Are Magnetic Anomalies the Cause of Black Hole Eruptions?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wolram
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Black holes Holes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between magnetic anomalies and black hole eruptions, exploring the properties of black holes (BHs) and the implications of general relativity (GR) in understanding high-energy events in galactic centers. Participants question the validity of current theories and the observational evidence for black holes.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express skepticism about the current understanding of black holes, noting that observations are based on their effects rather than direct observation of event horizons.
  • There is a suggestion that if black holes do not exist, it may indicate a need for modifications to general relativity in strong gravitational fields.
  • Participants discuss the possibility that high-energy events in galactic centers might not be caused by black holes if general relativity is found to be incorrect.
  • One participant mentions a personal skepticism regarding the proof of black holes, suggesting that while they may be approximated by black holes at certain distances, more rigorous testing of GR is needed.
  • A question is raised about the potential role of magnetic anomalies in causing eruptions, though one participant humorously compares this possibility to unlikely scenarios.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach a consensus, with multiple competing views on the existence of black holes and the validity of general relativity in extreme conditions. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the causes of the observed phenomena.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in current observational evidence and the need for further testing of theories in strong gravitational fields. There is an acknowledgment of the uncertainty surrounding the implications of black hole theory and the potential for alternative explanations.

wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,411
Reaction score
551
That is the question real, how well do we understand the properties
of BHs, AFAIK observations are based on the effect they have on there
surroundings, and no one has actually observed an event horizon.
Given that something creates massive disturbances in the center of
galaxies, has everything other than BHs been ruled out?
and is the loss of information an bothersome part of BH theory?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
wolram said:
surroundings, and no one has actually observed an event horizon.
Given that something creates massive disturbances in the center of
galaxies, has everything other than BHs been ruled out?

Everything else that can be predicted by standard physical theory has been ruled out, as far as I know. If black holes don't exist, it's likely because a modification to GR is required in the strong field limit.
 
BY Space Tiger
Everything else that can be predicted by standard physical theory has been ruled out, as far as I know. If black holes don't exist, it's likely because a modification to GR is required in the strong field limit.

So even though we have observational evidence of some high energy
events in the center of galaxies, it is possible that they are not caused
by BHs if GR is in error?
 
wolram said:
So even though we have observational evidence of some high energy
events in the center of galaxies, it is possible that they are not caused
by BHs if GR is in error?

That's right. I'm sure many of my colleagues would tell you that black holes are all but proven to exist, but I still share a bit of Einstein's skepticism on the validity of his theory in that regime. Nonetheless, something interesting is going on in those regions and my guess is that it can at least be approximated by a black hole at reasonable distances. I would be more willing to trust the black hole idea once we have more rigorous tests of GR in the strong field limit.
 
By Space tiger
That's right. I'm sure many of my colleagues would tell you that black holes are all but proven to exist, but I still share a bit of Einstein's skepticism on the validity of his theory in that regime. Nonetheless, something interesting is going on in those regions and my guess is that it can at least be approximated by a black hole at reasonable distances. I would be more willing to trust the black hole idea once we have more rigorous tests of GR in the strong field limit.

So would it be beyond the bounds of possibilities that these eruptions are
caused by magnetic anomalies?
 
wolram said:
So would it be beyond the bounds of possibilities that these eruptions are caused by magnetic anomalies?
No, but roughly as probable as ET landing in your back yard and Elvis jumping out. There is clearly a very large amount of mass centered on the location of suspected black holes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
7K