Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Feb 8, 2017 - 11:36 AM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

Some stars can be the size of a planet, others can be more than 1400 times bigger than the Sun. Different types of stars are shown to scale in this European Southern Observatory visualization.


Click on link to view video:

http://www.space.com/35620-how-big-can-stars-get-awesome-visualization-shows-scale.html

 
 Posted:   Feb 8, 2017 - 11:59 AM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

Betelgeuse, Betelgeuse, Betelgeuse . . .

Still here!

Seriously, will the largest black hole be larger than the largest star?

 
 Posted:   Feb 8, 2017 - 3:14 PM   
 By:   Metryq   (Member)

Seriously, will the largest black hole be larger than the largest star?

I don't know. How big is a mathematical figment of the imagination? Black holes are imagined to have an "event horizon," which is simply that speed of light threshold. A "singularity" has no size at all. And I'm guessing that a "super-massive black hole" would continue to have no size. Remember that mass is not the same as volume. As for an SMBH, the radius of its event horizon should be no different than any other black hole. Only the gradient would be steeper. Then again, if the collapsed matter has allegedly fallen out of our universe, why should there be any gravitational effect left behind at all?

 
 Posted:   Feb 8, 2017 - 4:43 PM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

How big is a mathematical figment of the imagination?

Yeah, that mathematical figment of the imagination got us to the Moon and Mars. Among many other places in the solar system.

 
 Posted:   Feb 9, 2017 - 8:09 AM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

We know there must be a limit to star size because physics decrees there is a segregation rule pertaining to star formation that limits their volume to be somewhat less than galaxy sized. You could have a condensed galactic core/centre where the largest stars might be found, however, that is also where SMBHs are going to be located. My guess is that at this stage of evolution of our universe, if black holes exist, they should have had the time to coalesce with baryonic matter and accumulate in size. So I think the heaviest objects by mass could very well be black holes unless dark matter and dark energy are clarified.

It is a very curious state of affairs. Stars shine and radiate via internal fusion, while their alter selves are dark and pull in anything within range. The only radiation they give out is externally, in the hot accretion disk, should there be one. Even if black holes do not consume everything, the universe will darken anyway with the coming heat death. I take it that virtual particles will still pop in and out of existence, so that Hawking radiation can occur. In this manner, way, way into the future, the black holes themselves will evaporate. An then, what are we left with?

Then again, if the collapsed matter has allegedly fallen out of our universe, why should there be any gravitational effect left behind at all?

That one hurts! wink A residual property left there by virtue of the fact matter can neither be created nor destroyed? It is a form of information testifying that a star was once there on this side of existence. It is a curiosity that some of the light emanating from a star will disappear into the light cone of some other causally connected black hole. Your question really does cause creaking when you think what happens to the personal experience of a photon, unaware of time in or out of a black hole?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vNaEBbFbvcY

 
 Posted:   Feb 13, 2017 - 12:22 PM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

Support your local black hole:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJw3Kst6zHA

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.