Slashdot Mirror
Simulation Explains Supermassive Black Holes
Spy der Mann writes "Using a new computer model of galaxy formation, researchers from Carnegie Mellon University have shown that growing black holes release a blast of energy that fundamentally regulates galaxy evolution and black hole growth itself. According to its creators, 'the model explains for the first time observed phenomena and promises to deliver deeper insights into our understanding of galaxy formation and the role of black holes throughout cosmic history'. Hi res pictures and animations (divX) are also available."
Well, after the incident with the British Royal Navy and the 38MB Powerpoint file linked to the front page. Now we get to see if the /. effect will cause the packets to coalesce and turn their server into a matter crushing supermassive black hole itself. I guess 22MB DivX is better than linking MPEG. :)
( o ) one could say I'm rather baked
Medium Image
Large Image
Medium Quality Movie
High Quality Movie
Have you metaroderated recently?
I always thought that Cosmetics were a black hole for money.
There are exactly 42,935,718 letter sized sheets in a square mile.
Here is another mirror for the Medium Quality Image
Have you metaroderated recently?
/me thinks they used iTunes screensaver for this :-)
When will I end this grieving ? When will my future begin ?
At least I think so. Seriously, I think everyone loves black holes.
This is my area of expertise, from the observational side. I've just finished writing a proposal (due today!) to observe "post-starburst quasars" in the infrared with the Spitzer Space Telescope. These are quasars that still show clear signs of massive starbursts, observations that can in principle test simulations like the ones discussed in the article. I've seen Di Matteo give a talk on this topic a year or two ago, and she strikes me as very good. I'm going to have to check out the new work closely -- I have suspicions that their explanation will fail in some details. But that's what makes science fun, finding the problems with ideas and fixing them, or forcing everyone to move on.
Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
Now we can replace the galaxy screensaver with this calculation, and it entertain even more!
Leopard cub
I've always wondered if one day everything will get swallowed up into a super massive black hole, it's nice to read an article explaining that black holes power quasars which actually push matter away from the black hole. At least temporarily (some billions of years?), I guess eventually gravity will win out over quasar wind.
Do not watch the video after eating acid.
You've been warned.
--- At my sig, unleash hell.
It says "regulate," not "accelerate" or "encourage." Even in more prosaic domains like Earth-bound policy, regulation often limits what is done rather than broadening it. If you Read The Fine Article, one of the authors is quoted explaining this outpouring of energy pushes back on infalling mass.
On a different note, perhaps as a Carnegie Mellon alumnus I am biased, but I find it interesting that the top billing went to a woman. This is the kind of interesting and relevant research result that could attract more women to "hard" science fields.
Here are tons of the most recent research papers on black holes. Definitely an good read for anyone with an interest in physics.
Creative Demolition
Mass to Energy to Mass.... Einstein Told Ya so.
Astronomy does pretty well with women, at least compared to other hard sciences. At the undergraduate level, it looks to be close to 50/50. Last year I think we had more female applicants for our summer REU program than males. We're going to admit more women than men into our graduate program this year, too. At the more senior levels, there are fewer women, but the numbers more or less match the historical demographics. My PhD advisor was female, and I have lots of female collaborators and a female grad student. Di Matteo isn't too old -- my generation, 30s. Physics, on the other hand, is still having its problems...
Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
They should have released images in 1024x768, 1280x1024 etc... to make it better wallpaper!
Surely the word "may" belongs in there somewhere?
Just in case, I made a BT link for the video and have it running in the background. So if the site does get SlashDotted, you know where to get it. :)
http://s2.isohunt.com/release.php?id=10330
I'm a signature virus. Please copy me to your signature so I can replicate.
There are interesting pictures on Google Images when you search for big black holes. Science is fascinating.
i always have wondering since nothing can escape then why is it emitting something out of it? Just a thought.
The blackholes don't actually emit anything. The accretion disk is what does the emitting. Imagine water going down a drain. Most of the matter approaching a blackhole is not on a direct collision course but rather the blackhole sucks it close where it spirals downward. The spiraling excites the atoms creating huge bursts of energy, sometimes enough to blast nearby matter out of the gravitational field.
chown -R us
If both galaxies have black holes at their centers, and the simulation is correct, then I have to wonder what the consequences will be for life within either galaxy, as I would imagine the burst of radiation from the collision of the black holes (and the resulting quasar) will be deadly.
Anyone wanna chime in with some numbers?
Maybe the Pierson's Puppeteers have the right idea after all...
Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
The blackholes don't actually emit anything. The accretion disk is what does the emitting.
Actually, black holes do emit. It's called Hawking radiation. But you're right in that what we see is coming from the accretion disk.
The X-rays are also produced as a part of the large burst of energy I mentioned.
chown -R us
The origin of the X-rays are not well understood, but are thought primarily to come from upscattering of thermal photons in a very hot atmosphere above the accretion disk. All the light basically comes from the stuff right around the black holes moving at relativistic speeds, not the black holes themselves.
Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
I'm pretty sure the last Disturbed album, Believe,
sucked so bad the graviational pulls caused a black hole.
Pretty terrifying and distructive. The album I mean.
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
This is not for lack of trying tho. Most of them headed that way ended up taking jobs on the psychic hot line, but hey, it was only a minor spelling mistake...
Why, who's giving permission?
The word "might" might have a place, though.
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
There's this interesting distinction in my areas (Computer Science and Computer Engineering). All the women in my graduate program were going into cognitive science or databases. None went into anything else.
Not that I blame them; I didn't go into any of those things either. It's strange, though, because those are the only two areas offered that don't have any hard math.
Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
But then, pure maths seems to be doing OK with women, at least at undergraduate/early graduate levels. So its not maths per se that's the problem. Is it simply inertia? Maybe astronomy 'simply' achieved a critical mass of women, so new female students don't feel like they're joining a club of crotchety old men?
Quick let's declare war on it.
So now you can announce results of a Simulation and have it be taken seriously? I want to announce that according to my simulation, most simulations are not worth the paper they are written on.
1. They made a model which seemed nice from a theoretical basis.
2. They simulated it.
3. They got a massive residual
4. They thought "oh crap, that didn't work, how can we justify our funding... lets say it fundamentally affects the evolution of the universe and formation of black holes, that should double our funding!"
5. Profit!
Am I missing something, or is this research fundamentally obvious. "Big galaxies contain more dust and make more stars, small galaxies have less dust and less stars." Gee wiz, that just stretches the limits of possibilities.
San Francisco Photographers
Remember the last article on /. about a star flunging away from our own galaxy? It said that could only be possible if the Milky Way orbited around a SM black hole. Which led to the discussion about the role of black holes in galaxy formation.
What strikes me is that just a couple of days after this theoretical discussion, the scientists at Carnegie Mellon come up with a model that predicts exactly the same theory.
It all points to the theory being actually true.
I give my intro astronomy students a problem to computer what the Galactic core would look like if it was a quasar and there was no intervening gas/dust (a really big if, since there is a lot of obscuration now).
What program and model do they use to do this?
When do we get our personal rotating cylindrical black holes? They make nifty time machines!
--
make install -not war
Keep in mind that evolution is just a theory, and must be critically examined.
I myself prefer to believe that God himself is pushing around all the energy by hand.
Similar work has been carried out by Cornell and Caltech under Saul Teukolsky and Kip Thorne. Cornell's Black Hole Numerical Group Homepage has more details about simulating collision of black holes and other relevent information.
actually, black holes are where God divided by zero.
The difference between spam and poop is that you don't have to dig through septic tanks looking for real food. -- Me
It's not God, it's the giant turtle farting.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Then again, it's not surprising to see a large drop in male students, considering how hostile and anti-male an environment so many universities have become.
Feminist bigotry is taking its toll.
The following website gives the hard numbers for whether the women at senior levels matches the historical demographics. It gives the percentage of women who receive PhDs compared to faculty positions for 1992, 1999 and 2003 at many different universities. Grad students in 1992 should have become either full professors or assistant/associate professors by 2003 (depending on when they received their PhDs). Check out the percentage of women who got PhDs in 1992 and compare it with the percentage of women faculty in 2003 for the different universities. With the exception of a few, most universities have a sharp difference between the fraction of 1992 female grad students and 2003 female faculty (assistant, associate and full profs). The number of women faculty does not match the historical demographics. Here are some interesting stats for well-known institutions:
h tml
Caltech:
22.6% 1992 female grad students
13.8% 2003 female faculty (associate, assistant and full profs)
MIT:
20.8% 1992 female grad students
11.5% 2003 female faculty
Harvard:
18.2% 1992 female grad students
6.3% 2003 female faculty
Princeton:
26.3% 1992 female grad students
10% 2003 female faculty
UC Berkeley:
22.6% 1992 female grad students
10.7% 2003 female faculty
Women in astronomy stats (from the American Astronomical Society):
http://www.grammai.org/astrowomen/stats/combined.
Seems astronomy is still having problems too!
This is some sweet information.
/usr/lib/xscreensaver/galaxy