What is the Connection Between Quasars and Black Holes?

  • Thread starter jaydnul
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Quasar
In summary, a quasar is a supermassive black hole located in the center of a galaxy, which emits a significant amount of EM radiation.
  • #1
jaydnul
558
15
Ive looked on a good number of websites, including the pedia, and i still feel like i didnt get a straight answer. What exactly is a quasar. Is it a black hole in the center of a galaxy? What is the physical makeup of a quasar?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
It is a supermassive black hole, typically in the center of a galaxy that has an active accretion disk surrounding it which puts out a significant amount of EM radiation. The accretion disk is primarily made up of hydrogen and helium gas, and "younger" quasars may also have dust in their accretion disks as well.
 
  • #3
perhaps you could elucidate how an accretion disc could be responsible for such enormous output of EM radiation?
 
  • #4
jnorman said:
perhaps you could elucidate how an accretion disc could be responsible for such enormous output of EM radiation?

Radiation emission is triggered by compression of the materials falling into the center by gravity. The properties of the central object dictate the frequency range of this radiation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disc
 
  • #5
jnorman said:
perhaps you could elucidate how an accretion disc could be responsible for such enormous output of EM radiation?

the accretion process is one of the most efficient ways of converting mass into energy (that we know of anyways). suppose a very small amount of matter undergoes a chemical reaction of some sort (combustion, synthesis, acid-base, etc.), and releases several hundred eV (electron volts) of energy. if an identical amount of that same matter were split apart at the atomic level (nuclear fission), it would produce several hundred MeV (several hundred million electron volts). the rate at which nuclear reactions convert mass into energy is several orders of magnitude greater than any chemical reaction. in nuclear fission, approx. 0.04% of the mass involved in the reaction will be converted to energy. nuclear fusion is approx. 8 times as efficient as fission, converting approx. 0.3% of the mass involved in the reaction into energy. but when it comes to converting mass directly into energy, hardly any other method appears to be more efficient than accretion around a highly compact massive object (the only other method i can think of that is theoretically more efficient is matter-antimatter annihilation). while i don't have a source in front of me, i seem to recall reading that an accretion disk can convert up to a whopping ~10% of its mass into energy.

now, as AbsoluteZer0 mentioned, the radiation emission is triggered by friction within the accretion disk, which is itself caused by the central body's gravitational pull. now while a supermassive BH is much larger than a stellar mass BH (both with respect to mass and EH diameter), it is still confined to what is otherwise an extremely small volume of space in comparison to the size of the galaxy in which it is at the center. using the concept of energy density, one can easily see that the release of such prodigious amounts of energy from within such a confined volume results in an extremely bright source...in this case, it can sometimes be bright enough to be seen from across the visible universe.
 
  • #6
So wait a second here.
Black holes are huge recycling centers for old used up matter?
Energy=Mass=Energy=Mass?
That's awesome! I love this universe! It totally kicks ***!
 
  • #7
Recycling centers for used matter? Not really. Once the matter passes into the black hole it is gone effectively forever. The time required to "get it back" via hawking radiation is longer than the current age of the universe.
Also, remember that mass and energy are not the same things.
 
  • #8
More mature galaxies, including The Milky Way, have supermassive BHs but not such a big accretion disc. It is thought that those galaxies where themselves quasars when they were younger?
 
  • #9
So If allowed enough time would a black hole eventually evaporate?
Would it eventually transform all its mass to energy?

Or would it eventually stop once its own mass dropped below the minimum mass for a black hole?
And if so, would that mean that a black hole could become "demoted" back down to regular matter?
 
  • #10
anorlunda said:
More mature galaxies, including The Milky Way, have supermassive BHs but not such a big accretion disc. It is thought that those galaxies where themselves quasars when they were younger?

It's possible.

solar71 said:
So If allowed enough time would a black hole eventually evaporate?
Would it eventually transform all its mass to energy?

Yep.

Or would it eventually stop once its own mass dropped below the minimum mass for a black hole?

There is no minimum mass for a black hole. What is requires is density. Your own body could become a black hole if compressed enough.
 
  • #11
I thought a quasar was an actively feeding galactic center? Or no? Anyway I thought that's where the immense amount of energy comes from that can be seen across the Universe: Consuming numerous close-by star systems until all the close ones are gone and then lays dormant, like ours, until stray ones get too close.

Is that not correct?
 
  • #12
The theoretical lower mass limit for a black hole is believed to be the Planck mass - about 1/100,000 of a gram. This is actually a rather astonishingly large number compared to other Planck units. The reasoning behind this limit is the Compton wavelength of the event horizon should not exceed its Schwarzschild radius, or more simply put, the Schwarzschild radius should not be less than a Planck length. There have been a number of arguments that the realistic minimum mass of a black hole could be considerably larger. This is consistent with the mass range hypothesized for primordial black holes of around 10^14 to 10^22 grams. Primordial black holes of 10^11 g or smaller would currently be evaporating. The resulting gamma ray background from such evaporations would be inconsistent with observation.

Jack, you are correct. It is currently believed that quasars are powered by supermassive black holes feeding on a supermassive accretion disc. This fuel supply is eventually exhausted and the beast goes into hibernation. These sleeping behemoths could be temporarily reawakened by galactic mergers.
 

1. What exactly is a quasar?

A quasar, short for "quasi-stellar object", is an extremely bright and distant object found in the center of some galaxies. It is powered by a supermassive black hole, which causes the surrounding gas and dust to emit large amounts of energy.

2. How are quasars different from stars?

Quasars are significantly different from stars in terms of their size, energy output, and location. While stars are relatively small and emit energy through nuclear fusion, quasars are much larger and emit energy from the accretion disk surrounding the black hole at their center.

3. How far away are quasars?

Quasars are located billions of light years away from Earth, making them one of the most distant objects in our universe. Their distance is determined through redshift measurements, which indicate how much the light from the quasar has been stretched due to the expansion of the universe.

4. Can we see quasars with the naked eye?

No, quasars are not visible to the naked eye. They are incredibly bright but also very far away, so they appear as small points of light even with the most powerful telescopes. However, they can be observed in other wavelengths of light, such as radio and infrared.

5. What is the significance of studying quasars?

Studying quasars is important for understanding the evolution of galaxies, as they are thought to play a key role in the formation and growth of galaxies. They also provide valuable insights into the physics of black holes and the early universe.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
984
Replies
6
Views
841
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
986
Back
Top