I will slowly try to present my case so as to comply with forum rules.

What decides what turns into what a question I have long had as far as blackholes and supernovas.


Since forum rules say I have to start off slow then my first item is does everyone accept that for most cases that rotation exists if I place a tiny top on my desk and give it a twist to set the top spinning.

Relative to...

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 ...

Why dont you actually ask what you want to instead of asking questions for first graders

The reason is directly related to if I directly post in such manner then I get a resultant deluge of posts asking wheres the fundament for such an assertion.

My first post was asking in if you believe or not in the rotation of an object such as a simple top or an even more simplistic coin on a basic desktop where the basic forces of centrifugal energy and frictional energy are at exposition.

Then if there is a basic concensus we will move on to the next item in what makes a Supernova or a blackhole discussion.

Assume there's a basic consensus. Please don't make people go after a new posts indicator to find basically nothing new in the thread.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

Then you should ask in the Q&A section. A supernova will form a black hole if a portion of it collapses into a sufficiently small volume that even the speed of light is insufficient to escape from it. Not all supernova will form black holes (not all produce remnants that collapse into a sufficiently small volume), and not all black holes are formed from supernova remnants (any mechanism that puts sufficient mass in a small enough volume will create a black hole).

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Thank you for your kind and timely advice.
However.
If I do so then the responses that I get to my question are going to be the typical mainstream responses.

I hope that maybe I can mention another reason as to why we sometimes get a blackhole and sometimes we get a Nova or Super Nova from a Sun.


The other day at a tire repair shop that also balances tires by spinning them I asked if there were someway for me to see the results of a tire spinning at maximum.

I was told that a tire gets destroyed if spun at maximum and that they never, ever do this at the tire shop.

I offered to pay to have a tire spun at maximum to see the results and the tire shop told me to come back Sunday to have the test run.

Sunday and the test was run and as the tire spun faster and faster pieces began to break free as if some invisible giant were ripping the tire apart piece by piece.

So my conclusion was when revolutions creating centrifugal force or CF exceeds material strength then we get a disintegration or an explosion.

Later that week I began to investigate if the same forces were at work in other items designed for high spin rates or high RPM and so I came to a jet turbine engine whose main component is a spinning jet turbine.

I investigated further and found that the jet engine can run at one hundred thousand revolutions per minute but it has a revolution limiter to prevent it going faster than this limit.

I then asked the military base Air Force Sargent at the maintenence hangar what happens if the jet engine RPM limiter fails and the jet turbine spins past 100, 000 RPM.

I was told the jet turbine breaks up and pieces fly out like missles and anyone standing between the redlines gets turned into red pulp.............oh and did I mention that after I heard that that I decided to take a few steps away! from the jet engine just in case

So my conclusion was when revolutions creating centrifugal force or CF exceeds material strength then we get a disintegration or an explosion.

So far for manmade objects but what about the effects of centrifugal forces on natural objects like Moons, Planets and Suns.

I found out that our Planet Earth bulges out at the Equator due to centrifugal forces as the Planet rotates.

And what is the RPM limit on rotating Suns?

I also found out from NASA Chandra that blackholes rotate.
IS there an RPM limit on blackholes?

So are your questions: can a star spin so fast that it desintegrates, and would that desintegration resemble a nova in any way? Same for black holes?

If so, they are normal Q&A questions. Why the lead up with the coin or top? It doesn't seem necessary if the questions are as I condensed them.

What's wrong with "the typical mainstream responses"? Would you not prefer your questions answered to best scientific understanding, rather than someone's wild ideas?

ETA: perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but I don't see any ATM proposal here, just a question about how stars can and cannot behave.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

I agree, is ther any reason this shouldn't be moved to Q & A?

Are you going to give us your own 'ATM' idea?

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Thats the question I had long ago when asking if an excessive spinrate may have been the leadup to the original Big Bang or Big Expansion and my question from several years ago was shot down.

The leadup in my question was to lead to this line of questioning if perhaps the Original Blackhole that led to this Universe was the result of excessive spin rate?

If a regular star can detonate due to excessive spin rate then what precludes a blackhole from a situation leading to an excessive spin rate creating a Nova or a Supernova?

Or in my question from long ago what prevents a Super Massive Black hole from an excessive spin rate that leads to detonation?

And if I post all these questions in regular Q and A I get shot down by folks telling me there are books and books on how the Big Bang started and excessive black hole spin rate is not one of those books.

So what do I do?

Thank you.

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

I hope to put forth that maybe the creation of Novas, Super Novas and maybe even Universes is maybe the result of excessive spin rate for Suns and Black holes.

I think that maybe if centrifugal force exceeds structural integrity of a Star or a Black hole then a detonation is inevitable when encountering high spin rates.

I think that maybe as a Sun collapses and its spin rate increases due to angular momentum conservation that the fine line that decides if we get a black hole or a Supernova is the actual rate of the increase of the spin rate.

I think that maybe if the spin rate increases way too fast in a short time frame then the creation of a new black hole is aborted and we get a detonation that we see as either a Nova or a Super Nova.

And maybe if the rate of spin increase is moderate or slow then that leads to a collapsing Sun being turned into a black hole.

For Suns that have sufficient mass to reach either a black hole or a Nova or Super Nova detonation,
For cases where Suns are smaller in mass then I think we get a white Dwarf.

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

Ah, I see.

That requires establishing that there was an "Original Blackhole that led to this Universe".

This would first need to be established. I have my doubts that it is possible. What would spin a star up to such rotation rates? If there is no spin up mechanism, how could it possibly form with such a rate?

The question seems moot if the points before the "then" are not established.

No, the first question would be: what could cause a black hole to have an excessive spin rate? If it happens during the process that was supposed to create a black hole, could it even form if a lot of mass was flung away due to excessive rotation.

I see what led you to posting it here now, thanks for explaining. As I'm not a specialist in any way on these topics, I hope someone else will help clearing things up in a manner acceptable to you.

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

When we iceskate we hold our arms out and begin to spin and we can increase our spin rate by collapsing or pulling our arms inward towards our body and this then results in an increase in spinrate speed and this same system is what a Sun that has an established spinrate does when it begins to collapse inwards since the increase in angular momentum results in an increase in the collapsing Suns spinrate

The first question as far as what makes a blackhole have an excessive spin rate is what slows a blackhole down since there is no friction in space?

I think that maybe as a blackhole consumes matter that part of the absorbed mass is turned into a higher spin rate the same as a dynamo or generator absorbs mechanical energy so then maybe a blackhole increases its spin rate as compensation for absorption of the angular momentum of the mass being absorbed.

What then limits the maximum spin rate of a black hole?

I think that maybe a very high spin rate for a black hole results when a black hole of aprox. seventy Sun masses trys to absorb a passing smaller black hole of aprox. ten Sun masses.

Maybe what if a smaller black hole orbits the larger black hole and if the angular momentum of the larger black hole increases too fast then the centrifugal force may exceed the inward gravitational pressure leading to a Nova explosion.

If we had a blackhole that first started out with the mass of a single sun and as it ate more and more Suns it speeds up to compensate and maintain equilibrium of a stable state and eventually eating entire Galaxies until it reached a limit on the spin rate.

I think that this limit is the mass of our Universe so that even a black hole with very stable and slow increases in spin rate eventually reaches a limit to further growth.





The second part of your question has me wondering what about small black holes that are created by Super Nova explosions in high energy ellliptical orbits.

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

If the matter collapsed inward, the spin rate would increase. This would cause the matter to expand outwards. This would cause the spin rate to decrease. This would allow the matter to collapse inwards. This would cause the spin rate to increase... We'd end up seeing a lot of stars that kept getting bigger and smaller and bigger and smaller in a never-ending cycle, without ever getting so small that they became black holes, and without ever getting so big that they fell apart.

There's a few points to make.
1.When Craig Breedlove made his land speed runs at the Bonneville salt flats in Utah, early car designs shred the rubber tires, so they switched to solid metal wheels...could've saved you a few tires.
2. Though the sun contains the vast majority of the mass of the solar system, presumably "condensed" from the presolar nebula, it has less angular momentum than the planets. That says that there's a physical mechanism for the transfer of angular momenta away from the central body...No?
3. Predictions of black holes occurring when stars of greater than 25 solar masses go supernova, failed in at least one case....leaving theorists scratching their heads....and the cat scratching the carpet

see:http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/05_...ss_110205.html
pete

__________________
A third rate theory forbids.
A second rate theory explains after the fact.
A first rate theory predicts.
A. Lomonosov

If that were the case then we never reach any Nova events, Super Nova events and Blackhole events.

The question I come back to is what sets off a Super Nova?
It has to be a massive instability in a stable system.

And the only time when I see that
type of event is when a Suns fuel is spent and its at the point of collapse to black hole or big bad fireworks time leading to a Nova or Super Nova event.

Or maybe not all blackholes are as long term stable as predicted?
Maybe what if there are some short term and medium term stable blackholes that one day decide to go bang?
But what sets them off?

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

You seem to be comfortable with numbers and observation. If you could work out the functional relationship between the mass of a star and the required rotation rate, that would be a good start.

__________________

The guy at the tireshop sold tickets to folks to see the tire rip apart under the centrifuge so I at least got some barbecued steak out of my tire deal.

I see that the Sun performs more like a heavy liquid than the solid I was expecting as far as the core interactions and angular momentum transfer.

Interesting that Stars have a venting or safety valve when detonating so that blackhole formation is not always a given.

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

Ah! hey that sounds interesting so I am off to try to build a data base of star mass and rotation rates.

Thank you.

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

Here's a star for you: Achernar

ESO press release

Astronomy website

It's around 6 solar masses. It's spins at ~ 250km/s at its equator. They've worked out the rotation limit as ~ 300km/s (before it spins apart).

But the thing is, it's already spewing out lots of material. A steady leak. So, I think that unless your star spun up suddenly, you might not get an "explosion".

__________________

Thats what I am thinking that for a nice boom be it a jet engine, star or black hole that we need a sudden spinup that rends the structural limits of the system and we get an interesting show.

Hmmm I am really bad at math but what about for all cases where structural integrity equals one and spin rate variability equals zero to .99999 we get a pulsating expanding/contracting system since it has a safety valve.

For all cases where structural integrity falls from one to .99999 or lower and spin rate variability reaches one we get an explosion since in this sudden spinup system we have no safety valve?

What about for a spinning blackhole at ninehundred RPM um Chandra observatory but I forgot what the blackhole was called and it seems to be at close to maximum spin rate.

So what if this spinning blackhole gets a flyby from a smaller blackhole and it makes the Chandra blackhole spin way past 900 RPM so that CF exceeds structural integrity like a jetengine going nuts?

I think that maybe the main clue is a sudden spinup with no compensatory mechanism that creates an instability that may lead to a buildup of energy that may lead to a sudden explosion?

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

What would make a disintegrating star "an interesting show"? Gas would get flung about .. but what would make it light up so we might see it brighter? (assuming that's what you mean with "show".)

ETA:

No, not an explosion... just stuff flying apart. Why assume an explosion would happen?

__________________
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" -- Charles Darwin
"Your right to hold an opinion is not being contested. Your expectation that it be taken seriously is." -- Jason Thompson
Meet the OOONG TOE.

A tiny portion of a Sun exploding is an interesting show to me AKA a Solar Flare.

I propose that a Sunwide Flare due to extreme spin rate is an interesting show to me and that maybe the reason we get a Nova or a Super Nova.

Explosions are just that.......stuff flying apart at high speeds just like Claymores or an LPG tank that encounters a nice spark that makes it fly apart fits my definition of an explosion.

Material at a Suns core is under much higher pressure/temperature than the surface material.

And an extreme spin may create a flat disc exposing the Stars core and we may get a cool show like a Sunwide Flare or explosion or AKA Nova or Super Nova

I think that maybe all a Super Nova or a Nova is these titanic jet streams of electricaly charged particles doing a short circuit due to extreme spin rates.

Old but http://soi.stanford.edu/press/970828.NASA/wpost.html

utterly unexpected meteorological feature in the form of titanic "jet streams" of electrically charged gases that circle the poles, churning the atmosphere where it was thought to be most calm.

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

That is a weird star...

It's entirely possible that during the core collapse, that the core spun up enough that the comination of centrificalforce and neutron degeneracy pressure prevented the collapse into a black hole.

Thats just a guess on my part however.

As to the threads OP: Even stars collapsing into a black hole go nova or sometimes, supernova or hypernova. So the premise of the OP seems a bit off, in that a star just doesn't collapse into a black hole without first some sort of explosive or spontanous shedding event in it's outer shells/layers.

__________________
There is no problem that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives - US Army Demolitions School

I just saw Hayley's comet, she waved, Said "why you always running in place? Even the man in the moon disappeared, Somewhere in the stratosphere" - Shinedown

http://worldsofothersuns.home.comcast.net/

You can pretend we're smart, here, and skip to the chase. Most of us actually are.

As per forum rules, one need not rewrite a calculus text before sharing Schrödinger's equation.




We get it.

You will, however, be required to explain non-standard terms such as "at exposition." The last time I heard that term was at the World's Fair, but that's probably not how you're using it...

Are you referring to exposition as a literary technique, or as the initial presentation of the thematic material of a musical composition?

If something else, please let us know. Perhaps you meant "juxtaposition?"

Also, there is no such thing as "centrifugal energy," except as errantly referenced by those perpetuating perpetual motion machines. There is a centrifugal force, however.

Ok, now we're getting somewhere.

Nope.

Nova are the result of the accretion of hydrogen onto the surface of a white dwarf star, usually accreted from a larger companion star. The result is runaway hydrogen fusion.

Supernova, on the other hand, fall into several different categories, involving carbon fusion, carbon fusion induced hydrogen fusion, core collapse of nickel-iron core stars exceeding the Chandrasekhar limit, and others.

I think the relative difference between your examples and a supernova would be akin to the difference between Tsar Bomba and a bacterial burp.

Sounds to me like an EU theory, aka "plasma cosmology," which has been rejected by mainstream scientific theory, not because it contradicts mainstream theory, but because mainstream theory is both explained and supported (evidence) by known astrophysical phenomena.

Please read this section.

Thank you.

While we are interested in what you think about 'spinning stars' what we need here is some evidence or data to back up your ideas.

__________________
All Moderation in Purple
To report a post (even this one) to the moderation team, click the reporting icon in the upper-right corner of the post:
─────────────────────────────────────────────
◄Rules For Posting To This Board ► ◄Forum FAQs ► ◄ Conspiracy Theory Advice ► ◄ Alternate Theory Advice ►

Thank you for the interesting read in the link.
However.
In the link they talk about magnetism and my question is based on electrical activity from friction of the spinning outerlayers of a Sun with a slower rotating core creating an electrical charge that detonates when discharged into a reactive portion of a Star.?

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

They do spin.

Please forgive me the Wikipedia link as I know its not good for me to post a wikipedia link as an information database...sorry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_rotation

A Star does have several rotation speeds for several Star layers.

http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/lin..._rotation.html

Plasma does absorb electricity but why no mention of the Sun haveing an electrical component to its plasma?


A mundane use of plasma and electricity
http://www.yieldengineering.com/default.asp?page=264


Most of my questions have been solved by the kind and patient intervention of forum members but I still have a few questions.

Some places have information that tells me that the Universe comes from a single blackhole that went blamoo.

The questions I still have is if Nova, Super Nova and Hyper Nova are common when stars collapse and if blackholes are also common then what about the orbital paths?

What if the model of one single blackhole is wrong?

What if what set off the original blackhole and led to this Universe being here was an encounter with a second smaller blackhole?

What if the original model of a single and static or non rotating blackhole no longer holds?

Thats the problem I have when reading about Universe expansion or Universe contraction.
Since if the matter needed for contraction is there then how to give an explanation to the original expansion?


Now if we posit a rotating black hole with plenty of Centrifugal force that went blamoo then the Universe expansion model kind of makes sense to me as red shift galaxies are acting like stones let loose from a sling?

__________________
Can an electric pulse become a gravitic pulse since mass being moved creates gravitic waves however faint they maybe.

You apparently missed the point. nobody was doubting stars and black holes spin. He was saying we need evidence or data that spinning is what causes an explosion. On another note I really think it would do you a world of good to read up on stellar nucleosynthesis which is the fusion that goes on in stars leading up to an eventual supernova.