We are inside a giant black hole

page: 1
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Hi first if this isn't in the right spot please move it. So I was reading this article today on sciencedaily and came to the conclusion (just my opinion) that we are in fact in a super massive black hole.



Now scientists working at Washington University in St. Louis with support from the McDonnell Center for the Space Sciences, have discovered two tiny grains of silica (SiO2; the most common constituent of sand) in primitive meteorites. This discovery is surprising because silica is not one of the minerals expected to condense in stellar atmospheres -- in fact, it has been called 'a mythical condensate.'
Five silica grains were found earlier, but, because of their isotopic compositions, they are thought to originate from AGB stars, red giants that puff up to enormous sizes at the end of their lives and are stripped of most of their mass by powerful stellar winds.

These two grains are thought to have come instead from a core-collapse supernova, a massive star that exploded at the end of its life.

Because the grains, which were found in meteorites from two different bodies of origin, have spookily similar isotopic compositions, the scientists speculate in the May 1 issue of Astrophysical Journal Letters, that they may have come from a single supernova, perhaps even the one whose explosion is thought to have triggered the formation of the solar system.


www.sciencedaily.com...


Then the video of the holographic universe that i watched before just clicked in that we are in fact in a black hole. Watch video and i'll explain



So the "holographic universe" would be like a "projector" in a 2D universe so the opposite of a black hole which is a white hole which would spew out matter.




White holes are the opposite of black holes, objects into which nothing can enter but are constantly spewing out matter. They were thought to be completely hypothetical, more a mathematical oddity than a real thing...but we may have seen one.



io9.com...


So my conclusion is that we were once oustide of the black hole or universe we are in now. The universe is a projection from the white hole (like a projector) that will keep expanding until the black hole runs out of matter to suck in at which point the universe would start to shrink. The particles they say they found would be from the star that created our universe.




posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSource
 


These threads may interest you:

Are we really living in a black hole? A trip into the theory of multi-verses.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by xmaddness
started on 2/11/2012 @ 12:50 PM

Radical New Theory: Are we living in a Black Hole?
www.abovetopsecret.com...
by xX aFTeRm4Th Xx
started on 7/23/2010 @ 06:35 PM

- PS

There are others as well:



Star and flag though. This stuff is always interesting.
edit on 4/22/2013 by this_is_who_we_are because: PS



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 10:34 PM
link   
I have thought about this in the past. Is it possible that we are the remnants of a massive star which exploded Millions of years ago? Blackholes are the remains of failed or exploded stars, yeah?



posted on Apr, 22 2013 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarknStormy
I have thought about this in the past. Is it possible that we are the remnants of a massive star which exploded Millions of years ago? Blackholes are the remains of failed or exploded stars, yeah?


So that is my thought yes. Before our universe was created there was a star (or whatever creates a super massive black hole that is in the center of all galaxies) that went supernova and turned into a black hole which ripped a hole in its current universe. The other end is the white hole spewing out all the matter creating our universe. all black holes then create new universes so in theory we would then have infinite universes. Then if you watch the video that talks about the universe as a hologram all the energy/light coming out of the white hole is the "projector" if you will of our holographic universe. Also in that video they say in theory all the matter that is sent into the black hole there is now a imprint of the informaition on the black hole itself and then could have it recreated. So to get a little stranger of an "infinite" you and me and the universe I would then have to say in "theory" all universes should be the same as the "original" created universe just changed a little. So there would then be an infinite number of you and me running around in different universes.
edit on 22-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   
reply to post by LightSource
 


Long time lurker here posting for the first time..

Having just watched the first part of Stephen Hawking's 'Grand Design' series, it seems to me that a big problem with the hypothesis put forth in the OP is time.

Hawking states that at the centre of a singularity, time does not exist. If you were to throw a clock into a black hole, assuming it could withstand the enormous tidal forces, it would slow down until it reached a point at the centre where it would stop completely.

Any thoughts on this? How could causality in our universe continue if we are supposedly at the centre of a black hole?

Edited to add: Likewise, the quote in the message above about 'before our universe was created' makes no sense, as time did not exist at this point..
edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 07:07 AM
link   
reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
 

Hello former lurker, and what took you so long? It took a black hole to suck you into the threads??? You will now not see so many ads, and be able to share stuff with everyone here. And you seem intelligent and literate, so YAY! Welcome.

About the thread, I love this type of thing too. And if we are all just projections on the black hole's surface (and whoever did the maths to get to that conclusion must be given a holographic Nobel Prize or something), then did we exist at some time as real people who were sucked into the black hole, much as ReturnofTheSonOfNothing has now been sucked into ATS? Am I just a reflection of the real Aleister, who is long gone? May he float in the black hole in peace (or pieces, as it were).



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
reply to post by LightSource
 


Long time lurker here posting for the first time..

Having just watched the first part of Stephen Hawking's 'Grand Design' series, it seems to me that a big problem with the hypothesis put forth in the OP is time.

Hawking states that at the centre of a singularity, time does not exist. If you were to throw a clock into a black hole, assuming it could withstand the enormous tidal forces, it would slow down until it reached a point at the centre where it would stop completely.

Any thoughts on this? How could causality in our universe continue if we are supposedly at the centre of a black hole?

Edited to add: Likewise, the quote in the message above about 'before our universe was created' makes no sense, as time did not exist at this point..
edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)



Hi ReturnofTheSonOfNothing-

Well some say that the past present and future are all happening at the same time which would mean there is no true time, and time that we think we know is really just an illusion. The "projection" or holographic universe would seem real but really all just an illusion. Here is another thought which could also maybe shed some "light" on this thought as well. There are many people that have had near death experiences that say they saw a big white light and were headed towards it. Could this be you headed back into the black hole to the outer surface of it? Your illusion dies and is sucked back in through the white hole (white light) and put back on the surface of the black hole (the information of you). Then at some point the process starts over again and "you" are projected again.

Also to add 1 more thing if this is the case then it would happen an infinite number of times as there is no "time". Another thought would also be if you could get sucked into another black hole then In theory you would now have 2 infinite "you's" playing an infinite number of times.

edit on 25-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aleister
reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
 

Hello former lurker, and what took you so long? It took a black hole to suck you into the threads??? You will now not see so many ads, and be able to share stuff with everyone here. And you seem intelligent and literate, so YAY! Welcome.

About the thread, I love this type of thing too. And if we are all just projections on the black hole's surface (and whoever did the maths to get to that conclusion must be given a holographic Nobel Prize or something), then did we exist at some time as real people who were sucked into the black hole, much as ReturnofTheSonOfNothing has now been sucked into ATS? Am I just a reflection of the real Aleister, who is long gone? May he float in the black hole in peace (or pieces, as it were).



Hi Aleister-

So yes we would be in theory from the original universe or black hole and got sucked in. So here is a thought that our original universe (projector) was and is our very own milky way galaxy. Our super massive black hole in the center of our galxy is the storage holder of all our information. Maybe we play our events backwards until we get sucked into the black hole which would also make the past, present and future statement very very true.



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   
First off, I just want to clarify something mentioned in the OP - the Science Daily story about the silicon fragments.

You do realise that the scientists are not suggesting these silicon fragments both came from the big bang, right? Only 2 elements were produced in the big bang - a lot of hydrogen and a small amount of helium. All of the heavier elements were forged in the stellar furnaces of stars which formed some time after. These stars then supernova'd and the resulting nebulae then formed accretion disks which settled into solar systems.

They are suggesting the fragments both came from the star which preceded our solar system.

So if these fragments are to be seen as evidence for existence in a black hole, it would be evidence for a localised black hole for just our solar system, and not the entire universe.

Just wanted to address that..

Okay -


Originally posted by LightSource
Here is another thought which could also maybe shed some "light" on this thought as well. There are many people that have had near death experiences that say they saw a big white light and were headed towards it. Could this be you headed back into the black hole to the outer surface of it?


I believe that this phenomena already has a more mundane explanation - hypoxia. When the brain is deprived of oxygen, vision is reduced to just the centre of our normal visible area resulting in 'tunnel vision'. Another common symptom of hypoxia is a feeling of euphoria.

I'll agree that the idea of a holographic existence is a thought provoking one, but unless some evidence can be presented which supports the idea, that's all it is.

So far, things haven't gone so well in that area. Physicists predicted that if the holographic universe hypothesis were true, we should be able to see some signs of it. Particularly, they think we should be able to detect a certain 'fuzziness' to elementary particles at the 'Planck Scale' (10^-35m). This would be like being able to see the pixels that make up an image.

Well, they have gone further than that - ten trillion times further to be exact. Down to 10^-48m and still no sign of any pixels making up the universe.

See io9.com... or just check the wikipedia entry on the 'Holographic Principle'.

Until there is some evidence for it, or until it can be demonstrated in some way I personally see no reason to entertain the notion any further than as an interesting thought experiment.
edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
First off, I just want to clarify something mentioned in the OP - the Science Daily story about the silicon fragments.

You do realise that the scientists are not suggesting these silicon fragments both came from the big bang, right? Only 2 elements were produced in the big bang - a lot of hydrogen and a small amount of helium. All of the heavier elements were forged in the stellar furnaces of stars which formed some time after. These stars then supernova'd and the resulting nebulae then formed accretion disks which settled into solar systems.

They are suggesting the fragments both came from the star which preceded our solar system.

So if these fragments are to be seen as evidence for existence in a black hole, it would be evidence for a localised black hole for just our solar system, and not the entire universe.

Just wanted to address that..

Okay -


Hi again ReturnofTheSonOfNothing-

Picture a universe outside ours. Now picture a black hole in that universe, lets say another milky way galaxy. Now picture all the matter being sucked into the super massive black hole. If you watch that short video I provide their theory is that on the surface of the black hole is all the information of each item that was sucked into it. They also go on to say that in their theory if you were able to gather that information you could then create the same item that was lost in it.

More on black holes is another theory that on the other side is a "white hole" spewing out this same matter. My opinion is it would be pure energy just like a "big bang" only there was no "bang" (except the rip that was caused by the black hole being created). I picure it like a balloon filling up, where the black hole would be the same as ourselves filling up a ballon and the air would be the spewing energy from the while hole. One of the things I have learned in this life is that size is only relevant to the perceiver. So 1 black hole would create a universe and then all black holes would then be their own universe.

Could it be that we are in fact living an exact replica of our first universe by the information stored on our black hole? the pure energy that is spewing out eventually becomes what it was when it was "destroyed". The most advanced science that could ever be thought of is just questions that haven't been answered yet.
edit on 25-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing


I believe that this phenomena already has a more mundane explanation - hypoxia. When the brain is deprived of oxygen, vision is reduced to just the centre of our normal visible area resulting in 'tunnel vision'. Another common symptom of hypoxia is a feeling of euphoria.

I'll agree that the idea of a holographic existence is a thought provoking one, but unless some evidence can be presented which supports the idea, that's all it is.

So far, things haven't gone so well in that area. Physicists predicted that if the holographic universe hypothesis were true, we should be able to see some signs of it. Particularly, they think we should be able to detect a certain 'fuzziness' to elementary particles at the 'Planck Scale' (10^-35m). This would be like being able to see the pixels that make up an image.

Well, they have gone further than that - ten trillion times further to be exact. Down to 10^-48m and still no sign of any pixels making up the universe.

See io9.com... or just check the wikipedia entry on the 'Holographic Principle'.

Until there is some evidence for it, or until it can be demonstrated in some way I personally see no reason to entertain the notion any further than as an interesting thought experiment.
edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)


I just wanted to add this and say that maybe the "fuzziness" would be the strings themselves. I also wanted to add that String theory as is stated down below leads to the holographic principle.


String theory is an active research framework in particle physics that attempts to reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity. It is a contender for a theory of everything (TOE), a self-contained mathematical model that describes all fundamental forces and forms of matter. String theory posits that the elementary particles (i.e., electrons and quarks) within an atom are not 0-dimensional objects, but rather 1-dimensional oscillating lines ("strings").

The earliest string model, the bosonic string, incorporated only bosons, although this view developed to the superstring theory, which posits that a connection (a "supersymmetry") exists between bosons and fermions. String theories also require the existence of several extra dimensions to the universe that have been compactified into extremely small scales, in addition to the four known spacetime dimensions.

The theory has its origins in an effort to understand the strong force, the dual resonance model (1969). Subsequent to this, five superstring theories were developed that incorporated fermions and possessed other properties necessary for a theory of everything. Since the mid-1990s, in particular due to insights from dualities shown to relate the five theories, an eleven-dimensional theory called M-theory is believed to encompass all of the previously distinct superstring theories.[1]

Many theoretical physicists (among them Stephen Hawking, Edward Witten, Juan Maldacena and Leonard Susskind) believe that string theory is a step towards the correct fundamental description of nature. This is because string theory allows for the consistent combination of quantum field theory and general relativity, agrees with general insights in quantum gravity (such as the holographic principle and black hole thermodynamics), and because it has passed many non-trivial checks of its internal consistency.[2][3][4][5] According to Hawking in particular, "M-theory is the only candidate for a complete theory of the universe."[6] Other physicists, such as Feynman, Lee Smolin and Glashow, have criticized string theory for not providing novel experimental predictions at accessible energy scales.[7]

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 25-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 06:59 PM
link   
According to what I've seen and heard over the years, this is my laymen's attempt at summing up the current scientific thought about the cosmos, its origins, and its fate:
1. It all started in a big bang
2. Early universe was hydrogen and helium
3. Stars formed and later exploded to produce heavier elements
4. It happened relatively quickly so that intelligent life might have existed several billion years ago
5. Some stars are, amazingly, as old as 13+ billion years - they're all very low mass
6. The universe is about 13.82 billion years old
7. Dark energy and dark matter account for an unseen mass/energy that acts on other objects
8. The universe is expanding and will continue to expand in all directions
9. The observable universe exists inside a terminating bubble outside of which we will never see
10. The universe will continue to expand and we will see less and less
11. The Higgs Boson, said to exist according to recent study, is unstable
12. Since the Higgs is unstable, it means that our universe will be replaced in several billion years
13. It'll be replaced by a more stable universe that will expand at lightspeed and destroy our universe

I goofed around with some math a while back. I was trying to figure out how big the observable universe would be if OUR sun was 60 feet away from the earth and this is what I produced:
(please excuse errors... remember.... i'm a laymen here, not a scientist)

28.00182 feet = mercury (0.466 697 AU; aphelion; furthest distance)
606.9574824 feet = saturn (10.11595804 AU; aphelion; furthest distance)
645.1612903 feet = 1 billion miles
2932.26 feet (0.5553 mi) = pluto (48.871 AU; aphelion; furthest distance)
645,161.2903 feet (122.1896 mi) = 1 trillion miles
3,792,661.531 feet (718.3071 mi) = 1 light/year
16,573,930.89 feet (3,139.0020 mi) = alpha centauri (4.37 light/year)
645,161,290.3 feet (122,189.6383 mi) = 1 quadrillion miles
9,557,507,058,120 feet (1,810,133,912.5227 mi) = galaxy andromeda (2.52 million light/year)
174,462,430,426,000,000 feet (33,042,126,974,621.2121 mi) = edge of observable universe

So at that scale, our solar system out to pluto would fit within 3000 feet. But the nearest star system would require over 3,000 miles. The observable universe is 33 trillion miles. But keep in mind that's not just other neighboring stars, that's neighboring galaxies out to the edge of observation. So whereas the stars in our galaxy would go out for thousands and millions of miles at most, other galaxies would extend out to billions and thousands of billions of miles..

The thing that struck me about all this was when I visualized it. The sun was about the size of a soccer ball and it was 60 feet from the earth. The earth was about the size of "o", literally. If you see "o" here on the screen, that's the size. What's amazing is that all the solar energy that has fed this earth and allowed for its life to come about has come from a relatively small sliver of light from the sun. Yet, this light is beaming out in all directions and that's just amazing to me.

I feel as time goes on we will know our interstellar neighborhood as well as we know the countries on earth. And being able to picture it all in 3d is important as well. I suspect we will discover planets around the nearby stars and this will inspire fascination in many a young (and old) dreamer.

I always go back to the original thinkers over 400 years ago that reasoned there might be other planets like earth around other suns like our sun. Yes, in fact, there were people back then that believed this, though without strong supporting evidence. Many did dare to suspect that our earth was circling the sun and that the stars at night were in fact other suns, but it was a leap of faith to suggest that there were other earths as well. I ask myself, what must we reason today to be as ahead of our time as they were? What's so outrageous (heresy!) and yet true?

(keep in mind that educated people in those days did not believe the earth was flat. this is actually a myth, mostly. laymen might have believed it, but not those doing academic study.)

We now know that other planets circle around other stars. We're now on the hunt for smaller planets like earth and there's much reason to believe we'll eventually find one.

Furthermore, we also know that the young Mars had liquid water rivers and oceans. We suspect that Venus may have also had water for a short-time. Greater still, we see now that Titan is like the early earth. It has methane rivers and seas. It rains methane. It has cryovolcanoes that belch a thick slushy WATER. In fact, it's believed that there's water mixed with other chemicals that constitues some of Titan's mountains. On Titan, water would be hard as rock and so only flows whne it's "molten". New research also hints that Titan is complex enough to produce amino acids.

The question is whether life out there is anything like it's here on earth. One might argue there's no life at all, but considering the many places life might form, the numbers are astronomical. You don't just consider planets, you must also consider rogue planets, moons, dwarf planets, asteroids, comets. Our solar systme, for example, has over 160 moons. Research hints that there could be billions or thousands of billions of rogue planets in our galaxy alone. If life turns out to be persevering and hardy then it'll be almost everywhere where it can find heat and some complex chemistry.

But it's still possible. Maybe earth is the only place in the universe where life exists.

But something tells me that life, once formed, seeks to spread itself.
edit on 25-4-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 25 2013 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSource
 


It's fascinating to think about, but again there just is no evidence.

All sorts of weird and wonderful things could be true. We could just be the extrusion into 3 dimensional space of vast pan-dimensional beings. Or perhaps the dreams of some hypergalactic space-beast.

I happen to suspect our universe was likely the result of a collision between 2 branes in the multiverse, but it could just have easily have popped into existence from nothing, or have been sneezed into existence by the Great Green Arkleseizure..

Perhaps life itself is a play written by a race of ancient turnips who live outside the known universe. Or maybe it's true that it's 'Turtles, all the way down'.

It's fun to speculate, but without evidence that's all it is.



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
reply to post by LightSource
 


It's fascinating to think about, but again there just is no evidence.

All sorts of weird and wonderful things could be true. We could just be the extrusion into 3 dimensional space of vast pan-dimensional beings. Or perhaps the dreams of some hypergalactic space-beast.

I happen to suspect our universe was likely the result of a collision between 2 branes in the multiverse, but it could just have easily have popped into existence from nothing, or have been sneezed into existence by the Great Green Arkleseizure..

Perhaps life itself is a play written by a race of ancient turnips who live outside the known universe. Or maybe it's true that it's 'Turtles, all the way down'.

It's fun to speculate, but without evidence that's all it is.


Thinking that the universe was created by a big bang is also just speculation and I feel fundamentally wrong and i'll tell you why.

Big bang-



A cosmological theory holding that the universe originated approximately 20 billion years ago from the violent explosion of a very small agglomeration of matter of extremely high density and temperature.

www.thefreedictionary.com...

Black Hole-


A black hole is a region of spacetime from which gravity prevents anything, including light, from escaping.[1] The theory of general relativity predicts that a sufficiently compact mass will deform spacetime to form a black hole.

en.wikipedia.org...

How can something so small which held all the matter in the universe not be a black hole? If the definition of a black hole is that a sufficently compact mass will deform spacetime to form a black hole, how could everything in our universe have become so small and dense and yet not become a black hole? There was no "big bang" in my opinion as they say, and again maybe a big rip when the black hole was formed and the white hole started spewing energy.

Also as you say there could be (and are) so many weird and wonderful things true in our universe who is not to say that each black hole in our universe is just 1 spot in a huge brain where its knowledge is kept.
edit on 26-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 03:28 AM
link   
S&F

This is just mind boggling

Let me get this right, we are all dead then yeah? As we have been sucked into the black hole and destroyed and we are kind copies/remnants of what we were chilling out on the surface of a stupidly big black hole.



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by felixjames20
S&F

This is just mind boggling

Let me get this right, we are all dead then yeah? As we have been sucked into the black hole and destroyed and we are kind copies/remnants of what we were chilling out on the surface of a stupidly big black hole.



Hi felixjames20-

Yes that is what I am proposing. The matter in our universe is stored (as information) on the outside of a black hole and we would be the copies (projections) if you will of that information. The black hole is like a hard drive or role of film which would then be "projected" by the white hole like the light from a movie projector or computer screen.

Edit- I would also add that the "size" of the black hole is only relevant to the person viewing it. To us that black hole would be huge but maybe its just a "normal" size looking at it from outside our universe.
edit on 26-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by LightSource
 


Then how is new life created if we are projections?



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 01:00 PM
link   
If the center of the black hole mirrors that of which it has consumed that means and entire galaxy or universe depending ont the scales you want to use is reflected. Therefore you could have a whole dimension mirrored on the surface of the black hole.

That's the theory.

For all this to be condensed vibrational energy coexisting with ethereal energy it would seem a black hole would be the best suspect.

So then you ask yourself if we are inside a brain. Are the black holes aneurysm's Or would it be more like a coaxial cable leading from one area of the brain to another?



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by LightSource

Originally posted by DarknStormy
I have thought about this in the past. Is it possible that we are the remnants of a massive star which exploded Millions of years ago? Blackholes are the remains of failed or exploded stars, yeah?


So that is my thought yes. Before our universe was created there was a star (or whatever creates a super massive black hole that is in the center of all galaxies) that went supernova and turned into a black hole which ripped a hole in its current universe. The other end is the white hole spewing out all the matter creating our universe. all black holes then create new universes so in theory we would then have infinite universes. Then if you watch the video that talks about the universe as a hologram all the energy/light coming out of the white hole is the "projector" if you will of our holographic universe. Also in that video they say in theory all the matter that is sent into the black hole there is now a imprint of the informaition on the black hole itself and then could have it recreated. So to get a little stranger of an "infinite" you and me and the universe I would then have to say in "theory" all universes should be the same as the "original" created universe just changed a little. So there would then be an infinite number of you and me running around in different universes.
edit on 22-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)

Check out my username history, I have posts going back 7 years ago talking about muli-verses and the output of blackholes being the source or gateway into other Universes.

The thing is, those other Universes may not at all be playing by the rules and limits that we have in this Universe. For example over here, we already have scientific foundations of knowledge in place, but in other Universes, all those rules may not apply or be totally upside down and inside out



posted on Apr, 26 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   
I don't actually believe black holes exist as they are depicting in any case, since Electric Universe does away with black holes and big bangs!

If the cosmos has recycle bins, its for the dust/shadow, not for souls.

www.holoscience.com...


It is not a star but common sense that is being torn apart. Black holes are not ‘stringy’ or ‘fuzzy.’ They are a mathematical figment. They don’t exist. There was no need to invent them if the electrical nature of matter and the universe had been considered. The ‘black hole’ concept is a classic example of the malaise afflicting modern physics. Mathematicians dominate the discipline. And it is a common mistake to assume that to be very clever at mathematics is to somehow be a genius across the board...


But most damning is that the narrow training of astrophysicists does not allow them to “see” the powerful electric discharge effects at the centers of galaxies. The x-rays, gamma rays, jets and radio lobes cry out for an electrical model. By simply invoking the electrical force, which is a thousand trillion trillion trillion times stronger than gravity, we can return to the realm of normal objects, normal physics, and common sense electrical engineering. The gravitational black hole model is fictional and worthless.





new topics
top topics
 
21
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join