Astronomy / Space Space is illogical
- Thread starter Nic727
- Start date
Its not the black hole that creates the light, bit it's accretion disc of super heated gas and sometimes from gamma ray bursts
White holes are 70s scifi nonsense
Also Kevin "Hercules" Sorbo survived 300 years near a black hole - beat that.
White holes are 70s scifi nonsense
Also Kevin "Hercules" Sorbo survived 300 years near a black hole - beat that.
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
Moving this to the Astronomy section.
I don't know, the OP mentioned White Holes, I think we should move this to the "Outdated Astronomy"-section. It should fit in pretty well with posts about dinosaurs in the jungles of Venus.
Actually ED is probably the game with the most accurate and realistic portrayal of space ever so far (SpaceEngine is better at that but it is not a game).
No. The accretion disc is what emits the light, and accretion discs are (not yet?) modelled in the game. What you see in the game is not even the black hole itself, but the event horizon, a virtual sphere around the black hole that marks the distance at which the escape velocity equals the speed of light.
Which is exactly what the game has. Search for "Sagittarius A*" in the galaxy map.
Yes this is a real hypothesis, but it is not proven, plus any matter falling into the black hole gets torn apart long before even touching the actual black hole. If black holes are the entrances to wormholes, the only thing you may be able to ever send through is radio signals, and even then it is questionable whether they would come out at the other end in some decipherable form.
Yes, and how exactly should this time dilation be simulated in multiplayer? This is simply not feasable for the game and therefore consciously omitted.
Maybe too complicated for you.
Oh my goodness.. could you imagine if they managed to figure out how to do that? Head towards the Horizon and you watch a players ship just .. stop.. but on their end, they're still moving. Man that would look insane.
To be clear, light (electromagnetic radiation) is not what laymen would consider matter - it's not composed of baryons. Photons are massless particles (which is how they travel at the speed of light - particles with mass cannot) which transmit the electromagnetic force. Gravity affects light because photons travel in straight lines through spacetime. Mass (and hence gravity) deforms spacetime, so a straight line through spacetime can actually be bent. This is how Einstein rings (gravitational lenses) work.
Estimates of the mass of Sagittarius A* put it between 2.2 and 4.5 million solar masses, with its companions in the range of thousands of solar masses (Wikipedia is awesome). It's not the black holes that hold the galaxy together. It's the mutual attraction between all of the matter in the galaxy (including the dark matter) that holds it together. There is far more mass in the galaxy than just the black holes at the centre, although supermassive black holes will tend to either form at the centre of a galaxy due to that region having the highest density of matter, or drift towards the centre of attraction.
Last edited:
I don't think anything in Braben's game can move faster than the speed of light. He has the value, C... but the speed of light is instantaneous.
I'm certainly not criticising anything about the game, even acknowledging the fact that you're right when he also ignores the work of Isaac Newton. This is a game. A game needs certain concessions to make it playable. I don't think I'd enjoy a game where I'd have to spend hours matching velocity vectors before I could take a potshot with my lasers.
Last edited:
Yes .... everything moves at the cosmic speed limit (the speed of light) in space-time. Nothing faster; nothing slower. ;-) As evolved monkeys in a low speed, low force environment, there was presumably no evolutionary advantage in perceiving anything other than a shadow of the underlying reality - so we perceive space as separate from time, time as universal etc etc
Last edited:
I have said this before many times. There are explanations for the phenomena OP puts forward, some of which I know, some of which I don't. But it goes to show how mind blowing the universe we live in is.
It is like that age old argument that "in terms of physics, a bumblebee should be unable to fly". Okay, now we do know where we went wrong in calculations and have established they should be able to, but the bottom line should always be...if you are observing a bee fly, the chances are that it is indeed flying
And in the same capacity, hopefully we'll uncover more and more of the theory behind this phenomenal place we live.
I really like that line.if you are observing a bee fly, the chances are that it is indeed flying
Fair enough.
No it's not. C has a well-defined speed (the speed of light in a vacuum.)
It's 299,792.458 KM/S
Last edited:
Probably?
Apologies for any redundancy with Monkey's answers (which I totally agree with)
The accretion disk can simply be viewed as its own thing; which is formed by the black hole.
And their mothership was in orbit of the planet. It should have experienced the same time dilation as the planet itself (minus dilation caused by the planet's gravity gradient).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladder_paradox
You don't understand the words you are using. The only relationship between "theory" and "fact" is that a theory may contain or be based on facts.
You could replace the word "fact" with "observation", and the relationship may become more clear.
Observations are things you see "a rock fell". Theories are models that explain observations and predict them (when I drop another rock it will fall, and here's why)
I see the same equivocation made with "law" all the time. A law describes the observation (such as the rate of change in speed of a dropping rock) .
Fact - something we measured happening
Law - a mathematical description of what we measured
Theory - The underpinnings of how and why the thing happened.
On massive black holes, that gravity gradient at the event horizon is pretty soft. Though something like radiation may kill you; spegettification would not be a problem at the event horizon on these massive black holes.
Synchronicity is a bigger problem. Simple dilation could be done by slowing the "tic" of the game's clock.
Your statement is wrong.
I don't know... it could be fun. I enjoy KSP and Independence Wars.
Read a book like Hegemony and tell me there's no way to make that combat into a fun game.
That is the presumed method of creation for most stellar-mass black holes. There are competing hypothesis' for super-massive and intermediate black holes.
It is not. Light has no resting mass and is not composed of baryons.
You cannot illuminate anything inside an event horizon.
The accretion disk can simply be viewed as its own thing; which is formed by the black hole.
If wormholes do actually occur in reality; you still cannot move matter through them (darn Einstein).
Interstellar actually did a pretty terrible job with relativity; though they get props for being one of the few movies to acknowledge that it is a thing in the first place.
You cannot exit an event horizon... that's the definition of an event horizon.
And their mothership was in orbit of the planet. It should have experienced the same time dilation as the planet itself (minus dilation caused by the planet's gravity gradient).
It is of course far worse than that. Type isn't just faster or slower, it's also different.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladder_paradox
You don't understand the words you are using. The only relationship between "theory" and "fact" is that a theory may contain or be based on facts.
You could replace the word "fact" with "observation", and the relationship may become more clear.
Observations are things you see "a rock fell". Theories are models that explain observations and predict them (when I drop another rock it will fall, and here's why)
I see the same equivocation made with "law" all the time. A law describes the observation (such as the rate of change in speed of a dropping rock) .
Fact - something we measured happening
Law - a mathematical description of what we measured
Theory - The underpinnings of how and why the thing happened.
The most accurate map of the galaxy perhaps. It's far from the best portrayal of space (Kerbal has that beaten easily)
Touching the actual black hole may actually be nonsensical.
On massive black holes, that gravity gradient at the event horizon is pretty soft. Though something like radiation may kill you; spegettification would not be a problem at the event horizon on these massive black holes.
Synchronicity is a bigger problem. Simple dilation could be done by slowing the "tic" of the game's clock.
Light moves a 180,000 miles / second. This is described with the constant c
Your statement is wrong.
I don't know... it could be fun. I enjoy KSP and Independence Wars.
Read a book like Hegemony and tell me there's no way to make that combat into a fun game.
You may have chopped my quote a little too severely. I said that in David Braben's game, the speed of light is instantaneous.
It's why we get instantaneous communications, and although he mentions the constant, C, in the game, his spaceships don't have any problems travelling faster than that speed...
... because every speed is okay, because every speed in his game is acceptable, because it's all slower than instantaneous.
- - - - - - - -
You could well be right. It could be an interesting game, but it's not Elite. I'll have a look at Hegemony. Who's the author?
Last edited:
I can't and won't comment on Braben's outlook on the game here, but I can say that the theory the FSD is based on allows FTL travel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive
^This^
^And this^
Also, it's the accretion disc that emits light, not the black hole itself.
Also, a "white hole" has never been observed. It's a purely mathematical construct. (they may exist, but we have't found any)
I don't mind the WWII fighters in space; I just wouldn't call it "realistic" either.
https://www.amazon.com/Hegemony-Mark-Kalina-ebook/dp/B007RS2E8O/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
Never say never.
It was only 150 years or so ago that it was considered impossible to break the speed of sound and live through the experience.
My college astronomy classes of 30 years ago were prating that such phenomena as hot jupiters were impossible. (I still have my textbooks)
My personal feelings are that the "FTL is impossible" crowd will be joining the lunar landing hoaxers and the Flat Earth society in ignobility. (Probably not in my lifetime, mores the pity.)
I figure theory of relativity is correct *within its parameters*. Looking *outside* its parameters is the key to understanding black holes, FTL, and suchlike.
I'm thinking Travis Taylor as (very) opposed to scientology.
It was only 150 years or so ago that it was considered impossible to break the speed of sound and live through the experience.
My college astronomy classes of 30 years ago were prating that such phenomena as hot jupiters were impossible. (I still have my textbooks)
My personal feelings are that the "FTL is impossible" crowd will be joining the lunar landing hoaxers and the Flat Earth society in ignobility. (Probably not in my lifetime, mores the pity.)
I figure theory of relativity is correct *within its parameters*. Looking *outside* its parameters is the key to understanding black holes, FTL, and suchlike.
I'm thinking Travis Taylor as (very) opposed to scientology.