This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Black Hole Caught Zapping Galaxy Into Existence?

Black Hole Caught Zapping Galaxy Into Existence? - Comments

xsjadolateralus's Avatar Comment 1 by xsjadolateralus


If this happens, don't the theists have one less (already fallible) argument of "Somethin can't come from nothin!"?


Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:41:00 UTC | #419518

tlb81's Avatar Comment 2 by tlb81

I LOVE the name Very Large Telescope.

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:41:00 UTC | #419519

glenister_m's Avatar Comment 3 by glenister_m

I'm not sure how this helps in the galaxy/black hole "which came first" question. Since the black hole is already there, without its own stars, then it appears to be there first - and where did it come from£

If it is helping its companion galaxy make stars, so it can steal them later, does the companion galaxy have a black hole, and where did its stars come from£ Colliding jets£

Don't get me wrong, I love this stuff. The fact that the jets of a black hole are producing stars in a nearby galaxy which it will merge with is very cool. However it either answers the question definitively "black holes come first", or suggest other options "galaxies form in pairs" or is simply another piece in a big puzzle.

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:02:00 UTC | #419530

mlgatheist's Avatar Comment 4 by mlgatheist

I am old and it has been decades since I took any physics classes, but I always thought that black holes were a mass so large that it calapsed on it self pasted the neutron barrier. That it's gravity was so strong that absolutely nothing can escape it, not even light. So how can jets be shooting out from it to feed the nearby galaxy£

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 19:20:00 UTC | #419556

MrStray's Avatar Comment 5 by MrStray

Yes, but WHO created the black hole from the beginning... Of course this is just another example of how great the Flying Spaghetti Monster is.

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 19:35:00 UTC | #419566

glenister_m's Avatar Comment 6 by glenister_m

RE:Comment #438015 by mlgatheist

As Stephen Hawking showed, Black Holes aren't really black.

A) They emit Hawking radiation, formed just outside the event horizon (point where light can't escape) so no laws of physics are broken.

B) Black holes also have an immense magnetic field, that twists tightly at the poles. As matter falls toward the black hole, it speeds up and heats up, but only some of it actually falls into hole. The rest gets driven by the magnetic field into the magnetic poles, and is fired off at incredible speeds and energies as jets.

So the short answer is, yes, anything that falls into the black hole and passes the event horizon is lost. However a large amount of what falls toward the hole is actually flung away from the hole as jets at the magnetic poles before it can cross the event horizon.

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:02:00 UTC | #419575

DoctorMelkor's Avatar Comment 7 by DoctorMelkor

Re: Comment #437988 by glenister_m

I agree, I think that while this is some fascinating information about a particular intriguing case, it hardly shifts or settles any paradigms as to how galaxies in general form and acquire their black holes. It's neat, but for all we know it may be a very unusual situation...well, I guess it IS already that in that it's an ultramassive black hole not in the center of a galaxy already.

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:23:00 UTC | #419605

crookedshoes's Avatar Comment 8 by crookedshoes

Your explanation is excellent (way over my head as I am a Biologist) however, I'd really appreciate some mention of FSM's noodly appendage. I think, if you scrutinize the scenario (from Hawking's book) it is blatantly obvious that the swirls of matter exuded from the poles of the black hole are de facto proof of his presence.

Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:40:00 UTC | #419619

lackofgravitas's Avatar Comment 9 by lackofgravitas

I'm waiting for the BLT, the Bloody Large Telescope.

But seriously, I love this stuff, galaxy building black holes. Who'd a thought?

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 00:55:00 UTC | #419667

masubi's Avatar Comment 10 by masubi

"'s what you do when you don't have the math for real science." -- From the show Sliders

Live a good life,


Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:18:00 UTC | #419691

Bala's Avatar Comment 11 by Bala

I love the title - Black Hole caught zapping galaxy into existence. Reminds me of a Ricky Gervais skit.

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:31:00 UTC | #419694

zengardener's Avatar Comment 12 by zengardener

6. Comment #438034 by glenister_m
Marked as excellent.

Which come first, the supermassive black holes that frantically devour matter or the enormous galaxies where they reside?

I guess the obvious answer is that they form at the same time.

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 07:23:00 UTC | #419736

Rumraket80's Avatar Comment 13 by Rumraket80


This subject is unrelated to the supposed "first cause" of the universe.

The implication in the article is that supermassive black holes work as a focusing point around which gas and dust can collect over millions of years, making stars and thus galaxies.

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 09:57:00 UTC | #419794

SaganTheCat's Avatar Comment 14 by SaganTheCat

The big issue now is how must we worship our black hole, what makes him angry and who should be sent into it as a sacrafice

one assumes black holes don't like the gays and find women a bit icky at best

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:52:00 UTC | #419866

mlgatheist's Avatar Comment 15 by mlgatheist


Thank you for the information.

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:10:00 UTC | #419868

Tyler Durden's Avatar Comment 16 by Tyler Durden

"And I, for one, welcome our new insect supermassive black hole overlords" - Kent Brockman

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:15:00 UTC | #419870

King of NH's Avatar Comment 17 by King of NH

I wonder if this links back to

If so, we could be rooting out the final hiding places of Bigfoot and his Fairy Starmakers.

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:49:00 UTC | #419908

tommcc's Avatar Comment 18 by tommcc

I love this stuff but unfortunately, once the information passes over the event horizon into my brain, it is so dense in there that everything gets jumbled up.
So, I was hoping someone can explain relationship (if any£) between a quasar and a black hole.

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:53:00 UTC | #419909

Simon Says's Avatar Comment 19 by Simon Says

6. Comment #438034 by glenister_m

I am sorry my good sir but you are precisely wrong in your interpretation of singularity mechanics. I happen to be an expert on black holes as I have seen the Disney movie of same title and I can assure you that you are incorrect. You see things are not "lost" into a black hole as is evidenced when Captain Dan Holland, Lieutenant Charles Pizer, Dr. Kate McCrae and V.I.N.CENT passed into and through the black hole. Source HERE

As Dr. Hans Reinhardt intended to do before his unfortunate imprisonment in hell, inside the shell of Maxamillion, his servant robot. Which is a very inopportune happenstance for a scientist to have to endure when great works of scientific discovery are afoot.

Did you know that after that movie The Black Hole was made, about the same time as Star Trek the movie, also 1979, there were very few other films made with overtures since those two. I think One exception was the movie The Big Blue. Which had a very nice overture. Of course being American I am partial to the Bill Conti sound track. The Eric Serra is a fine piece of work but since the first version for me was the Conti piece I am partial to it. The music score aside, I enjoyed the longer European cut of the movie and the more ambiguous ending. The American ending to The Big Blue was a little less ambiguous but not a sure thing in itself.

What were we talking about again?

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:38:00 UTC | #419990

Simon Says's Avatar Comment 20 by Simon Says

Oh yes almost forgot HERE is the Bill Conti version from The Big blue.

An HERE is the Eric Serra version.

I think the Serra version is good, but a little too electronica jazzy.

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 19:50:00 UTC | #419995

InYourFaceNewYorker's Avatar Comment 21 by InYourFaceNewYorker

Wow, this is interesting... and hard to wrap my head around!

Fri, 04 Dec 2009 04:33:00 UTC | #420125

zengardener's Avatar Comment 22 by zengardener


I was hoping someone can explain relationship (if any£) between a quasar and a black hole.

Quasars show where massive black holes are growing rapidly. As a massive black hole consumes an object, some of the matter is hurled away through one of the poles. N/S. only it's not matter any more but a strong emission of the entire radio specrtum.

So, an inactive black hole has consumed everything within reach, and an active black hole is the brightest thing in the Universe, like a trillion times as bright as our sun.

Pictures of Quasars

Quasar on Wiki

Fri, 04 Dec 2009 06:45:00 UTC | #420138