A big AMEN to that!Please dont tell me what you think cause i saw all of what you beleive for months and its unbeleivable. I am more interest in science then wild imagination.
So, when light is reflected off of objects, it does undergo a slight redshift? When a photon travels through extremely long distances, billions of light years worth, is it not believable that it becomes significantly redshifted.. Even say, down to a microwave wavelength, eventually dispersing out to a constantly waining CMBastro_uk wrote:Hi Doum
Yes the photon does lose energy, it is essentially redshifted so its wavelength increases.
I did a little bit of research into solar sails in my undergrad days, the important thing is that for maximum propulsion the sail has to be reflective. Naively you would assume it is better for the sail to absorb the photon, but when you do this the sail heats up and reradiates the energy as lower energy photons. Some of these will be emitted in the forward direction meaning that they cancel out some of the thrust. So the best result is to have a perfectly reflective surface.
Simple answer no. And the reason is related to your next question. To redshift light by that much would require many scattering events, each scattering event would essentially be random and this would eventually tend to destroy any information about the original path of the light. This would mean that the light would become a diffuse glow with no discernable structure.So, when light is reflected off of objects, it does undergo a slight redshift? When a photon travels through extremely long distances, billions of light years worth, is it not believable that it becomes significantly redshifted.. Even say, down to a microwave wavelength, eventually dispersing out to a constantly waining CMB Wink
The reflected light can also be blue shifted, dependent on the direction of the reflective object. The change in the wavelength = the + or - speed of the objectSo, when light is reflected off of objects, it does undergo a slight redshift? When a photon travels through extremely long distances, billions of light years worth, is it not believable that it becomes significantly redshifted.. Even say, down to a microwave wavelength, eventually dispersing out to a constantly waining CMB Wink
Hmm, A light booster eh. So if a photon hits say a mirror traveling .5C towards the photon, the photon would end up with a velocity 1.5C in the opposite direction.?Dr. Skeptic wrote: The reflected light can also be blue shifted, dependent on the direction of the reflective object. The change in the wavelength = the + or - speed of the object
What? No, photons always travel at c. It would gain energy, not velocity, ie. the wavelength would decrease.Wadsworth wrote:Hmm, A light booster eh. So if a photon hits say a mirror traveling .5C towards the photon, the photon would end up with a velocity 1.5C in the opposite direction.?
I don't think there's really a cap on the frequency of light, although it gets harder to generate higher frequencies due to the energies required. I could be wrong though.Once the wavelength is decreased to that of Gamma, and then beyond what happens to our photon? Becomes a nice open ended vibrating string
Why couldn't' we do this experiment in one of our super accelerators?
Once the wavelength is decreased to that of Gamma, and then beyond what happens to our photon? Becomes a nice open ended vibrating string?
You are mistaken.Black hole do not eject matter, what we see going out as high energy particule and X-ray are coming from matter that are thorn apart by the huge gravity(Bent of spacetime) of the black hole. That matter have not reach the event horizon yet, but it is falling in for good
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/25 ... les_green/A team of astronomers from The Netherlands and the UK has discovered a vast "jet-powered bubble" formed in the gas around a black hole in the Milky Way.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The discovery means that for decades scientists have been severely underestimating how much power black holes pump back into the universe instead of merely swallowing material across their event horizons.
Jets of energy and particles flowing outwards at close to the speed of light are a common feature of all accreting black holes, ranging from supermassive black holes at the centres of active galactic nuclei to stellar-mass black holes in X-ray binary systems within our own Galaxy.
However, for the first time European astronomers have now discovered a large bubble surrounding an X-ray binary system. The bubble is approximately 10 light years across, and is predicted to be expanding with a speed of around 100 km per second (225,000 mph).
It appears to have been formed by the action of a powerful outflow or "jet" of energy and matter from the black hole over a time scale of about a million years.
The new, detailed radio observations of a black hole called Cygnus X-1 show a ring of radio emission around a bubble in the nearby interstellar gas - the result of a strong shock that develops at the location where the jet strikes the rarefied gas of the interstellar medium.
The jet that created the bubble seems to be carrying more than 100,000 times the total luminosity of our Sun, and yet the only evidence for this incredible flow of energy is its impact on the tenuous gas between the stars, resulting in the expanding bubble.
"We already knew that supermassive black holes at the centre of other galaxies produce enormous amounts of energy, but this finding proves that something similar is happening in our backyard," said Elena Gallo of the University of Amsterdam, lead author of the paper which will appear in this week's issue of Nature.
"Remarkably, it also means that, after a massive star dies and turns into a black hole, it is still capable of energising its surroundings, by means of completely different mechanisms."
"The importance of this result is that it demonstrates that black holes such as Cygnus X-1, of which there may be millions within our galaxy alone, do not swallow all of the infalling matter and energy, but rather redirect a considerable fraction of it back into space," added Rob Fender of the University of Southampton, second author on the paper.
"We knew about jets from black holes and expected to discover some interaction of the jet's energy with the gas in our Milky Way, but the size and energy content of this bubble came as a surprise," added co-author Dr. Christian Kaiser, also of the University of Southampton.
The question for the Chandra team was how much energy would be required for the jets to produce these bubbles, in some cases thousands of light years across? The answer, according to Steve Allen of Stanford University, is a trillion trillion trillion watts.
The upshot of this fuel-efficient conversion rate, Reuters notes, is that big black holes theoretically have enough gas to keep firing for hundreds of billions of years, way beyond the current estimated age of the universe - a modest 13.7bn years.
A knock-on effect of the black holes' emissions, says Kim Weaver of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Centre, is that the outpouring of energy heats up the gas surrounding the galactic centre, thereby preventing stars from forming from cooling gaseous matter.
Weaver said: "This is one way to keep the stars from forming and letting the galaxies grow bigger."
However, it is not that jets escape from inside the event horizon. Nothing can escape from an event horizon, by definition! Instead, it is thought that jets originate in the accretion disk that surrounds the event horizon.
A fluid falling onto a small object usually cannot fall directly onto it --- most of the matter will miss the object initially, rotate around it, and only gradually be able to hit the central object. Think of draining your bathtub: Accretion disks are the celestial equivalent of this phenomenon, and can be found around black holes, neutron stars, white dwarfs, or around ordinary stars (planets are believed to form from an accretion disk around a protostar).
Accretion disks around a variety of objects seem to be able to produce jets (protostars certainly do, in addition to accreting black holes). It is just that the ones from an accreting black hole tend to be the fastest and the most spectacular. A general rule of thumb is that the speed of a jet is about the same as the escape velocity of the central object --- so the jets from accreting black holes are at near the speed of light, while protostar jets are much more leisurely.
Although accretion disks have sufficient energy to eject a small fraction of the infalling material as jets, it is not clear exactly how. The accretion disks are thought to generate tangled-up magnetic field, which is probably what collimates the jets. However, astrophysicists are still working out the details of how material is lifted up from the accretion disk in the first place, and how exactly it is that the accelerating force (probably radiation pressure) can overcome the gravity of the central object.
Some theorists do think that there is something special about jets from black holes, and that an intrinsic property of black holes helps create such powerful jets. Other theorists disagree.
Magnetic reconnection is a key physical process in space and laboratory plasmas and its macroscopic consequences are numerous. To name a few, it is the physical process responsible for solar flares, tremendous solar explosion sometimes billion times more powerful than an atomic bomb
==========================================Magnetic reconnection is the process whereby magnetic field lines from different magnetic domains collide and reconnect, changing the overall magnetic field topology [Animation 1]. This topological change leads to the mixing of previously separated plasmas. It also efficiently converts magnetic field energy to particle energy, generating reconnection jets (along the horizontal white arrows on animation 1) and plasma heating
===========================================Active Galactic Nuclei (AGN) are galaxies in which the energy output from the central nucleus exceeds the bolometric luminosity of the stellar population by several orders of magnitude. As a substantial fraction of this luminosity is emitted at higher energies X-ray observations provide the best tool for a study of the physical conditions of the central engine of these objects.
The assimilation of accretion disks cause the jets. Proven: the larger the accretion disk the larger the jets - no accretion disk = no jets. For your theory to be true all back holes and neutron stars would require a calcuable jet proportional to size/density. Observations prove they absolutely do not! (Astronomy 101)Dr Skeptic if you can prove to me different than do so.
Similar are the jets created by Neutron stars , quark stars, the theoretical Preon stars and the so called Black Holes.
Think about for a second.
What creates the Jet?
I'm aware of this info.The assimilation of accretion disks cause the jets. Proven: the larger the accretion disk the larger the jets - no accretion disk = no jets. For your theory to be true all back holes and neutron stars would require a calcuable jet proportional to size/density. Observations prove they absolutely do not! (Astronomy 101)
The simple answer is friction. Matter in accretion disc rubs against each other converting the gravitational potential energy into heat. The heat evaporates protons and electrons from the disc, they are then funnelled by magnetic fields also produced by the disc. These form the Jets.It does not explain the driving force that pushes matter away from the Black holes for thousands of light years.
