A Solar Black Hole
- Thread starter Dryson
- Start date
If a sun has the ability to become a black hole and becomes a black hole then the fact that the black hole was occupying the same space time as the sun is real.
It can't fathom such an idea then I hardly doubt you can fathom anything other than what you read in a book and then repeat.
The question is why does this section never post any ideas from the members their selves? Its almost like you can't escape from the pages of book or a frame a t.v. show.
It can't fathom such an idea then I hardly doubt you can fathom anything other than what you read in a book and then repeat.
The question is why does this section never post any ideas from the members their selves? Its almost like you can't escape from the pages of book or a frame a t.v. show.
Not really Robert. When a black hole consumes matter it is shredding matter as it is consumed as well as ejecting super heated matter back out into space. Radiation is heat. Basic science. So any radition given off by a black hole or let's say a sun that it has consumed would be considered a source of generating heat.
As another matter of fact any an all types of motion generates heat regardless of the source that is in motion.
The only known area of space that does not generate heat is the CMB or the hole in the middle of the universe where Dark Matter is not even present.
If an object has motion it generates heat. A black hole has motion so it therefore generates heat because it is in motion.
So yes a black hole can be considered a black hole sun because it is a body in motion that consumes matter and emits radiation or heat.
Yes, really. Nothing is escaping the black hole. The energy observed is from the corona outside the black hole. This has been in articles quoted here and explained multiple times. I should hope you won't continue your propensity to neither listen nor learn, but no doubt, you will.
If you are willing to simply redefine words to mean what you want, then yes, essentially anything is possible.
But here in real life, words have agreed-upon definitions, and while a black hole may be surrounded by dramatically heated material, it is no more a star in any conventional sense than a campfire-roasted marshmallow is.
Its would be a black hole star because the back home came from what used to be a star.
If a black hole is not a star then where did the black hole come from?
Black holes just dont form out of nothing.
Like I said a body in motion will generate heat which is actually radiation. If a body does not generate radiation then it is not a body in motion nor are there atoms within the object that create motion. Without motion there is not any heat generated.
A black hole has motion and generates heat or radiation. If a black hole didn't generate heat then it wouldn't exist.
A black hole comes from a sun that has collapsed and formed into a singularity. A sun has the life generating and life taking ability because of the radiation a sun emits. Radiation that helps life grow but if the wrong type of radiation is present then the life will either mutate or simply die. A black hole is the opposite. At first a black hole will cause life to die or mutate and lastly support life. With the ability of a black hole to support life or cause it to mutate then a black hole can be considered a star or a black star.
Last edited:
Is a corpse the same as an embryo?
Just because one thing comes from something else doesn't mean they're the same thing.
We understand the point you're trying to make, but the words you're using don't mean what you're trying to make them mean.
As I said before: I challenge the OP to put crude oil in his car's gas tank. Because it's, y'know, the same as gasoline.
Dryson, science and learning cannot be accomplished with thought experiments, which is basically what you're doing. Crack open a textbook and read, or dive in and do the science yourself. Merely talking about things which you obviously do not understand does not make them behave the way you think they should.
Dryson doesn't seem to perceive time in the same way as the rest of us -- more like one of those wormhole aliens on DS9.
"Used to be a star" != "is a star."
What were you before you were born?
Technically, everything forms out of "nothing." Physics is weird.
Motion only generates heat when there's friction, which is not so common an issue in vacuum. And it's not "radiation," at least not ionizing radiation (which is what most people think when they think "radiation"). Use more precise terms.
Again, motion by itself does not generate heat. This is just wrong. Remember, all motion is relative, which mean absolutely anything can be considered to be moving or standing still, depending on your frame of reference. Thank Einstein for that one.
No. This is just wrong. I have literally no idea what this is supposed to mean but it's wrong.
I'll be goddamned, an accurate statement of fact. Well done.
Only within our solar system, as far as we know. We may not at all be representative.
This is more or less true.
It's not the opposite, it's just different.
What? No. This makes no sense at all. Black holes don't "support life." A black hole may be surrounded by an accretion disc with enough energy radiating from it to be roughly equivalent to a star's output, and this may allow conditions for life, but it's entirely speculative at this point. It doesn't work "opposite" a typical, fusing star.
You occasionally show a grasp of basic facts but then you wander off into bizarro territory with statements that are virtually incomprehensible if not demonstrably wrong.
The word "become" defeats your point here the same as it did the last time I mentioned it. You have admitted you were wrong now in at least two posts.
You are trying to argue for a square circle here.
What? No. This makes no sense at all. Black holes don't "support life." A black hole may be surrounded by an accretion disc with enough energy radiating from it to be roughly equivalent to a star's output, and this may allow conditions for life, but it's entirely speculative at this point. It doesn't work "opposite" a typical, fusing star.
Black holes do in fact support life because of their destructive power and the radiation that is emitted from them. Black Holes shred planets and suns and then redistribute the matter and energy across space time that supports the overall life of the Universe.
http://news.discovery.com/space/alien-life-exoplanets/black-hole-alien-life-110413.htm
Black holes do in fact support life because of their destructive power and the radiation that is emitted from them. Black Holes shred planets and suns and then redistribute the matter and energy across space time that supports the overall life of the Universe.
http://news.discovery.com/space/alien-life-exoplanets/black-hole-alien-life-110413.htm
Last edited:
Even as much as it's accurate at all, this is an unprovable statement. So far, "the overall life of the universe" is only proven to be one small insignificant planet.
Although you're welcome to shift the goalposts by saying "black holes support life on Earth". Then you'll need to prove that instead.
Or stop making things up.
There is a black hole at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy that if the Black Hole didn't exist then Earth wouldn't exist.
https://www.ras.ru/forum/forum_thre...ectionid=80817f48-47b4-442b-a77d-27a01dc013c4
I suppose you read @Robert Maxwell's post, right? Do you at least agree that he proved you wrong in at least half a dozen cases?
Similar threads
- Poll
