Is There a Black Hole in Our Solar System?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the existence of black holes (BHs) in our solar system, highlighting the reliance on gravitational disturbances as evidence for their existence. Participants debate the hypothetical nature of black holes, emphasizing that observations of gravitational influences suggest they are not purely theoretical. While some argue that new physics may be needed to explain certain astronomical anomalies, others assert that current evidence, including images of jets and potential X-ray emissions from event horizons, supports the existence of black holes. The conversation also touches on the sun's orbit around the galaxy's center, which is believed to contain a supermassive black hole, but clarifies that there is no black hole within our solar system. Overall, the discussion reflects a mix of skepticism and acceptance regarding the evidence for black holes.
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
Messages
4,410
Reaction score
555
there is so much in the literature about BHs, but AFAIK only observations
of some gravitational disturbance has been observed, how can we ascribe
this to some thing that is purely hypothetical?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I am sure this topic has been talked about almost to exhaustion so will
only cite these 2 cited papers.

http://www.edpsciences.org/articles/aa/pdf/2002/48/aaeg151.pdf

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0109/0109035.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
wolram said:
there is so much in the literature about BHs, but AFAIK only observations
of some gravitational disturbance has been observed, how can we ascribe
this to some thing that is purely hypothetical?
That's a contradiction. If its based on observations, then it isn't purely hypothetical.
 
The black hole situation is tricky, but here's the basic gist: we've observed gravitational influences that cannot be explained by the mainstream theories in any way other than to invoke a black hole. In other words, we're assuming they're black holes because of the theory. For them to be something else would probably require new physics.

I would certainly say that this is not a bad first guess as to their identity, but I think we should be careful about making assumptions. After all, we assumed that the universe would be decelerating before we observed it to be behaving otherwise.
 
Sorry Russ_watters, i will choose my words better next time, hopefully.
 
Space Tiger
I would certainly say that this is not a bad first guess as to their identity, but I think we should be careful about making assumptions. After all, we assumed that the universe would be decelerating before we observed it to be behaving otherwise.

I could not agree more, but it has been mentioned in the literature, that
new science may be needed to explain other astro anomalies.
 
purely hypothetical would be a collision of two "distortions of gravity" aka black holes...I'd like to hear theories on that.
 
actually we have seen what we believe to be black holes. We have pictures or the acretion (spelling) disks and the jets that are around the black hole. Of course, we could be wrong about what's inside but whatever it is would need a massive amount of gravity. Also, I am pretty sure I read somewhere that we can detect X-rays coming from the event horizon. These are made by anti-matter and matter colliding at the event horrizon.
 
x8jason8x said:
purely hypothetical would be a collision of two "distortions of gravity" aka black holes...I'd like to hear theories on that.

Such collisions are expected to produce large amounts of gravitational radiation. In fact, the LIGO project is attempting to detect these events.
 
  • #10
michael879 said:
actually we have seen what we believe to be black holes. We have pictures or the acretion (spelling) disks and the jets that are around the black hole.

We of course have images of jets (they can extend to megaparsecs in size), but I've not heard of imaging of accretion disks. Do you have a reference?
 
  • #11
if this [http://www.mpe.mpg.de/ir/GC/index.php ] doesn't convince you that black holes are real- then nothing will- seeing is believing
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
SetAI

That is rather convincing, is anything known about the bodies orbiting
this central mass?
 
  • #13
I've seen it theorized somewhere that our own sun is supposedly orbiting a BH 1/10 its' size. I think that must be utter nonsense, but maybe I'm missing something crucial that would make it possible?
 
  • #15
x8jason8x said:
I've seen it theorized somewhere that our own sun is supposedly orbiting a BH 1/10 its' size. I think that must be utter nonsense, but maybe I'm missing something crucial that would make it possible?

The sun orbits the center of the galaxy which is believed to contain a supermassive BH, but there's not a BH included in our local solar system.
 
Back
Top