Temperature of Black Hole Jet Exceeds Expectations, Shatters Scientific Theory

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight


But again...isnt the oceans "body" more susceptible to the earths gravity than a mere humans.

Yes. Paradoxically, that gravity reinforces the bulge of the tide.

Look what hapens at the sides of the Earth when the Moon faces the planet:



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.

We humans though are nowhere as large to experience a similar effect, hehe.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

LIke the concept of the compass and magnetism, the water is indeed magnetically grounded to the planet by all the other forces that's what's keeping it here. But it cannot seep into the interior of the planet so once it levels out such as it is with the ocean, then the other forces generating attraction are able to intereact with it causing the tides.

It's not specifically just the moon that causes the tides. We would still have the tides because of our sun would pull at the water that is less solid than the ground.

So we would still very much have tides because of our star if that helps answer the question.

a reply to: AnuTyr

im saying gravitons don't.

Serendipity
I just revisited the Electric Universe theory and this is telling

www.holoscience.com...

“After all, to get the whole universe totally wrong in the face of clear evidence for over 75 years merits monumental embarrassment and should induce a modicum of humility.” [3] “The Standard Model of particle physics would appear to fail in nearly every possible way, and all of its failures seem to stem from the early 1930s. By all indications science seems to have taken a wrong turn about this time. After three hundred years of progressively simplifying the description of the universe, with fewer entities and simpler laws, it suddenly turned the other way, with complexity and entities multiplying like rabbits.” [4] “We are about to enter the 21st century but our understanding of the origin of inertia, mass, and gravitation still remains what has been for centuries – an outstanding puzzle.” [5]

How has this situation arisen? In the 20th century technology perfected wireless communication and computers and got man into space, while fundamental science fell deeper into a ‘black hole’ of complication, illogicality and metaphysics. I consider the principal cause has been the usurping, since Einstein, of natural philosophy and physics by theoretical mathematicians. Meanwhile Einstein, perhaps to his credit, remained sceptical of his own work.[6,7]

I have always found it instructive to read what past luminaries of science thought of a radically new idea. The free exchange of opposing opinions is later stifled by the bandwagon effect. Science, like all human endeavours, is subject to fads and fallacies.

When controversy was still tolerated over Einstein’s theories, Sir Oliver Lodge, a noted Fellow of the Royal Society, wrote in Nature on Feb 17, 1921: “..what is really wanted for a truly Natural Philosophy is a supplement to Newtonian mechanics, expressed in terms of the medium which he suspected and sought after but could not attain, and introducing the additional facts, chiefly electrical—especially the fact of variable inertia—discovered since his time… If we could understand the structure of the particle, in terms of the medium of which it is composed, and if we knew the structure of the rest of the medium also, so as to account for the potential stress at every point—that would be a splendid step, beyond anything accomplished yet.” [8] [Emphasis added]

This is precisely the Electric Universe view. Natural Philosophy has withered in its confrontation with the modern fashion of mathematical metaphysics and computer games. Most of the ‘discoveries’ now are merely computer generated ‘virtual reality’ — black holes, dark matter, dark energy, etc. The computer models are constructed upon a shadowy kernel of ignorance. We do not understand gravity! Einstein in his special theory of relativity postulated there was no medium, called the ‘aether.’ But Maxwell’s theory of electromagnetism requires it. And Sir Oliver Lodge saw the aether as crucial to our understanding. So Einstein, at a stroke, removed any possibility that he, or his followers, would find a link between electromagnetism and gravity. It served the egos of his followers to consecrate Einstein’s ideas and treat dissent as blasphemy.

a reply to: AnuTyr

thanks but both you and Swanne seem to avoid answering why humans dont bob up and down, after all we are mainly made of water and if the moon is strong enough to counteract the Earths centre of gravity attraction on the oceans and make tides, why do we as "lighter bodies composed mainly of water" than an ocean, not jump up and down by the effects of the moon?

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Humans don't bob up and down because they are less large than seas and so the Moon (or sun) have too few particles to pull.

Third time I'm writing it...

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

this gets even better?
www.plasmacosmology.net...

"We have direct evidence of the superluminal action of the electric force, given that gravity is a longitudinal electric force. Indeed, Newton's celebrated equation requires that gravity act instantly on the scale of the solar system. It has been calculated that gravity must operate at a speed of at least 2x1010 times the speed of light, otherwise closely orbiting stars would experience a torque that would sling them apart in mere hundreds of years. Similarly, the Earth responds to the gravitational pull of the Sun where it is at the moment, not where the Sun was 8 minutes ago. If this were not so, the Earth and all other planets in the solar system would be slung into deep space within a few thousand years. Gravity is therefore an electrical property of matter, not a geometrical property of space.

"What is the nature of light? Einstein's special theory of relativity was disconfirmed right at the start by the Michelson-Morley experiment, which showed a residual due to the æther. This was later confirmed by far more rigorous repeats of the experiment by Dayton Miller. But by then popular delusion and the madness of crowds had taken hold and contrary evidence would not be tolerated. The Dayton Miller story makes interesting reading. If it weren't for the extraordinary power of self-delusion, commonsense would tell us that a wave cannot exist in nothing. So Maxwell was right, light is a transverse electromagnetic wave moving through a medium, the æther.

a reply to: swanne
This post just confirms my opinion that we and this universe (all atoms) are being generated and projected from a distant system , sub atomic particles are speeding in faster than light and forming all atoms and then breaking apart only to repeat the process over and over.So nothing is solid, all LAWS of physics are just generated rules that are violated other places in the universe.Time is a mere generated parameter that we are to perceive as real.We are to perceive that matter is solid but its not. gravity... thats right just a perception,and yes without the observer all of this is a house of cards.I think all of this is designed to hinder the scientific minds trying to search out the operation of our surroundings to take them over, when men figure out how a natural system works ,the first thing they want to do is take it over and steal it , then sell it to the highest bidder.It seems someone knew before hand how to keep us busy when he formed these worlds ,and to protect us from ourselves by having us chasing the never ending thread .

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

That is pure rubbish.

The Earth does respond to the gravity of the Sun as it was 8 minutes ago. Gravitational waves have already been measured.

On the other hand, faster than light signals implies causality violations, and this means major problems for the universe.

10 Trillion Kelvin. Can anyone actually fathom how hot that really is though?

That's 17999999999540.33 F and 9999999999726.85 C

I can't wrap my head around the intensity of something that hot and what could possibly be happening to achieve those temperatures.

a reply to: gpols

what could possibly be happening to achieve those temperatures.

I have my ideas.

a reply to: supergravity

take them over, when men figure out how a natural system works ,the first thing they want to do is take it over and steal it , then sell it to the highest bidder.It seems someone knew before hand how to keep us busy when he formed these worlds ,and to protect us from ourselves by having us chasing the never ending thread .

www.imdb.com...
The Truman Show (1998)

a reply to: swanne

That is pure rubbish.

care to say what is exactly rubbish?

gravity waves measured...like this?

www.holoscience.com...

Then what could the signal mean? Physorg.com reports, According to David Shoemaker of MIT, the leader of the Advanced LIGO team, it looked just like physicists thought it would. “The waveform that we can calculate based on Einstein’s theory of 1916 matches exactly what we observed in 2015,” he said. “It looked like a chirp, it started at low frequencies—20 or 30 hertz, that’s like the lowest note on a bass guitar, sweeping very rapidly up over just a fraction of a second… up to 150 hertz or so, sort of near middle C on a piano.” “The chirp corresponded to the orbit of these two black holes getting smaller and smaller, and the speed of the two objects going faster and faster until the two became a single object,” he explained. “And then right at the end of this waveform, we see the wobbling of the final black hole as if it were made of jelly as it settled into a static state.” Does this reasoning really make sense? Or is the public being baffled by mathematical abstractions? 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.” What can succeed, without stretching either “space-time” or credulity, is the most concentrated form of stored electromagnetic energy known to science—a plasmoid. According to the foundational principle itself— E=mc2 —concentrated energy is equivalent to concentrated mass. So if not due to gravity, what might the LIGO chirp* be? *See here for a diagram and recording of a linear chirp. The Advanced LIGO interferometer relies on super accurate measurements using laser light traveling along each arm of the instrument. The LIGO instruments have the largest sustained ultra-high vacuum in the world (8x the vacuum of space) keeping 300,000 cubic feet (about 8,500 cubic meters) at one-trillionth the pressure of Earth’s atmosphere in an effort to prevent any effect on the laser beams that are being used to detect motion equivalent to the width of a hydrogen atom over 4 km. So the results obtained critically depend on our understanding of light being correct. But here again, Einstein did away with Maxwell’s æther medium without explaining how an electromagnetic wave could travel through nothing. You cannot wave nothing! It is remarkable that Einstein ignored the fact that the vacuum is known to have the properties of a dielectric medium. There is no perfect vacuum devoid of matter. The Electric Universe proposes that the dielectric medium of the vacuum is a plenum of neutrinos, which like all subatomic particles must have internal structure that distorts to form electric dipoles when exposed to an electric field. Of course the designers of the experiment didn’t consider that neutrinos occupy the space inside those 4 km arms. There is no way of removing them or keeping them out. They pass through the Earth as if it weren’t there.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight


www.holoscience.com...
The heart of the issue here is that Einstein did not explain gravity. As many scientists are beginning to acknowledge, a new paradigm is now required by the sheer force of discovery. Looking back on his life at age 70, Einstein gave a clear evaluation of what he believed were his accomplishments:

“You can imagine that I look back on my life’s work with calm satisfaction. But from nearby it looks quite different. There is not a single concept of which I am convinced that it will stand firm, and I feel uncertain whether I am in general on the right track.”

This confession, in a personal letter to Professor Solovine, dated 28th of March 1949, was not made public until many years after Einstein’s passing.

Nearly impossible to tell what is happening at a distance of 2B LYs. Why would anyone simply assume there is a stream of anything at all emitting from an object from which nothing can escape ... not even light.

Am afraid there's something else at work ... it's just too far away to see clearly. And there they go again with those dad-blamed guesses.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
The heart of the issue here is that Einstein did not explain gravity.

This statement is ridiculous. Einstein most certainly did "explain gravity". Ever hear of a little something called 'General Relativity'?

Science lab on earth attained a cooler 3.6 Billion degrees but they don't know how they attained that temperature. It was achieved after the plasma’s ions should have been losing energy and cooling.

Link

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: scubagravy
But what we're looking at now happened how long ago ?

Well, it's 2.4 billion light years away, so 2.4 billion years ago.

This.

Just one of the (many) things that totally trips me out about space.

The OP goes to show that most of these scientists have not a clue what is really going on out there. Makes me wonder if there IS life on other planets, that maybe they figured it all out a lot faster than us mere humans.

originally posted by: AnuTyr
a reply to: swanne

Anything that acts as a medium between the electromagnetic force and protomagnetic force are held together by the neutromagnetic force. Neutrons being much larger hold the carrying capacity of the neutromagnetic spectrum and is able to counter balance the force of the protomagnetic and electromagnetic spectrums. Each of these forces are different and interact with each other differently but collectively generate * gravity*. Gravity isn't one single force that pulls all matter together it is all the forces interacting.

My point with all of this, is that density does not = * Gravity* if gravity a catch all force that can pull in anything actually existed. All mass would be pulled into one location because the spread of this one force collectively over a distance would overpower all the other forces. However, it does not exist as such and is mearly the effect of these 3 common forces interacting and leveling out.

super mass density such as that of dark energy should, by the understanding of gravity saying that all matter regardless sends out gravitons based on its density. Then Dark energy should still intereact physical particles. However it does not because gravity is a force that is generated by these 3 interacting with each other.

And these forces carry partners, often when a partner attaches itself with another partner of the same complimentary waves. They will have less sending and reciving waves to attract single sub-atomic particles. A stable particle does not have any one type of particlar magnetic force but caries all of them collectively in a balence. that's what make the particle stable to begin with such as gold. Which is why it makes it a great conductor because electrons will be carried from one atom of gold to the next without being reabsorbed into the gold itself and becoming a new particle. You see what im saying? But the gold itself is still sending out neutro magnetic, proto magnetic and electro magnetic waves enough that is is attracted to physical mass with the highest carrying capacity of force. Which is the Earth. But does not carry enough electromagnetic charges for a magnet to pick it up.

Wow, that is some fine grade BS right here.

Please write up the force equation between two magnets and the force equation between two masses.

I'll be waiting in suspense. ROFL.

a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Well, the discovery doesn't rule out Hawking Radiation just yet.

delete