Black Hole Particle Jets Explained

Screaming Cactus writes "A team of researchers led by Boston University's Alan Marscher have apparently worked out the physics behind the particle streams emanating from many black holes. According to the researchers, 'twisted, coiled magnetic fields are propelling the material outward.' By watching an 'unprecedented view' of a black hole in the process of expelling mass, they were able to confirm their theory, predicting where and when bursts of energy would be detected."

Comments

The scatological aspects of astronomy.

[Kenja]

an 'unprecedented view' of a black hole in the process of expelling mass

Ok, so its juvenile and stupid. But it still made me laugh.

Re:The scatological aspects of astronomy.

[oodaloop]

Ok, so its juvenile and stupid. Not really. You may not be aware, but one of the reasons the term Black Hole stuck around was to annoy French astrophysicists (the term translates to a bodily orafice in French). The question was later posed (by Wheeler, I believe) as to whether black holes have 'hair', meaning do they give off observable radiation or other phenomena, much to the chagrin of his French counterparts. The question was posed, FWIU, mostly just so American physicists could snicker while French physicists had to talk about black holes and hair in public conferences. And it turns out that yes, black holes do in fact have hair.

Now we have black holes expelling mass. I'm sure you're not the only one finding this humorous.

Re:The scatological aspects of astronomy.

[The Only Druid]

Didn't he say that matter could NOT escape a black hole? This isn't matter escaping a black hole. This is matter, outside the black hole, being accelerated and hurtled outwards by the forces of the black hole.

This is how science works

[smooth wombat]

'By watching an 'unprecedented view' of a black hole in the process of expelling mass, they were able to confirm their theory, predicting where and when bursts of energy would be detected."

Note to all ID supporters, this is how real science works. Propose a theory which can be tested, then go about trying to disprove the theory.

Now go ahead, flame me. My karma can take it.

Re:This is how science works

[macemoneta]

It's called "climate change" now. That way if the current trend of lower temps continues and we go into another mini ice age (as some are predicting) they're still right!

It's called "climate change" now because people had problems understanding the concept of global warming; they concentrated on the terminology instead of understanding the process.

Energy is being added to the Earth's outer layer, including the atmosphere. This additional energy is like turning on a blender - everything is going to get mixed up. Places where it was cold may turn warm. Places where it was warm may become cold. Deserts will form where there was arable land. Dry places may get wetter. The ice caps act as a thermal buffer (like the ice cubes in a drink), and the additional energy is causing them to melt. This in turn raises sea levels.

Things get complicated because of the political boundaries; people can't just move to where things are becoming nicer. If the farm land in the U.S. turns to a dust bowl for example, we can't just pick up 300M people and move to another country - just as the U.S. doesn't open its borders to tens of millions dying of thirst and starvation in other countries.

A secondary complication is the delicate balance between airborne particulates and greenhouse gases. Reducing pollution levels reduces both, but not at the same rate. As the two have opposing impacts, and tend to be politically controlled by local goverments, it's and extra monkey wrench in the calculations.

In this context, the term "climate change" is easier for people to grasp. It doesn't change what is happening.

Good science writing

[ekstrom]

This is a good article. It was complete enough to satisfy the casual interest of this old physicist who once worked for awhile as an astronomer, explained all of its terms in ways accessible to a more general public, but was never tedious about it. We need more science writing of that quality. Also good work, it would seem. Rarely do you get a chance to check astrophysical theory in such detail against observations.

Re:Hawking Radiation

[PhuCknuT]

Yes, this is completely different, but it's not exactly the black hole emitting anything. The jets are from material that hasn't fallen into the black hole yet, being accelerated along the axis of rotation by the twisted magnetic fields outside the black hole.

Re:Hawking Radiation

[ekstrom]

This is radiation from the accretion disk, which both supplies the material and twists up the fields which then accelerate the material. It's not from the hole itself. Of course it is all powered by the hole's gravitational field.

Re:Hawking Radiation

[evanbd]

Well, large black holes don't evaporate -- even the cosmic background radiation is enough to add more mass than they lose to Hawking radiation. The CMB is at ~2.7K, and a 1 solar mass black hole has a temperature of 60nK from the Hawking radiation.

I am french that is not informative

[aepervius]

Black hole translate to "trou noir", which is as funny (or unfunny) as "black hole" is in english. I don't ever recall an astrophysicists in France which was annoyed, or amused. I would REALLY like to see a reference to this.And to the moderator, such an assertion would require at least a lnik or reference to be modded informative +5. Right now at best it is only +5 funny.

Re:Hawking Radiation

[Walt Dismal]

I've always wondered whether magnetic fields inside a black hole are restricted to being within the internal boundary of the black hole, but not able to penetrate outside it? Does the event horizon also apply to them? Does the boundary established by the hole's gravitational field prevent a magnetic field from emerging? That would imply gravity can trump magnetism. I guess that makes sense if gravity warps space, and magnetism has to propagate through space, so if space is distorted the magnetic field lines are too. So does this mean one could somehow bottle up enormous magnetic fields within a gravity-compressed space? Does this operate in suns to contain their reactions? And why do my friends from Tau Ceti always look at me like I was crazy when I ask them this? Just because I'm human doesn't mean they have to treat me like a galactic retard. Although that explains the Slinky they gave me, claiming it was advanced alien technology.