Since you didn't say, I'm just guessing at what you don't understand.

Escape velocity is the speed you'd have to go to overcome an object's gravity.

The further away you are, the easier it is to escape the object's gravity.

You understand the universe is expanding right?

That makes it even easier.

So to answer the question I was responding to, no, black holes won't eventually suck up everything in the universe.

I get the universe is expanding.
The rest is a gray area for me.

He's just saying that no, the entire universe won't get sucked into black holes. Statistically, they're just too far apart to do that and most of the universe is moving in directions that won't go into a black hole.

Decay said:

---

He's just saying that no, the entire universe won't get sucked into black holes. Statistically, they're just too far apart to do that and most of the universe is moving in directions that won't go into a black hole.

---

They cranked cern up in 2008. Europe is a black hole now.

Decay said:

---

He's just saying that no, the entire universe won't get sucked into black holes. Statistically, they're just too far apart to do that and most of the universe is moving in directions that won't go into a black hole.

---

Which is fine and dandy, as soon as someone explains what dark energy and matter are. Relatedly, to the Euclid mission, they make up what, 95% of the universe and…we don't get it at all?

Physicists need to do some damn homework, is my take away. We're quibbling about 5 percent, plus or minus.

What percentage of stars become black holes?

Sea Speed said:

---

What percentage of stars become black holes?

---

Depends on the time horizon

Not perfect, but the universe is expanding faster than the black hole can pull it in. So even though the black hole is exerting a force on the object, the object is moving away from the black hole fast enough that the black hole will never be able to suck it in.

In the normal life cycle of a star. Somewhere along the line i got it in my head that every star ended their life as a black hole but I just did some quick reading that tells me otherwise. I wonder how I got that idea in my head.

The universe is really only expanding in the largely in the empty spaces in between galaxies, galaxies are largely held together by something called dark matter which we don't know what it is.

Not all stars collapse into black holes. Only certain ones with specific mass and composition.

https://twitter.com/_mgde

To a p h r e s h Falcon 9 and @ESA_Euclid telescope - ✌🏻out girl scouts

This mission marks the first standalone partnership flight between @esa and @SpaceX - well done to all!

Off on a journey to see the unseen!

- @NASASpaceflight pic.twitter.com/gOs4Qgp6Fw

— Max Evans (@_mgde_) July 1, 2023

Do which of those is the Goldilocks planet?

I think that's a fake image (vs. the description). First, the tweet credits the European southern observatory, which…definitely lacks the resolution to take such a direct image. Second, we did actually get a 'direct' image from Webb late last year, but I think it is a much grainier image of one theorized planet being shown.

The image in the tweet is probably Saturn with its moons around it.

nortex97 said:

---

I think that's a fake image (vs. the description). First, the tweet credits the European southern observatory, which…definitely lacks the resolution to take such a direct image. Second, we did actually get a 'direct' image from Webb late last year, but I think it is a much grainier image of one theorized planet being shown.

The image in the tweet is probably Saturn with its moons around it.

---

It is a true photo of another star system.

https://www.eso.org/public/images/eso2011b/

Quote:

---

This image, captured by the SPHERE instrument on ESO's Very Large Telescope, shows the star TYC 8998-760-1 accompanied by two giant exoplanets, TYC 8998-760-1b and TYC 8998-760-1c. This is the first time astronomers have directly observed more than one planet orbiting a star similar to the Sun.

The two planets are visible as two bright dots in the centre (TYC 8998-760-1b) and bottom right (TYC 8998-760-1c) of the frame, noted by arrows. Other bright dots, which are background stars, are visible in the image as well. By taking different images at different times, the team were able to distinguish the planets from the background stars.

The image was captured by blocking the light from the young, Sun-like star (top-left of centre) using a coronagraph, which allows for the fainter planets to be detected. The bright and dark rings we see on the star's image are optical artefacts.

Credit:
ESO/Bohn et al.

---

Ah, thanks, glad to be wrong on this. Interesting to be sure, though I'd guess those are very warm planets.

It boggles the mind to think how many more of those are out there.

PJYoung said:

---

It boggles the mind to think how many more of those are out there.

---

Hell, just in our galaxy alone there must be more than we can count in a lifetime.

Sea Speed said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

It boggles the mind to think how many more of those are out there.

---

Hell, just in our galaxy alone there must be more than we can count in a lifetime.

---

Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindbogglingly big it is. I mean you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
- The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy

Sea Speed said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

It boggles the mind to think how many more of those are out there.

---

Hell, just in our galaxy alone there must be more than we can count in a lifetime.

---

A million lifetimes.

Today is the 10 year anniversary of one of the most spectacular rocket failures of all time. pic.twitter.com/LQqwOEwctB

— DeadKennedyInSpace (@DKiSAerospace) July 2, 2023

Obviously this number is significantly greater than we predicted. For those who asked, that previous number was not considering the area in yellow, which were also completed today. This area is technically outside of the true foundation of the OLM

📸: @RGVaerialphotos pic.twitter.com/k2s1ITD3cn

— Zack Golden (@CSI_Starbase) July 3, 2023

These new cameras from SpaceX are something else… 🔥 pic.twitter.com/WDKHGMCIg4

— Primal Space (@thePrimalSpace) July 3, 2023

I don't think the low quality stuff we were used to seeing during staging was related to camera quality but rather bandwidth and communication back to earth. Apparently they are using starlink to transmit signals and have the capacity to stream back much higher resolution.

Quote:

---

SpaceX and the Federal Aviation Administration are asking a federal court to dismiss a lawsuit by environmental and Indigenous groups seeking a new assessment of the environmental impacts of rocket launches from South Texas.

In a filing Friday, the FAA said the groups lack legal standing for their claims against the agency that granted a launch license to SpaceX's Starship rocket program. Separately, a SpaceX filing said the first Starship launch on April 20 provided no cause for the FAA to conduct a new environmental assessment, a process that could halt further test launches for years

---

https://www.expressnews.com/business/article/spacex-faa-ask-dismissal-suit-seeking-starship-18183067.php#photo-23731503

I am actually pretty relieved 'the government' is fighting the enviro/green-nazi's this time. I was afraid the politics would work…against 'us.' The 5th circuit might be a good thing here too, as standing jurisprudence etc. is generally favorable for Nasa/FAA.

Not sure if this was posted here, good video/upgrades tho…

This is not great for AST SpaceMobile.https://t.co/EysGWa6P23

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) July 5, 2023

I remain dubious, marketing spin aside, about an iphone etc. being able to directly establish a working datalink with an orbiting satellite.

nortex97 said:

---

This is not great for AST SpaceMobile.https://t.co/EysGWa6P23

— Eric Berger (@SciGuySpace) July 5, 2023

I remain dubious, marketing spin aside, about an iphone etc. being able to directly establish a working datalink with an orbiting satellite.

---

If there's something to the tech, would Elon absorb what they are doing in a buyout or do it on his own?

Starlink has their own deal that they are working on with T-mobile.

This is another of those nerdery realms I am out of my depth on, but in my head the T-mobile service at least offers the advantage of having a whole lot more satellites overhead than the one above from the odessa company.

I…again, really don't understand how a little omnidirectional iphone antenna can get a datalink to work even partly reliably/at a bandwidth that is useful outside of a desperation 'please come help me' text in a remote area with a bird overhead and no other RF interference/clear sky. I think it has as such worked once or twice to save a hiker/boater.

nortex97 said:

---

Decay said:

---

He's just saying that no, the entire universe won't get sucked into black holes. Statistically, they're just too far apart to do that and most of the universe is moving in directions that won't go into a black hole.

---

Which is fine and dandy, as soon as someone explains what dark energy and matter are. Relatedly, to the Euclid mission, they make up what, 95% of the universe and…we don't get it at all?

Physicists need to do some damn homework, is my take away. We're quibbling about 5 percent, plus or minus.

---

Don't worry, Werner Heisenberg (the father of quantum mechanics), didn't get it either. He has some amazing quotes on the complexities of the universe.

"When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first."

"Uncertainty" is NOT "I don't know." It is "I can't know." "I am uncertain" does not mean "I could be certain."

"The atoms or elementary particles themselves are not real; they form a world of potentialities or possibilities rather than one of things or facts."

"Only a few know, how much one must know to know how little one knows."

"Not only is the Universe stranger than we think, it is stranger than we can think."