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.
OccamsRazor04
VoidHawk
A black hole is an object — typically a collapsed star — whose gravity is so strong that its escape velocity exceeds the speed of light. Since nothing is known to exceed the speed of light, nothing can escape from a black hole.
Does that indicate that an object within the gravity would be pulled faster than the speed of light? If not why not?
And If so, then FTL is possible.
No, it means an object would have to go FTL to escape. Nothing goes FTL. Nothing escapes (except for certain instances where the escape velocity is less than FTL). If FTL was possible then the black hole would not suck it in, it would escape, the fact nothing does is further proof FTL is impossible.
Another example of the aether convection fields would be the way sol entraps planets within its outputs convection path. That is, we are not falling towards it on some crazy flat space blanket, we are trapped in its outputs convection path. What keeps us in orbit and not being pulled towards it is the pressurization of the output field. Where each planet's location should then be a output fields focal point or center of field.
Nothing goes FTL.
If FTL was possible then the black hole would not suck it in, it would escape, the fact nothing does is further proof FTL is impossible.
Snarl
Here are my questions about black holes. If a black hole is the remnant of a collapsing star, and that star was burning, and shedding mass (CMEs) ... didn't it already have enough mass to absorb light to begin with?
Riffrafter
Nothing goes FTL.
Do you mean nothing that we know of?
What about tachyons? Like black holes, much of what we know/surmise about them is theory and conjecture based on other "solid" science.
Thanks! Do they think that spin and or revolutions (as in Earth both spinning and revolving around the Sun) are possibly part of the 'cause' or the result of gravity... or neither? (It seems like the Earth's velocity would propel it in a straight line, but for the Sun's gravitational pull, and this opposing force might result in the Earth spinning and revolving around our star.) Thank you for your patience!
Phage
reply to post by new_here
Please give your take on what causes gravity. It's not fully understood, or at least subject to some debate... am I right? I'd be interested to know what you adhere to.
As far as I can tell gravity is a property of matter. As to what "causes" that property...no one knows and physicists would be the first tell you that. That doesn't mean that they don't know how it behaves and it doesn't behave anything like magnetism. At least not like any form of magnetism that has ever been seen.edit on 9/28/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)
Phage
reply to post by new_here
The Earth's rotation is the result of momentum left over from the original formation of the Solar System. It is gradually slowing down though, due to the influence of the gravity of the Moon. The reason for this is a bit on the complicated side though. In essence, the Moon is "stealing" rotational energy from the Earth and converting it to orbital energy. That is why the Moon is slowing moving farther from the Earth.