do black holes exist, or do scientists have it wrong?

[alphaparticle]

If, as believed light velocity is insufficient to escape a black hole, then at some point the velocity of light within that black hole = 0. Plug THAT value for 'c' into Einstein's equation and 'prove' that infinity = 0!

No. The speed of light is still c in a black hole. It is that local spacetime itself is so warped that light itself can't escape the region.

[Guest]

If, as believed light velocity is insufficient to escape a black hole, then at some point the velocity of light within that black hole = 0. Plug THAT value for 'c' into Einstein's equation and 'prove' that infinity = 0!

 

No. The speed of light is still c in a black hole. It is that local spacetime itself is so warped that light itself can't escape the region.

 

~

 

As For Black Holes

 

Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:

 

Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. Isaiah 55:6-7

 

And/Or The Ever Decreasing Dark Matter,

 

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

 

For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9

 

When Things Just Won't Add Up

 

He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart,

 

so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end. Ecclesiastes 3:11

 

Punt~!

 

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

 

Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

 

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

 

And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 2 Timothy 4:1-4

 

....Astrophysicist Dr Prajwal Kafle, from The University of Western Australia node of the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, said we have known for a while that most of the Universe is hidden.

 

"Stars, dust, you and me, all the things that we see, only make up about 4 per cent of the entire Universe," he said.

"About 25 per cent is dark matter and the rest is dark energy."....

 

 ...."The current idea of galaxy formation and evolution, called the Lambda Cold Dark Matter theory, predicts that there should be a handful of big satellite galaxies around the Milky Way that are visible with the naked eye, but we don't see that," Dr Kafle said. http://phys.org/news/2014-10-dark-thought-scientists.html#jCp

 

 

[alphaparticle]

 

If, as believed light velocity is insufficient to escape a black hole, then at some point the velocity of light within that black hole = 0. Plug THAT value for 'c' into Einstein's equation and 'prove' that infinity = 0!

 

No. The speed of light is still c in a black hole. It is that local spacetime itself is so warped that light itself can't escape the region.

 

~

 

As For Black Holes

 

lol nice

[Enoch2021]

 

Last year I got into the comedy series "The Big Bang Theory", and one of the main characters was working on String Theory. I'm no physicist, astro or otherwise, so I didn't know what String theory is. I set out to learn. In my studies I came upon the problem of Black Holes. Since I'm not out to prove anything, one fact became apparent rather quickly. We can never prove the existence of Black Holes empirically. That is to say, while we proved the moon is real by going there, we can never do this with Black Holes. We can't even send a probe near a Black Hole because if it is real, the probe's signal's will be sucked into the Black Hole long before it gets close enough to take pictures. The probe will simply be declared as Lost, and we will never be certain why.

For those of you who don't know, if Black Holes are real, they are thought to have such strong gravitational fields that even light can't escape them. We used to think they are real, and we also thought they were what Star Trek calls a wormhole. That is a tunnel type short cut to another part of the cosmos.

So the fact is, they cannot be proven to exist. Now if only astrophysicists could admit this, they'd save themselves much agony. It seems lately that Black Holes are threatening to change all we now know about physics. I say this is ludicrous. What we already know is real. It lead to the development of atomic power, spacecraft that went to the moon and beyond. On a micro level, our knowledge of physics has lead to computers, smart phones, and even nanotechnology. I see no reason to discard our current knowledge of physics because theoretical Black Holes don't fit. At the end of the day, Black Holes are nothing but theories. Physicists should disregard them and move on. There are much more important things for physicists to work on.

 

 

the reason there are empirical reasons to think black holes exist is because you can observe the gravitational effects of one astronomical object on another and from that infer the masses of these objects. Likewise, you can see what sort of light, whether visible or not, objects emit. So, if you have some object with mass in a certain range that doesn't seem to be emitting any sort of light itself there is a reason to think it could be a black hole. Another way you can infer their existence is again their their gravitational effects, but in this case, via gravitational lensing.

 

So, I see two problems here. One is, this researcher says that her math shows that such objects could  not form because they would shed the mass necessary to make a black hole first. Well, empirical evidence suggests there are objects with the necessary mass. The second thing is that there are objects with the requisite mass that themselves don't radiate light. These are pretty good reasons for suspecting that black holes do in fact exist.

 

The second thing is that general relativity is actually used in our technology also. Your GPS uses special and general relativistic corrections in order to work properly. If our understand of that theory is off, it would be rather important to know for lots of reasons.

 

 

 

 

========================================================================================

 

How can Black Holes exist when they were "Conjured" by MatheMagics...which have been shown to be Corrupt? (That's being Kind)

 

So the scenario is...."Conjure" something then attempt to locate it by 2nd, 3rd, 4th order of effects in a Universe that 97% of...we have no clue of.

Black Holes first appear in the Literature in 1784, from John Michell of the (Michell-Laplace Dark Body) motif.

 

I thought Science was in the Business of First Observing a Phenomenon.....THEN, attempting to Validate Causation via EXPERIMENT.  We have the Direct Inverse of that Concept (minus the Experiment because it's a "Just So" story) demonstrated here.

 

"Gravity" is one of the WEAKEST "Forces"---- (this term is a fiasco, basically...whenever they haven't the first clue this gets pulled out of the "Grab Bag" then it's Reification Fallacy Time), in the Universe.

 

These Astrophysicists need another Refresher (or an Initial block of Instruction) with the Inverse Square Law.

 

Gravity vs ElecroMagnetic (Strength):

 

If Gravity:  = 1

ElectroMag = 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000  STRONGER!  36 Order of Magnitudes....In BOTH directions.

 

 

GPS: Has nothing whatsoever to do with General Relativity.  Basically, All they did was gather data from "Gravity" Probe A in 1976 where they identified differences in Cesium Atomic Clocks on the Probe vs on the Ground then "Error Correct" so they'd mesh and said.....Yep, lets put them here!

 

 

GPS is wheeled out as a Pseudo-Justifier and "alleged" Validation of General Relativity....that basically states that the closer you are to the Center of the Earth (Or a Mass) the slower "TIME" will flow.  Or Gravity "Affects" Time.

 

Ok, "Time" for a Thought Experiment.....

 

Lets use a Gravitational Clock... Two Sand Filled Hour Glasses, which function by GRAVITY; apples to apples, as it were.  We'll keep one and set it on the ground @ the base of Mount Everest then take the other to the top.  We then turn them over @ the same "Time"....which one drains faster?

Lets try it again....we move the "Clock" from the top of Mount Everest and take it into Space between the Moon and the Earth...then turn each over again.  Which drains faster? For the person who is turning that "Clock" over in Space....time has stopped!  Because there's no Sand entering the bulb.  Which "Clock" is moving slower? Define Falsified?

Define Rubber Ruler? .... then Compare and Contrast that Measure with a Titanium Ruler then reconcile each into One coherent and objective explanation.

 

They're extrapolating from an erroneous/arbitrary "convention" then conflating 2 different issues...it's one thing for Mickey's Hands/Cesium Atomic "Clocks" to run fast/slow but quite another to then extrapolate from that observation that "TIME" has been affected due to Gravity.

 

Additionally, I want somebody to explain to me, in the context Einstonian Gravity: when I go to the grocery store and buy some apples and place them on a scale, does the curvature of spacetime around the spring, connected to plate and display, interact with the spacetime curvature of the Apples?  Please Explain/Illustrate the Mechanism?

Am I getting Bamboozled by the Store or Einstein, True or False?

[other one]

 

Am I getting Bamboozled by the Store or Einstein, True or False?

 

 

I know that I don't really feel very well today and maybe that is affecting my thought process.......  but just how am I supposed to answer true or false to a question....   the answer may acually be one or the other, neither, or both......     but where does the true or false come in...

[Enoch2021]

 

 

Am I getting Bamboozled by the Store or Einstein, True or False?

 

 

I know that I don't really feel very well today and maybe that is affecting my thought process.......  but just how am I supposed to answer true or false to a question....   the answer may acually be one or the other, neither, or both......     but where does the true or false come in...

 

 

 

It was a Rhetorical Question...with a dash of Sarcasm purposely set up and inherently unanswerable

[Guest]

As For Black Holes

 

lol nice

 

 

If You Can't Ever Observe It

Neither Even Measure It

Nor Reproduce It

 

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

 

For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9

 

It Must Be Science

 

And they said, There is no hope: but we will walk after our own devices, and we will every one do the imagination of his evil heart. Jeremiah 18:12

 

You See

 

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

 

Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20-21

 

No?

 

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160

 

....Astrophysicist Dr Prajwal Kafle, from The University of Western Australia node of the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, said we have known for a while that most of the Universe is hidden.

 

"Stars, dust, you and me, all the things that we see, only make up about 4 per cent of the entire Universe," he said.

"About 25 per cent is dark matter and the rest is dark energy."....  http://phys.org/news/2014-10-dark-thought-scientists.html#jCp

 

Dark Energy Is What You May Experience

From Eating Dark Chocolate

If You Can Ever

See It

 

Or So They Say.....

 

[alphaparticle]

It's a rather odd coincidence that empirical findings of time dilation fit the expectations of special and general relativity! If the complaint is, where is the empirical evidence? there is one. Likewise for explaining the orbit of Mercury. likewise to explain gravitational lensing. Likewise for the fact that you can elevate many different kinds of 'clocks' and note, empirically, as you want, at different elevations the time dilation effect of being in different parts of a gravitational well. You can look at the redshift of light from different elevations to show this also. And of course, there is the potential for observing gravitational waves, an observational experiment currently being undertaken, which will help to decisively decide the case.

 

According to General Relativity, locally accelerating frames are equivalent to gravity. That is the core principle of it. So put the hourglasses in an elevator with no windows. Have one be close to the surface of the earth, another out in space, neither accelerated. Now imagine accelerating the one in space such that its local acceleration matches g, now you will not be able to tell whether or not you are in a gravitational field or in an accelerating frame. That is a relevant thought experiment. 

 

All of this is a rather odd discussion in this thread, considering the researcher in questioned *used* General Relativity as the cornerstone of her calculations in the first place. I am not sure how that obvious point got lost in the exchange.

[alphaparticle]

 

As For Black Holes

 

lol nice

 

 

If You Can't Ever Observe It

Neither Even Measure It

Nor Reproduce It

 

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

 

For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9

 

It Must Be Science

 

And they said, There is no hope: but we will walk after our own devices, and we will every one do the imagination of his evil heart. Jeremiah 18:12

 

You See

 

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

 

Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20-21

 

No?

 

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160

 

....Astrophysicist Dr Prajwal Kafle, from The University of Western Australia node of the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, said we have known for a while that most of the Universe is hidden.

 

"Stars, dust, you and me, all the things that we see, only make up about 4 per cent of the entire Universe," he said.

"About 25 per cent is dark matter and the rest is dark energy."....  http://phys.org/news/2014-10-dark-thought-scientists.html#jCp

 

Dark Energy Is What You May Experience

From Eating Dark Chocolate

If You Can Ever

See It

 

Or So They Say.....

 

 

Observational astronomy is legit, when it involves very precisely sorts of predictions about what we ought to observe in the world if such and such is true. The restrictions that are being placed on what counts as 'real' science are a bit bizarre in my  view.

[Guest]

As For Black Holes

 

lol nice

 

 

If You Can't Ever Observe It

Neither Even Measure It

Nor Reproduce It

 

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

 

For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:8-9

 

It Must Be Science

 

And they said, There is no hope: but we will walk after our own devices, and we will every one do the imagination of his evil heart. Jeremiah 18:12

 

You See

 

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

 

Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:20-21

 

No?

 

Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:160

 

....Astrophysicist Dr Prajwal Kafle, from The University of Western Australia node of the International Centre for Radio Astronomy Research, said we have known for a while that most of the Universe is hidden.

 

"Stars, dust, you and me, all the things that we see, only make up about 4 per cent of the entire Universe," he said.

"About 25 per cent is dark matter and the rest is dark energy."....  http://phys.org/news/2014-10-dark-thought-scientists.html#jCp

 

Dark Energy Is What You May Experience

From Eating Dark Chocolate

If You Can Ever

See It

 

Or So They Say.....

 

 

 

Observational astronomy is legit,

 

when it involves very precisely sorts of predictions

 

about what we ought to observe in the world if such and such is true.

 

The restrictions that are being placed on what counts as 'real' science are a bit bizarre in my  view.

 

 

When One Actually Admits He (Thinks) He Sees (Observes) Only 4% Of The Cosmos

 

He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end. Ecclesiastes 3:11

 

Yet Magically He Than Claims To "Know" All The Rest

 

Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:

Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.

 

For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:6-9

 

Beloved, That's Really Bizarre

 

And ye have done worse than your fathers; for, behold, ye walk every one after the imagination of his evil heart, that they may not hearken unto me: Jeremiah 16:12

 

Science

 

Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen. 1 John 5:21