Slashdot Mirror


Do Solo Black Holes Roam the Universe?

sciencehabit writes "Two mysterious bright spots in a disheveled, distant galaxy suggest that astronomers have found the best evidence yet for a supermassive black hole being shoved out of its home. If confirmed, the finding would verify Einstein's theory of general relativity in a region of intense gravity not previously tested. The results would also suggest that some giant black holes roam the universe as invisible free floaters, flung from the galaxies in which they coalesced. Although loner black holes may be an entity that has to be reckoned with, they would still be rare."

135 comments

  1. YES! And I can prove it... by Shoten · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I was married to one for a while.

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  2. No... by aussiedood · · Score: 0

    ...they always travel with their Wookie!

    1. Re:No... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i was gonna say pimp

  3. We just keep finding more dark matter, no mystery? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And the other day - turns out tons of hydrogen gas not previously observed in voids. Sooner or later, that obvious bit of "curve over-fitting" that required the mysterious dark matter might just have to go away. That would be cool - it was obviously a bandaid on a cancer in the theory.

  4. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by The+Mighty+Buzzard · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ease off. That was a huge step up from our normal First Posts.

    --
    Violence is like duct tape. If it doesn't solve the problem, you didn't use enough.
  5. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Shoten · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's ironic, then, that neither of you have put anything forth to foster the discussion along what you would consider "proper" lines. Oh, and you both posted as ACs, too...

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  6. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While true, it also embodies everything worth avoiding about sites such as Reddit. The signal to noise ratio is getting far too out of whack.

  7. Fantastic by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I find it fascinating that theories developed in the first half of the last century continue to stand up to observation. This fits the predictions of general relativity, and that is almost as exciting as if they discovered something that totally blew away the predictions. The latter would mean we go back to the cutting board, but this is, as I said, almost as exciting. It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

    1. Re:Fantastic by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

      It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

      I'm gonna guess 'not much'. If there were a lot of them, every once in a while something would run into one, and believe me, we'd notice.

    2. Re:Fantastic by kanto · · Score: 3, Informative

      It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

      I'm gonna guess 'not much'. If there were a lot of them, every once in a while something would run into one, and believe me, we'd notice.

      If there were lots of them then we'd also see them because of the gravitational lens effect they'd impart.

    3. Re:Fantastic by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

      right. the article did mention that these rogue supermassive black holes are rare. hardly enough to put a dent in the 95% of the universe's "missing" mass.

      --
      insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
    4. Re:Fantastic by __aaeihw9960 · · Score: 1

      believe me, we'd notice.

      In the grand scheme of the universe, how long have we been able to notice these things? And, in the grand scheme of the universe, how do we define a lot?

      It's all relative, but I'm not an astrophysicist. If there is one in the room, can you please speak up?

    5. Re:Fantastic by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

      In the grand scheme of the universe, how long have we been able to notice these things?

      Not for long, but they tend to be obvious. It would be like completely missing a small, dark galaxy that turns hydrogen into X and gamma-rays and distorts the image behind it.

      And, in the grand scheme of the universe, how do we define a lot?

      Well, since we were talking about them possibly being at least a significant part of the mass of dark matter, I'd say 'a lot' would be enough that they outweigh the visible mass of the universe.

    6. Re:Fantastic by tywjohn · · Score: 1

      bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'

      Reminds me of the last date I had.

    7. Re:Fantastic by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      It makes me wonder how much of the 'missing mass' that we lump into the dark matter bucket is actually contained in bodies like this; bodies so massive that we can barely fathom their 'size'.

      I'm gonna guess 'not much'. If there were a lot of them, every once in a while something would run into one, and believe me, we'd notice.

      If there were lots of them then we'd also see them because of the gravitational lens effect they'd impart.

      That would only apply if there were stars on the other side of them (from us) to generate light so that we could see the lens effect. What if these super massive black holes are on the edge of the universe or between the edge and the first lit stars, how would we know? (since the universe is defined by the shockwave expanding outward from the big bang, the other side is considered "nothing" since we have no known measurement or indications of what lies on the other side - think of the universe as a bubble) Heck, while we're pondering, they could be on the other side of the edge, from a previous universe, one that collapsed in on itself and created a new big bang, perhaps even ours. We are just neophytes in understanding our universe, and we certainly do not begin to understand anything outside of it or what was before, we barely think we know what was soon after "the beginning". We cannot even succinctly state if time existed before then, we simply have nothing to observe or measure against.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    8. Re:Fantastic by randall77 · · Score: 1
      > That would only apply if there were stars on the other side of them (from us) to generate light so that we could see the lens effect.

      True. That experiment has been done, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_compact_halo_object

      There is much wrong with everything else you say. First, black holes can't be only at the edge of the universe. There is no edge - the universe is isotropic, as far as we know. Unless you suggest that the black holes were in the early universe but have somehow vanished over time. But in any case, that is totally irrelevant. We see dark matter effects IN galaxies NEAR us that we can see ALL of. If all the black holes are at the edge of the universe, they aren't affecting the dynamics of the galaxies we can see, and thus can't be cause of the dark matter effect.

    9. Re:Fantastic by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      There is much wrong with everything else you say. First, black holes can't be only at the edge of the universe. There is no edge - the universe is isotropic, as far as we know. Unless you suggest that the black holes were in the early universe but have somehow vanished over time. But in any case, that is totally irrelevant. We see dark matter effects IN galaxies NEAR us that we can see ALL of. If all the black holes are at the edge of the universe, they aren't affecting the dynamics of the galaxies we can see, and thus can't be cause of the dark matter effect.

      Much wrong? Let's start with yours:

      Black holes at the edge of the universe - you've been there? You purport to know what happened in the first ms, seconds, minutes, and hours of the universe? Please do enlighten the rest of us. We have absolutely no idea what's further out from the prototype galaxies. We've seen very little if any evidence of the monster stars that gave us all our higher order elements. Each one of those was truly massive, existed for a very short time, and went super nova for lack of a better description, leaving behind... we think, a black hole. Provided of course that the universe started out as a hydrogen plasma as the popular theory has it today and everything was built up through nuclear fusion. I personally am not willing to put a stake in the ground and state that black holes cannot exist beyond the furthest observable galaxies. You may, and you might or might not join a long line of other stake holders (flat earth, earth center of the universe, sun center of the universe, solid earth, etc)

      The universe is nearly isotropic. There are variations. This is not the only reference stating so.

      No edge (well, surface actually)? Do you define the universe by the limits of the radiation of the big bang? Or is the universe everything, including things 100 quadrillion light years away, should they exist? I'm curious, because the common definition is everything inside the "edge" (or surface) describing the extent of the big bang, although there are theories that describe things outside our "known" universe. I know the answer to that one is more philosophical at this point, since there is absolutely nothing we can say today about what's even at the limits light has traveled since the big bang. It would all be mere speculation with no way to prove it.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    10. Re:Fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Black holes at the edge of the universe - you've been there? You purport to know what happened in the first ms, seconds, minutes, and hours of the universe? Please do enlighten the rest of us. We have absolutely no idea what's further out from the prototype galaxies.

      IANAP, but as far as I know the theories cover everything back to the first 10e-43 seconds.

    11. Re:Fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was God who created the heavy elements just like he created Man (yes, God is a HE - there's no evidence God is a she). The Bible says so, thanks.

    12. Re:Fantastic by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      There was no "before" the big bang. There was no time, space, matter, energy, distance, or anything else. Our universe may be inside another universe, or there may be other universes along side ours, but other universes may not even have such a thing as "time".

    13. Re:Fantastic by randall77 · · Score: 1
      > Black holes at the edge of the universe - you've been there? You purport to know what happened in the first ms, seconds, minutes, and hours of the universe? Please do enlighten the rest of us. We have absolutely no idea what's further out from the prototype galaxies.

      I think you're confusing time with space. There is clearly a "time" edge to the universe, the big bang itself. But there is no evidence for a space edge of the universe. Yes, we don't have much evidence for what exists time-beyond the prototype galaxies. But we have lots of evidence for what is space-beyond the prototype galaxies. Namely, it will look like every other region of space that we can see. Relativity and the isotropy of space demand it. (i.e. if an alien grew up in one of those prototype galaxies that is ~13+ billion light years from here, and space beyond it was different somehow, then space wouldn't be isotropic for that alien. And that alien would have the same question about what is beyond our galaxy - we WERE the 13+ billion light year distant prototype galaxy for lots of the observers in the universe.)

      In any case, knowing what happened in the early universe is completely irrelevant for what is causing the dark matter effect in galaxies today (other than, of course, whatever causes the dark matter effect was probably created in the early universe). Flying spaghetti monsters could have roamed the early universe, it doesn't matter. Only things that survived until today can be causing it.

    14. Re:Fantastic by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      My point was we have no idea what's closer to the edge. Dark matter/energy are recent theories to support recent observations that didn't fit the original model, nor could explain the newly observed accelerating expansion of the universe. (Until just the last couple of decades, it was assumed that the universe was decelerating, and the question was would it contract) But, IANA(A)P, so I might have my dates and prevalent theories off by a little bit, it still highlights that they are theories and still changing.

      I'm not confusing space and time, I'm saying that we have no frame of reference to hang time on outside of the existence of our universe. To me, logically, it seems ludicrous to state that time started with our universe. But neither you nor I can point to anything that predates our universe. We can speculate, however.

      Knowing what happened early in the universe might be extremely relevant, or it might not. We don't know. We assume space is isotropic beyond the time/space edge of the big bang, but we have absolutely no way of knowing. It may be that there are other areas just like ours, or we (our universe) may be alone, or it may be far more interesting than we can fathom at this stage.

      Theories of things untestable will remain theories, and we should be open to change them when evidence presents itself. Flying spaghetti monsters and giant turtles not excepted.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    15. Re:Fantastic by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      IANAP, but as far as I know the theories cover everything back to the first 10e-43 seconds.

      Just remember - they are theories.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    16. Re:Fantastic by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I will disagree with the absolute statement about there being no "before" the big bang. We don't know, we have nothing to measure or even really speculate against. The only thing we can say with certainty is that time existed after the big bang in our universe (defined as that volume containing the energy of the big bang). Other than that - all sorts of fantastical things as you mention might or might not exist. We simply don't know and have no way to prove or disprove any of the conjectures. Logical reasoning and current scientific knowledge allow us to speculate on various possibilities, but that's all it is. If you consider that space within the universe is vast, think about the "space" holding the universe....

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    17. Re:Fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster do you belong to?

  8. "An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by Greyfox · · Score: 2

    You mean, by being sucked into a giant black hole? Unless you have some suggestions on how to make a giant black hole change its course, or how to move your solar system out of the way of a giant roaming black hole, that is...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    1. Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      That statement implies that black holes should not be ignored... not that they should be combated.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    2. Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by boarder8925 · · Score: 2

      Sounds like something that could be straight out of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

    3. Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Easy. We just need a group of roughnecks led by Bruce Willis and some nuclear warheads. Right?

    4. Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      If you have a "problem" black hole, the eventual outcome will be entirely the same whether you ignore it or not! Me, I'm all for hiding my head in the sand and hoping we don't get sucked into a black hole anytime soon. I can't see you, Black Hole! La la la la la!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    5. Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Bruce Willis can save Earth from destruction. He has a proven track record.

      We must kidnap and freeze him so we can restore him whenever an apocalypse looms.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    6. Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by Tarlus · · Score: 1

      Yeah, unfortunately I don't see us finding a way to be proactive about an incoming black hole. On the other hand, I'd be pretty darned curious to see what is on the other side of it...

      --
      /* No Comment */
    7. Re:"An Entity That Has to Be Reckoned With"? by JTsyo · · Score: 1

      A black hole might be too much for Bruce and his merry band, it would be time to send up Check Norris to karate kick the back hole.

  9. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You do know that you get no karma for +1 Funny, right?

    Slashdot isn't some game where you try to score the most karma points. It's a communication forum, and GP wanted to communicate something funny.

  10. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when has it been hip to be smart? It's hip to *look* smart. *Being* smart will still get you an atomic wedgie (at least until you are able to turn smart into rich - because it is definitely hip to be rich).

  11. Solo black hole != Solo supermassive black hole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you mean supermassive, damn well say supermassive; from the headline, anyone would think "Duh, of course they do -- whaddya think happens when a solo star (say, ejected from its galaxy by a close pass) with tens of solar masses collapses..."

    Supermassive black holes, generally understood to be found only in galactic cores, are much more interesting.

  12. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, lighten up. That headline cries out for (mostly bad attempts at) humor.

    There should be one about the Eastern District Court of Texas, and how they get their restaurant bills sent to the office...

  13. Well... by surfdaddy · · Score: 1

    Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?

  14. Do black holes clean their plate? by uslurper · · Score: 1

    Couldnt a black hole just consume all the stars in its galaxie to end up a loaner?

    --
    oldhack: "Security is a waste of money until shit hits the fan. 5 minutes later, it becomes waste of money again. "
    1. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In short: BLACK HOLES DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!

      Longer answer: wait for someone with better explanation skills than mine to come along.

    2. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Informative

      No... the stars in a galaxy are orbiting their own collective center of gravity, not the blackhole. It just so happens that this collective center of gravity often attracts enough stars that it collapses into a super massive black hole. The most likely scenario for the blackhole to lose it's galaxy is in a collision with another galaxy (although "Collision" is a bad word since nothing actually hits anything else) The center of mass of the 2 combined galaxies would radically change rather suddenly (in galactic terms) and the Super massive blackhole would begin orbiting the new center of gravity. If it's orbit is too far out, it would get flung off. In most situations stars would get flung out with it. But rarely it could shoot off on it's own.

    3. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by Tarlus · · Score: 2

      (although "Collision" is a bad word since nothing actually hits anything else)

      I like to think of it as merging.

      --
      /* No Comment */
    4. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by mug+funky · · Score: 2

      more like a brief merging of heavenly bodies followed by a massive ejection of.. um. stars.

      sorry, i was trying to make it filthy but failed to find a plausible way to refer to stars as fluids. i guess they can be modelled as such...

    5. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stars are significantly more dangerous than the black holes they eventually become. The gravitational pull of an object doesn't increase by becoming a black hole, its compactness of the object merely lets you get a lot closer to the center of mass (in which case, if the star had been there instead you would have been fried much earlier on from BEING INSIDE THE STAR). If our sun were suddenly compressed into a black hole the event horizon would extend just a few kilometers from the current center of the sun, beyond that the entire solar system wouldn't react at all. Other than the small detail of having no more sun, that is.

    6. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by Maritz · · Score: 1

      If you have a star that goes supernova and leaves say an 8 solar mass remnant, it has exactly the same gravity as a star with 8 solar masses. Being a black hole doesn't give it 'stronger' gravity in any sense, it just means that it has a superdense core that is guaranteed to pull you in and crush you if you get too close. (from your own point of view at least - to an outside observer you will move asymptotically towards the event horizon, increasingly redshifted, but never quite passing the horizon)

      Most supermassive black holes (like the one at the centre of our galaxy) are a miniscule fraction of the total mass of the galaxy. So it isn't going to suck the galaxy in. It will suck in the odd star or gas cloud that wanders too close. The rest of the galaxy orbits the gravitational centre more or less as if there were a few hundred million solar mass star there.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    7. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      plasma?

    8. Re:Do black holes clean their plate? by JTsyo · · Score: 1

      yea but it's easier to tell that you're flying into a star than a black hole.

  15. Proving... by grasshoppa · · Score: 0

    They can capture the light from a star, but they can't catch a cab.

    ( sorry )

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    1. Re:Proving... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahaha i like your sig, the only reason i know it is you when posting

  16. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Nocturnal+Deviant · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well look at his user number...they should have stopped at 1 million and allowed invites only...

    --
    -Noc
  17. Blowing away the old theories would be better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...because the old theories make it WAY too hard to achieve practical interstellar travel and planetary colonization.

  18. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Tanktalus · · Score: 3, Funny

    Slashdot isn't some game where you try to score the most karma points.

    What? Shit, why have I been wasting all this time here if I can't win?

  19. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by gmhowell · · Score: 2

    Ahh, yes, that lovely golden age of slashdot when first posts didn't make fun of exes, but did have recruitment statements for GNAA.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  20. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by gmhowell · · Score: 1, Funny

    Well look at his user number...they should have stopped at 100,000 and allowed invites only...

    FTFY.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  21. Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

    turns out tons of hydrogen gas not previously observed in voids ... the mysterious dark matter might just have to go away

    Put your toys away, son. A million, billion, trillion tons wouldn't even show up as a rounding error when it comes to dark matter.

  22. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Nocturnal+Deviant · · Score: 1

    ...I wasn't doing that as a dick swinging contest. More as a "the longer slashdot has gone on, the more idiots have come aboard" It was actually shortly after I joined that I started noticing the downward spiral in comments.

    --
    -Noc
  23. Rare and dying by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 1

    Although loner black holes may be an entity that has to be reckoned with, they would still be rare."
    Without lots of matter to use as a fuel source they would evaporate after a fashion.

    --
    I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
    1. Re:Rare and dying by maroberts · · Score: 5, Informative

      The theoretical evaporation of black holes is an incredibly slow process; a black hole the mass of the sun would only evaporate after some 10^67 years. which considering the age of the universe is 13x10^9 years (or about 6000 if you're a creationist) means it won't disappear any time soon.

      --

      Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
      Karma: Chameleon

  24. Black holes are hard to see by MetricT · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If you were to take the 3 million solar mass black hole in the center of the Milky Way, and plop it into the solar system where the sun is, the Schwartzchild radius would be well within the orbit of Mercury. We wouldn't lose a single planet, though an earth "year" would shrink to roughly 2 hours. Hold your fist at arm's length. That's how big it would appear in the sky.

    Now imagine trying to see something like that, from 4 billion light years away, moving faster than galactic escape velocity. The only reason you can see it at *all* is that it's still siphoning galactic gas into its accretion disk. Once it hits intergalactic space, you'll never see it again.

    Three million solar masses sounds huge, but is a microscopic fraction of the Milky Way's total mass (1-4 trillion solar masses). Given the quantity of matter orbiting near the center of a galaxy, I'd believe it likely that even if the central black hole were ejected, a new one would form in short (cosmologically speaking) time. So core ejection may not be a one-off, but a common event during galaxy collisions. In which case, there might be enough of them to partly explain dark matter (though certainly not enough to explain it all).

    We also know there is a relationship between the mass of the central black hole, and the "tightness" of the arms in a spiral galaxy. But how would core ejection affect this? Given the speed of light, the outer regions of a galaxy would be tightly wound, while the inner region would be loosely wound (after core ejection). Wouldn't that look an awful lot like a barred spiral?

    So many interesting questions, so few answers...

    1. Re:Black holes are hard to see by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      not lose a single planet? only if you mean cranking up the Earth's kinetic energy to maintain its present orbit. if a straight magical substition happened, the entire solar system's orbits would cross the horizon.

    2. Re:Black holes are hard to see by Mspangler · · Score: 2

      "If you were to take the 3 million solar mass black hole in the center of the Milky Way, and plop it into the solar system where the sun is, the Schwartzchild radius would be well within the orbit of Mercury. We wouldn't lose a single planet, though an earth "year" would shrink to roughly 2 hours."

      How high would the tides be? Would the tide just fall into space? Would Earth be outside the Roche radius, or would it disintegrate? If Earth is orbiting at 44% of the speed of light, the meteor shower on the leading face should be pretty intense. Pretty gamma rays instead of pretty lights?

    3. Re:Black holes are hard to see by catmistake · · Score: 2

      But how would core ejection affect this?

      I can't explain it... and while the science is well understood, in practice it seems to work better than any science can explain, as time and again it has been shown that if you eject the core and fire a few photon torpedos at it, destroying it spectacularly in close proximity to your ship, somehow, even though there really is no shock wave in the vacuum of space to transfer the momentum needed, and even though your WARP drive and main propulsion is now busted, it somehow allows your ship to escape a gravity-well and be on its merry way.

    4. Re:Black holes are hard to see by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Ah, that only works with a "red matter" black hole. You know, the kind of black hole that you can go through and come out a hundred years in the past!

    5. Re:Black holes are hard to see by catmistake · · Score: 1

      Ah, that only works with a "red matter" black hole. You know, the kind of black hole that you can go through and come out a hundred years in the past!

      You are mistaken; ejecting the WARP core is an all encompassing solution to escape any number of unfortunate circumstances one may find one's ship in while exploring the Galaxy.

  25. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by ichthyoboy · · Score: 2

    And here I thought it was hip to be square... I guess I should stop taking life lessons from Huey Lewis :-(

  26. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Tarlus · · Score: 1

    I'm actually surprised that this news post hasn't already sparked more of the racist comments that have shown up here lately.

    --
    /* No Comment */
  27. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if slashdot isn't a game, then what's up with the achievements? if you don't think it's a game, you are being played. the object of the game is to gain enough karma points that you can troll at will with impunity. mini-games include Make Others Look Stupid, Make Yourself Look Smart, and I'm Sofa King Funny.

    --
    insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
  28. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by __aaeihw9960 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Honest Question here - do you really believe that the best way to foster free and open discussion is to severely limit the people that can participate?

    Look at my number. It is huge. Yes, I contribute some bullshit every now and then, but I honestly try my best to contribute to this open forum. Why is my number soooo big? Because I chose to lurk first, learn the dynamics and how to do stuff (technical word there), and then post.

    It's like this - you want to ride a roller coaster. So, you go to an amusement park. Then you get pissed about waiting in line with the other idiots. What are your options? (a) Build your own rollercoaster; or (b) quit bitching about the line and enjoy the pleasant conversations that do happen, when they happen.

    If you are not the owner of a website, who are you to limit, or suggest a limit for that matter, on who can contribute?

    Why do I love the internet, and online forums and discussion boards? Because I can hear a...n...y...t...h...i...n...g... on them. If I wanted to have a closed discussion on a topic, I'd go back to yelling at my television. It feels just as good, and is as one-sided as you make it.

    In other words, sir or ma'am, I understand that you believe that there were glory days on this site. I'm sure there were. But, limiting who can speak, simply based on how old s/he is comes off as, in my opinion, utter bullshit.

    In other words. Learn to ignore the shit. Look for the good. It's there, if you care to be positive. OR, instead of limiting who can post, have a system where you can register your account, but can not contribute until you reach a certain time on the site, or number of articles read paired with time spent reading, or something. I don't know, just quit complaining about it. It's just as annoying as the bullshit posts from user numbers>1,000,000, and contributes nothing to the discussion.

    But that is all my opinion. Thank you.

  29. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, great jokes. The words were the same, it's just that it was a different kind of black hole back then.

  30. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

    I would love to see more first posts that actually spoke to the topic instead of just small penis geeks getting their tiny rocks off.

    I attempted that a few days ago. Granted, I was going for on topic humorous instead of insightful or informative (something about eating too much space turkey made our galaxy's super massive black hole too lethargic).

    Submitted my post, and it was still the only post thus far for the discussion. Hit reload, and it was still the only post. Then a few minutes later, I hit reload again, and it was no longer the first post. For some reason, it was bumped down to 6th position even though it was the only post for a short while.

    How did that happen? Doesn't matter really, but it still piqued my curiosity about how postings get prioritized here.

    --
    This space unintentionally left blank.
  31. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by yurtinus · · Score: 1, Funny

    Oh shut up, we all know you've got a three digit UID account. You just made a new one so you could brag about how big your number is.

    --
    +1 Disagree
  32. Of course: if stars can be slungshot out by yoctology · · Score: 3, Insightful

    then black holes can be too. We have observed almost a score of so of stars with the 2 million MPH velocity required to escape from a galaxy, which they probably got from proximity to a black hole. There is no reason not to think that a black hole could have the same close orbit. Just much much, rarer.

    1. Re:Of course: if stars can be slungshot out by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      There is no reason not to think that a black hole could have the same close orbit. Just much much, rarer.

      Why do you think they're rarer?

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    2. Re:Of course: if stars can be slungshot out by randall77 · · Score: 1

      Because we've looked for them. See the Wiki about MACHOs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_compact_halo_object

    3. Re:Of course: if stars can be slungshot out by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      Trust me in this, I think we've only scratched the surface of things we've looked for. There will be many "surprises" over the next few decades at least.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
  33. How to Find a Roaming Black Hole by bratwiz · · Score: 1

    How to Find a Roaming Black Hole...

    Look in the Red Dwarf District.

    1. Re:How to Find a Roaming Black Hole by dylsexia · · Score: 1

      From Red Dwarf "Marooned"

      Hilly: Well, the thing about a black hole - its main distinguishing feature - is it's black. And the thing about space, the colour of space, your basic space colour, is black. So how are you supposed to see them?
      Rimmer: But five of them? . How can you manage to miss five black holes?
      Hilly: It's always the way, innit? You hang around for three million years in deep space and there hasn't been one, then all of a sudden five turn up at once.

    2. Re:How to Find a Roaming Black Hole by Maritz · · Score: 1

      You see the thing about grit, is it's black...

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  34. Re:You have to ask? by mug+funky · · Score: 1

    black holes don't suck.

    people who turn ANY topic into "bleh bleh debt blah blah obama" suck.

  35. Re:Blowing away the old theories would be better.. by mug+funky · · Score: 1

    that difficulty is the only thing stopping THEM from coming...

  36. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Roachie · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some guy makes a witty crack, 1 simple, single sentence post.

    Then 4000 neckbeards get all pissy about it and chime in to complain about the S/N ratio.

    --
    This sig is not paradoxical or ironic.
  37. Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    Duh, but that was not the GPs point. They are finding additional %s. Brown dwarfs, extra H2 in the voids etc. Anything is possible, especially something based on 'finaglers constant' (FC=answerwant/answergot) like dark matter.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  38. Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how am I supposed to parse that? As (a million (billion (trillion)))tons or as an expressive statement that not even trillions of tons would count as a rounding error?
        The first one would be (10^6)*(10^9)*(10^12), which is a shitload of tons. The mass of the universe is roughly 3*10^52 to 3*10^54 kg given 1 ton is ~10^3 kilograms that would put that hydrogen as roughly half the mass of the observable universe.
      The second one would be essentially vacuum since those 10^12 tons of gas would be have a density of roughly 1 ton per 9*10^18 LY^3 LY is light year.

  39. I'm curious by axlr8or · · Score: 1

    Being ejected? Is it possible, that the Black Hole is more like a boat anchor, and the galaxy continues to move on?

  40. The summary just asks for it by user+flynn · · Score: 1

    A "disheveled, distant galaxy" and a giant black hole?

    --
    In the distance you hear an ominous moo.
  41. YMBNH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot isn't some game where you try to score the most karma points

    You're so new here that you haven't actually got here yet

    1. Re:YMBNH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you're so new here that you haven't got an account. Neither do I.

      If not turning every-damn-thing into a game is wrong, [insert rest of the cliche here].

  42. Gravitational lensing against deep field? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Solo black holes are hard to see, but supermassive ones flung out fast could have a proper motion detectable by lensing against a deep field background, even when the proper motion of a luminous object at that distance would be far too small to detect. There's a motion magnification vs luminosity tradeoff there.

    Although the LSST is aimed at wide rather than deep field acquisition, detection of weak gravitational lensing is one of its many target goals, so the LSST could find the smoking guns and tell deep field observatories where to look.

  43. Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste by yndrd1984 · · Score: 2

    how am I supposed to parse that?

    As a joke - albeit one that pointed out that H2 in voids, given our current understanding of course, isn't a candidate for dark matter. Not enough mass, not in the right place, and interacting using photons being three of the main problems with it.

    The first one would be (10^6)*(10^9)*(10^12), which is a shitload of tons. The mass of the universe is roughly 3*10^52 to 3*10^54 kg given 1 ton is ~10^3 kilograms that would put that hydrogen as roughly half the mass of the observable universe.

    3+6+9+12=30 - so 10^30 kg of H2, or about half of the sun's mass. That's 22 orders of magnitude short, given your own numbers, of being 'half the observable universe' - i.e. not even a rounding error.

  44. Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste by yndrd1984 · · Score: 3, Informative

    They are finding additional %s. Brown dwarfs, extra H2 in the voids etc.

    Right, but none of them have the right properties (no EM interactions, etc) to be dark matter, not to mention that their mass is trivial compared to the amount required.

    Anything is possible, especially something based on 'finaglers constant' (FC=answerwant/answergot) like dark matter.

    We're a little past that stage. For example, we have observed galaxies colliding in ways that separate the visible mass from the non-visible mass - i.e. the stars, gas etc, interact via EM and slow down, while the majority of the mass (inferred through gravitational lensing) continues on as if it's affected only by gravity. It's hard to ascribe that kind of behavior to dim stars or extra-galactic H2.

  45. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Oh, shut the fuck up you humorless sack of shit.

  46. Re:We just keep finding more dark matter, no myste by WCguru42 · · Score: 4, Funny

    You obviously don't understand that 10^30 is nowhere near 1/2 of 10^52. It's practically nonexistent on that scale.

    --
    "Educate the mind but never at the expense of the soul."~Blessed Basil Moreau
  47. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    It's ironic, then, that neither of you have put anything forth to foster the discussion along what you would consider "proper" lines.

    Having read two comments from you I've yet to discover one single "proper line"

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  48. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Some guy makes a witty crack, 1 simple, single sentence post.

    If it's a one-off thing, hey, who is complaining?

    Unfortunately, that's not the case

    Vast majority of Slashdot articles are laced with mindless fucktard "Foist Post"

    I'm getting very, very sick of it !!

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  49. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0

    Honest Question here - do you really believe that the best way to foster free and open discussion is to severely limit the people that can participate?

    It's not about putting any artificial limit

    It's about having users that are courteous enough to not post shit on places like Slashdot

    Look, this is not a "community site" like Facebook

    This is a site where people are interested in tech, in science, in astronomy, physics etc, sharing information and engage in discussion

    There have been too many "First posts" and racist rantings

    The noise are overpowering genuine discussions and I can see that users are getting discouraged and many have left

    If the Slashdot admin don't do nothing to stop this, Slashdot not be Slashdot anymore
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  50. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by gmhowell · · Score: 1

    I only get worked up when newbs arrive with broken sarcasm filters.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  51. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by gmhowell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    My point is that 1 million is just as arbitrary as 100k.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  52. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hahahaha

  53. And they say... by TexVex · · Score: 1

    And they say that gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces. Gravity can trap unbelievable amounts of matter until the the heat death of the universe; it can shape the orbits of galaxies that are millions of light-years in diameter; it can create conditions that we simply don't have the math to explain. Gravity is the one force that we don't have a good theory to explain yet.

    Pshaw. Gravity sees your Strong Force and raises you a Theory of Everything. :)

    --
    Fun with Anagarams! LADS HOST, SHALT DOS. HAS DOLTS. AD SLOTHS, HATS SOLD. ASS HO, LTD.
    1. Re:And they say... by Maritz · · Score: 1

      And yet my puny electromagnetic powered muscles can overcome the mighty gravity of Earth by picking up a lemon, and even then I'm not even that short of breath. A few minutes and I'm ready to go again. Have that, gravity.

      Still, maybe it only *seems* weak because it's leaking out of our 3d brane world into higher dimensional space. ;)

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  54. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Many of the oldbies are not coming back

    True, some have died, RIP

    But those who are still not-yet-dead, many are not coming back to Slashdot due to the shitty "First Post" and the racist-ranting that are overpowering all meaningful discussions

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  55. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by flyneye · · Score: 1

    Don't put your life in the hand of a rock and roll band, you'll throw it all away. -- Oasis , Don't Look Back in Anger
    Even Huey sings country now.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  56. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Union, first posts YOU, Computers cure PCFIX , Niggers Love You and You moderate Slashdot.

  57. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by flyneye · · Score: 1

    Dammit, I had +1 laying around here some-damn-where, Someone toss this guy one more for +5 Insightful.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  58. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by bronney · · Score: 1

    The achievement are "psych profile tags" for webdev to quickly categorize us for sale to targetted-ad agencies. Thanks for playing.

  59. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by flyneye · · Score: 2

    Not to interrupt yer moral soapbox special feelings or anything, but my slider to the right says I'm a third down the page and none of you sister boys has said a damn thing pertaining to black holes, galactic feces being flung about, Lawyers, NASA or nothing.

    So with that outa the way, I'll introduce a recentish occurence, http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/?IDNumber=PIA13455. I figure if you can venture a ratio of black holes to stars you can figure odds of being affected by one coming our way.

    No fear, have a beer. Don't let my low number fool ya baby, No Viagra needed here.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  60. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by flyneye · · Score: 2

    I can remember worse than this. You gotta figure the number of usual probable participants occupied with "Venus Transit" events, parties and swap meets.

    Relax, beer is good, they'll be back.

    --
    *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
  61. Over Eating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps those bad boys just ate everything in their region. That would leave them lonely and short of a meal.

  62. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by catmistake · · Score: 1

    the object of the game is to gain enough karma points that you can troll at will with impunity

    I've never been good at games, but I was lucky enough to somehow eternally have excellent karma, regardless of the mod points I have or haven't been awarded. I must say, it is awesome. Though I try not to abuse the privilege, I was recently just awarded my first +3 Troll... didn't last too long, but it felt great. Anyway, welcome to my world.

  63. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by catmistake · · Score: 1

    Honest Question here - do you really believe that the best way to foster free and open discussion is to severely limit the people that can participate?

    Well, that is the idea behind representational democracy, and I happen to think it works... uh... well enough. Do you honestly believe that true ideal democracy, Classical-style, is a viable alternative? We have the technology today to actually make it happen even in a society as large as the United States, giving every citizen the ability to have one vote on any consideration on the floor. While a nice idea... I'm not sure it would really work out... I think it would suffer the same deficits that representation democracy suffers from, only on a massive scale, and the rights violations and slipups would also in turn be massive SNAFUs.

  64. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh man that was good.

  65. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Lotana · · Score: 4, Funny

    It was actually shortly after I joined that I started noticing the downward spiral in comments.

    So it was YOU?!

  66. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Lotana · · Score: 2

    There have been too many "First posts" and racist rantings

    Honest question: Were you reading Slashdot during the GNAA days?

    Honestly, the signal to noise ratio is very good. Trouble is that the signal is no longer tech, but politics. Ever since coverage of 9/11 the community visibly changed. YRO is where all the views are, with tech-oriented articles hardly gets any comments.

  67. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Honest Question here - do you really believe that the best way to foster free and open discussion is to severely limit the people that can participate?

    Either you are replying to the wrong person completely, or the answer is an obvious NO.

    Nocturnal Deviant claimed we should censor anyone with an ID over a million.

    gmhowell pointed out that if we go with that line of reasoning, that arbitrary number can easily be modified to anything, especially an anything that includes the very person suggesting the censoring.

    If you are against censoring as as your post claims, then why are you also so against gmhowell for pointing out the fact censoring is a slippery slope to support and can easily backfire against the very people trying to censor others?

    Once you open that can of worms, you can never assure some of those worms don't jump in your own mouth.

    So if you truly are against censorship as your post claims, why are you jumping down the back of the very person pointing out how bad censorship is?

    Does that mean you in fact agree with the original poster gmhowell replied to, and in fact DO support censorship (as long as you aren't included in the list to be censored of course)?
    I have to ask because your words say one thing, and your actions say the exact opposite.

  68. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm actually surprised that this news post hasn't already sparked more of the racist comments that have shown up here lately.

    Is you GAY? Is you a BLACK HOLE? If so, you be eligible to join the GBHAA!

    There's nothing "lately" about racist /. posts; only you 7-digit UIDs who weren't around for the GNAA's heyday think so.

  69. Yes they do exist! by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    .. You should meet my ex!

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  70. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *holds up an old, worn out sign*

    ===>>> PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

  71. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Inda · · Score: 1

    The whole moderation system has been a game since day one. Easily gamed, if you're into that sort of thing.

    Post first and post often.

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  72. Issues by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have issue with the indication that they are "flung" from their galaxy.

    The fact that it is more massive than any of the stars would indicate that it would not be flung out by something else other than a even more massive black hole, and that is very unlikely. However, if by chance it were to be flung out of it's galaxy, is there any doubt that it would rip other star systems away from that galaxy as well?

    And if black holes can be flung out of the galaxy, then with the much lower mass and higher quantity, I would expect to see large numbers of intergalactic solar systems.

    In the case of a lone black hole, I think it's more likely to form by simply consuming everything in a galaxy. Once everything is consumed, the blackhole simply roams in the dark.

    1. Re:Issues by Maritz · · Score: 1

      And if black holes can be flung out of the galaxy, then with the much lower mass and higher quantity, I would expect to see large numbers of intergalactic solar systems.

      Why large numbers? If it's a rare event, then bingo, that's why you don't see large numbers. Besides, intergalactic stars would probably be very difficult to see. (too dim and distant)

      In the case of a lone black hole, I think it's more likely to form by simply consuming everything in a galaxy. Once everything is consumed, the blackhole simply roams in the dark.

      There's no reason why it would consume everything in the galaxy. Being a black hole doesn't mean it's going to hoover everything up. Our galaxy's central black hole is estimated around 2-3 million solar masses. The galaxy as a whole is probably 3-4 trillion solar masses. It's not going to suck everything up.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  73. Armagedon - The Sequel by earlyhike · · Score: 1

    Gee, how is Bruce Willis going to save us from this new peril?

    1. Re:Armagedon - The Sequel by Maritz · · Score: 1

      By turning it down, one would hope.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
  74. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

    so explain the ads-disabled checkbox, available only to those with an account... if you're referring to targeted ads by cookie or IP, there are ways around that too, which slashdot users are more likely to be aware.

    --
    insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
  75. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by Eponymous+Hero · · Score: 1

    yep, in my experiments with slashdot karma i first tried to get as low a karma rating as possible, and found it very easy to accumulate more troll points. there was an inertia to it. then i switched direction. as i got my karma rating up, and continued with various written acts of immaturity, i found those willing to give me troll points harder to find, and even had others with good karma agree with me. social psychology, ain't it grand?

    --
    insensitive clod overlords obligatory xkcd car analogy russian reversals whoosh pedant fanbois ftfy in 3...2...1..PROFIT
  76. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    Actually, it's several games. The winners are listed here.

  77. Re:You have to ask? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was no mention of Obama. You are the one who associated him with the monstrous national debt.

  78. Re:YES! And I can prove it... by mcgrew · · Score: 2

    Post first and post often.

    I've found that often, no matter how insightful or thought-provoking an FP is, some dufus will mod it "offtopic," "troll," or (hilariously) "redundant." I try to avoid first posts, just because if the first two mods are the "FP always modded down" type, nobody is likely to even see it. What's the point of making a comment if you're going to be at -1?