of the words you are trying to use if you want to avoid posting such gibberish.


All the other "I've been right all along" claims are equally as silly, and equally as embarrassing to yourself. So, instead of wasting so much of your time time parroting the same nonsense over and over again, why don't actually take the time to learn some physics and "do the maths". You will find that ALL your claims are born of ignorance not wisdom.
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (8) Feb 04, 2018
What we're looking at here are *data*. Any simulation that can't predict the data is eliminated; the ones that can are substantiated. There's only one that can. If someone wants to challenge it they'll need to provide data that substantiate it and a simulation that duplicates it.

This is what the EUdiots can't do.
Uncle Ira
5 / 5 (8) Feb 04, 2018
From the above article:
...new molecules - including hydrogen, carbon monoxide and water - can form in the winds themselves.
I now remind IMP-9, RNP and all those who may have missed/forgotten that I have been pointing out for them (for years now) what the above 'mainstream' group are only just realizing, ie: that PRECISELY THIS kind of 'recycling process' (of older/evolved/complex material/molecules/dust etc,


You probably did not know this, but new "molecules" of hydrogen only means that two old protons got together to make a new "molecule". All molecules of hydrogen are H2's, it's a diatomic stuffs. If it does not have two, it's not a molecule of hydrogen.

In my following posts, I will remind of you all of my most recent observations proving my longstanding comprehension of all this.
Shouldn't you wait until you comprehend it before you bring up the longstanding business?
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Feb 04, 2018
@Uncle Ira

It's more complex, Ira. To get an overall idea of the full range of recycling, intermediates and outcomes involved, you need to have read all my posts relevant to this constant recycling (only now being investigated properly by mainstream, as per above PO report). Eg, from a more recent thread... http://phys.org/n...rse.html

...to @Whyde:
Then consider the high energies and quark gluon plasma and fusions and deconstructions going on in the disc-jets systems alluded to. Then see that any 'calculations' are meaningless unless you understand that quark gluon plasma is being created all the time and recycled into deep space to reproduce all the 'observed' abundances/ratios depending on which region or epoch you are observing.
See the fuller picture? material of all sorts/sizes recycled into 'new' Quark-Gluon Plasma; which forms 'new' protons, electrons etc; which in turn go on to form 'new' Hydrgen/Helium nuclei etc. Ok? :)
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Feb 04, 2018
@RNP.
THIS kind of 'recycling process' (of older/evolved/complex material/molecules/dust etc, creates 'pristine' Hydrogen etc ALL THE TIME
The DEFINITION of "pristine" is that the material has NOT been recycled through stars and therefore does NOT contain metals IN ANY FORM.
Read in fuller context please. See the 'inverted commas' enclosing 'pristine'? They are to indicate that it's (previous) mainstream orthodoxy cosmologists 'paradigm' that had long been naively/simplistically and untenably, MIS-identifying and assuming incorrectly, that Hydrogen/Helium in the deep (interstellar, intercluster, intergalactic, inter-galactic-cluster) space 'must be' 'primordial' (ie supposedly 'pristine' and un-recycled from alleged BB! Please read and catch up with all the relevant context, mate. Thanks.
All the other "I've been right all along" claims are equally as silly,..
Meanwhile in REALITY, mainstream article/work NOW (eg, as above) increasingly supporting me. :)
RNP
4 / 5 (8) Feb 05, 2018
@Realitycheck
See the 'inverted commas' enclosing 'pristine'? They are to indicate that it's (previous) mainstream orthodoxy cosmologists 'paradigm' that had long been naively/simplistically and untenably, MIS-identifying and assuming incorrectly, that Hydrogen/Helium in the deep (interstellar, intercluster, intergalactic, inter-galactic-cluster) space 'must be' 'primordial'


More nonsense. We KNOW that the interstellar and intergalactic media are not pristine, because they have been OBSERVED not to be. It is apparently only you that thinks they are. In your own words: Please read and catch up with all the relevant context.

The intercluster medium is more complicated, but large quantities of gas that contains no metals have been OBSERVED in such locations. So we KNOW it is out there.

In any case, the article above and its associated paper make NO reference to such, or any other, 'pristine' material, making your posts even more erroneous and pointless.
RNP
4 / 5 (8) Feb 05, 2018
@RealityCheck
See the fuller picture? material of all sorts/sizes recycled into 'new' Quark-Gluon Plasma; which forms 'new' protons, electrons etc; which in turn go on to form 'new' Hydrgen/Helium nuclei etc. Ok? :)


Preposterous! Indeed, even more outrageous than your usual nonsense.

Where, for f**ks sake, are you suggesting that Quark-Gluon plasma is generating significant amounts of " 'new' Hydrgen " [sic]?

Why do you do this? You just conjure silly stuff out of thin air in an attempt to make yourself sound knowledgeable, but instead make yourself look stupid.
Uncle Ira
5 / 5 (7) Feb 05, 2018
@ Really-Skippy. How you are Cher? I am doing just fine and dandy, thanks for asking.

It's more complex, Ira. To get an overall idea of the full range of recycling, intermediates and outcomes involved, you need to have read all my posts relevant to this constant recycling
I been reading all your irreverent posts for years Cher. They have not improved since you first started with this foolishment.

See the fuller picture?
The fuller picture just shows your mental conditions are resistant to whatever it is the doctors are trying on you.

Anyhow, I trust that those who have been attacking ME (instead of doing what I urged them to do/see for themselves) while I have been correct all along,
Do you and Trump-Skippy go to the same doctors? It's not helping him either.
Zzzzzzzz
5 / 5 (6) Feb 05, 2018
Tf and cd8, what you advocate is not the scientific method. And your peers judge you guilty of crankery and bombastic nonsense.


Indeed. These two fecal regurgitators are already on my ignore list, along with RC. Mackita is trying to get on it as well.....
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018
@RNP.
We KNOW that the interstellar and intergalactic media are not pristine, because they have been OBSERVED not to be.
Only RECENTLY observed/understood NOW by mainstream; while I have been pointing all this out for YEARS to YOU; while you derided me for being ahead-of-the-curve/mainstream on this (and other) crucial understandings that FALSIFY early naive/simplistic 'BB-pristine' gas/elemental abundance ratios/calculations/interpretations.
The intercluster medium is more complicated, but large quantities of gas that contains no metals have been OBSERVED in such locations. So we KNOW it is out there.
NOW you/mainstream do; BUT I've been pointing out these OBVIOUS things for YEARS (while you/mainstream kept 'swallowing the 'Cool-Aid' of BB-based FALSE BELIEFS.

READ! It's NOT JUST GAS 'features', RNP! Please see my VERY FIRST post above: Mainstream ALSO long mistakenly assumed low-metalicity stars, clusters, galaxies STILL forming from Big-Bang-LEFTOVERS H/He! :)
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018
@RNP (and @ Zzzzzzzz too if he can see this).
Preposterous! Indeed, even more outrageous than your usual nonsense.

Where, for f**ks sake, are you suggesting that Quark-Gluon plasma is generating significant amounts of " 'new' Hydrgen " [sic]?

Why do you do this? You just conjure silly stuff out of thin air in an attempt to make yourself sound knowledgeable, but instead make yourself look stupid.
You didn't know that innumerable Black Hole Disc-Jet PROCESSES/OUTFLOWS are many orders of magnitude MORE energetic than our LHC; and have been outputting Q-G-Plasma for EONS? Amazing!

This is what happens when you put ME on "IGNORE", guys; you MISS the full context/info; without which, responses, like yours above, then demonstrate how easily IGNORANCE, ARROGANT gang-like mentality/belief in their own inerrancy, can CORRUPT professional mainstream cosmology field/literature FOR DECADES (only just NOW recovering; thanks to bravely OBJECTIVE researchers in this field). :)
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018
@Uncle Ira.

Please do yourself a favor, Ira: read my last two posts to RNP above. Then you might just realize how you are being as/more useless, ignorant, malignant and just plain stupid, uncomprehending 'cheerleader' and 'sycophant' for 'the gang' in this new year than you were in the last/previous years. Was that your New Year Resolution, Ira?....to see if you could be/make even more irrelevant noise here at PO than you did before? If so, then you are now well on track to keeping that NY resolution, Ira! Pity. :)
Uncle Ira
5 / 5 (3) Feb 05, 2018
Was that your New Year Resolution, Ira?
Work to have as good a year this year as I did last year. And be grateful if this year is only half as good as last year was.

If so, then you are now well on track to keeping that NY resolution, Ira!
Yeah, everything is looking good for me so far. But then I don't like to complain even when I got something to complain about, it can always be worser.
RNP
3.7 / 5 (6) Feb 05, 2018

@Realitycheck

@RNP.
We KNOW that the interstellar and intergalactic media are not pristine, because they have been OBSERVED not to be.


Only RECENTLY observed/understood NOW by mainstream; while I have been pointing all this out for
YEARS to YOU;


AGAIN, YOU LIE. I recall a flurry of activity in the field of the metallicity of the intergalactic medium in the late 1990s. Here is a paper from 2003 that summarises the previous decade's research (with a quick search you could have found this for yourself).

https://arxiv.org...6469.pdf

When will you learn that there are people reading your posts that know much more about astrophysics than you, and that the nonsense you post only serves to show you to be a charlatan troll?
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Feb 05, 2018
@RNP
When will you learn that there are people reading your posts that know much more about astrophysics than you, and that the nonsense you post only serves to show you to be a charlatan troll?
LOL
you're talking about a pseudoscience idiot who hasn't figured out that its posts are searchable in every f*cking search engine on the interwebz

nor has it figured out that cursory examination of its inane pseudoscience delusions led directly to his home address which said idiot posted online (but has the temerity to complained about in the past because -shockingly enough- people found it by searching his comments and pseudoscience phrasing, just like zeph, who was also similarly doxx'd)

lastly, said idiot is so absolutely bereft of intelligence while being so unapologetically incompetent that it can't do a cursory search about its claims, as you point out above

just report the idiot
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Feb 06, 2018
@RNP.

Calm down, RNP; you are conflating/confusing two separate issues, mate.

NOTE WELL:

I was addressing ONLY the humongous quantities of hydrogen etc gas content found ONLY SINCE NEW INFRA-RED range telescopes came on line MORE RECENTLY. They found that galactic EXTENTS/MASSES were much larger than previously thought based on older telescope observations/estimates etc; AND ALSO found humongous quantities of intergalactic/intercluster Hydrogen etc gas previously UNKNOWN to exist in such quantity/mass!

MY point ONLY had to do with the fact that ANY deep-space Hydrogen/Helium was deemed BY BigBangBelievers to be PRISTINE (ie, PRIMORDIAL; ie, from Big Bang Beginning); and hence they ALSO ASSUMED that any low-metallicity star/star-cluster/galaxy must also be made from such 'leftover gas from BB! Read the literature re that BB-biased assumption/interpretation for decades now.

BUT above NEW article/work NOW agrees NEWLY REFORMED Hydrogen/Helium is CONSTANTLY produced! :)
RNP
3.7 / 5 (6) Feb 06, 2018
@Realitycheck
I was addressing ONLY the humongous quantities of hydrogen etc gas content found ONLY SINCE NEW INFRA-RED range telescopes came on line...

Give me one example of such humungous discoveries. Don't worry, I'll do the maths for you if you can't do it.

MY point ONLY had to do with the fact that ANY deep-space Hydrogen/Helium was deemed BY BigBangBelievers to be PRISTINE (ie, PRIMORDIAL; ie, from Big Bang Beginning); and hence they ALSO ASSUMED that any low-metallicity star/star-cluster/galaxy must also be made from such 'leftover gas from BB!

I have refuted this point above and even provided a reference as proof.

BUT above NEW article/work NOW agrees NEWLY REFORMED Hydrogen/Helium is CONSTANTLY produced! :)

You fail to understand the article. It talks about production of Hydrogen MOLECULES not the production of Hydrogen atoms. The fact that you entertain such a silly concept underscores your lack of understanding of even basic physics.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Feb 06, 2018
@RNP.
Give me one example of such humungous discoveries.
You are being patently disingenuous, insincere, RNP. I expect any interlocutor attacking me to at least be up to date with ALL the relevant recent discoveries/reviews. READ UP; instead of playing these troll/ego games. :)
I have refuted this point above and even provided a reference as proof.
You "refuted" nothing; you conflated/confused two separate issues; and still patently haven't read up, 'connected the dots' appearing in the larger discovery/review picture. Stop being 'myopic', 'pedantic', BIASED. It's that sort of 'blinkers' that left us with 'Big Bang' mess only now being cleaned up.
You fail to understand the article.
It's part of bigger picture 'dots' set. Again, stop being myopic and pedantic; see the fuller picture/insights! Eg: consider what is happening in BH disc-jets/winds: Our LHC is PUNY by comparison, yet IT TOO produces Quark-Gluon Plasma that reforms into NEW Protons/atoms! THINK. :)
RNP
3.7 / 5 (6) Feb 07, 2018
@RealityCheck
Straight out of the crank's play book.

You REFUSE to give references for your nonsensical claims, OBFUSCATE around subjects where you realise you are wrong, and INVENT physics to try and bolster your failing position.

I must say that the claim that significant amounts of "new" Hydrogen and Helium can be produced in BH jets really is the silliest thing you have said in a long time (and that takes some doing). It is wrong on so many fronts it is unbelievable. For instance, leaving aside everything else, have you never heard of the Conservation of Baryon Number? To put it simply for you, this means that if an interaction produce a "new" particle it must also produce a "new" anti-particle. Were this an anti-proton it would annihilate with a proton leaving the amount of hydrogen the same. I.e. It precludes your claim at the most fundamental level.

I am fed up with reading your ridiculous bleating, so take your trolling nonsense somewhere else.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Feb 07, 2018
@RNP.
You REFUSE to give references for your nonsensical claims, OBFUSCATE around subjects where you realise you are wrong, and INVENT physics.......the claim that significant amounts of "new" Hydrogen and Helium can be produced in BH jets really is the silliest thing.........if an interaction produce a "new" particle it must also produce a "new" anti-particle. Were this an anti-proton..
*sigh*...incredibly powerful blinkers, RNP!

LHC produces Quark-Gluon plasma. Yes?

BH Disc-Jets/Winds processes MANY orders of magnitude more powerful/extensive; have been producing Quark-Gluon plasma for EONS.

Symmetry breaking 'chaos' processes involved; producing all sorts of 'intermediate' states/particles; MANY of which are 'anti-particles' that AREN'T 'protons'; which may be Kaons, Pions, Muons that DECAY into Electrons, Positrons, Neutrinos/anti-Neutrins (like at LHC).

Anyway, I didn't say EXTRA; I said NEW; RE-formed from Quark-Gluons Plasma from recycled EXISTING matter! :)
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (3) Feb 07, 2018
Mackita is trying to get on it as well.....

mackita (Zeph) is an auto-ignore for me.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Feb 07, 2018
Mackita is trying to get on it as well.....

mackita (Zeph) is an auto-ignore for me.

it's actually quite fascinating to see how they twist their beliefs and delusions to make themselves feel better

knowledge is power - so studying the benign idiocy of delusional pseudoscience idiots like them is how we learn to deal with the malicious criminally insane fanatic
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Feb 08, 2018
@Forum.

Oh the irony! Oh the insensibility to their own foibles and failings, as demonstrated by their own 'bot-voting' and unheeding gang-attacks on the person instead of sticking to the science/logic arguments made!
Mackita is trying to get on it as well.....

mackita (Zeph) is an auto-ignore for me.

it's actually quite fascinating to see how they twist their beliefs and delusions to make themselves feel better

knowledge is power - so studying the benign idiocy of delusional pseudoscience idiots like them is how we learn to deal with the malicious criminally insane fanatic
Is any further comment needed after that latest demonstration of everything that's wrong and insidiously dangerous with 'the gang' mentality certain 'members' STILL exhibit so insensibly and all too often in this new year as in the last/previous, @Forum? Sad.
Captain Stumpy
3.7 / 5 (3) Feb 09, 2018
@idiot pseudoscience liar and brain dead crank sam fodera
gang-attacks on the person instead of sticking to the science/logic arguments made!
1- you don't post science: you post your opinion on science

2- when we attempt to get you to "science", you lie (BICEP)

3- when we attempt to get you to use the scientific method and actually validate your claims by showing the fatal flaws in a public posted study, you not only ignore the request (for 7,660 posts - current as of February 8, 2018, 7:40 pm), but you lie about posting the requested data in the site (which is searchable by Google and every other search engine)

that makes you the consummate liar - which can be validated by anyone with a search engine and patience

science doesn't take someone at their word - which is what you want from everyone else

you're a troll, and reported

.

.

PS - there is no gang. just a LOT of people who think you're an idiot troll
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Feb 09, 2018
@Forum.

From @Stumpy to @RNP:
you're talking about a pseudoscience idiot who hasn't figured out that its posts are searchable in every f*cking search engine on the interwebz
While RNP is being addressed by egotistical, malignant, foul-mouthed, bot-voting, science ignoramus @Stumpy even too insensible to see the irony in his driveling 'personal trolling noise'!

The same search engines can find @Stumpy's posts too!....Yuk!

And again, unwitting CS-irony/insensibility:
nor has it figured out that cursory examination of its inane pseudoscience delusions..
Which are being confirmed correct all along with every new mainstream study/review/discovery!

It's unequivocally demonstrable: @Stumpy is the one "deluded", hey, @Forum?

Oh the humanity!:
said idiot is so absolutely bereft of intelligence..
This from an admitted INTERNET STALKER, LIAR/LIBELER, BOT-VOTING ignoramus BETRAYING all SCIENCE/HUMANITY objectivity/fairness principles ON A SCIENCE SITE! Poor CS.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Feb 09, 2018
@Stumpy.
there is no gang. just a LOT of people who think you're an idiot troll
You mean that SAME "LOT of people" who:

- fell 'hook-line-and-sinker' for that all-too-obvious BICEP2 crap despite my cautions/urgings to check it out properly before again quoting it to 'bash the cranks'?

- who've been skewing the metrics ON A SCIENCE site with your/their campaign of bot-voting, lying, denying and trolling/burying/disparaging CORRECT discussions with your TROLL SHITE 'conversations' amongst your/gang of incestuous daisy-chain of INTERNET LOSER jerks 'upvoting' each other '5s' while downvoting '1' even to CORRECT science/logics posts from me/others now being proved correct all along by MAINSTREAM?

- still in denial, malignant, as ever in this New Year as the last/previous; and therefore still suffering 'egg-on-face' with every new mainstream discovery/study/review confirming ME, my Reality-based ToE/Maths insight/observations, CORRECT?

Sad CS/gang of losers. Pitiful.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Feb 14, 2018
@RNP.
I was addressing ONLY the humongous quantities of hydrogen etc gas content found ONLY SINCE NEW INFRA-RED range telescopes came on line...
Give me one example of such humungous discoveries. Don't worry, I'll do the maths for you if you can't do it.
Where have you been, mate!? Please do what I urged long ago: Read up BEFORE you launch into more ignorance-based insults, denials.

Just some links to give you the 'hint' as to 'the tip of the iceberg' still out there yet unseen and (except by me) unsuspected, that creates 'new' matter in deep space from BH jets/winds 'recycled material'; as well as all those Microwave frequencies generated all over by such and other processes which create a BACKGROUNG of microwave CMB even NOW as we speak.

https://phys.org/...rms.html

http://iopscience...2/79/pdf

https://phys.org/...rgy.html

OK, mate? :)

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.