Black Hole Destroying A Star
tags:
Stumble ThisGreat Simulation. A 'feeding' black hole.
X Greetings! You are not currently logged in, but please don't let that stop you from voting up any videos you like. :)
|
| |||||||||||||||
black hole,star,gravitational pull,tear apart,jets of uneaten star Black Hole Destroying A Star
Comments  playlists with this video Space Simulations by punk225
who voted for this video mauz15
- mintbbb
- NetRunner
- Gratefulmom
- lucky760
- kronosposeidon
- siftbot
x119 - gwiz665
- Farhad2000
- Almanildo
who has this post bookmarked smooman
Black Hole Destroying A Star Related Videos
| Watch this Video NextFriends O' the Sift Top New Videos by Vote                Subscribe Top 15 Sifters of All Time Top 15 Sifters of the Past Week 10. dan00108
(210 votes) Newest Appreciated Comments         | ||||||||||||||
See, this is the stuff that make me disbelief any god people have dreamed up on our little blue dot. Their god is so small, so confined to our tiny planet that it in turn is insignificant compared to displays like this. Compared to the majesty of entire stars and galaxies erupting into life, swirling in the cosmic void, and being devoured by forces we don't even fully understand, the universe is grander, more complex, and more beautiful than any religion in humanity's short history.
Well said.
The feeding super massive black hole is called a quasar, no? Quasars are awesome.
So all over the world couples stood together in joy. And me, Zoidberg! And no one could have been happier unless it would have been Valentines Day. What? It was? Hooray!"
jk. the universe is indescribable...too beautiful for our eyes and language to interpret
See, this is the stuff that make me disbelief any god people have dreamed up on our little blue dot. Their god is so small, so confined to our tiny planet that it in turn is insignificant compared to displays like this. Compared to the majesty of entire stars and galaxies erupting into life, swirling in the cosmic void, and being devoured by forces we don't even fully understand, the universe is grander, more complex, and more beautiful than any religion in humanity's short history.
I suppose that would depend on how "big" you imagine God to be. Your disposition tells me you think very lowly of any god. It's a matter of perspective. You see something much too grand and marvelous for any god to have a hand in. I see something much too grand and marvelous for God NOT to have a hand in.
So you'd see light swirling into the centre, but at the event horizon you'd see "black".
Right? Am i a nerd? Am i a wrong nerd? Cos that'd be even worse.
>> ^Simple_Man:
See, this is the stuff that make me disbelief any god people have dreamed up on our little blue dot. Their god is so small, so confined to our tiny planet that it in turn is insignificant compared to displays like this. Compared to the majesty of entire stars and galaxies erupting into life, swirling in the cosmic void, and being devoured by forces we don't even fully understand, the universe is grander, more complex, and more beautiful than any religion in humanity's short history.
I suppose that would depend on how "big" you imagine God to be. Your disposition tells me you think very lowly of any god. It's a matter of perspective. You see something much too grand and marvelous for any god to have a hand in. I see something much too grand and marvelous for God NOT to have a hand in.
When I mention god or religion, I mean the major denominations that people segment themselves into. In that context, how can anyone deny me claiming their god is insignificant? The very idea of a personal god, watching over our tiny planet, personally involving themselves in our affairs is arrogant in nature. It's the same type of arrogance that leads to the ideas like geocentrism, and that our existence is somehow privileged and special. I'd sooner recognize a deist god than any mainstream religion.
Isn't this a bit misleading? I mean, a feeding black hole would still be black in any format that we could define black or white within. Ie. eyesight. And even the radiation that does "emit" from a black hole which we may see with instrumentation comes from virtual particles around the event horizon.
So you'd see light swirling into the centre, but at the event horizon you'd see "black".
Right? Am i a nerd? Am i a wrong nerd? Cos that'd be even worse.
You're a right nerd
The black hole itself - the area inside the event horizon - would be black indeed. What we do see is light generated by the accretion disc: the matter swirling around the black hole, orbiting it in ever decreasing circles until it falls in. Now, as it circles, the material gets ferociously hot through friction, emitting visible light and x-rays and stuff. It's also under huge pressures, enough in many cases (maybe all, I don't remember) to initiate nuclear fusion, which of course will produce plenty of light and heat too.
The causes of the polar jets shown in the animation are complex and not fully understood, but they are composed of ejected matter from the accretion disc, not from the black hole itself. The virtual particle phenomenon you mentioned (as I'm sure you know) is called Hawking radiation. This is when pairs of virtual particles to come into being at the event horizon. In some cases one lucky particle out of a pair will be travelling in just the right way to fly off into space, while its partner falls into the hole. It would therefore seem to an observer that the black hole had emitted a particle. Groovy.
I can't believe they are using jerky cam on astronomy cgi. I have to admit it does the job as usual, adding 20% more realism to any footage. Eventually we will get jaded of this film technique. It will be the 21st century's laugh track.
I was SOOO thinking exactly that! I mean its obviously a recreation why pretend theres a helicopter filming it
Maybe I watched Stargate too many times where the open gate got too close to the black hole and SG1 had to do their thing again. Where is Sam when I need her ... Uh and those three guys too of course.
Does this make the black hole the guest star?
Only the last 10 seconds need apply
See, this is the stuff that make me disbelief any god people have dreamed up on our little blue dot. Their god is so small, so confined to our tiny planet that it in turn is insignificant compared to displays like this. Compared to the majesty of entire stars and galaxies erupting into life, swirling in the cosmic void, and being devoured by forces we don't even fully understand, the universe is grander, more complex, and more beautiful than any religion in humanity's short history.
And if you realize that the video that made you drift into these conclusions is the communicative product of human speculation about the real event, than you may also realize that the human imagination is also grander than the notion of god, being able to invent and project notions and events that surpass us.
The universe is only 6000 years old. All the light from so-called galaxies and the rest of the universe was created solely for our amusement and is nothing more than a distraction. It isn't real. It is simply there to keep us busy until the day of rapture, where those who are 'chosen' will the magically transported into an alternate universe where they can live in happy la-la land on solidified cloudtops for the rest of eternity, grow a set of wings, and fly like birds oblivious of all physical laws, aerodynamics, gravity, and be without anuses... as we'll never need to eat or poop material from the physical plane of existence again...
Meanwhile the rest of you non-believers get to be sucked up and eaten by a real black hole along with the rest of the solar system. All black holes ultimately lead to one big highly compressed lake of fire. As fire cannot exist in aqeuous form, it is more like supercompressed plasma... rather than fire and brimstone as most might assume.
>> ^dannym3141:
Isn't this a bit misleading? I mean, a feeding black hole would still be black in any format that we could define black or white within. Ie. eyesight. And even the radiation that does "emit" from a black hole which we may see with instrumentation comes from virtual particles around the event horizon.
So you'd see light swirling into the centre, but at the event horizon you'd see "black".
Right? Am i a nerd? Am i a wrong nerd? Cos that'd be even worse.
You're a right nerd
The black hole itself - the area inside the event horizon - would be black indeed. What we do see is light generated by the accretion disc: the matter swirling around the black hole, orbiting it in ever decreasing circles until it falls in. Now, as it circles, the material gets ferociously hot through friction, emitting visible light and x-rays and stuff. It's also under huge pressures, enough in many cases (maybe all, I don't remember) to initiate nuclear fusion, which of course will produce plenty of light and heat too.
The causes of the polar jets shown in the animation are complex and not fully understood, but they are composed of ejected matter from the accretion disc, not from the black hole itself. The virtual particle phenomenon you mentioned (as I'm sure you know) is called Hawking radiation. This is when pairs of virtual particles to come into being at the event horizon. In some cases one lucky particle out of a pair will be travelling in just the right way to fly off into space, while its partner falls into the hole. It would therefore seem to an observer that the black hole had emitted a particle. Groovy.
Hooray!
See, this is the stuff that make me disbelief any god people have dreamed up on our little blue dot. Their god is so small, so confined to our tiny planet that it in turn is insignificant compared to displays like this. Compared to the majesty of entire stars and galaxies erupting into life, swirling in the cosmic void, and being devoured by forces we don't even fully understand, the universe is grander, more complex, and more beautiful than any religion in humanity's short history.
In some respects, science has far surpassed religion in delivering awe. How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded, "This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed"? Instead they say, "No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way."
-Carl Sagan
>> ^Simple_Man:
See, this is the stuff that make me disbelief any god people have dreamed up on our little blue dot. Their god is so small, so confined to our tiny planet that it in turn is insignificant compared to displays like this. Compared to the majesty of entire stars and galaxies erupting into life, swirling in the cosmic void, and being devoured by forces we don't even fully understand, the universe is grander, more complex, and more beautiful than any religion in humanity's short history.
I suppose that would depend on how "big" you imagine God to be. Your disposition tells me you think very lowly of any god. It's a matter of perspective. You see something much too grand and marvelous for any god to have a hand in. I see something much too grand and marvelous for God NOT to have a hand in.
Douglas Adams: "Isn't it enought to see that the garden is beautiful without having to believe there are faires at the bottom of it too?"
Who alterest all things with thy peering eyes.
Why preyest thou thus upon the poet's heart,
Vulture, whose wings are dull realities?
How should he love thee? or how deem thee wise,
Who wouldst not leave him in his wandering
To seek for treasure in the jewelled skies,
Albeit he soared with an undaunted wing?
Hast thou not dragged Diana from her car?
And driven the Hamadryad from the wood
To seek a shelter in some happier star?
Hast thou not torn the Naiad from her flood,
The Elfin from the green grass, and from me
The summer dream beneath the tamarind tree?
im totally hot for this
It is kind of sensual, in that armageddon sort of way.
Im interested in why its spewing out parts of the star from the center like that. It's not like a black hole has limitations.. it IS a singularity, everything that is known to us should have no problem being swallowed into it.
Isn't this a bit misleading? I mean, a feeding black hole would still be black in any format that we could define black or white within. Ie. eyesight. And even the radiation that does "emit" from a black hole which we may see with instrumentation comes from virtual particles around the event horizon.
So you'd see light swirling into the centre, but at the event horizon you'd see "black".
Right? Am i a nerd? Am i a wrong nerd? Cos that'd be even worse.
Not sure if someone else has responded yet, but technically, a feeding black hole would still be black, sure... but it would be impossible to see the black part. You would have to get to the event horizon itself to see anything, and by that time you'd no longer be part of this universe. So... really, you may be technically correct... but the hole extends out past the event horizon... once something starts falling into the gravity well, it is "in the hole" as it were.