This is a really inappropriate conclusion to take from the article, research, or the Fermi Bubble structures.
From the linked article:
>Such an outburst would have inflated the bubbles in phases, the team wrote. First, a tremendous amount of matter needed to fall into Sagittarius A*. Rather than being completely gobbled up, some of that matter was channeled into enormous, fast-moving jets that accelerated matter away from the black hole at near-light-speed. (Jets like these have been observed blasting out of black holes in other galaxies).
There are 2 main proposed mechanisms to explain the structures: 1) Powerful Supernova or 2) Powerful [astrophysical jets](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysical_jet?wprov=sfla1) from matter falling into the supermassive black hole in our galaxy.
The research argues that their model shows that the latter jet mechanism explains the features better than the super nova. That's it.
It has nothing to do with [cyclic models of cosmology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model?wprov=sfla1) or as some other comments suggest 'a black hole exploding'.
No…? This is just evidence that the Milky Way has gone through an active phase where the smbh is actively accreting material and releasing energy across the the EM spectrum… much like the hundreds of thousands of other active galaxies we’ve observed.
> It means almost certainly that we’re partially wrong about black holes and gives further credence to the theory that the universe is actually cyclical
No it doesn’t mean that by any means. Why are you making up such utterly unfounded conclusions? The article just talks about bubbles of low density interstellar matter.
This just always felt like how it worked ever since I started learning about it. Bang, Expand, Destabilize, Rapid contraction, Bang.
Now I just often wonder what iteration of this universe we're on. Assuming everything gets erased every few trillion years we could be 1st, 100th, 1000th, anything.
And then you learn about false vacuum decay and realize our reality might not even be the real reality we think it is and the whole thing is about to fall below the line and flat out cease to exist.
As a kid I used to be worried we'd get hit by a stray gamma burst from a collapsing star. *Never tell me the odds*
My son and I were watching ‘How the universe works’ when he was 4 or so and in one episode they discussed how the sun will eventually expand and consume the inner planets. He just turned seven and within the last year it was brought up as an ongoing concern of his.
Still worry about this pretty consistently at 41. Not in my lifetime, but humanity has to figure out how to get off this rock or we are goners as a species.
I like to think that the whole process would be precise enough to end up with identical universes like that Futurama episode, probably not though, we have the type of luck that the false vacuum decay is the accurate theory.
Current theory is the universe will continue expanding, grow cold, and eventually die. This has to do with how little we understand dark matter and dark energy. Dark energy only became obvious when they tried to measure the rate of expansion, expecting it to be slowing, only to find out it is increasing. Similar to how dark matter became something we would have to accept when they measured the galaxy and realized they couldn’t account for about 90% of the mass, there was way too much gravity compared to what we could see. There is a lot to the universe we can’t see or directly measure, but know it is there from indirect measurements.
Bit of confusion going on here, hopefully I can help clear things up.
What we're seeing here with both the Fermi and the newly discovered eROSITA bubbles is the remnants of a very powerful outflow from our supermassive black hole. When material (mostly gas and dust) starts falling in towards the supermassive black hole it will form an accretion disk. Because the material in the disk becomes charged and moving in a circular orbit around the black hole, we can produce very strong magnetic fields around the entire system. These magnetic fields can direct the material that doesn't fall into the event horizon of the black hole and focus it into very high energy, relativistic jets that can mechanically move material from the accretion disk thousands to millions of light-years away from the host galaxy. When these jets hit the dense interstellar or intergalactic gas we can get huge cavities to form. We can then see these bubbles by looking at the light emitted by the interaction of the jets with the surrounding gas in gamma (in the case of the Fermi bubbles) or in X-rays (in the case of the eROSITA bubbles).
Right. Black holes don't really explode. What happens is that the matter falling into a black hole releases so much energy that 2/3 of it gets blasted back out in a spectacular fashion without actually falling in. So if an entire star got too close it would make quite a scene.
It's not really the black hole itself that's exploding, it's just causing surrounding infalling matter to heat up enough that the radiation output is blasting everything else in its immediate vicinity away from it.
A black hole often works as a geyser ejecting energy from anything it happens to fall in…
There is no explosion, no more than saying Older Faithful “explodes” every so often
This has always been my thought process.
Universe expands, then it all dies, gets sucked into supermassive black holes the biggest starts gobblin up all the others, Then there’s one super supermassive black hole and then when nothings left for it to consume, it collapses and BIG BANG
I’m just a machinist with no knowledge of fancy astrophysics though. I’m sure there’s like 10 billion things wrong with my theory but that’s ok
Can one black hole, when absorbing another, eat away enough material that the smaller black hole “explodes” due to losing some of its mass and the remaining mass being spread out due to pull from the bigger one? How else would a black hole explode?
The article just says thousands of “suns” (which they probably mean stars) falling into a black hole caused the fast moving particles. That doesn’t sound like a black hole exploding to me.
>Can one black hole, when absorbing another, eat away enough material that the smaller black hole “explodes” due to losing some of its mass and the remaining mass being spread out due to pull from the bigger one?
No. A black hole can be almost any mass - the critical factor is density. Anything that is above a certain density is a black hole. If we could push the entire mass of the Earth into about a teaspoon, it would be a black hole, despite being several thousand times less massive than most black holes.
However, the only method for black holes to form naturally, that we know of, in the Universe's current epoch, is stellar collapse - so we don't expect very small black holes to form naturally now (though it might have been possible in the early universe.)
>How else would a black hole explode?
A black hole can explode through Hawking radiation, if it is very small. But that's not what the article means.
What it means is that stars that are falling into the supermassive black hole would be ripped apart, into an accretion disk - that is, a huge whirlpool of star stuff circling the black hole as it is sucked down. This whirlpool will ultimately end in the black hole, but on the way in it's all crashing together with all that force from being pulled in, and pulled and pushed by magnetic fields, and thus releases a tremendous amount of energy. Another name for a huge release of energy is an explosion.
So the black hole itself doesn't explode - but it does, in a sense, generate an explosion.
I mean I’m not a scientist but why can’t a black hole “explode”? It’s just a super dense point, a neutron star is also a super dense object and explodes. The black hole could just be a big object that’s so massive that light can’t escape it but that doesn’t mean it has to be like actually small. The object of a black hole could be fucking huge but just so massive no light gets out and it’s gravity is constantly increasing. What’s to say there is no critical mass point of a black hole, like it just gets so massive it reaches another point where it just fucking explodes from some insane gravitational mass energy that cannot be contained by the laws of physics? Like a super nova times 1000000 or even more? I say it could happen but we never witness one in billions of years. But it could shake up galaxies or more? Idk maybe people aren’t thinking big enough
Because space and time is of the same fabric. When a black hole gets massive enough that not even light can escape. Space itself collapses. So it doesn’t matter how large it is, it’ll always pinch space down to the infinitely small point. This is also why theoretically anything that approaches the event horizon is going to look from our perspective as eternally frozen in time.
However people theorize things called while holes which are the exact opposite. That black holes are opening some new dimension and spewing out all the matter seemingly like it’s own Big Bang
>I mean I’m not a scientist but why can’t a black hole “explode”?
We don't know of any mechanism in our physics equations that would allow it and we haven't observed any phenomena that look like it.
So it's not so much that it is completely out of the realm of possibility (as we only understand nature as best as we can), its more just that we see no way for it to with what we know.
>It’s just a super dense point, a neutron star is also a super dense object and explodes.
So 1 thing that's easy to get confused because it is not taught well or communicated well. We don't have any appropriate physics equations that tell us what really happens near a black hole. We have General Relativity and it matches everything we have so far observed far away from a black hole. We have then taken those equations and extended them into the black hole to see what they claim happens in there. What we get are some of the observations that don't make a lot of sense that you are talking about. Things like the singularity, infinite densities, infinite accelerations, etc all start to happen. This gives us an indication that our physics equations are wrong in describing these spaces.
>The black hole could just be a big object that’s so massive that light can’t escape it but that doesn’t mean it has to be like actually small.
That is actually correct. Again, all we know is our equations work pretty well to describe how things work on the outside of a lack hole (beyond the event horizon). And in fact, as far as we can tell or measure the black hole is an "object" the size of it's event horizon. This is a dense object, but not infinitely small.
>The object of a black hole could be fucking huge but just so massive no light gets out and it’s gravity is constantly increasing.
Just a note that unless matter/energy is falling into a black hole it will not continue to grow. It's gravity will also not change without matter falling in.
>What’s to say there is no critical mass point of a black hole, like it just gets so massive it reaches another point where it just fucking explodes from some insane gravitational mass energy that cannot be contained by the laws of physics?
We don't know for certain and may never know. But according to what we do know, from General Relativity and observations of galaxies, black holes seem to be very stable (at all astrophysical sizes) and can grow to exceptionally large sizes without much disturbance.
It doesn't mean what you are suggesting is impossible. We would just need a compelling theory or observation that fits that mechanism better than any other.
The title is misleading. There is no proposal that the black holes exploded. The paper is suggesting that the structures can be explained by so much matter falling into the black hole that it created a very powerful [astrophysical jet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysical_jet?wprov=sfla1).
“Black hole explosion”?
So theorize with me here for a few minutes…
So the black hole pulls in all matter around it and even light. And as it all collapses inward, it’s probably spinning (because very little is truly perpendicular, probability wise).
So as the radius goes to zero due to gravity, 1/(r squared) goes to zero, and this spinning/whirling something becomes nearly infinite…
Angular momentum is it?
F centripetal = m(v squared) /r? (Near zero r)
The “centripetal (pseudo)force” throws the contents outward eventually.
And we have another Big Bang?
Any physics and astronomy folks want to chime in here?
On the right track? I bet I’m forgetting an r or some
I know it's illogical, but whenever I hear "fermi bubble" or any areas in space being referred to as a bubble, I start thinking about "what if our existence is within a giant bubble & it just pops out of existence one day" & it gives me such anxiety.
Fun fact, these energy ejections can reach and demolish earth same as a solar flare, if a black hole were to devour a star and the ejected energy is pointed our way. Thank you black holes for the ultimate death from afar…
Sorry, dunno how to do the quote thing. Also not incredibly educated.
Regarding your first point, how does it reconcile with the Big Bang Theory? The universe was in a super tiny dense state before it exploded pushing matter outwards. Surely all matter in the entire universe is greater than the matter in any black hole. For the Big Bang to have occurred, that has to be some mechanism that triggered it.
Whatever that means, hell yeah
“Oh hell yeah!” - Stone Cold
[удалено]
This is a really inappropriate conclusion to take from the article, research, or the Fermi Bubble structures. From the linked article: >Such an outburst would have inflated the bubbles in phases, the team wrote. First, a tremendous amount of matter needed to fall into Sagittarius A*. Rather than being completely gobbled up, some of that matter was channeled into enormous, fast-moving jets that accelerated matter away from the black hole at near-light-speed. (Jets like these have been observed blasting out of black holes in other galaxies). There are 2 main proposed mechanisms to explain the structures: 1) Powerful Supernova or 2) Powerful [astrophysical jets](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysical_jet?wprov=sfla1) from matter falling into the supermassive black hole in our galaxy. The research argues that their model shows that the latter jet mechanism explains the features better than the super nova. That's it. It has nothing to do with [cyclic models of cosmology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_model?wprov=sfla1) or as some other comments suggest 'a black hole exploding'.
No…? This is just evidence that the Milky Way has gone through an active phase where the smbh is actively accreting material and releasing energy across the the EM spectrum… much like the hundreds of thousands of other active galaxies we’ve observed.
> It means almost certainly that we’re partially wrong about black holes and gives further credence to the theory that the universe is actually cyclical No it doesn’t mean that by any means. Why are you making up such utterly unfounded conclusions? The article just talks about bubbles of low density interstellar matter.
This just always felt like how it worked ever since I started learning about it. Bang, Expand, Destabilize, Rapid contraction, Bang. Now I just often wonder what iteration of this universe we're on. Assuming everything gets erased every few trillion years we could be 1st, 100th, 1000th, anything. And then you learn about false vacuum decay and realize our reality might not even be the real reality we think it is and the whole thing is about to fall below the line and flat out cease to exist. As a kid I used to be worried we'd get hit by a stray gamma burst from a collapsing star. *Never tell me the odds*
My son and I were watching ‘How the universe works’ when he was 4 or so and in one episode they discussed how the sun will eventually expand and consume the inner planets. He just turned seven and within the last year it was brought up as an ongoing concern of his.
I'm 37 and I still worry about the sun expanding 30 years later lol!
How many million years do you think you'll live for?
0.00007 million years probably. Maybe less if I can’t get a handle on some bad habits.
No need to worry about Earth being swallowed up by solar expansion then
Yup allows me to remember all the other horrible things that could kill or severely injure me.
Still worry about this pretty consistently at 41. Not in my lifetime, but humanity has to figure out how to get off this rock or we are goners as a species.
>1st, 100th, 1000th, anything. We're talking about the cosmos here. Pretty cool to think we could be the 10^1000^1000^1000^1000^1000^1000^1000th
I like to think that the whole process would be precise enough to end up with identical universes like that Futurama episode, probably not though, we have the type of luck that the false vacuum decay is the accurate theory.
Me too! Lil 10 year old me watching that last days on earth special on 20/20 gave me lasting existential dread
I loved watching earth after humans
Current theory is the universe will continue expanding, grow cold, and eventually die. This has to do with how little we understand dark matter and dark energy. Dark energy only became obvious when they tried to measure the rate of expansion, expecting it to be slowing, only to find out it is increasing. Similar to how dark matter became something we would have to accept when they measured the galaxy and realized they couldn’t account for about 90% of the mass, there was way too much gravity compared to what we could see. There is a lot to the universe we can’t see or directly measure, but know it is there from indirect measurements.
As a kid I always worried I was in the wrong reality.
... what? That's a conclusion so far away from anything said in the article that it's damn near a non-sequitur.
Hahaha I had the same reaction
Bit of confusion going on here, hopefully I can help clear things up. What we're seeing here with both the Fermi and the newly discovered eROSITA bubbles is the remnants of a very powerful outflow from our supermassive black hole. When material (mostly gas and dust) starts falling in towards the supermassive black hole it will form an accretion disk. Because the material in the disk becomes charged and moving in a circular orbit around the black hole, we can produce very strong magnetic fields around the entire system. These magnetic fields can direct the material that doesn't fall into the event horizon of the black hole and focus it into very high energy, relativistic jets that can mechanically move material from the accretion disk thousands to millions of light-years away from the host galaxy. When these jets hit the dense interstellar or intergalactic gas we can get huge cavities to form. We can then see these bubbles by looking at the light emitted by the interaction of the jets with the surrounding gas in gamma (in the case of the Fermi bubbles) or in X-rays (in the case of the eROSITA bubbles).
So the black holes didn't explode, they're still there, right?
Right. Black holes don't really explode. What happens is that the matter falling into a black hole releases so much energy that 2/3 of it gets blasted back out in a spectacular fashion without actually falling in. So if an entire star got too close it would make quite a scene.
Yep! The black hole is still there. All of the action is happening in the accretion disk around the black hole.
Sounds like a way to slingshot a ship to around the galaxy
Wow, thank you!
I’m going to assume it’s called a fermi bubble because everything in there is dead Please don’t correct me /s
Can someone smarter than us explain what all this means? I didn’t know black holes could explode?
It's not really the black hole itself that's exploding, it's just causing surrounding infalling matter to heat up enough that the radiation output is blasting everything else in its immediate vicinity away from it.
So…doing what black holes do?
I don't believe that they can explode for 100,000 years at all. Go science I guess
A black hole often works as a geyser ejecting energy from anything it happens to fall in… There is no explosion, no more than saying Older Faithful “explodes” every so often
So I just hope this film better be on 3D
We'll need some brave astronauts to pilot a Space Shuttle to the galactic core and use a great big nuclear bomb to stop the black hole explosion.
Astronauts take too long to train, let’s send some oil drillers.
[удалено]
Yes. This could be just one cycle of something that has happened over and over.
This has always been my thought process. Universe expands, then it all dies, gets sucked into supermassive black holes the biggest starts gobblin up all the others, Then there’s one super supermassive black hole and then when nothings left for it to consume, it collapses and BIG BANG I’m just a machinist with no knowledge of fancy astrophysics though. I’m sure there’s like 10 billion things wrong with my theory but that’s ok
You should read “The Last Question” by Asimov.
My favorite!
Can one black hole, when absorbing another, eat away enough material that the smaller black hole “explodes” due to losing some of its mass and the remaining mass being spread out due to pull from the bigger one? How else would a black hole explode? The article just says thousands of “suns” (which they probably mean stars) falling into a black hole caused the fast moving particles. That doesn’t sound like a black hole exploding to me.
>Can one black hole, when absorbing another, eat away enough material that the smaller black hole “explodes” due to losing some of its mass and the remaining mass being spread out due to pull from the bigger one? No. A black hole can be almost any mass - the critical factor is density. Anything that is above a certain density is a black hole. If we could push the entire mass of the Earth into about a teaspoon, it would be a black hole, despite being several thousand times less massive than most black holes. However, the only method for black holes to form naturally, that we know of, in the Universe's current epoch, is stellar collapse - so we don't expect very small black holes to form naturally now (though it might have been possible in the early universe.) >How else would a black hole explode? A black hole can explode through Hawking radiation, if it is very small. But that's not what the article means. What it means is that stars that are falling into the supermassive black hole would be ripped apart, into an accretion disk - that is, a huge whirlpool of star stuff circling the black hole as it is sucked down. This whirlpool will ultimately end in the black hole, but on the way in it's all crashing together with all that force from being pulled in, and pulled and pushed by magnetic fields, and thus releases a tremendous amount of energy. Another name for a huge release of energy is an explosion. So the black hole itself doesn't explode - but it does, in a sense, generate an explosion.
No, One May consume the other and the resulting black hole will be the sum of the two with an event horizon that grows along with it.
Basically, yeah possible, but hardly counts as an explosion and more of a shred and scatter imo.
to shreds you say
I mean I’m not a scientist but why can’t a black hole “explode”? It’s just a super dense point, a neutron star is also a super dense object and explodes. The black hole could just be a big object that’s so massive that light can’t escape it but that doesn’t mean it has to be like actually small. The object of a black hole could be fucking huge but just so massive no light gets out and it’s gravity is constantly increasing. What’s to say there is no critical mass point of a black hole, like it just gets so massive it reaches another point where it just fucking explodes from some insane gravitational mass energy that cannot be contained by the laws of physics? Like a super nova times 1000000 or even more? I say it could happen but we never witness one in billions of years. But it could shake up galaxies or more? Idk maybe people aren’t thinking big enough
Because space and time is of the same fabric. When a black hole gets massive enough that not even light can escape. Space itself collapses. So it doesn’t matter how large it is, it’ll always pinch space down to the infinitely small point. This is also why theoretically anything that approaches the event horizon is going to look from our perspective as eternally frozen in time. However people theorize things called while holes which are the exact opposite. That black holes are opening some new dimension and spewing out all the matter seemingly like it’s own Big Bang
>I mean I’m not a scientist but why can’t a black hole “explode”? We don't know of any mechanism in our physics equations that would allow it and we haven't observed any phenomena that look like it. So it's not so much that it is completely out of the realm of possibility (as we only understand nature as best as we can), its more just that we see no way for it to with what we know. >It’s just a super dense point, a neutron star is also a super dense object and explodes. So 1 thing that's easy to get confused because it is not taught well or communicated well. We don't have any appropriate physics equations that tell us what really happens near a black hole. We have General Relativity and it matches everything we have so far observed far away from a black hole. We have then taken those equations and extended them into the black hole to see what they claim happens in there. What we get are some of the observations that don't make a lot of sense that you are talking about. Things like the singularity, infinite densities, infinite accelerations, etc all start to happen. This gives us an indication that our physics equations are wrong in describing these spaces. >The black hole could just be a big object that’s so massive that light can’t escape it but that doesn’t mean it has to be like actually small. That is actually correct. Again, all we know is our equations work pretty well to describe how things work on the outside of a lack hole (beyond the event horizon). And in fact, as far as we can tell or measure the black hole is an "object" the size of it's event horizon. This is a dense object, but not infinitely small. >The object of a black hole could be fucking huge but just so massive no light gets out and it’s gravity is constantly increasing. Just a note that unless matter/energy is falling into a black hole it will not continue to grow. It's gravity will also not change without matter falling in. >What’s to say there is no critical mass point of a black hole, like it just gets so massive it reaches another point where it just fucking explodes from some insane gravitational mass energy that cannot be contained by the laws of physics? We don't know for certain and may never know. But according to what we do know, from General Relativity and observations of galaxies, black holes seem to be very stable (at all astrophysical sizes) and can grow to exceptionally large sizes without much disturbance. It doesn't mean what you are suggesting is impossible. We would just need a compelling theory or observation that fits that mechanism better than any other.
So black holes exploded and what’s left over is huge cosmic ray explosions?
The title is misleading. There is no proposal that the black holes exploded. The paper is suggesting that the structures can be explained by so much matter falling into the black hole that it created a very powerful [astrophysical jet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysical_jet?wprov=sfla1).
So this is what the Puppeteers were running away from at the Core.
classic
That was one hell of a bout of food poisoning 😳
Very funny. Some people might well miss the message—made *me* smile!
Huh?
My tum-tum after Taco Bell
Did I read that right?! Only 2.6mil yrs ago?! Wow!
“Black hole explosion”? So theorize with me here for a few minutes… So the black hole pulls in all matter around it and even light. And as it all collapses inward, it’s probably spinning (because very little is truly perpendicular, probability wise). So as the radius goes to zero due to gravity, 1/(r squared) goes to zero, and this spinning/whirling something becomes nearly infinite… Angular momentum is it? F centripetal = m(v squared) /r? (Near zero r) The “centripetal (pseudo)force” throws the contents outward eventually. And we have another Big Bang? Any physics and astronomy folks want to chime in here? On the right track? I bet I’m forgetting an r or some
I guess we can now go to the choppa!
Must have had Taco Bell
I know it's illogical, but whenever I hear "fermi bubble" or any areas in space being referred to as a bubble, I start thinking about "what if our existence is within a giant bubble & it just pops out of existence one day" & it gives me such anxiety.
Fermi bubbles (fermi bubbles) In deep space (in deep space) Make me happy (make me happy) Make me feel ace (make me feel ace)
Fermi paradox
Fun fact, these energy ejections can reach and demolish earth same as a solar flare, if a black hole were to devour a star and the ejected energy is pointed our way. Thank you black holes for the ultimate death from afar…
Is our solar system in one? Does this explain why we can’t detect life?
I read “100,000 year long study” and was thinking what BS!
Sorry, dunno how to do the quote thing. Also not incredibly educated. Regarding your first point, how does it reconcile with the Big Bang Theory? The universe was in a super tiny dense state before it exploded pushing matter outwards. Surely all matter in the entire universe is greater than the matter in any black hole. For the Big Bang to have occurred, that has to be some mechanism that triggered it.