Relativity of rotational motion confirmed:

Well, the day you stop expecting the Universe to behave way you would like it to, rather than the way it actually does behave, is the day you will be ready to start learning science. And not a moment before

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Agreed, you totally reject any possibility of BH's period, yet are unable to describe any situation that causes the effects on matter/energy and spacetime that we observe. Quite ironic!

No contradiction on my part, just your say so.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It's you that rejects standard accepted cosmology as formulated over more than a 100 years and in conjunction with GR.
It's you that have had threads moved to pseudoscience and the cesspool.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So who is doing the contradiction?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Wrong! Go back and do some more research my friend.
GR says nothing about the quantum/Planck level and therefor does not apply.
Just as all we can say with any confidence about the evolution of space and time at the BB[henceforth known as spacetime] is from t+ 10-43 seconds....Or the quantum/Planck level. Understand?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Not good enough my friend. As you have also agreed [although ironically you dismiss BH's] any singularity is probably purely mathematical: Most physicists don't believe any physical singularity exists at r=0:
So whatever form the mass exists in at that region [the PLANCK/QUANTUM LEVEL] is still responsible for the spacetime curvature that makes up the BH.
And if that BH is spinning, then so to is the mass at whatever condition it exists in. We call it a ring singularity.

Crazy obtuse talk.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

When any mass collapses to its Schwarzchild radius a BH is the result, and compulsory collapse according to GR occurs up to at least the quantum/Planck level where GR has no more say.

Again totally wrong.
A BH is simply any mass that has collapsed under the force of gravity to within its Schwarzchild radius as dictated by GR.
The singularity is any region where our current laws and GR do not apply: That starts at the quantum/Planck level just as I have explained to you, and just as is applied at the evolution of the universe/spacetime and t+10-43 seconds.

So, what are you pushing? Please explain yourself. Are you suggesting a rajesh inspired Black Neutron Star?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

In essence your whole outlook on denying cosmology and BH's is an absurdity.
BH's obviously by their very nature is apparently counter intuitive for a layperson.
That's about the only excuse you have.
GR can now be said to be certain within its bounds of applicability...So to have BH's gained tremendously in that certainty in light of the excellent accurate recent aLIGO experiment.
These are accepted near undeniable scientific certainties.

On the other hand there are many points you will never address, because you are unable to address them in any logical sensible manner, ie, the facts that [1] Preaching your evangelistic anti mainstream science nonsense here , gets you exactly nowhere, [2] If you had anything of substance you would not be here, and [3] your problems with GR, BH's and other areas of cosmology like gravitational lensing and radiation, are entirely fabricated as has been pointed out to you many times.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Paddoboy,

Your post # 42 is a total mess, and does not reflect mainstream views.....

1. You are mixing up Plankc level with GR failure, which is incorrect.
2. You are bringing in a new concept that mass resides somewhere around Planck level, which causes the observed effect around, that is also not mainstream.
3. You are agreeing that singularity cannot exist, still you are pushing the same.

You should understand fully, whetever you defend. Sorry pal, you lack the deeper understanding of the subject. Ask your friends to evaluate your above post, you will see the mistakes.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It is sad that you have not rebutted any of the around 20 pts on BH and Spacetime..

And I agree with the gist of above post, the day mainstream guys and their parrotised supporters realise that nature does not produce BH or worm holes or time travels or spacetime curving, then the true science will come out. They are all hindering the progress of science in this field.

Your argument is as shallow as that of Paddoboy devoid of any science content.....

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

No, exactly the opposite. But of course you are able to supply a reputable link supporting your assertion?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Not sure how much more simply I can explain it......
Let me reiterate, GR fails at the quantum/Planck level [but again, can you supply a reputable link to support your assertion?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'm saying that most physicists agree that the singularity is not physical, simply a mathematical concept where our laws and GR do not apply.
If the r=0 singularity does not exist as most believe, there must be some mass in an unknown form before those infinities are reached....that would be at or below the quantum/Planck level.

My friends and otherwise can evaluate at their own chosen time.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

[although most seem to have you on ignore so they are not a party to your nonsensical assertions]
Your own evaluation is worth nothing, unless of course you can support your assertions with a reputable link.
Hurry, must pick up the better half shortly.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Oh brother! The whole world is wrong except for I!!!!
That does nothing for your credibility my friend.
Let me again try to help you particularly in your many misunderstandings of BH's
The singularity is defined correctly as a mathematical concept that is a warped region of spacetime where quantities may become infinite so that ordinary physical laws cease to apply. The origin and destination of the BB and BH's respectively, are regions where those laws and GR do not apply.

 

Wrong....ask your friends. They should help you in here.

 

This is also nonsense......not as per GR.

What is so special about about Planck level here in GR ? Just some stupid poposience you have read somewhere.

 

tsk, tsk, calm down my friend, you'll have a coronary! I've asked you many times for links to, or references to support what you say. Is that so difficult to do?
Let me again reiterate......The Singularity is a mathematical concept and most reputable physicists do not believe it exists physically as per the infinities it leads to.
This is what you must learn to accept. A singularity in itself may not be infinite, but can lead to infinite quantities.
But since you reject BH's anyway and from memory also the BB, GR, and see most of the accepted experiments that confirm these results as fraudulent, why are you even preaching your singularity?
While there certainly is a non zero chance that you are correct and the whole world is wrong, those chances are much closer to the zero then to one.
You take it easy you hear?

 

What a fool I am!

Naif that I was, I assumed you were genuinely asking for help, and I did my little best to provide it.

It is now clear to me that, like our "friend" Farsight, you scarcely read the help that is offered. Or if you did, you failed to understand it, or, more likely, chose to ignore it in favour of your own misguided prejudice.

What a fool I was!

 

You are enacting drama....no need.

Please attempt to rebut those twenty odd points....you only said mere bland statements (or drama) is not sufficient....If you feel that all or any of the point raised by me is nonsense, then just point that out with a brief argument.

 

You still have to link GR failure with Quantum / Plancks level ?

mainstream do not claim that GR fails at these levels......this your misreading or mix up.
Mainstream also do not claim that some sort of mass resides at or below plankcs level...this is also your misreading.
Mainstream also do not talk about any level below plancks level...this is also your fabrication.

I am surprised why Rpenner is letting you go...probably because he finds you a harmless enthusiast of cosmology.

 

Been there, done that.
But I have a better exercise...Please show me, or describe mass/energy at the quantum/Planck level?
.

It certainly does, and as usual despite your protests, its you who is misreading and/or mixed up.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Let me again set you straight on what you don't accept anyway,

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

ie BH's.
[1] GR tells us when the Schwarzchild radius is breach, further collapse to a singularity is compulsory.
[2] The singularity is a mathematical artifact leading to infinite quantities.
[3]Most physicists do not believe that any such infinite quantities exist in reality.
[4] GR fails at the quantum/Planck level.
[5] The Planck level is only a convenient mathematical tool that coincides with the quantum level of existence.
[6] If what physicists believe re the infinite quantities of the singularity not being reached is fact, then the mass/energy must exist at some as yet unknown form below that Planck/quantum level and before the infinite quantities of the mathematical singularity.

Of course they do! The point is though unlike the BH proper, the singularity/quantum/Planck level is not set in stone.

Your continuous appeal to the mods is quite child like and what many cranks are apt to do.
Let me say though that he certainly has picked you up on many of your fabricated scenarios and also some points re myself, which I gladly accept.

And finally since I'm always a nice bloke, here's some more info and a link that verifies all I have claimed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units
The Planck scale expresses the region in which the predictions of the Standard Model of quantum field theory and of general relativity are no longer reconcilable, and quantum effects of gravity are expected to dominate.

So once again my friend, we have a situation where according to you, the whole world is wrong and you are 21st century's cosmological Saviour!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Congrats!

The biggest absurdity in this whole discussion is you believing that you are competent enough to rewrite 21st century cosmology from the comfort of your abode on a remote science forum.

 

All Sr# marked points are Paddoboy ??? questionable understaning even after so many posts and moderators kid gloves handling...

[1] GR tells us when the Schwarzchild radius is breach, further collapse to a singularity is compulsory.

I never said that.....but you have a problem here as in pt#6 you contradict this.

[2] The singularity is a mathematical artifact leading to infinite quantities.

Well thats my stand....good that you are admitting. It is you who is pushing that singularity can spin etc...all nonsense..


[3]Most physicists do not believe that any such infinite quantities exist in reality.

Since I never believed that singularity (actually it is 1/0 un maths) can exist in nature, but if Physicists starts following this belief then sooner or later BH will also be dumped. Can you define BH, keeping this belief intact ?


[4] GR fails at the quantum/Planck level.

No, it does not. This is your BULL SHIT.


[5] The Planck level is only a convenient mathematical tool that coincides with the quantum level of existence.

No, it does not coincide with quntum level ? Do you know what is quantum level ? Plancks length is non achievable and plancks time has an issue as we do not know if time has discrete nature or not. So you fail here as usual.

[6] If what physicists believe re the infinite quantities of the singularity not being reached is fact, then the mass/energy
must exist at some as yet unknown form below that Planck/quantum level and before the infinite quantities of the mathematical singularity.

This is your crap as picked up from somewhere. No physicist has ever stated anything like this that the mass resides below Plancks level..

 

.
Are you sure? We'll see...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

No, I never said you said it. You were totally ignorant of that fact until I told you. And yes, it is fact.

Once more you show your confusion: Most physicists do not believe those infinite quantities and their infinities will ever be reached.
In other words the collapse will stop at some point above those infinities, and below the Planck/quantum level at which GR does not apply...So, really nothing counter intuitive there at all for anyone that does not have an agenda.
Obviously it follows that whatever stage of mass that exists, if it is spinning, we have a Kerr metric and spinning BH, and we call it a ring singularity, remembering it is at or below the quantum/Planck level.
But again this has been told to you, and reinforced with past professional replies more than once.

See previous answer. To the contrary re dumping of BH's, they are actually now even more certain and confirmed with the aLIGO experiment.

No, it's your ignorance.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

again......
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_units
The Planck scale expresses the region in which the predictions of theStandard Model of quantum field theory and of general relativity are no longer reconcilable, and quantum effects of gravity are expected to dominate.

See previous link. And as usual just another emotional agenda driven denial by yourself.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

ps: You could supply a reputable link to support your claims? On second thoughts, no you can't!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Physicists mostly are of the opinion that the infinite quantities of the mathematical singularity are not reached...It therefor follows that the mass must reside in an unknown state above those infinite quantities and below the quantum/Planck level as I have explained.
Obviously you need to create whatever fantasies you are able to support your non existent credibility re 21st century cosmology and BH's.


Of course you could link to somewhere reputable [a learning institute or recognised professional] to support your claims, but again on thinking, no you obviously can't.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So much for your continuing unsupported agenda driven denials.

 

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/P/Planck Length

The Planck length, and associated Planck time, defines the scale at which the currently accepted theory of gravity fails.The main reason for this breakdown is that the Planck scale is smaller than the quantum wavelength of the Universe as On this scale, the entire geometry of spacetime as predicted by general relativity breaks down. a whole. Consequently, on such scales, an as yet undiscovered theory that combines general relativity and quantum mechanics is needed to describe the laws of physics. At this stage, scientists have not been able to determine what this theory is, even though they understand what some of its properties should be.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length
Theoretical significance[edit]
There is currently no proven physical significance of the Planck length; it is, however, a topic of theoretical research. Since the Planck length is so many orders of magnitude smaller than any current instrument could possibly measure, there is no way of examining it directly. According to the generalized uncertainty principle (a concept from speculative models of quantum gravity), the Planck length is, in principle, within a factor of 10, the shortest measurable length – and no theoretically known improvement in measurement instruments could change that.[citation needed]

In some forms of quantum gravity, the Planck length is the length scale at which the structure of spacetime becomes dominated by quantum effects, and it is impossible to determine the difference between two locations less than one Planck length apart. The precise effects of quantum gravity are unknown; it is often guessed that spacetime might have a discrete or foamy structure at a Planck length scale.

 

Please understand that for a BH, the concept of spinning mass inside EH is not there...please take help to understand this basic thing. It is bloody blasphemy to say that for stellar mass BHs the ring singularity resides below Plancks level.

You are an ignorant mainstream mob supporter, and it is a sorry state on this forum that you being the chief propagandist of mainstream here spreading misinformation about mainstream, and knowldgeable moderator is not even correcting you by PM, if not publicly.

This is pure BS, no physicist has ever made this claim. It is senseless to talk below Plancks level. You do not understand that in GR nowhere the parameter h (plancks constant) appears, while plancks length has this parameter. So it is foolish to claim that GR fails at plancks level.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You seem agitated? Property of spin to any BH is reasonably applied [as agreed by at least three professionals when you were brought to task over this in another thread] by the observation of any ergosphere and frame dragging. We call it a Kerr metric and logically any stellar BH would have it due to the original spinning of the star from whence it collapsed. Unless that spin has been negated as also previously discussed.
It's called physics and it has all been pointed out to you previously and from memory partly why at least one of your threads was moved to the fringes along with your rather baseless denial..

It's terribly sad when an otherwise person interested in cosmology, can be so torn apart and blinkered by agendas.
TIP: Think why mainstream views become mainstream views.

No, it is fact, 100% GR is non applicable at the quantum/Planck level as per the links I went to the trouble of supplying.
And you appear to be contradicting yourself, so calm down OK?
Let me explain your contradiction first....
You say that we can't talk about Planck level and GR does not apply highlighted in red...[correct so far] then you say it is foolish to say that GR fails at the Planck level, highlighted in blue.
Just as my previous link explained, The laws of physics and GR do not apply at the quantum/Planck level, where the singularity lies.
Since we have no data at those regions, and physics hate infinities, physicists /cosmologists believe that the infinite quantities of the mathematical singularity is not reached, so logically a surface/mass in some as yet unknown state must [if their doubts about the mathematical singularity is correct] exist.
You need to really go back to basics.

 

Paddoboy :

Despite your emotional appeal, I standby above on following counts...


1. Your repeated statement that GR fails at planck's level is not mainstream. For Schwarzchilds BH the singulairty is at r = 0, not at r = Plancks Length. As I said in EFEs, h does not appear. Both domains are different.

2. Your statement that Physicists feel that mass resides somewhere below Plancks level is also incorrect. You may not know that Plancks sphere has a volume of the order of 10^-105 cubic meter, so if I take a normal stellar mass BH (3M) then the ensuing density would be so high that around 10^80 observable universe mass can reside in a sphere of the volume of 1 cubic meter. This is nonsense and no Physicist will talk like this. Thats why I said your claim is juvenile BS. You give so many links, give one link where this claim is maintained.

3. It is also incorrect that for spinning BH, the ring singularity resides below Plancks level.


If you continue with your nonsense then that shall be trolling as per forum rules...Repeated incorrect assertions even after the same is pointed out, is trolling as per forum rules.