Why the black hole image is nonsense

[Frannie]

Well what I think he is saying is that if there is energy being released at the transition layer around the black hole, and we see that energy release as mass is ripped in structure and crushed, then since the black hole is spherical, there should also be the same energy releases as light in front of the black hole as well.
However, I think the mistake is that the black hole is spinning, and the debris is not slowly moving straight in, but is orbiting.
Those two factors turn what would be a spherical shell of light, into a halo ring of light, I think,

It's not spherical shell of material. The material generally sits in a disk, due to the black hole's rotation. The material between us and the black hole is not seen by us as being between us and the black hole, as that light is bent away from the straight, direct path to us by the gravity of the black hole.

I will buy the idea the spinning of the black hole would cause the incoming material to form a disk.
But I do not get the idea the black hole would interfere at all with any light being generated by any material in front of the black hole. When the black hole is directly behind the material being taken in, the black hole could not bend the light.
So I think it is more likely that there just is no material in front of the black hole, but only in the spiral disk of material. And if you were not looking directly perpendicular to the disk, it would not even look like a black hole, because you would be seeing the edge of the disk instead of the hole.

Dude the black hole is 3d circular, gravity radiates out in all directions remember, it is not a hole in a flat surface there is no front or behind.

Are planets flat, you are living like 500 years ago on a flat Earth

Jesus

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But I do not get the idea the black hole would interfere at all with any light being generated by any material in front of the black hole.

The black hole's gravity is so strong that it bends the path of the light emitted from all material near it, including that material between us and the black hole.

This is a good video that will help:

 

[Rigby5]

This image makes sense only if the universe is 2d, in reality the halo around the hole would be 3d surrounding the hole at the center

Lol, but idiots believe

black hole image - Google Search:

I still stand by my post. Gravity is found in everything and has a value.
Mass is determined by size of a planet. This can be seen with the moon landings. Smaller than Earth.
So if the so called Black hole is in fact a massive planet with such massive gravity that light can not escape it would look like a hole. At some point the gravity gets so great it changes the planet as you all know.

Actually gravity does not explain the observed movements observed in the universe and as far as black holes are concerned nothing is known only speculated. Bye the way a hole in space would not look any different than the empty space around it also please explain how a lightless hole can have size. The thing everyone misses is that the radiation coming out of or surrounding the hole is that this would be in the form of a 3d shell surrounding the hole and hiding the entire thing making photography impossible, theoretically anyway

But you use big letters to detail why you failed algebra

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

 

[Frannie]

This image makes sense only if the universe is 2d, in reality the halo around the hole would be 3d surrounding the hole at the center

Lol, but idiots believe

black hole image - Google Search:

I still stand by my post. Gravity is found in everything and has a value.
Mass is determined by size of a planet. This can be seen with the moon landings. Smaller than Earth.
So if the so called Black hole is in fact a massive planet with such massive gravity that light can not escape it would look like a hole. At some point the gravity gets so great it changes the planet as you all know.

Actually gravity does not explain the observed movements observed in the universe and as far as black holes are concerned nothing is known only speculated. Bye the way a hole in space would not look any different than the empty space around it also please explain how a lightless hole can have size. The thing everyone misses is that the radiation coming out of or surrounding the hole is that this would be in the form of a 3d shell surrounding the hole and hiding the entire thing making photography impossible, theoretically anyway

But you use big letters to detail why you failed algebra

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

The accretion disk is not the black hole. The gravitational field from the black hole exist in a 3d universe not on a 2d image. Do you believe that if you approach the hole from the side that there is no gravitational pull? There is no side, or front and back.

Sure wish I could copy and paste from wikipoopy where any 8th grader can enter information

Jesus

 

[Rigby5]

But I do not get the idea the black hole would interfere at all with any light being generated by any material in front of the black hole.

The black hole's gravity is so strong that it bends the path of the light emitted from all material near it, including that material between us and the black hole.

This is a good video that will help:

Okay, I will buy that.
But I can also see how that is hard to explain, and I could never explain that to anyone else.
Its not so much the idea of the light being bent, but that we are seeing a coherent warping of the the back side of the accretion disk.
Almost hurts to think about it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But I can also see how that is hard to explain, and I could never explain that to anyone else.

Easiest way is with a model or drawing. It's not complicated, but it's not intuitive, either.

but that we are seeing a coherent warping of the the back side of the accretion disk.

And the front side. Much of the light from the front side of the disk orbits the black hole millions of times before emerging over the horizon of the event horizon map. This light thhen becomes part of the "ring" we observe.

Yes, it's a mind bender. What is really great is that scientists perfectly predicted what it would look like.

 

[Rigby5]

This image makes sense only if the universe is 2d, in reality the halo around the hole would be 3d surrounding the hole at the center

Lol, but idiots believe

black hole image - Google Search:

I still stand by my post. Gravity is found in everything and has a value.
Mass is determined by size of a planet. This can be seen with the moon landings. Smaller than Earth.
So if the so called Black hole is in fact a massive planet with such massive gravity that light can not escape it would look like a hole. At some point the gravity gets so great it changes the planet as you all know.

Actually gravity does not explain the observed movements observed in the universe and as far as black holes are concerned nothing is known only speculated. Bye the way a hole in space would not look any different than the empty space around it also please explain how a lightless hole can have size. The thing everyone misses is that the radiation coming out of or surrounding the hole is that this would be in the form of a 3d shell surrounding the hole and hiding the entire thing making photography impossible, theoretically anyway

But you use big letters to detail why you failed algebra

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

The accretion disk is not the black hole. The gravitational field from the black hole exist in a 3d universe not on a 2d image. Do you believe that if you approach the hole from the side that there is no gravitational pull? There is no side, or front and back.

Sure wish I could copy and paste from wikipoopy where any 8th grader can enter information

Jesus

Yes the accretion disk is not the black hole.
But the accretion disk is the only thing we can see.
And wiki is usually a good place to start, even if it sometimes is wrong.
And it does explain why there is pull from all sides of a black hole, but the accretion is still in a disk.

 

[Frannie]

This image makes sense only if the universe is 2d, in reality the halo around the hole would be 3d surrounding the hole at the center

Lol, but idiots believe

black hole image - Google Search:

I still stand by my post. Gravity is found in everything and has a value.
Mass is determined by size of a planet. This can be seen with the moon landings. Smaller than Earth.
So if the so called Black hole is in fact a massive planet with such massive gravity that light can not escape it would look like a hole. At some point the gravity gets so great it changes the planet as you all know.

Actually gravity does not explain the observed movements observed in the universe and as far as black holes are concerned nothing is known only speculated. Bye the way a hole in space would not look any different than the empty space around it also please explain how a lightless hole can have size. The thing everyone misses is that the radiation coming out of or surrounding the hole is that this would be in the form of a 3d shell surrounding the hole and hiding the entire thing making photography impossible, theoretically anyway

But you use big letters to detail why you failed algebra

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

The accretion disk is not the black hole. The gravitational field from the black hole exist in a 3d universe not on a 2d image. Do you believe that if you approach the hole from the side that there is no gravitational pull? There is no side, or front and back.

Sure wish I could copy and paste from wikipoopy where any 8th grader can enter information

Jesus

Yes the accretion disk is not the black hole.
But the accretion disk is the only thing we can see.
And wiki is usually a good place to start, even if it sometimes is wrong.
And it does explain why there is pull from all sides of a black hole, but the accretion is still in a disk.

In other words you were wrong because there is no possible way for a black hole to have a front or back.

Its illogical

 

[Rigby5]

I still stand by my post. Gravity is found in everything and has a value.
Mass is determined by size of a planet. This can be seen with the moon landings. Smaller than Earth.
So if the so called Black hole is in fact a massive planet with such massive gravity that light can not escape it would look like a hole. At some point the gravity gets so great it changes the planet as you all know.

Actually gravity does not explain the observed movements observed in the universe and as far as black holes are concerned nothing is known only speculated. Bye the way a hole in space would not look any different than the empty space around it also please explain how a lightless hole can have size. The thing everyone misses is that the radiation coming out of or surrounding the hole is that this would be in the form of a 3d shell surrounding the hole and hiding the entire thing making photography impossible, theoretically anyway

But you use big letters to detail why you failed algebra

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

The accretion disk is not the black hole. The gravitational field from the black hole exist in a 3d universe not on a 2d image. Do you believe that if you approach the hole from the side that there is no gravitational pull? There is no side, or front and back.

Sure wish I could copy and paste from wikipoopy where any 8th grader can enter information

Jesus

Yes the accretion disk is not the black hole.
But the accretion disk is the only thing we can see.
And wiki is usually a good place to start, even if it sometimes is wrong.
And it does explain why there is pull from all sides of a black hole, but the accretion is still in a disk.

In other words you were wrong because there is no possible way for a black hole to have a front or back.

Its illogical

If you go back and watch the video in post #22, it explains why you see the same thing no matter what direction you look at the black hole from. Since the light is being bent, you see the front as well as the back of the accretion disk. So you will see a ring even if actually only the edge is facing you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Actually gravity does not explain the observed movements observed in the universe and as far as black holes are concerned nothing is known only speculated. Bye the way a hole in space would not look any different than the empty space around it also please explain how a lightless hole can have size. The thing everyone misses is that the radiation coming out of or surrounding the hole is that this would be in the form of a 3d shell surrounding the hole and hiding the entire thing making photography impossible, theoretically anyway

But you use big letters to detail why you failed algebra

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

The accretion disk is not the black hole. The gravitational field from the black hole exist in a 3d universe not on a 2d image. Do you believe that if you approach the hole from the side that there is no gravitational pull? There is no side, or front and back.

Sure wish I could copy and paste from wikipoopy where any 8th grader can enter information

Jesus

Yes the accretion disk is not the black hole.
But the accretion disk is the only thing we can see.
And wiki is usually a good place to start, even if it sometimes is wrong.
And it does explain why there is pull from all sides of a black hole, but the accretion is still in a disk.

In other words you were wrong because there is no possible way for a black hole to have a front or back.

Its illogical

If you go back and watch the video in post #22, it explains why you see the same thing no matter what direction you look at the black hole from. Since the light is being bent, you see the front as well as the back of the accretion disk. So you will see a ring even if actually only the edge is facing you.

Spot on

 

[Frannie]

Actually gravity does not explain the observed movements observed in the universe and as far as black holes are concerned nothing is known only speculated. Bye the way a hole in space would not look any different than the empty space around it also please explain how a lightless hole can have size. The thing everyone misses is that the radiation coming out of or surrounding the hole is that this would be in the form of a 3d shell surrounding the hole and hiding the entire thing making photography impossible, theoretically anyway

But you use big letters to detail why you failed algebra

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

The accretion disk is not the black hole. The gravitational field from the black hole exist in a 3d universe not on a 2d image. Do you believe that if you approach the hole from the side that there is no gravitational pull? There is no side, or front and back.

Sure wish I could copy and paste from wikipoopy where any 8th grader can enter information

Jesus

Yes the accretion disk is not the black hole.
But the accretion disk is the only thing we can see.
And wiki is usually a good place to start, even if it sometimes is wrong.
And it does explain why there is pull from all sides of a black hole, but the accretion is still in a disk.

In other words you were wrong because there is no possible way for a black hole to have a front or back.

Its illogical

If you go back and watch the video in post #22, it explains why you see the same thing no matter what direction you look at the black hole from. Since the light is being bent, you see the front as well as the back of the accretion disk. So you will see a ring even if actually only the edge is facing you.

No human has ever looked at a black hole from more than one direction, however that is what I said, that the hole is 3d and has no front of back as you said

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In other words you were wrong because there is no possible way for a black hole to have a front or back.

Of course, that is moronic, as black holes have both, from a relatively fixed frame of reference.

No human has ever looked at a black hole from more than one direction,

Irrelevant.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Now we focus our attention on the black hole at the center of our galaxy. While this black hole is 1000 times smaller than the black hole in the image, it is also 1000 times closer. So it has roughly the same angular size to our telescopes.

 

[Frannie]

Anything with a large gravitational mass would accelerate things towards it, with greater velocity as they come near. But nothing is going to be going straight at the black hole because the black hole also has a velocity, and in effect is moving out of the way. So the result of that is an accretion disk.

{... An accretion disk is a structure (often a circumstellar disk) formed by diffuse material in orbital motion around a massive central body. The central body is typically a star. Friction causes orbiting material in the disk to spiral inward towards the central body. Gravitational and frictional forces compress and raise the temperature of the material, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation. The frequency range of that radiation depends on the central object's mass. Accretion disks of young stars and protostars radiate in the infrared; those around neutron stars and black holes in the X-ray part of the spectrum. The study of oscillation modes in accretion disks is referred to as diskoseismology
...
Accretion disks are a ubiquitous phenomenon in astrophysics; active galactic nuclei, protoplanetary disks, and gamma ray bursts all involve accretion disks. These disks very often give rise to astrophysical jets coming from the vicinity of the central object. Jets are an efficient way for the star-disk system to shed angular momentum without losing too much mass.

The most spectacular accretion disks found in nature are those of active galactic nuclei and of quasars, which are thought to be massive black holes at the center of galaxies. As matter enters the accretion disc, it follows a trajectory called a tendex line, which describes an inward spiral. This is because particles rub and bounce against each other in a turbulent flow, causing frictional heating which radiates energy away, reducing the particles' angular momentum, allowing the particle to drift inwards, driving the inward spiral. The loss of angular momentum manifests as a reduction in velocity; at a slower velocity, the particle wants to adopt a lower orbit. As the particle falls to this lower orbit, a portion of its gravitational potential energy is converted to increased velocity and the particle gains speed. Thus, the particle has lost energy even though it is now travelling faster than before; however, it has lost angular momentum. As a particle orbits closer and closer, its velocity increases, as velocity increases frictional heating increases as more and more of the particle's potential energy (relative to the black hole) is radiated away; the accretion disk of a black hole is hot enough to emit X-rays just outside the event horizon. The large luminosity of quasars is believed to be a result of gas being accreted by supermassive black holes.[3] Elliptical accretion disks formed at tidal disruption of stars can be typical in galactic nuclei and quasars.[4] Accretion process can convert about 10 percent to over 40 percent of the mass of an object into energy as compared to around 0.7 percent for nuclear fusion processes.[5] In close binary systems the more massive primary component evolves faster and has already become a white dwarf, a neutron star, or a black hole, when the less massive companion reaches the giant state and exceeds its Roche lobe. A gas flow then develops from the companion star to the primary. Angular momentum conservation prevents a straight flow from one star to the other and an accretion disk forms instead.
...}
Accretion disk - Wikipedia

The accretion disk is not the black hole. The gravitational field from the black hole exist in a 3d universe not on a 2d image. Do you believe that if you approach the hole from the side that there is no gravitational pull? There is no side, or front and back.

Sure wish I could copy and paste from wikipoopy where any 8th grader can enter information

Jesus

Yes the accretion disk is not the black hole.
But the accretion disk is the only thing we can see.
And wiki is usually a good place to start, even if it sometimes is wrong.
And it does explain why there is pull from all sides of a black hole, but the accretion is still in a disk.

In other words you were wrong because there is no possible way for a black hole to have a front or back.

Its illogical

If you go back and watch the video in post #22, it explains why you see the same thing no matter what direction you look at the black hole from. Since the light is being bent, you see the front as well as the back of the accretion disk. So you will see a ring even if actually only the edge is facing you.

No human has ever looked at a black hole from more than one direction, however that is what I said, that the hole is 3d and has no front of back as you said

An ignored member posted...…………….So do I miss Fort Funny?

Nope