Black holes don’t emit or reflect light, making them effectively invisible to telescopes. Scientists primarily detect and study them based on how they affect their surroundings: Black holes can be surrounded by rings of gas and dust, called accretion disks, that emit light across many wavelengths, including X-rays. Source: science.nasa.gov/universe/black-holes/
@@globbob78 you can not see a black hole anyway it's void of light because it's bends it around. This is why the images are showing the light as it bends around.
This must be a loop... The universe could start at a sphere, strech, and loop that closes in (attraction) to make a circle similar to a ring. Then it could strech again for expansion. Or maybe its a large black hole
It is not.the most powerful telescope ever built. Let's back up. The reason we got.the James web telescope is because the military had the same pointed down for years and when they released the tech to the civilarket due to getting new tech THEN we got the tech for it. You can bet there is something better even now.
First off fact that we've never actually sent a probe into a black hole mainly because we can't find one that we can get to, so Albert Einstein's concept on general relativity couldn't possibly play any kind of impact on people's thoughts or ideas of factual speaking anything at all. You said it yourself people say that the center of it is the singularity, where you get spaghettified. Which is strictly a Sci-Fi fictional concept but for the most part that's where reality seems to get the majority of its "new thoughts" from. Though they don't know anything solid because we have no real evidence to prove any of it it's all faith-based. Like my faith in Jesus Christ or my faith in the fact that there is a intelligent designer. Give the fact we can see this stuff and can't explain it does not make that god of the gaps as the excuse for us not knowing we have faith to fall on, but you not knowing and claiming that science fiction novel stuff like Star Trek Star wars and concepts from there are now factual and real, little carry. Not only that but explain things like the multiverse and why you think it's a singularity or the fact you get spaghettified is all stuff from shows like those seems like you have a lot more faith than any Bible believe in Christian.
BS. Galileo proved that mass does not attract mass. Gravity/mass attraction is not a fundamental force of nature. Einstein was a flat earther who used your ignorance to promote himself to the god of mass. Your LIGO? Do you known the detectors where pushed out of alignment and not pulled. When two objects collide, tgey create friction. Friction is heat. Heat is radiant energy. What LIGO detected was the amount of friction generated by that collission. Comprende. Einstein was a fraud. Relativity has never been proven. For a law to be valid, it must be equally applicable in ALL frames of reference. Including the frames of Space, Time, whether the frame is vertical ot horizontal or rotating. Now, quit promoting church propaganda. There are no 'gravitational waves'. Gravity/mass attraction was invented to explain why objects dont float off into space on a stationary plane.
@@KNOWVIDS1 I am sorry but you are being given bad information. Galileo proved back in the 1590s that mass does not attract mass. Newton followed up with the math, F=ma, and showed that force comes from Acceleration. Not mass. Nasa followed up Galileo's ball drop experiments on the moon with a hammer&feather. Same result. Mass does not attract mass. LIGO? The detectors were pushed out of alignment, not pulled. Electromagnetic waves are force carriers, they carry the force away from the source. Not towards. Mercury's orbit? Earth's tides. Both are the direct result of the respective planets motion in space. The earth is rotating on its axis accelerating its mass outward and forward creating curved space. Kepler's laws of motion, the acceleration factor increases as the radius decreases. On earth, this additional acceleration goes into the yearly tidal bulge on the side opposite of the sun. Mercury's mass is solid, that additional acceleration creates a deflection that sends the planet on a different trajectory. So, no. There is no experiment that validates relativity. Relativity is rooted in flat earth science, mass attraction. Mass does not create acceleration. Example. Accelerate water from 0 to 100. Now add more mass (ice), do you get more acceleration? The laws of physics are equally valid in ALL frames of reference. Space, Time, vertical, horizontal, rotation, 2d, 3d, 1 dimension as in a photon's wavelength. Nice try though. You are learning that not every experiment was properly conducted and analyzed. The Hafele-Keating experiment proves it. No information/data on the amount of energy each clock used. No mention of the fact that the cesium-133 atom is being chilled to absolute zero while the o observers atoms are at room/body temperature. No data/information on the observers heart beats. Nasa's flight log data shows accelerated heart rates during lift-off. Contrary to what you relativists claim. Shall I go on?
