Slashdot Mirror
More Blackholes Discovered...
Lispy writes "Space.com has this story about the surprising finding of missing blackholes. There might be up to five times more blackholes in space than previously estimated.
"The European Southern Observatory in Munich, Germany reports that the black holes were all in "active" galaxies, meaning they were actively consuming large quantities of galactic matter.""
What if there are black holes being formed constantly, appearing in pen space even WITHOUT there having been a star there?
The universe could be collapsing, with black holes appearing faster and faster, exponentially more and more of them.
Well, I for one welcome our new black hole overlords.
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
Does this make the theory of a "big crunch" any more likely than before? I'm guessing not.
The theory which I understood to be most prominent at present was one of an accelerating, expanding galaxy. Eventually, all galaxies would be moving away from one another so swiftly it would be impossible to see one galaxy from another. Every galaxy would sputter and die in a universe its inhabitants would perceive as utterly empty.
Does the discovery that black holes are more prominent than before just mean that the pace of destruction of said galaxies will only be any different? Or does it do anything to reverse the present theory? It's possible there's no change at all. Any galaxies like this that were seen (in the article) were behaving that way billions of years ago. Who knows what's going on now.
Also, I wonder what could trigger the Milky Way's black hole into an "active" state. Heck, it may already have happened, but it would take about 50,000 years for us to see it.
There is a possibility of "antimatter" with antigravity property.
FYI, in English (since you reference a French site), "antimatter" is charge-reversed matter. It still has positive mass and therefore, standard positive gravity.
You're looking for word(/phrase) "negative mass".
Note that negative mass emits a negative gravity field and therefore repulses everything, though; based on your haphazard explanation it's not clear if you're trying to claim negative mass would emit a gravitational field that attracts other negative mass.
That's just a nomenclature point. Here's a criticism: Every theory I've ever seen like that focuses in on how their exotic theory could explain something, but then completely fails to draw out the rest of the conclusions of that exotic matter. For instance, see the discussion on Exotic Matter in Wikipedia. Negative mass may explain some things, but it would also produce a boatload of other effects which we haven't seen.
Dark energy, in my mind, remains a better theory.