Not really sure about this source but I thought of you guys.
I thought black holes were still something that might exist until recently. I should have stuck to that Astronomy GCSE after all ;)
I'm stuck wondering why that in this video it looks like something is coming out of the hole, I thought it just sucked things up, like Tootally man.
:scratch-head:
Black Hole Eats Star (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/25/black-hole-eats-star-video_n_937150.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl4%7Csec1_lnk3%7C89617&ref=fb&src=sp)
Yes, black holes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole) do exist. Prof. Hawking paid out on a bet regarding Cygnus X1 a few years back. The bet being it was/wasn't a black hole. He bet on it wasn't.
There is no direct evidence of black holes. They're black and relatively small. Anything that goes past the event horizon is lost from observation from this universe. All that exists is its mass, charge and angular momentum. Which happen to be the main parameters of a sub-atomic particle as well.
There is lots of indirect evidence of black holes inc. their super massive variety (these exist in the middle of galaxies). If a black hole swallows a planet/star it will create an accretion disc that gives off x-rays and gamma rays (both powerful photons, gamma are the highest) and these are detectable. If other stars have a stable orbit then the mass of the orbiting bodies can be worked out. This is how our super massive black hole's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermassive_black_hole) mass was worked out (4.1 million solar masses). Any star over 7 solar masses and dead (no nuclear reactions) must be a black hole.
P.S.
The Huffinton post is at best poor. I found this article misleading.
I'm with Snowy about the quality of the HP's reporting of all things "science~ie". I have yet to see or read a report from them that didn't have some sort of inaccuracy in it.
As to those long, thin blue columns you see that seem to emerge from the "center" of the black hole, that's the "energy burst" the HP said was "hurtling toward earth", and the article was mostly correct in their description of the makeup of those jets of energy. They don't really come from inside the black hole itself, but are created at the extreme inner edge of the "event horizon", where the forces of gravity and inertia are so great that things get a little strange, and much of the energy created (as matter is "destroyed") is "kicked up", but the "spin" that the energy still has imparted to it is so strong it acts like the barrel of a rifle, and keeps the jet in a very narrow angle as it escapes. There are several theories as to how these jets are created, but my favourite is that, at the final instant of interaction of matter, inertia and gravity, massive quantities of anti-matter are formed, and interact with similar quantities of regular matter, which violently cancel each other out. But due to the "shape" of the forces involved, there are only two ways for the energy to "escape": into the black hole (which the overwhelmingly vast majority of the energy goes), or "up through the maelstrom", which results in the high energy particles we "see".
An article from Phil Plait about the same event but better.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/08/26/star-eaten-by-a-black-hole-still-blasting-away/ (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2011/08/26/star-eaten-by-a-black-hole-still-blasting-away/)
Thanks for getting me up to date folks. Yes I was a bit wary of that site.
If you want the "real scoop" about anything to do with astronomy, Dr. Phil (Plaitt, bot that other guy) is certainly the one to seek out. :)