Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Black Holes Suck...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Robert Garfinkle on March 10, 2003 01:40:58 UTC

In theory, a black hole is suppose to be a nuclear body which is so massive (and unstable), that when it collapses, it collapses in on itself. To my knowledge, that is the short of it, as I understand it.

It is ultimately what turns into a supernova vs. just going nova.

A star is born, and if it a 'main sequence' star (like our sun), it lives a normal, rather boring life, and then turns to a white dwarf, and eventually goes nova. While, a massive star, like stated above, has a more 'radical' life, and then at the end of it's life, becomes a supernova, and then moves to becoming a black hole.


Others may have a better explanation as to what one is and probably do.

Robert

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
    Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
    "dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
    are trademarks of John Huggins