Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NASA Uncovers Millions of New Black Holes

Posted by Soulskill on from the enough-for-everybody-so-please-share dept.

coondoggie writes "NASA today said its Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer satellite has unearthed a 'bonanza of new-found supermassive black holes and extreme galaxies called hot DOGs, or dust-obscured galaxies.' NASA said the latest discoveries help astronomers better understand how galaxies and the behemoth black holes at their centers grow and evolve together." The news was released in a press conference, and io9 has a comprehensive write-up about everything that was covered, including the Q&A session. Pretty pictures here.

20 of 77 comments (clear)

  1. "NASA Uncovers Millions of New Black Holes" by msauve · · Score: 5, Funny

    Quick, cover them back up, before they cool off!

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  2. Black holes by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Funny

    So what they're saying is... they've found teenagers.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  3. I know what you're thinking.. by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 5, Funny

    I know what you're thinking. You're thinking, 'are there a million black holes waiting to hoover up all sentient life from the universe or are there 100 million black holes waiting to hoover up all sentient life from the universe? ' Well to tell you the truth, in all the chaos I myself can't remember how many black holes I made. So let me ask you, punk. Do you feel lucky ?

    1. Re:I know what you're thinking.. by Antipater · · Score: 2

      The word "hoover" just sounds weird in Eastwood's voice.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    2. Re:I know what you're thinking.. by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      a hundred million black holes in the universe? Given that there are 170 billion galaxies, that's a pretty small number of black holes.

    3. Re:I know what you're thinking.. by hansraj · · Score: 4, Informative

      A black hole would dissipate via Hawking radiation only if it doesn't absorb more energy than it emits. Large blackholes absorb more energy (cosmic background radiation) than they would emit and hence will not necessarily dissipate. From wikipedia:

      "A black hole of one solar mass has a temperature of only 60 nanokelvins; in fact, such a black hole would absorb far more cosmic microwave background radiation than it emits. A black hole of 4.5 × 1022 kg (about the mass of the Moon) would be in equilibrium at 2.7 kelvin, absorbing as much radiation as it emits. Yet smaller primordial black holes would emit more than they absorb, and thereby lose mass."

    4. Re:I know what you're thinking.. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Informative

      In the long term -- "long" that makes the current age of the universe look like an eye-blink and protons seem unstable -- the CMB will be redshifted away until even supermassive black holes begin losing mass.

      "This, too, shall pass."

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  4. So how does this relate to the "missing matter" by Marrow · · Score: 2

    Black holes are heavy right?

  5. New? by rossdee · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll bet these have been around longer than we have

  6. Missing mass of the universe? by arthurh3535 · · Score: 2

    It sounds like they just found a lot of 'missing mass' here? How does it jibe for balancing things without using 'dark matter/energy'?

    --
    No! It's a *SIG*. Keep the Special Interest Groups away! (Con joke!)
    1. Re:Missing mass of the universe? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Informative

      How does it jibe for balancing things without using 'dark matter/energy'?

      Not well.

      These SMBHs are in the centers of galaxies, and piling up more mass at the center of a galaxy doesn't explain the problem of flat galactic rotation curves. The mass needs to be in and surrounding the galaxy, which is why the non-exotic DM theory is called "MACHOs" as in MAssive Compact Halo Objects -- because it'd have to be in the halo.

      It's even worse for Dark Energy, since extra mass would actually have the opposite effect that DE has, pushing the universe closer to the Big Crunch scenario. It certainly would not explain accelerating expansion.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:Missing mass of the universe? by Smauler · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It doesn't. Basically the reasoning for dark matter is this :

      Under Newtonian or Einsteinian physics, galaxies should rotate a lot slower on the outside, and quicker in the middle than than they actually do (a little like our solar system behaves). No one can explain why they do not, satisfactorily yet.

      Dark matter is an explanation which proposes that there is undetectable matter causing the gravity interference which does explain the mechanics of galactic movements. Trouble is, we haven't got a hold of dark matter yet, so although it's an explanation, it's not concrete by any means. If you want a definite explanation, you're probably going to have to go to your priest.

      Black holes don't fit. There aren't that many black holes, and despite the name, they are observable. If there were enough black holes to cause galaxies to rotate like they do, we'd have seen them already.

  7. Found it! by mill3d · · Score: 2

    That dark matter isn't so dark anymore in the IR range apparently.

    --
    Nothing is enough for whom enough is too little - Confucius
  8. Millions of black holes ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... nothing to see here, please move along!

  9. Holly knows why it took so long to find them... by QilessQi · · Score: 2

    "The thing about a black hole - it's main distinguishing feature - is it's black. And the thing about space, the color of space, your basic space color - is it's black. So how are you supposed to see them?"

    --
    Koans and fables for the software engineer
    1. Re:Holly knows why it took so long to find them... by garyebickford · · Score: 3, Funny

      Look during the day, when there's more light to see by.

      --
      It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
    2. Re:Holly knows why it took so long to find them... by drkim · · Score: 3, Informative

      They can be found in a number of ways...

      They give off something called Bekenstein-Hawking radiation because they are sucking up half of spontaneously generated particle pairs - leaving the other half (that would normally disappear back into the sucked up particle) to spray out into space.

      They can be 'seen' by the gravitational lensing they produce when you try to look at the background behind them. (And most of space isn't black, it's full of bright objects and lots of microwave radiation.)

      ...and, of course, their presence can be measured by looking for their strong gravitational pull on instruments and objects around them.

  10. Great! by excelsior_gr · · Score: 2

    Maybe now they can find all my missing socks.

    1. Re:Great! by VortexCortex · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hence why Gnome's logo is a bare foot...

  11. but enough about their budget... by swschrad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    find any new ones in space?

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?