[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 17 KB, 385x488, 1312621364851.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5869595 No.5869595[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Do black holes move relative to space or do they stay at a fixed position?

Picture unrelated.

>> No.5869600

Bump for curiosity.

>> No.5869604

same as galaxies

>> No.5869612

>relative to space
relative to what?

>> No.5869650

>>5869612
The ether. Duh.

>> No.5869654

They move in space. There are black holes in the disk of the galaxy and they are moving around the center of the galaxy in the same way any other object is.

>> No.5869677

Relative to space, otherwise black hole collisions wouldn't occur.

>> No.5869693

>>5869677

You don't understand what space is. I'm not trying to insult you, I'm simply stating that you're wrong.

>> No.5869695 [DELETED] 

>>5869693
Well, Mr Smartass. What IS space?

>> No.5869696

>>5869693
I'm afraid that you don't understand what space is. Please, understand, there are just some things that are beyond your mind. Don't get angry, just leave the science to the scientists.

>> No.5869700

>>5869695

>Relative to Space
Was the giveaway. This just doesn't make any sense. At all.

>> No.5869703

There is nothing special about the way black holes interact with external space. They act in the same way as any other massive object.

>> No.5869704 [DELETED] 

>>5869700
Answer the question: What is space?

>> No.5869705

>>5869700
I was answering using the terminology of the question so as not to confuse the OP. Of course there is no relative to space but it's a marginally better misunderstanding than that they are in a fixed position.

>> No.5869711

define relative, define black holes, define fixed, define position, define space, define "do", define movie.
Not even being sarcastic.

>> No.5869713 [DELETED] 

>>5869711
You're not funny, you're just making yourself look stupid.

>> No.5869715

>>5869713
you're not serious either, you look like you have no clue regarding physics.
Once you get on my level you gonna start asking the same things from plebes.

>> No.5869728

>>5869715
>Once you get on my level you gonna start asking the same things from plebes.
D'aww, he thinks he's a real scientist.

>> No.5869731

>>5869728

what is real?

>> No.5869733 [DELETED] 

>>5869715
1. This was my first post ITT.
2. You did already demonstrate your lack of understanding, hence why I needed to call you out on your bullshit.

It's time for you to drop the trip unless you enjoy the embarrassment.

>> No.5869732

>>5869731
One who's earned the right to be pretentious.

>> No.5869734

>>5869732

I thought that was guaranteed in the Constitution.

>> No.5870651

They move relative to space.

>> No.5870659 [DELETED] 
File: 1.96 MB, 320x212, 1372619861317.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5870659

>>5869595
>BH's
>Not being effectively entirely straight lines
>asking about fucking position

>> No.5871376

>>5870651

Thank you, sole sane person on /sci/.

>> No.5871386

>>5870651
>>5871376
>"They move relative to space."
>a meaningless claim
>"Thank you, sole sane person on /sci/."
lel

>>5870659
definitely not sfw figget

>> No.5871445

>>5870659
Are you suggesting that straight lines don't have position? You might want to check for stupidity between your ears. Also this is a safe for work board, please don't post porn.

>> No.5871452

>>5869696
>>5869696

see, you could have taken the opportunity here to explain that there is no such thing as an absolute velocity, only relative velocities, simple shit really.

But instead you decided being a cunt was the better choice. good on you m8

>> No.5871469

Fun fact: Black holes are dimensional gateways.

>> No.5871515

You can't be relative to space in the same way you can't find the end of a circle. It's meaningless. Things are only relative to other things, and space is very literally nothing.

>> No.5871527

Yes, they do, they act just like the fucker he was before getting critical mass and going insane.

>> No.5871572

>>5871515

wrong

what is this? 1920?

>> No.5873192

>>5871515
Do you not know what a frame of reference is?

>> No.5873774

>>5873192
What is the reference frame for space?

>> No.5875358

>>5873774
the absolute reference frame centered at the origin of the universe

>> No.5875373

>>5875358

0/10

>> No.5875379 [DELETED] 

>>5875373
That's the necrobumper. She only has 30 seconds to think of a comment; of course it's going to be inane.

>> No.5875434

>>5871469
ANY N-dimensional manifold is a "gateway".

The problem is, you think that the other dimensions go anywhere relative to their origin that is not the same as their origin. You would not personally survive the transformation, but your energy would become something for that dimension to observe with whatever they observe things with..

>> No.5876203

>>5875434
>meaningless sequence of psychotic babble

>> No.5877606

>>5875434
I don't think you understood the concept of manifolds.

>> No.5878825

>>5875434
>something for that dimension to observe

Do you even know what a dimension is?

>> No.5879969

Do black holes counteract the expansion of the universe?

>> No.5880650

>>5879969
Yes. Dark energy pushes Hawkins' radiation out of the black hole. The black hole is usually strong enough to suck it back in.

>> No.5880971

>>5878825
hey man! he's trying his hardest!

>> No.5882004

>>5880650
What is Hawking radiation? If light cannot escape a black hole but Hawking radiation can, does that mean Hawking radiation is faster than light?

>> No.5882654 [DELETED] 
File: 1.16 MB, 2100x1260, 5869595.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5882654

>>5870651
>>5871376
>>5873192
>>5873774
>>5875358
>>5876203
>>5877606
>>5878825
>>5879969
>>5880650
>>5882004
Bumping dozens of threads for a week with conversations with yourself isn't normal. But on autism it is.

4chan needs a mechanism to prevent samefags from bumping enormous numbers of threads. If you agree, email moot@4chan.org so we can get this to happen.

>> No.5882751

>>5882004
Not exactly. Gravity turns off momentarily to let some of the radiation out.

>> No.5884153

>>5882751
By what mechanism does gravity turn off?

>> No.5884180

>>5884153

it doesn't i don't even know what the fuck they are talking about. seriously just search for hawking radiation and look at the pretty pictures, it really does explain it perfectly in about 2 seconds.

>> No.5884181

>>5882004
The emitted particles were never inside the event horizon, it was their entangled partners that were.

Fuck why din't we just rename this board /math/ and be done with it

>> No.5884742

They do move.

You can prove this to yourself very simply: Consider a binary star system. As the stars orbit each other, they tug each other around. Since [stellar] black holes are thought to be evolved stars, we have found them in such binary systems. We then have two choices, either the visible star is violating the laws of physics, or there is an unseen massive companion. This is actually similar to how dark matter has been inferred to exist.

There is no reason to expect that the unseen companion [candidate black hole] does not also move, because the force of the black hole on the visible star is equivalent to the force of the visible star on the black hole. You could also conceptualize this through general relativity.

You look at things orbiting the black hole to learn about their relative motion, mass, rotation, etc.. since we have to infer their properties based on their gravitational influence.

Last bit: we are fairly confident that most, if not all galaxies have a supermassive black hole. Since all galaxies are moving away from each other [save local galaxies] as space expands, they are by definition moving.

Physics is fun!

>> No.5884840

>>5884153
You first have to understand that all black holes are equipped with a glitchy firewall prone to crashing, It sometimes inadvertently blocks the gravity.

>> No.5886263

>>5884181
>The emitted particles were never inside the event horizon, it was their entangled partners that were.

I don't understand. Can entanglement lead to FTL teleportation of mass? Or how else do particles leave the black hole?

>> No.5887327

>>5886263
>Can entanglement lead to FTL teleportation of mass?
No, it cannot. The person you are replying to is an uneducated and embarrassingly silly child who read or watched a popular presentation on black holes. Quantum tunneling does not allow you to transmit information superluminally in any context. In the presence of black holes there is a subtlety different ""nonlocal"" (although not really) effect to insure that information at the singularity is fundamentally not lost. I will not be able to dumb it down unless you have some basic knowledge of non-commutative geometry and holography.

>> No.5887333

>>5869595
They move.

This isn't an "opinion" kinda question OP, it is fact. We know this shit. Blackholes move, go ask any astronomer, or google it.

\thread

>> No.5888710

>>5887327
>I will not be able to dumb it down unless you have some basic knowledge of non-commutative geometry and holography.

"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough." -- Einstein

>> No.5888716

Space is expanding in every direction. If a back hole was chilling in some void it would be moving away from every point in space

>> No.5888786
File: 61 KB, 200x200, bernard black 2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5888786

Space can be warped, so there is "fabric".
Why can't space that isn't warped ("absolute space") be considered the absolute reference frame?

>> No.5889127

>>5888786
There is no such thing as zero curvature, because distortion extends outwards to great distances, even if imperceptibly small.

Also, the distortions themselves propagate through space. Consider the Sun as it revolves around the center of the galaxy. It drags its space-time distortion with it. Space that is ~flat (see first P) will distort according to the mass-energy that passes through it.

You might argue that some point very far away that is essentially flat could serve as a reference point. This argument breaks down because of the expansion of space. Any reference point you select is going to be moving to be moving away from distant sources at tremendous speeds. There really is no 'privileged' reference frame :v

>> No.5889309 [DELETED] 
File: 49 KB, 1296x720, 5869595.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5889309

Someone has been keeping at least 35 threads alive
by bumping them twice a day. Compare the post times of
>>5870651 >>5871376 >>5873192 >>5873774 >>5875358 >>5876203
>>5877606 >>5878825 >>5879969 >>5880650 >>5882004 >>5882751
>>5884153
to the post times in other threads.
It's clear most of these are the same person.
The threads being bumped:
>>5858447 >>5861383 >>5862983 >>5863249 >>5865823 >>5866853
>>5867452 >>5867640 >>5868097 >>5868460 >>5868538 >>5869504
>>5869595 >>5869759 >>5869946 >>5872951 >>5873166 >>5873829
>>5874378 >>5874727 >>5875025 >>5876410 >>5876819 >>5878449
>>5878607 >>5878684 >>5878722 >>5880041 >>5880453 >>5880775
>>5881738 >>5883998 >>5884116 >>5884625 >>5885545
Write to moot@4chan.org if you want it to stop.

>> No.5889605

>>5889127
>There is no such thing as zero curvature,
You are a pseudo-intellectual kibitzer parading ignorance. Nothing prohibits one from finding a coordinate system such that the spin connection vanishes. The remainder of your post is mostly filled with nonsensical and downright wrong and childishly wrong statements that I will not even bother with.

>> No.5889679

>>5889605
Yeah, frame dragging and basic principles of equivalence are totally pseudo-intellectual. How stupid of someone to try to explain something to a guy asking a question without assuming he has graduate level courses under his belt.

Instead of spouting off random terms and insults without saying anything constructive, maybe try to lend something to the understanding of others? While you're at it, go browse the basic cosmology articles on Wiki. I think you'll find some interesting results that pop out of even the most basic Robertson-Walker formulation.

Or you could just assume that everyone that posts is below your mighty intellect because they are trying to relate complex ideas to other people. You are a prime example of why scientists get a bad rap as arrogant assholes who concern themselves with one-upping each other instead of trying to further human knowledge.

>> No.5890652

>>5888716
>Space is expanding in every direction.

What is it expanding into?

>> No.5890674

>>5890652
It doesn't expand into anything, because this implies there is an outside volume that it is filling.

It is more accurate to think of more space being made as space expands. Though this is also somewhat misleading. Think of space as a huge grid, and over time the grid itself is getting larger, carrying elements on the grid away from one another. In Cosmology, the measure this expansion with the 'scale factor'.

Of course you cannot detect this locally, but over distances of millions to billions of light years, it becomes measurable. This is why light from distant galaxies is red-shifted. The waves are stretched by spatial expansion, also interpreted as recessional speed. Some astronomers call it red stretch instead of redshift for this reason.

>> No.5891140

Space-as-a-fixed-background doesn't exist. All that exists is a gigantic list of distances between particles.

>> No.5891155
File: 1.14 MB, 275x200, 1366906823574.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5891155

>>5869595

Ok /sci/, total casual here, just gonna put what I think the answer is and watch the endless shitstorm.

Wouldn't the answer be both depending on where you are observing the black hole from? Theoretically, if you were inside the black hole looking outwards into "space" you would appear to be moving.

If you are observing the black hole from say, Earth, it would appear to be static because it bends the light around itself. Since light is essentially the existance of matter, it bends space around itself rather than going through space. Much like a boulder in a stream redirects water.

Any correction would be nice, I'm trying to learn.

>> No.5891170

>>5869595
they move bitch.

>> No.5891189

>>5891155

SCIENTITIANS COME BACK I WANT TO LEARN

>thinly veiled bump

>> No.5891215

>>5890652
Imagine a piece of elastic being pulled in every direction simultaneously. The elastic is not assimilating or consuming the environment around it, but its volume is increasing and the particles within the elastic getting further apart. Space is basically an elastic inside a vacuum.

>> No.5891226

>>5891155
If you could look outwards from within, you would probably observe blinding light squeezed into a tunnel towards the horizon. All the light passing into the black hole is being blue-shifted towards the singularity (center of the BH).

The black hole you are 'observing' form Earth is moving, just as any other object like a star is moving relative to Earth. True, light must bend as it goes near it, but the same thing happens with any massive object, this is how General Relativity was first demonstrated in ~1919 with light from distant stars bending around the Sun during an eclipse.

Inside or very near the BH things are complicated, a kind of "infinitely" curved space, but outside it is pretty valid to treat it as just any other 'normal' massive object. It has to obey the curvature of space it passes through, otherwise it could not do things like orbit another objec, such as a star, which we have observational evidence for.

>> No.5891239

>>5891226

>tl;dr I'm a fucking idiot.

Thanks man.

>> No.5891273

>>5869595
>relative to space
There's your problem right there.

>> No.5891361

>>5889679
>frame dragging and basic principles of equivalence
In contrast to the unfortified kindergarten ideas in that post those are real scientific concepts.
>try to explain something
That poster did not present any explanation. Instead he was behaving like an infantile moron by regurgitating gigatons of unequivocally dishonest garbage.
>without assuming
Stammering extraordinarily shallow, oversimplified caricatures is OK as long as they are correct. Unfortunately the extraneously-diseased brain of that other poster has successfully demonstrated it is incapable of even the aforementioned on a freshmen-level physics topic.
>random terms
Like a five-year-old spoiled boy you makes screams of your lack of education. If you weren't a mentally defective middle school dropout who pretends that he understands physics after watching some sleazy pop-science video on the internet, then maybe you would understand them. Why do you find it necessary to display such destructive ignorance instead of keeping to the children's playground? Please stop violating >>>/global/rules/2.
>insults
Just stating observations. You should know that science starts with observations. And so far in your post we have only observed an insubstantial pile of sheer nonsense.
>without saying anything constructive
This is some mediocre reading comprehension. That poster babbled something inane and I corrected him. It is not my fault that this invokes emotional disappointments. It would be a good idea to try reading an actual science book so this kind of embarrassment will not happen again to you.
>While you're at it, go browse the basic cosmology articles on Wiki. I think you'll find some interesting results that pop out of even the most basic Robertson-Walker formulation.
It is a waste of time for you to read those articles as you lack the cognitive skills to understand them.

>> No.5891362

>complex ideas to other people.
On the science board we expect at least a minimum of education. Freshmen undergraduate physics is not complex and rambling several prevailing pseudoscientific misconceptions does not constitute a laymen explanation.
>You are a prime example
The mentally sick and paranoid fantasies you have about science and scientists do not belong here. Take your meds.

>> No.5891440

>>5889605
ya sure you fucking shithead youve got your goddamn local lorentz frame and vanishing spin connections and shit but can you get your curvature tensor to vanish? no you fuckhead

>> No.5891596

>>5891362
You have yet to contribute anything here, and are just slinging insults down from some imagined throne.

Also, you are making vast, sweeping generalizations and assumptions about people you do not know. If there is anyone who needs meds, it's you buddy.

>> No.5891597

>>5891440
No, you see he can because you are a middle-school dropout and watched Bill Nye to learn about GR. Or something :p

>> No.5891657

>>5884181

Thanks for finally explaining that to me. Never knew that that was how/why Hawking radiation worked.

Now to look up what 'entangled' means...

>> No.5891765

Andromeda and the Milky Way are predicted to collide one day, so at least one of them is moving. So yes, they move.

>> No.5891771
File: 195 KB, 633x758, you feel that rookie.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5891771

>>5891765
What happens when two stars collide?

>tfw I will never watch two stars collide

>> No.5891778
File: 2.72 MB, 230x173, 1369853855505.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5891778

>>5891771
star collision is a rarity even during galactic merging
distances between stars are too fucking big

>> No.5893104

>>5891778
You didn't answer her question. She wanted to know what would happen.

>> No.5893114

>>5891771
For stars that are small enough, they would fling out mass initially, then gather it back in and just be one bigger star.
For really big stars, it could trigger a supernova.
It wouldn't be very interesting to watch, though. It would take decades for the collision to happen.

>> No.5893129

>>5893104
>she

>> No.5893136 [DELETED] 

>>5893104
10 hour interval bump

>underage female detected

>> No.5893639

>>5891778
Could happen in globular clusters though.

At least its a decent explanation for blue stragglers.

>> No.5893648

>>5869704
>A: we are at the north pole
>B: what if we keep going north?
>A: That makes no sense

What IS space

>> No.5893868

>>5891440
Did you repeatedly fail babby's first GR? I am not talking the entire spacetime, feebleminded moron. Around that local frame you have ordinary flat spacetime dynamics, you fucking retarded piece of trash. There is no such thing as curvature for an observer stationed there as she does not even know what curvature is, you dysphasic cretinous imbecile.
>can you get your curvature tensor to vanish?
I can, you mentally dysfunctional simpleton. There is a vertex operator for every possible infinitesimal variation of the background; I may perturb it by adding or removing closed strings in the graviton mode until I recover a flat geometry, you brainless dimwit. Go back to school and stop flooding /sci/ with underaged low level edgy teenager high school ignorant bullshittery. You are everything that is wrong with this board.

>> No.5894967

>>5893114
>It wouldn't be very interesting to watch

What if one of the stars is made of lava and the other is made of ice?

>> No.5895763

>>5893868
>by adding or removing closed strings in the graviton mode

But string theory is just a geuss and has no evidence.

>> No.5895813

>>5895763
Yes, but who needs evidence when you can play really complicated "what if?!" games with random math and claim you've shown something physically significant.

Science supported by empirical reasoning instead of dick waiving convoluted mathematics is so passe.

>> No.5897019

>>5895813
>Yes, but who needs evidence

Hitchens' razor.

>> No.5897026

>>5869595
They're str8 lines m8... still, sentience is a strange thing to cope with when you realize you breath air

>> No.5897822

>>5895763
There is evidence.

>> No.5899282

>>5897822
Can you please post the evidence?

>> No.5899313

>>5887327
>I will not be able to dumb it down unless you have some basic knowledge of non-commutative geometry and holography.

Bullshit. You need neither to explain the really rather trivial no-signalling and no-teleportation theorems.

>> No.5899323

>>5893868
Is this an attempt at humor?
Do you ever actually talk to other people?

>> No.5899837

>>5899282
Why?

>> No.5901052

>>5899323
Why do you think she was attempting humor? What she said is scientifically accurate.

>> No.5901861

>>5899313
What do those have to do with the correct resolution to the black hole information paradox?

>> No.5901892

>>5901052
Probably because the of the interspersed repetitive insults? I mean its either a poor attempt at humor or a really socially inept person.

If "she" has something meaningful to say, why not just say it without all the bullshit?

>> No.5903330

>>5901892
>Probably because the of the interspersed repetitive insults?
They are justified because the person she replied to demonstrated humungous ignorance.

>I mean its either a poor attempt at humor or a really socially inept person.
I think you are socially inept, if you can't handle being scientifically corrected.

>> No.5904000

>>5897026
>sentience
Can someone please explain to me what this means?

>> No.5904004

>>5904000

since you got trips i'll be nice

it means self aware and able to think

>> No.5904007

>>5904004

then what is sapience

nigger don't be condescending when you don't kniw shit yourself.

go join "i fucking love science" on facebook or something

>> No.5905497

>>5904004
How would you test this? What are the observable effects?

>> No.5906284

>>5904007
Could you explain the difference?

>> No.5906291

>>5904007

sapience means you have knowledge

>> No.5907939

>>5904007
>go join "i fucking love science" on facebook or something

I don't have a facebook account.

>> No.5907970

>>5869693
said tesla to einstein

interesting iallry

>> No.5908633

>>5906291
What is knowledge?

>> No.5908646

what is is

>> No.5910213

>>5908633
Knowledge is information stored in the brain.

>> No.5910749

>>5910213
And intelligence is the application of said knowledge

>> No.5911963 [DELETED] 

>>5910749
An IQ test doesn't need any prior knowledge.

>> No.5911965

>>5911963
That's why it's bogus.

>> No.5912922

>>5911965
How would you suggest we measure low crystallized intelligence?

>> No.5914252 [DELETED] 

>>5912922
with X-ray crystallography

>> No.5914891

>>5914252
Would this not damage the brain in the process?

>> No.5916067 [DELETED] 

>>5914891
The brain was already damaged by applying the crystallization technique.

>> No.5917480 [DELETED] 

Black holes stay at a fixed position. This is a consequence of Newton's third law.

>> No.5918787

>>5917480
If they stay at a fixed position, than how is it that two blackholes can collide?
this is something that does happen, and I can understand that time and space is skewed to the point where it conceptually no longer even exists in a blackhole, but with this being the case how can space move around it with time and space reemerging at the blackholes previous coordinates?

>> No.5919180

>>5918787
>how is it that two blackholes can collide?
Due to Einstein's field equations, the space between the black holes shrinks.

>> No.5920424 [DELETED] 

>>5918787
>than how is it that two blackholes can collide?

This has never been observed.

>> No.5921193

>>5920424
We have indirect evidence.

>> No.5922204 [DELETED] 

>>5921193
[citation needed]

>> No.5923131

>>5922204
Look up Peter Woit's thought experiments.

>> No.5924096 [DELETED] 

>>5923131
I tried to google but I didn't find it.

>> No.5924102

>>5920424
>>5921193
>>5922204
>>5923131
>>5924096

1. there's black holes in the centers of galaxies
2. galaxies move through space
3. black holes move through space

black holes are just collapsed stars. if stars can move, so can black holes

>> No.5925459 [DELETED] 

>>5924102
>2. galaxies move through space
>3. black holes move through space

This is a non sequitur. "Dogs can move. Therefore dead dogs can move too."

>> No.5926455 [DELETED] 

What was the OP's picture?

>> No.5927377

>>5926455
Check the archive.

>> No.5929213 [DELETED] 

>>5927377
Where can I find the archive?

>> No.5929272

>>5869654
But wouldn't the larger mass/gravitational pull of a black hole cause every other gravitational force necessary for any type of orbit to be meaningless?

>> No.5930919 [DELETED] 

>>5929272
Is gravity affected by black holes?

>> No.5930928

>>5929272

There's a black hole at the center of our galaxy, so that's evidently not true.

>> No.5932194

>>5930919
Gravity implies that black holes do not exist.

>> No.5933673 [DELETED] 

>>5930928
Where is the center of our galaxy?

>> No.5934740 [DELETED] 

>>5933673
It depends on your frame of reference.

>> No.5935934 [DELETED] 

Black holes do not move. Only the space around them moves.

>> No.5937515 [DELETED] 

Black holes are the sinks of spacetime.

>> No.5937532

>>5933673
Its barycentre (centre of mass), which lies approximately 50,000ly from all points on its circumference.

>> No.5939341 [DELETED] 

>>5937532
How do we find the barycentre?

>> No.5940574 [DELETED] 

>>5939341
In order to find it we need to know whether black holes move relative to space or stay at a fixed position.

>> No.5942487 [DELETED] 

>>5940574
How do we find out?

>> No.5942508

>>5869595

Black holes move around like any other object. If they didn't, galaxies would be anchored in place around the supermassive at their core, and we know that isn't true.

>> No.5944373 [DELETED] 

>>5942508
How do we know the movement of galaxies is not just the expansion of space?

>> No.5946503 [DELETED] 

>>5944373
Science has not yet found a method of distinguishing between these events.

>> No.5947738 [DELETED] 

>>5944373
What is the universe expanding into?

>> No.5947787

daily reminder that this thread is over a month old

>> No.5949145 [DELETED] 

>>5947787
Yet the question is still unanswered. Perhaps it will remain a mystery forever.

>> No.5949178
File: 23 KB, 288x499, why.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5949178

>>5949145
...The second post answered correct.

What kind of game do you think this is?

>> No.5949959 [DELETED] 

>>5949178
The second post only moved the goalposts without answering the question.

>> No.5951218 [DELETED] 

>>5949178
But the second post is wrong. There are more black holes in an atom than galaxies in the milky way.

>> No.5952325

>>5869595
They move relatively to objects in space.
Nothing is relative to "space" itself..there is no real origin of open space that we use.

>> No.5952368

>>5952325

you're mostly right, but we can use the CMB as a reference for absolute space. (it's not entirely accurate but it works sometimes)

>> No.5952462

>>5869728
acting condescending as though implying that you are "a real scientist" makes you "a real scientist" lel what's your field and contribution?

>> No.5952470

>>5875358
implying it is a ball of stuff in a big dark room

>> No.5952472

>>5875434
this is literally the worst post in the history of this
board
/neck yourself son

>> No.5952475

>>5884840
nice use of the term firewall in regards to the reason findings at event horizons
>hope it was intended

>> No.5952478

>>5888786
wow this is almost newtonian in origin look at any high school physics data sheet and see that. TL;DR force in experience even when distance from source tends to infinity

>> No.5952482

>>5894967
love it

>> No.5952483

>>5897019
possibly missed the sarcasm?

>> No.5952536

>>5925459
dead dogs do move depending on frame of reference

>> No.5953388 [DELETED] 

>>5952470
According to the bing bang theory the universe started at a single point in space.

>> No.5954730 [DELETED] 

>>5952536
OP's question is about absolute motion, not relative motion.

>> No.5956040 [DELETED] 

Black holes do not move.

>> No.5956170

>>5953388
the universe is still at the singular point.
everywhere is the center of the universe.

>> No.5956241

>>5954730
What is motion without a reference point?

>> No.5956249

>>5953388
>According to the bing bang theory the universe started at a single point in space.

That is wrong.

>> No.5956843

Black holes are stationary but the universe is moving

>> No.5957304 [DELETED] 

>>5956249
The bing bang theory states the universe exploded from a singularity.

>> No.5957866

>>5956040
What happens when you have two charged black holes

>> No.5959287

>>5957866
They would either repel or attract each other.