Why are quasars hard to explain

This part does not include the white hole and describes the space-time outside of a normal black hole. What would a white hole look like if it did exist? Where can I read more? In the interest of openness I leave the first attempt here also: "In the full, and most simple General Relativistic solution for a space-time which has a Black Hole in a vacuum , there are two singularities.

Similar Questions that might Interest You Does the singularity in a black hole create a new Universe? Intermediate What is a singularity? Random Question. How long do supernova remnants last? Most Recent. How much does the Earth "wobble" on its orbit due to the Moon's gravity? Intermediate Why is the sun red? Beginner But seriously: what was there before the Big Bang? Beginner How far can photons move freely in the early universe Advanced How likely is it that the Solar System has had or will have a close encounter with another star?

Intermediate How do we know what we observe is x light years away? Beginner What makes quantum mechanics and general relativity incompatible? Advanced What are we doing about Space Junk? What what a black hole merger look like from a telescope? Editor's Pick. What is the universe expanding into? Intermediate What do I need to do to become an astronomer? Beginner What's the difference between astronomy and astrology? Beginner Why is looking out into space the same as looking back in time?

Beginner Can we find the place where the Big Bang happened? Most Popular. The primordial universe also wouldn't have contained the molecules necessary to form dust. Indeed, the Spitzer telescope registers quasar dust clouds as unique infrared signals—conspicuously missing from the newly discovered black holes. Research appears March 18 in the journal Nature. All rights reserved. Share Tweet Email. Read This Next Signs of an extreme planet found in another galaxy. Science Signs of an extreme planet found in another galaxy An odd x-ray signal hints that a Saturn-size world could be the first known planet lurking in the Whirlpool Galaxy 28 million light-years away.

Timber salvaged from New York City buildings reveals ancient climate. Environment Planet Possible Timber salvaged from New York City buildings reveals ancient climate Timbers taken from demolished buildings in the city can extend by hundreds of years how far back in time scientists can tell what the climate was.

Helping kids overcome a fear of shots. An icy world is in meltdown, amid penguin population shifts. Magazine Planet Possible An icy world is in meltdown, amid penguin population shifts Marine life off the Antarctic Peninsula needs protection as sea ice declines and fishing boats move in to take more krill. Each galaxy you look at most likely merged with another galaxy in the past few billion years. The question is, have the two black holes merged, or are they still there?

You need friction to make that happen. How do these black holes ever get close enough to merge? This has been a surprisingly vexing problem. So has the question of how matter orbiting a black hole gets down to the event horizon where it can be eaten.

These black holes are separated by one percent of a parsec. Clearly they managed to solve the infamous final parsec problem. Seth Fletcher is chief features editor at Scientific American.

Follow Seth Fletcher on Twitter. Already a subscriber? Sign in. Thanks for reading Scientific American. Create your free account or Sign in to continue. Your model fails the "reionization" test too. Early estimates based on expansion models were off by more than a whole order of magnitude and it took them three of four tries to get any closer than Eddington at predicting the average temperature of spacetime.

Worse yet, the only way you can actually get a "match" to even those observation is to insert 95 percent ad hoc constructs, one of which has failed billions of dollars worth of lab tests!

Notice a problem? A further expansion of the maths in my previous post is to show the relationship between redshift z and cosmological time dilation. The redshift z is defined as. However as shown in my previous post. Therefore the equation becomes: A picture using actual data tells a thousand words to illustrate the maths.

Informative x 1 List. Readers should note that we have still seen nothing remotely resembling a legitimate scientific rebuttal to Hawkin's observations of a complete lack of time dilation in quasars, nor any other published paper which claims to observe time dilation in quasars.

I'm starting to believe that this nifty little mathematical exercise is simply another clever form of denial. As the other links in this thread also demonstrate, astronomers can't even explain the heat source of the plasma jets around quasars either, mostly because they refuse to embrace electric fields and current flow in spacetime.

Astronomers today are completely and totally electrophobic when it comes to cosmology. They're like the keystone cops of physics, but boy can do they do metaphysical math exercises.

Are either of you planning to post an actual rebuttal to Hawkins work, or shall I assume that you can't find a scientific rebuttal to his findings? It's not like LCDM doesn't fail at least a half dozen other long distance, high redshift predictions, including failing the surface brightness tests, tests of their reionization claims, supermassive black hole problems, mature galaxy problems, etc.

Make no mistake about it, LCDM offers no real 'knowledge' to start with because 95 percent of it amounts to placeholder terms for human ignorance and most of the rest of their math which they apply to plasma amounts to "pseudoscience" according to the author of MHD theory. The whole LCDM model is utterly and entirely devoid of any type of real "knowledge" which is why none of it actually works in the lab.

We spent billions looking for dark matter and found nothing. Their model fails tons of observational tests too, but they simply sweep all their failures right under the rug and pretend they don't exist.