Black Holes: Key to the beginning and end of the universe?

You could, albeit one that was continually eating itself. Then it becomes a race between the hydrogen "in orbit" being dragged in (and blown out!) and incoming hydrogen arriving fast enough to sustain it.
And why would all this hydrogen accrete conveniently at the same time and symmetrically around the "sphere" of the BH (isn't most mass in the ecliptic)?

It is what? A different question?
Yeah, I said that.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

.

you did

now explain why you said it ( " a different question )

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's quite simple (but get someone to read it out and explain it to you).
Your claim was wrong.
Pincho pointed out that rogue stars originate in galaxies (which is true), but that doesn't invalidate the fact that your claim, as written, was incorrect.
But, if what you ACTUALLY meant was "stars cannot be formed unless there's a galaxy" then, since it has a different answer, and has a different meaning from what you wrote, it's a different question.
Because it's different in meaning, intent, wording and answer.
Got it?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Thought I answered that with 27.

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2849797&postcount=27

 

looked up rogue stars as you suggested

could they be flung out by rotation of the galaxy ?

 

I see no real reason a star could not be formed without a galaxy.

Could someone address that in more detail? It might be rare, but impossible? Just a little more density of the cosmic dust in one area? Lack of other stars and objects to subject it to thier gravity and stop a stars formatation?

Thank you.

 

You know that a quasar is just an active SMBH. All that infalling gas will create a lot of energy release that will push the infalling gas away. Call it a black hole wind if you will. But anyway that wind will compress the gas away from the BH in a very close to circular orbit and at the same time will become less active as there is less infalling gas close to the EH. Most assuredly ecliptic, doesn't have to be by much does it? Most of us think of our planet's orbit as circular, even when I know it's not. As to why all the hydrogen in the first place? I'm not completely opposed to a BB theory. I just don't like much about the accepted theory.

 

how do you see this happening though

just your thoughts

just asking

 

Most small star clusters or rogue stars can be broken loose from their parent galaxy by collisions or near misses by other galaxies.

 

The more I think about it the more I agree.
What part, exactly, does a galaxy play in the formation of a star?
IOW a star forms because there's a local accretion of matter that accumulates enough to achieve ignition.

A "galaxy" before any stars have have formed would be a high-matter-density volume that is a breeding ground for these local accretions, but I don't know of anything that says there are/ were no sub-galactic-sized clouds of matter ready to do the same. (In fact, surely it's ridiculous to think there weren't: what are the odds of NOT having smaller clouds of matter?)

I'm open to any and all correction/ expansion.

 

From http://www.rigel.org.uk/blog/000280.shtml

 

or by being flung out by the rotational speed of the galaxy core

plus we don't know what happens behind the galaxy , the area behind the galaxy we can't see

 

What?

Equally: what?

 

It's possible just not very likely. Scientists say that galaxy and star formation all over the universe happened at about the same time. They made this determination by looking for the oldest stars in every galaxy and they were all about the same age (give or take something under a billion years).

How could this happen? I know what the current theory says. But I just can't buy it. If you start with an expanding volume of space filled with a hot energetic gas like hydrogen after a big bang. How would it be possible that pockets of gravity would form all over the entire volume of hot expanding hydrogen and start condensing into SMBH's and stars? It makes a whole lot more since that those SMBH's were already in existence (pockets of gravity).

 

think about it

think of rotation , centrifugal force

 

No, you think about it.
How did it stay long enough to form a star if the rotational velocity is fast enough to throw it out?
Why wasn't it thrown out sooner? Why aren't more being thrown out?

And WTF is the difference between

By definition if something is rotating too fast to hold on to the material in it then that material gets thrown out as soon as that speed is reached.
If you'd bother to read the linked article it offers an explanation for rogue stars.

And I'm still waiting for you to explain:

 

No matter how I think of it. The best I can come up with is a star with an elliptical orbit similar to that of a comet in our own solar system. It could get pretty far out and never break free to become a rogue.

 

okay

then that would mean the star is from outside the galaxies influence

 

No it wouldn't.
KJK's example was specifically likened to something within the influence of a solar system.
Did you not notice the words - never break free to become a rogue?

 

okay

true