Connect with us

The Conversation

Some black holes at the centers of galaxies have a buddy − but detecting these binary pairs isn’t easy

Published

on

theconversation.com – Marco Ajello, Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Clemson University – 2024-12-05 07:40:00

Some black holes, bound by gravity, rotate around each other, as shown in this simulated image.
Simulating eXtreme Spacetimes Lensing (SXS), CC BY-SA

Marco Ajello, Clemson University and Jonathan Zrake, Clemson University

Every galaxy has a supermassive black hole at its center, much like every egg has a yolk. But sometimes, hens lay eggs with two yolks. In a similar way, astrophysicists like us who study supermassive black holes expect to find binary systems – two supermassive black holes orbiting each other – at the hearts of some galaxies.

Black holes are regions of space where gravity is so strong that not even light can escape from their vicinity. They form when the core of a massive star collapses on itself, and they act as cosmic vacuum cleaners. Supermassive black holes have a mass a million times that of our Sun or larger. Scientists like us study them to understand how gravity works and how galaxies form.

Figuring out whether a galaxy has one or two black holes in its center isn’t as easy as cracking an egg and examining the yolk. But measuring how often these binary supermassive black holes form can help researchers understand what happens to galaxies when they merge.

In a new study, our team dug through historical astronomical data dating back over a hundred years. We looked for light emitted from one galaxy that showed signs of harboring a binary supermassive black hole system.

Galactic collisions and gravitational waves

Galaxies like the Milky Way are nearly as old as the universe. Sometimes, they collide with other galaxies, which can lead to the galaxies merging and forming a larger, more massive galaxy.

The two black holes at the center of the two merging galaxies may, when close enough, form a pair bound by gravity. This pair may live for up to hundreds of millions of years before the two black holes eventually merge into one.

Supermassive black holes orbiting around each other can emit gravitational waves.

Binary black holes release energy in the form of gravitational waves – ripples in space-time that specialized observatories can detect. According to Einstein’s general relativity theory, these ripples travel at the speed of light, causing space itself to stretch and squeeze around them, kind of like a wave.

Pulsar timing arrays use pulsars, which are the dense, bright cores of collapsed stars. Pulsars spin very fast. Researchers can look for gaps and anomalies in the pattern of radio waves emitted from these spinning pulsars to detect gravitational waves.

While pulsar timing arrays can detect the collective gravitational wave signal from the ensemble of binaries within the past 9 billion years, they’re not yet sensitive enough to detect the gravitational wave signal from a single binary system in one galaxy. And even the most powerful telescopes can’t image these binary black holes directly. So, astronomers have to use clever indirect methods to figure out whether a galaxy has a binary supermassive black hole in its center.

Searching for signs of binary black holes

One type of indirect method involves searching for periodic signals from the centers of active galaxies. These are galaxies that emit significantly more energy than astronomers might expect from the amount of stars, gas and dust they contain.

These galaxies emit energy from their nucleus, or center – called the active galactic nucleus. In a process called accretion, the black hole in each active galaxy uses gravity to pull nearby gas inward. The gas speeds up as it approaches the black hole’s event horizon – like how water surrounding a whirlpool moves faster and faster as it spirals inward.

As the gas heats up, it glows brightly in optical, ultraviolet and X-ray light. Active galactic nuclei are some of the most luminous objects in the universe.

Some active galactic nuclei can launch jets, which are particle beams accelerated to near the speed of light. When these jets line up with our observatories’ lines of sight, they appear extremely bright. They’re like cosmic lighthouses.

Some active galactic nuclei have periodic light signals that get bright, fade and then get bright again. This unique signal could come from the cyclical motion of two supermassive black holes inside, and it suggests to astronomers to look for a binary black hole system in that galaxy.

On the hunt for a binary black hole system

Our team studied one such active galactic nucleus, called PG 1553+153. The light from this object gets brighter and dimmer about every 2.2 years.

These periodic variations suggest that PG 1553+153 has a supermassive black hole binary inside. But a binary isn’t the only explanation for this variation. Other phenomena, such as wobbly jets or changes in the flow of material around the black hole, could also explain this pattern without the presence of a binary black hole, so we had to rule those out.

To understand whether the PG 1553+153 system’s light emission patterns came from a binary black hole, we simulated how binary supermassive black holes collect gas. Our models suggested that sometimes, when the black holes pull in gas, dense clumps of gas collect around the outside of the hole.

We calculated that the time it takes for these clumps to orbit around the two black holes should be five to 10 times longer than the time it takes for the two black holes to circle each other.

So, we finally had a clear prediction that we could test. If a binary black hole system caused the 2.2-year periodic variation in PG 1553+153, then we should also be able to see a longer pattern of variation, about every 10 to 20 years, when the clumps of gas circle around the black holes.

But to see whether this was really a pattern, we needed to watch it repeat for four to five cycles. For PG 1553+153, that would be 40 to 100 years.

Astronomers have observed the sky for hundreds of years. But the era of digital astronomy, where astronomical images are recorded on computers and saved in databases, is very recent – only since the year 2000 or so.

Before then, starting around 1850, astronomers recorded images of the sky on photographic plates. These are flat pieces of glass coated with a light-sensitive chemical layer traditionally used in photography. Many observatories around the world have photographic images of the night sky dating back to more than a hundred years ago. Before that, astronomers would sketch what the sky looked like in their notebooks.

Projects like DASCH, Digital Access to a Sky Century at Harvard, have started digitalizing photographic plates from a few observatories to make them available for scientists and nonscientists alike.

Our team learned that the DASCH database provided data on PG 1553+153 dating back to 1900 – more than 120 years. We used this dataset to see whether we could see a pattern repeating every 10 to 20 years.

Somewhat to our surprise, we found a 20-year pattern that adds more evidence to our theory that there’s a binary system at the core of PG 1553+153. The detection of this second pattern also helped us figure out that the masses of the two supermassive black holes are in a 2.5:1 ratio – with one 2½ times as large as the other – and that their orbit is nearly circular.

While this historical data makes us more confident that there are two supermassive black holes in PG 1553+153, we still can’t say for sure. The final confirmation might need to wait until pulsar timing arrays become sensitive enough to detect the gravitational waves coming from PG 1553+153.The Conversation

Marco Ajello, Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Clemson University and Jonathan Zrake, Assistant Professor of Physics, Clemson University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post Some black holes at the centers of galaxies have a buddy − but detecting these binary pairs isn’t easy appeared first on theconversation.com

The Conversation

What is seditious conspiracy, which is among the most serious crimes Trump pardoned?

Published

on

theconversation.com – Amy Cooter, Director of Research, Academic Development and Innovation at the Center on Terrorism, Extremism and Counterterrorism, Middlebury – 2025-01-22 15:12:00

The Jan. 6, 2021, storming of the Capitol was the result of a planned conspiracy to disrupt the government, prosecutors alleged.
AP Photo/John Minchillo

Amy Cooter, Middlebury

Several of the highest-profile figures in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection were charged with, and convicted of, the crime of seditious conspiracy, which is defined as the act of getting together with other people to overthrow the government. They were among the roughly 1,500 people involved in the insurrection who were pardoned or had their prison sentences commuted by Donald Trump on his first day in office.

Seditious conspiracy is a serious crime of conspiring to overthrow the government or stop its normal functioning. Historically, seditious conspiracy has been difficult to successfully prosecute.

In 2009, for example, a state judge ruled that prosecutors had failed to provide sufficient evidence for members of the Michigan Hutaree militia to go to trial on that charge. Certain militia members had been accused of plotting violence against police officers. While some members faced other charges for their actions, the judge determined that a plot against law enforcement was not sufficient to support charges of attempting to overthrow the government.

In contrast, the U.S. Department of Justice charged 18 people associated with the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol with that crime, asserting that they had intended to “oppose by force the lawful transfer of presidential power” or had committed other actions that would undermine the entire system of government.

Of those 18, four pleaded guilty, and 10 were found guilty at trial. The remaining four were found not guilty of seditious conspiracy but were convicted of other crimes that were related to the insurrection.

Capitol entry not required

Oath Keepers militia leader Stewart Rhodes’ seditious conspiracy conviction was especially significant because, unlike some other defendants, Rhodes did not physically enter the Capitol building. He was instead in “the restricted area of Capitol grounds,” according to a Justice Department statement.

His conviction was based in part on his communications, including text messages, both before Jan. 6 and on the day itself. Prosecutors successfully argued that these communications were part of a broader conspiracy to disrupt the election certification by organizing and encouraging others to participate in more direct action.

Two men walk in front of a group of masked men with the Washington Monument in the background.
Proud Boys members Joseph Biggs, left, and Ethan Nordean, right with megaphone, walk toward the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021.
AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

Militias respond to convictions – and clemency

Many observers believed successful prosecutions for these charges sent a strong message that violence against a democratically elected government was not acceptable.

Scholars of militia activity like me saw a period of relative quiet through much of Joe Biden’s presidency, which was, in part, likely due to the consequences the Jan. 6 defendants faced.

Some groups, however, continued social media discussions of their beliefs that the 2020 election had been “stolen,” as Trump continues to falsely claim, and which was used as justification by militia members for their attack. Trump himself said publicly he thought the defendants were unjustly persecuted and promised to pardon them if and when he returned to power.

The full effect that the pardons will have on militia actors and related groups in coming years is uncertain: Will the pardons send the message to all Americans that political violence is acceptable, or at least that it can be overlooked or forgiven if the right political figures are in power?The Conversation

Amy Cooter, Director of Research, Academic Development and Innovation at the Center on Terrorism, Extremism and Counterterrorism, Middlebury

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post What is seditious conspiracy, which is among the most serious crimes Trump pardoned? appeared first on theconversation.com

Continue Reading

The Conversation

Ozempic and similar weight loss drugs may lower risk of 42 health conditions, but also pose risks

Published

on

theconversation.com – Ziyad Al-Aly, Clinical Epidemiologist, Washington University in St. Louis – 2025-01-22 14:11:00

The research shows the health effects of these drugs are significant and wide-ranging.
Mario Tama via Getty Images News

Ziyad Al-Aly, Washington University in St. Louis

Several years ago, a little-known drug named Ozempic – previously used only to treat diabetes – emerged as a promising new drug for weight management.

The Food and Drug Administration’s approval of Ozempic in 2021 for weight loss treatment ushered in a new era for the class of drugs called glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists, or GLP-1.

Today, GLP-1 drugs, including Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound, have become household names and key tools in the fight against obesity: 1 in 8 American adults say they have used a GLP-1 drug, and forecasts show that by 2030, 1 in 10 Americans will likely be using these medications.

Now, research from my lab and others suggests that GLP-1 drugs could help treat dozens of other ailments as well, including cognitive issues and addiction problems. However, my colleagues and I also found previously unidentified risks.

I am a physician-scientist and I direct a clinical epidemiology center focused on addressing public health’s most urgent questions. My team works to address critical knowledge gaps about COVID-19, long COVID, influenza, vaccines, effectiveness and risks of commonly used drugs, and more.

On Jan. 20, 2025, my team published a study of more than 2.4 million people that evaluated the risks and benefits of GLP-1 drugs across 175 possible health outcomes. We found that these drugs lowered risks of 42 health outcomes, nearly a quarter of the total that we analyzed. These include neurocognitive disorders such as Alzheimer’s disease and dementia, substance use and addiction disorders, clotting disorders and several other conditions.

Unfortunately, we also found that GLP-1 drugs come with significant side effects and increase the risk of 19 health conditions we studied, such as gastrointestinal issues, kidney stones and acute pancreatitis, in which the pancreas becomes inflamed and dysfunctional.

Initially, GLP-1 drugs were developed to treat diabetes.

Cognitive benefits

One of the most important health benefits we found was that the GLP-1 drugs lowered the risk of neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer’s disease and dementia. These findings align with other research, including evidence from preclinical studies showing that these drugs may reduce inflammation in the brain and enhance the brain’s ability to form and strengthen connections between its cells, improving how they communicate with one another. These effects contribute to mitigating cognitive decline.

Two other key studies have shown that patients treated with a GLP-1 drug for diabetes had a lower risk of dementia.

All of these studies strongly point to a potential therapeutic use of GLP-1 drugs in treatment of the cognitive decline. Ongoing randomized trials – the gold standard for evaluating new uses of drugs – are looking at the effects of GLP-1 drugs in early Alzheimer’s disease, with results expected later in 2025.

Curbing addiction and suicidal ideation

GLP-1 drugs have also demonstrated potential in reducing risks of several substance use disorders such as those involving alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, opioids and stimulants. This may be due to the ability of these drugs to modulate reward pathways, impulse control and inflammatory processes in the brain.

The effectiveness of GLP-1 drugs in curbing addictive behavior may explain their spectacular success in treating obesity, a chronic disease state that many have suggested is indeed a food addiction disorder.

Our study demonstrated a reduced risk of suicidal thoughts and self-harm among people using GLP-1 drugs. This finding is particularly significant given earlier reports of suicidal thoughts and self-injury in people using GLP-1 drugs. In response to those reports, the European Medicines Agency conducted a review of all available data and concluded that there was no evidence of increased risk of suicidality in people using GLP-1 drugs.

Now at least two studies, including our own, show that GLP-1 drugs actually reduce the risk of suicidality.

Other benefits

In addition to the well-documented effects of GLP-1 drugs in reducing risks of adverse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes, our study shows a significant effect in reducing risk of blood clotting as well as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism.

One puzzling finding in our study is the reduced risk of infectious diseases such as pneumonia and sepsis. Our data complements another recent study that came to a similar conclusion showing that GLP-1 drugs reduced risk of cardiovascular death and death due to infectious causes, primarily COVID-19.

This is especially important since COVID-19 is regarded as a significant cardiovascular risk factor. Whether GLP-1 drugs completely offset the increased risk of cardiovascular disease associated with COVID-19 needs to be thoroughly evaluated.

GLP-1 drugs may also be useful in treating fatty liver disease and conditions ranging from asthma to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, sleep apnea, osteoarthritis, depression and eye disorders.

Some doctors are prescribing GLP-1 drugs to help with fertility issues.

Risks and challenges

Despite their broad therapeutic potential, GLP-1 drugs are not without risks.

Gastrointestinal issues, such as nausea, vomiting, constipation and gastroesophageal reflux disease are among the most common adverse effects associated with GLP-1 drugs.

Our study also identified other risks, including low blood pressure, sleep problems, headaches, formation of kidney stones, and gall bladder disease and diseases associated with the bile ducts. We also saw increased risks of drug-induced inflammation of the kidneys and pancreas – both serious conditions that can result in long-term health problems. These findings underscore the importance of careful monitoring in people who are taking GLP-1 medications.

A significant challenge with using GLP-1 drugs is the high rates at which patients stop using them, often driven by their exorbitant cost or the emergence of adverse effects. Discontinuation can lead to rapid weight gain.

That’s a problem, because obesity is a chronic disease. GLP-1 drugs provide effective treatment but do not address the underlying causes of obesity and metabolic dysfunction. As a result, GLP-1 drugs need to be taken long term to sustain their effectiveness and prevent rebound weight gain.

In addition, many questions remain about the long-term effectiveness and risks of these drugs as well as whether there are differences between GLP-1 formulations. Addressing these questions is critical to guide clinical practice.The Conversation

Ziyad Al-Aly, Clinical Epidemiologist, Washington University in St. Louis

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post Ozempic and similar weight loss drugs may lower risk of 42 health conditions, but also pose risks appeared first on theconversation.com

Continue Reading

The Conversation

Attitudes toward Christian nationalism don’t just boil down to views on race, religion and history − research suggests ‘moral foundations’ play a critical role

Published

on

theconversation.com – Kerby Goff, Associate Director of Research at the Boniuk Institute for the Study and Advancement of Religious Tolerance, Rice University – 2025-01-22 07:43:00

Christian nationalism is the belief that the United States was founded to be a Christian nation.
Douglas Sacha/moment via Getty Images

Kerby Goff, Rice University; Eric Silver, Penn State, and John Iceland, Penn State

The concept of Christian nationalism has taken center stage in many Americans’ minds as either the greatest threat to democracy or its only savior.

Political scientist Eric McDaniel defines Christian nationalism as the belief that the United States was founded to be a Christian nation. “In this view,” according to McDaniel, “America can be governed only by Christians, and the country’s mission is directed by a divine hand.” Why does the idea resonate with some but alarm others?

Scholars often portray Christian nationalism as rooted in a deep-seated desire to exclude non-Christians and people of color from American society. Historians point to a persistent link between racism and Christian nationalism among white Americans throughout U.S. history.

White Christians, however, are not the only ones sympathetic to Christian nationalist ideas. Nearly 40% of Black Protestants and 55% of Hispanic Protestants agree with statements such as “being Christian is an important part of being truly American.” Interestingly, over one-third of Muslims agree that the U.S. government should promote Christian moral values but not make it the official religion.

Many who reject Christian nationalism do so because it seems to privilege those white Christian Americans who would like to make conservative Christianity the United States’ official religion. Conversely, supporters argue that the future of the U.S. depends upon loyalty to God and to staying true to the country’s Christian past. They contend that since the nation’s founding, a Christian influence in government and societal institutions such as education and health care has been and remains essential to sustaining religious, political and economic stability.

While racial, religious and political tribalism appear to influence who supports and who rejects Christian nationalism, our own research suggests there are other factors at play, specifically moral differences. We set out to understand the role that different moral values play in shaping support for and opposition to Christian nationalism.

Our study drew on the most influential social science approach to understanding moral values: moral foundations theory.

Moral differences

Moral foundations theory states that humans evolved to possess six primary moral intuitions that shape moral judgments – care for the vulnerable, fairness in how people are treated, loyalty to in-groups, respect for authority, reverence for the sacred, and the safeguarding of individual liberty.

A vast amount of research finds that liberals endorse the first two foundations, care and fairness, but score lower on the rest.

Conservatives, on the other hand, tend to score equally on all six foundations. This suggests their moral judgments often involve balancing a desire to be compassionate with a desire to safeguard the stability of the social order.

Moral foundations theory has been used extensively by social scientists to study hot-button issues such as crime control, policing, vaccine resistance, immigration, same-sex marriage, abortion and more.

For example, research finds that prioritizing care for the vulnerable, which is most pronounced among liberals, is linked to reduced acceptance of police use of force. Conservatives, who also value respect for authority, often favor “law and order” even when it involves use of force.

What our research found

A human hand inserting the Bible into a locked ballot box, placed in front of the American flag.
Researchers found that support for Christian nationalism was strongly associated with the moral foundations of loyalty, sanctity and liberty.
selimaksan/E+ via Getty images.

With moral foundations theory as our guide, we analyzed Christian nationalism using a 2021 national survey of 1,125 U.S. adults conducted by YouGov, a global opinion research organization. We measured respondents’ moral foundations with the moral foundations questionnaire, which has been used extensively by researchers across numerous academic disciplines.

To measure Christian nationalism, we asked respondents whether they agreed with six questions, such as whether the federal government should declare the United States a Christian nation, advocate Christian values, allow prayer in public schools and allow religious symbols in public spaces, to list a few.

What we found surprised us.

Support for Christian nationalism was most strongly linked to the moral foundations of loyalty, sanctity and liberty, but not to the authority foundation. We expected Christian nationalism to appeal to individuals who are enamored of authority, providing a rationale to their support for authoritarian leaders. But in our study, respect for authority did not distinguish those who supported Christian nationalism from those who opposed it.

We also found that support for Christian nationalism was linked to having a weaker fairness foundation. But it was not related to the strength of one’s care foundation.

We conclude that differences over Christian nationalism emerge not because some people care about the harm Christian nationalism could bring to non-Christian Americans, while others don’t. Rather, our findings suggest that those who support Christian nationalism do so because they are more sensitive to violations of loyalty, sanctity and liberty, and less sensitive to violations of fairness.

Our findings also revealed that support for Christian nationalism isn’t merely about racism or being ultrareligious, as critics often suggest. We accounted for endorsements of anti-Black stereotypes and religiosity. Yet, moral foundations remained the best predictors of Christian nationalist beliefs, even after taking into account these critical variables.

2 moral approaches to Christianity in the US

The Christian nationalism scale we and others have used combines several different beliefs about Christianity’s role in society. So we also examined how each of the six items in our Christian nationalism scale related to each of the six moral foundations. We found two important patterns.

A large campaign poster that says, 'Vote The Bible! Take a Stand for Morality.
Researchers found different moral values playing a role in shaping support or opposition for Christian nationalism.
Joe Sohm/Visions of America/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

First, we found that the Christian nationalist desire to bring church and state closer together was most prominent among those with strong loyalty and sanctity foundations and a weak fairness foundation. This means that people who advocate for a Christian state largely do so out of loyalty – specifically, loyalty to God – and out of a desire to adhere to God’s requirements for society, as they understand them.

In line with this, support is also linked to a desire to protect the sanctity of the nation’s Christian heritage. Those who oppose bringing church and state closer together do so out of a sense that such a union would be unfair.

Second, we found that the desire to allow prayer in schools and religious symbols in public spaces was strongest among those with pronounced liberty and sanctity moral foundations. This likely means that people who favor public religious expression, but not a union of church and state, do so because they see individual religious expression as a sacred national ideal.

All in all, our study shows that support for or opposition to Christian nationalism is not merely due to religious, political or racial identities and prejudices, as many believe, but is rather due to entrenched moral differences between the two camps.

Building solidarity through diverse moral concerns

Moral divides are not necessarily impassable. It’s possible that understanding these diverging moral concerns may help build bridges between those who are sympathetic to and those who are skeptical toward Christian nationalism.

America’s founders conceived of fairness and liberty as central to a democratic society. And these values have fueled loyalty to a robust national identity ever since.

Our research suggests that the controversy surrounding Christian nationalism is driven not by a lack of moral concern by sympathizers or critics but by their different moral priorities. We believe that understanding such differences as morally rooted can open the door for mutual understanding and productive debate.The Conversation

Kerby Goff, Associate Director of Research at the Boniuk Institute for the Study and Advancement of Religious Tolerance, Rice University; Eric Silver, Professor of Sociology & Criminology, Penn State, and John Iceland, Professor of Sociology and Demography, Penn State

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Read More

The post Attitudes toward Christian nationalism don’t just boil down to views on race, religion and history − research suggests ‘moral foundations’ play a critical role appeared first on theconversation.com

Continue Reading

Trending