), but a freaky story about a black hole "zapping" a nearby galaxy. Thought it was interesting:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317232,00.html
Peace
The Death Star Galaxy
-
TotcProductions TotcProductions https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=6202
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5113 posts since 5 Mar, 2003 from Philadelphia, USA
No, not a new Algomusic Vsti (although it might be interesting to see what it would feature ), but a freaky story about a black hole "zapping" a nearby galaxy. Thought it was interesting:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317232,00.html
Peace
), but a freaky story about a black hole "zapping" a nearby galaxy. Thought it was interesting:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,317232,00.html
Peace
-
- KVRAF
- 6496 posts since 26 Nov, 2004 from Frederick, MD
I saw that on the BBC news page yesterday.
I'd already heard of this as a potential danger of smaller black holes, but that was on a stellar scale, not a galactic scale. Some theorists have postulated that the lifespan of intelligent species close to galactic center is likely to be much shorter than those out on galactic rim because the density of stars nearer to the galactic core is such that more black holes are likely to form, and these "death rays" would crop up much more often there and essentially sterilize the inner worlds. Of course they also spur new star growth, so as in all things, creation and dissolution are parts of the same cycle.
So, to all those populated planets in that smaller galaxy near the one with the nasty black hole, I say . . . "Sucks to by you!"
Of course all that happened like 1.4 billion years ago. Who knows what's going on there now.
I'd already heard of this as a potential danger of smaller black holes, but that was on a stellar scale, not a galactic scale. Some theorists have postulated that the lifespan of intelligent species close to galactic center is likely to be much shorter than those out on galactic rim because the density of stars nearer to the galactic core is such that more black holes are likely to form, and these "death rays" would crop up much more often there and essentially sterilize the inner worlds. Of course they also spur new star growth, so as in all things, creation and dissolution are parts of the same cycle.
So, to all those populated planets in that smaller galaxy near the one with the nasty black hole, I say . . . "Sucks to by you!"
Of course all that happened like 1.4 billion years ago. Who knows what's going on there now.
-
- R.I.P.
- 3833 posts since 8 Sep, 2003 from Santa Clara, CA, USA
Hey..thanks for this news..I still have to read up on it. I still have to get into the 'theorists' camp sometime..but I still have to read Hawking 
Tim
Tim
-
TotcProductions TotcProductions https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=6202
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5113 posts since 5 Mar, 2003 from Philadelphia, USA
I thought all of Hawking's material went straight to speak&Spell.tconrardy wrote:Hey..thanks for this news..I still have to read up on it. I still have to get into the 'theorists' camp sometime..but I still have to read Hawking
Tim
-
- R.I.P.
- 3833 posts since 8 Sep, 2003 from Santa Clara, CA, USA
Does that mean I can circuit bend it?TotcProductions wrote:I thought all of Hawking's material went straight to speak&Spell.tconrardy wrote:Hey..thanks for this news..I still have to read up on it. I still have to get into the 'theorists' camp sometime..but I still have to read Hawking
Tim
Tim
-
TotcProductions TotcProductions https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=6202
- KVRAF
- Topic Starter
- 5113 posts since 5 Mar, 2003 from Philadelphia, USA
tconrardy wrote:Does that mean I can circuit bend it?TotcProductions wrote:I thought all of Hawking's material went straight to speak&Spell.tconrardy wrote:Hey..thanks for this news..I still have to read up on it. I still have to get into the 'theorists' camp sometime..but I still have to read Hawking
Tim
Tim
-
- KVRAF
- 6496 posts since 26 Nov, 2004 from Frederick, MD
I tried to read Hawking's A Brief History Of Time but, sheesh! It's so dumbed down I couldn't read it. I had already gone through things like Perfect Symmetry: The Search for the Beginning of Time by Heinz R. Pagels, portions of which are now, no doubt, out of date, but it was a much more in-depth and complicated look at physics and cosmology than Hawking's miniscule tome. Maybe his other writings are a bit more in depth.
There were two lines from Pagels's book that really stuck with me. The first was when he was talking about how the universe during the big bang appeared to have accelerated very rapidly, and has now slowed down. He said some theorists believe this happened because the universe in that early stage was in a "false vacuum", kind of like a ball sitting on top a hill. The ball (the universe) rolls off the hill very quickly (expands rapidly), but when it encounters the valley (a true vacuum) it slows down (expands less rapidly). He then said that the universe would continue to expand at its present rate..."unless it is in fact we are in yet another false vacuum, in which case it may contract very rapidly, winking out of existence in a micro-second."
I was reading Vedic philosophy/mythology at that time and what ran through my mind was "Brahma opens his eyes and the universe is created. Brahma closes his eyes and the universe is destroyed."
The other one...another moment, was when he was talking about suns going supernova. I think the line went: "If one of the suns in our local group went supernova, it would flare up to the brightness of our own sun and end all life on Earth. Fortunately, none of the stars in our local group are large enough to go supernova...with the possible exception of Sirius."
Possible exception...
It's a savage garden, my friend. A savage garden.
There were two lines from Pagels's book that really stuck with me. The first was when he was talking about how the universe during the big bang appeared to have accelerated very rapidly, and has now slowed down. He said some theorists believe this happened because the universe in that early stage was in a "false vacuum", kind of like a ball sitting on top a hill. The ball (the universe) rolls off the hill very quickly (expands rapidly), but when it encounters the valley (a true vacuum) it slows down (expands less rapidly). He then said that the universe would continue to expand at its present rate..."unless it is in fact we are in yet another false vacuum, in which case it may contract very rapidly, winking out of existence in a micro-second."
I was reading Vedic philosophy/mythology at that time and what ran through my mind was "Brahma opens his eyes and the universe is created. Brahma closes his eyes and the universe is destroyed."
The other one...another
moment, was when he was talking about suns going supernova. I think the line went: "If one of the suns in our local group went supernova, it would flare up to the brightness of our own sun and end all life on Earth. Fortunately, none of the stars in our local group are large enough to go supernova...with the possible exception of Sirius."Possible exception...
It's a savage garden, my friend. A savage garden.
