black holes

[askavir]

No totally wrong I'm afraid, it has no extra gravity, things could orbit exactly as before if anything it has less gravity and things would spin out

No.

As black holes "swallow" other celestial bodies they increase in mass. And their gravity increases with mass. With the increase in mass, they might pickup other celestial bodies which might be "in range" of its increased gravity towards them and rinse repeat. That how supermassive / intermediate black holes are formed, many were already discovered which make Sag A look like a peanut in comparison. Supermassive black holes have such gargantuan mass (and with it, gravity) that they are the centers or many galaxies and basically hold them in place, as these whole galaxies orbit around them (including ours).

If a black hole mass is not enough / no other celestial bodies are in range of its gravitational pull, they stop growing.

Anyway, you sure as hell would not be able to waltz around them freely at a few tenths of kilometers away like we can on this game.

 

[Varrag]

The accretion discs on close binary systems or those in gas/dust fields however should be unbearably hot and some of the brightest and dangerous objects out there, but without them visible it'd be harsh to kill folk for approaching from a wrong angle. I really hope they come soon - would be a vastly more exciting and visually impressive feature to add than discolasers. Imagine the marketing screenshots! (hint hint) Spinning/feeding neutron stars firing jets of instadeath out of their poles would be great too pls while we're at it - I was very glad to see they lensed space a bit at least.

Space Engine 0.9.74. beta build has just been updated with -among other things- feeding black holes; this in video below is Sag A* (skip to ~1:45). There is still work to be done, but it's certainly looking great. Now, as you said, approaching something like this would be indeed extremely dangerous. I hope that FDEV can make something like this too.

[video=youtube;SYE36uvQdSQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYE36uvQdSQ[/video]

 

[frostypaw]

No.

As black holes "swallow" other celestial bodies they increase in mass. And their gravity increases with mass. With the increase in mass, they might pickup other celestial bodies which might be "in range" of its increased gravity towards them and rinse repeat. That how supermassive / intermediate black holes are formed, many were already discovered which make Sag A look like a peanut in comparison. Supermassive black holes have such gargantuan mass (and with it, gravity) that they are the centers or many galaxies and basically hold them in place, as these whole galaxies orbit around them (including ours).

If a black hole mass is not enough / no other celestial bodies are in range of its gravitational pull, they stop growing.

They don't all manage to swallow other celestial bodies though. Ours is current not feeding - the orbits of the stars around it are fairly stable

other galaxies central black holes Are feeding and we see them as quasars

remember the black hole is a sun that has exploded - it cannot have more mass and hence more gravitational pull than the sun it replaced. it doesn't suddenly increase in mass and start pulling in other stars from light years away. The formation of SMBs and even the intermediates is still the subject of much discussion

this here's an image of a gas cloud they hoped would plummet into Sag A* so they could watch it feed, but it missed and will take some time to come back around if it hasn't been stretched into nothingness by then. the other stars shown are in fairly stable orbits and will remain that way for a long time

Space Engine is looking cracking, hope FDev have their eye on that

 

[SkipRat]

Black holes should be used to remove 99% of this forum, so never to return.

 

[W4rSkuLL]

Playing with a black hole, I remember doing that with a girl She liked it

 

[tiger61378]

I recently saw my first black hole (and neutron star, both orbiting an O class....actually, I think that the one referenced earlier in this thread was the one I was at). Very impressive...er, well, not really. I had a hell of a time even seeing it because it was so tiny, so there was very little lensing effect. The neutron star had a bit better effect at least. I'm currently making my 3rd attempt at Sag A* (first one was derailed by the Horizons announcement, second by a bit of stupidity in a planetary ring that led to a 9kly jump home), so this time around, provided I don't do anything stupid, I should get to see the really impressive ones in the core.

 

[askavir]

They don't all manage to swallow other celestial bodies though. Ours is current not feeding - the orbits of the stars around it are fairly stable

other galaxies central black holes Are feeding and we see them as quasars

True, basically we agree.

remember the black hole is a sun that has exploded - it cannot have more mass and hence more gravitational pull than the sun it replaced. it doesn't suddenly increase in mass and start pulling in other stars from light years away. The formation of SMBs and even the intermediates is still the subject of much discussion

Don't forget than before a sun explodes, it expands immensely and if other celestial bodias are caught in its growing radius, they are "swallowed". Our sun is expected to grow beyond the orbit of Mars before exploding. The sun does not have enough mass to become a black hole. But stars who do, have enormous mass, they grow extremely large before exploding (or collapsing). Any matter (from planets, moons, gas, even other stars if sufficiently close) caught in the growing radius/gravity of the expanding star will become part of it and add to its mass. But yes, a formed black hole cannot have more mass than the total mass of the expanded star prior to its explosion. And also the black hole does not create mass after forming, its mass will only increase if other matter is close enough to be caught in its gravity.

Anyway my main point is that if feels odd (to say the least) that in the game we can fly rings around black holes at only a few tenths of kilometers from it..

this here's an image of a gas cloud they hoped would plummet into Sag A* so they could watch it feed, but it missed and will take some time to come back around if it hasn't been stretched into nothingness by then. the other stars shown are in fairly stable orbits and will remain that way for a long time
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/12/14/article-0-0F2D2DFE00000578-336_634x357.jpg

Space Engine is looking cracking, hope FDev have their eye on that

In the formation of stellar objects everything takes millions of years, that gas cloud might spin around Sag A a long, long time before eventually getting "caught" (if it does). Cool pic!

 

[[DOOK] Droogie]

They don't pulse. The reason they appear to and some are pulsars is as they spin they fire most of the radiation generated out in jets from their poles but these are rarely neat polar rotations so it flashes over us like a lighthouse and we call them pulsars. There are others we see side on that just sit there being boring

No totally wrong I'm afraid, it has no extra gravity, things could orbit exactly as before if anything it has less gravity and things would spin out


Have a look up how large it actually is, there's plenty of room - all this stuff surprised the hell out of me, it's well worth a read

The gravitational effects of orbiting a black hole would be far different than a star. Again, Interstellar got that part right. It was wreaking havoc on that planet.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Stars are in stable orbit around Sag A, yes. Light years away. Not a matter of just light seconds.

 

[frostypaw]

The gravitational effects of orbiting a black hole would be far different than a star. Again, Interstellar got that part right. It was wreaking havoc on that planet.

It was rather close lol

But further out rather than me explain to you again why don't you explain to me why you think one mass of size M has different levels of gravity depending on whether it's a star or a blackhole at the same distance?

 

[[DOOK] Droogie]

It was rather close lol

But further out rather than me explain to you again why don't you explain to me why you think one mass of size M has different levels of gravity depending on whether it's a star or a blackhole at the same distance?

Talking about a supermassive black hole here. You can get close to Sag A with no ill effects other than heat damage in super cruise. It's one of the few that cause that. The Great Annihilator is a tame puppy, and should be one of the most dangerous spots in the galaxy.

Show me another star with the mass of Sag A. It has about 4 million times the mass of the sun. You can get awfully close to it. Gargantua in Interstellar was another supermassive black hole. It's gravitational effects stretch far, and it warps the space around it dramatically, even outside of the event horizon.

Super Cruise doesn't really care about it is all I'm saying. It's just another system.

 

[frostypaw]

Oh i thought we agreed on all that pages back lol

Interstellar was still a film, got a bit carried away. A black hole will feed on what it can then it ends up stuck with the rest of it's surrounds just made of steady orbits and crossing their fingers some interaction sends something more in - it's their hungry fate. Ours should be pretty peaceful at the moment - we can only detect it's there by the orbits currently. Up close I'd imagine there's still a lot more drama but who knows - maybe we explorers will get some love in the next newsletter (lol )

 

[[DOOK] Droogie]

Oh i thought we agreed on all that pages back lol

Interstellar was still a film, got a bit carried away. A black hole will feed on what it can then it ends up stuck with the rest of it's surrounds just made of steady orbits and crossing their fingers some interaction sends something more in - it's their hungry fate. Ours should be pretty peaceful at the moment - we can only detect it's there by the orbits currently. Up close I'd imagine there's still a lot more drama but who knows - maybe we explorers will get some love in the next newsletter (lol )

I'm just saying that Sag A B is too close to Sag A to be in stable orbit It should be dinner. It's a product of procedural generation. Just like there are black holes 2ls from stars in this game, and everything is just fine. It's PG at work.

 

[Zarlok]

My first visit to a black hole was just the other side of the Horsehead Nebula. It was only 6ls from its parent star which was blue hot. I was disappointed that the blackhole wasnt sucking gas off its parent. I went for a closer look and nearly got flipped into the star. Apart from my over curiosity nothing else happened. I have travel led within 500km of one out near the California Neb last week with no ill effects. Due to the extreme gravitation tide my ship should have started to stretch like a piece of spaghetti with the front of the ship being torn apart more than the rear. No such thing of course. They are still most intriguing and when out in an area I always have a look to see if I can find one.

 

[frostypaw]

The lack of effect is excused by frameshift - it's a warp bubble type drive so you're not entirely part of the local galaxy when in it and such effects are minimised.... the theory holds in scifiness, but getting close enough should drop you out and tear your ship apart for sure at the least

 

[[DOOK] Droogie]

The lack of effect is excused by frameshift - it's a warp bubble type drive so you're not entirely part of the local galaxy when in it and such effects are minimised.... the theory holds in scifiness, but getting close enough should drop you out and tear your ship apart for sure at the least

There's no effect in real space, either.