Why we think there is a black hole in the center of the milky way.

Aug 18, 2017 6:24 PM

SmokinGoods

Views

173701

Likes

4258

Dislikes

47

They pointed a IR telescope at the center of the milky way for 15 years, you can see stars, some 15x the size of our sun orbiting around nothing.

It's the axle on which everything turns.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

space is amazing

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

wow. That's a *fast* orbit.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Maybe the aliens painted it black so we couldn't see it at night time

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I honestly expected this to be a dickbutt.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Black hole sun. Won't you come, and wash away the pain?

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

This is very cool. And it should be noted that there's almost no debate for this being the case.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

False, the stars are tethered to a stationary pole and God is playing a hell of a game of tether ball

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

But wait, if those are stars and they're orbiting a black hole, wouldn't their light be sucked in? Or is that already accounted for?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I didn't realize there was speculation about this. I was under the impression this is just how galaxies work...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Weird thing is that black hole doesn't have enough grav. pull to hold galaxy together. Its magic/ dark matter

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Very decidedly not nothing.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What do you think happened to any planets that were orbiting that one star that did the fast u turn?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

that's fucking fast, no? Btw. didn't they build a radiotelescope (network?) now to actually "see" it?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yes they did. The data is in Antarctica at the moment. Waiting for winter to end down there to get it out to start analysis.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

huh? You talk about actual data or telescope?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There's a large radio telescope at the south pole that participated in the observation. No idea why the data is there, but it is

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Pretty sure there's a black hole in the center of Uranus too. I'll be here all week, folks.

9 years ago | Likes 50 Dislikes 1

You’d smell pretty bad then

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That is so awesome.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I can't be the only one wishing one of those stars would just get sucked in and vanish

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Maybe all the stars in that cluster already have but we won't see it for hundreds if not thousands of years.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

It wouldn't vanish, though. It would just...stop.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

It would vanish blackhole would destroy it so it will no longer produce light. It's light wont be able to seen by the telescope

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

If there wasn't one, this would still happen as those stars would orbit the center of gravity. We think that because of mass measurements.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Doesn't really work like that when the object is orbiting inside the other masses.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

What is the object that is "orbiting inside the other masses"? What other masses?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The object here are the stars orbiting the black hole. The other masses are the rest if the milky way.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Without a black hole at the center, the stars would just drift straight through the region rather then wihipping around.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Meh. It's probably just @OP's mum coated in vantablack.

9 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 1

Thers a black hole in me bolix, i dont expect you to understand, a little thing called science.

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 3

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The science of Uranus

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Why does this not have more upvotes?? :-)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I was talking to a person who tried to refute all black hole theories with some electric universe stuff. Guy basically said he's smarter >>

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Yeah, the electric universe nuts are almost as bad as flat-earthers. Just don't argue with them, they see no reason.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Uh, wtf is "electric universe"?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It would take way to long to explain here. Google it, but remember that it is all patently absurd.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

communities just keep perpetuating the lie because it's profitable somehow. Some serious tinfoil hat shit.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yes, what is electric universe? Do you have a link?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That link is textbook tinfoil hat bullshit.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

than Einstein, and that Einstein was completely wrong about gravity, black holes, theory of relativity, etc and that the scientific/math >>

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Don't show me these things. It keeps me the fuck up at night.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

It has a name too if that helps....our black hole is named Sagittarius A*, also called Sag A Star

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

It helps a bit but mostly because the name sounds like sagging tits.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah? Sol has 333K times the mass of Earth. That supermassive black hole (actual term) has 4 million times the mass of Sol and is 4.5

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

billion miles wide. The US is 0.025 light seconds from Europe. That SMBH is 6.5 light hours in diameter.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

You kinda get off on this, don't you?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Hah. You are a'okay in my book.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That's a staggering thought. An object so big it takes light over a quarter of a day to get from one side to the other. Light-bending 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

gravity notwithstanding. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The largest known black hole, an ULTRAmassive one, is 40 BILLION solar masses, or 10,000 times the mass of this supermassive one.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Jesus tittyfucking Christ. Damn, space, you scary!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'd heard of light years but it never occurred to me that there we light days as well

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Earth is 8 light minutes from the surface of the sun.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And light minutes and light seconds too !

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A light(any measure of time) is literally the distance it takes light to travel. The moon is about 1.8 light seconds away.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And OP's mom is eight light hours wide.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The moon is approx 2 light-seconds from us.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So in some weird way, are being slowly sucked to the center of the galaxy to.be destroyed?

9 years ago | Likes 82 Dislikes 6

Entropy is the only road back to another big bang

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Orbiting =/= getting sucked in

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

Tell me more about this sucking...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's surprisingly hard to get sucked into a black hole. Have to be heading almost directly at it, far easier to end up in orbit around it.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Or get flung away.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Considering the red tint of the universe we're probably drifting away.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That doesn't apply inside a galaxy. Gravity is much more powerful than whatever drives expansion.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Nov 8, 2017 9:27 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Nov 8, 2017 9:27 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

I.e. the information is lost, as if it went into a hole.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

We're not nearly close enough for that to happen

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

It's actually nearly impossible to fall into a black hole

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

To be reborn. Haven't you seen interstellar?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Our solar system is actually expanding outward as is our galaxy. We are spinning away from the center w/ no force to pull us back in.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Even if that were how it worked, our sun would probably die and kill us all before that happened

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Black holes don't suck things in.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

dont worry, you will be dead long before that happens! :D

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

No. Black holes still obey the law of gravity. If you replaced it with an equal mass object, everything would revolve around THAT the same

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thing is there are no objects with equal mass because they'd be black holes too. They don't "suck" just have so much freaking gravity

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't worry. It's the same no matter which galaxy you live in.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

I've accepted my inner Rick and embraced nihilism, anyway.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

No, the gravitational effect is the same as if there were a star there the same mass, though that star would be much bigger in volume 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Though our orbit may be decaying, one rotation around the center takes 250 million years. It would take like 10^30 years for us to fall in

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

We can also get orbital rebounding. When it gets super close it can begin to slowly move back away for a bit.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Amazing to think, the last time we were at this point in the galactic rotation, dinosaurs were taking their first steps on Earth.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Though there is debate over whether it is decaying at all

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Wouldn't the black hole decay by then?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not if the entire galaxy inside earth orbit spent that 10^30 years falling into it, but if it weren't feeding yes. 10^30 is so big as 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's nearly meaningless. Like 1 nonillion or something like that. I believe that is even far past the heat death of the universe. 2/3

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

In the same rate we're being sucked into the sun...

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 0

Be careful how you say that, some would take that as confirmation we're getting sucked into the sun

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I figured since Earth was dangling around sun for 4,5 billion years that wouldn't be an assumption... but I was wrong...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We're getting sucked into the sun? Oh fuck, I'd better tell Facebook!!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There you go global warming. We are slowly getting closer to the Sun!

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

v

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Hahaha

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Think of it this way: everything has gravity and can pull everything else with lower mass in. There are lots of things in our solar system,

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But not everything gets pulled into the sun. It's all a matter of proximity and trajectory.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Gravity doesn't work one way. Both thing with gravity are pulling on each other

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Everything that has mass attracts everything else in the universe. That pull however reduces with distance, so things on the other side of

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The universe would feel the pull of earth but at such a small fraction that I probably wouldn't have enough space or time in the universe to

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Convey that.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

All the objects are falling towards the center of the gravity well created by the hole, but given the amount of time elapsed , everything

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

on a direct course has already fallen in and acreated. If a star were to fall in even slightly off a direct course today, it would also

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

'pile up' in an acretion disk around the edge of the event horizon and activate the polar jets, which we havent seen much action from

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

in all the time weve been capable of watching. The short answer is : what remains isnt on a direct collision course.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A more precise way of putting it is that a galaxy is nothing more than they accretion disk of a very large black hole.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not really because we're not orbiting the black hole, we're orbiting the center of the galaxy like everything else.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Which is almost inside the blackhole (if there is one) only offset due to the huge amount of gravity formed by literally every other

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

object in the galaxy.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The black hole is there because it's the center of the galaxy, not the other way around. As it interacts gravitationally with everything

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Black holes don't infinitely suck stuff in, that's a common misconception. We're orbiting the center of the Milky Way, like all stars.

9 years ago | Likes 88 Dislikes 2

Not exactly the orbit is either decaying or being released. Nothing is in a perfect geosycronous orbit.

9 years ago | Likes 35 Dislikes 37

Geosynchronous orbit means it orbits at the same speed the body rotates. Meaning it's always above the same point

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

1. Geosynchronous is entirely unrelated to what you're talking about. What you mean is perfect stable orbit. 2. That is correct

9 years ago | Likes 44 Dislikes 1

Quit downvoting the guy cause he referenced the wrong term, we know what he was talking about jeez.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 14

Thanks but it's no use. I gave up a long time ago. If I didn't know any better I'd say this site is filled with doctors and physicist.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 6

But instead it's filled with a bunch of tweens, grammar/spelling Nazis, and people who like that stupid dog language.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 5

No idea. I upvoted him and specifically noted he was correct in my response.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

His entire point was wrong though, not just his word choice.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

My understanding is that even if the angular momentum of a satellite in orbit is perfect, gravitational radiation and other factors cause(1)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

His point that all orbits being in flux is correct actually. No orbit is stable to infinity.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

So you're saying that according to modern theory that some celestial bodies are in completely perfect, (non-decaying or expanding) orbits.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Decay over time regardless, no matter how minuscule. I would personally love to know if I'm wrong though. (2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

It's a guy who thinks he's God, I've seen the documentary "Star Trek 5: The Final Frontier"

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

No no.. it's the home of the Collector Base and is only reachable through the Omega-4 Relay.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Life is not a dream

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

True story

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Awesome post

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Didn't they capture one getting destroyed?

9 years ago | Likes 298 Dislikes 5

There was a gas cloud that was supposed to put on a show a year or too ago. The event was underwhelming for reasons I don't recall.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It was full of hot air

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

shouldn't you be transporting people instead of browsing Imgur? It's a surprise you were able to get Scotty out of that loop.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No the guy watching out for this look away and was just home after he came back

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 46

I may have just had a srtkoe while reading this.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

What the fuck did that mean?

9 years ago | Likes 43 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Why don't you go rest for a while champ.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 0

I remember this, a star being devoured.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

i think that was a simulation

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Our super massive black hole is actually saturated. It doesn't suck in more mass.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

Im gonna go with ... WRONG

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

How in the hell could it be saturated? My mind can't quite conceive the concept.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You mean the gravity wave experiment? It was more like two black holes crashing into each other and merging.

9 years ago | Likes 185 Dislikes 1

That is badass

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

https://imgur.com/Aa4nJlZ

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Made the whole universe ring like a bell.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Jesus, if sound existed in space, that would've been horrific

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

The next best thing: a gravitational wave represented as a sound wave - https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/video/ligo20160211v2

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I believe this is what you were thinking of (which is a computer simulation) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9s3f20CxwpM

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That's a simulation of a tidal disruption event, which is a star getting torn apart by a black hole.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That's the graphic i remember. Thought it was a real event focused on the center of the galaxy.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Most astronomers believe there is a black hole in the center of nearly every galaxy.

9 years ago | Likes 1249 Dislikes 4

And this is why. Because we have good evidence of it. It's not just random beliefs or faith, it's based on facts.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

yeh, we think there is a SM black hole in our galaxy because there seems to be one in every galaxy. The gif is just showing a candidate 4 it

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's supermassive black holes (millions of solar masses). We also think there are billions of smaller black holes (~10 solar masses) 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Aug 19, 2017 12:49 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

inside each galaxy (the prediction is around 100 million for the Milky Way). 2/2 (fixed a typo - thanks @lilrent)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

My theory that my dick is the center of the universe is being well recieved in certain academic circles

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Recently, they believe in Multi-Universes with billions of more galaxies, and each was created by its' own Big Bang. Don't know if true.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not exactly. Multiverse theory is misunderstood by the public, thanks to some poor sensationalized science journalism

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Any sauce on that? Love this kind of stuff.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Haven't seen that video, but he gave a talk at my university and I expect it should be the same. Anyway, multiverse gets confused with (1/2)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

(2/2) the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, which isn't very widely accepted as all that good.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Andrei Linde is one of the original multiverse theorists. If you've got time, his talks are good https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9E1zMGvbQw

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thanks...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Choosy moms choose jif

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The 'nearly' intrigues me. Care to elaborate?

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

There's always the odd chance that somewhere a collision occurred & the black hole at the center went one way & the galaxy went the other.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

This is correct. Source: my PhD in Quasar Astrophysics.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As a mathematician, this confirmation continues to make my day. :D

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Could be a star. A gigantic, very dense one, for sure. Not that I know enough to make that an assumption based on reason...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

which may end up being a black hole at some point, wouldn't it?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Ancient assonaut theorists believe aliens placed a black hole in the earth 's core in ancient times.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

So... Morons, then.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I... what... how... That makes no sense! I am going to have to google this absurdity.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Every spiral galaxy. Probably not irregular ones. Also: supermassive and ultramassive black holes, not the regular kind.

9 years ago | Likes 79 Dislikes 3

Ellipticals too, since they're formed from colliding spirals.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Some of those have them too. They think only small ones with little activity don't.Lots of irregulars have simply undergone trauma recently.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Recently in astronomical timeframes...

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Yup.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well, it would make sense. Millions or billions of planets and suns can't orbit around nothing. There has to be something in the center.

9 years ago | Likes 366 Dislikes 10

Not at all. Bodies will orbit a shared barycenter of the masses which can exist in empty space b/w them. Nothing needs to actually be there.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I'd like to agree but in all honesty "making sense" is a completely different ballpark in the macro level.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Like yo mama

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A black hole generally doesn't make up most of the mass of a galaxy. All the satrs and stuff just kinda orbit around each other

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Galaxies don't orbit around black holes. The mass even of supermassive black holes is way to small to have that effect on galaxies.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Nougat

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's turtles

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not necessarily. The discovery of supermassive black holes was a bit of a surprise.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They account for only a small fraction of the total galactic mass. They could disappear and the galaxy wouldn't notice

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's OPs mom

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

She is indeed super massive.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Giant toilet flushing. We are just waiting for our turn at the bottom.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Darn Energy is causing the universe to expand, so no.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

You're wrong. Yes, the universe is expanding, but not our galaxy. It's the distance to other galaxies that are increasing.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I don't think I'll see the end though.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The VERY weird thing is that stars don't move as if they're free bodies orbiting a point mass. Galaxies almost seem rigid as they spin.

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 2

Gravity is like magnets: magic :P

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

That's the single best explanation for fundamental forces anyone has ever come up with.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

For a brief period after the discovery of planetary orbiting, but before it was understood, some people thought that there were angels

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That is completely false. For example the arms of our galaxies are never the same collection of stars. Each star moves at diff rates, and

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

due to some quirky physics just tend to group there before orbiting out of the arm

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Those "Quirky physics" are one of the tbe three biggest questions in science.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

It's not false, it's just a very simplified explanation for the observed effect that demands "dark matter" exist.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

No. We know dark matter exists because stars in a galaxy orbit faster than they should be. No idea who told you they dont orbit, or that

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

EXPLAIN

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Dark matter. The observed rotation of stars in galaxies is SLOWER than it should be, as if there was way more mass than we see.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Faster, not slower

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Planets are all revolving at different rates. Mar's year is shorter than Jupiter's year which is shorter than Neptune.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I think that he thinks that stars don't do the same thing in a galaxy.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

He is incorrect. In fact galaxies may look like they rotate as a rigid group, but they dont. For example, the arms of our galaxy are not

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

always made up of the same stars. Individual stars orbit independently, but happen to slightly slow down when they enter an arm,

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So the universe doesn't revolve around me?

9 years ago | Likes 335 Dislikes 2

Hubble's (the man not the telescope) data says it does. Every other galaxy is also at the center but why think like that?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"So the universe doesn't revolve around me?" - the millennial generation

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Universe doesn't seem to revolve around anything. Just keeps expanding and expanding.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Any universe you create does.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

unless your name Sagittarius A*

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No, but you're still a black hole that sucks the life out of every thing.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

@BlackHole this guy is trying to steal your spot!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No it revolves around the earth, so wait yeah it does revolve around you.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

It doesn't revolve around you. But in terms of inflation, you are the center of it. Or any other point you choose.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just yo momma

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

you so fat, the aliens made billions of copies and put them at the center of each galaxy to hold them together

9 years ago | Likes 114 Dislikes 0

well not billions, it was like 3 tops

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You're so fat, aliens cut off a small portion of your mass to use for the gravity glue of trillions of galaxies.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

It's yo Mama's

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

How do we know that @MrDeadsr isn't yo' mama?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Technically, not necessarily. All bodies orbit the center of mass of the system. No rule says that the center of mass has to be occupied.

9 years ago | Likes 100 Dislikes 2

there is rule called "there has to be mass there for orbit to even happen." a lot of mass. i'm gonna side with the astrophysicists here.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

This precisely. Enough mass *can* coagulate to form a black hole, but that itself is only a side effect of the high density of matter.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

On a galaxy scale the "center of mass" doesn't necessarily need to be one body if I'm understanding you correctly?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Like a poly star system. No actual object at center of gravity.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I have a physics degree and was looking for this comment

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

See, e.g., Pluto and Charon.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Im almost certain they're binary due to having almost the same mass, is that what you are saying?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Their barycenter is located outside the mass of any celestial body.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm stupid and this is confusing but I'm gonna ask...if there's mass at the center then wouldn't that mean something was there?

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Center of mass does not mean a mass at the center. If you take two equal masses and place them some distance apart, the center of mass is1/2

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

The point halfway between them. If one of the two were larger, the center of mass would be a point between, but closer to the larger mass2/3

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

I think it's a bit like a human body. Made of a bunch of smaller parts that are relatively extremely close to each other, forming a unit.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But I don't know. I'm a Psych major. I like brains and stuff.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Take a donut, the centre of the mass is in the middle of the donut, you eat the centre of the mass, i wiil eat the rest...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The black hole diet

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Disclaimer: I am a chemist, not an astrophysicist.

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 1

That would imply a relatively perfect distribution of mass throughout the galaxy. So that the gravitational pull...

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

from all points of the galaxy would be strong enough and equal enough so that net attraction is to the center. Very unlikely.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Shouldn't chemists know a buttload about orbits?

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

We take standard physics classes where we learn the mechanics of orbits, harmonic oscillators, and the like, but atomic and molecular

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Orbits and orbitals aren't really the same thing.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Only molecular orbitals.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0