What is the Universe expanding into..

Do you think there was anything before the big bang?

  • I don't think there was anything before the Big Bang

    Votes: 56 12.5%
  • I think something existed before the Big Bang

    Votes: 200 44.7%
  • I don't think the big bang happened

    Votes: 54 12.1%
  • I think the universe is part of a mutiverse

    Votes: 201 45.0%

  • Total voters
    447
Status
Not open for further replies.
Member
Joined 2009
Paid Member
Quasars are among the brightest objects in the universe - luminous, active galactic nuclei powered by supermassive black holes that are actively feeding on nearby material.

Recently, scientists have found the most distant quasar yet known, residing about 13 billion light-years from Earth. They estimate that this particular quasar's seriously supermassive black hole ingests an amount of mass equivalent to 25 Suns every year.

The first quasar ever to be identified is 3C 273, which is one of the closest quasars to us at a mere 2.5 billion light-years away. It was discovered in the 1960s.
See, there's never enough information in a simple google search. For example, where pray tell is this apparent accretion coming from? Shall I hazard a guess and assume(hopefully not as Benny Hill might), that it's the matter accumulating due to the gravitational pull of the black hole? If so, how is it that the black hole is not by the same properties preventing this radiation from escaping? Not even light escapes, right? Very puzzling:confused:
 
Just throwing it out there, and other random thoughts

What if an adjacent bubble universe intercepted ours, and the resultant stresses resulted in a Big Bang, strewing undestroyed remnant matter everywhere? It could easily not have the same make up as that of our newer universe, and so not interact with our matter well at all. Remnant characteristics could be compressed by the impact of intersection with ours into crushed dimensions. I believe it could retain some foreign laws of its prior nature . It may be so hard to detect due to this. It could be nearly invisible to us, and therefore understood to be dark matter. Only able to weakly be detected as gravity, in a weaker form, since it doesn't have an identical god particle in its remnants.
Couldn't it's scattered gravity pull be from an infinitely large point we are in (since it had no frame of reference, the size of its point is moot, relative to itself). And could this not exert an omnidirectional pull on our universe, constantly driving an accelerating expansion?

You can tell because I'm not writing equations, and using words in this that I'm not a physicist. But I'm curious nonetheless. There doesn't seem to be much available in quick search engines while these concepts were fresh to me.
I hope no one is offended at the time it took to read this.
 
Last edited:
www.hifisonix.com
Joined 2003
Paid Member
I read that quasars differ from ordinary black holes in that that are much more massive and rotate far faster. The jets that are normally emitted at the poles of a BH are also rotating very fast. As material falls into the BH, the rotating jets eject much of it at very high speed (1000’s km/sec) and the jets are 1000’s of LY long.

Could be the MW started life out as a quasar. It’s in the right age range (one of the oldest we know of at 12.7 BY. Andromeda by contrast is estimated at 7 BY) and the halo of material above and below the disc stretches out or about 1 MLY - this could have been material ejected earlier in the galaxy’s history.

There’s a nice write on wiki about the MW btw.
 
What if an adjacent bubble universe intercepted ours, and the resultant stresses resulted in a Big Bang, strewing undestroyed remnant matter everywhere?
The possible existence of bubble universes is one of at least five parallel universe hypotheses. Parallel Universes: Theories & Evidence | Space

If we picture our own universe as a bubble, it is sitting in a network of bubble universes.

The key point which undermines your idea is that bubble universes are unable to interact with each other.

What's interesting about the hypothesis is that the other bubble universes could have very different laws of physics from our own, since they are not in any way linked.
 
So it seems the kooky guy is correct in that black holes are responsible for populating the universe... by first gathering matter and then regurgitating it into the building blocks of the large celestial bodies which form galaxies?
I'm not sure what happens to the matter which falls into a black hole. Some say it is simply squeezed out of existence at the singularity.

What I am more sure of is that a supermassive black hole accelerates matter falling towards its event horizon to such high speeds that it heats up to millions of degrees and emits unimaginable amounts of radiation. A supermassive black hole is the engine at the heart of a quasar.

The radiation is emitted in the form of infra-red light, visible light, ultraviolet light and X-rays. Some quasars are radio souces as well.

Note that the energy emitted by a quasar is generated outside of the supermassive black hole - it does not emerge from within the supermassive black hole itself.
 
A black hole would appear as a blank sphere in space if it were not for its accretion disc.

Astronomers thought that a black hole would look like a spherical region of darkness surrounded by a glowing halo of gases, dust, and stellar debris

This was confirmed by the first image of a black hole obtained in 2019 which resembles a doughnut.

The spherical event horizon is the 'hole' in the middle of the doughnut, and the 'dough' is the accretion disc which is swirling around just outside the event horizon.

P.S. I'm pretty sure we've been through all this before, so no more black hole descriptions from me! ;)
 

Attachments

  • Black Hole in M87 Galaxy.jpg
    Black Hole in M87 Galaxy.jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 67
Last edited:
Huey called them white holes, as if the hole is defined in where it is.

Yes friends,

I am listening to molecules that are be horse whipped by two 3" FaitalPRO Broad Rangers hanging off some Baltic Birch Sorta circles in front of a small city of 1" Maple cutoffs. They more they sing the better I love them.

One of the better $40.00 I EVER spent. I have puked out wine that cost WAY more than that.

I am a fool for more than I remember. The singing city is on top of the Massive sub-woofer that has only made me cry a few times.

"Pines of Rome" by Ottorino Respighi has blown the end off some fine orchestra halls... and a few outdoor venues:

Pines of Rome Finale - Bing video
 
The reason I asked is because it's an accretion "disc" and you see the dark nucleus. So it seems that it's 2 dimensional.
You can't see the nucleus of a black hole as I explain below. The event horizon is 3D, and the accretion disc is 2D.

The 'nucleus' of a black hole is a point in space-time called a 'curvature singularity' *. It is surrounded by a spherical region from which light can't escape and which is bounded by the event horizon.

* At the centre of a black hole, space-time becomes a one-dimensional point which contains a huge mass. As a result, gravity and the curvature of space-time become infinite, and the laws of physics as we know them cease to function.

The more we probe the question "What is a black hole", the more perplexed us mere mortals become. You need to be a Stephen Hawking to comprehend a singularity! :eek:
 
Thanks Marty! Black holes certainly do become more perplexing the more we probe them! :cool:

Apart from classification by mass, black holes can be classified by their two other properties - rotation and charge:
  1. Schwarzschild Black Hole, otherwise known as a ‘static black hole’, does not rotate and has no electric charge. It is characterised solely by its mass.
  2. Kerr Black Hole is a more realistic scenario. This is a rotating black hole with no electrical charge.
  3. Charged Black Hole can be of two types. A charged, non-rotating black hole is known as a Reissner-Nordstrom black hole, a charged, rotating black hole is called a Kerr-Newman black hole.
Black Hole | COSMOS
 
Status
Not open for further replies.