How we discovered the strange physics of jets from supermassive black holes

March 2, 2018 by Konstantinos N. Gourgouliatos, The Conversation
Jets from Centaurus A. Credit: ESO/WFI (Optical); MPIfR/ESO/APEX/A.Weiss et al. (Submillimetre); NASA/CXC/CfA/R.Kraft et al. (X-ray, CC BY-SA)

Supermassive black holes, which lurk at the heart of most galaxies, are often described as "beasts" or "monsters". But despite this, they are pretty much invisible. To show that they are there at all, astronomers typically have to measure the speed of the clouds of gas orbiting those regions.

But these objects can sometimes make their presence felt through the creation of powerful jets, which carry so much energy that they are able to outshine all the light emitted by the stars of the host galaxy. We know that these "" are two streams of plasma (matter made up of electrically charged particles despite having no overall charge), travelling in opposite directions at velocities very close to the speed of light.

The physics governing these cosmic fountains, however, has long been a bit of a mystery. Now our new paper, published in Nature Astronomy, has shed some light on the causes of their extraordinary appearance.

What makes relativistic jets exceptional is their impressive stability: they emerge from a region as big as the event horizon (the point of no return) of the and propagate far enough to break out from their while maintaining their shape for a long time. This corresponds to a length that is a billion times their initial radius – to put this in perspective, imagine a water fountain coming out of a 1cm wide hose pipe and remaining undisrupted for 10,000km.

Once the jets propagate at great distances from their origin, though, they lose their coherence and develop extended structures which often resemble plumes or lobes. This indicates that the jets undergo some sort of instability, strong enough to completely change their appearance.

A jet dichotomy

The first astrophysical jet was discovered in 1918 by the American astronomer Heber Curtis, who noticed "a curious straight ray … apparently connected with the nucleus by a thin line of matter" in giant elliptical galaxy M87.

Artist’s concept shows a galaxy with a supermassive black hole at its core. Credit: NASA

In the 1970s, two astronomers at the University of Cambridge, Bernie Fanaroff and Julia Riley, studied a large ensemble of jets. They found that they could be split into two classes: those containing jets whose brightness decreases with distance from their origin, and those that become brighter at their edges. Overall, the latter type is about 100 times more luminous than the former. They both have slightly different shape at the end – the first is like a flaring plume and the second resembles a thin turbulent stream. Exactly why there are two different kinds of jets is still an area of active research.

As jet material gets accelerated by the black hole, it reaches velocities up to 99.9% of the speed of light. When an object moves so fast, time dilates – in other words, the flow of time at the jet, measured by an external observer slows down as predicted by Einstein's special relativity. Because of this, it takes longer for the different parts of the jet to communicate with each other – as in interacting or influencing each other – while travelling away from their source. This, effectively, protects the jet from being disrupted.

However, this loss of communication does not last forever. When the jet is ejected from the black hole, it expands sideways. This expansion makes the pressure inside the jet drop, while the pressure of the gas surrounding the jet does not decrease as much. Eventually, the external gas pressure overtakes the pressure inside the jet and makes the flow contract by squeezing it. At this point, the parts of the jet come so close that they can communicate again. If some parts of the jet have become unstable in the meantime, they can now exchange this information and instabilities can spread to affect the entire beam.

The process of expansion and contraction of the jets has another important consequence: the flow is no longer along straight lines but on curved paths. Curved flows are likely to suffer from "centrifugal instability" which means they start creating whirlpool-like structures called vortices. This was not considered to be critical for until recently.

Indeed, our detailed computer simulations show that relativistic jets become unstable because of the centrifugal instability, which initially only affects their interface with the galactic gas. Once they have contracted due to external pressure though, this instability spreads throughout the entire jet. The instability is so catastrophic that the jet does not survive beyond this point and gives place to a turbulent plume.

Putting this result in perspective we get a better insight of the impressive stability of astrophysical jets. It can also help explain the enigmatic two classes of jets discovered by Fanaroff and Riley – it all depends on how far from its galaxy a jet becomes unstable. We made computer simulations of what these jets would look like based on our new understanding of the physics of these cosmic beams, and they very much resemble the two classes we see in astronomical observations.

There's a lot more to learn about the gigantic, wild beasts residing at the centre of galaxies. But little by little, we are unravelling their mystery and showing that they are indeed perfectly law-abiding and predictable.

Explore further: Unravelling the mysteries of extragalactic jets

Related Stories

Unravelling the mysteries of extragalactic jets

December 11, 2017

University of Leeds researchers have mathematically examined plasma jets from supermassive black holes to determine why certain types of jets disintegrate into huge plumes.

Researchers clarify dynamics of black hole rotational energy

February 14, 2018

Astrophysicists at MIPT have developed a model for testing a hypothesis about supermassive black holes at the centers of galaxies. The new model enables scientists to predict how much rotational energy a black hole loses ...

Powerful jets from non-spinning black holes

November 18, 2015

A black hole is so simple (at least in traditional theories) that it can be completely described by just three parameters: its mass, its spin, and its electric charge. Even though it may have formed out of a complex mix of ...

How black hole jets punch out of their galaxies

June 17, 2016

A simulation of the powerful jets generated by supermassive black holes at the centers of the largest galaxies explains why some burst forth as bright beacons visible across the universe, while others fall apart and never ...

Recommended for you

Three NASA missions return first-light data

September 21, 2018

NASA's continued quest to explore our solar system and beyond received a boost of new information this week with three key missions proving not only that they are up and running, but that their science potential is exceptional. ...

Dwarf companion to EPIC 206011496 detected by astronomers

September 20, 2018

Using ESO's Very Large Telescope (VLT), European astronomers have uncovered the presence of an M-dwarf around the star EPIC 206011496. The newly found object is more than 60 percent less massive than our sun and is bounded ...

69 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Solon
not rated yet Mar 02, 2018
How is the direction of the 'flow' in these jets determined?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (9) Mar 02, 2018
As jet material gets accelerated by the black hole, it reaches velocities up to 99.9% of the speed of light. When an object moves so fast, time dilates – in other words, the flow of time at the jet, measured by an external observer slows down

This is just, stupid meaningless tripe.
Because of this, it takes longer for the different parts of the jet to communicate with each other – as in interacting or influencing each other – while travelling away from their source. This, effectively, protects the jet from being disrupted.

Wow, just wow! How do they get away with this? Anti-science at it's finest, one pseudoscientific concept after another. The plasma ignoramuses seems to be exceedingly proud of his utter ignorance on the matter.
The jets are electric currents, the energy and the physics involved are electromagnetic. No pseudoscience required.
granville583762
3 / 5 (6) Mar 02, 2018
Against the force of gravity
As jet material gets accelerated by the black hole, it reaches velocities up to 99.9% of the speed of light.

How close to gravities light radius do these jets emerge, travelling outwards at 99.9% C where gravity is pulling these jets inside at the speed of light, the amount of energy required is more than the accretion contains if all the matter falling into the light radius star was converted into energy through E=MC* to accelerate these jets against the force of gravity to 99.9% C
RNP
3.9 / 5 (11) Mar 02, 2018
@cantdrive85
Wow, just wow! How do they get away with this? ........

Wow, just wow! How do you get away with this? A complete lack of understanding of science at its finest. The EU ignoramus seems to be exceedingly proud of his utter ignorance on the matter.
The jets have been shown not to be electric currents, the energy and the physics involved are certainly not electromagnetic.Only science required.
granville583762
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
Jets of matter
These jets emerge out of the light radius stars spin axis, forming star forming Fermi-bubbles that are above and below the stars host galaxy stretching over 23,000Lys, where some of the stars formed fall back into the event horizon; which brings us back to the question "How close to gravities light radius do these jets emerge?".

granville583762
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
Spin axis and its event horizon
These jets continually feed the star forming Fermi-bubbles where some of the stars formed escape the host galaxy, so there is the unusable position of an event horizon ejecting matter out its spin axis which goes on to make stars which then escape the host galaxy.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (7) Mar 02, 2018
The jets have been shown not to be electric currents

Somebody didn't get the memo I guess.
http://www.mdpi.c...4/5/4/71
the energy and the physics involved are certainly not electromagnetic.

You don't say?
http://iopscience...L15/meta
From the abstract;
"Our analysis strongly supports a model where the jet energy flow is mainly electromagnetic."

I bet you feel stupid now DNP, disappear now?
granville583762
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
Event horizons jets, their electric currents and magnetic fields
Plasmatic matter containing electrons travelling at 99.9%C is an electric current and consequently a magnetic field which will contain the electrons in tight orbits emitting Bremsstrahlung radiation. The jets are emerging from the event horizon as plasma type matter; it is difficult to avoid an electric current and a magnetic field.
granville583762
3.4 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
Electrons jets are massive bodies
Last time I looked the electron had 9.1x10-31Kg of mass, an electric currant by definition is a massive body, if all that was ejected out the event horizon was an electric currant, light radius stars are emitting jets of matter out their event horizons into their spin axis in the form of electrons.
jonesdave
4.3 / 5 (11) Mar 02, 2018
The jets are electric currents,.....


They are more than just currents, but the point to note is that if you take away the BH then there is no current formed.

@Solon,
How is the direction of the 'flow' in these jets determined?


Well, without reading the paper, I would think the answer would be obvious. Unless the jets are absolutely perpendicular to our line of sight, then we can measure the Doppler shift. For a galaxy that is not quite edge on, then one of the jets will be blue shifted towards us, and the other red shifted away from us.

granville583762
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
jonesdave:- They are more than just currents, but the point to note is that if you take away the BH then there is no current formed.

Or when the BH goes on its periodic diet
NoLeads
5 / 5 (2) Mar 02, 2018
+cantdrive85 lol classic!
rrwillsj
1 / 5 (1) Mar 02, 2018
The questions that interest me are: Are these jets to be expected only from similar massive galaxies?

In other words, is there a minimal level for Galactic Mass to produce these jets?

Could smaller BH-EH conglomerations be producing jets? Even on a smaller, less visible scale?

Or, is this phenomena only resulting during the history of massive galaxies?

Is it probable, that when galaxies collide or smaller galaxies are consumed, that this phenomena will usually occur during the cores amalgamating?
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (7) Mar 02, 2018
They are more than just currents,

What else are they?
the point to note is that if you take away the BH then there is no current formed

This is just conjecture, especially considering there is absolutely no reality based physical mechanism described to turn the monsterous sucker into a monstrous jetter.
Solon
1 / 5 (7) Mar 02, 2018
"For a galaxy that is not quite edge on, then one of the jets will be blue shifted towards us, and the other red shifted away from us."

I have not found any references to such measurements. I think it is only another assumption that the flow is outwards and it is just as likely that the emissions are Cherenkov radiation of particles being accelerated towards the BH.

granville583762
5 / 5 (8) Mar 02, 2018
Solon:- I think it is only another assumption that the flow is outwards and it is just as likely that the emissions are Cherenkov radiation of particles being accelerated towards the BH.

The flow is definitely out of the event horizon into the spin axis ending in the star forming Fermi-bubbles above and below the galaxy
jonesdave
4.2 / 5 (10) Mar 02, 2018
What else are they?


Gas and dust.

This is just conjecture, especially considering there is absolutely no reality based physical mechanism described to turn the monsterous sucker into a monstrous jetter.


No, it isn't conjecture. Read the literature. I gave you a link a few days ago, going back to 1976, where this had been modeled.
granville583762
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
BHs have their limits
The BH jets are caused by over snacking on stars, their releasing matter from inside their event horizons letting of pressure, BHs eject 50% of the mass they take in, even BHs have their limits. They can only grow at a limited rate.
granville583762
4 / 5 (4) Mar 02, 2018
Taking the path of least resistance
It is the centrifugal force of the spinning mass inside the event horizon held together by the force of gravity where the plasmatic matter takes the path of least resistance and exits through its spin axis as jets of matter.
jonesdave
4.2 / 5 (10) Mar 02, 2018
I have not found any references to such measurements. I think it is only another assumption that the flow is outwards and it is just as likely that the emissions are Cherenkov radiation of particles being accelerated towards the BH.


Then you'd be wrong. Took me all of a couple of minutes to find this, and I'm sure there are plenty more:

Face-on dust disks in galaxies with optical jets
https://arxiv.org...7358.pdf

The jet they can see is blue shifted. That means it is coming towards us. That is, exiting the BH.
granville583762
4.4 / 5 (7) Mar 02, 2018
jonesdave:- The jet they can see is blue shifted. That means it is coming towards us. That is, exiting the BH.

This is a breath of fresh air; observational data showing matter exiting event horizons of BHs, how readily observations change the landscape and how easily it is for our preconceived notions on BHs to change in a blink of an eye. It seems as though it was only yesterday a BH was an impenetrable singularity.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
What else are they?


Gas and dust.

I think you mean plasma, at least you should because there ain't no gas there.
I gave you a link a few days ago, going back to 1976, where this had been modeled.

Ummm, nope. Wild conjecture is meaningless mumbo jumbo, especially when even the plasma ignoramus author above stated this;
"The physics governing these cosmic fountains, however, has long been a bit of a mystery."

Lest we forget, the plasmoid which actually does, in reality, create jets.
Plasmoid Phenomena Explains Energy Jets from the So-called Black Hole
https://www.linke...ack-hole
jonesdave
5 / 5 (8) Mar 02, 2018
Lest we forget, the plasmoid which actually does, in reality, create jets.
Plasmoid Phenomena Explains Energy Jets from the So-called Black Hole
https://www.linke...ack-hole


Yes, I've forgotten it already! A crank on linkedin, with unpublished, un-peer reviewed woo. Any burke can do that. Not a single equation, nor anything quantitatve, and not a single reference. Pure woo. EUesque.

cantdrive85
1 / 5 (6) Mar 02, 2018
Surprise, surprise, surprise!
https://youtu.be/2TnkJ8_BmSI

An ad hominem attack. It is jonesdumb, shouldn't expect anything different.

What GR/BH pseudoscientific peer-reviewer is going to publish his relevance into oblivion?
691Boat
5 / 5 (8) Mar 02, 2018
Lest we forget, the plasmoid which actually does, in reality, create jets.
Plasmoid Phenomena Explains Energy Jets from the So-called Black Hole
https://www.linke...ack-hole

@CD85: I like how your evidence is a dude on LinkedIn making unfounded claims for 2 paragraphs, then complaining about "mainstream science" for the rest of his article. Who wouldn't be convinced after reading that?
jonesdave
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 02, 2018
Ummm, nope. Wild conjecture is meaningless mumbo jumbo, especially when even the plasma ignoramus author above stated this;
"The physics governing these cosmic fountains, however, has long been a bit of a mystery."


Out of context. That jets could form is long known. This particular paper is suggesting that the necessary conditions for the jet to get going are due to galaxy mergers.
Here is Blandford, from 1982:

http://adsabs.har...9..883B7

jonesdave
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 02, 2018
@CD85: I like how your evidence is a dude on LinkedIn making unfounded claims for 2 paragraphs, then complaining about "mainstream science" for the rest of his article. Who wouldn't be convinced after reading that?


Yep. Could have been written by Thornhill! I see his BSc was in EE. Now, there's a surprise.

cantdrive85
1 / 5 (7) Mar 02, 2018
That jets could form is long known

Really? You mean astronomers could look up and see them? You're brilliant! There is no mechanism to create the jets in the standard pseudoscience, period. It's a gravity monster, you've got nothing that can legitimately eject matter to these energies. Only electromagnetic fields can do so, it's a simple fact.
jonesdave
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 02, 2018
That jets could form is long known

Really? You mean astronomers could look up and see them? You're brilliant! There is no mechanism to create the jets in the standard pseudoscience, period. It's a gravity monster, you've got nothing that can legitimately eject matter to these energies. Only electromagnetic fields can do so, it's a simple fact.


Really? Show us the paper where this is spelled out without recourse to a black hole. Go.
granville583762
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
cantdrive85:- There is no mechanism to create the jets in the standard pseudoscience Only electromagnetic fields can do so, it's a simple fact.

The BH jets are caused by over snacking on stars, their releasing matter from inside their event horizons into the spin axis letting of pressure ejecting 50% of the mass they take by centrifugal force of the spinning mass inside the event horizon under gravitational pressure taking the path of least resistance exiting through its spin axis.
granville583762
4 / 5 (4) Mar 02, 2018
Cantdrive85:- The matter inside the event horizon is compressed to the speed of light "gravities light radius" so under extreme gravitational pressure, it escapes out the BHs spin-axis at 99.9% the speed of light as "BH spin-axis outflows". This process has been known for 10 years and more.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (5) Mar 02, 2018
Sorry granville, BH's are but a mathematicians fanciful faerie tale. They defy accepted physics, and the entire edifice on which they are built is nothing more than pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo.
Show us the paper where this is spelled out without recourse to a black hole

http://plasmauniv...PS-I.pdf
jonesdave
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 02, 2018
Sorry granville, BH's are but a mathematicians fanciful faerie tale. They defy accepted physics, and the entire edifice on which they are built is nothing more than pseudoscientific mumbo jumbo.
Show us the paper where this is spelled out without recourse to a black hole

http://plasmauniv...PS-I.pdf


Lol. A failed hypothesis from 1986! Brilliant. Anything else?
Peratt predicted that his currents would emit synchrotron radiation at wavelengths close to that seen in the COBE survey. We didn't see it. Neither did WMAP, or Planck and numerous other surveys that would see it. Not only that, but his sims showed only a vague resemblance to spiral galaxies, and couldn't explain ellipticals or irregulars at all. As hypotheses go, it was pretty lame. And is rightly totally ignored. Even by Peratt these days, it would seem.
Solon
5 / 5 (1) Mar 02, 2018
jd
"Face-on dust disks in galaxies with optical jets"
Ta.

How does the outflow become relativistic?
https://arxiv.org...306.0970
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (7) Mar 02, 2018
Peratt predicted that his currents would emit synchrotron radiation

It has already been shown how the plasma absorbs the signature.
http://plasmauniv...007b.pdf
Your still stuck fantasizing about your ideal gases and MHD nonsense.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (7) Mar 02, 2018
Not only that, but his sims showed only a vague resemblance to spiral galaxies, and couldn't explain ellipticals or irregulars

This is also an out and out lie, he produced the entire evolution from ejected quasar to giant elliptical as well as galaxy clusters. He also described numerous irregulars.
http://plasmauniv...PS-I.pdf
http://plasmauniv...S-II.pdf
You only claim it is failed because it would render the entire edifice of your pet pseudoscience worthy of the trash bin of science along with epicycles.
jonesdave
4.1 / 5 (9) Mar 02, 2018
Not only that, but his sims showed only a vague resemblance to spiral galaxies, and couldn't explain ellipticals or irregulars

This is also an out and out lie, he produced the entire evolution from ejected quasar to giant elliptical as well as galaxy clusters. He also described numerous irregulars.
http://plasmauniv...PS-I.pdf
You only claim it is failed because it would render the entire edifice of your pet pseudoscience worthy of the trash bin of science along with epicycles.


Wrong. It had spirals with zero matter between the arms! Is that what really happens? And how is his current woo moving stars around, hmmm? It's nonsense. Was then, is now. Which is why it is ignored. Anyways, this has been discussed to death elsewhere, and it simply doesn't pass muster.
granville583762
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 03, 2018
Light radius stars.
Cantdrive85:- Gravity has the escape velocity of light, its "light radius". Matter and gravity can only travel at the velocity of light and gravity can only compress matter to velocity of light, a star can only shrink to R=2GM/C* which is its light radius or commonly called its event horizon, where gravity is zero at its centre of mass - Newtonian physics. Gravity can only accelerate mass to the speed of light and no more so it can only compress matter to the escape velocity of light as a light radius star commonly known as a blackhole and grows in accordance with formula R=2GM/C*. A BH can shrink no smaller than its light radius, growing with increasing mass while maintaining its light radius as a light radius star. As we inhabit our 15billion light radius star of creation, bears witness.
granville583762
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 03, 2018
Escaping your escape velocity
Cantdrive85:- This is why matter is emerging from BHs because matter moving at 99.9%C, gravity takes an infinitely long distance to decelerate mass as our earth has its own escape velocity. This is why matter travelling at 99.9%C is able to pass freely either way through the light radius or "event horizon" and takes the path of least resistance through the BHs spin-axis emerging as spin-axis outflows – Newtonian physics. This is what we are observing. BHs ejecting jets of matter into their Fermi-bubbles above and below the host galaxies.
granville583762
4 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
Blackholes and Newtonian mechanics
Cantdrive85:- The orbiting accretion disk and BH spin as one which is also in the same plane as the host galaxy, a disk of spinning orbiting matter attracted onto the equally spinning BH, the matter continually pilling on to the equatorial surface of the BH, there are only two outlets available to release the ever increasing pressure, the two BHs spin axis. As long as the accretion disk can supply the black hole with matter this process continues.
jonesdave
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 03, 2018
jd
"Face-on dust disks in galaxies with optical jets"
Ta.

How does the outflow become relativistic?
https://arxiv.org...306.0970


Well, that can only be modeled. What I've seen seem to involve toroidal magnetic fields, such as in:

https://academic..../1028651
granville583762
4 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
Blackholes and their outflow magnetic-fields
jonesdave:- What I've seen seem to involve toroidal magnetic fields.

The outflow jets are spinning at the angular velocity of the light radius star, the electrons in the jets are moving in two directions linear and angular effectively acting as a giant solenoid, giving the BH a magnetic field during spin-axis outflows. The electrons electric-field giving rise to magnetic-fields which then goes on to constrain the original spinning electrons enabling the electron to exhibit a whole host of electromagnetic emissions. The BH does not simply release energy; the accretion disk is often accompanied by a quasar, there is long series of electro-chemical reactions involved concerning BHs when they release mass and energy. There are electric fields emanating from the stars within the galaxies, between the galaxies, though the electric fields cannot shift a star out its orbit, never mind a galaxy, the effects are real but academic.
RNP
3 / 5 (2) Mar 03, 2018
@cantdrive85
Somebody didn't get the memo I guess……..


The first paper you quote, which, by the way, is from an open access journal and therefore not really credible, nevertheless says; ".... in all kpc-scale detections, the inferred electric currents are found to flow away from the galactic nucleus." I.e the jets are OUTFLOWS and there is NO current flowing through the central region.

The second article says "An equal but opposite "return current" flows inward (or outward) at much larger distances from the jet axis so that the net current outflow from the source is zero.".

These articles make it clear that your claim the jets are CAUSED by a current flow is pure drivel and that you have not even read and understand the references you quote.
RNP
3.7 / 5 (3) Mar 03, 2018
@cantdrive85
Somebody didn't get the memo I guess……..


The first paper you quote, which, by the way, is from an open access journal and therefore not really credible, nevertheless says; ".... in all kpc-scale detections, the inferred electric currents are found to flow away from the galactic nucleus." I.e both jets are OUTFLOWS and there is no current flowing through the central region.

The second article says "An equal but opposite "return current" flows inward (or outward) at much larger distances from the jet axis so that the net current outflow from the source is zero.".

Both papers also recognise the source of the jets are the BH in the centre. These articles therefore make it clear that your claim the jets are CAUSED by a current flow is pure drivel and that you have not even read and understand the references you cite.
cantdrive85
2 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
These articles therefore make it clear that your claim the jets are CAUSED by a current flow is pure drivel and that you have not even read and understand the references you cite.

I was pointing out the jets are an electric current, you denied, I showed you to be wrong as even the plasma ignoramuses agree they are electromagnetic currents.
I also pointed out that plasmoids are the source of these jets, regardless of what the darkists claim.
granville583762
4.7 / 5 (3) Mar 03, 2018
The Plasma Universe.

So this is the spat, I've been wondering what it was a few days now, well that's solved that problem.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
It took a few days? Perception is not a strong point for you, is it?
RNP
4 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
@cantdrive85
I was pointing out the jets are an electric current, you denied, .....

The point I was making is that the currents are the RESULT of the process, not the CAUSE of them.

N.B. There are plenty of well known physical processes that generate electric currents (thermovoltaics, the piezoelectic effect, the triboelectric effect etc). The point is that, in these processes, the currents are caused by an underlying, *non-electromagnetic* process. You can deny it as much as you want, but even the papers you quote recognise this to be the case in BH jets.
granville583762
3.7 / 5 (6) Mar 03, 2018
2 Billion Ly Galactic Electrical Currents
cantdrive85:- the jets are an electric current.

Galaxy 3C303 is emanating 10x10+18 amps of current which is the strongest current ever seen coming from a galactic core, where its jet is 150,000Lys long, longer than our milky way, even though it is from a BHs spin-axis, it is an electric currant, showing it is possible that these currant from BHs can reach between galaxies.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
The point I was making is that the currents are the RESULT of the process, not the CAUSE of them.

Well I guess Engrish isn't your strong point because you said;
The jets have been shown not to be electric currents, the energy and the physics involved are certainly not electromagnetic.

Right....
When you figure out how to express yourself you come on back and join the fray, k snookems'...
jonesdave
3.9 / 5 (7) Mar 03, 2018
.....showing it is possible that these currant from BHs can reach between galaxies.


I would very much doubt that. 150 000 l yrs is less than 10% of the distance between the Milky Way and Andromeda.
RNP
4 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
@cantdrive85
Well I guess Engrish [sic] isn't your strong point because you said;......


So, you are only going to criticise my English? Why not trying to respond to my scientific point that the jets are NOT caused by electric currents, rather than just obfuscating?
granville583762
4 / 5 (4) Mar 03, 2018
Blackholes and their electric currants
jonesdave:- I would very much doubt that. 150 000 l yrs is less than 10% of the distance between the Milky Way and Andromeda.

"Possible" is the key word; it does not mean it can reach between galaxies, it has been detected crossing a distance of 2billionLYs between the milky way and galaxy 3C303, after travelling 150,000Lys and then further to our galaxy, it effects are so small and insignificant its academic. But the point remains the BHs currants now have significant effects at 150,000 light years and this is not a billion solar mass blackhole and there are even bigger blackholes than a billion solar mass's.
cantdrive85
1 / 5 (3) Mar 03, 2018
So, you are going to focus on my English?

Apparently you speak Engrish because what you said and meant are very different. See, I was responding to your message and syntax as I cannot read minds over the interweb.
If you would like to, we can discuss how plasmoids (which are balls of electric currents) can create these jets.
RNP
4.3 / 5 (6) Mar 03, 2018
@cantdrive85
So, still no response to my point?.
OK then. I would love to hear how you think plasmoids can cause BH jets. It should be very entertaining!!! I would also like to hear your opinion on why the papers you quoted directly refute your claims.
granville583762
4.2 / 5 (5) Mar 03, 2018
Plasmatic blackholes
RNP:- I would love to hear how you think plasmoids can cause BH jets.

How can you be of the scientific view, "BH's are but a mathematician's fanciful faerie tale" can then have the view that "plasmoids can cause BH jets". Is this not a blackhole emitting spin-axis outflows, its blackhole outflows under another name.
milnik
1 / 5 (1) Mar 05, 2018
Again, this is evidence that science has no idea of ​​black holes, nor does it know how and why they arise. Jets formed from matter of any kind of appearance, can not come out of the black hole, because it is the place where matter is returned and transformed back into the form of substance Aether, from which matter forms. What astronomers see is not black holes, but they are celestial bodies in the process of forming star systems.
When forming matter from Aether, a quark gluon plasma is formed first, which, as a body, forms magnetars, which can have an enormous magnetic field around them. From this magnetars, through the sequence of the process of the deformation of the gluon, the particles of the particles are obtained as a strong gamma ray and a beam of light (quasar). If two sources are found close to it, a dual star is formed and, due to faster rotation, it pulsates by releasing energy in the form of jets and light and various radiation (pulsars).
milnik
1 / 5 (1) Mar 05, 2018
Behind this, a neutron star arises, which as a supernova explodes and forms clouds of gases from which star systems, galaxies, and clusters of galaxies are formed. Because of the resulting gravity (ratio of Aethera and 3kg of particles to 3 quarks and 3 bonds of gluon), it starts compressing these bodies to critical mass and gravity, when a black hole is formed in which the matter passes into the Aether from which it was formed. These are renewable averages, which take place over eons for years.
granville583762
5 / 5 (3) Mar 07, 2018
You cannot subdivide a vacuum
Milnic:- Eliminate your variables, there is an unsubstantiated theory, gluons have a quark gluon plasma. There is no Aether, no holes in the vacuum of space, and a singularity is simply coordinates in the vacuum of space. There is only one vacuum. It does need explaining in greater detail as it is self explanatory, you cannot subdivide a vacuum, if you could you dig half a hole.

milnic:- When forming matter from Aether, a quark gluon plasma is formed first.

The quarks are the base's of matter, until we find smaller particles the quarks are the particle emerging in the chain of particle, the quark gluon plasma – the gluon plasma is yet to be proved!
milnik
1 / 5 (2) Mar 07, 2018
You and the science claim that there is a vacuum and you think of a space in which there is no substance. And I agree with that, but there is no absolute vacuum, because the entire space in the universe is filled with AETHER substance. From this substance, matter is formed in two "aggregate" states: "solid" (3KG particles, these are 3 quarks and 3 bonds of gluon) and a "liquid" state, which are free gluons that form with 3kg particle breakdown, all chemical elements and with Aether cause the appearance of magnetism. Gluones do not contain quarks, as quarks are formed before gluon.
Understand this as my Copyright.
granville583762
5 / 5 (3) Mar 07, 2018
milnic:- There is at least 12 quarks 6 being anti- and there are more to be found, the total number of subatomic particles is growing year on year, it is a mistake to suppose what we presently observe is all that exists, this is building ones ivory tower for one's self, it becomes ingrained in the subconscious eventually reality is to much for the mind to take as it cannot see the wood for trees. You must have read the article and associated scientific literature http://iopscience.../6/10/14
these are 3 quarks.

granville583762
5 / 5 (2) Mar 07, 2018
there is more than meets the eye
these are 3 quarks.

Anonym203782
not rated yet Mar 09, 2018
its a really nice but seems to be more precise

which also belongs into postulates of string theory. It's sorta logical, because the extradimensions represent the 3D underwater in 2D water surface analogy of 4D space-time
milnik
1 / 5 (2) Mar 09, 2018
@mackita, what is dense aether ?
@granville,
In nature there is only one anticycle that is permanent, and it is positron. All other anti, which "finds" science, appears at the moment and is not a permanent particle in nature. What is an "anti" particle. It is a particle that has a spin direction opposite to the spin of an electron. If you look at the Earth from a position above the north pole, it rotates counterclockwise, and if you look at that distance above the south pole, its direction is the opposite. How can the quarks be anti-gluon together and they are the basis of proton and neutron? This would mean that there are also anti-neutron anti-protons, formed from normal particles. When the particles measure anything, they do the science either by lasers or other particles, and thus only irritate the natural particle, which is "angry" at the "scientific visit"
Da Schneib
not rated yet Mar 09, 2018
Here's the thing: we don't seem to see jets in the absence of accretion disks.

Now, why would that be?

If anyone knows of a relativistic astrophysical jet that doesn't come from an object with an accretion disk, let's see your reference linked here.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2018
no visible accretion runs in central black hole
Ummm, apparently you've forgotten the EHT project, which is currently underway. We'll be imaging the accretion disk in the next year or two. We've already seen strong indications of an accretion disk based on moving flares from Sgr A*. So it looks like you're wrong. Again. And making stuff up to disrupt. Again. And hoping no one spots it. Again. The data that will show you're lying will show up shortly. Perhaps you'll have the integrity to admit it but I kinda doubt it.

You're a real POS, you know that, @macurinetherapy?
milnik
1 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2018
Because science does not know the consequences of Aether's relationship with various forms of matter, there are countless nebuloses invented by numerous researchers. You mention many researchers and their claims serve as true evidence to you, although this has not been proven. Why are there so many variants of black hole behavior? Because science does not understand the structure of the universe and the phenomena that arise from the relationship between Aether and various forms of matter. Science does not know the processes of forming matter, and thus the formation and dissolution of celestial bodies.
Mackita, you are putting too many others' statements, which are not mutually agreeable, which confirms that there is nothing wrong with achieving the true causes of the phenomenon.
milnik
1 / 5 (2) Mar 10, 2018
When the star falls into a black hole, it is transformed into Aether and thus causes only Aether's vibrations to achieve its homogeneity in the universe. These vibrations propagate through Aether on all sides alike (spherically).
barakn
not rated yet Apr 13, 2018
Another problem with our "black hole" at the center of Milky Way is, the stars in its neighborhood are revolving Sgr A* quite closely - they should get ripped by its gravity field already - but this is not gonna to happen. -mackita/Zephir.

Bullshit. The tidal force of a massive black hole is quite small because the radius r of a large black hole is large and tidal force is proportional to 1/r^3.

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.