Black holes do not exist

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Luchito, Mar 3, 2021.

  1. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    "Our" time, that is a heavy expression, many people shrinking and being compressed into a single poster named Dave C something. I guess you also have the mathematical background for such a phenomenon.

    To tell the truth, nobody knows what they are because they don't exist,
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389


    I'm curious about what you eat, because it makes you guess very well what is going on.
    Why you tempt me to write what you already know? Theory of evolution is one, the superfluous theory of one layer of snow per year was another one, etc.

    And funny thing: when you review inheritance and chromosome anomalies, the results are that there is not a single chance apes will acquire human characteristics, but there are lots, but lots of observations, showing that anomalies at that level cause in humans to acquire ape characteristics.

    What this reviews are telling you?

    Very simple, these observations are telling you that if any step between those two happen, then apes will continue being apes but humans could become apes.

    Then, nature is crying loud that there is not a process of ape alike beings becoming human but totally the contrary, that humans -because certain events- became apes.

    Science rules, yes sir.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    You are dodging.

    Yes. They are a direct consequence of GR. They are a prediction of GR.

    But since you don't believe in math, we have ample physical evidence for them:

    1. We have observed astronomical objects that have no other explanation except a massive, highly compact object,
    2. We have observed stars at the centre of our galaxy orbiting a body that is so constrained by both mass and size that the only thing it can be is a black hole.
    3. We have resolved them directly.

    So, we have a theory - one of the most successful theories in all science - and that theory directly predicts black holes. And we have observations that no other theory can explain.
    And now we have direct observation of the thing that our theories have been predicting.

    That's science, baby.


    We do, and they do.

    Sure, what you think they are - doesn't. What you think they are - is born of ignorance and laziness, but it has nothing to do with black holes.

    And I'm convinced you know that now, otherwise you wouldn't have wasted 20 posts trying to dodge the fact that you don't even know what a black hole is.

    So yes, this is a waste of our time.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    OK, it looks like you understand primate evolution even less than you understand black holes.
     
  8. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Good luck with that

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    I'm thinking when science puts out something which disagrees with the good book that disagreement is an attack

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Yes when will you start?
    Well that's a turn up for the books. Black holes are like (equivalent to) god

    Nobody knows what god is because he/it does not exist

    god = black hole. That should be worth a years worth of Scientific American articles

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Pretty good baby typing English

    Hey do you think Luchito could be one of those primates set to type out Shakespeare, but somehow got shifted to silly science?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447


    perpetual causative simultaneous actions

    interesting idea
    (its like a maths problem that may or may not work)


    how does everything stop from not all happening at the same time ?

    the reflection of the person in the mirror bouncing to another mirror going on forever...
    the action of the phenomena
    which is being observed
    so it is as a consequence
    of a previous or simultaneous action/phenomena ?


    remember this is black holes(physics), not religion

    did someone mention time as a factor ?

    assuming you are observing, you can only be observing(in theory) from a time location
    if you are not observing, then you are creating and lose your ability to be sitting in the future observing your own consequential action being enacted at the same time in the future, (in one theory).

    it gets very complicated if your talking REAL (theoretical)quantum physics


    physics
    not religion ...
     
  13. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Kid asking question about two Black Holes - 3 min 19 secs



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    RainbowSingularity likes this.
  14. Dicart Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    465
  15. Dicart Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    465
    Other observation here :
    https://www.eso.org/public/france/news/eso0846/
     
  16. Luchito Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    389
    You truly have a great point.

    But instead of "time location" (assumed to be a expression of yours because such a thing doesn't exist) the physical location of the observer might bring different results. This has happened with the different reports of the Shoemaker asteroid hitting Jupiter, when from Earth and spacecrafts, the observation reports were disparate when comparing their data.

    To bring this topic Black holes do not exist to its end at one two three, the next step is to follow your inclusion of time as the major factor, this is because time is the key opening the marvels predicted by Relativity, and Relativity is the base foundation for the formation of black holes.

    You just ruined lots of expected fun, but I think making this debate short is better for everybody, it saves lots of babbling around.

    Time: Relativity never specified what time is, but assumed its characteristics.

    A scrutiny reveals time is nothing but a measure, and invention made to to obtain an ordered data, like we do with other measures we call weight, longitude, volume, etc.

    Discarding time as a physical entity capable to be distorted by the speed of objects and gravity force of bodies, then the whole theory of Relativity is invalidated, and by consequence the theoretical foundation to assume the existence of black holes disappears the same way it appeared decades ago: by magic.

    Ladies and gentlemen, claps to RainbowSingularity, thanks to him we went straight to the main source of the theory of black holes (Relativity), and thanks to him this discussion has reached its top ending.

    What can be discussed now?

    Time
    doesn't exist physically, time is just a measure, you won't expect a measure to suffer "dilatation" because such should be nuts.

    Relativity discards itself by its lack of evidence inside its own doctrines, it shot itself in its foot when it used a conventional idea of those times -flowing of time- which was a common understanding in those years, and now it has been realized that such was no other but a common misunderstanding of reality. Lol.

    I feel frustrated as you do, because I was preparing a muddy ground to be mopped by lots of faces while making them eat dirt, but, well, thanks to RainbowSingularity participation, the show is ending fast.

    I don't think someone will want to discuss the validity of Relativity to make valid the black holes theory.

    If such is the next step, by rules of the scientific method, the physical existence of time must be brought to the table to be analyzed, tested, and play with it to obtain the maximum information of such a phenomenon.

    No other but direct evidence must be presented, because in order to define time as other than a measure, a solid definition of time will be required, and that definition must include those weird characteristics of flowing and dilatation.

    Without evidence, whatever you say is not science.


    Black holes do not exist, I put my house and all my money on it.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2021
  17. Dicart Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    465
    Without science, whatever you say is only common sens.
    So, how will you now prove what you just said ? ("Without evidence, whatever you say is not science")
    Black holes exist, but you dont understand what the term "exist" stands for when used in the scientific domain.
    In some theory time exist, in other theory time do not exist.
    You never asked yourself the question why the scientist never complain about this obvious contradiction ?
    Are they just too stupid that they not even see this ?
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,935
    Not knowing about the evidence is not the same as lack of evidence.
     
  19. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    Difference in understanding of observations

    Evidence will sort out the winner

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. Dicart Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    465
    The black holes exists (this is a fact), but we only well know their external part.
    What happens as matter fall into the black hole is less obvious, because we can only know this by using theory, so it is still science but we can't have experimental confirmation.
    Therefore, it is possible that the mathematical representation behind the Schwarzchild limit is ... much more a mathematical simplification then a physical reality.
     
  21. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    2 different things


    magisterium
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magisterium

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Black_hole
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    moose lodge

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Ladies night

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    all different things
    but the mind looks for ways to connect some with others to simplify things to add "reason" of singular concept as a natural process of mental render
    arguable if this state of entropic thought might have a biological foundation toward cellular formation of its own render function to self recognize as a receptor controlled experiencer

    (this is write4u & Daves s' territory ?)
     
  22. Dicart Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    465
    A Black hole is a giant donut !
     
  23. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    and we have usa government released UFO footage showing humans have barely touched the surface of physics which makes the latest jet fighters look like a children's box cart.
     

Share This Page