It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Stephen Crothers Destroys the Quackademic "Black Hole" & Relativity!

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 07:08 AM
Well guys, this one is going to get the goat of mainstream scientists. Stephen J. Crothers claims that the theory of Black Holes has been conjured up by combination of confusion, superstition and ineptitude, and is sustained by widespread suppression of facts, both physical and theoretical.

According to him, it has been recently 'proved' that the black hole and the expanding Universe are not predicted by General Relativity at all!

It must not be forgotten that all the arguments for the black hole are theoretical, based solely upon the erroneous Hilbert solution and the meaningless Kruskal-Szekeres extension on it. One is therefore lead to wonder what it is that astronomers actually “see” when they claim that they have found yet another black hole here or there.

Besides the purely mathematical errors that mitigate the black hole, there are also considerable physical arguments against it, in addition to the fact that no event horizon has ever been detected.

A Brief History of Black Holes, By Stephen J. Crothers

Ok, so let's see what he has to say on Black Holes and the Electric Universe in the video below.

So what do you think?
edit on 10-1-2015 by OrionHunterX because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 07:28 AM
a reply to: OrionHunterX

Apparently they are just mathematical concepts based on observation of something being affected by nothing.

This video might be relative, scuse the pun.

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:03 AM
a reply to: OrionHunterX

He is not alone, he has great company.

Stephen Hawking questions the theory of black holes, too, even doing an about turn on his own former theory:

Stephen Hawking: 'There are no black holes'

I am going with Stephen Hawking's new observations and theorising that there is actually no true event horizon and firewall.

They are not holes in space. They are like gravitational whirlpools. The gravity is so intense because of their mass that light itself is bent beyond the observable spectrum. Hawking radiation is emitted as information. The matter that was sucked into this super dense whirlpool of gravity is spewed out as radiation, which satisfies Quantum physics that matter cannot simply disappear. It has been transformed through this super gravitational process. The information is returning back into space as the beginning particles all over again; in a word the matter of the star and all the gases of its dying is "recycled" as Hawking radiation that are the building blocks of just about everything.

I theorise different kinds of super dense bodies (black holes). Stars become "black holes" and so, too, there are giants at the centres of galaxies that do the same thing on a super scale. This is my theory, though. Just my imagination and I do not have the mathematical skills to formulate it.

edit on 10-1-2015 by lonesomerimbaud because: tidy up.

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:07 AM
Science is a amazing thing eh. But without it we may never have got this
a reply to: OrionHunterX

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:09 AM
a reply to: OrionHunterX

Will watch it later, sounds hilarious. We see and measure the effects of black-holes and that's what gets me, I still put my money on the horsey named "black-hole" even if it is super dense matter...

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:27 AM

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: OrionHunterX

Will watch it later, sounds hilarious. We see and measure the effects of black-holes and that's what gets me, I still put my money on the horsey named "black-hole" even if it is super dense matter...

We can't see them. They have not been observed this way. Every physicist would tell you they are still just a theory. We can sense there being there and Einstein's Relativity predicts their existence. The Hawking radiation theory, too, cannot be proved because we would need to get instruments there to measure. The closest is,

"At first scientist believed that the nearest black hole to Earth was the one at the center of the Milky Way Galaxy. This seemed to be debunked by the discovery of a new black hole only 1600 light years away. This new black hole is actually a rare type of black hole called a micro quasar.".

I believe the universe to be an entity in itself. All these processes are the functions of the whole entity as a body working in harmony.

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:32 AM
a reply to: lonesomerimbaud

That's why I said "effects" see and measure the effects. They are there.
I am more surprised you wouldn't give me a funny look for saying my black hole is super dense matter That was the fun part actually...

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:50 AM
1. gravity does not exist, What causes gravity is magnetism. Which can bend light. For instance. If you have a lot of magnetic particles just floating around in space. it's very likely on a large scale light will warp around it.

Now for the sake of hilariousness.

Nothing these guys are coming up with are disproving paradoxs but are rather hinging on their own. I don't have time to sit there for 44 minutes and hear them out on reasons why they think it dosn't exist. I sort of interested in knowing what their operation of the univese is. Please tell us.

Do infinite singularities happen in space? Can space pool infinitely in one spot? No matter how small? Without escaping the focus point?

If that is what these people think a black hole is they are pretty much wrong. And by such definition. Nothing like that exists in our Universe as far as i know.

Likewise, what replenishes matter from the effects of entropy that would undoubtly swallow all the physical matter in existance? IF there isn't something currently shooting off super charged particles in all directions of space. I garentee all these stars won't just randomly expand because they want to. They expand because of all the mass they swallow and become unstable.

If super novas are possible. Which undoubtly they are. Where is all this excess matter coming from?

*The Simulated Universe?* Is that their answer? From the Anus of the universe comes something from nothing literally in all sense of the word.

I'm going to have to call B.S on that.

Besides, Lensing effect have already showed that black holes do in fact exist. Are they event horizons? Well think of it this way. They are so large. That the ammount of light that gets sucked in is much more signifigant in terms of surface area and distance than say. Outside the feild of magnetic bending.

Magnets pull things. So the faster a magnetic feild spins. The faster objects move. They become invinisible to us as they are pulled along their linear magnetic paths. And be that magnetism in particular has multipul *powers* Such as Negative charges and positive charges are obviously the most common. Neutral charges also exist. As well as Sub-charges. Which make up everything that these other particles are made up of.

So saying that *Gravity* a still unknown force but is applied to all mass based on existing magnetic forces displayed here on Earth ( LOL ) we base what is *Gravity* on our Experience here on Earth.

If you need proof of magnetism just look at well. Any planet in space. They all have strong magnetic feilds around them.

Now how does this relate to Dark Vortexs? And Dark Energy? Well a vortex is exactly what it is. A vortex that displaces itself along the golen ratio, Which is not a perfect circle. The result is a spiraling Galaxy with bands of stars being dragged by the magnetic forces pulsing from the center of the galaxy.

And These forces are so dense, When objects go beyond the supernova level and are subjected to forces that render magnetic laws obsolete for a time. As pressure * Movement of mass collasping* Causes mass to get caught in a type of *Highway of compression* There has to be something suspending matter in space, in the arrangements they are in.

in a true vacume objects would clump together. There would be nothing to reduce mass from excellerating at speeds faster than the speed of light and beyond. In a true vacume there is zero force resistance. The strongest force would gain infinite velocity Which is where the theory of the big bang had to be amended for it to even make some sense at all. To make matters worse. As mass excellerates at a greater pace faster and faster than the speed of light. Velocity will overcome magnetic force and objects simply would cease to exist. There would be no Order. Mass would fly across the universe at speeds faster than what can be seen. Carrying a rift current of matter along its path being tossed along the way into oblivion. Objects need to be slowed down in order for galaxies to even form.

Arguing this kind of stuff literally brings up so many paradoxs.

Anyways il continue cuz its funny.

Basically. Something IS filling up what we call empty space. So What we call empty space, actually isn't empty space at all. There is just so much of it, It's pushing matter together, allowing magnetic forces to bond and for orbits to occure. Thus allowing an existance of a stable universe.

Why must all these universe creation myths scientists think up must be doom porn ? I mean come on. Simulated Universe? Watching to much matrix. Ask the Romans what they think about simulated universe and they could show you a simulation in the gladiators arena.

So since objects obviously cannot singularly increase in size to even the size of a galaxy. One object is not even one object it is several objects.

So if we cannot see an infinitely expanded object, how are we to see an infintely dense object?

Define Infinite in such cases? As a singulae object existing in its current state forever and ever? Or the potencial to expand or implode the universe? Because that's what Infinity would mean.


Or pointing to another object and being like That object is infintely vast! Its surface area is massive. If it became unstable it would just not implode for some reason but expand.... but it won't just expand into any ol blast. but another universe!!!!

General public is like nice doc, Great theories. How does this benifit me or all life in universe? ( All of existance) It does not. It is just doom porn.

Even the big bang is doom porn. Besides, Dark energy already account for much of the microwave background noise in space.

Since, it takes up so much surface area, And given. It is only made up of compressed mass with zero magnetic force or rather the force is so scrambled * Since fragments are broken down to their tiniest *grains of sand* And compressed into small particles. Where the sub-atomic arangement does not favour magnetic arrangment. Polar opposits will be touching each other, But being packed so tight. There is only so many slots that can be filled till magnetic force from all these opposites being forced so close to each other seals them in place. What happens after this over time is energy builds up. The magnetic forces are fighting each other which builds up potencial energy. There would be little to no audible vibration on a singular level. However increase surface area and distance and that is a different story. The slow movement of these sea of particles causes galaxies to drift in space caught in currents.

Like wise there are Jet streams shooting off Gamma rays from the center of our galaxy where this dark mass substance is being produced.

Theres avery precise number for how much physical matter can exist in the universe at one time. Since all other space is taken up by decaying particles that are recovering energy so that the mass can become functioning physical matter again.

To think a process like this does not exist ( Saying Dark Vortexs don't exist) Is like saying nature doesn't have a cycle to replenish energy. Which is rediculous. if you tried to say those exist words in front of the scientific community you would be laughed at. Yet, Word it differently and it's exactly what people believe when they buy

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 08:54 AM
into the big bang theory.

So what's your theory of the Universe? Does its conception and purpose result in doom porn? Or a stable enviroment?

Because saying that matter does not get compressed into a non activating state is like saying the universe is ultimately doomed.

Since Entropy will always forever stamp on the hilariousness of these theories.

If you finda solution to entropy, A solution to how mass can ovecomes destabalization to even achive such claims as infinite density and infinite expansion from a single focus point into all existance because no matter what they think up.

The Laws of Therodynamics will be a thorn in their side.

Laws of Therodynamics

edit on 10-1-2015 by AnuTyr because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 09:43 AM
I guess if you are willing to think in circular reasoning then any theory will suffice for awhile until you may have to create another theory using circular reasoning . I like beginnings middles and ends and always got sick on merry go rounds :>) a reply to: AnuTyr

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 11:13 AM
Everything you need to know about Stephen J. Crothers:


He wants to discredit science, but at the same time present his own brand of "science". Everyone is his own "armchair scientist", but our modern techonlogy and knowledge are built on mainstream science, and it works.

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 11:22 PM
a reply to: wildespace

Everything you need to know about Stephen J. Crothers:

Two more things you need to know: he is (or was) an ATS member under his own name. He is also a pal of our leading electric-universe fantasist AnarchoCapitalist, aka mnemeth1.

His work has been extensively discussed and discredited on ATS. He has no credibility here whatsoever.

posted on Jan, 10 2015 @ 11:56 PM
a reply to: Astyanax

A fantasist uses their imagination. Even Einstein was a fantasist. There is nothing wrong with imagining scenarios.


“Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand.”
edit on 10-1-2015 by DrunkYogi because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 09:13 AM
a reply to: DrunkYogi

A fantasist uses their imagination.

Thank you for your attempted correction. You remind me that it is risky to use metaphors on the internet, where not everybody has the vocabulary to interpret them correctly.

A fantasist is someone who uses their imagination to compose musical or literary fantasies. Mr Crothers' writings are not, strictly speaking, literary fantasies; they are more correctly regarded as mathematical ones.

posted on Jan, 11 2015 @ 09:17 AM
a reply to: Astyanax

LOL. Sure, if you say so.

top topics


log in