PaulSpoerry.com

Social Media, technology, and geeky stuff for your brain.

  • Home
  • About
    • Privacy Policy
  • Categories
    • Google+ Posts
    • Site news
    • Tech
      • Android
      • Apple
      • Chrome
      • Gadgets
      • Hacking
      • Linux
      • OSX
      • Privacy
      • Web Life
        • Bittorrent
        • Facebook
        • FireFox
        • GMail
        • Google
        • Google+
        • Twitter
        • WordPress
        • Windows
          • Windows 7
    • Google+: Getting Started Guides
    • Games
    • Meditation
    • Politics
    • Science
    • That’s freakin hilarious
  • Code
    • FreeImageZoom
    • Post Editor for Google+™
    • The Plus Editor
  • Contact
You are here: Home / Google+ Posts / We've been wrong about black holes

We've been wrong about black holes

June 24, 2015 by Paul Spoerry 22 Comments



We May Have Dramatically Misunderstood the Shapes of Black Holes
Even if you didn’t see Interstellar, you’ve probably heard about how black holes have an “event horizon” — and once you pass it, you’re mashed into multi-dimensional mush. But now, some physicists believe we got it all wrong. Black holes are more like fuzzy balls of cotton, with no event horizons at all.

We've been wrong about black holes… they are more like fuzzy balls of cotton

Check this out on Google+

Filed Under: Google+ Posts

About Paul Spoerry

I’m a groovy cat who’s into technology, Eastern Thought, and house music. I’m a proud and dedicated father to the coolest little guy on the planet (seriously, I'm NOT biased). I’m fascinated by ninjas, the Internet, and anybody who can balance objects on their nose for long periods of time.

I have a utility belt full of programming languages and a database of all my knowledge on databases... I practice code fu. Oh, I've also done actual Kung Fu, and have a black belt in Tae Kwon Do.

I run. I meditate. I dance. I blog at PaulSpoerry.com, tweet @PaulSpoerry, and I'm here on Google+.

I'm currently work for IBM developing web enabled insurance applications for IBM and support and develop a non-profit called The LittleBigFund.

Comments

  1. Le Mont Bennett (Mr Monte) says

    June 25, 2015 at 2:59 am

    Astrophysics Porn! I go to sleep every night with a space documentary playing!

  2. Carl Rauscher says

    June 25, 2015 at 5:28 am

    These two theories are not in opposition; the dense stellar core may be visualized as a fuzzball of vibrating quantum strings, but it resides at the bottom of the steep gravity well we only see as a black hole (mouth) in space.

  3. harry cronos says

    June 25, 2015 at 6:19 am

    My theory is that black hole isn't a gravity well but more like a hair dryer

  4. mick mack says

    June 25, 2015 at 6:21 am

    of course its misunderstood as its all guess work based on other guess work. Good luck with that

  5. Jungle Jargon says

    June 25, 2015 at 7:47 am

    Time and distance are not the same there as here, regardless.

  6. Gord Davison says

    June 25, 2015 at 8:16 am

    hmm a stringy black hole

  7. Gord Davison says

    June 25, 2015 at 8:32 am

    I have a few problems with this hypothesis. First of all strings cannot be tested so even though the theory is elegant and has a lot of theoretical support for it there is no physical evidence yet. Second is that to base a hypothesis on an unproven hypothesis.. well you get my point.

  8. pierotte pepe Vassau says

    June 25, 2015 at 8:55 am

    lol

  9. Gord Davison says

    June 25, 2015 at 9:35 am

    +Le Mont Bennett !!Me too!! I listen to YouTube Brian Greene, Sean Caroll, Morgan Freeman, Niel Degrasse Tyson, Royal Institute and more. Just can't get enough.

  10. Aleksey Ambaryan says

    June 25, 2015 at 1:01 pm

    Shouldn't the mass distribution and therefore gravity pull on the surface of the black hole be equal all across the surface of the black hole? If it is a "fuzzball" like, then it should mean that at some surface place there is more mass and gravity than at the other place. And if so, there have to be a spot on the surface of the black hole with mass/ gravity sufficiently low for light to escape, which by the way doesn't happen (probably). I am not an expert, at all.

  11. Yash Trivedi says

    June 25, 2015 at 1:44 pm

    My theory is that a black hole is like a vaccum cleaner… Sucks in everything and enlarges in volume it has no shape (in depth) and is bound by the gravity it gets defined and explodes when the mass gets greater then the gravity of event horizon to form a big bang type of expanding universe again….

    Just sayiń….. 😁

  12. Gord Davison says

    June 25, 2015 at 2:02 pm

    +Yash Trivedi interesting but no. It is the mass and its pressure that makes the black hole in the first place. Atoms are mostly empty space and it's the force of the electrons that holds them apart or stops your finger from going through a table. Once the electrons are out of the equation as in a neutron star then it is the force of the protons holding things apart. Once that force is overcome then a black hole collapse. The mass is all there except electrons but they account for a very small portion.

  13. Aleksey Ambaryan says

    June 25, 2015 at 2:34 pm

    +Yash Trivedi Energy cannot leave the black hole, e.g. light, [edited: apart from black-body radiation. But such radiation would theoretically result in evaporation of the BH]. For explosion to happen, the black hole will need to convert matter (that defines mass) in to energy, like stars do. Besides, the more matter introduced in to the BH the greater mass it becomes, the greater gravity should be produced, therefore more energy [edited: conversion] will be needed to overcome the [edited: increasing] gravity. Or, were you referring to a breaking of a surface tension of the BH? Which by the way shouldn't happen, since you still need sufficient energy to break surface tension in a first place. Cause if you get enough energy at the surface level to break the surface tension and release the [edited: surface and inner] matter of BH, therefore reducing BH mass, in to space, than you still need to contain enough energy to overcome the gravity of the break-away matter from collapsing on to self or BH again, [edited: since under own gravitational pull of expelled mater] there will be reduction of initial energy (assuming the force of gravity at the surface of the BH is less then at the center of the BH wrong assumption, gravity at surface of BH is greater then at the center).

  14. 497362 _ says

    June 25, 2015 at 9:47 pm

    black holes are fiction. it doesnt matter if you dont understand them. it only matters that you are entertained by the idea, and, if you can scam it, get money for extending the myth.

  15. Gord Davison says

    June 25, 2015 at 10:05 pm

    +497362 _ wrong

  16. Aleksey Ambaryan says

    June 26, 2015 at 12:40 am

    +497362 _​ couldn't agree more! It has been scientifically proven that you live in a celestial sphere!

  17. pierotte pepe Vassau says

    June 26, 2015 at 1:27 am

    science is just like religion…made up!

  18. pierotte pepe Vassau says

    June 26, 2015 at 5:42 am

    this is whats up…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCyZuW_tNhM&list=RDMMNvlE14cM-zk&index=14

  19. Gord Davison says

    June 26, 2015 at 5:54 am

    +pierotte pepe Vassau​ then you have no scientific understanding.

  20. pierotte pepe Vassau says

    June 26, 2015 at 5:55 pm

    ok

  21. Charles Spears says

    June 26, 2015 at 10:18 pm

    Electric universe !

  22. 497362 _ says

    June 27, 2015 at 1:09 am

    +Charles Spears indeed!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Copyright © 2023 · Epik on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in