Drakkith said:Neutrinos do not travel FTL. There was an error in the setup of the detectors and clocks. I believe one of the cables was incorrectly installed. And while neutrinos may be a type of dark matter, they are not the type that we normaly talk about if my memory is correct.
Are you making this up or did you get this from somewhere?
No, that was a faulty experiment.
Observations have been made and we have reason to believe that dark matter doesn't interact with normal matter. Look at the Bullet Cluster for example.
hubble_bubble said:Sorry the neutrino thing was a joke too good to miss.
The bullet cluster article raises some issues. As MACS J0025.4-1222 appears to have had its dark matter halo stripped it would be useful to observe effects on rotational velocity if any. Also if this halo reforms over time then the dark matter has to come from somewhere.
Also what about the galaxy rotation problem?
hubble_bubble said:
Drakkith said:I don't see what this has to do with the rest of the thread. Please don't post just to post, it doesn't help the thread at all and will only make for a confusing conversation with multiple topics being discussed at one time.
There is no known link between dark matter and black hole mass [re: Supermassive black holes do not correlate with dark matter halos of galaxies http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.4650] . It is also unlikely dark matter is a significant contributor to black hole mass because, unlike baryonic matter, it is essentially collisionless. Baryonic matter is slowed by collisions with other baryonic matter allowing it to shed angular moment and be captured by local gravitational wells [like black holes]. Ingesting large amounts of dark matter would also interfere with galaxy formation via a process called runaway accretion.hubble_bubble said:Also bear in mind that the halo is proportional to the size of black hole and not the mass of the galaxy it surrounds.
Chronos said:There is no known link between dark matter and black hole mass [re: Supermassive black holes do not correlate with dark matter halos of galaxies http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.4650] . It is also unlikely dark matter is a significant contributor to black hole mass because, unlike baryonic matter, it is essentially collisionless. Baryonic matter is slowed by collisions with other baryonic matter allowing it to shed angular moment and be captured by local gravitational wells [like black holes]. Ingesting large amounts of dark matter would also interfere with galaxy formation via a process called runaway accretion.
Chronos said:There is no known link between dark matter and black hole mass [re: Supermassive black holes do not correlate with dark matter halos of galaxies http://arxiv.org/abs/1101.4650] . It is also unlikely dark matter is a significant contributor to black hole mass because, unlike baryonic matter, it is essentially collisionless. Baryonic matter is slowed by collisions with other baryonic matter allowing it to shed angular moment and be captured by local gravitational wells [like black holes]. Ingesting large amounts of dark matter would also interfere with galaxy formation via a process called runaway accretion.
hubble_bubble said:I have just looked up this article about quantum gravity.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/02/010212075309.htm
If the speed of light is frequency dependent then this could explain the position of the halo.
hubble_bubble said:"We conclude that black holes do not correlate directly with dark matter. They do not correlate with galaxy disks, either. Therefore black holes coevolve only with bulges."
This implies rotational velocity as the bulge will form around a rotating black hole, presumably with significant velocity. Also accumulating an ergosphere where time and space behave in peculiar ways.
hubble_bubble said:just one fly in the ointment. If the event horizon stops anything at light speed or less escape the black hole how does gravity itself have an influence outside the EH. It travels at the sped of light. I know that this sounds like a very silly question to ask as it is self referencing, but that is a force that travels at the speed of light that violates its own bounds. We do not even know what gravity is but there could be a case for arguing that is should trap everything including itself.
Chronos said:See http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=264/
Drakkith said:Since that article is over 11 years old and I've never heard of this before, I'm going to assume that no correlation has been observed yet. Nor do I understand how this could possibly explain the position of the halo.
I really don't think the rotation of the black hole has anything to do with the velocity of the bulge. The effect of the black hole's rotation just doesn't extend far enough out to do anything like this to my knowledge.
Gravity is in the geometry of spacetime, it is not something that has to "get out" of anything. Gravity WAVES travel at the speed of light, but gravity, meaning the geometry of spacetime, acts instantly. It is only the change in spacetime that moves at c.
Drakkith said:You can extend it further. It just has negligible effect due to the vast distances between objects in space. And I don't know what you mean by "gravity amplification", as such a thing does not exist. Gravity behaves no differently near a black hole than it does near any other object.
hubble_bubble said:Within the event horizon I would say that gravity is definitely amplified. Past the point of no return. BTW what mass would produce a Swarzchild radius equal to the Planck length and also to Planck length cubed?
Drakkith said:Then you are incorrect. Gravity is not amplified within the event horizon according to current theory.
Simple: the Planck mass. Or maybe the Planck mass with a small prefactor, as those are arbitrary anyway.hubble_bubble said:BTW what mass would produce a Swarzchild radius equal to the Planck length and also to Planck length cubed?
mfb said:Simple: the Planck mass. Or maybe the Planck mass with a small prefactor, as those are arbitrary anyway.