if a black hole ejects mass and has magnetic poles then how is it stated a black hole is infinite?
344596
Wow, that is a very good and tricky question. If you really want to know please send me an e-mail and I will tell you the most recent answer proposed by the science community.
440519
I believe that everything (not even light can escape; that's how strong the gravity of a black hole is) that is sucked into a black hole turns into "singularity" which has an unimaginable mass.
473814
General relativity (as well as most other metric theories of gravity) not only says that black holes can exist, but in fact predicts that they will be formed in nature whenever a sufficient amount of mass gets packed in a given region of space, through a process called gravitational collapse. For example, if you compressed the Sun to a radius of three kilometers, about four millionths of its present size, it would become a black hole. As the mass inside the given region of space increases, its gravity becomes stronger — or, in the language of relativity, the space around it becomes increasingly deformed. Eventually gravity gets so strong that nothing can escape, an event horizon is formed, and matter and energy must inevitably collapse into a singularity.
790112
A black hole is an object predicted by general relativity with a gravitational field so strong that nothing can escape it — not even light.\n\nA black hole is defined to be a region of space-time where escape to the outside universe is impossible. The boundary of this region is a surface called the event horizon. This surface is not physical, just an imaginary boundary. Nothing can move from inside the event horizon to the outside, even briefly.\n\nThe existence of black holes in the universe is well supported by astronomical observation, particularly from studying X-ray emission from X-ray binaries and active galactic nuclei. It has also been hypothesized that black holes radiate energy due to quantum mechanical effects known as Hawking radiation. \n\nHistory\n\nThe concept of a body so massive that even light could not escape was put forward by the English geologist John Michell in a 1784 paper sent to the Royal Society. At that time, the Newtonian theory of gravity and the concept of escape velocity were well known. Michell computed that a body with 500 times the radius of the Sun and of the same density would have, at its surface, an escape velocity equal to the speed of light, and therefore would be invisible. In his words:
474017
An event horizon is the theoretical visible edge of a black hole.  A black hole is a mass so dense that its gravity will allow nothing to escape, not even an object travelling at the speed of light, not even light itself.  An event horizon is the boundary of a black hole at which light can still escape.  Therefore we could see everything that happens up to an event horizon, in theory.  Beyond this boundary, light is drawn back into the super-dense mass and nothing can be seen.
176071
What lies at the exact center of black holes is not known. Relativity equations point to the center of a black hole being what's called a "singularity," but that would be a point of zero volume containing infinite mass. Obviously impossible. As things now stand, our laws of physics simply do not apply to what the center of a black hole might be.
177835
The physics within a black hole have not yet been defined.\nHowever, Stephen Hawking won a Nobel Prize for discovering\nthat the fringe of a black hole evaporates. Thus, a black hole does not grow forever, it actually will disappear over billions and billions of years.
1142505
The singularity itself has zero size. But the conventional "measurement" of a black hole is its "Schwarzchild radius", which is the distance from the singularity at which the escape velocity is equal to the speed of light. Once anything (even light!) falls within the Schwarzchild radius, it cannot escape. The size of the Schwarzchild radius depends on the mass of the black hole.
453304
There are many thoeries to how this process works...we all know that black holes are the decayed from of a supermassive star.  Technically the universe would have to all collapse before it could expand...like a star it has massivle amouts of atomic energy, and non atomic...al matter was inside this small, infinitely dense space.  Then, the big bang appeared and everything expaned.  My personal theory or space time is that there is no limate to space therefore there is no limit in time...there is no beginning or end to either becaus they are related to each other and mush remain at a simimal or equal constant.  Thus everything within time has a finite length.  The events in time will end, but not time itself.  There is a lot to all of these theories.  Anyways the point to this is that there is a center to the universe but not space.  Anything that is a mass has some ammount of gravity...some, though have more energy than others.  This is what makes a black hole.  the things in a black hole are packed into an infinitely small space.  Then hydrogen plasma shoots out of some supermassive blackholes.  this energy still remains a mysterty to me on how it can escape the black hole, almost like the big bang, but more controlled.  there WAS a mass at the center of everything, but how that works still is a mystery.  I think that there were once supersupermassive aters where the center of our calaxy is today.  this explain the expansion of out galaxy and the surrounding stars and such.  So there was once a biis mass that keeps dividing till it smaller.  Sadly at the end of our universe, everything will once again be absorbed.  That last part is my thoery.  But can we survive?  Well I hope I answered you're question thurough enough.  My hands are kinda tired.\n\nBTW...does the stuff I said too confusing or does it work..I'm not exaclty the sharpest when it comes to these things but I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about?
918848
According to general relativity, the matter inside a black hole collapses to a single point: a "singularity".  At this point, the mass density (ρ = m/V) is undefined (because the volume of a single point is zero). \nWe have a lot to learn about extreme cases such as this.
1038709
First, a black hole is neither black nor a hole as we commonly think of them.  But we'll get back to that.  Black holes were first theorized by Karl Schwarzchild in 1916.  He demonstrated that were a star to collapse under its own gravity to less than a certian radius, then it would cease emitting any radiation, hence the "black" part.  This particular aspect was addressed by Stephen Hawking in 1976.  He theorized that after the initial formation of the singularity (what used to be the star) and it's black hole, that the hole would then start to lose mass by emission of radiation, now known as Hawking radiation.  Since it does emit some form of radiation, we can't strictly call it black, but, let's face it, the name has stuck.  \n\nOk, now that brings us to the hole part.  One other outcome of Schwarzchild's work was that of the infinite solution.  Under certain conditions (to lengthly to go through here, but please use the references) there exists a solution to the Einstein Field Equations where the curvature of the system becomes infinite.  \n\nThis is where conventional modes of speech break down.  Ok, a hole to us is a pit, a dug out area.  This is easy to visualize.  A black hole is not like this.  If you were to travel through space and happen across a black hole (Let's assume that you could see it), it wouldn't appear like a pit that things can fall into.  Instead, the fabric of space would seem to distort; everything would get streched off into infinity and compressed into a point.  (I'll apologize about the bad imagery now.)  \n\nThis is a hard concept for us 4-D beings.  It's a worthy topic of study, just mind-bending.
849237
There's most likely not an 'other side'.  A black hole is a bunch of matter that's been compressed down into a singularity, or an extremely dense spot.  More stuff falling into the hole isn't going anywhere; it's just contributing to the density of the black hole itself.
242119
First, you it is better to say that the two black holes have the same mass. in such case (or in other cases also) they will begin to gravitate each other by the power of gravity, because according to Isaac Newton any mass is affected by any other mass in the universe.\nwhen they gravitate each other, they begin to orbit each other in a complex way untill they merge with each other forming a new black hole with an event horizon more then the combined primitive two (according to Stephen Hawking).
828617
Although it's not an object in the usual sense, since it is of infinite mass and zero volume, the actual answer is a "singularity"----ONE WORD. This is what is found at the center of a black hole (which is probably the answer most people will give, bur the black hole "contains" the singularity, which is hence more densely compressed.
1117199
Not quite true; while the gravitational field is so immense within the event horizon of a black hole that even light cannot escape it, two different phenomena occur right at the event horizon which provide astronomers with secondary evidence of their presence.  Firstly, all the matter a black hole consumes becomes accelerated by its gravitational pull.  If the matter is a charged particle, acclerating it creates a changing electric and magnetic field around it, which propagates as electromagnetic radiation -- basically light.  Up until the point where it crosses the event horizon, it continues to emit EM radiation which may be detectable from Earth (if enough particles are accelerated at once)  Secondly, there's "Hawking radiation:" the intense curvature of space-time at the event horizon of a black hole causes virtual particles to pop into existence -- a pair, actually, one particle and it's corresponding antiparticle (being opposites, they cancel each other out energy-wise and the universe is still balanced)  In the rest of the universe, when a virtual particle pair appears, the two opposite charges annihilate one another in a (tiny) flash of light, but at the event horizon, there's a good chance that one of the two gets sucked into the black hole while the other goes zinging off in the opposite direction, effectively adding to the mass of the universe.  So a stream of subatomic particles can also sometimes be detected from a black hole.\n\nAlso, because black holes ARE such a big gravity well, they affect stars more distant from us than the black hole is by allowing us to see them via gravitational lensing -- the gravity is enough to bend light from stars that are beyond it enough so that we can see them, but there is a detectable distortion to the image that astronomers can use to determine where the mass causing the lensing is located, and based on what we know of the stars beyond it, can calculate its mass... and if the number they get is huge like a red giant star yet it doesn't glow, that's another good indicator of a black hole in the neighborhood.
1019775
LAYMAN'S THEORY\n\nBlack holes are objects so massive and compact that no physical body or signal—not even light—can escape from their gravitational pull once it has crossed the so-called "event horizon" around the black hole (for a black hole of the mass of our sun the event horizon would have a radius of just 3 km, hence black holes are comparably small objects in astronomical terms). Besides the frequent stellar mass black holes (which are thought to be generated at the death of stars about 10 times or more massive than our sun) there is a second class of black holes, which reside in the centers of almost all galaxies and are a million to billion times as massive as our sun. Such so-called supermassive black holes are thought to be the central engine of "Quasars," the most distant and luminous objects known in the universe. Their electromagnetic emission is thought to arise when gas heats up to temperatures of million of degrees before falling beyond the event horizon of a supermassive black hole. In order to find evidence for the existence of such objects, one has to show that so much matter is concentrated in such a small volume that all alternatives to black hole can be excluded—e.g., dense clusters of dark astrophysical bodies such as planets, neutron stars, etc. This is a difficult task in extragalactic systems because of their incredibly large distance. The center of our home galaxy, the Milky Way, however, is about 100 times closer than our next major neighbour galaxy, the Andromeda galaxy. Therefore the undertaking of finding strong direct evidence for the existence of supermassive black holes is most easily done in the Milky Way. For probing the gravitational field at the center of the Milky Way one can use stars as test particles. Imagine the following scenario: If our sun did not give off any light, we would still know of its existence because the gravitational pull of the Sun (along with the angular momentum of the Earth) makes our home planet move around it once a year. In a similar way we have observed the movements of stars close to the supposed supermassive black hole, called Sagittarius A*, in the center of our Milky Way for over a decade. A star was found that moves around Sagittarius A* once every 15 years. By inferring the properties of its orbit with the help of Kepler's laws it was straightforward to show that the (dark) object that forces the star onto its orbit must have about 3.5 million times as much mass as our sun. Furthermore, this mass must be concentrated into a volume just about three times as large as our solar system. Since there is no other known physical object with these properties that can be stable over a significant length of time (compared to the lifetime of our galaxy of about 10 billion years) we concluded that the Sagittarius A* is indeed a supermassive black hole.
35446
a black hole is an area of space-time with a gravitational field so intense that its escape velocity is equal to or exceeds the speed of light.