-
9 votes
-
A total solar eclipse in an astronomer's paradise
3 votes -
Using machine learning and a whole lot of data from telescopes positioned around the world could test the theory of gravity in new ways
4 votes -
The pitfalls of searching for alien life
6 votes -
NASA chooses Saturn’s moon Titan as its next destination as part of Project DragonFly—a drone mission to explore Titan's surface over two years
28 votes -
NASA reopens Apollo mission control room that once landed men on Moon
11 votes -
Inside Starshot, the audacious plan to shoot tiny ships to Alpha Centauri
10 votes -
SpaceX faces daunting challenges if it’s going to win the internet space race
8 votes -
Beautiful maps of the solar system’s asteroids and the topography of Mercury
6 votes -
Was Apollo 11 a beginning or an end? Fifty years after man walked on the Moon, mankind is still stranded on Earth. That’s not the way it was supposed to be.
14 votes -
SpaceX preps Falcon Heavy for “most difficult” flight
9 votes -
"13 Minutes to the Moon" - BBC documentary podcast on Apollo 11
7 votes -
NASA rover on Mars detects high amounts of methane gas, hinting at possibility of life
8 votes -
NASA will conduct a delicate rescue mission to free a probe trapped just inches below the Red Planet’s surface
6 votes -
Carl Sagan’s solar sail is finally ready to fly
6 votes -
Ancient Babylonian astronomers calculated Jupiter’s position from the area under a time-velocity graph
7 votes -
Apollo’s brain: The computer that guided man to the Moon
5 votes -
Physicists debate Hawking’s idea that the Universe had no beginning
13 votes -
A short history of Presidential vacillation: Mars or the Moon
5 votes -
NASA may allow private astronauts on the ISS for $11,250-$22,500 a day
10 votes -
Why astronomers are worried that SpaceX’s satellite network will pollute the night sky
10 votes -
The 'forbidden' planet has been found in the 'Neptunian Desert'
4 votes -
‘Wow, what is that?’ Navy pilots report unexplained flying objects
14 votes -
Will Starlink and other satellite networks ruin the night sky for astronomers?
4 votes -
Starlink - Low latency satellite internet
20 votes -
The launch industry prepares for a shakeout
3 votes -
As commercial spaceflight takes off, the US aviation industry gets protective of airspace
4 votes -
We are going: NASA's plan to return to the Moon by 2024
12 votes -
Jeff Bezos dreams of a 1970s future
6 votes -
Inside NASA’s race back to Neptune’s icy moon Triton
5 votes -
The paraglider that NASA could have used, but didn’t, to bring astronauts back to Earth
6 votes -
Blue Origin - Blue Moon lunar lander
6 votes -
Rocket Lab launches three US military satellites
4 votes -
SpaceX’s unnerving silence on an explosive incident
12 votes -
The race to develop the moon
8 votes -
The space rock that hit the moon at 61,000 kilometers an hour
6 votes -
SpaceX cuts broadband-satellite altitude in half to prevent space debris
7 votes -
On verge of space history, Beresheet fails to land safely on Moon
8 votes -
I have a basic and possibly uninformed question about the event horizon of a black hole
It is my understanding that if you are looking at an object falling into a black hole from a remote viewpoint, then the object will appear to take “forever” to complete the fall into the black...
It is my understanding that if you are looking at an object falling into a black hole from a remote viewpoint, then the object will appear to take “forever” to complete the fall into the black hole. The object is effectively frozen in time at the black hole’s event horizon, from the remote viewer’s POV.
Is this the correct interpretation so far? If so, let’s remember that.
It is also my understanding that a black hole can increase in mass as it captures new objects. The mass does increase from an external viewpoint. Is this accurate?
If I understand known science on the above points, then the paradox I see here is that while the visual information is frozen in time from the external POV, the mass of the black hole does increase from the external POV. So is this where the Holographic Principle comes in? Or is there another explanation here, or am I off-base entirely?
Or is it just that the accretion disk gains mass and black holes never increase in mass from an external POV, after they are initially formed?
Is this known?
Please either attempt to answer my tortured question, or point me to material that might lead me ask a better question.
Thanks!
13 votes -
Even space isn’t safe from ads: Companies want to turn satellites into billboards
15 votes -
Frustrated pilots got Navy to stop dismissing UFO sightings
8 votes -
NASA's flagship James Webb Space Telescope, will run Javascript for instrumentation control using a defunct & proprietary interpreter with a list of errata last updated in 2003
12 votes -
Will we find extraterrestrial life on ice worlds? Why Europa is the place to go for alien life.
4 votes -
Astrophysical detection of the helium hydride ion HeH+
5 votes -
The logistics of the International Space Station
7 votes -
Why was it so hard to take a picture of a black hole? What are we even looking at?
11 votes -
New video of Intelsat 29e satellite reveals dramatic “anomaly”
13 votes -
The most dangerous stuff in the universe - Strange stars explained
11 votes -
Scott Kelly spent a year in orbit. His body is not quite the same
11 votes -
What a year in space did to Scott Kelly
6 votes