Fate of Galaxies: Will Stars be Pulled into Black Holes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter pforeman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Galaxies
AI Thread Summary
In the distant future, it remains uncertain whether all stars in a galaxy will be absorbed by a central black hole, as this complicates theories of thermodynamic equilibrium. The orbits of stars in galaxies like the Milky Way are generally stable, with gravitational radiation affecting only those close to the black hole. Occasionally, close interactions between stars can lead to some being ejected from the galaxy, while others may drift closer to the black hole over time. Additionally, smaller stellar black holes form within galaxies, slowly radiating away. Overall, the processes governing star dynamics and black hole interactions are extremely slow and complex, leaving the ultimate fate of galaxies open to speculation.
pforeman
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
In the far distant future, will all of the stars in a galaxy be pulled into one giant black hole in the center?
Are the arms of spiral galaxies like our milky way spiralling in or flying out?
Thanks
Paul
 
Space news on Phys.org
That is still being debated. I seriously doubt 'all' stars will be absorbed by supermassive black holes, which seriously complicates any theory the universe will eventually achieve a state of perfect thermodynamic equilibrium.
 
pforeman said:
In the far distant future, will all of the stars in a galaxy be pulled into one giant black hole in the center?
Are the arms of spiral galaxies like our milky way spiralling in or flying out?
Thanks
Paul
For the most part, the orbits of stars in our galaxy are extremely stable. For objects close to the black hole, there is some gravitational radiation that causes the objects to lose orbital energy. But the magnitude of this radiation is extremely dependent upon distance, and is pretty negligible for objects even a short (in astrophysical terms) distance away.

Every once in a great while, there will be a close interaction between stars which transfers enough momentum to one star to kick it out of the galaxy. The galaxy loses one star, but the remaining stars have less orbital energy between them and are, after that interaction, on average a bit closer to the orbiting black hole. After many such interactions, more stars are liable to have fallen into the central black hole.

At the same time, matter within our galaxy is (occasionally) forming smaller stellar black holes which very slowly radiate away to nothing.

On extremely long time scales, matter itself is likely to decay through a process known as proton decay.

All of these processes are incredibly slow, and I couldn't tell you which will win out. But Wikipedia has a nice article on the subject:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_an_expanding_universe
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
11
Views
4K
Back
Top