Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 18:09:44 UTC No. 16115496

Okay, how about this. How about, can it spin itself apart? If two black holes hit in such a way to spin faster than the matter that makes it up can hold it together, can it rip itself apart again?

Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 18:43:40 UTC No. 16115556

>>16115402
split apart what? the black thing you see there isn't solid but literally nothing, there is nothing to "split apart" according to GR (which we know it's wrong but whatever)

Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 18:51:19 UTC No. 16115564

>>16115556

It would go from being one big depression in space-time, to being two smaller depressions in space-time. Like it was before they combined. I don't know what those things really are(i think i know what those things really are, but we don't have to know that to know that for this), but there were two of them before and then when they combined there was a bigger one, and i'm asking is there some mechanism to reverse that process?

Like, they both have their own momentum. The black holes that we've observed merging oscillate around each other just like any two orbiting bodies. So they both obey the same physics that gives rise to momentum in matter.

It seems to me that if a black hole was on a head on collision with another black hole, it might rip itself apart, and a chunk go sailing off in another direction, rather than coalesce into one larger black hole.

Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 20:07:55 UTC No. 16115686

>>16115402
>Hey, so is there any known mechanism by which a black hole could splinter and shed smaller black holes?
Sort of. Depends on how far you are willing to suspend your disbelief.
Kerr black holes have ring-shaped singularities carrying angular momentum, so an external gravitational force could induce a twist in that ring that could—in extremely questionable models—sever it into two separate rings.
But can they escape each other's event horizons without re-merging? Doubtful!

Go on Google Scholar and look up "black hole bifurcation."

Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 22:17:31 UTC No. 16115921

>>16115686

Okay, but imagine instead of two black holes orbiting each other in tighter and tighter orbits until they overlap, but instead imagine a head on collision like a billiard ball hitting another stationary billiard ball.

Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 22:24:37 UTC No. 16115931

>>16115921

No solidness to the billiard balls in this example, just imagine the same kind of momentums involved.

Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 22:32:43 UTC No. 16115939

what is it about black holes that makes them the number one most popular popsci topic of discussion amongst the brainlet soience fangoys?
is it the comic bookish aspects of the spectacular, unrealistic and completely non disprovable conjectures which go along with the topic that make black holes so popular amongst the scientist posers and wannabes?

Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 22:35:01 UTC No. 16115945

/sci/'s daily humiliation ritual

Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 03:48:17 UTC No. 16116384

>>16115402
If black holes spin fast enough, their physics do get fucked up in all kinds of ways, but I doubt they could split

Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 12:12:35 UTC No. 16116748

>>16115939
You are gay for black dicks

Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 02:05:03 UTC No. 16117825

>>16115939
they chonky, like ur mom, and about as popular too

Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:29:24 UTC No. 16118819

>>16116384
what happens if two black holes combine with speed that exceeds the speed of light?
how does the shape of space change to compensate for an otherwise ftl spin?

Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:41:01 UTC No. 16118837

>>16115939
I recently became mildly interested in black holes after spending my life not caring about them. Specifically i wondered about the nature of microscopic black holes, and wondered if something like an electron which is modeled as a point particle, should not be a black hole in its own right.
Then i wondered, well what if an electron black hole collided with another electron black hole, should that not create a new particle with twice the electron charge? Should we not see some continuum of particles with continuous mass and charge? Analysis of these articles ouught to reveal no internal structure, like quarks or nothing, because they would be black holes.
But then i thought black holes at that scale ought to exist as fundamental "modes" of some quantum gravity field-thing and because that doesnt exist yet i lost interest in the topic.

Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 16:50:57 UTC No. 16118863

>>16118837

I specifically said i looked for the answer before i asked the question.

Yes, we've all heard of stuff that makes us wonder whether black holes and particles might be related. But when i heard of those ideas, nobody said anything about black holes being able to decay, other than hawking radiation, like particles do. Nobody asked that question.

So now i'm asking that question.

Actually... slightly second question. Hawking radiation is just supposed to be like.. heat, right? It couldn't possibly produce... a splinter black hole, right? Shit. I regret not thinking of this question while he was alive. I was thinking about it back then.