- #1
Soul Intent
- 8
- 0
- TL;DR
- I'm not suggesting there aren't simple answers to the questions I'm about to pose. It's possible I'm missing something obvious, I'd appreciate feedback. Thanks!
Shouldn't all black holes have the same density? Since all are assumed to contain a singularity (infinite density). Also, depicting spatial curvature due to gravity in terms of a two-dimensional fabric is very misleading. Whether you're imaging a black hole, or a star. We live in a three-dimensional reality, so gravitational curvature should be represented in that way.
Lastly, based on my individual understanding, all black holes can trap light. It's a characteristic which defines them, apart from everything else in the universe. Their mass creates a region which, if crossed, nothing can escape. However, lately I've been reading up on some questions I've had for a while. It seems as though black holes vary in mass, from very small (say 15 solar masses) to very large (billions of solar masses). As a general rule of thumb, stars at least 10 times the mass of our sun die in supernovae which in effect creates a black hole. Now, my question is should not all black holes be, from their very nature, exponentially larger in mass than even the heaviest star in the universe? Take cygnus X1 for example. In order to prove it was a black hole, it had to be no less than at least 3 solar masses. This confuses me. Stating this, suggests that cygnus weighs less than some stars. It's final mass was discovered to be 15 solar masses, but my confusion still stands. There are some stars that outweigh ours by 10 or even 20 times. Yet, this particular black hole is only 15 solar masses? So, how much mass does it take to ultimately trap light forever? Or slow time to a stand still?
My theory is that every black hole in the universe must be more massive than anything else that can possibly exist, since nothing else can slow time or trap light in such an extreme fashion. So in the case of cygnus X1, 15 solar masses should easily be determined to be significantly less massive than any black hole. Yet, it's regularly regarded as the first black hole to be discovered. They originally detected cygnus by it's companion stars orbit, and from the high energy X-ray radiation coming from a seemingly invisible source. So it must be a black hole, right? Although, it only weighs in at 15 times the mass of our sun. The X-rays were coming from it's accretion disk spinning at half light speed, and heated to 10s of millions of degrees. If you ask me, such a disk would be very bright and would be easily seen. But apparently the disk wasn't recognized until cygnuss' mass was determined which unquestionably made it a black hole- of 15 solar masses.
I understand supermassive black holes. Something being millions or billions times heavier than our sun, one can imagine strange things would occur. Like light being unable to escape, or time slowing to the point where if someone were to watch something fall in, it would never appear to cross the event horizon. Basically, how can a black hole that weighs less than some stars slow time drastically, and trap light? If this is possible, there would be many objects in the cosmos capable of slowing time and trapping light; which would undoubtedly change the nature of the universe itself.
Thoughts.
Lastly, based on my individual understanding, all black holes can trap light. It's a characteristic which defines them, apart from everything else in the universe. Their mass creates a region which, if crossed, nothing can escape. However, lately I've been reading up on some questions I've had for a while. It seems as though black holes vary in mass, from very small (say 15 solar masses) to very large (billions of solar masses). As a general rule of thumb, stars at least 10 times the mass of our sun die in supernovae which in effect creates a black hole. Now, my question is should not all black holes be, from their very nature, exponentially larger in mass than even the heaviest star in the universe? Take cygnus X1 for example. In order to prove it was a black hole, it had to be no less than at least 3 solar masses. This confuses me. Stating this, suggests that cygnus weighs less than some stars. It's final mass was discovered to be 15 solar masses, but my confusion still stands. There are some stars that outweigh ours by 10 or even 20 times. Yet, this particular black hole is only 15 solar masses? So, how much mass does it take to ultimately trap light forever? Or slow time to a stand still?
My theory is that every black hole in the universe must be more massive than anything else that can possibly exist, since nothing else can slow time or trap light in such an extreme fashion. So in the case of cygnus X1, 15 solar masses should easily be determined to be significantly less massive than any black hole. Yet, it's regularly regarded as the first black hole to be discovered. They originally detected cygnus by it's companion stars orbit, and from the high energy X-ray radiation coming from a seemingly invisible source. So it must be a black hole, right? Although, it only weighs in at 15 times the mass of our sun. The X-rays were coming from it's accretion disk spinning at half light speed, and heated to 10s of millions of degrees. If you ask me, such a disk would be very bright and would be easily seen. But apparently the disk wasn't recognized until cygnuss' mass was determined which unquestionably made it a black hole- of 15 solar masses.
I understand supermassive black holes. Something being millions or billions times heavier than our sun, one can imagine strange things would occur. Like light being unable to escape, or time slowing to the point where if someone were to watch something fall in, it would never appear to cross the event horizon. Basically, how can a black hole that weighs less than some stars slow time drastically, and trap light? If this is possible, there would be many objects in the cosmos capable of slowing time and trapping light; which would undoubtedly change the nature of the universe itself.
Thoughts.