Jump to content


Photo

A Very Large Black Hole

  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 14 November 2013 - 03:09 PM

There have been some discussions on GR and galaxies, which prompted this question.

Mass increases with the cube of the radius of a spherical object while the Schwartzschild radius is proportional to the mass of the object. So for very large black holes the density can be quite low. The universe is estimated to have a Schwarzschild radius of about 10 billion light years by some.

Based on a quick calculation, (please correct me if I made an arithmetic error) a large spherical "galaxy" with a density of one solar mass per cubic light year would lie within its Schwartzschild radius if it were about 200 million light years across. It can't be made stable and would eventually collapse but it would take a while.

The question is, if the solar system were one of the stars, and an object from the outside fell in, What would you see? How would it appear? Bear in mind, even though you would see a boundary from the outside, there would not be a visible boundary from the inside.

#2 GregLee1

GregLee1

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2013
  • Loc: Waimanalo, HI

Posted 14 November 2013 - 04:39 PM

I happened across this NASA Q&A thing, which seems relevant to your question. Jonathan Keohane is answering a question about why the early universe didn't form a black hole and cease to exist. He gives an easy answer and a hard answer. The easy answer, if I've got it straight, is that the early universe and the present universe did form a black hole, and we're in it right now:

Why then was the early Universe not a black hole? Well, lets figure out its Schwarzschild radius to get a basic rule of thumb idea of what is going on.

Rsch = 3km x Mass of the whole Universe in solar masses
= about 10 to 100 billion light years
= about the current size of the whole Universe

So, in the basic definition of a black hole I used above (where the size of the object is smaller than the Schwarzschild radius) the whole Universe is one big black hole with us on the inside.



The hard answer he gives, however, seems not to answer the question.

#3 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 14 November 2013 - 04:42 PM

We are probably in a black hole. The question would be the same. If there was something outside the universe that fell in, what would you see?

We just don't know if there is anything outside the universe.

#4 maugi88

maugi88

    Postasaurusrex

  • -----
  • Posts: 3345
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013
  • Loc: SE MN

Posted 14 November 2013 - 07:25 PM

The question is, if the solar system were one of the stars, and an object from the outside fell in, What would you see? How would it appear? Bear in mind, even though you would see a boundary from the outside, there would not be a visible boundary from the inside.


If its true, we are inside a universal black hole. Maybe we have already seen it in the deep field. Maybe the smeared galaxies that are attributed to gravity lensing of dark matter is actually a galaxy as it looks after just entering our black hole. Maybe, just a thought.

#5 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22354
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 14 November 2013 - 11:17 PM

We are probably in a black hole. The question would be the same. If there was something outside the universe that fell in, what would you see?

We just don't know if there is anything outside the universe.


I expect that anything that fell through the event horizon would be approaching the speed of light at that moment. It would also be smeared by any lateral component of its motion or by the black hole's rotation.

So, I would guess that if we are in a black hole, and there are objects falling though the event horizon, that we would perceive them only as a diffuse glow of electromagnetic radiation.

Of course, if we are inside a black hole, I don't see how we can avoid being sucked into the singularity ourselves, so I think the whole question is moot.

#6 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 14 November 2013 - 11:23 PM

there would be no singularity for a while. The density of the matter inside the large black hole would be diffuse. The universe doesn't have a singularity. (Actually there are many singularities in the universe.) I also think the matter falling in would become diffused.

#7 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22354
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 15 November 2013 - 12:02 AM

Good point. So, maybe the perceived acceleration of cosmic expansion is really just us accelerating towards a singularity doom?

But anyway, even if the internal density of a black hole is low, I don't know of any theoretical treatment that allows light to travel freely in all directions inside it. And that's what appears to be happening in our neighborhood.

#8 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 15 November 2013 - 12:09 AM

I think it's due to the size of the universe. It expanded faster than light so the visible universe doesn't include all the light. I think it's a matter of time for the doom.

When I was in school the professor was explaining how the sun would become a red giant and engulf the earth in about 4 billion years. One of the students who was half asleep asked "how long?" The professor answered 4 billion years. The student said " Thank god, I thought you said 4 million years."

#9 maugi88

maugi88

    Postasaurusrex

  • -----
  • Posts: 3345
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013
  • Loc: SE MN

Posted 15 November 2013 - 06:22 AM

I think it's due to the size of the universe. It expanded faster than light so the visible universe doesn't include all the light. I think it's a matter of time for the doom.

When I was in school the professor was explaining how the sun would become a red giant and engulf the earth in about 4 billion years. One of the students who was half asleep asked "how long?" The professor answered 4 billion years. The student said " Thank god, I thought you said 4 million years."


That's Hilarious :roflmao:

#10 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 15 November 2013 - 09:48 AM

If you want to think this way - I remember doing this simple calculation as a kid - since by definition you cannot escape the universe (if you exist, you are in the universe), the whole thing *must* be a black hole, with the redshift horizon as its Schwarzschild radius. (Everything beyond the redshift horizon is not in causal contact with us.) This lets you *calculate* the required density. It turns out to be right on the money :)

I was once told you couldn't think this way. But that never stopped me!

-drl

#11 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 16 November 2013 - 10:48 AM

We are probably in a black hole. The question would be the same. If there was something outside the universe that fell in, what would you see?


Things that are beyond the redshift horizon are really beyond it. Nothing will be appearing over it. No matter how you interpret it, as (really ill-defined) spatial expansion, or as the effect of (precisely defined) conformal geometry, the redshift horizon is an absolute limit that defines everything that can possibly be causally connected to us (a fancy way of saying visible).

-drl

#12 Andy Taylor

Andy Taylor

    Twisted, but in a Good Way

  • *****
  • Posts: 1873
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Epsom - UK

Posted 16 November 2013 - 03:05 PM

If you want to think this way - I remember doing this simple calculation as a kid - since by definition you cannot escape the universe (if you exist, you are in the universe), the whole thing *must* be a black hole, with the redshift horizon as its Schwarzschild radius. (Everything beyond the redshift horizon is not in causal contact with us.) This lets you *calculate* the required density. It turns out to be right on the money :)

I was once told you couldn't think this way. But that never stopped me!

-drl


No further questions required...

That just about sums it up for me.

#13 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 16 November 2013 - 03:27 PM

The universe doesn't have an edge so if something fell in it could appear anywhere if in fact it survived the entry and remained in one piece.

#14 choran

choran

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2123
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2012

Posted 16 November 2013 - 03:56 PM

Confusing to me, but what else is new? If there's no edge, where/what is the boundary between "out' and "in" when something falls "in". :question:

#15 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22354
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 16 November 2013 - 04:07 PM

If things can appear anywhere, that would imply they can disappear from anywhere too.

That would explain a couple of missing keys, at least.

#16 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 16 November 2013 - 04:10 PM

It can't disappear. Nothing can escape a black hole.

#17 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 16 November 2013 - 04:24 PM

I am not sure how you would map the surface of a black hole with the inside. There is a discontinuity in spacetime. If something were falling in you would see it slow down and eventually stop at the surface. Time would stop. I don't know what would happen from the falling bodies' perspective. You can also never get any information on anything going on beyond the event horizon.

#18 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22354
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 16 November 2013 - 04:46 PM

It can't disappear. Nothing can escape a black hole.


Tell that to my keys.

#19 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 16 November 2013 - 04:57 PM

it could also explain the socks that disappear in my dryer.

#20 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • -----
  • Posts: 6879
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 17 November 2013 - 04:25 PM

I am not sure how you would map the surface of a black hole with the inside. There is a discontinuity in spacetime. If something were falling in you would see it slow down and eventually stop at the surface. Time would stop. I don't know what would happen from the falling bodies' perspective. You can also never get any information on anything going on beyond the event horizon.


No discontinuity. The light cones are tipped over, but a horizon is a horizon, and it's all smooth.

-drl

#21 Qwickdraw

Qwickdraw

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1725
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2012
  • Loc: Ann Arbor, MI

Posted 18 November 2013 - 06:43 AM


So, I would guess that if we are in a black hole, and there are objects falling though the event horizon, that we would perceive them only as a diffuse glow of electromagnetic radiation.


Well, a diffuse glow of electromagnetic radiation does exist and we interpret it to be the remnants of the BB. Perhaps it is other galaxies blurring as they fall into the black hole we are in. Just a wild thought.

#22 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 18 November 2013 - 09:37 AM

I don't know if we would perceive the as diffuse glow.

#23 llanitedave

llanitedave

    Humble Megalomaniac

  • *****
  • Posts: 22354
  • Joined: 25 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Amargosa Valley, NV, USA

Posted 18 November 2013 - 11:04 AM

That's why I just said "electromagnetic radiation" rather than "light". I was sticking my neck out enough as it was.

#24 PeterR280

PeterR280

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1185
  • Joined: 27 May 2013

Posted 18 November 2013 - 12:35 PM

I don't think this aspect is well understood. There needs to be more development of the theories. Some very smart guys like Hawking, Susskind, Hooft etc. haven't really come up with good answers.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics