• Black hole's spin measured accurately for first time. Spoiler: It's fucking fast
    69 replies, posted
[quote]Astronomers have found a way to accurately measure the spin of a supermassive black hole for the first time and as expected, it's pretty darn fast -- nearly-the-speed-of-light fast.[/quote] [url=http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-02/28/black-hole-spin-explained]Source[/url]
Imagine a centrifuge on that, y'know, If it was possible.
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but would we be able to like, idk, skirt around the edge and use it as a "catapult" to go really fucking fast basically?
[QUOTE=Dr. Deeps;39800367]So, correct me if I'm wrong, but would we be able to like, idk, skirt around the edge and use it as a "catapult" to go really fucking fast basically?[/QUOTE] If you weren't liquified by the amount of G's you would be pulling, sure.
[QUOTE=Dr. Deeps;39800367]So, correct me if I'm wrong, but would we be able to like, idk, skirt around the edge and use it as a "catapult" to go really fucking fast basically?[/QUOTE] Assuming you wouldn't get sucked in (by maintaining a safe distance from the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizon]Event Horizon[/url]), you would indeed go really fucking fast. To a lesser extent, we use this already by doing what's called a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_slingshot]gravitational slingshot maneuver[/url] to get probes into deep space. e: one of the probes that used this to overkillingly amazingness is the Cassini-Huygens probe with 4 assists to get to Saturn [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Cassini_interplanet_trajectory.svg[/img]
[QUOTE=its shortie;39800391]If you weren't liquified by the amount of G's you would be pulling, sure.[/QUOTE] you could choose the distance at which you do it
[QUOTE=Dacheet;39800421] To a lesser extent, we use this already by doing what's called a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_slingshot]gravitational slingshot maneuver[/url] to get probes into deep space.[/QUOTE] that's probably why he brought it up... currently our best means for space travel are relatively weak assed thrusters and slingshotting using gravity of large bodies
[QUOTE=Dacheet;39800421]Assuming you wouldn't get sucked in (by maintaining a safe distance from the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizon]Event Horizon[/url]), you would indeed go really fucking fast. To a lesser extent, we use this already by doing what's called a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_slingshot]gravitational slingshot maneuver[/url] to get probes into deep space. e: one of the probes that used this to overkillingly amazingness is the Cassini-Huygens probe with 4 assists to get to Saturn [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Cassini_interplanet_trajectory.svg[/img][/QUOTE] You would have to have an orbital velocity greater than that of the gravitational pull; otherwise your orbit would degrade.
[QUOTE=FoodStuffs;39800479]that's probably why he brought it up... currently our best means for space travel are relatively weak assed thrusters and slingshotting using gravity of large bodies[/QUOTE] In the case of Cassini, it was over 13 km/s of Delta-V (go-making-power) more efficient: [quote]The Cassini probe passed by Venus twice, then Earth, and finally Jupiter on the way to Saturn. The 6.7-year transit was slightly longer than the six years needed for a Hohmann transfer, but cut the extra velocity (delta-v) needed to about 2 km/s, so that the large and heavy Cassini probe was able to reach Saturn, which would not have been possible in a direct transfer even with the Titan IV, the largest launch vehicle available at the time. A Hohmann transfer to Saturn would require a total of 15.7 km/s delta-v (disregarding Earth's and Saturn's own gravity wells, and disregarding aerobraking), which is not within the capabilities of current launch vehicles and spacecraft propulsion systems. [/quote] And now I'm living up to my title. [editline]4th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Bradyns;39800498]You would have to have an orbital velocity greater than that of the gravitational pull; otherwise your orbit would degrade.[/QUOTE] This is relatively easy when we're talking about interplanetary speeds (especially in the inner solar system).
a degrading orbit isn't really a bad thing... in fact i think the best place to launch from would be the bottom of an ellipsis, which would require lots of orbit degradation, then a final boost when at the optimal angle.
[IMG]http://puu.sh/2ceHj[/IMG] black holes spin me right round baby, right round
Still slower then the average Kenyan.
[QUOTE=Dacheet;39800513]This is relatively easy when we're talking about interplanetary speeds (especially in the inner solar system).[/QUOTE] But, we aren't talking about interplanetary, we're talking about a black hole.
That's fucking fast.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;39800570]But, we aren't talking about interplanetary, we're talking about a black hole.[/QUOTE] Well assuming you're beyond the event horizon, it's doable albeit requires a shit ton of mass and fuel and energy and shit. And even so, you'd have the Oberth effect on your side when you (hopefully) do a burn to increase your velocity beyond the escape velocity of the black hole.
This shit just got way too nerdy for my redneck brain...
[QUOTE=Dr. Deeps;39800630]This shit just got way too nerdy for my redneck brain...[/QUOTE] This thread summed up in a post.
[QUOTE=Dacheet;39800421]Assuming you wouldn't get sucked in (by maintaining a safe distance from the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_horizon]Event Horizon[/url]), you would indeed go really fucking fast.To a lesser extent, we use this already by doing what's called a [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_slingshot]gravitational slingshot maneuver[/url] to get probes into deep space.e: one of the probes that used this to overkillingly amazingness is the Cassini-Huygens probe with 4 assists to get to Saturn[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Cassini_interplanet_trajectory.svg[/img][/QUOTE] That is so fucking cool.
I like the picture they used. [IMG]http://cdni.wired.co.uk/620x413/s_v/shutterstock_89064337.jpg[/IMG] and that'd be scary as fuck if you were being pulled into a black whole. No escape and you'd be pulled apart like spaghetti (at nearly the speed of light too)
[QUOTE=Dr. Deeps;39800367]So, correct me if I'm wrong, but would we be able to like, idk, skirt around the edge and use it as a "catapult" to go really fucking fast basically?[/QUOTE] I think I saw this in that Stephen Hawking documentary about the universe. He explained that, if you could find exactly the right distance, angle, and speed to approach the black hole without being pulled into its gravity well, you could orbit it at near the speed of light and travel forward in time.
power generation?
But I don't know a goddamn thing about space or physics or any somesuch, so I probably wouldn't take my word for it.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;39800680]I think I saw this in that Stephen Hawking documentary about the universe. He explained that, if you could find exactly the right distance, angle, and speed to approach the black hole without being pulled into its gravity well, you could orbit it at near the speed of light and travel forward in time.[/QUOTE] Assuming the black hole is big enough, this is correct. Time (which is relative) tends to slow down relative to an outside observer as the former's speed increases, up until the speed of light, when time stops (and extrapolating this, time would go backwards somehow if you managed to go tachyonic speeds). If you could skim the outside of the event horizon of a supermassive black hole for a year in your time frame, it would be something like six hundred years (pending on size and speed and boring equations) when you returned to Earth. Speaking of General Relativity, we first truly, practically confirmed this when we were launching GPS satellites. Since GPS works with the time it takes for beams of light from four different sources to meet at a target, you need really, really, really accurate timekeeping equipment on the satellites to measure down to really accurate points. So we put up these timers in the satellites without taking GR into account (the whole time slowing down when you go fast and junk) and -- since orbit is fast -- the time on the satellites slowly got out of sync with the time on the ground, decreasing the accuracy by more and more. I believe the story goes is that after the first day in operation without compensating for GR, if you were in London and measured your location via the GPS, it would tell you that you were in Paris. They obviously fixed that quickly. [SUB][SUB][SUB][SUB][SUB]oh god why do i know all this[/SUB][/SUB][/SUB][/SUB][/SUB] [editline]4th March 2013[/editline] You know I've entered the weird part of Wikipedia when you see math like this [t]http://puu.sh/2cfxP[/t]
Maybe one day we can use black holes as mass relays.
[QUOTE=ZombieDawgs;39800359]Imagine a centrifuge on that, y'know, If it was possible.[/QUOTE] Would it separate the atoms?
[QUOTE=Blazyd;39800668]I like the picture they used. [IMG]http://cdni.wired.co.uk/620x413/s_v/shutterstock_89064337.jpg[/IMG] and that'd be scary as fuck if you were being pulled into a black whole. No escape and you'd be pulled apart like spaghetti (at nearly the speed of light too)[/QUOTE] actually this is the original one [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/fD5GRk5.jpg[/IMG]
Black holes make me feel small and powerless. Like, our entire solar system could get sucked by one, and there's nothing we could do about it, and we'd leave absolutely no trace of our existence (other than maybe a deep space probe or two?)
[QUOTE=Dacheet;39800773]You know I've entered the weird part of Wikipedia when you see math like this [t]http://puu.sh/2cfxP[/t][/QUOTE] woah dude... ALGEBRA [editline]4th March 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Blazyd;39800668]I like the picture they used. [IMG]http://cdni.wired.co.uk/620x413/s_v/shutterstock_89064337.jpg[/IMG] and that'd be scary as fuck if you were being pulled into a black whole. No escape and you'd be pulled apart like spaghetti (at nearly the speed of light too)[/QUOTE] That's a terribly inaccurate image lol
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;39801606]That's a terribly inaccurate image lol[/QUOTE] an accurate image would be pretty damn boring :v:
I just meant the shape of the event horizon really
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.