Looking back in time to watch for a different kind of black hole

September 19, 2018, Georgia Institute of Technology
Image from the DCBH simulation shows density (left) and temperature (right) of an early galaxy. Supernovae shock waves can be seen expanding from the center, disrupting and heating the galaxy. Credit: Georgia Tech

Black holes form when stars die, allowing the matter in them to collapse into an extremely dense object from which not even light can escape. Astronomers theorize that massive black holes could also form at the birth of a galaxy, but so far nobody has been able to look far enough back in time to observe the conditions creating these direct collapse black holes (DCBH).

The James Webb Space Telescope, scheduled for launch in 2021, might be able look far enough back into the early Universe to see a galaxy hosting a nascent . Now, a simulation done by researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology has suggested what astronomers should look for if they search the skies for a DCBH in its early stages.

The first-of-its-kind simulation, reported September 10 in the journal Nature Astronomy, suggests that direct formation of these would be accompanied by specific kinds of intense radiation, including X-rays and ultraviolet emission that would shift to infrared by the time they reach the telescope. The black holes would also likely spawn massive metal-free , a finding that was unexpected.

The research was supported by NASA, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the National Science Foundation, the Southern Regional Education Board and two Hubble theory grants.

"There are supermassive black holes at the center of many large , but we haven't been able to observe the way they form or how they got that large," said Kirk S. S. Barrow, the paper's first author and a recent Ph.D. graduate of Georgia Tech's School of Physics. "Scientists have theorized that these supermassive black holes could have formed at the birth of a galaxy, and we wanted to turn these theoretical predictions into observational predictions that could be seen by the James Webb Space Telescope."

DCBH formation would be initiated by the collapse of a large cloud of gas during the early formation of a galaxy, said John H. Wise, a professor in Georgia Tech's School of Physics and the Center for Relativistic Astrophysics. But before astronomers could hope to catch this formation, they would have to know what to look for in the spectra that the telescope could detect, which is principally infrared.

The formation of a black hole could require a million years or so, but to envision what that might have looked like, former postdoctoral researcher Aycin Aykutalp—now at Los Alamos National Laboratory—used the National Science Foundation-supported Stampede Supercomputer at the University of Texas at Austin to run a simulation focusing on the aftermath of DCBH formation. The simulation used physics first principles such as gravity, radiation and hydrodynamics.

Image is a simulated UV false-color image showing the heated gas spiraling into the black hole in the center. Credit: Georgia Tech
"If the galaxy forms first and then the black hole forms in the center, that would have one type of signature," said Wise. "If the black hole formed first, would that have a different signature? We wanted to find out whether there would be any physical differences, and if so, whether that would translate into differences we could observe with the James Webb Space Telescope."

The simulations provided information such as densities and temperatures, and Barrow converted that data into predictions for what might be observed through the telescope—the light likely to be observed and how it would affected by gas and dust it would have encountered on its long journey to Earth. "At the end, we had something that an observer could hopefully see," Barrow said.

Black holes take about a million years to form, a blip in galactic time. In the DCBH simulation, that first step involves gas collapsing into a supermassive star as much as 100,000 times more massive than our sun. The star then undergoes gravitational instability and collapses into itself to form a massive black hole. Radiation from the black hole then triggers the formation of stars over period of about 500,000 years, the simulation suggested.

"The stars of this first generation are usually much more massive, so they live for a shorter period of time," Wise said. "In the first five to six million years after their formation, they die and go supernova. That's another one of the signatures that we report in this study."

After the supernovae form, the black hole quiets down but creates a struggle between electromagnetic emissions—ultraviolet light and X-rays trying to escape—and the black hole's own gravity. "These cycles go on for another 20 or 30 million years," Wise said.

Black holes are relatively common in the universe, so the hope is that with enough snapshots, astronomers could catch one being born, and that could lead to a new understanding of how galaxies evolve over time.

Star formation around the DCBH was unexpected, but in hindsight, it makes sense, Barrow said. The ionization produced by the black holes would produce photochemical reactions able to trigger the formation of the stars. Metal-free stars tend to be larger than others because the absence of a metal such as iron prevents fragmentation. But because they are so large, these stars produce tremendous amounts of radiation and end their lives in supernovae, he said.

"This is one of the last great mysteries of the early universe," Barrow said. "We hope this study provides a good step toward figuring out how these formed at the birth of a galaxy."

Explore further: Image: Black hole bounty captured in the center of the Milky Way

More information: Kirk S. S. Barrow et al, Observational signatures of massive black hole formation in the early Universe, Nature Astronomy (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41550-018-0569-y

Related Stories

Oxymoronic black hole RGG 118 provides clues to growth

August 12, 2015

Astronomers using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and the 6.5-meter Clay Telescope in Chile have identified the smallest supermassive black hole ever detected in the center of a galaxy, as described in our latest press release. ...

Recommended for you

Mystery of coronae around supermassive black holes deepens

December 18, 2018

Researchers from RIKEN and JAXA have used observations from the ALMA radio observatory located in northern Chile and managed by an international consortium including the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan (NAOJ) to ...

New bright high-redshift quasar discovered using VISTA

December 18, 2018

Using the Visible and Infrared Survey Telescope for Astronomy (VISTA), astronomers have detected a new bright quasar at a redshift of about 6.8. The newly identified quasar, designated VHS J0411-0907, is the brightest object ...

NASA's 1st flight to moon, Apollo 8, marks 50th anniversary

December 18, 2018

Fifty years ago on Christmas Eve, a tumultuous year of assassinations, riots and war drew to a close in heroic and hopeful fashion with the three Apollo 8 astronauts reading from the Book of Genesis on live TV as they orbited ...

48 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.2 / 5 (10) Sep 19, 2018
"The James Webb Space Telescope, scheduled for launch in 2021, might be able look far enough back into the early Universe to see a galaxy hosting a nascent massive black hole. Now, a simulation done by researchers"

A simulation very rarely has enough unassailable data to make the results absolute evidence, up until some math equations and other bits of fluff are introduced into the results to make it more in line/palatable with what is in the textbooks already.
Black Holes are said to be the remnants of Stars that have gone supernovae and collapsed all the way into a BH through enormous and unimaginable gravitation.
BUT, in the very beginning where there were NO Stars at all, BHs could not have existed. If and when there was such a galaxy holding Stars and a BH, the timeline would not have been "the early" Universe, unless they mean a billion or more years had passed where the gases had time to cool and clump into dust.
szore88
2.7 / 5 (7) Sep 19, 2018
Well, all I can say is before they launch the Webb scope, I hope they double check to make sure mirrors were ground properly, unlike Hubble. What was it, they used cm, instead of inches or something?
valeriy_polulyakh
2.2 / 5 (10) Sep 19, 2018
In search of black holes and dark matter astrophysicists are relying on indirect observations. It would seem that the measurement of the event horizon of a black hole directly would be a direct evidence. However, by the nature of a horizon, any real measurement of the event horizon will be indirect. The Event Horizon Telescope will get picture of the silhouette of the Sgr A* which is due to optical effects of spacetime outside of the event horizon. The result will be determined by the simple quality of the resulting image that does not depend on the properties of the spacetime within the image. So, it will be also indirect and an existence of BH is a hypothesis.
https://www.acade...ilky_Way
Benni
2 / 5 (12) Sep 19, 2018
The result will be determined by the simple quality of the resulting image that does not depend on the properties of the spacetime within the image.


Those imaging properties already exist: http://ircamera.a...nter.htm

Here a very deep, high resolution (1 arcsec) X-ray image of the Galactic Center -- the source elongated up and down just above and to the right of the center is Sgr A*, but it doesn't stand out at all. Even in X-rays, where we look to find stellar black holes, there is nothing to draw our attention to a supermassive black hole here!"

Look at pic frames 7& 8 from the top of the page & read the captions next to the two frames. NO BH in evidence at Sgr A*. No accretion disc, no EH, no stellar mass feeding off another, just a bunch of huge stars with zero evidence that a mass that would extend almost to the orbit of Mars exists at SgrA*.

granville583762
2.8 / 5 (11) Sep 20, 2018
Do blackholes exist
Not as we traditionally theorised
Singularities do not exist
We see stars with accretion disks
Where large amounts of mass are ejected out their spin-axis into star forming Fermi-bubbles
We are seeing stars ejecting mass - This by definition is not a blackhole
So, do blackholes exist - No, not as theory states in a singularity and event horizon of no return
So what are we observing if not blackholes – a good question – our theory is morphing into reality
The reality is blackholes don't exist – so what are we observing – a star suiting our whimsical theory
granville583762
2.8 / 5 (11) Sep 20, 2018
Blackholes and Circular arguments
Do blackholes exist
Not as we traditionally theorised
Singularities do not exist
We see stars with accretion disks
Where large amounts of mass are ejected out their spin-axis into star forming Fermi-bubbles
We are seeing stars ejecting mass - This by definition is not a blackhole
So, do blackholes exist - No, not as theory states in a singularity and event horizon of no return
So what are we observing if not blackholes – a good question – our theory is morphing into reality
The reality is blackholes don't exist – so what are we observing – a star suiting our whimsical theory

As the Circular arguments having become prevalent of late, the blackhole theory is a closed loop or circular argument theory, full of contradictions, because when all is said and done, it is a singularity, which is invisible, like the invisible cat, in the invisible hat, as it can never seen!
antialias_physorg
3.7 / 5 (15) Sep 20, 2018
As the Circular arguments having become prevalent of late

Says the guy who thinks black holes do not exist because he says they do not exist.

The irony is so thick on that one you could cut it with a knife.
jonesdave
3.4 / 5 (15) Sep 20, 2018
look at pic frames 7& 8 from the top of the page & read the captions next to the two frames. NO BH in evidence at Sgr A*. No accretion disc, no EH, no stellar mass feeding off another, just a bunch of huge stars with zero evidence that a mass that would extend almost to the orbit of Mars exists at SgrA*.


Oh dear. The uneducated D-K loon is back again!

Benni
2.3 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
look at pic frames 7& 8 from the top of the page & read the captions next to the two frames. NO BH in evidence at Sgr A*. No accretion disc, no EH, no stellar mass feeding off another, just a bunch of huge stars with zero evidence that a mass that would extend almost to the orbit of Mars exists at SgrA*.


Oh dear. The uneducated D-K loon is back again


Yes, we noticed you are!

Have anymore resume enhancements you'd like to add to that fraudulent claim you made for having an Astronomy degree from Uni of Auckland , NZ that has NEVER offered such a degree? Yeah, 1979-81 you claimed you were there. And now wait a minute, that's only two years, BS or BA disciplines are four years, the more your claims about your education that we examine the more tattered your educational resume becomes.

You need to do a better job morphing your claims for being Benni's most credible critic, right antialias, after all you just gave this foul mouthed fraud a 5 Star?
jonesdave
2.9 / 5 (14) Sep 20, 2018
^^^^^This idiot just cannot get it through his thick head that he is clueless about science. Never got past high school did you Benni? Too stupid to understand that fission creates anti-neutrinos, despite claiming to be a nuclear engineer. Doesn't know what a half-life is! Go away, moron, you are a waste of space.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (15) Sep 20, 2018
Yeah, 1979-81 you claimed you were there. And now wait a minute, that's only two years, BS or BA disciplines are four years,


Maths not your strong point is it, dumbo? 79-80-81 = 3 years, which is what it takes for a bachelors degree in NZ, UK, and elsewhere I suspect. You likely wouldn't know that, never having done a degree. Unless Fat Joe's Diner offers one in burger flipping.

granville583762
2.8 / 5 (13) Sep 20, 2018
Between AP and JD is a closed loop as you can go from one to another as though you are standing still in the same singularity unable to escape in a circular reality, may be blackholes do exist in singularities that don't exist except in singularities, or a circular reality
jonesdave
2.8 / 5 (11) Sep 20, 2018
Between AP and JD is a closed loop as you can go from one to another as though you are standing still in the same singularity unable to escape in a circular reality, may be blackholes do exist in singularities that don't exist except in singularities, or a circular reality


Shut up Granny. You are another moron who needs to go back to school.
granville583762
2.5 / 5 (13) Sep 20, 2018
Burger flipping realities
jonesdave> Maths not your strong point is it, dumbo? 79-80-81 = 3 years, which is what it takes for a bachelors degree in NZ, UK, and elsewhere I suspect. You likely wouldn't know that, never having done a degree. Unless Fat Joe's Diner offers one in burger flipping.

Don't stop just there JD, carry on and elaborate on your burger flipping activities, how many dimes an hour do you get, are you allowed lunch breaks and time off .
jonesdave
3 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
Don't stop just there JD, carry on and elaborate on your burger flipping activities, how many dimes an hour do you get, are you allowed lunch breaks and time off .


I wouldn't know. Ask Benni.

granville583762
2.8 / 5 (13) Sep 20, 2018
Don't stop just there JD, carry on and elaborate on your burger flipping activities, how many dimes an hour do you get, are you allowed lunch breaks and time off .

I wouldn't know. Ask Benni.

Benni said ask you, as he's never burger flipped, as you appear knowledgeable on the intricacies of burger flipping.
granville583762
2.8 / 5 (13) Sep 20, 2018
These extremely dense objects through the event horizon
phys.org> Black holes form when stars die, allowing the matter in them to collapse into an extremely dense object from which not even light can escape. Astronomers theorize that massive black holes could also form at the birth of a galaxy, but so far nobody has been able to look far enough back in time to observe the conditions creating these direct collapse black holes

So what is escaping from these extremely dense objects, from which not even light can escape, that is ejecting matter through their event-horizon, out their spin-axis into 25,000Lyr star-forming Fermi-bubbles above and below the host galaxy?
Benni
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 20, 2018
Between AP and JD is a closed loop as you can go from one to another as though you are standing still in the same singularity unable to escape in a circular reality, may be blackholes do exist in singularities that don't exist except in singularities, or a circular reality


Shut up Granny. You are another moron who needs to go back to school.


......however, going back to school is far different than never having been there in the first place, and then to claim having received an Astronomy degree from Uni of Auckland that has NEVER offered such a degree, this alone should be enough to make everyone shake their heads at your credibility to engage in all the foul mouthed name calling rants which consumes 90% of your time here.

Hey, here's some science for you ( as opposed to Pop-Cosmology), answer the questions posed in photo frames 7 & 8 at http://ircamera.a...nter.htm SMBH that astronomers can't find.
jonesdave
3 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
......however, going back to school is far different than never having been there in the first place, and then to claim having received an Astronomy degree from Uni of Auckland


Liar.

Hey, here's some science for you ( as opposed to Pop-Cosmology), answer the questions posed in photo frames 7 & 8 at http://ircamera.a...ter.htm. SMBH that astronomers can't find.


Nope, that is just you being a cretin, as usual. Figured out how to change an antineutrino into a neutrino yet, thicko? Lying about being a nuclear engineer, aren't you, bozo? How come I, and others, have to keep correcting your schoolboy errors in the subject? Because you are lying about having studied the subject, correct? You're deranged, Benni, as is obvious to anyone reading the crap that you come out with. Why do you do it?
Benni
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 20, 2018
Nope, that is just you being a cretin, as usual. Figured out how to change an antineutrino into a neutrino yet, thicko? Lying about being a nuclear engineer, aren't you, bozo? How come I, and others, have to keep correcting your schoolboy errors in the subject? Because you are lying about having studied the subject, correct? You're deranged, Benni, as is obvious to anyone reading the crap that you come out with. Why do you do it?


OK, after all that, do Pop-Cosmology a great leap forward in credibility & locate the SMBH in the pics at:

http://ircamera.a...nter.htm

.........when you've done this then maybe we can begin to believe your credibility for claiming to have an Astronomy degree from an institution that has never offered such a degree, Ok, so, where in photo frames 7 & 8 from the top of the page is that SMBH at Sgr A*?
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
when you've done this then maybe we can begin to believe your credibility for claiming to have an Astronomy degree from an institution that has never offered such a degree


Never claimed any such thing. Liar.

Ok, so, where in photo frames 7 & 8 from the top of the page is that SMBH at Sgr A*?


Lol. What a dickhead! You really are stupid aren'y you? This has all been explained to you before, you idiot. You are just too dumb to understand it.

Benni
2.3 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
when you've done this then maybe we can begin to believe your credibility for claiming to have an Astronomy degree from an institution that has never offered such a degree


Never claimed any such thing. Liar.
Another backtracking of past claims. So now you admit to NOT having an Astronomy degree from Uni Auckland?

Ok, so, where in photo frames 7 & 8 from the top of the page is that SMBH at Sgr A*?


Lol. What a dickhead! You really are stupid aren'y you? This has all been explained to you before, you idiot. You are just too dumb to understand it.


........of course just another name calling rant as you continue exposing Pop-Cosmology for what it is.
jonesdave
3.1 / 5 (15) Sep 20, 2018
Ok, so, where in photo frames 7 & 8 from the top of the page is that SMBH at Sgr A*?


Didn't bother reading the rest of the page, did you, dumbo?

Sagittarius A*, or Sgr A* for short, turns out to be a unique radio source and its characteristics clearly suggest it is the supermassive black hole. For example, unlike the stars, radio measurements show it is not orbiting but just sits stolidly in the center. This requires it to be far more massive than any of the stars.
granville583762
2.8 / 5 (13) Sep 20, 2018
Going back to school
Benni> ......however, going back to school is far different than never having been there in the first place

I missed that subtle point, "Going back to school", at least JDs being honest in realising that everyone but himself can claim to be able to "Go back to school"!
jonesdave
2.8 / 5 (13) Sep 20, 2018
Another backtracking of past claims. So now you admit to NOT having an Astronomy degree from Uni Auckland?


I never claimed that, so how can I backtrack on it? Dummy.

........of course just another name calling rant as you continue exposing Pop-Cosmology for what it is.


No, just showing you up for the lying, uneducated loon that you are. Why do you come on here? You obviously know the square root of zero about science. What compels you? Some sort of mental problem? Very strange.

theredpill
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 20, 2018
First comment section I have seen that the ratings actually reflected the quality of the comments at the time I read it. The sock drawer isn't open yet.
jonesdave
2.5 / 5 (11) Sep 20, 2018
First comment section I have seen that the ratings actually reflected the quality of the comments at the time I read it. The sock drawer isn't open yet.


Which merely shows how thick you are. Correct?
theredpill
2.5 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
"Which merely shows how thick you are. Correct?"

Reading the comments, there is a clear separation between those who understand that mathematical simulations and theory do not a reality make...and two sci-fi buffs who think they do. That would be you and another lost soul. I have never seen the word "thick" substituted for "rational" before. Perhaps if I powered my computer by quasi-neutral electricity I could understand physics the way you do.
jonesdave
2.7 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
Reading the comments, there is a clear separation between those who understand that mathematical simulations and theory do not a reality make...and two sci-fi buffs who think they do. That would be you and another lost soul. I have never seen the word "thick" substituted for "rational" before. Perhaps if I powered my computer by quasi-neutral electricity I could understand physics the way you do.


Which again just proves that you have no grasp of the relevant science. Just another EU nutjob, right?

ShotmanMaslo
3.7 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
Hey, here's some science for you ( as opposed to Pop-Cosmology), answer the questions posed in photo frames 7 & 8 at http://ircamera.a...nter.htm SMBH that astronomers can't find.


Black hole is too small to be directly seen in such picture. This was already explained to you, but since you are thick and ignorant it is no use. The only "Pop-cosmology" is your electric universe crap and similar assorted pseudoscience you like to spew.
theredpill
2.7 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
"Which again just proves that you have no grasp of the relevant science. Just another EU nutjob, right?"

You are a really neat guy...since "rational" can be transposed to "thick" in the quasi-neutral Jonesdave universe...it would only make sense that you consider mathematical simulations programmed using several non-confirmed variables, bolstering a theory, to be "relevant science." I can only assume you must consider nursery rhymes and poems to be relevant science as well. Mary had a little lamb...it's fleece was net neutral over the Debye length.

theredpill
2.7 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
Hey look...in the right panel of the simulation at the top...the one in orange....it's a profile of Jesus! The simulation created a profile of Jesus! Finally...scientific PROOF of Jesus because the simulation made it....glad we can finally lay this one to rest.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
You are a really neat guy...since "rational" can be transposed to "thick" in the quasi-neutral Jonesdave universe...it would only make sense that you consider mathematical simulations programmed using several non-confirmed variables, bolstering a theory, to be "relevant science." I can only assume you must consider nursery rhymes and poems to be relevant science as well. Mary had a little lamb...it's fleece was net neutral over the Debye length.


WTF are you on about?

Gigel
3 / 5 (4) Sep 20, 2018
@valeriy_polulyakh: The only way to directly probe a BH is to fall into one. But nobody is eager to do that. So in the end we have to rely on long-range observations. From the current common knowledge, no other object than a BH would have an event horizon. But then, who can tell there are no other forces that could stabilize a collapsing star inside its event horizon?
granville583762
3.2 / 5 (9) Sep 20, 2018
Travelling an infinitely long distance through the event-horizon
Gigel> @valeriy_polulyakh: The only way to directly probe a BH is to fall into one. But nobody is eager to do that. So in the end we have to rely on long-range observations. From the current common knowledge, no other object than a BH would have an event horizon. But then, who can tell there are no other forces that could stabilize a collapsing star inside its event horizon?

There is nothing special about an a event horizon, it is just like the earth's escape velocity radius, except at the speed of light, where Gravity takes an infinitely long time to bring an object to a halt - Sir Isaac Newton
hat1208
3 / 5 (8) Sep 20, 2018
@Benni

OK, after all that, do Pop-Cosmology a great leap forward in credibility & locate the SMBH in the pics at:

http://ircamera.a...nter.htm

It says in the paper from the University of Arizona infrared camera, that the black hole cannot be imaged and is only implied because of the distance to the galactic center.
granville583762
3.2 / 5 (9) Sep 20, 2018
The Whirlpool of Charybdis

At 26Lys Sagittarius A, the radio image http://ircamera.a...a_lg.jpg is show a structure with spiral arms where stars are in the ionised filamentary dust, what we should be doing is looking at other active regions of the Milkyway for the same structures
As to the mythical blackhole it looks like a damp squid

The sea monster Charybdis lived under a small rock on one side of a narrow channel. Opposite her was Scylla, another sea monster, that lived inside a much larger rock, the strait were within an arrow-shot of each other, and sailors would come in reach of the other. To be "between Scylla and Charybdis" therefore means to be presented with two opposite dangers, the task being to find a route that avoids both.
Three times a day, Charybdis swallowed a huge amount of water, before belching it back out again, creating large whirlpools capable of dragging a ship underwater.
jonesdave
3.3 / 5 (12) Sep 20, 2018
@Benni

OK, after all that, do Pop-Cosmology a great leap forward in credibility & locate the SMBH in the pics at:

http://ircamera.a...nter.htm

It says in the paper from the University of Arizona infrared camera, that the black hole cannot be imaged and is only implied because of the distance to the galactic center.


They can detect its presence in radio. Also the fact that there is a ~ 4m solar mass object in the place where it is located is beyond doubt. Orbital dynamics, Kepler, that sort of thing:

http://www.galact...ons.html
hat1208
3.3 / 5 (7) Sep 20, 2018
@granville583762

The Whirlpool of Charybdis

Huh?
jonesdave
3.6 / 5 (14) Sep 20, 2018
No accretion disc, no EH, no stellar mass feeding off another, just a bunch of huge stars with zero evidence that a mass that would extend almost to the orbit of Mars exists at SgrA*.


Another of Benni's famous bloopers that I shall be saving! Orbit of Mars? What the hell are you on? Mars orbits at ~ 1.5 AU. That is ~ 225m km. Radius of event horizon for a 4m solar mass BH = 12m km. Mercury has a mean orbital distance of ~ 60m km. You really haven't got the hang of this science and maths lark, have you?
Benni
2 / 5 (8) Sep 20, 2018
Hey, here's some science for you ( as opposed to Pop-Cosmology), answer the questions posed in photo frames 7 & 8 at http://ircamera.a...nter.htm SMBH that astronomers can't find.


Black hole is too small to be directly seen in such picture..


.....odd though isn't it, the caption next to the pic says:

"If the black hole dominated the energy of the Galactic Center, it would be the second brightest source in the infrared image".

.......I know shotty, it's easy to miss relevant scrutiny of a pic to discover that what should be the 2nd brightest object in pic 7 is mysteriously MISSING, just like so much of the rest of Pop-Cosmology theories when it comes to disclosure of OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE.
Benni
2.2 / 5 (10) Sep 20, 2018
It says in the paper from the University of Arizona infrared camera, that the black hole cannot be imaged and is only implied because of the distance to the galactic center.


Aw hattie, come on, get into the right sequence of picture frames.

Pic Frame 7:

"If the black hole dominated the energy of the Galactic Center, it would be the second brightest source in the infrared image".

Pic frame 8:

"the source elongated up and down just above and to the right of the center is Sgr A*, but it doesn't stand out at all. Even in X-rays, where we look to find stellar black holes, there is nothing to draw our attention to a supermassive black hole here!"

So just knock it off trying to rewrite the University's own captions. Simply put, the OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE shows no evidence of an SMBH at Sgr A*. I know, you're a big Pop-Cosmology guy & can't stand the thought of losing your precious BHs or losing sleep over the thought they do not exist.

Ojorf
3.2 / 5 (11) Sep 21, 2018
Benni, you keep asking the same things. How many times do people have to explain them to you before you get it?
You keep arguing against your own straw men and your misunderstanding of basic physics. That explains your total misinterpretation of the observable evidence. and your subsequent confusion.
How about joining the forums here?
What do you say?
Bet you would not, chicken shit.
ShotmanMaslo
3.7 / 5 (9) Sep 21, 2018
Benni, you cant even read with comprehension. Please return to elementary school before discussing astrophysics.

"If the black hole dominated the energy of the Galactic Center"

Notice the IF in there? Black hole is not feeding currently, and as such it is *black* and does not dominate the galactic center at all when that photo was taken. Hence no detectable infrared or x-ray emissions. The black hole does flare up occasionally:

https://scitechda...ttarius/

http://iopscience...6/588806
hat1208
2.6 / 5 (5) Sep 21, 2018
@Benni
So just knock it off trying to rewrite the University's own captions. Simply put, the OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE shows no evidence of an SMBH at Sgr A*. I know, you're a big Pop-Cosmology guy & can't stand the thought of losing your precious BHs or losing sleep over the thought they do not exist.

BIOYA
Benni
2.3 / 5 (9) Sep 21, 2018

How many times do people have to explain them to you before you get it?

Notice the IF in there? Black hole is not feeding currently
Always an excuse with you Pop-Cosmology aficionados.

"Here is a very deep, high resolution (1 arcsec) X-ray image of the Galactic Center -- the source elongated up and down just above and to the right of the center is Sgr A*, but it doesn't stand out at all. Even in X-rays, where we look to find stellar black holes, there is nothing to draw our attention to a supermassive black hole here!" http://ircamera.a...nter.htm

"NOTHING to draw our attention to a supermassive black hole there". It seems the spin you're trying to place on "IF", is the opposite conclusion due to the lack of observational evidence in the two pics. You have your fantasies, in the meantime there are these pics standing in defiance of one of your grandest fantasies & that of all of Pop-Cosmology.
jonesdave
2.5 / 5 (8) Sep 21, 2018
^^^^^^^Lol. What an eejit!
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
2.6 / 5 (5) Sep 24, 2018
Nice!

As for the emotional thread, I hope at least some learned the scale and various observational characteristics of black holes, They, as well as astrophysical simulations, are well understood and accepted. (Even if not all physics are: "[The existence and physics of direct collapse black holes] is one of the last great mysteries of the early universe,"

Well, all I can say is before they launch the Webb scope, I hope they double check to make sure mirrors were ground properly, unlike Hubble. What was it, they used cm, instead of inches or something?


Oy. One Mars mission famously did that mistake and crashed. For Hubble, equally famously, "a reflective null corrector, a testing device used to achieve a properly shaped non-spherical mirror, had been incorrectly assembled" [ https://en.wikipe..._problem ].

Why are you laying your (lack of) googling on the rest of us?

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.