Eyewitness to a Black Hole

[starbiter]

http://thunderbolts.info/tpod/2010/arch ... itness.htm

I asked Mel what would happen if something similar to the events described in this TPOD happened in the Milky Way. My question below is followed by Mel's response.

Me,

What would happen to the Earth if the Milky Way ejected a Quasar? What would be the time frame? Is the Milky Way mature enough to eject a Quasar?

Mel's response,
[...]
Amy proposed this way back when. An ejection would cause (or be the result of) a surge throughout the galactic circuit: hence, in active galaxies, we see "star forming regions" (hot spots) around the outside. A plasma focus discharge at the core would be accompanied by energizing the coupled circuits in the stars in the arms. Planetary sheaths & stellar sheaths might "light up," probably exchange charge to adjust to the increased voltage; perhaps the stars would have their own ejections (Herbig-Haro like); more pinches (stars) would form on the galactic Birkeland currents.
>
>When the first infrared & radio images of the center of the Milky Way came out, there was a tiny spiral galaxy (assumed to be a distant "background object", of course) just a little way away from the center along the axis. If it were an actual tiny plasmoid that had been ejected by the core, we estimated it would have been ejected about 10,000 years ago. I seem to remember that there are several supernova remnants around the core that have an estimated time of explosion of around 10,000 years, also. Putting that together with the EU estimate of around 10,000 years for the last catastrophe, there's the possibility that what our ancestors recorded in myths was a galaxy-wide ejection event.
>
>So, no, even if they had invented space travel, they couldn't have escaped...unless they could get to another galaxy.
>
>Keep your (grounded) tin-foil hat handy: Any day now....
>
>:)
>
>Mel


Me again,
The Amy Mel refers to is the late Amy Acheson. Amy was the glue that held the Electric Universe together in the early days. People liked her.

michael

[Nereid]

I think the paper (preprint, so far) that the Chandra PR is based on (at least in part) is "The Murmur of The Hidden Monster: Chandra's Decadal View of The Super-massive Black Hole in M31" (here is the abstract; click on one of the links under Download: to get the full paper).

The abstract reads as follows (I bolded some parts, for emphasis):

The Andromeda galaxy (M31) hosts a central super-massive black hole (SMBH), known as M31*, which is remarkable for its mass (~10^8 M_sun) and extreme radiative quiescence. Over the past decade, the Chandra X-ray observatory has pointed to the center of M31 nearly 100 times and accumulated a total exposure of ~900 ks. Based on these observations, we present an X-ray study of the temporal behavior of M31*. We find that M31* remained in a quiescent state from late 1999 to 2005, exhibiting an average 0.5-8 keV luminosity ~10^{36}erg/s, or only ~10^{-10} of its Eddington luminosity. We report the discovery of an outburst that occurred on January 6, 2006, during which M31* radiated at ~4.3\times10^{37}erg/s. After the outburst, M31* apparently entered a more active state that lasts to date, characterized by frequent flux variability around an average luminosity of ~4.8\times10^{36}erg/s. These strong flux variations are similar to the X-ray flares found in the SMBH of our Galaxy (Sgr A*), which may be explained by an episodic ejection of relativistic plasma inflated by magnetic field reconnection in the accretion disk.

[Osmosis]

I didn't know "magnetic reconnection" smelled like this!

[Nereid]

may be explained by an episodic ejection of relativistic plasma inflated by magnetic field reconnection in the accretion disk.

Wow, that is quite a mouthful

Could I ask you to do something for me please Grits?

When you quote a post of mine, which includes a quote that is clearly identified as being by somebody else, could you please make sure you attribute the words you quote correctly?

In this case, I quoted from the abstract of a preprint (on the arXiv server) whose lead author is Zhiyuan Li and I took the trouble to indicate that (by writing "Li et al").

When you quoted from my post, you took a phrase from the abstract; *I* did not write those words, yet you made it look as if I did.

[flyingcloud]

you should have said Neried copied and pasted, instead of Neried wrote, jeesh Grits c'mon now we don't want to be misrepresenting the word of Neried I thought this was settled a few times over by now

[Nitai]

may be explained by an episodic ejection of relativistic plasma inflated by magnetic field reconnection in the accretion disk.

Wow, that is quite a mouthful

Could I ask you to do something for me please Grits?

When you quote a post of mine, which includes a quote that is clearly identified as being by somebody else, could you please make sure you attribute the words you quote correctly?

In this case, I quoted from the abstract of a preprint (on the arXiv server) whose lead author is Zhiyuan Li and I took the trouble to indicate that (by writing "Li et al").

When you quoted from my post, you took a phrase from the abstract; *I* did not write those words, yet you made it look as if I did.

I don't think he meant to. I think he was quoting your bolded part and was highlighting it for emphasis. Don't think it was directed at you. Just my observation.

[Nereid]

flyingcloud, Nitai,

I realise that I may be a tad too sensitive about things like this, but in my defence I think there was a great deal of mis-interpretation, even mis-representation, here in this Thunderbolts Forum, of what I have written, until quite recently.

It may be that Grits did not intend to attribute Li et al.'s words to me (and she - he? - may not even have been aware, at the time, that that's what happened) ...

[flyingcloud]

noted