Black holes do not exist

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

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

    Messages:
    12,361
    Be prepared to be amazed

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    https://www.iflscience.com/space/ga...of-a-nearby-supermassive-black-hole-eruption/

    Small extract

    Feast your eyes on the best view in radio waves of Centaurus A, a nearby galaxy whose supermassive black hole has been erupting for millions of years. This activity has created jets that stretch for a million light-years – and if they were visible to our eyes, they would wider than 16 full moons in the sky.

    Not a bad photo of something which does not exist

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,130
    What's a "white hole"? Do any exist?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,361
    Mr Google will direct you to Wikipedia which might resolve your query

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,130
    It's a pity that Write4U didn't check with Mr Google or wikipedia.
     
  8. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,607
    I did and used the term in context .

    What is a white hole?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/what-is-a-white-hole/


    This is easily described as an infinitely recycling toroidal universe, and the singularity is the joining of a new opposite dimension where gravity is reversed.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2021
  9. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,361
    Wri4U has been on my Iggy list for a long time since I become tired of his finger wagging listen to me text writing style

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,607
    The irony is inescapable .......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,130
    Write4U:

    Here's the important point about white holes from what you quoted from elsewhere, in case you missed it:
    "But unlike black holes, there’s no consensus about whether white holes exist, or how they’d be formed."
    So, the correct answer to the question I asked you ("Do any [white holes] exist?") is: none have been confirmed to exist, so far, and in fact there is disagreement about whether any could even exist theoretically.

    Then, at the end of your post, you added what I assume is your own conjecture:
    I have no idea what "easily" could possibly mean in that sentence. I think that's probably your Dunning Kruger at work again: you badly underestimate the "ease" of working out the implications of a complicated gravitational theoretical hypothesis.

    But how did I know that sentence was one of your own invention, rather than one you were quoting? The simple answer is that, as is often the case when you (Write4U) attempt to make a technical statement, the sentence doesn't make any actual sense when it is broken down into its parts.

    For instance, what is an "opposite dimension"? That concept is absent from physics.

    And you want to give the impression that you have a clue about what an "infinitely recycling toroidal universe" might be, but that's a smokescreen, isn't it?
     
    river likes this.
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,607
    The difference between you and me is that you regurgitate that what has already been written, whereas I venture out on a limb and posit a speculative perspective on what is known about a subject.
    Note that this comment was about the accompanying illustration of a toroidal universe.
    Yeahhh, isn't it something that might be fun to consider? Can you actually definitively claim that posit false or can you perhaps take that ball and run with it? Offer a variation on a theme?

    Perhaps it is my 15 years of playing jazz that has given me a penchant for seeking "variations on a theme".

    Theories are not fashioned by refraining from speculation. On the contrary, most theories are achieved with vigorous debate about possible solutions, until some consensus emerges and the focus shifts to providing proof.

    I compare you to a musician playing in a large orchestra (no room for improvisation) whereas I like small free-flowing combos (allowing plenty of supporting improvisation).

    Just a difference in style, that's all.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2021
  13. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,574
    No, you make up stupid stuff based on your ignorance of physics. Instead of making up stupid stuff why don't you learn some physics. You just waste your time and look silly making stuff up.
     
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,607
    And you know how all about this stuff? Well then enlighten me with your deep insights about Black holes and White holes.
    Or stop your silly observations about something you know just as little about as I do!

    I challenge you to say something intelligent about White holes. If you can't then just sit back and enjoy the banter.
     
  15. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,130
    I think you'll find that in almost every case where scientific advance is made, it is made by somebody who has an exquisite understanding of the current state of scientific thought on the matter. When it comes to speculation, I might venture that there are two types: fantastical speculation and realistic speculation. In fantastical speculation, anything goes. Fantastical ideas don't need to conform to what is already known about the world. Magic is allowed in the world of Harry Potter by "speculating" about how magic might work if we were free to ignore all the evidence that our real world doesn't allow magic of that kind. Realistic speculation, on the other hand, requires a deep understanding about what is and isn't possible, based on a knowledge of the constraints imposed by what we already know about our world. Realistic speculation then takes that small subset (of things that may be possible) and proposes reasonable hypotheses about how things might go, which can, and perhaps will, be ultimately tested to see whether such speculation was justified.

    If you have vaguely come across the term "toroidal universe" somewhere, you are free - of course - to go off into wild speculative fantasies about what such a universe might look like and what might be possible within that fantasy world. But that kind of speculation won't lead to any new science. To do new science, you will need to learn about universe topologies in general, and then the specific mathematical description of the toroidal varieties, and about what is theoretically possible in a toroidal universe. Then, with the appropriate background under your belt, you might be in a position to expand on the theory you have already learned to make some intelligent guesses (hypotheses) about novel properties that toroidal universes might have, and to suggest appropriate tests that could confirm or refute your hypothesis.

    To take another example, consider Magical Realist and his UFO crusade on this forum. He, like you, likes to "posit a speculative perspective on ... a subject". So he speculates (fantastical speculation) about how lights in the sky might be time travellers from a future Mars, or whatever, and none of it is the least bit scientific or likely to provide any useful insights into the UFO "phenomenon". At the same time, he ignores everything that is known about the fallibility of human perception from science, and much else besides. And he can't be bothered to do the leg work required to get up to speed with any of that stuff, because - let's face it - realistic speculation takes so much more effort than fantastical speculation. It's easier to just tune into to entertaining stuff on youtube.
    The claim you want me to falsify is ... what? Your throw-away idea that a toroidal universe might be 'infinitely recycling' (whatever that might mean), and that it might therefore include 'white holes' (whatever those might be)?

    Can you not see how hopelessly nonspecific your "hypothesis" is? You haven't defined your terms. You haven't outlined any mechanism by which your idea would bear its white-hole 'fruit'. We might as well talk about how Luke Skywalker's landspeeder can float above the ground. Answer: fantastical speculation, so anything goes! It just has to be fun!

    Don't get me wrong. I like watching Star Wars as much as the next guy, but I don't need to kid myself that it's teaching me about science when I watch it.
    That vigorous debate you mention is part of what I called realistic speculation, above.
    I don't think you understand what working research scientists do when they go to work each day. Do you think, for instance, that no "improvisation" was involved in the invention of vaccines for Covid 19? It wasn't the writers of Star Wars who came up with those vaccines, you know. It was scientists who have all done the hard yards in getting themselves up to speed with a lot of "boring, mundane" science that is already established. I guess you'd argue they are the type of people who, like me, simply "regurgitate what is already written". But then the obvious question arises: how do people like us ever produce anything new? Perhaps Lady Gaga dropped by the lab and imagined up a corona vaccine to spite the unimaginative scientists who were taught never to speculate? Is that what you think?

    By the way, I play music too, including jazz. And yes, I improvise. I don't pretend I'm doing science while I'm playing, though.
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2021
  16. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,130
    Back at you.
     
  17. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,612
    Yep. When John Goodenough or Jeff Dahn say something about a new battery, I tend to sit up and pay attention. When Magical Realist says something about yet another ghost, or W4U says that microtubules have enabled yet another miracle, I tend to laugh.
     
    Michael 345 likes this.
  18. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,361
    ROFL?
     
  19. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,607
    That remark was directed at origin, but if you want to include yourself, that's ok by me.

    From what I have read on the recent state of research on microtubules, we'll see who has the last laugh. And while I cannot judge the quantum mechanics in this process, I am not the least bit worried that I will be proven wrong about the role of microtubules in the phenomenon of emergent consciousness.

    "the brain is too wet and warm for quantum and therefore consciousness."

    Do you know how ignorant that sounds?

    You may keep deluding yourselves about asking the hard question about some magic ingredient. I'll stay with the known properties of microtubules and the inherent potential contained in that knowledge.

    Are we drifting off topic here, or is this going to be laid at my door again?
     
    Last edited: Dec 28, 2021
  20. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,574
    Oh.
    No one enjoys your ignorant ramblings. I do enjoy the intelligent responses to your blather.
     
  21. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,607
    Welcome to the show then. After all, nothing else happening.

    Want to add some blather?
     
  22. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,607
    I have made my speculative contribution and aside from meaningless huffing and puffing, no one else has offered anything of interest and worthy of further discussion.

    So, no back at me. The ball is still in your half of the court. Man up and make a guess, that would be fun. That's all this is, in case anyone was under the illusion this is formal scientific theatre.
     
  23. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,612
    Were you under the illusion that your "speculative contribution" was worthy of further discussion? Funny.

    Maybe white holes are really microtubules.
     
    Michael 345 and Dywyddyr like this.

Share This Page