I'm no expert but we have images. Do you need someone to go get spaghettified for proof? We couldn't even observe that btw.

That's okay. It doesn't need you to believe in it.

[removed]

[removed]

This might blow your mind too, but the earth is a globe.

[removed]

Ooof. That hurts their brain.

[removed]

[removed]

That's okay, science doesn't care if you believe in it, because it still continues to science

Well to be fair to the OP, they might not be. In the current idea of what they are, aren't Bose stars or gravstars or whatever their called a possibility?

[removed]

There are actually valid criticisms of the theoretical models for black holes. It's possible that the objects we are observing aren't the same as the mathematical models we have of black holes.

We have good reason to believe that our models have a pretty good lead on how these objects behave though.

It's called a sphere.. globes arnt real!

[removed]

They got pictures now, it's not even theoretical anymore

[removed]

It’s absolutely real. The team might suck right now, but the fans are incredibly passionate. It hasn’t been the same since moving the team from Oakland to Las Vegas however.

It's not a sphere either. It's a gottdang geoid

[removed]

Is it possible that it’s just a star so dense that light, even its own can’t escape it. No not a black hole but a black star.

[removed]

It isn't a portal to another dimension like in sci fi movies but it's real

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

You just renamed the same thing

You’re just describing a black hole. With something that dense, it collapses in under its own gravity. It wouldn’t look like a star, hence the black hole moniker.

Hahaha! I had a bad day today just wanted some laughter! Thank you dude/dudet! Happy new years

You are reaching too far for what is believable. I still want to know where gravity comes from.

[removed]

[removed]

Mass? Jesus Christ have you people ever read a book?

I know, right! It was a shockingly good Disney movie that many people have never seen. Far ahead of it’s time, but definitely real.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Black_Hole_(1979_film)

[insert your mother joke here]

Seeing someone freeze in place for eternity would be just as hunting though

[removed]

Jesus Christ, it's not a geoid Marie, it's a mineral!

[removed]

breaking news: black holes are found to not be real after a skeptical reddit post leads top scientists to revisit the idea

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Ok. And I don't believe in you. Both your and my statements do not change anything. Therefore, you can believe or be sure of anything, no one cares.

I think I've seen it suggested: a hyper-dense object of some kind, which isn't a singularity.

Maybe some other effect is in play that we're ignorant to, which prevents singularity formation. This might be a clean way of explaining away why our current math breaks down at the center of these things.

To be clear, I'm not sold on the idea myself. But, if these objects are singularities (I believe this to be the case), the strangeness of them is massively underrated.

Do you have data to support this theory?

I thought I imagined seeing this movie.

Apparently, you've never met never met my ex wife.

That’s pretty much what it is, it’s just that if it’s dense enough so light can’t escape, then it’s not made out of gas/plasma like stars are anymore

And if you figure that out, let us all know. There's money and a prize in it.

[removed]

Turns out we were wrong all along!

Accepting the process doesn't require belief in every thing we think is probably true. It's ignorant to say someone "doesn't believe in science" because they disagree with a position currently accepted by the majority.

Science corrects for mistakes all the time. For you to try to shut that down doesn't sound like you agree with the scientific process.

Vikings guy here, was rooting for you guys down there with Adams out of our division!

Pretty self explanatory, if it's a dense enough object that it crushes light particles then I'd assume no human being is going to survive going into it

Isn’t it still a globe like object. Anything pulled into it will eventually just stop at some point. It’s not going to pass through into some fantasy dimension.

He's not, current model of a black hole is a singularity. However, look at bosestars and it's the same effect as a BH but not singularity. Quick thing on them here at 8:02 https://youtu.be/XJMmCg15PpE

As first described by the German Professor Gottdang.

Is this a troll? Because we literally have images of one. It was huge news when it happened.

[deleted]

gravity doesn’t “come from” mass. So maybe pick that book back up yourself bud.

Aaand I don't believe in viruses. Yknow, cause I can't see it with the naked eye or something. What's that? The cough? Oh, I'm sure it's nothing.

I'm sure generations of scientists who have devoted their lives to pushing the boundaries of knowledge and discovery aren't as smart as that one blog I read on Facebook once.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

A radiotelescope image of the black hole at the center of M87 was taken a couple of years ago, adding strongly to the evidence that black holes are real.

Conversely, black holes don’t believe in u/Rabbitlooker.

I doubt he even knows the scientific process.

Absolutely nothing wrong with not immediately believing what is presented to you and asking questions. You just have to be able to address facts properly in your questions. Are black holes guaranteed to exist? No. Are they currently the most likely candidate for what occupies high gravity wells strong enough to bend light? Yes. How can we test to see if something actually is a black hole? Well one way is to look at it. Funny enough, just recently humanity managed to pull that off. Look at the photo, and question what things do you think could’ve made that photo that don’t break the facts of how it was obtained. Fact, it was done by a large number of people using telescopes around the world, and then it was processed by even more people. You’re not going to create a convincing argument that every human on earth involved is hiding a cover up. So you need to take it as a real photo of something very far away. Do you believe certain stars might burn fuel in a way that absorbs light and emits a higher form of radiation that could decay to the white ring we see in the photo? Do you believe something else? You have to start by critically thinking about the evidence in front of you, and if you can come up with a testable hypothesis about what you see then you SHOULD bring it to other people, you SHOULD test it yourself. And once youve tested it a whole bunch and you have an answer, then you should start asking questions about why you got the conclusion you did. There will always be more questions because that’s how the science rabbit hole works. But at the end of the day, don’t take a given answer at face value if it feels wrong. Come up with a way to test, poke, and prod what is generally considered common knowledge. That’s how we as a species grows.

Edit for reference the radiation decaying is me totally making something random up. I am not suggesting that by any means

Wow that was removed fast. I don't believe this post existed!

It got mixed reviews when it came out, but was generally praised for the special effects at the time. And it took a darker tone that up until then had been more subtle for most Disney productions so was noteworthy. Wait, what?

I mean you are totally right and I agree with all that, especially the part about me being ignorant honestly, but it doesn't really change much. Whether we believe in something, right or wrong is irrelevant because the thing in question doesn't really care whether we know how it works or not.

[deleted]

What is the thing though. What is your belief in place of it? The thing with too much mass. The thing that looks like a black hole in space?

Your answer is probably more fantastic than the one we have.

I prefer "she" and yes actually I do, although I still agree I'm kind of stupid

Some scientists believe that the inverse of a black hole is a white hole. Infinitely bright, and matter can never enter it. A Penrose diagram is typically used to represent this theory. Some think that the “other side” of a black hole might actually be a parallel universe, but it’s a one way trip because you can’t ever escape a black hole or enter a white hole once it spits you out. There’s no empirical evidence for the existence of white holes, and most physicists consider them to be purely theoretical. But it’s a fun thought that I wish Christopher Nolan would hear about lol

I didn’t mean the shape, necessarily, but the effect. He had the right idea without the follow through: a star of that density would be a singularity and almost incomprehensibly small for its mass, and most black holes are created from collapsing stars.

So they were pretty close but couldn’t quite get past the idea that it wouldn’t really be a star anymore.

In 1971, two astronomers proposed x-ray source Cygnus X-1 might be a black hole. This is the first object to be nominated for being a black hole.

If further investigations proved Cygnus x-1 was not a black hole, Stephen Hawking would be very disappointed because he had done so much work on black holes.

In 1974, Stephen Hawking bet Kip Thorne that Cygnus x-1 was not a black hole. Then if Cygnus x-1 turned out not to be a black hole, Hawking would at least have won a bet.

In 1990, enough evidence had finally accumulated that Kip Thorne conceded and Hawking won the bet. Cygnus x-1 is a black hole.

You'd think we would have seen an infinitely bright object with a telescope long before we discovered a totally dark object

Common misconception in play here. If a scientist enters into a commonly agreed upon topic discussion, stating "I just don't believe in x", this is just a bias and is appropriately ignored.

"I have questions about the mechanics of x which makes me think perhaps there's a y that has all the features we've observed about x" is a perfectly fine viewpoint, rooted in scientific method.

"I wonder whether the data we've observed about x is actually just noise/biased/incomplete" is perfectly valid.

"I disgree with the commonly agreed narative for no reason other than my gut" should be ignored until some reasonable evidence as to why they disagree has been presented. If we had infinite manpower and resources, sure, leave no stone unturned! But since we don't, our current scientific model REQUIRES us to ignore such claims, or else we will be distracted from actual observations.

There are, as stated in other comments, some reasons to question black holes as we understand them today, but this was presented as "my gut just says they're not real." Which is fine. They can follow their gut. It's not gonna hurt anyone. But for others to defend that gut feeling as good enough scientific IS harmful and erodes our abilities to reason about and, in the worst case, DO, actual science.

Even if you criticize the models that still doesn't justify dismissing the thing we are attempting to explain though does it?

Its kind if like saying I don't believe in clouds. I can see them but I don't believe in them? That's nonsense. I might think they aren't explained properly but I can't say I don't believe in them.

It isn’t really a globe-like object. The event horizon is spherical because that’s the point that light can no longer escape its pull towards the singularity, but it isn’t really a globe.

You’d certainly think so! It’s all just based on the idea that the laws of physics are symmetrical, so if a black hole can swallow matter and information, a white hole should be able to spew it out.

I believe if it's so dense that light can't escape then the gravitational force pulling everything to the center is so strong that everything is crushed into an infinitely small single point, and it's like a feedback loop where the more stuff that gets sucked in adds to the density and thus the strength of it's gravitational pull which means it can crush more into the singularity. I don't think there is any physical globe like object, no growing buildup of physical material. The "size" appears to increase because as it gains more mass it's able to pull light in from further away.

Not an expert but that's my basic understanding as a layman.

Easy to hunt when they’re frozen in space

I think most of his initial description was lame. But, he promptly deleted it. As for the actual question he posed though? Perfectly valid.

The model has issues, and alternative ideas might be worth looking into. Measured skepticism doesn't hurt, especially in science.

Oh it'll spit out the "matter" you were made of but I highly doubt you'd still be alive

That's not proper skepticism though. Skepticism is what gets us closer to understanding black holes. Simply denying their existence isn't helpful skepticism at all.

[removed]

We can't take experts' theories or pictures of black holes as complete facts. There are so many odd behaviors displayed from the universe on a large scale down to the smallest particle.

Space as real as it is to us seems to have trouble giving us real-time proof. I trust the experts but I don't rule out the possibility that black holes are not what we think they are. They act as a trash bin folder on a desktop

He didn't deny their existence, he just said he doesn't believe. Einstein himself had the same opinion, despite discovering some of the equations.

And, tbh: since the model says to divide by zero, that's a perfectly fair stance. "Black hole" might be erroneous terminology for these objects that we're now detecting.

I think the model is correct myself, but it is incomplete. We definitely don't have a good idea of what dividing by zero even means.

I feel this in my bones. RN4L

OP will believe when one pulls his butthole out through his ear

But we really don’t know that because we don’t know what’s behind the event horizon. A supermassive black hole like Sgr A* wouldn’t spagettify you though. You could theoretically pass the event horizon alive

I thought all black holes spaghettify you? How can you determine whether they would or not

Woah, you just blew my mind. When we get down to quantum levels I'm just bewildered. Excuse my language, but a complete mind f**k.

He deleted the discussion so in a way, he froze himself in place for eternity. Neat

[removed]

If a SMBH was large enough, the tidal forces at the event horizon could theoretically be lessened to where you could survive. But things would be really cool way before then.

Edit: this video explains it a little at the 4 minute mark (and is really cool)

[removed]

The black hole, like so many things in life, exists in heather you believe or not.

You don't even know that scientist don't know where gravity comes from haha

And to continue, "my gut says black holes aren't real" doesn't mean you do or do not "believe" in science

Here you go bud

https://www.google.com/search?q=how+is+gravity+produced&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari

Took a 3 second search you dimwit.

>It’s not going to pass through into some fantasy dimension

Is that a commonly accepted model of a black hole?

[removed]

[removed]

Once again.

Gravity doesn’t “come from” mass.

Also google isn’t a book