Giant Black Hole At Milky Way's Core Stays Slim
thomst writes "A team of researchers from Harvard and MIT announced at the 215th meeting of the American Astronomical Society a new theoretical model of how the super-massive black hole at the center of the Milky Way consumes gas from surrounding star clusters, based on a million seconds of observation by the orbital Chandra X-ray telescope. Astronomers had previously believed that the object, known as Sagittarius A* (pronounced 'Sagittarius A-Star') consumed only around one percent of the gases it stripped from the star clusters around it, but the new model reduces its consumption to 0.01 percent (i.e. — two orders of magnitude). Physorg.com's uncredited reporter gets the story right, while space.com's Andrea Thomspon clearly doesn't understand the mechanism behind the phenomenon (essentially, thermal conduction from the extremely-hot accretion disk heats the surrounding gas, causing it to expand, and thus move away from Sagittarius A*'s gravity well)."
Then it would be Sagittarius A* eh?
No brain, no pain.
So is this story about the black hole, or about the fact that one place got the story right, while another author got confused? Sounds like a hit job to me, and probably better ways to fulfill vendettas.. Just sayin'...
A million seconds is about 11.5 days.
Actually, the Space.com story does mention the correct mechanism ("It also creates pressure that helps some stellar winds avoid the black hole's gravitational grasp altogether."), but also a second one ("The conduction causes some of the heat in the gas to travel outwards, reducing the strength of the radiation that results from the black hole's consumption.") that sounds a bit odd. Physorg doesn't credit a reporter because they're printing a CfA-authored story (as evidenced by the "Provided by Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics").
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
>> essentially, thermal conduction from the extremely-hot accretion disk heats the surrounding gas, causing it to expand, and thus move away from Sagittarius A*'s gravity well
If there is a dense enough concentration of gas that thermal expansion (i.e. pressure) can keep it out of the gravity well, then is there enough density to actually call that an atmosphere? It's an interesting thought... although going from "atmosphere" to anything else (life, etc.) has about a billion hurdles in-between.
I would assume that in the disc there is a range of concentration/pressure, but never thought it would reach/exceed our atmospheric pressure. That would be cool.
MadCow.
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
After reading that yawner of a story, I am SO FUCKING GLAD I never pursued astro research after that summer of my junior year in college.
If the story's boring it's the writer's fault. A good writer can write "how to mow a lawn" and make it interesting. Bad writing and boring teachers are what turns school kids off on learning, and most people off on science.
Free Martian Whores!
Here is the scientific paper.
Find free books.
Seriously. How can you skip a joke like that? It's reaching out and grabbing you, pulling you in to never let go and never let anything escape.
PS: How much more do I have to type to get past the lameness filter?
>"Sagittarius A* (pronounced 'Sagittarius A-Star')"
So... it isn't a star but they call it A-Star?
Perhaps "The Saggitarius Object Formerly Known As A-Star"...
"Low Fat Milky Way" sounds better to you?
Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
Similarly, bad pay and zero prestige are what turn interesting and talented people off teaching.
"I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p