BLACK HOLES

DavidMcC · **#41** by **DavidMcC** » Sep 30, 2014 5:54 pm

CdesignProponentsist wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:You still haven't said what you mean by "singularity". Do you mean a mathematical singularity, or a more physically realistic one?

A physical gravitational singularity.

So, in other words, you're rubbishing Lee Smolin's fecund universes theory, right? I think he only retracted it because he tried to apply Darwinian natural selection inappropriately.

CdesignProponentsist · **#42** by **CdesignProponentsist** » Sep 30, 2014 6:28 pm

I'm familiar with it. Its an interesting idea, but I'm not sure that it says anything about requiring singularities, just a variability in physical laws.

Besides, I'm not rubbishing any of these ideas, they were imagined by people much smarter than I. But I do have a problem with "real" singularities due to the infinities they generate. I'm guessing they can be avoided once we have a better understanding of quantum gravity.

DavidMcC · **#43** by **DavidMcC** » Oct 02, 2014 3:22 pm

CdesignProponentsist wrote:I'm familiar with it. Its an interesting idea, but I'm not sure that it says anything about requiring singularities, just a variability in physical laws.

...

Not on the face of it, but it does when you combine it with a related idea (possibly also his :dunno:

) that black holes are little universes, as "seen from the outside''. The corollary is that universes are black holes, as seen from the inside.

CarlPierce · **#44** by **CarlPierce** » Oct 02, 2014 4:33 pm

Well we don't even know if matter still exhibits the same properties when compressed to a ridiculous degree does it still create gravity in the same way ? That's a big assumption.
So unless you have all the physical facts there is no way to mathematically prove anything.

CdesignProponentsist · **#45** by **CdesignProponentsist** » Oct 02, 2014 4:38 pm

I don't think that hypothesis is suggesting that there is an entire universe inside a singularity.

From what I understand, during the initial collapse, and near, but not at, reaching a singularity, space becomes time-like and time becomes space-like causing it to expand again through conservation of momentum into it's own space. So the two universes are both extendant and connected through a bottleneck, but inside the event horizon.

Essentially you could pass from one space into another. Unfortunately it would entail passing yourself and the entire mass of the star through a proton sized needle eye.

Interestingly, from the perspective of the parent universe the bridge between the two is located in space whereas in the child universe it would be located in time at the moment of the Big Bang.

DavidMcC · **#46** by **DavidMcC** » Oct 02, 2014 4:45 pm

CarlPierce wrote:Well we don't even know if matter still exhibits the same properties when compressed to a ridiculous degree does it still create gravity in the same way ? That's a big assumption.
So unless you have all the physical facts there is no way to mathematically prove anything.

Well, a black hole still exerts a gravitational pull on surrounding matter that is outside the Schwarzchild radius, as if it was a normal massive object. In other words, it is still "creating gravity" in the same way, at least outside the Schwarzchild radius.

Evolving · **#47** by **Evolving** » Oct 02, 2014 5:38 pm

It's "Schwarzschild", by the way: Schwarz-schild, black shield.

Like Roth-schild: red shield.

Neither has anything to do with children!

DavidMcC · **#48** by **DavidMcC** » Oct 02, 2014 6:00 pm

Evolving wrote:It's "Schwarzschild", by the way: Schwarz-schild, black shield.
...

Yeah, sorry, Evolving. My bad. :oops:

Evolving · **#49** by **Evolving** » Oct 02, 2014 6:30 pm

kennyc · **#50** by **kennyc** » Oct 28, 2014 12:10 pm

American Physicist Claims That Black Holes Do Not Exist and Are Mathematically Impossible

.....Her research proposes a potential resolution of the “black hole information loss paradox,” which results from a conflict between Einstein’s general theory of relativity, which suggests that physical information can disappear in a black hole forever, and quantum mechanics, which states that no “information” can ever be permanently lost in the universe since it is encoded in its wave function until the time that this function collapses.
....

http://www.learning-mind.com/american-p ... mpossible/

hackenslash · **#51** by **hackenslash** » Oct 28, 2014 12:49 pm

We already have a thread on this

Also, the article is wrong straight out of the gate:

The term “black hole” refers to regions in space formed when a star dies and collapses under the pressure of its own gravity to a single point in space called a singularity.

Bzzzzz. Thank you for playing. The term 'black hole' refers to any body whose mass is entirely contained within its Schwarzschild radius. The singularity is a) not necessary and b) hugely problematic (QM says no).

I should also point out that this has been subjected to a coprolitic barrage from an elevated position by a physicist she cites 10 times in her paper.

Pulsar · **#52** by **Pulsar** » Oct 28, 2014 12:50 pm

First of all, we already have a thread on that: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/physics/black-holes-t45625.html
A thread in which you posted, btw.

And second, why are you linking to a blog post from are fucking psychology student?

Edit: scooped by the Hack...

campermon · **#53** by **campermon** » Oct 28, 2014 12:56 pm

campermon wrote:

!
GENERAL MODNOTE
Just energizing the jump gates to merge topics. Please engage inertial dampeners and extinguish any cigarettes.

Phew! That always gives me the willies!

:cheers:

hackenslash · **#54** by **hackenslash** » Oct 28, 2014 12:57 pm

Yes, but your name is not important...

kennyc · **#55** by **kennyc** » Oct 28, 2014 12:57 pm

hackenslash wrote:We already have a thread on this

.....

Thanks for merging Mr. Mod.

The interesting part to me is the information aspect. So there! Perhaps I should have posted in "Brain, Mind, Consciousness"

kennyc · **#56** by **kennyc** » Oct 28, 2014 12:58 pm

Pulsar wrote:First of all, we already have a thread on that: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/physics/black-holes-t45625.html
A thread in which you posted, btw.

And second, why are you linking to a blog post from are fucking psychology student?

Edit: scooped by the Hack...

It's all about consciousness, you know.... :eh:

kennyc · **#57** by **kennyc** » Oct 28, 2014 12:59 pm

hackenslash wrote:Yes, but your name is not important...

Nor his nether-regions.....except maybe to the one in the avatar blowing in his ear...

campermon · **#58** by **campermon** » Oct 28, 2014 1:03 pm

kennyc wrote:
Pulsar wrote:First of all, we already have a thread on that: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/physics/black-holes-t45625.html
A thread in which you posted, btw.

And second, why are you linking to a blog post from are fucking psychology student?

Edit: scooped by the Hack...

It's all about consciousness, you know....

You mentioned the 'c' word in physics :nono:

That's it, pack your bags - you're banned!

:grin:

campermon · **#59** by **campermon** » Oct 28, 2014 1:04 pm

kennyc wrote:
hackenslash wrote:Yes, but your name is not important...

Nor his nether-regions.....except maybe to the one in the avatar blowing in his ear...

kennyc · **#60** by **kennyc** » Oct 28, 2014 1:11 pm

campermon wrote:
kennyc wrote:
Pulsar wrote:First of all, we already have a thread on that: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/physics/black-holes-t45625.html
A thread in which you posted, btw.

And second, why are you linking to a blog post from are fucking psychology student?

Edit: scooped by the Hack...

It's all about consciousness, you know....

You mentioned the 'c' word in physics

That's it, pack your bags - you're banned!

Well at least I didn't say the "P" word - Philosophy.....oh Sh*T....

BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: BLACK HOLES

Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Re: Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Re: Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Re: Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Re: Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Re: BLACK HOLES

Re: Black Holes are Impossible according to one scientist

Who is online