Comments on: Are You A Black Hole? https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/ Brian Koberlein Tue, 19 Feb 2019 13:26:59 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.0.3 By: Farzad https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-6037 Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:07:07 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-6037 You explained it well and i found it simply understandable and logical when using scientific facts.

]]>
By: Meet Joshi https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-5961 Mon, 12 Feb 2018 16:40:31 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-5961 How do we know that far away galaxies are moving away at speed of light?

]]>
By: Levent Yenigun https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-5780 Sat, 16 Dec 2017 00:46:20 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-5780 Is it possible to create a blackhole, give it a momentum in space, keep it close enough to travel by its side and go to distant stars?

]]>
By: Jeff Guarino https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-5360 Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:13:27 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-5360 So then light which has a rest mass of zero, would generate no graviational field , ever ?? I can’t see this happening. If I had an electron and positron which had definite rest masses and small gravitational fields. Let them annihilate each other and produce gamma rays. The gamma rays have no rest mass and thus no gravity ??? I don’t understand this.

]]>
By: Brian Koberlein https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4925 Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:27:41 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4925 When you say something moves “through space,” what do you mean? Space isn’t an absolute background against which you can measure speed. Since motion is relative, motion and relativistic mass can’t cause a gravitational collapse into a black hole.

]]>
By: SUBHASIS BISWAS https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4924 Mon, 16 Jan 2017 19:16:44 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4924 Sir..!
For distant galaxies, they are not moving through space with the speed of light themselves. The ‘effective speed’ of those galaxies due to the expansion of space around them is greater than speed of light from our frame of reference. Since they are not moving with speed of light through space themselves, their relativistic mass doesn’t become infinitely large. So, I don’t agree with your explanation and not satisfied with your answer.

]]>
By: Jaleel Asante https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4632 Wed, 05 Oct 2016 17:13:49 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4632 Absolutely correct, but oddly enough the explanation given, though derived from a flawed premise still describes the creation of a black hole by movement relative to an observer. At some point, any object moving away from you faster than the speed of light (which can happen with objects moving WITH space) will form a horizon and conform to all the characteristics of a black hole and the attendant and relevant laws of thermodynamics including Hawking radiation and “no hair” theorem”.

]]>
By: FreddyLuxe https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4499 Tue, 30 Aug 2016 16:57:15 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4499 From what I understand, E=MC2 doesn’t say an object going really fast is gaining mass. It seems to gain mass to an observer, but the object itself feels the same mass.

Let’s think of a bullet and a gun. While the bullet itself is not heavy at all, when you use a gun and shoot it, the bullet now appears to have gained mass and is now able to create a hole in the wall.

The bullet itself didn’t gain mass, but its kinetic energy makes it seem to have gained mass. It takes a lot more energy to make it stop the faster it goes.
If the bullet is going at the speed of light, it doesn’t weight more, but it’s kinetic energy makes it seem to have gain infinite mass. It will take infinite energy to make it stop, or go faster.
Since it’s real mass didn’t change, it cannot generate more gravity than when it’s not moving. Also it cannot become a black hole.

Well I’m no scientist but this is how I understand the physic behind it. Let me know if I’m lost in the void of stupidity. And also I hope my English is good enough so you guys understand.

]]>
By: K.J. https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4427 Sat, 13 Aug 2016 21:50:19 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4427 I wrote “This means that the Universe’s density went down by a factor of 1,090”
Thats not right….it should be “This means that the Universe’s density went down by a factor of 1,090^3”
My bad…sorry 🙂

]]>
By: K.J. https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4264 Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:55:06 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4264 @Roger; before stating that the BB is based only on redshifts, you might want to check what evidence there is for the BB. Even Wiki would provide enough insight.

And @Joe i agree agree to your reply. In simple terms you could say;
When the Universe was aged 380,000 years, it was dense and its temp was 3,000K. Imagine a small portion in the Universe sized 42 million lightyears which became our observable Universe today. The redshift of the CMB is about 1,090. This means that the Universe’s density went down by a factor of 1,090. It also means its temp dropped by a factor of 1,090 (3,000K / 1,090 = 2.75K). And its (our observable part) size growed by a factor of 1,090 (42mln ly * 1,090 = 45,780,000,000 ly or 45 billion ly radius)

But not with the part about the expansion happening everywhere 🙂
I calculated it once. If the Milky Way was expanding with space, it would do so at a rate of 2.15km/s. That sounds like alot, but its diameter would grow by about half an Astronomical Unit in one year. We could not measure it when we wanted to. This suggest that indeed the expansion might take place locally too. But its not. If you calculate it for our Solar System, you will find numbers that do not match. The distance Sun/Earth or AU increases by 20cm/year but it would be alot more if expansion took place here too. The Moon recedes 2.75cm/year but with an expansion “included” you get another number. Same go’s for the distance to the other planets. I am sorry, i cannot find my old notepad with calc’s, else i would have mention the exact numbers. Anyhow, expansion does occur locally, but it just passes by. The forces that keep matter together and gravity are so much stronger, expansion of space can’t hold a grip onto it….expanding space has no affect on it.

]]>
By: K.J. https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4263 Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:23:00 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4263 Its better to think about black holes require a minimum density, not minimum mass.

]]>
By: Alan https://briankoberlein.com/2016/06/26/are-you-a-black-hole/#comment-4249 Tue, 05 Jul 2016 21:12:59 +0000 https://briankoberlein.com/?p=6060#comment-4249 It made more sense to me when I learnt …
E=mc^2 + mv
At human speeds and masses the momentum is insignificant.

]]>