Blackholes Don't Tilt

Blackholes spin slower with time. Electrons can't spin slower than "C"
When a blackhole stops spinning it will explode. Without its feature of
spin there is no electron. (that's the way of reality) Bert

In message , BenignVanilla
writes

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
BV What happens when a BH takes in every thing around it? It still has
the micro waves of space(endless supply),and as its mass density goes up
it gets colder. Bert


Surely a BH gobbling up a bunch of stars will have some change as all the
stars in the area are gobbled, and there is nothing left by the background
xrays? Does it slow down? Does it begin to lose gravity?

I'd guess it will just sit there when the area is empty, forming the
sort of cold spot Bert hopes to see. Trouble is, the centre of a galaxy
is a very crowded place, and stars are probably being perturbed and
changing their orbits all the time. Eventually, one will pass close
enough for a collision and you'll get another outburst of energy and
matter that's moving too fast to be pulled in. And the BH is always
getting bigger. Unlike the tiny ones that are theorised it doesn't
produce much Hawking radiation (that's why it's so cold)
--
"Roads in space for rockets to travel....four-dimensional roads, curving with
relativity"
Mail to jsilverlight AT merseia.fsnet.co.uk is welcome.
Or visit Jonathan's Space Site http://www.merseia.fsnet.co.uk

BV The blackhole's great mass density gives it a great gravity
force,however gravity weakens inversely the square of the distance
between objects. Stars orbiting a blackhole have angular motion,and like
the earth orbiting the sun can have a stable orbit. Stars that have
fallen into a BH give the BH at the core a mass of millions suns . I
don't have any idea how many stars make up our galaxy bulge(its real
bright.) We have to keep in mind that the BH does not add any light to
the bulge,it just helps to create it. Bert

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
BV The blackhole's great mass density gives it a great gravity
force,however gravity weakens inversely the square of the distance
between objects. Stars orbiting a blackhole have angular motion,and like
the earth orbiting the sun can have a stable orbit. Stars that have
fallen into a BH give the BH at the core a mass of millions suns . I
don't have any idea how many stars make up our galaxy bulge(its real
bright.) We have to keep in mind that the BH does not add any light to
the bulge,it just helps to create it. Bert


I understand what a BH is. I am just wondering what happens to one, once it
is no longer able to feed.

BV.

BV Space has energy,and a blackhole all by itself might not be as
massive as a blackhole at the core of galaxies,but the micro waves
intrinsic to all of space can add to its mass. A good theory on
blackholes could go like this. "blackholes transform energy waves into
particles" (mass) We know there are vast areas of space that are empty.
Astronomers call them "space voids" This could be a cluster,or strings
of blackholes. A theory could have this idea"Blackholes made space
clumpy" If we someday find space voids colder than the space around
them that also could be telling us about loner blackholes. BV there
has to be billions of blackholes that are not absorbing a star that got
to close. Blackholes were formed at the big bang. Blackholes were
created by the first stars(supernova). Blackholes have to be very long
lasting(very stable) I can't visualize and inner structure motion.
Bert

"BenignVanilla" wrote in message
...


Bert, I understand all that. We have already discussed that. Maybe I need
to
re-phrased my question. When a BH is sitting around gobbling up stars, it
is
adding massive amounts of mass to itself. When the stars are all gobbled
up,
and there are just small snacks, the x-rays, to gobble, how does this
affect
the BH? Can a BH fizzle out? If it's mass stays nearly the same, can it
eventually just cave in on itself? Starve?


A large, hence cold, black hole can't help but keep
feeding on background radiation. Even the 2.7K
CMBR is enough to continue to add mass to the BH,
albeit very slowly.

Eventually, if the universe heads towards a heat-death
and the CMBR drops below the temperature of the BH,
then the BH will begin to evaporate. The evaporation
process would take many, many, many, (well, you get
the picture), trillions of years.

BV Rodger Penrose has a singularity in the core of every blackhole.
What you are really asking does a very massive blackhole lets say a mass
of 100,billion suns,Have a credical mass? I say yes(based on nothing)but
I like continuing mini bangs created by an exploding blackhole to create
a mini universe. BV it kind of makes sense to me to have very large
mass blackholes(like those in galatic cores) fuse together(collide)
because nature likes to do things using pairs. This could almost
instantly create the credical mass. It could be happening as I type ,and
our gamma ray detectors pick up their explosion every day. We might say
some day " Here comes another universe " Bert

Hi Scott What you posted is a good theory on early blackholes that
came out of the big bang. The reason is things were closer
together(more dense),and blackholes could have gobbled up mass that was
well within its gravity field,and this made its gravity stronger.
Could we theorize Scott that these early massive blackholes,are what we
see as the core(hub) of galaxies? If I was a blackhole I would love to
be in that bright bulge of our galaxy. Fact is I can't think of a better
place in all the rest of the universe. Bert

Mason It is our fault for not thinking harder. I have a very
good theory why galaxy's created 100 billion stars in set areas of
space. Bert

"BenignVanilla" wrote...
in message ...

"Painius" wrote in message
...

Not so mysterious, BV... here on Earth, as on any mass, "down"
would be in the direction of the flow of gravity. And "up" is the
opposite direction.

And on an even *more* arbitrary note, astronomers like to view
the Solar System as having a "top" and "bottom." If viewed with
the planets revolving around the Sun in a counter-clockwise
direction, we are viewing the "tops" of the planets (in most cases)
and their North poles. So in this case, if one looks out into the
cosmos from, say, Antarctica, then one is looking "down."
snip

So where would the arbitrary point for BH's be set?

BV.

Up and down having already been standardized as previously
noted... if you are looking at a BH from a point along its spin
axis, and if it is spinning ccw, then you are looking at the top
of the BH.

And this makes me wonder what the Universe looks like from
*inside* a BH? How do the stars appear? Is their light maybe
distorted by the tremendous BH gravity field? Is starlight bent
in weird and beautiful ways?

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Asimov! where have you gone?
Your written word goes on and on,
All becomes so clear to see
In Asimov's Astronomy!

Paine Ellsworth