Added: 2 years ago
From: Best0fScience
Views: 12,189
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (106)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • a black hole.. something that cant be seen and is so powerful that nothing can escape it, not even light. but thers a bnunch of stars orbiting it? im confused

  • I've been to catholic and christian church (never baptized in any) and now I'm currently a Mormon. But all I can say is that every religious person should just shut up about science... "God" gave us the ability to reason for a dam reason.. let us evolve and learn about life through scientific ways cause religion and working at all right now. but in the end if "god" does exist you can rub it in everyone's face.

  • People say i know Jesus, BUT does he know you? The bible is very deep. Get to know the author of it which is Jesus christ, then you will understand the supernatural and occult science. I DARE YOU !!!!!! However, in Matthew 16: 24)Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 26) or what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?...

  • if somehow you could compress the sun to the size of a bouncy ball it would become a black hole. would any of the planets fly into it? no. they would keep their same orbit. think about it. bouncy ball sun would have the exact same mass therefore its gravitational tug on the planets wouldnt change.

  • im sure some of the stars are slowly getting sucked in. heres the thing though. black holes dont just automatically suck everything near them in. everything has a safe orbiting distance.

  • Why are the stars next to the black hole not getting sucked into it?

  • 3:01 Nooooooo Dr. J

  • I always knew it, how in hell all those stars can be together if theres not a black hole in the center of em

  • video keeps stopping (only this one)

  • I love science

  • I love black holes

  • I got yer globular cluster right *here*

    wink wink nudge nudge

  • absolutely beautiful

  • I love how "Globular clusters" sounds.

  • oooooooOOOOOOOOOoooooo

  • Welcome to the Stellar Holocaust ;P

  • It was beautiful how at about 2 minutes in they just kept zooming in and in and in and in and...

  • That's how I felt. Imagine that each one of those twinkle is something just like our Sun, but likely bigger and it really puts into perspective just how tiny and remote we are when compared to the immensity of the Universe.

  • the hubble ultra deep field does a much better job of that

  • awesome

  • So, because the only explanation they have for the motions is that there must be "super dense" matter at the centre, they must then assume that there is a black hole there.....something that has never EVER been proven to exist, only disproven!

    You can't infer that something exists, just because you have no other explanation for it.

  • 1) How have black holes been disproven?

    2) I don't see how black holes are any less theoretical than, say, wind... We can see their effects and their existence is strongly supported by physics principles and equations.

  • when have black holes been disproven? if science needs a constant rather than a variable, it chooses the best explanation if its consistant with everything else they find, and is falsifiable, science keeps it until new evidence comes to light.

  • Hi Guys/Gals,

    Just look up EU theory. And don't say the existence of a black hole is supported by physics. When you start adding theoretical things on top of theoretical things like say black holes on top of dark matter on top of dark energy...

    Gravity only equations don't work, so they add devices to further complicate the original theory. I think it would be of benefit to explore alternative theories, since present science is all too often suprised by data.

  • @ Groovyguy: "... so they add devices to further complicate the original theory"

    You mean like electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces, which effects are observable in laboratories and household items the world over? You mean like velocity, which is concluded based on ER shifts? You mean like relativity, which has been observed by high precision machines and whose existence the GPS system depends on?

    Anyways, nice video, BestOfScience!

  • too often? WTF, are you some sort of conspiracy theorist?... just looked at your profile, funny thing, I could tell.

    the existence of a black hole was predicted by physics well before one was actually found.

  • There is an extraordinary amount of evidence supporting black holes. We use inference to determine a lot more things than black holes... such as gravity, sub-atomic particles, the orbit of pluto... I could go on...

  • Actors they ain't. =)

    Very interesting.

  • I always wondered if a blackhole could consume so many stars and other blackholes that it could become too massive and start eating the entire universe, is that possible?

  • :=))

  • (>^.^)> science

  • Gravity is too weak a force for super-massive black holes to really affect anything outside their own galaxy. Also, if a super-massive black hole becomes too large, it can actually start to push nearby stars *away* from them, thus starving itself of fuel. I can't recall exactly why this happens, but I just saw a documentary about super-massive black holes on the Science Channel explaining it.

  • wait wait, so if a black hole doesnt take in anything for a long period of time its starts to weaken? would it just dissipate?

  • Look up "Hawking Radiation"

  • Yes, black holes "evaporate" over time.

  • LOL, I think he's actually saying "Welcome to the Hubblecast." But it does sound like Holocaust.

  • It does, so weird.

  • glad i wasnt alone.

    Definitely heard holocaust myself, until i listened again.

  • at :47 it sounds like he's saying "Welcome to the Holocaust" haha

    Sorry if that's inappropriate but that is what it sounds like he's saying.

  • Just a hypothesis, but what if it was the source of the Big Bang? A massive event such as that would have probably shredded something in the fabric of space time, so... possible?

  • It couldn't have shredded it because it was, by definition, the expansion of spacetime. What preceeded it? There are some hypothesis, but no working theories yet. An interesting topic, though!

  • The Big Bang was the source of both space and time.

  • thats such a sad view point.. Time is merely the way you identitfy the real.. time in merely change in vs change in... its not a real thing or dimesion is a way that you can understand..

  • "thats such a sad view point."

    That's a matter of opinion.

  • I was under the impression that they both existed previously, they just disentangled themselves from one another after then into a form that makes sense to us now.

  • actually you can re write physics starting from newton going all the way to relativity without time in any of the equations which will give rise to quantum gravity. Look up Julian Barbour hes a scientist working in collaboration with other to prove this very idea. Also i would present to you the fact that if you were outside the universe and looking at it as a whole system then i could give you a given number of states and you could calculate all internal forces and devices without time since...

  • Huh... I did not know that. Interesting...

    Time remains relevant (and relative) in quantum physics, however, because the properties of some particles change depending on the amount of time for which they are viewed. Exempli gratia: In micro-time, electrons can exist in two places at once, and virtual particles pop in and out of existence.

  • Time has nothing to do with the potentials of electrons. They exist in/as all possible states until they interacted with.

  • Huh... I had just seen a documentary mentioning it, but then it was quite out-dated. I stand corrected.

    However, time *does* matter when it comes to the second law of thermodynamics.

  • Potential is temporal measurement. Without time there is no such thing as potential. The idea that electrons can assume multiple states simultaneously is not an actual property of electrons but of our inability to accurately observe them. Our lack of perception limits us to the use of statistics to determine a range of possible states and the probabilities of those states, which is a function of time. But there is still only one possible state an electron can have and that's the state it's in.

  • Simultaneous states is a property of electrons. We can observe the state of an electron, but in doing so we interact with it, prompting it to settle into one state. Check out a video explaining the double slit experiment, that's a good example. We also use the simultaneous multiple states of electrons in the processors of computers, as the electrons can be on both sides of the medium at the same time.

  • the when of what happend has no relavence to what is actually taking place meaning time is useful as a relative measurment to understand something from the inside.. for instance if the entire existance of everything random got 6x larger and it was all realitive you could never prove it had happened unless you were outside that system since no internal interaction can be used to give us perspective.

  • The Big Bang was the *expansion* of space-time. The pre-Bang *singularity* was the source.

  • I stand corrected.

  • Wait... what are you proposing was the source of the Big Bang?

  • I have no idea, I generally don't touch the Big Bang because there are a lot of unexplainable things that get into both philosophy and math, both of which are based purely on speculation. I take the Buddhist perspective and am just grateful it's here. However, this cluster they mention has a lot of unique qualities. Because of that, I just speculated that this may be the location (or source) of where the Big Bang occured, rather than the physical matter.

  • Oh, well it's important to note that the Big Bang was simply the expansion of space-time. The Big Bang did not have a location, because it's something that happened *to* space, not *in* it. Also, the cluster's unique qualities do not indicate that it is tied to the Big Bang more than anything else.

    I hope this helped your understanding of Big Bang theory.

  • love this channel

  • I deny the HubbleCast!

    No wait, there it is.

  • It sounds like potholer54 is speaking from 1:23 unwards? Is that just in my imagination?

  • It is! Good ear.

  • I can see why you would hear a similarity, but there is a certain timbre to potholer54's voice that the voiceover does not have.

  • Potholer is developing a distinct Australian accent whilst enjoying the sunny weather ;).

  • Wait, did she say "seed of a supermassive black hole"? Does that mean that globular clusters are how supermassive black holes form, after absorbing all of the orbiting stars?

  • In my opinion, if its alot of gravity, its alot mass and so its alot of matter: even if theres so much gravity that light cant escape.

  • Not realy. Supermasive black holes are found in the center of galaxyes, because there is a lot of stars on wich they can prey, and theres also enough gravity to pull them to the center faster. In Omega Centurai there's black hole that's quite big, but still much smaller than supermasive black holes, so they suspect that Omega Centurai has been a dwarf galaxy.

  • Space is much!

  • That was sooo cool when they zoomed in on Omega Centurai. What an awesome shot!!

    Space is sooooooo beautiful!!!

  • 4:30

  • 4:31

  • 0:47

    does he really say "welcome to the holocaust" ??

  • yes, i think he did. Wouldnt be as funny is they werent german. lolz

  • Welcome to the hubble cast. the name of the show. ;)

  • i thought that too xD

  • Anti-science nut thinking: Hurr, they can't decide what it is, they changed it a few times in 2000 years = science totally in flux, what you learned 5 minutes ago in class is now wrong! Now the bible, that never changes!

  • really, the bible never changes.

    What would you call the adittion of a new testament? What would you call the numerous translations?

    How is your Greek, latin and Hebrew?

    The change in sience is also known as progres. Scientist discard what turns out to be wrong and go on searching for the right awnser.

    The bible just goes on and on being wrong.

  • guess the " Now the bible, that never changes" worked a bit like a red flag on a bull to me.

    After reading some of your other comments I think we agree on the bible. If we do I'm, sorry for the out of wack comment.

  • No problem. I've sometimes almost commented on things, then re-read and thought "hey wait a minute..."

  • LOL, the Bible never changing is the reason Gays still can't get married and abortion doctors get murdered. Can't progress with the times, can you Christians?

  • for some reason they seem to be avoiding the "kill anyone who works on sundays" rule.

    exodus 31: 15, for those of you who don't know where it is.

  • Ummmm, let me think of a Red herring real fast, or just act like that's not a big deal because it was the Old Testament.

  • no worries, there's plenty of gems to find in the new testament as well ;)

    jeebus bless you, my friend

  • damn good point my friend =)

  • when he says hubblecast it sounds like holocaust... lolz

  • HaHa creationist think we are special. HA!

    What a bunch of RUBISH!

  • And then when you reject their fairy story of how the universe was made specially for us, and that we don't need what they're trying to sell us, they call US arrogant!

  • 40kM... omg thats enormous... with heavy stars only 20M... thats 2000heavy stars consumed...

  • It has a bad case of galactic munchies.

  • It's absolutely beautiful!!!

  • Kewl.

  • Absolutely amazing. I had no idea that it was a cluster of so many stars. It's fun to think about. Fun to imagine how many planets could be in that cluster, and if any of them have life.

  • I'd think that the star would be orbiting the black hole too quickly and eccentrically to hold planets, but I'm no astrophysicist, so don't mind me. XD

  • I'm sure that would be the case in close proximity to the black hole, but most of the stars are far enough from it to be more than able to hold onto planets, I'm sure. I'm not an astrophysicist either, so I don't know.

  • Wow, I had to rewind... I could've sworn he said, "Welcome to the holocaust".

    ...but he didn't.

  • Made me lol

  • Didn't Freud say something about that? :P

  • hubblecast

  • aye dito

  • Fascinating.

  • Excellent! Good post.

    Nix ~

  • second :D this is awsome !!!!!!! 5/5

  • Wrong, first to comment...

    You didn't even first right XD

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more