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.
Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by yampa
If not a black hole, what exists at the center of the galaxy?
What is your understanding of the term black hole and what it physically means?
The number line is a totally abstract mathematical construction.
Originally posted by yampa
Black holes were produced as a theoretical speculation *first* - they were not trying to explain unexplained data. If the original speculation is false, and you can point out mathematically why it is false then why would you return to a broken theory?
Crothers is making serious specific technical charges against the mathematical basis of the models - it is not easy understand his objections without quite a lot of experience around mathematical modelling (same reason many people never challenge the original theory).
I watched that video last year and I couldn't quite grasp the objections because I hadn't studied enough of the math. I've done a lot more study and practice since, and for what it's worth, it now seems to me that he really knows his subject and is pretty much smashing it out the park.
It's not like we have all this crazy blackholeish data pouring down on us which is begging to be explained. What we have is a completely fictional model, that science has spent fortunes and countless careers on trying to fit data to.
Originally posted by ImaFungi
Purely out of interest, in your understanding, what is a black hole?
Is it purely energy, like a quark-gluon soup? Or is it more plasmic and primal then that?
Im talking about the super massive black hole at the center of the galaxy. Im wondering if it is rotating so unbelievably fast, how can it grow in density, when matter goes near it (as data shows it appears to be shredded), how is it thought that the matter gets sucked in?
Originally posted by wildespace
For me, the two examples are quite enough to conclude that dividing by zero results in infinity.
The problem of dividing by zero reminds me of the impossibility of having square root of -1. Yet we have found a way to deal with it by using imaginary numbers. Perhaps dividing by zero is not as scary as the academia makes it to be.
The reason maths has such trouble with division by zero is because a) the result of a calculation is expected to be a number (and infinity is not a number), and b) because in algebra, division is the inverse of multiplication, and multiplying any number by zero results in zero.
So sometimes it's good to think outside the box.
Originally posted by Moduli
It's not any of those things, because all of those things are technobabble and don't have any meaning.