It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Black holes do NOT exist and the Big Bang Theory is wrong, claims scientist - and she has the maths

page: 7
37
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2014 @ 07:23 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr
Gravity as a weak force is what makes black holes so fascinating.
I think the idea of multiple gravity sources at a coinciding point in polydimensional space is as good a guess as any for why black holes have so much gravity.

Polydimensional space....is that a real term or did I just pull that out of my ass? I google it and find music... Oh well, it fits I guess.




posted on Oct, 12 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Black hole DO exist.
Just look and the Black Budgets and you'll be forced to agree.



posted on Oct, 12 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: badgerprints
a reply to: dragonridr
Gravity as a weak force is what makes black holes so fascinating.
I think the idea of multiple gravity sources at a coinciding point in polydimensional space is as good a guess as any for why black holes have so much gravity.

Polydimensional space....is that a real term or did I just pull that out of my ass? I google it and find music... Oh well, it fits I guess.


Well in string theory we can take dimentions into account and even explain dark matter since folds in the 3rd dimention weaken gravitational effects. Dark matter could be nothing more than objects we perceive as being distant and actually do to the folding of space is very close. But this probably isnt the right thread to discuss this.



posted on Oct, 12 2014 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: badgerprints


...Gravity is an incredibly weak force think the entire planet earth is tugging on you yet you can still move. If it were like the other forces we would be a puddle of goo.


YES, the attraction is week,
because there is no such FORCE as gravity,
only electric resonance attraction



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 06:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: KrzYma

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: badgerprints


...Gravity is an incredibly weak force think the entire planet earth is tugging on you yet you can still move. If it were like the other forces we would be a puddle of goo.


YES, the attraction is week,
because there is no such FORCE as gravity,


Very true. Gravity is not a force at all, it is a consequence of mass.

But I thought everyone knew that?? am I wrong?

Korg.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Korg Trinity

originally posted by: KrzYma

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: badgerprints


...Gravity is an incredibly weak force think the entire planet earth is tugging on you yet you can still move. If it were like the other forces we would be a puddle of goo.


YES, the attraction is week,
because there is no such FORCE as gravity,


Very true. Gravity is not a force at all, it is a consequence of mass.

But I thought everyone knew that?? am I wrong?

Korg.

It is a consequence of mass is true, but gravity is a definite force too.



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: Korg Trinity

originally posted by: KrzYma

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: badgerprints


...Gravity is an incredibly weak force think the entire planet earth is tugging on you yet you can still move. If it were like the other forces we would be a puddle of goo.


YES, the attraction is week,
because there is no such FORCE as gravity,


Very true. Gravity is not a force at all, it is a consequence of mass.

But I thought everyone knew that?? am I wrong?

Korg.

It is a consequence of mass is true, but gravity is a definite force too.


My question 'am I wrong?' was not really meant to be related to gravitation. it was meant to be targeted at 'I thought everyone knew that'

But of course I realize that it is not as clear cut as this question may appear to be.

You see it depends on your frame of reference. If you were to look at newtons law of gravitation then yes Gravity could indeed be considered a force.

However, what supersedes Newton was Einsteins general relativity, which shows that gravity is caused by a curvature of space-time by mass.

what supersedes Einstein? Well Einstein would have himself had he lived... he was working on the theory of Quantum gravity at the point he died.

of course the theory has been under development ever since...

In essence the theory of Quantum gravity shows that mass itself is nothing more than space-time density and that all the matter in the universe is actually just made of dense space-time. This is a very general sentence that I could write about for literally pages, but suffice to say.. Gravity is an emergent property of reality as opposed to an actual bonafide fundamental force.

I will go so far as to say that the other three forces we have, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear will themselves be distilled down eventually as the strong and weak nuclear interactions themselves are a consequence of entropy which in turn is a consequence of the true randomness at the fundamental level of reality, the electromagnetic being caused by vibration information exchange also at this level of reality.

So... to summarize...

Yes... when reading a text book about the standard model all the four forces are recorded as actual forces of interaction. However as we understand more about quantum mechanics and quantum theory in general, the four forces actually become just emergent properties of reality... all have one factor in common, they are all a consequence of the fundamental levels of realty...

If we want to really understand and describe the universe we have to understand the forces that govern at the Planck scale, and that can only be achieved through theoretical physics at this stage.



Korg.


edit on 13-10-2014 by Korg Trinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Thanks yr post, though I do not subscribe to GR at all.
Since only a force can produce an accel. so gravity has to be a bonafide fundamental force and this has to be factored into the quantum mechanics as well. Einstein just made some gobbledygooky conjuring and came up with his GR and unfortunately the MS gobbled it up, hook line and sinker.
a reply to: Korg Trinity




posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei
Thanks yr post, though I do not subscribe to GR at all.
Since only a force can produce an accel. so gravity has to be a bonafide fundamental force and this has to be factored into the quantum mechanics as well. Einstein just made some gobbledygooky conjuring and came up with his GR and unfortunately the MS gobbled it up, hook line and sinker.
a reply to: Korg Trinity



You seem to not understand GR at all. Let me say force is caused by energy mass is indeed energy the two are interchangeable in Einstein's equation's. So the effect of this energy sitting in one place bends spacetime creating gravity. Is it a force of course it is . It interacts and effects interactions is this the answer no probably not don't believe many scientists think we have it right. But on the other hand Einstine isn't wrong either we know his equations work so he put us on the right track were just not sure the final destination yet.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Korg Trinity
Black holes do NOT exist and the Big Bang Theory is wrong, claims scientist - and she has the maths to prove it


She claims that as a star dies, it releases a type of radiation known as Hawking radiation - predicted by Professor Stephen Hawking.

Professor Mersini-Houghton's new theory manages to explain why this might be so - namely because black holes as we know them cannot exist.

However in this process, Professor Mersini-Houghton believes the star also sheds mass, so much so that it no longer has the density to become a black hole.

Before the black hole can form, she said, the dying star swells and explodes.

The singularity, as predicted, never forms, and neither does the event horizon - the boundary of the black hole where not even light can escape.

‘I’m still not over the shock,’ said Professor Mersini-Houghton.


O.k. Does this strike you as a total misunderstanding on what Hawking Radiation is??

Hawking radiation is caused when a pair of virtual particles (the positively charged and the negatively charged) come into existence as a result of the quantum fluctuations close to the event horizon of a black hole.

Under normal conditions the pair would annihilate each other instantly but.... if one particle of the pair popped into existence behind the Event horizon and one in front of it... it would cause the lucky particle in front of the event horizon to shoot off into space..a fully fledged particle... These particles are what we call Hawking radiation....

So......

How can this scientist be correct... she states that the dying star would loose mass as a result of Hawking radiation so the event horizon never forms.....

Could it be that she miss understood what Hawking radiation is?

Or perhaps the article itself is in error??

What are your thoughts?

Korg.



I knew there was something wrong with the whole black hole theory!!! Now we know!



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   
No space is not bent at all and to date for what practical applications have einsteins equations been used so far for 100 + years?
a reply to: dragonridr


edit on 14-10-2014 by Nochzwei because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei
No space is not bent at all and to date for what practical applications have einsteins equations been used so far for 100 + years?
a reply to: dragonridr



Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave. Einsteins equations show up in alot of scientific research one way or another. Einstein took a leap before him matter ruled the universe after it was energy. Until science made the shift to looking at the world around as energy moving from one place to another science was lost. Einstein realized we dont have to have matter using matter to have a reaction. His equations led us into areas even he didnt like such as quantum mechanics. He didnt like the thought of the very small not acting like the very big. He believed the universe was ordered and we could calculate everything in the universe. Part of being a patent clerk he liked to try to make order of things. Unfortunately even he was forced to admit that the universe just doesnt work that way. And was continually bothered looking for the link between the large and the quantum scale.

PS you might be interested to know Einstein wasnt trying to figure out gravity thats a misconception his equations just happen to explain it better. His concern was light and what it truly is and how it worked.
edit on 10/14/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   
'Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave.'
Lol all these and which equations exactly?
a reply to: dragonridr



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei
'Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave.'
Lol all these and which equations exactly?
a reply to: dragonridr



Think here is a good start for your education into relativity.

www.physicscentral.com...



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Nochzwei
'Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave.'
Lol all these and which equations exactly?
a reply to: dragonridr



Think here is a good start for your education into relativity.

www.physicscentral.com...
All gobbledygook there mate. I don't subscribe to einsteins anything except his work function that got him a nobel prize.
Now again same ques as before, which equations exactly. Put these equations in the post instead of any links



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: badgerprints
a reply to: dragonridr
Gravity as a weak force is what makes black holes so fascinating.
I think the idea of multiple gravity sources at a coinciding point in polydimensional space is as good a guess as any for why black holes have so much gravity.

Polydimensional space....is that a real term or did I just pull that out of my ass? I google it and find music... Oh well, it fits I guess.


Well in string theory we can take dimentions into account and even explain dark matter since folds in the 3rd dimention weaken gravitational effects. Dark matter could be nothing more than objects we perceive as being distant and actually do to the folding of space is very close. But this probably isnt the right thread to discuss this.



I'm not a believer of "string theory," and in reference to black hole cosmology...I'm also not a believer of "multiverses" as well.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 02:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Nochzwei
'Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave.'
Lol all these and which equations exactly?
a reply to: dragonridr



Think here is a good start for your education into relativity.

www.physicscentral.com...
All gobbledygook there mate. I don't subscribe to einsteins anything except his work function that got him a nobel prize.
Now again same ques as before, which equations exactly. Put these equations in the post instead of any links


I'm sorry.. SAY WHAT???



Korg.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Nochzwei
'Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave.'
Lol all these and which equations exactly?
a reply to: dragonridr



Think here is a good start for your education into relativity.

www.physicscentral.com...
All gobbledygook there mate. I don't subscribe to einsteins anything except his work function that got him a nobel prize.
Now again same ques as before, which equations exactly. Put these equations in the post instead of any links


Just because you are incapable of understanding whats involved doesnt mean others cant. Its no shame not being the brightest bulb in the room as long as your willing to learn.

Now as far as what math common things used from Einstein is for example the velocity addition formula or of course energy to mass conversions especially in nuclear physics. Than for space flight his field equations are used that allows us to get a tiny satellite to a body such as mars. To do this we must calculate its exact position months in advance and aim for where its going to be not where it is. My suggestion stop going to those anti science scam sites and pick up a physics book.

Oh and heres the paper from Einstein that changed physics. lots of math stuff was involved i know its all gobbledy gook.
en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 10/14/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 11:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Nochzwei
'Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave.'
Lol all these and which equations exactly?
a reply to: dragonridr



Think here is a good start for your education into relativity.

www.physicscentral.com...
All gobbledygook there mate. I don't subscribe to einsteins anything except his work function that got him a nobel prize.
Now again same ques as before, which equations exactly. Put these equations in the post instead of any links


Just because you are incapable of understanding whats involved doesnt mean others cant. Its no shame not being the brightest bulb in the room as long as your willing to learn.



Dude
Again, why do you assume such silly nonsense.
Lets see the equations, no links and no wishy washy stuff in your post pl.



posted on Oct, 15 2014 @ 01:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Nochzwei

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Nochzwei
'Nuclear reactors, GPS , stealth technology, sending probes to mars and the moon, communications such as microwave.'
Lol all these and which equations exactly?
a reply to: dragonridr



Think here is a good start for your education into relativity.

www.physicscentral.com...
All gobbledygook there mate. I don't subscribe to einsteins anything except his work function that got him a nobel prize.
Now again same ques as before, which equations exactly. Put these equations in the post instead of any links


Just because you are incapable of understanding whats involved doesnt mean others cant. Its no shame not being the brightest bulb in the room as long as your willing to learn.



Dude
Again, why do you assume such silly nonsense.
Lets see the equations, no links and no wishy washy stuff in your post pl.





Feel better now this is Einsteins field equations

Also since you dont want links thought id show you something Einstein predicted but we couldn't prove until recently.




top topics



 
37
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join