Timeline for Is it possible that quasars are not powered by black holes but some other kind of compact, massive object?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 20, 2018 at 22:51 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackAstronomy/status/954848861000011777 | ||
| Jan 20, 2018 at 13:03 | answer | added | AtmosphericPrisonEscape | timeline score: 5 | |
| Jan 19, 2018 at 12:58 | comment | added | AtmosphericPrisonEscape | You should be right with that. I think the argument for the 'central engine' of a quasar to be a black hole were something something relativity. I'll look it up later if I have time. Else you can google for the central engine, that's the keyword in that field. | |
| Jan 19, 2018 at 6:55 | comment | added | SavedbyZer0 | @AtmosphericPrisonEscape: However, when there is a compact object present the infalling matter strikes the surface and results in intense bursts of radiation that can exceed the Eddington limit. Whereas with an event horizon the radiation released is well below the Eddington limit because much of that energy is being sucked into a black hole. | |
| Jan 19, 2018 at 5:17 | comment | added | AtmosphericPrisonEscape | The properties of the accretion flow are more a function of the environment than that of the compact object. So I think you're not comparing apples and apples here. | |
| Jan 18, 2018 at 18:30 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 18, 2018 at 18:31 | |||||
| Jan 18, 2018 at 18:26 | history | asked | SavedbyZer0 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |