| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
17 Oct 2005 07:03:08 PM |
| Object: |
The Myth of Black Holes |
As Stephen Hawking has pointed out: General Relativity predicts its own
downfall by predicting singularities.
There is an extreme to gravity but it doesn't include a black hole.
They're better thought of as Dark Holes.
The theory of General Relativity predicts another infinity that Hawking
has overlooked. Namely the infinite Eintein shift to light emitted at
the surface.
Energyless light predicted?
Dead light?
PoppyCock.
The infinite gravitational redshift to light emitted at the event
horizon of any black hole is all the theoretical evidence needed to
falsify General Relativity in the case of its extreme; the so called
"black holes."
Instead the redshift to light must remain finite; effectively removing
the theoretical boundaries to light. Light cannot be brought to rest.
It's the law.
The finite gravitational redshift leaves light coming out of a dark
hole only dimmer at emission. That's all there is to the extreme of
gravity.
Cheers. -- Light Falls --
.
|
|
| User: "Bilge" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
18 Oct 2005 03:02:23 AM |
|
|
macromitch@internetCDS.com:
As Stephen Hawking has pointed out: General Relativity predicts its own
downfall by predicting singularities.
As everyone has pointed out, you've predicted you'll always be
an idiot by your previous posts.
There is an extreme to gravity but it doesn't include a black hole.
They're better thought of as Dark Holes.
The theory of General Relativity predicts another infinity that Hawking
has overlooked. Namely the infinite Eintein shift to light emitted at
the surface.
Energyless light predicted?
Dead light?
PoppyCock.
The infinite gravitational redshift to light emitted at the event
horizon of any black hole is all the theoretical evidence needed to
falsify General Relativity in the case of its extreme; the so called
"black holes."
Instead the redshift to light must remain finite; effectively removing
the theoretical boundaries to light. Light cannot be brought to rest.
It's the law.
The finite gravitational redshift leaves light coming out of a dark
hole only dimmer at emission. That's all there is to the extreme of
gravity.
Cheers. -- Light Falls --
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tice with a J" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
17 Oct 2005 07:25:19 PM |
|
|
I've read "The Universe in a Nutshell" and a few of Hawking's essays,
and he doesn't cite black holes as the downfall of GR. He does theorize
that they aren't completely black, but that involves quantum, so that's
a story for another time.
As for the energyless light, it's not poppycock. Rather, it's a very
good description of what happens in a black hole. You may doubt that
matter can collapse into a singularity because it just can't get that
dense, which is a legitimate objection that hasn't yet received a
definite yes or no, but to doubt the black hole theory because of its
redshift predictions is not legitimate.
Black holes don't bring light to rest - like you said, nothing can.
They merely sap it off all its energy. The light waves could be said to
continue on after being sapped, but they would be completely flattened,
and not waves at all.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BernardZ" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
18 Oct 2005 08:07:37 AM |
|
|
In article <1129595119.560624.94180@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>,
lodo.bear@gmail.com says...
You may doubt that
matter can collapse into a singularity because it just can't get that
dense, which is a legitimate objection that hasn't yet received a
definite yes or no,
Could you please explain further?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orion" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
18 Oct 2005 08:41:12 AM |
|
|
The fatal error in relativistic physics is perhaps the assumption that
all motion is relative.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
17 Oct 2005 07:48:04 PM |
|
|
You've missed the point tice. It doesn't matter what
Hawking has said: Energyless light *is* predicted.
You can't get around it; although I see you've tried!!!
No black holes. They're a myth.
But there are Dark Holes where the redshift
to light is finite.
I am not saying we are not seeing the extreme
of gravity; but it aint a "black" hole.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Igor" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
17 Oct 2005 07:57:42 PM |
|
|
wrote:
You've missed the point tice. It doesn't matter what
Hawking has said: Energyless light *is* predicted.
You can't get around it; although I see you've tried!!!
No black holes. They're a myth.
But there are Dark Holes where the redshift
to light is finite.
I am not saying we are not seeing the extreme
of gravity; but it aint a "black" hole.
You're a broken record that should actually learn something about the
subject before you attempt to critique it. For the umpteenth time, you
need to look up "Kruskal Coordinates". But then again don't. We all
know you're much happier complaining and wallowing in your own
ignorance.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tice with a J" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
17 Oct 2005 08:08:37 PM |
|
|
I did not try to get around. The black hole theory does, as you said,
predict this energy-less light. I was saying that that's no reason to
throw out black holes.
We already know that reality is filled with weird things, like platypi
and general relativity, so I wouldn't throw out black holes just yet.
A thought: Hawking predicted the existence of emissions from a black
hole, as a result of the uncertainty principle. It may turn out that
when we try to observe Hawking radiation, it proves to be no more than
the uber-red shifted light you predicted, and black holes are merely
very dark. I can't say you're wrong or I'm wrong until we have
experimental results to back us up. What I can say is that you
shouldn't throw out the black hole theory on principle, just because
its predictions are too weird.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: The Myth of Black Holes |
17 Oct 2005 09:16:42 PM |
|
|
Tice with a J wrote:
I did not try to get around. The black hole theory does, as you said,
predict this energy-less light. I was saying that that's no reason to
throw out black holes.
The failure of theory is the "very"
reason to throw it out tice.
Stop packin' that Baloney!!!
We already know that reality is filled with weird things, like platypi
and general relativity, so I wouldn't throw out black holes just yet.
A thought: Hawking predicted the existence of emissions from a black
hole, as a result of the uncertainty principle. It may turn out that
when we try to observe Hawking radiation, it proves to be no more than
the uber-red shifted light you predicted, and black holes are merely
very dark. I can't say you're wrong or I'm wrong until we have
experimental results to back us up. What I can say is that you
shouldn't throw out the black hole theory on principle, just because
its predictions are too weird.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
