Slashdot Mirror
The Mystery of the Naked Black Hole (sciencemag.org)
sciencehabit writes: Most, if not all, galaxies have supermassive black holes at their centers surrounded by dense clouds of stars. Now, researchers have found one that seems to have lost almost its entire entourage. The team, which reported its find at the annual meeting of the American Astronomical Society, says it doesn't know what stripped the stars away. But it has put forward a tantalizing possibility: The object could be an extremely rare medium-sized black hole, which theorists have predicted but observers have never seen.
Oh, what mysteries it contains.
The object could be a black hole, which theorists have predicted but observers have never seen.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
The black hole lost its entire entourage because it ran out of money. All that white dust for non-stop parties don't come cheap.
Since I'm not NdGT, I'd have to ask:
How do we know the black hole itself didn't strip the stars away? That's kinda what they do, isn't it?
Man, that title sounds like a cross between a Nancy Drew book and some really bad porn.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
A "naked singularity" is usually what people call a black hole without an event horizon, an object that's pretty important in theoretical physics. Calling something a "naked black hole" is kind of confusing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Occasionally we have seen stars that have been ejected from their galaxies. This can happen during galaxy mergers.
How do we not know that this is just a massive star that turned into a black hole after it got ejected from its original galaxy? After all massive stars do not last that long because of their size.
That would make a good porn title.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Maybe it eated dem all, becuz dey has a flavor?
Maybe the answer is that there weren't many stars there to start out with. Why assume they have been "stripped" away? We barely know anything about black holes. Since they are so far away we can never get close enough to them to study them effectively. We can only guess. This will be a mystery forever.
Naked Black Hole? I think we all know that's a goatse link.
For heaven's sake! Don't click!
They went full SJW. And SJW gonna SJW.
I read the headline, and got very excited thinking that someone had found a naked singularity, it should have been re-worded to say, The Mystery of the Black Hole with Middle aged spread or something. Finding a intermediate sized Black hole is interesting, but not quite as exciting as a naked singularity would have been. To be fair to /. Sciencemag came up with the title, not the editors!
Else we would have been fried by radiation if it wasnt. We know we have a BH or a modest size from fast moving stars near it.
The one thing I have realized about black holes in my studies has been there are an infinite variety of them, and their variety mirrors the way we look at the world.
For instance, there are two dimensional black holes, you see these on accretion disks. There are three dimensional ones. There are n-dimensional ones. There are black holes which don't absorb light and do absorb sound, and vice versa. There are black holes which are digital, some that are analog.
The list goes on.
Need proof?
That's your job.
"The object could be an extremely rare medium-sized black hole",
I like my black holes extra medium please.....
Extremely rare medium sized black holes... are those a bit like extremely rare medium sized Americans?
It is no naked, there are some gas, that why you can see it en X-rays, but there are less stars. So, its not the black hole, its is something unsual in the stellar dynamics in the surroundings.
That's right out at the edge of the central bulge (if the galaxy is the same size as the Milky Way.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"