Re: Chandra and black hole abundance

From: Amara Graps (
Date: Sat Jan 15 2000 - 13:03:32 MST

From: Spike Jones <> Fri, 14 Jan 2000 22:24:52

>If I understand it correctly, the larger a black hole, the harder it is to
>observe. Since the radiation it emits is a direct function of the surface
>area of the event horizon but the frequency is inversely proportional
>to the square of the area, a large black hole would emit less total
>radiation than a small one. If so, then the ones observed and reported
>in today's paper are the smaller ones? Its been several years since I
>have read Hawkings books. Perhaps Amara Graps can help us?

(315) VII

Space being(don't forget to remember)Curved
(and that reminds me who said o yes Frost
Something there is which isn't fond of walls)

an electromagnetic(now I've lost
the)Einstein expanded Newton's law preserved
conTinuum(but we read that beFore)

of Course life being just a Reflex you
know since Everything is Relative or

to sum it All Up god being Dead(not to

mention inTerred)
                 LONG LIVE that Upwardlooking
Serene Illustrious and Beatific
Lord of Creation,MAN:
                     at a least crooking
of Whose compassionate digit,earth's most terrific

quadruped swoons into billiardBalls!

(ee cummings)


..hows that for a nonscientific answer ..?



Amara Graps email:
Computational Physics vita: finger
Multiplex Answers URL:
"If you gaze for long into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into
you." - -Nietzsche

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:17 MDT