Where Do Black Holes Lead?, page 7
Pages: <<  4    5    6    7  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times


reply posted on 24-5-2009 @ 01:46 PM by S.J.Crothers
Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by KrisFromGenk


Stephen J. Crothers first is a mathematician not a physicist. His argue is Einstein theory is mathematically unsound. This is why he attacks physicists for there theories his belief is space time is linear and not curved In a linear model space time cannot be warped and there fore black holes cannot exist. He also claims that the mathematics leading to curved space time does not exist this is the basis for his theory.His problem with the math?Eventually it Gets to the point in math you cant divide by 0 and this must happen in a singularity.If space time is not curved this cannot happen at all.


This does not accurately describe me: I'm neither a mathematician nor a physicist. More accurately, I'm a gardener and home handyman who does science in his spare time. Also, I have no theory - my work pertains to what is and what is not consistgent with General Relativity. Black holes are fallacious, and so is Big Bang and Einstein gravitational waves. Also, the claim that I hold that "the mathematics leading to curved space time does not exist" is totally false (see below).


Now i know at least one point hes wrong he claims the math doesnt exist to even deal with curved space time.Tools like the Lie derivative, metric connection and pullback functions are all used to do calculus on curved space-time. Even if you don't think space-time itself is curved, the maths of dealing with the notion of curved space-time (or more obvious curved surfaces like that of a sphere) is very well developed, so you can't deny that the tools aren't there. As for the rest not done with my degree and right now im not willing to argue which model is correct but currently observations support relativity. So untill we have a better idea black holes still need to exist.


This is incorrect. I have NEVER claimed that the mathematics for dealing with curved spaces does not exist. In fact, I calculate in my papers the Gaussian curvature of the spherically symmetric geodesic surface in the spatial section of Schwarzschild spacetime. I also calculate the Riemann tensor scalar curvature invariant of Schwarzschild spacetime and also refer to the Ricci curvature (it is zero in Schwarzschild spacetime). I also demonstrate that the Riemann tensor scalar curvature invariant is not an independent curvature invariant, contrary to the claims made by the relativists, since it is a function of the aforementioned Gaussian curvature. So the charge here against me is entirely false, as can be verified by my papers, here:

www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/papers.html

It is rather astonishing how things I have never claimed are so often conjured up and attributed to me, despite what actually appears in my papers.



reply posted on 25-5-2009 @ 12:18 AM by dragonridr
reply to post by S.J.Crothers


Cool its always great to get information straight from the horses mouth so to speak. So why do you conclude black holes cannot exist since apparently alot of people have mis quoted and apparently lied. Why would black holes contradict relativity when Einstein himself postulated there existence?Is the problem have to do with the behavior of the singularity or is it the curvature of space time?


reply posted on 28-5-2009 @ 10:42 AM by S.J.Crothers
reply to post by dragonridr


Black holes are nonsense. Here are some of the reasons why.

1) On the one hand it is claimed by the astrophysical scientists that black holes have an escape velocity >= c (speed of light in vacuo). On the other hand they also claim that nothing, including light, can even leave a black hole. If the escape velocity of a black hole is c, then light can escape and all observers could see it; and massive bodies could leave it, but not escape. If the escape velocity is > c then light and massive bodies could both leave the black hole, but not escape, and so there is always a class of observers that could see it. The claims of the astrophysical scientists are contradictory.
2) All black hole ‘solutions’ relate to a universe that contains only one mass. But escape velocity involves two masses by definition – one mass escapes from another mass. Furthermore, the black holers use Newton’s expression for the escape velocity and ‘Schwarzschild’ radius of their black hole. But one cannot use a Newtonian two-body relation in what is alleged to be a non-Newtonian one-body configuration, and one cannot use a Euclidean geometry (Newton’s) to determine radii in a non-Euclidean geometry. The black holers have erroneously blended Newtonian theory into Einstein’s non-Newtonian theory, and therefore their arguments are nonsense.
3) The black hole is alleged to contain an infinitely dense point-mass singularity. Now Special Relativity and General Relativity must be consistent, and according to Einstein and his followers, the laws of Special Relativity must hold in sufficiently small regions of his gravitational field, and these regions can be anywhere in his gravitational field. But Special Relativity forbids infinite density because infinite density implies that material bodies can acquire the speed of light in vacuum (which would require an input of infinite energy), which is impossible according to SR. So for GR to be consistent with SR, GR must also forbid infinite density, and therefore the Theory of Relativity forbids the infinitely dense point-mass singularity of the alleged black hole and so forbids black holes.
4) According to black hole theory it takes an infinite amount of time for an observer to confirm the presence of an event horizon. But nobody has been and nobody will be around for an infinite amount of time to make the observation. And so black holes can never be confirmed (making them metaphysics, not physics).


reply posted on 28-5-2009 @ 10:55 AM by S.J.Crothers
reply to post by dragonridr


5) Since all black hole ‘solutions’ relate to a universe that contains only ONE mass, the notion of black hole interactions is nonsense. By way of example; a ‘Schwarzschild’ black hole is alleged from a solution for Ric = 0, which is a spacetime that by construction contains NO MATTER, but which is alleged by the astrophysical scientists to nevertheless contain one mass (causing the alleged gravitational field). Since the Principle of Superposition does not apply in General Relativity, one cannot therefore arbitrarily insert into the spacetime of a ‘Schwarzschild’ black hole another ‘Schwarzschild’ black hole (independently from Ric = 0) so that the two black holes mutually persist in and mutually interact in a mutual spacetime that by construction contains no matter! Furthermore, there are NO KNOWN SOLUTIONS to Einstein’s field equations for two or more masses and there is no existence theorem by which it can even be asserted that his field equations contain latent solutions for such configurations of matter. Upon what solution to Einstein’s field equations do the black holers rely for black holes in multitudes or for a single black hole interacting with other matter generally? The simple answer is, none! They have no such solution. Once again they merely invoke Newton’s theory and blend it into Einstein’s non-Newtonian theory in order to justify the notion of black hole interactions and multiple bodies. Their arguments are complete and utter nonsense.
6) The black hole was originally conjured from “Schwarzschild’s solution”. However, ‘Schwarzschild’s solution’ is NOT even Schwarzschild’s solution, and Schwarzschild’s actual solution FORBIDS black holes. These facts are easily confirmed by Schwarzschild’s original paper, here: www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/schwarzschild.pdf
7) Non-technical discussion of the foregoing, in more detail, is here:

www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/article-1-1.pdf


reply posted on 3-9-2009 @ 09:52 PM by LucidDreamer85
reply to post by The_Truth_Seeker


I think to another black hole.....but you enter one way and exit another is a totally different part of the galaxy / universe / dimension.......

They aren't " just there for the hell of it" .........they serve a purpose , as does everything in this universe....


reply posted on 10-9-2009 @ 05:23 PM by Karilla
There is no other end. A black 'hole' isn't a hole, its a point of incredibly intense and powerful gravity. People like to speculate that it could be so instence that it fold space up in some whacky way that actually leads to another dimension or whatever, but thats all very speculative.


It's not speculative. It's just that nobody here can do the maths involved. Einstein could and did. So did Stephen Hawking, which is the reason anybody has heard of him. He isn't famous because he wrote "A brief history of time", he got that book publoished because he was a well known physicist due to his work on black holes. The mathematics describing black holes are understood and it is now accepted that our own galaxy has a super-massive black hole at it's core. Some of the consequences of the existence of black holes, such as the implied existence of worm-holes and white holes are less well understood.

The reason a black hole is described as such is that there is a region surrounding the singularity known as the event horizon, the point at which the gravitational field created by the singularity is too strong for even light to escape, so this area would be black. Ironically, if you could look directly at a black hole it would appear very bright indeed, as the light emitting matter just beyond the event horizon would be extremely concentrated in space and yet light would still be able to escape in your direction.

As for travelling through a black hole, it is speculated about by phsicists, because of the Einstein-Rosen bridge, which connects a black hole and a white hole that may be seperated by vast distances in 'normal' space. Wheeler later worked out that the wormhole would be so short-lived that in reality nothing would have time to make it through. There is speculation that it could be held open, allowing specially shielded craft to travel through, but the energy required is truly staggering.

The answer to your question "Where would you go if you went through a black hole" is: "Somewhere else".

Edited to put in the quote tags. Forgot who I was quoting, but you know who you are.


[edit on 10-9-2009 by Karilla]
Pages: <<  4    5    6    7  >>    ^^TOP^^