Black Hole Booster New 2022

🔞 ALL INFORMATION CLICK HERE 👈🏻👈🏻👈🏻

Black Hole Booster New 2022
KVVU 25 TV 5 Dr Henderson, NV 89014 (702) 435-5555
A Gray Media Group, Inc. Station - © 2002-2022 Gray Television, Inc.
More stories to check out before you go
(CNN) - Fair warning, once you hear the sound of a black hole, you can’t unhear it and it is a little terrifying.
NASA shared a 34-second clip of the Perseus galaxy cluster, which is about 240 million light years away from Earth.
Scientists say the black hole sends out pressure waves that cause ripples in the hot gas, which can be translated into a note.
To be clear though, the actual note is one humans can’t hear. It is about 57 octaves below middle C.
NASA says they shifted the note so we could hear it by amplifying it and mixing it with other data they have about black holes.
The spooky sound will be perfect addition to your Halloween playlist.
Copyright 2022 CNN Newsource. All rights reserved.

KVVU 25 TV 5 Dr Henderson, NV 89014 (702) 435-5555
A Gray Media Group, Inc. Station - © 2002-2022 Gray Television, Inc.
More stories to check out before you go
(CNN) - Fair warning, once you hear the sound of a black hole, you can’t unhear it and it is a little terrifying.
NASA shared a 34-second clip of the Perseus galaxy cluster, which is about 240 million light years away from Earth.
Scientists say the black hole sends out pressure waves that cause ripples in the hot gas, which can be translated into a note.
To be clear though, the actual note is one humans can’t hear. It is about 57 octaves below middle C.
NASA says they shifted the note so we could hear it by amplifying it and mixing it with other data they have about black holes.
The spooky sound will be perfect addition to your Halloween playlist.
Copyright 2022 CNN Newsource. All rights reserved.

This article is more than 7 months old
This article is more than 7 months old
An artist's impression from May 2020 of what were – but are no longer – thought to be the orbits of the objects in the HR 6819 system. Photograph: L Calcada/European Southern Observatory/AFP/Getty Images
Original reporting and incisive analysis, direct from the Guardian every morning
© 2022 Guardian News & Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. (modern)
Researchers have a new view of HR 6819: two stars, one of them a ‘vampire’
Astronomers who thought they had discovered a black hole on our cosmic doorstep have said they were mistaken, instead revealing they have found a two-star system involving a stellar “vampire”.
The system, known as HR 6819 in the constellation Telescopium, was in the headlines in 2020 when researchers announced it contained a black hole . At just 1,000 light years from Earth, it was the closest yet found to our planet.
At the time the team behind the work said the presence of a black hole was necessary to make sense of the movement of two stars in the system, suggesting a black hole and one star orbited each other while the second star moved in a wider orbit.
Now the researchers say they were mistaken: the black hole does not exist.
Dietrich Baade, an emeritus astronomer at European Southern Observatory (ESO) and a co-author of the work, said just one blob of light was previously detected, containing the hallmarks of two stars.
Since both stars are of similar brightness and the same age, they would normally have the same mass and would whirl each other around with similar, high velocity.
“Since we saw that only one of the stars was whirled around at high velocity by some massive object, which we didn’t see, we assumed this unseen massive object to be a third body, namely a black hole,” he said.
But other researchers disputed the idea, suggesting the system contained two stars alone, one of which had recently been stripped of mass by the second, sometimes called a stellar “vampire”, making the latter far more massive.
Writing in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics , Baade and colleagues report how the groups teamed up to analyse fresh data from the ESO’s Very Large Telescope (VLT) and Very Large Telescope Interferometer (VTLI).
“Science should be about the open questions that everyone is trying to solve, and not about who was right and who was wrong,” said Dr Julia Bodensteiner, a co-author of the study from the ESO who proposed the “vampire star” explanation.
If a black hole was indeed present, the two stars would be expected to have a large separation. However, in the scenario with no black hole, the stars would be expected to be much closer together.
The results from the VLT revealed no indication of a second star in a wide orbit. In addition the data suggested that both stars contributed to light captured from a single bright source – again suggesting they were sitting close to each other.
The findings were further backed up by data from the VLTI, which in addition revealed that the two stars were orbiting each other.
“Because the stripped star had lost most of its mass, the second star can reel it around quite easily while its effect on the other star is equally easily missed,” said Baade.
While the findings scotch the idea of a black hole, the researchers remain upbeat.
“The stripped star is even more exciting than the black hole because it was caught in a phase that lasts only a very small fraction of the total lifetime of the system,” said Baade.
“The excitement is not about the low chances of the discovery but about the stripped star revealing the inner part of the star. The stripping has removed the thick intransparent curtain of the outer layers so that we can look much closer to where the star has generated the energy that it is radiating away and has synthesised new elements.”
Baade added that when such elements were ejected, the stardust could form not only new stars but also planets and their inhabitants.

Science | Black Holes May Hide a Mind-Bending Secret About Our Universe
Give this article Give this article Give this article
Black Holes May Hide a Mind-Bending Secret About Our Universe
Give this article Give this article Give this article
Take gravity, add quantum mechanics, stir. What do you get? Just maybe, a holographic cosmos.
As a subscriber, you have 10 gift articles to give each month. Anyone can read what you share.
For the last century the biggest bar fight in science has been between Albert Einstein and himself.
On one side is the Einstein who in 1915 conceived general relativity, which describes gravity as the warping of space-time by matter and energy. That theory predicted that space-time could bend, expand, rip, quiver like a bowl of Jell-O and disappear into those bottomless pits of nothingness known as black holes.
On the other side is the Einstein who, starting in 1905, laid the foundation for quantum mechanics, the nonintuitive rules that inject randomness into the world — rules that Einstein never accepted. According to quantum mechanics, a subatomic particle like an electron can be anywhere and everywhere at once, and a cat can be both alive and dead until it is observed. God doesn’t play dice, Einstein often complained.
Gravity rules outer space, shaping galaxies and indeed the whole universe, whereas quantum mechanics rules inner space, the arena of atoms and elementary particles. The two realms long seemed to have nothing to do with each other; this left scientists ill-equipped to understand what happens in an extreme situation like a black hole or the beginning of the universe.
But a blizzard of research in the last decade on the inner lives of black holes has revealed unexpected connections between the two views of the cosmos. The implications are mind-bending, including the possibility that our three-dimensional universe — and we ourselves — may be holograms, like the ghostly anti-counterfeiting images that appear on some credit cards and drivers licenses. In this version of the cosmos, there is no difference between here and there, cause and effect, inside and outside or perhaps even then and now; household cats can be conjured in empty space. We can all be Dr. Strange.
“It may be too strong to say that gravity and quantum mechanics are exactly the same thing,” Leonard Susskind of Stanford University wrote in a paper in 2017 . “But those of us who are paying attention may already sense that the two are inseparable, and that neither makes sense without the other.”
That insight, Dr. Susskind and his colleagues hope, could lead to a theory that combines gravity and quantum mechanics — quantum gravity — and perhaps explains how the universe began.
The schism between the two Einsteins entered the spotlight in 1935, when the physicist faced off against himself in a pair of scholarly papers.
In one paper, Einstein and Nathan Rosen showed that general relativity predicted that black holes (which were not yet known by that name) could form in pairs connected by shortcuts through space-time, called Einstein-Rosen bridges — “wormholes.” In the imaginations of science fiction writers, you could jump into one black hole and pop out of the other.
In the other paper, Einstein, Rosen and another physicist, Boris Podolsky, tried to pull the rug out from quantum mechanics by exposing a seeming logical inconsistency. They pointed out that, according to the uncertainty principle of quantum physics, a pair of particles once associated would be eternally connected, even if they were light-years apart. Measuring a property of one particle — its direction of spin, say — would instantaneously affect the measurement of its mate. If these photons were flipped coins and one came up heads, the other invariably would be found out to be tails.
To Einstein this proposition was obviously ludicrous, and he dismissed it as “spooky action at a distance.” But today physicists call it “entanglement,” and lab experiments confirm its reality every day. Last week the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to a trio of physicists whose experiments over the years had demonstrated the reality of this “spooky action.”
The physicist N. David Mermin of Cornell University once called such quantum weirdness “ the closest thing we have to magic .”
As Daniel Kabat, a physics professor at Lehman College in New York, explained it, “We’re used to thinking that information about an object — say, that a glass is half-full — is somehow contained within the object. Entanglement means this isn’t correct. Entangled objects don’t have an independent existence with definite properties of their own. Instead they only exist in relation to other objects.”
Einstein probably never dreamed that the two 1935 papers had anything in common, Dr. Susskind said recently. But Dr. Susskind and other physicists now speculate that wormholes and spooky action are two aspects of the same magic and, as such, are the key to resolving an array of cosmic paradoxes.
To astronomers, black holes are dark monsters with gravity so strong that they can consume stars, wreck galaxies and imprison even light. At the edge of a black hole, time seems to stop. At a black hole’s center, matter shrinks to infinite density and the known laws of physics break down. But to physicists bent on explicating those fundamental laws, black holes are a Coney Island of mysteries and imagination.
In 1974 the cosmologist Stephen Hawking astonished the scientific world with a heroic calculation showing that, to his own surprise, black holes were neither truly black nor eternal, when quantum effects were added to the picture. Over eons, a black hole would leak energy and subatomic particles, shrink, grow increasingly hot and finally explode. In the process, all the mass that had fallen into the black hole over the ages would be returned to the outer universe as a random fizz of particles and radiation.
This might sound like good news, a kind of cosmic resurrection. But it was a potential catastrophe for physics. A core tenet of science holds that information is never lost; billiard balls might scatter every which way on a pool table, but in principle it is always possible to rewind the tape to determine where they were in the past or predict their positions in the future, even if they drop into a black hole.
But if Hawking were correct, the particles radiating from a black hole were random, a meaningless thermal noise stripped of the details of whatever has fallen in. If a cat fell in, most of its information — name, color, temperament — would be unrecoverable, effectively lost from history. It would be as if you opened your safe deposit box and found that your birth certificate and your passport had disappeared. As Hawking phrased it in 1976: “God not only plays dice, he sometimes throws them where they can’t be seen.”
His declaration triggered a 40-year war of ideas. “This can’t be right,” Dr. Susskind, who became Hawking’s biggest adversary in the subsequent debate, thought to himself when first hearing about Hawking’s claim. “I didn’t know what to make out of it.”
A potential solution came to Dr. Susskind one day in 1993 as he was walking through a physics building on campus. There in the hallway he saw a display of a hologram of a young woman.
A hologram is basically a three-dimensional image — a teapot, a cat, Princess Leia — made entirely of light. It is created by illuminating the original (real) object with a laser and recording the patterns of reflected light on a photographic plate. When the plate is later illuminated, a three-dimensional image of the object springs into view at the center.
“‘Hey, here’s a situation where it looks as if information is kind of reproduced in two different ways,’” Dr. Susskind recalled thinking. On the one hand, there is a visible object that “looked real,” he said. “And on the other hand, there’s the same information coded on the film surrounding the hologram. Up close, it just looks like a little bunch of scratches and a highly complex encoding.”
The right combinations of scratches on that film, Dr. Susskind realized, could make anything emerge into three dimensions. Then he thought: What if a black hole was actually a hologram, with the event horizon serving as the “film,” encoding what was inside? It was “a nutty idea, a cool idea,” he recalled.
Across the Atlantic, the same nutty idea had occurred to the Dutch physicist, Gerardus ’t Hooft, a Nobel laureate at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.
According to Einstein’s general relativity, the information content of a black hole or any three-dimensional space — your living room, say, or the whole universe — was limited to the number of bits that could be encoded on an imaginary surface surrounding it. That space was measured in pixels 10 ⁻ ³³ centimeters on a side — the smallest unit of space, known as the Planck length.
With data pixels so small, this amounted to quadrillions of megabytes per square centimeter — a stupendous amount of information, but not an infinite amount. Trying to cram too much information into any region would cause it to exceed a limit decreed by Jacob Bekenstein, then a Princeton graduate student and Hawking’s rival, and cause it to collapse into a black hole.
“ This is what we found out about Nature’s bookkeeping system ,” Dr. ’t Hooft wrote in 1993. “The data can be written onto a surface, and the pen with which the data are written has a finite size.”
The cosmos-as-holograph idea found its fullest expression a few years later, in 1997. Juan Maldacena, a theorist at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, N.J., used new ideas from string theory — the speculative “theory of everything” that portrays subatomic particles as vibrating strings — to create a mathematical model of the entire universe as a hologram.
In his formulation, all the information about what happens inside some volume of space is encoded as quantum fields on the surface of the region’s boundary.
Dr. Maldacena’s universe is often portrayed as a can of soup: Galaxies, black holes, gravity, stars and the rest, including us, are the soup inside, and the information describing them resides on the outside, like a label. Think of it as gravity in a can. The inside and outside of the can — the “bulk” and the “boundary” — are complementary descriptions of the same phenomena.
Since the fields on the surface of the soup can obey quantum rules about preserving information, the gravitational fields inside the can must also preserve information. In such a picture, “ there is no room for information loss ,” Dr. Maldacena said at a conference in 2004.
Hawking conceded: Gravity was not the great eraser after all.
“In other words, the universe makes sense,” Dr. Susskind said in an interview.
“It’s completely crazy,” he added, in reference to the holographic universe. “You could imagine in a laboratory, in a sufficiently advanced laboratory, a large sphere — let’s say, a hollow sphere of a specially tailored material — to be made of silicon and other things, with some kind of appropriate quantum fields inscribed on it.” Then you could conduct experiments, he said: Tap on the sphere, interact with it, then wait for answers from the entities inside.
“On the other hand, you could open up that shell and you would find nothing in it,” he added. As for us entities inside: “We don’t read the hologram, we are the hologram.”
Our actual universe, unlike Dr. Maldacena’s mathematical model, has no boundary, no outer limit. Nonetheless, for physicists, his universe became a proof of principle that gravity and quantum mechanics were compatible and offered a font of clues to how our actual universe works.
But, Dr. Maldacena noted recently, his model did not explain how information manages to escape a black hole intact or how Hawking’s calculation in 1974 went wrong.
Don Page, a former student of Hawking now at the University of Alberta, took a different approach in the 1990s. Suppose, he said, that information is conserved when a black hole evaporates. If so, then a black hole does not spit out particles as randomly as Hawking had thought. The radiation would start out as random, but as time went on, the particles being emitted would become more and more correlated with those that had come out earlier, essentially filling the gaps in the missing information. After billions and billions of years all the hidden information would have emerged.
In quantum terms, this explanation required any particles now escaping the black hole to be entangled with the particles that had leaked out earlier. But this presented a problem. Those newly emitted particles were already entangled with their mates that had already fallen into the black hole, running afoul of quantum rules mandating that particles be entangled only in pairs. Dr. Page’s information-transmission scheme could only work if the particles inside the black hole were somehow the same as the particles that were now outside.
How could that be? The inside and outside of the black hole were connected by wormholes, the shortcuts through space and time proposed by Einstein and Rosen in 1935.
In 2012 Drs. Maldacena and Susskind proposed a formal truce between the two warring Einsteins. They proposed that spooky entanglement and wormholes were two faces of the same phenomenon. As they put it, employing the initials of the authors of those two 1935 papers, Einstein and Rosen in one and Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen in the other: “ER = EPR.”
The implication is that, in some strange sense, the outside of a black hole was the same as the inside, like a Klein bottle that has only one side.
How could information be in two places at once? Like much of quantum physics, the question boggles the mind, like the notion that light can be a wave or a particle depending on how the measurement is made.
What matters is that, if the interior and exterior of a black hole were connected by wormholes, information could flow through them in either direction, in or out, according to John Preskill, a Caltech physicist and quantum computing expert.
“We ough
Porno Teen Hair
Gilf Cum Compilations
Porno Best Handjob