4 ms·

Black hole in orbit around planet could be sign of advanced civilization

30 points by amichail 2y ago

WheelsAtLarge 2y ago
"could be a sign", how about "most likely not be a sign." Interesting, how the Alien fantasy has permeated so much of our society without the slidest bit of proof. It's even part of a website that professes to be reporting on science.
- Mistletoe 2y ago
  I get what you are saying, but I would find it even more amazing if we are alone. It and we would be the most miraculous thing in the universe. Maybe we are, but the odds surely favor the opposite no?
  - giantrobot 2y ago
    > I get what you are saying, but I would find it even more amazing if we are alone. Alien life in the universe is extremely likely. That does not mean however that every odd phenomenon is evidence of that alien life. It's unlikely (possible but unlikely) some alien civilization has a pet black hole in orbit of their planet. Just a random comet getting grabbed by its gravity could generate dangerous x-ray bursts for the planet's inhabitants. Jumping to the conclusion of "it's aliens!" is unscientific and really a bit tiring.
    - cthalupa 2y ago
      Well, this is all positioned as "possible technosignature," there's not some black hole orbiting around a planet that we've seen that has us going "that's weird must be aliens." Though, a black hole of the size we're talking about is in and of itself potentially evidence of aliens - as noted in the article, they would evaporate within a year and a half without a constant influx of mass. Most places where you would find a black hole that is accreting matter is going to be a place where there is enough matter for it to become significantly larger, and once it's away from places rich with matter, space is emptying enough there's basically no chance it's having that much fall in.
    - The_Colonel 2y ago
      > Jumping to the conclusion of "it's aliens!" is unscientific and really a bit tiring. It kinda seems your jumping to conclusions, "sign" is not the same thing as "evidence". Sign is basically increasing the perceived likelihood, but it may mean an increase from e. g. 0.000001% (baseline) to e. g. 0.001%. Add some other signs like presence of water, radio activity etc. (each of which alone is no proof of aliens) and you can get interesting candidates.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- michaelmrose 2y ago
  Do you consider this specific bit of speculation on what we perhaps might look for as evidence of alien life is a fantasy or the entire idea of alien life?
  - WheelsAtLarge 2y ago
    Life took a hold here so why can't it be somewhere else? My problem is that there's a never-ending implication that if we can't explain something right away then it must be created by an alien civilization. It's a lazy way to look at how the universe functions. For most of our history, the default creator was God. Lately, in the last 100 or so years, it has been switched to aliens in many cases. We have Science which gives us a method to come up with a possible solution without defaulting to a super being. What bugs me is that there is 0 evidence of there being advanced civilizations. We have been brainwashed by sci-fi. Believing in aliens because we saw them at the movies or read a book about them helps no one. To me, it's a form of misinformation that's in the same realm as the moon being made of cheese.
zeagle 2y ago
This is speculative science fiction. It cites a post in a journal that is "OPEN ACCESS Research Notes of the AAS is a non-peer reviewed, indexed and secure record of works in progress, comments and clarifications, null results, or timely reports of observations in astronomy and astrophysics." ... So a blog?
- cthalupa 2y ago
  Speculative, sure. Fiction? As much as any other theoretical technosignature is. Does our understanding of science allow for this? At a surface level, it seems like it does. Is it likely? Who knows. The comments on this article are kind of weird. Dr. Loeb is one of the handful of scientists where SETI-style research is their bread and butter - it's not like we're throwing thousands of our best and brightest at this research at the expense of something more practical. Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field.
  - zeagle 2y ago
    > Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? I guess my disdain for this field's scientific rigor shines through. When hypotheses aren't testable... > Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field. That is a fair point!
    - ofrzeta 2y ago
      I don't know. There are academics, medical doctors who believe in homeopathy or worse. So academic credentials no not automatically translate in overall rationality.
      - 2y ago
LorenPechtel 2y ago
Nonsense. No advanced civilization would permit such a thing. Yes, it's the most efficient means of generating energy known. But feeding something like that is exceedingly hard. You can't just drop mass in, such small black holes will be past the Eddington limit. You'll need a particle accelerator yeeting stuff at it with incredible precision and if you mess up it's going to blow. And do some pretty nasty things to the planet. I'm not finding any good answers to where the Eddington limit is but what I am finding has a few more zeroes than this and simply doesn't glow brightly enough to be useful.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  So you build some particle accelerators and get yeeting. We're talking about advanced civilizations here. Now the huge gamma ray bomb next to your home planet, that's a problem...
  - LorenPechtel 2y ago
    You are yeeting at something a tiny, tiny fraction of the size of what you're yeeting. And a tiny, tiny fraction of the accuracy of any measuring tool. Not to mention that it's going to be surrounded by an energetic particle cloud.
    - andrewflnr 2y ago
      Yeah, and? Get. Yeeting. I'm messing with you. Mostly. But you have to assume, as the premise, that these sort of things can be solved. Notably, you have to sling a lot of matter at it, so you may as well sling a lot so you can miss some. And maybe the leftover matter getting heated up by radiation/particle cloud is part of your energy recovery mechanism?
      - LorenPechtel 2y ago
        You'll have a cloud no matter what you do but you would be much better off if it were coming off directly as photons. You have to shoot through that cloud to hit the target.
slibhb 2y ago
Avi Loeb is one man clickbait factory.
RaftPeople 2y ago
Alternate title: "Black hole in orbit around planet could be a sign that physics in that section of the universe is very similar or even identical to ours"

30 points by amichail 2y ago

"could be a sign", how about "most likely not be a sign." Interesting, how the Alien fantasy has permeated so much of our society without the slidest bit of proof. It's even part of a website that professes to be reporting on science.

Mistletoe 2y ago
I get what you are saying, but I would find it even more amazing if we are alone. It and we would be the most miraculous thing in the universe. Maybe we are, but the odds surely favor the opposite no?
- giantrobot 2y ago
  > I get what you are saying, but I would find it even more amazing if we are alone. Alien life in the universe is extremely likely. That does not mean however that every odd phenomenon is evidence of that alien life. It's unlikely (possible but unlikely) some alien civilization has a pet black hole in orbit of their planet. Just a random comet getting grabbed by its gravity could generate dangerous x-ray bursts for the planet's inhabitants. Jumping to the conclusion of "it's aliens!" is unscientific and really a bit tiring.
  - cthalupa 2y ago
    Well, this is all positioned as "possible technosignature," there's not some black hole orbiting around a planet that we've seen that has us going "that's weird must be aliens." Though, a black hole of the size we're talking about is in and of itself potentially evidence of aliens - as noted in the article, they would evaporate within a year and a half without a constant influx of mass. Most places where you would find a black hole that is accreting matter is going to be a place where there is enough matter for it to become significantly larger, and once it's away from places rich with matter, space is emptying enough there's basically no chance it's having that much fall in.
  - The_Colonel 2y ago
    > Jumping to the conclusion of "it's aliens!" is unscientific and really a bit tiring. It kinda seems your jumping to conclusions, "sign" is not the same thing as "evidence". Sign is basically increasing the perceived likelihood, but it may mean an increase from e. g. 0.000001% (baseline) to e. g. 0.001%. Add some other signs like presence of water, radio activity etc. (each of which alone is no proof of aliens) and you can get interesting candidates.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
michaelmrose 2y ago
Do you consider this specific bit of speculation on what we perhaps might look for as evidence of alien life is a fantasy or the entire idea of alien life?
- WheelsAtLarge 2y ago
  Life took a hold here so why can't it be somewhere else? My problem is that there's a never-ending implication that if we can't explain something right away then it must be created by an alien civilization. It's a lazy way to look at how the universe functions. For most of our history, the default creator was God. Lately, in the last 100 or so years, it has been switched to aliens in many cases. We have Science which gives us a method to come up with a possible solution without defaulting to a super being. What bugs me is that there is 0 evidence of there being advanced civilizations. We have been brainwashed by sci-fi. Believing in aliens because we saw them at the movies or read a book about them helps no one. To me, it's a form of misinformation that's in the same realm as the moon being made of cheese.

zeagle 2y ago

This is speculative science fiction. It cites a post in a journal that is "OPEN ACCESS Research Notes of the AAS is a non-peer reviewed, indexed and secure record of works in progress, comments and clarifications, null results, or timely reports of observations in astronomy and astrophysics." ... So a blog?

cthalupa 2y ago
Speculative, sure. Fiction? As much as any other theoretical technosignature is. Does our understanding of science allow for this? At a surface level, it seems like it does. Is it likely? Who knows. The comments on this article are kind of weird. Dr. Loeb is one of the handful of scientists where SETI-style research is their bread and butter - it's not like we're throwing thousands of our best and brightest at this research at the expense of something more practical. Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field.
- zeagle 2y ago
  > Do you just fundamentally disagree with the idea of scientists doing research and theorizing potential technosignatures? I guess my disdain for this field's scientific rigor shines through. When hypotheses aren't testable... > Calling this a blog is also quite dismissive - it's not like this is some random dude who wrote some random stuff and got picked up. It's a work in progress from one of the most knowledgeable scientists in this field. That is a fair point!
  - ofrzeta 2y ago
    I don't know. There are academics, medical doctors who believe in homeopathy or worse. So academic credentials no not automatically translate in overall rationality.
    - 2y ago

LorenPechtel 2y ago

Nonsense. No advanced civilization would permit such a thing. Yes, it's the most efficient means of generating energy known. But feeding something like that is exceedingly hard. You can't just drop mass in, such small black holes will be past the Eddington limit. You'll need a particle accelerator yeeting stuff at it with incredible precision and if you mess up it's going to blow. And do some pretty nasty things to the planet. I'm not finding any good answers to where the Eddington limit is but what I am finding has a few more zeroes than this and simply doesn't glow brightly enough to be useful.

andrewflnr 2y ago
So you build some particle accelerators and get yeeting. We're talking about advanced civilizations here. Now the huge gamma ray bomb next to your home planet, that's a problem...
- LorenPechtel 2y ago
  You are yeeting at something a tiny, tiny fraction of the size of what you're yeeting. And a tiny, tiny fraction of the accuracy of any measuring tool. Not to mention that it's going to be surrounded by an energetic particle cloud.
  - andrewflnr 2y ago
    Yeah, and? Get. Yeeting. I'm messing with you. Mostly. But you have to assume, as the premise, that these sort of things can be solved. Notably, you have to sling a lot of matter at it, so you may as well sling a lot so you can miss some. And maybe the leftover matter getting heated up by radiation/particle cloud is part of your energy recovery mechanism?
    - LorenPechtel 2y ago
      You'll have a cloud no matter what you do but you would be much better off if it were coming off directly as photons. You have to shoot through that cloud to hit the target.

slibhb 2y ago

Avi Loeb is one man clickbait factory.

RaftPeople 2y ago

Alternate title: "Black hole in orbit around planet could be a sign that physics in that section of the universe is very similar or even identical to ours"