nsane.forums Posted December 3, 2009 Share Posted December 3, 2009 Which came first: supermassive black holes, or the galaxies that orbit them? Recent observations of a distant quasar with no apparent host galaxy and a nearby companion galaxy suggest that it is possible for quasars to build galactic homes for themselves using the jets of particles they propel out of their poles. Not only could this relationship explain the order of events, but it could also provide a causal explanation for the direct relationship between the size of galaxies and the black holes they orbit.The quasar in question is named HE0450-2958, located about 5 billion light-years away from Earth. Researchers who used the Very Large Telescope at the European Southern Observatory in Chile were intrigued by the apparent "nakedness" of the quasar—that is, the lack of a host galaxy. They were uncertain whether the host galaxy was obscured by large amounts of dust, but they couldn't detect any of the infrared light that is usually given off by dust. View: Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioActive Posted December 5, 2009 Share Posted December 5, 2009 Fascinating, but tell me again why should we care?! <_< Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted December 6, 2009 Share Posted December 6, 2009 @Lohengrin:Of course you wouldn't be interested... you're not into astronomy ^_^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shought Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 I think it's cool if they find out stuff like this...Would be even more cool if they'd find some planet(s) on which we could easily live :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 @shought:Indeed... Imagine naming your own planet :w00t: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioActive Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 @Lohengrin:Of course you wouldn't be interested... you're not into astronomy ^_^That's not the point. The point is; they keep spending billions of dollars on fascinating yet utterly useless things, we shouldn't bother with space, we have enough problems on Earth that need our attention, not to mention the funds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 @Lohengrin:You have your own point, and they have their own.If you want to blame someone, blame their government, not them.In any case, there's no use playing the blame game.If you blame them, they will just ask you: if you know what's happening, then why are you doing nothing?Then you'll answer: why blame me when I have no control over things?And as a result, an endless cycle of blame game will just continue.Situations like this are out of our hands unless someone is willing to do something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator DKT27 Posted December 7, 2009 Administrator Share Posted December 7, 2009 It's directly or indirectly aimed at good of the mankind, all these finds. Isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioActive Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 It's directly or indirectly aimed at good of the mankind, all these finds. Isn't it?No, it isn't. All these "discoveries" have never benefited humanity in ANY real sustainable way. It's more like a spoiled rich kid's -very expensive- hobby, and the rich kid here being the government funding it (from people's money of course!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shought Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 I hate to say it (figure of speech), but Lohengrin is right, if you ask me.Many of our problems are caused by money paid for no production. Whenever you pay something there should be production to 'make up for it', as soon as there's not, the system will fail. Of course any sane mind will argue: 'but there is production, a lot of people get work, a lot of parts and fuel is needed, so more people get work, tons of production'. Following that reasoning it would be equally 'smart' to spend money on supporting people who drink in world's biggest drinking contests, for there is a lot of production, people who organize it, drinks and stuff have to be made, but all this stuff isn't 'real' production. It's production for the sake of production, not production for the sake of the things that really matter, we(us).Same goes for the music industry, which is why I believe piracy is just. When you buy a song, even better: when millions of people buy a song there is a lot of 'production', singers get paid, songwriters get paid, greedy bastards get paid, companies that produce CDs and stuff get paid(a little). But there is no 'real' production, again.Most might blame the banks for the economic crisis, but they're not the only ones to blame, believe me, they're not. If anyone should take the fall for this all, it should be we(us), for creating (and allowing for) such a system (to be created).I'll end my rant here... :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizarre™ Posted December 7, 2009 Share Posted December 7, 2009 @shought:Read my last post :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.