I want to hear peoples theorys about Black Holes. please read.

[Harry Costas]

I have tried and tried unable to load the links,,,,,,,,darn darn

It must be my comp with its security thing

 

Darn Darn,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[HIENVN]

greetings my fellow humans.. My name is Margaret D. Ward. im a young genius also. i am trying to hear more of differant theorys about black holes. please reply with information that your "believe" is valid. thank you, please reply.:hihi:

 

According to the specialists of NASA (National Aeronautic & Space Administration,) all the recent theories “make fantastic predictions that seem hard to believe.” In my opinion, you should consult Einstein' Unified field theory in 1920. Although this theory was rejected by the scientists of 20th century, but it still have an ability to develope in 21st century and will be explain some secrects of the universe such as Black Holes, Dark Energy...

[WillieB]

Well I guess just about all physics enthusiasts have a theory or at least an idea about how black holes are formulated and what effect they have on the volume of space in which they reside. So there is no reason why I shouldn't post my own thinking on the matter.

 

Black holes are said to be composed of a concentration of matter so dense as to even to prevent light from escaping their gravitational attraction. That, in itself, brings up an interesting question. If a photon of light possesses no mass why, except for its propensity to follow the lines created by the curvature of space, is it affected by gravity at all? To delve into that let's just conjecture as to what photons, and all leptons, are composed of. All leptons must be composed of something. Let's just say that they are made up of the finest "grains" of the universe. These grains are so constituted so that, when they meet one another, they mutually exert strong accelerations upon one another in opposite directions thereby driving themselves through space. When they pass through a mass of matter their forward progress is slowed which actually increases their accelerative power in the direction opposite to their own vector. As the mass grows denser the accelerative power towards its center becomes stronger (but it never reaches an infinitely strong gravitational pull). However there is a catch 22 in this scenario. At some point the mass of matter and its density rises to the point that it becomes completely impenetrable to these "grains" of the universe. What happens then?

 

As, in their encounters, our "grains" impose accelerations on a vector which is exactly opposite to their own, the incoming grains will find themselves not encountering any of their compatriots from a vector parallel to the route toward our "black hole" and thus they will be diverted from that path and will never even impact on the black hole but will inexonerably steered on a path around it. At that point and only then will a true black hole be complete.

 

WillieB

[Deepak Modak]

Stephen Hawking has written a lot about black holes.

[yourstruly]

greetings my fellow humans.. My name is Margaret D. Ward. im a young genius also. i am trying to hear more of differant theorys about black holes. please reply with information that your "believe" is valid. thank you, please reply.:thumbs_up

part 1: the beginningless and the mechanism of reality

for an incomprehensible moment nothing was

(the word nothing, in the way it is being used here, represents the end of language)

however, it is not possible to be nothing

it doesn't make sense in language to say " i am going to be nothing "

the word being and the word nothing are nonsensical when used in the way given in the example in the line above

they exclude each other

(are mutually exclusive)

it is not possible to be and not be at the same time

not even reality can pull off that trick

as it is in our language so it is in reality

the consequence of zero as the absolute is that, instantly, everything that can exist materialized

all that came into existence in that moment of immediacy following the incomprehensible beginningless gained its existence as a result of being the consequence of the absolute of nothing

for it all to make perfect sense all we have to say now is that there is a continual regeneration of reality via the mechanism of the absolute reaffirming its character as the beginningless and endless and giving rise to, and superimposing itself over, all that can be in an infinitely fast manner

and so, as quickly as everything that can exist materializes it dematerializes

and then again, an infinitely small consideration of anything that the mind can dwell upon reoccurred

and this is the mechanism of reality

being and not being happening infinitely quickly

it has been that way for eternity past and it will be the same for all of eternity

this way of thinking about how things are is supported by bell's theorem of interconnectedness which proves that all of reality is connected faster than the speed of light

now we can speculate...

it currently makes most sense to think that all that can be came into being in a moment

that the moment be thought of as being infinite in every respect

infinitely dense, infinitely small, infinite variation of non symmetrical shapes, infinite variation of symmetrical shapes, infinite energy, infinitely short in duration, infinite numbers, infinite happiness, infinite sadness...

or

that everything that can be exists in an infinitely small package and that there infinite packages

each package is adjoined to its surrounding packages

each individual package is triangular in shape which is part of a structure that extends throughout infinite dimensions

the thought that the potential for all things that can exist can be contained in an infinitely small consideration of time certainly doesn't gel with our experience of reality

or...

be mindful here

in trying to explain reality all we can ever have is a purely theoretical model

neils bohr was emphatic on this point... "there is no quantum world. there is only an abstract mathematical description"

he would have been pleased with the implications thrown up by bell's theorem

the quantum world is totally alien to the world we experience

bear this in mind and be ready to junk any idea that occurs to you

many physicists are convinced that string theory, which falls into this category, is the way things really are

hope you find this intriquing

if so there's more at... http://www.endic.at

there's an entry on black holes under "B" in the index table

yours truly

Edited August 16, 2010 by yourstruly
Fitting it to page

[SpaceTravellor]

THE CYCLICAL UNIVERSE.

We need to have a whole new cosmology in order to understand the Universe.

Maybe it all is much more simple than we are used to be told by the modern cosmologists?

 

1. The Universe is.

2. In the whole Universe there is 2 basic forces creating in-folding and outfolding movements.

3. Electric forces creates magnetic fields in the cosmic gas and dust.

4. Magnetic fields assembles this gas and dust = "gravity".

5. The magnetic fields connects gas and dust into larger lumps of gas and dust.

6. The connection of gas and dust "melts" together until the critical point.

7. When this critical point is reached, larger spheres of gas = stars, and dust = planets and so on, is spread out again = "antigravity" via the swirling movement in the magnetic field.

 

This cyclical explanation needs no "anti" this or that in order to explain the movements in the whole Universe. "Gravity" goes both ways. The connection and distribution of gas and matter is just an issue of looking at the cosmic movents in a very natural way.

 

My Cosmological Site

My Cosmological site

My Mytho-Cosmological site

 

Ivar Nielsen

Natural Philosopher

[Natural]

Well If gravity is where matter is and gravity is considered that it is mass and the total mass of a large object is not what determines the force of which it applies to an object in its vicinity but rather the density of the mass which creates the effect of gravity and if density is considered the displacement of the medium of which electromagnetic energy travels through -space- then as matter collapses it acts in a way of a sponge that squishes space out of it. The greater the density, density which I consider the percentage of space to matter ratio in a given volume, the greater the force of gravity becomes. So as an object such as a dieing sun begins to collapse the space is displaced at a higher and higher percentage as the density increases, and in return, begins to increase the effect of gravity more and more. Molecular structure is overpowered and matter begins to become very close. It may come so incredibly close that all space is squished from this object and all matter has unified. Once unified it is no longer the matter we know and understand. Incapable of creating electromagnetic energy, or even kinetic heat. It may become a giant or respectively, small billiard ball like object that is pure gravity or rather though of as, pure density. Pure density which creates the singularity effect of similar considerations. So it either becomes a pure displacement of space field fabric or a pure collection of space fabric. The unified matter feeds on energy-matter. This pure density may be the maximum of gravities force and proportional to its volume. How it creates new matter for new stars and planets... I don't know but my wild idea considers that pure density requires a pure opposite, a dichotomy system? is that the right word? The same force in as the same force out. Spitting out energy/fundamental matter for the beginning of new matter through the points of least resistance created from a high velocity rotation at the equal force and velocity capability that pulls inwards. Its just a wild idea and not a theory but somewhat logical though process of mine. It is a bit a off the top of my head explanation to a bunch of ideas.

 

I really like Arkain's ideas. :)

Especially because all of these ideas correspond to what we now know about black holes without contradicting any of the observations. (even 5 years later) ;)

And every time I hear a supposedly intelligent person say "there is nothing at the center of a black hole" it turns my stomach. No true scientist would talk about the existence of "nothing". (Kip Thorn said that) Or worse yet a hole in "nothing". :P

And the only problem that I have with Arkain's ideas are the same problem that I have with one of the basic fundamentals cosmology. (forgive me great and powerful Einstein... ) And that is that space has a "fabric". Space is not an object, it is an area. Therefore you can not tear a "hole" in an area. Space has objects in it but is not composed of objects. (the objects are composed of themselves) Only particles (or energy waves) can be effected by forces through interaction with those forces. Forces can not act upon nothing. Which means that there must be an object at the center of a black hole whether we know what it is or not. And a black hole does not have an "other side" because it is not a two dimensional object. Therefore it does not lead anywhere except to the center. And while I'm on this rant let me go a step further and say that it is impossible to have more than 3 spacial dimensions because those three are infinite and would therefore automatically incorporate any other supposed dimension into one of the three. (which I theorize are actually more like one spherical dimension radiating in all "directions" since "direction" is only applicable to one observer... but that's another story) ;)

But I really like the ideas of a point of "pure displacement" and the idea of not allowing electromagnetic activity because of the condensed nature of matter at that point. (what happens when there is not room for a quark to vibrate?) And since both of these thought processes go beyond our knowledge of what we know as matter. (and the properties thereof) It will take a new definition of those properties before we will be able to describe exactly what is at the center of a black hole.

Great ideas Arkain!

B)

[C. michael Turner]

I believe the current theory regarding black holes is that they exist.

Imagine that all matter is bound as compressed gravitational wave, space itself. As liquid water could be thought as condensed water vapor, all matter and energy could be thought as condensed space. A black hole would be the most condensed space. And as a puddle of water evaporates creating water vapor, all matter, or black holes evaporate creating space itself, via release of the gravitational wave. Time, space, and gravity are the actions if this process.

[belovelife]

Ok, I envision a black hole like a firecracker that spins and shoots sparks

where active galactic nuclei emitt hydrogen almost constantly, but as al large

reaction of impetali ( matter/anti-matter constantly anihilating and creating)

so when enought electromagnetic energy reaches the agn, it shoots sparks

each spark the beginning of ansolar system

where the intial ignition of the spark starts the star, the initial blast

throws matter like a cloud that will gravitationally attract and form planets

 

now the black hole itself would have layers, inner core probly pure ether

not going throgh the impetali process

the outer layers are going throught the impetali process which gives

the region a massive positive charge

as electromagnetic energy is absorbed by the black hole,

there is a grasp for it by all the impetali reactions going on

when enough energy is present in a given area

atomic forces begin, and stars bounce out of the black hole

( like pos-pos magnets, or simpler; as the electron shell is surrounding

a given amount of impetali, and a shell is present in the black hole,

the forces of gravity eventually become less that the repultion effect of

stable atomic shells, )

 

then we have the disc shape of any given galaxy

 

where the effect of a black hole may be # 4 in a sequence

#1- gravity well: created by impetali reaction

#2- magnetism: varying intensities resonated through the atomic spectrum

#3- space-time bend: heavily dense objects ( pulsar- mushroom shape)(added vector through space)

#4- black hole : ¿ creates disc shape orginazation of matter ?

[belovelife]

Take sunspots for instance

the question is what part of the electromagnetic spectrum eminates from the center

 

from visible light it is black,

going on this data one could surmise that it is a pocket of impetali on the surface

gatherin ems therfore forming atomic matter

do solar flares originate at a sunspot

if so then it would be microcosmal to the macrocosmal event At a black hole

[belovelife]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunspot?wasRedirected=true

 

this would describe ( in terms of the impetali concept based black hole)

an event where the presence of ems out weighs the lack of ems

so the potental detection of heat is the ems that is emminated from the event

where in a black hole as a total, ems would be undetectable as a whole

but visible in the surrounding elements that are minuely ejected

and further detectable in " star nurseries"

[HydrogenBond]

Consider two situations. The first is a large spherical volume of space, the diameter of a solar system, containing rarefied matter. The second is neutron density, where all the rarified matter has been compressed into a small zone of neutron density of relativistic (GR) size.

 

The rarified matter is thin, so any space-time contraction is minimal. The neutron density, on the other hand, has significant space-time contraction. Which of the two equal masses will have a larger gravitational impact at longer distances?

 

One answer is, since the mass is the same, both will be the same. However, the space-time contraction reference of the neutron density sees farther due to space-time contraction. If the laws of gravity apply in his reference, when he fills in his perceived distance into the gravity equations, his distance is closer so he calculates stronger attraction.

 

If we go to a black hole, its singular reference means it can see to infinity. When it plugs numbers into the physics equations, it uses distance=0, so super-gravity is everywhere. It sees gravity way ahead of the expanding universe all the way to infinity.

 

The question becomes, which is moving faster. The expansion of the universal space-time in rarefied space, or the, sum of all the GR contraction references? The latter is the summation of the contracted matter, if we plug the distance seen, within their reference, into the gravity equations? That is a good project for someone wanting to make a name.