Still Waters Posted February 26, 2015 #1 Share Posted February 26, 2015 A monster black hole powering "the brightest lighthouse in the distant universe" has been discovered that is 12 billion times more massive than the sun, scientists have revealed. The extraordinary object is at the centre of a quasar - an intensely powerful galactic radiation source - with a million billion times the sun's energy output. http://www.telegraph...an-the-sun.html 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred_mc Posted February 28, 2015 #2 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Considering that we are seeing it, or rather its effect, as it looked 13 billion years ago, just try to imagine how big it is now :-o , maybe it is eating up much of the universe. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayidieoneday Posted February 28, 2015 #3 Share Posted February 28, 2015 right now... I would like to be in its event horizon. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pallidin Posted February 28, 2015 #4 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Good God! I'm glad the quasar harboring this (if the quasar even exists anymore--- the back hole itself would of course) and the black hole is nowhere near our "neighborhood" Seems a little too hungry for comfort. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Smoke aLot Posted February 28, 2015 #5 Share Posted February 28, 2015 One more of those object which should not exist where they are right now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarjarbinks Posted February 28, 2015 #6 Share Posted February 28, 2015 when i think about how big the universe is, i got vertigo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenceMinisterMishkin Posted February 28, 2015 #7 Share Posted February 28, 2015 This could be where the mighty Megalodon spawns from! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+joc Posted February 28, 2015 #8 Share Posted February 28, 2015 This could be where the mighty Megalodon spawns from! This could be where the entire Universe spawns from. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calibeliever Posted February 28, 2015 #9 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Sometimes I feel like us trying to understand the nature of the universe is like a chimp trying to understand the nature of an internal combustion engine. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenceMinisterMishkin Posted February 28, 2015 #10 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Sometimes I feel like us trying to understand the nature of the universe is like a chimp trying to understand the nature of an internal combustion engine. Given enough time, anything is possible. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silver Thong Posted February 28, 2015 #11 Share Posted February 28, 2015 This could be where the entire Universe spawns from. This could be how other Universes are created meaning a multiverse we have yet to discover. Hence helping explain the big bang, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warf Posted February 28, 2015 #12 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Yes,, when that thing goes off it will be big bang 2 or 3 or 4 !!!. I am surprised that there are still people in the program believing in this big bang thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foil Hat Ninja Posted February 28, 2015 #13 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Big deal. Fox News is a bigger time-suck than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolguy Posted March 1, 2015 #14 Share Posted March 1, 2015 That's a great find, I hope it says out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayidieoneday Posted March 1, 2015 #15 Share Posted March 1, 2015 This could be how other Universes are created meaning a multiverse we have yet to discover. Hence helping explain the big bang, .... we already know how other multiverses are created. I don't think there's a way to create another universe in an already existing multiverse (or are you suggesting it would be quantum disconnected from other universes in the multiverse? or would its particles spontaneously entangle with particles in the source universe?...creating a multiverse is simple, you heat up a concentrated region of spacetime until the new multiverse bubbles off the quantum potential field on the "outside" of our multiverse bubble (something about heating the region of spacetime near the temperature of the early universe creates some quantum confusion that makes it happen, I don't really understand the details, ask Ichio Kaku, he can explain it) creating a universe within a multiverse? that would create all kinds of problems as the universes within a multiverse aren't entirely disconnected (for example, they share entangled particle pairs where one entangled particle is in a different universe from its counterpart).of course I have no academic credentials to wave around so you can promptly ignore me after heartily laughing at me! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted March 1, 2015 #16 Share Posted March 1, 2015 .... we already know how other multiverses are created. No we dont. The multiverses theory is still what it is, a theory and even Hawking and Kaku talk about it as a theory so the process of the self creation of multiverses, and I say self creation to exclude a creator, is a theory as well and so nothing "that we already know" about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayidieoneday Posted March 1, 2015 #17 Share Posted March 1, 2015 No we dont. The multiverses theory is still what it is, a theory and even Hawking and Kaku talk about it as a theory so the process of the self creation of multiverses, and I say self creation to exclude a creator, is a theory as well and so nothing "that we already know" about. I really hope you know in science, there's nothing more certain than a scientific theory! that's as certain as it.gets! if you meant to say speculation... well, it's certainly more than that as the math holds up and the things make sense, but the thing about theoretical physics is it's always going to be theoretical anyway, the.single universe is also a theory and an outdated one at that! Occam's razor doesn't apply because a single universe isn't enough to explain some quantum phenomena like "spontaneous dis/appearance" that a multiverse can explain easily! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted March 1, 2015 #18 Share Posted March 1, 2015 I really hope you know in science, there's nothing more certain than a scientific theory! that's as certain as it.gets! if you meant to say speculation... well, it's certainly more than that as the math holds up and the things make sense, but the thing about theoretical physics is it's always going to be theoretical anyway, the.single universe is also a theory and an outdated one at that! Occam's razor doesn't apply because a single universe isn't enough to explain some quantum phenomena like "spontaneous dis/appearance" that a multiverse can explain easily! ... I don't really understand the details, ask Ichio Kaku, he can explain it.. You said that you do not understand the details but on the other hand you are talking a lot (too much) about quantum mechanics and similar and I`m really in the impression that yr approach is more of esoteric nature than based on real science. But anyway and related to yr initial claim: No we dont. The multiverses theory is still what it is, a theory and even Hawking and Kaku talk about it as a theory so the process of the self creation of multiverses, and I say self creation to exclude a creator, is a theory as well and so nothing "that we already know" about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayidieoneday Posted March 1, 2015 #19 Share Posted March 1, 2015 You said that you do not understand the details but on the other hand you are talking a lot (too much) about quantum mechanics and similar and I`m really in the impression that yr approach is more of esoteric nature than based on real science. But anyway and related to yr initial claim: you've now made a personal attack and pointed out your debased opinion/impression of my "approach" without actually addressing a single scientific/theoretical point I made. you also seem to continue to misunderstand the meaning of the word "theory" in a scientific context. I guess that's your esoteric approach to a discussion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted March 1, 2015 #20 Share Posted March 1, 2015 you've now made a personal attack and pointed out your debased opinion/impression of my "approach" without actually addressing a single scientific/theoretical point I made. you also seem to continue to misunderstand the meaning of the word "theory" in a scientific context. I guess that's your esoteric approach to a discussion! It wasnt a personal attack in any kind. I attacked your initial claim : ... we already know how other multiverses are created as to be wrong and as to be of esoteric nature and due to that facts there is no need for me to adress any of your other "scientific/theoretical" points as the base for a discussion on science can only be made if the base itself is of scientific nature. And as you claimed ... we already know how other multiverses are created, and to repeat, we dont know yet and we even not know yet if these do exist but we do have theories about, I would say that yr understanding of the word "theory" is different but not in compliance to its general meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mayidieoneday Posted March 1, 2015 #21 Share Posted March 1, 2015 (edited) It wasnt a personal attack in any kind. I attacked your initial claim : ... we already know how other multiverses are created as to be wrong and as to be of esoteric nature and due to that facts there is no need for me to adress any of your other "scientific/theoretical" points as the base for a discussion on science can only be made if the base itself is of scientific nature. And as you claimed ... we already know how other multiverses are created, and to repeat, we dont know yet and we even not know yet if these do exist but we do have theories about, I would say that yr understanding of the word "theory" is different but not in compliance to its general meaning. ...sure except the other points weren't dependent on the initial claim (which I should have phrased "have a theoretical understanding of how they're likely created" ) I'll back out here as you seem bent on a semantics debate using dirty tactics! have a nice day Edited March 1, 2015 by mayidieoneday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toast Posted March 1, 2015 #22 Share Posted March 1, 2015 ...sure except the other points weren't dependent on the initial claim (which I should have phrased "have a theoretical understanding of how they're likely created" ) I'll back out here as you seem bent on a semantics debate using dirty tactics! have a nice day I disproved yr initial claim. If you call that dirty tactics, its on you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moon tide Posted March 5, 2015 #23 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Jeez, that's a whopper. Jeez, that's a whopper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now