Central Black Hole Theory

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Beaconator, Jan 27, 2014.

  1. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,486
    Black holes are commonly held to be behind the creation and expansion of the universe. They are also considered the final resting place of energy and information. Therefore, they are the beginning and they are the end. Which prompts the question, "what is it now?"

    Before we begin to answer that question it is imperative to distinguish normal matters from the extremes of gravity. The universe contains different chemicals which absorb different spectrums of light. A black hole is possibly considered homogeneous and absorbs all spectrums of light. Black holes emit radiation all the time. Normal matter only emits radiation when excited. Normal matter stores information. Black holes are considered to destroy it? I might be misinformed but in any case the overall similarities between a holistic outlook to normal chemicals mirror the properties of black holes too much to consider total information loss.

    If we consider black holes the start of the universe then why do we not consider them the seed of information?

    Consider an embryo which divides creating nearly identical cells. The original cell becomes a part of many new ones. Could this biological nature been replicated from "the beginning"?

    That would mean the key to understanding the universe would be within ourselves as opposed to researched studies.

    The uses of our material capabilities are discovered through research.

    99.9% of all information is known or has been considered for centuries through the gift of consciousness. The last .1% is how a black hole produces energy in opposition to observed and recorded data. Is our data flawed? Our ideas inverted? Incomplete? Or is this just another example of our ability to misrepresent circular logic!

    Like a high school student questions osmosis or electrical signals in the nervous system, I believe we have been duped by thinking singularly. The question we should be asking is how two black holes can exist simultaneously.

    We consider subatomic particles the first matter to appear from the beginning. We would still be right to consider microscopic black holes to have originated before. I believe they did and would have to in order to feed into the central quasar producing entities they are today.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543


    That post is actually a whole heap of unsupported bullshit and pseudoscience.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.

Share This Page