Flag ID

Why Quasars Ignite

There's your winning smile, a bright summers day, then there's Quasars ! Unlike the latter, Quasars are amongst the brightest objects in the Universe, often shining out more energy than the entirety of the galaxy that hosts them.

While we know a fair bit about what they are, how they begin has been a debate since they were first found.

Most galaxies have a supermassive black hole at their centre, our Milky Way has one 4.5 million times the mass of our own Sun, and in galactic terms, that's fairly light weight, there are black holes within 60 million light years of us several billion times the mass of our Sun, real goliaths, which tend to sit at the centre of Elliptical Galaxies.

Qasars are incredibly active supermassive black holes, so the question remains, why are some quasars and others not, what causes this to happen ?

A team of astronomers from the Universities of Sheffield and Hertfordshire have found an interesting bit of information which may hint towards the answer. In a study of Quasars, they have discovered that galaxies that are home to a Quasar are three time more likely to be in a state of interaction or collision with another galaxy.

This leads them to believe that the galaxy merger is responsible for piling an enormous quantity of material towards the black hole, causing it to grow incredibly quickly but also as messy eaters, pushing out much of it in the form of radiation in beams emanating from the poles.

One consequence of this is the galaxy is quenched of dust and gas, the very elements needed to create new stars, and is likely the reason most elliptical galaxies have such monster black holes, the remnants of all the star making material consumed, and that pushed out, leaving behind stars old enough to live on since that happened.

Source :

phys.org

Astronomers solve the 60-year mystery of quasars, the most powerful objects in the universe

Scientists have unlocked one of the biggest mysteries of quasars—the brightest, most powerful objects in the universe—by discovering that th

i feel like the crimew thing shows how much queer discourse dehumanizes people. crimew is an extremely cool & talented person who's like. literally embodying 'be gay do crime' in it's truest form, but the minute that people find out it is a bi lesbian, suddenly thats. all they can think of her as? like no consideration of how it Hacked The Fucking No Fly List, everyone can only focus on her lesbian identity crimes. because none of the people who do this shit can ever see "wrong" queer people as people. they treat identity discourse like it's the biggest issue in the world even to this absolutely absurd level. doesn't matter what they do for queer liberation doesn't matter if they are happy, if you Do Identity Wrong all you are in their eyes are a freak who's personally responsible for lesbophobia or transphobia or w/e. funny how that works

"If you go on T you won't look like a pretty anime boy, you're gonna look like an ugly man!" is so funny because I'm SE Asian, have been on T for 3 years with subtle (but satisfactory) changes, and definitely still have been told I look like an anime boy or a K-pop idol (because racism.) I do like to take care of my appearance and make an effort to look nice and stylish, but that's not a "pretty anime boy" or "K-pop idol" thing, I'm just A Guy who wants to look nice and pretty and cool. It's such an odd statement cause from my perspective it definitely does not consider the experience I described above, LMAO. It's assuming a "little white girl who doesn't know any better and likes anime" person, or something like that. (Just putting this out there because transmascs of color definitely need to be heard more, and transitioning on T experiences are all very very different.)

And anyways, the condescending way people talk down to trans men who do want to look like their cute/pretty fictional men transition goals is so weird... Like, what's wrong with that, anyways? Some fictional guys are really designed nicely, and may give new perspective on masculinity or maleness that people IRL may not show depending on where you live. Anyways, I think even if T changes you to be more masculine than you expected, you can still present in a way inspired by characters and styles you admire if you so like.

And the other side -- what's wrong with looking like an "ugly" man? I feel like that's saying any masculine trait is "ugly," so if you think that please reevaluate yourself. Looking more like a man Is Kind Of The Entire Point. Many transmascs will embrace that masculinity, and that's not anything bad, wrong, or poisonous. If you think it makes them look uglier or more like a predator or enemy, I want you to know that is not a very kind mindset to have toward transgender people, or to any man in general; it's rather in poor taste, and shows you are not an ally to transgender people. So if you do desire to be an ally, I urge you to reevaluate yourself and challenge yourself on what being a "man" entails, what being "masculine" entails. Because it's not inherently immorality or ugliness, it's just a gender.

This framing of masculinization as something to be warned against, that we don't know what we're getting into is not very cool, definitely ignoring we have our own agency and choices and feelings about our bodies. Like, when we go on T, often we know what it will do to us, and what kind of person we are gender-wise. We're making that choice for ourselves, absurd that we're treated like we don't know any better. We know. Don't treat it like a warning that we'll become less desirable types of people.

With NASA announcing their streaming service NASA+ and also announcing it’s going to be free and also ad free, I’d just like to appreciate the lengths they go to make scientific knowledge and exploration as available as they possibly can.

"We love our black hole"

Neptune's rings

by NASA

Here's a reminder to stop shortening the James Webb Space Telescope's name to "James Webb" and instead use "JWST".

"A lot of us would appreciate it if people didn't refer to the JWST as just "James Webb". He does not deserve to have his name associated with the praise the telescope receives. He didn't do these things. What he did do was awful. I only wanna hear sentences in which "James Webb" is the subject when they're about what he did. Otherwise it erases everything that we fight to bring awareness to. All we see when people do this is praise for a man who brought so much pain to the community. It feels like people are ignoring the fight to rename it and it legitimises NASA's name choice and justifies their horrible treatment of those who spoke up. So please consider using the full name, JWST or other alternative names that have been suggested."

from this post:

Tumblr

Rover's Rovers

Something I want to add: A lot of us would appreciate it if people didn't refer to the JWST as just "James Webb". He does not deserve to ha

Space + Academia

Requested by @starclusters-super-dumb-reblogs

X X X | X X X | X X X

ARE THERE MORE THAN 1 UNIVERSE??

Blog# 198

Saturday, June 4th, 2022

Welcome back,

What – one vast, ancient and mysterious universe isn’t enough for you? Well, as it happens, there are others. Among physicists, it’s not controversial. Our universe is but one in an unimaginably massive ocean of universes called the multiverse.

If that concept isn’t enough to get your head around, physics describes different kinds of multiverse. The easiest one to comprehend is called the cosmological multiverse. The idea here is that the universe expanded at a mind-boggling speed in the fraction of a second after the big bang. During this period of inflation, there were quantum fluctuations which caused separate bubble universes to pop into existence and themselves start inflating and blowing bubbles.

Russian physicist Andrei Linde came up with this concept, which suggests an infinity of universes no longer in any causal connection with one another – so free to develop in different ways.

Cosmic space is big – perhaps infinitely so. Travel far enough and some theories suggest you’d meet your cosmic twin – a copy of you living in a copy of our world, but in a different part of the multiverse. String theory, which is a notoriously theoretical explanation of reality, predicts a frankly meaninglessly large number of universes, maybe 10 to the 500 or more, all with slightly different physical parameters.

And then there’s the quantum multiverse. Physicist Hugh Everett came up with this idea, which is predicted by his “many worlds” interpretation of quantum physics. Everett’s theory is that quantum effects cause the universe to constantly split. It could mean that decisions we make in this universe have implications for other versions of ourselves living in parallel worlds.

Originally published on www.newscientist.com

COMING UP!!

(Wednesday, June 8th, 2022)

“WHAT IS THE NEW THEORY OF GRAVITY??”