Temperature of Black Hole Jet Exceeds Expectations, Shatters Scientific Theory

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Yes, it is just plain rubbish.

Black holes are a flawed theoretical concept used to make the minuscule force of gravity responsible for the most energetic compact bursts of energy in the universe. But black hole theory doesn’t relate to the universe we observe. The problem is that gravitational dogma doesn’t equip theorists to deal with the colossal energies and unrealistic mass concentration required by the theorized “black holes."

And the truth is exactly the opposite: the astrophysical simulations of black holes based on nothing but orthodox Einsteinian general relativity, simulations which have been developed over decades, matched exactly, and quantitatively the waveforms of gravitational waves emitted, including polarization.

It was direct detection of both gravitational waves, and black holes and black hole mergers, all predicted ahead of time by theory.

It's yet another colossal triumph for the radical vision of Albert Einstein. Between LIGO and Gravity Probe B, everything about space warping is completely true.

The rumors are that LIGO team have found a number of further events.

Einstein was a very humble man with extraordinary insight and a genius intelllect. He was his own greatest critic, though, and knew quite well that his own proposals, along with the entire foundation of physics, resided within a house of cards. To this day, though, his most well-known contributtions to physics remain rock solid. Despite the rise of quantum theory/mechanics and the standard model, SR/GR and much of classical physics still stand. And a quantum theory of gravity is still just wishful thinking.

As far as gravity goes, Einstein didn’t treat it as a force. In Einstein’s view, the curvature of spacetime (not space) is the result of gravity’s influence, which in turn determines the way matter is distributed within space. Hmmm... Not sure I stated that correctly. Put another way, GR is strictly a theory of spacetime geometry. It makes no attempt to explain what gravity is. However, it is considered the closest thing we have to a theory of gravity. What it does do is describe how gravity causes stuff with mass to interact by changing it's geometric distribution within space due to spacetime curvature. And it does a damned good job of it.

It may be that gravity just doesn’t lend itself well under the umbrella of particle physics/quantum mechanics, and scientists are heading down the wrong path by insisting space must be granular (graviton) in nature. They’re so obssessed with coming up with a Theory of Everything (what an arrogant name) to cover all the known forces, though, that they continue down this road with blinders flapping in the wind. It may turn out that we’ve been barking up the wrong tree all along.

Einstein had a beautiful mind.

Just my 2 cents...

look at the electric universe theory. explains data and observations much more accurately and simply than the standard theories.



a reply to: swanne

toward the end of his life he was quoted as saying something to the effect of "I'm not certain any of my work will stand up to the test of time"


a reply to: netbound

originally posted by: swanne
a reply to: the owlbear

My personal opinion to solve the high temperature of the black hole jet involves preons - something which is a bit controversial in the inner circles of Physics.

If a black hole is strong enough, it could in theory not only rip atoms into particles (generating energy in the process), but also particles into their components (preons) - generating even higher levels of energy which would come as unexpected by physicists who discard the existence of preons.

Preons were discovered over a century ago with a form of remote-viewing and their discovery scientifically confirmed in 1980 and since mathematically proved. Here's a taster: here.
Just thought some of you would like to know, whether it is relevant to this thread or not.

a reply to: bottleslingguy

toward the end of his life he was quoted as saying something to the effect of "I'm not certain any of my work will stand up to the test of time"

So far, it has.
Over and over and over again.

a reply to: swanne

At 90° of the Moon, the ocean level is going down, following gravity. The excess of water goes the only place it can go: feed into the bulge, where there is more gravity because of the presence of the Moon.

Tides are not caused directly by gravity, as such. They are caused by a gradient in gravitational force.

The ocean on the side of the Earth closest to the Moon is being pulled more strongly toward the Moon than the solid Earth, creating a bulge. Meanwhile, the Earth is being pulled from the ocean on the far side, creating that bulge.

Humans are too small to notice the gravity gradient. Unless you get too near a black hole. In which case the gravity gradient would pull you apart.

a reply to: Phage

Yeah, but you try explaining the meaning of "gradient gravitational force" to a new ager.

I had to use simple words. Notice how I kept on insisting on the role of size, though.

you can cling to your beliefs it's ok


a reply to: Phage