• dwindling7373@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    Tell me you don’t understand black holes using a lot of words.

    As far as gravity goes they are equivalent to the star that they collapsed from and just as deadly.

    The difference is that you can get that much closer before “impacting” with it, but you and superman would be fucked pretty much at the same distance from it.

    And I think you need a lot less than 300 writers to conjure an idea that leverage our fantasy in more and better ways.

    • Wirlocke@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 day ago

      Nothing you said about black holes really contradicts what they were saying? Even if a star and black hole can have the same gravity, there is still a shell of space that once you pass you cannot ever return. I’m sure Superman could go into a star and come back out, not so much with a black hole.

    • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      And an infinitely dense point in spacetime doesn’t necessarily exist: it’s just what general relativity predicts is at the center of a black hole.

      The last time our physical model of the universe predicted an infinite value, we ended up discovering new physics eventually (the ultraviolet catastrophe). (Edit: ultrasound was a typo).

      • Wolf@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 hours ago

        And an infinitely dense point in spacetime doesn’t necessarily exist: it’s just what general relativity predicts is at the center of a black hole.

        If the singularity at the center of a black hole didn’t exist, and was just extremely dense instead, would all of the other properties that we know is true about black holes be able to exist? For example we know that Sag A* and that one other black hole we ‘imaged’ give off no light, would that still be possible without a singularity?

    • drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I mean, the gravitational gradient is much higher. To me this kind of sounds like saying “there’s nothing that special about a 10 watt laser, an LED lightbulb puts out the same amount of light”, but a 10 watt laser is enough to instantly and permanently blind you.

      Its true that there’s nothing that special about orbiting a black hole, but I think its not really logically inconsistent (inasmuch as a superhero can be logically consistent) to say “even if superman could survive dipping into a sun he probably wouldn’t be too happy if he stuck his arm into an event horizon”.

    • Cat_Daddy [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’d also likely burn to death pretty early on in the process. Like, the moment you cross the event horizon, instant death.

          • Cat_Daddy [any, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            I assumed it would be further inward than the photon sphere because heat radiation is (also an assumption) easier for gravity to hold back than light. I don’t know how “heavy” a star’s heat is, though, so ¯\ˍ(ツ)ˍ/¯

            • dwindling7373@feddit.it
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Heat radiation are particles with a mass and a certain speed, they are all by definition heavier and easier to trap than photons.

              In terms of escape velocity, nothing can try to escape faster than light.