Thats right. Sun will never become a black hole. For a star to become a black hole, a star should be really massive. When a main sequence start eats up all its fuel in its core it becomes inert as it is mostly helium. The star's core then contracts under its own gravity and heats up. This causes the fusion reaction to quicken in the outer layers and the star begins to expand and there is a huge increase in its brightness. When the star runs out of all possible elements to support the nuclear fusion it collapses under its immense gravity (The nuclear fusion process was providing the star enough energy to counter its massive gravity.. when that is gone the star collapses). The gravitaional force immemse that the star collapses into a tiny dot in space in less than a second. This causes insane heating of the stellar material and if the star has enough material in it.. it would result in the 'Supernova', a celestial nuclear explosion. This explosion is so powerful that the supernova usually outshines the entire bumch of galaxies for a moment!But

Rarely do stars survive this explosion (supernova), but sometimes the core does survive. If the core's weight is 1and1/2 to 3 solar masses the cores becomes a neutron star. These types of stars are made of very dense material (a teaspoon of that material would weigh a billion tonnes!). If the surving core is considerably heavier than 3 solar masses, it forms a black-hole. As we all know immense mysteries shroud black-holes. The event horizon is a place where law of physics are defied and broken (or even dont exist :)!)

Sadly our sun can never become a black hole as it does not have what it takes to be one (as said above).

Scientists widely believe that after the red-giant phase, sun will become a white-dwarf.

There are exceptions, in very rare occurances.

This might help a bit:

http://www.universetoday.com/2006/07/20/a-glimpse-at-the-future-of-our-sun/

Maybe not... I don't have time to read it all. Excuse me, if I'm incorrect.

I read it. There is no mention of sun becoming something else other than a white dwarf. But it does have some interesting info on coupling the capabilities of telescopes. Thanks for the info!.

yes its density is much higher. this is due to the heavier elements inside it and the lack of fusion energy expanding its volume.

Posted By: migrena

gram of sun as white dwarf would weight like... gram" alt="" src="/extensions/Vanillacons/smilies/standard/bigsmile.gif">

lol, should have spotted that too

But, this is quite irrelevant right, cos the sun wouldnt turn into a black hole, and a black hole couldn't just appear... could it?

But if the sun was sucked into a black hole , would it mean all the other planets are sucked in too.

Would it be possible for the sun to be sucked in? Would there be a black hole close enough, or big enough?

[I could learn alot like this]

ifte, if a black hole could suck in Sol, then yes all the planets would sink as well.

*smacks forehead*

if the sun was to turn into a black hole, then it would have the same mass. that would not affect any orbits around it, since it is still the same mass.

you guys are being frightfully stupid about this.
a black hole is an infinitely dense mass. the amount of mass is not important. what's important is that it is a singularity, ie infinitely small. the mass dictates the radius of its event horizon.

any mass that is infinitely small, can have another mass infinitely close to it. if it can be infinitely close, then it will at some point cross the gravitational threshold where it cannot escape. a black hole is black because past a certain point light travelling tangentially to it gets sucked in despite it travelling at the fastest possible orbit speed - the speed of light. the distance from the center of the black hole to this threshold is determined by the mass of the black hole.

am I being clear enough?

Yay! That makes sense. That post deserves this:

No I explained that very clearly. The gravitational forces when you are deep inside the sun are acting all around you, pulling in all directions, as apposed to a black hole which always has a direction no matter how close to the center you are because it is infinitely small.

Posted By: MrFingers

we sit 1km from the center of the sun. ignoring we'd be toast in a split second, we would experience alot of pressure, but a very small amount of gravitational forces. think about it, we are right in the middle, the sun's mass is all around us, pulling in all directions.

i would say that at 1km from center we would experience quite large puling too, it goes like this:
in the center there you feel balance betwen right and left side od sun, then you move a bit right, mass of the sun on your left is getting bigger while mass on your right is getting smaller so gravity pulling looses its balance, you can say that 1km is not much but if you consider the size of sun... lets say that slice of sun with thickness of 1km would weight more than earth
therfore 1cm would be safer :)

as a sidenote: there is another possibility to turn sun into black hole, lest assume that some singularity connects its negative einstein-rozen bridge to center of the sun... the result would be black hole with mass equal to sum of both

Posted By: migrena

Posted By: Udoboy

ifte, if a black hole could suck in Sol, then yes all the planets would sink as well.

extramally small black hole wouldnt increase sun mass enough to do this and therfore teorethically you can turn sun into black hole without sucking rest of the solar system by throwing suchblack hole into the sun

I think you missed my point. I was talking about a black hole external to the sun, not replacing the sun. That was the question asked by ifte two posts prior to my response.

If a black hole existed somewhere, and came cruising along near the Solar System, and sucked in Sol, then all the planets in the system would also be sucked in. We build a gravitational model at Texas State that verified this claim.

We actually did, and tested our results against previous models.

i said "extreamaly small mass", thus something smaller than 1 gram
before you ask it is possible to craate such black hole artifically (look into "end of world" topic) and during the first few hours of our universum it was possible for that kind of fenomenon appear spontaneously

Posted By: MrFingers

that's impressive because that is no small simulation... were u a physics major?

if you use only newtonian physics its just a matter of size of this simualtion (or how much you agree to approximate the model), but to get any resonable results needed processing power would be equal to used by seti@home or even more...

ifte please read the rest of the damn post.

migrena theoretically any mass can be a black hole, no matter how small. yeah the simulation is just large scale.

it is a common misconception

lol :)

well physics is in my genes and I'm starting a physics undergraduate at imperial college in 2 weeks. being american alot of you won't know that in england you do just one course for 4 years, instead of the mix and match, and imperial college is kind of like MIT - 5th for physics in da world innit.

science isnt that clever, im in admiration of the people who can write amazingly articulated essays.

the two are so closely linked :) I like to think of physics as the study of the fundamentals of the universe, and maths as the universal language.

What about that other post from that 11 year old kid (aparently, I don't know many 11 year olds who follow hawkings), anyway, he said that hawkings proposed a theory of radiation in which the black holes disolve, which, I estimate, in turn, recreates balance between the universe. Perhaps I am totally wrong and hope I really don't confuse anyone. But any validity in that?

certainly if a black hole was to 'evaporate', we would not emerge intact.

I actually have a different theory which explains what hawkings is trying to cover in a - in my opinion - better way. It is very new and very mine :p I didn't mention it before because I only came up with it a couple days ago.

well yeah, not matter what happens inside of a black hole, it's going to crush anything into the smallest sub atomic particles possible.

i was jk im not eleven im 16...i just wanted to see if yall would notice lol

As stars collapse, they emit Beta radiation, which are electrons, thus allowing their density to rise to the point of becoming a black hole or neutron star.

Posted By: Udoboy

As stars collapse, they emit Beta radiation, which are electrons, thus allowing their density to rise to the point of becoming a black hole or neutron star.

Unless they give off a significant number of electrons (each atom) I don’t see how that would explain the size of a black hole, by this time in the stars life there isn’t much Hydrogen or Helium so there still should be at least one electron orbit in place. Which still hold a substantial amount of “empty space”.

So the question still stands…

As the star collapses, and it gets more and more dense… what happens to the atomic structure? Aren’t the electron orbits “fixed”? Or do they collapse and this is what allows the vast amount of matter to be condensed into a rather small package.

the exact answer to your question is not known.

my thoughts on that issue is that as a black hole forms it creates a new universe, the matter and energy flowing into the black hole enter the new universe and expand it. the new universe's space-time plane is like a balloon with the neck being the black hole, all new mass entering the balloon creates more pull on the neck thus increasing the gradient of the space-time plane outside the black hole. the gradient of the space-time outside is directly related to the entire mass of the universe inside of it. but these are just my thoughts, and there are issues with it like; why does the neck shrink to a single dimension (singularity) and what keeps the matter flowing in one direction, etc.

basically, people dont know what exactly happens in a black hole, it is all speculation - although intelligent speculation. If you are talking about a neutron star, I believe udoboy was correct and you would lose all the electrons. the process of beta radiation is the emission of one electron and one proton turning into a neutron. if this occurs repeatedly you are left with a nucleus of neutrons with nothing else, no matter what u start with.

no thats a terrible idea. I would lose all interest in this forum if I had to treck around the internet finding information to support ideas I had made myself or information I had absorbed long ago. that would bore the shit out of everyone here.