Gravity: The why and the how:

[The God]

Nup, It's 100% fact, and the evidence is spread over many threads and posts of yours.
Still if you have anything invalidating what I say, be my guest.



No again it is fact, and any detailed explanation or maths you have supplied is questionable at best and out right wrong at worst.
Still again, if you have any reputable link supporting your nonsense, then nows the time to present it.

Words, sentences, fairy tales and pseudoscience as usual.
Again though all you need do is supply some reputable link that invalidates what one of the worlds authorities [Kip Thorne] on BH's has said.
I won't hold my breath though.

Entirely wrong and a mish mash of nonsense to impress...in that you fail.
Simply put the tidal gravity effects increase to infinity all the way to the singularity and at some point will and does overcome the strong nuclear force.
Needless to say if you have anything invalidating my two links then go ahead.

No one is that interested in what you have plagiarised in the past. As a lay person, you have no support for anything you say. While I supply as many as is warranted. It also appears your obsession with naming me is overtaking what little credibility you do have if any.
Again support what you say or my claims stand as does my two tutorials that you tried your hardest to get changed. You really need to do better.


The only ignorance that I see my friend is your own unsupported nonsense against my accepted mainstream cosmology, and that ignorance is added to further in expecting that you are fooling anyone.

All abuses...Mixing up BH tidal forces and singularity with Neutron Star Physics...

 

[paddoboy]

Very vague and ill conceived statement, poor mischief by a dud. My stand is very clear that BH singularity is not possible in reality and I standby that. I never doubted the argument behind formation or Gravitational collapse process.

Again, everything I said is as accepted by mainstream cosmologists.
But once again, you are practising to deceive.
No one here from memory and certainly not any of our professional replies and mainstream cosmologists believe that any Singularity is physical. So why again do you raise it..For theatrical effects once again?
The Singularity is simply a result of compulsory collapse as dictated by GR, while recognising the fact that the same GR is a classical theory that does not say anything about the quantum level.
A future validated QGT should reveal that.
Let me reiterate then now that the Singularity has been put in its place, that
there have been many doubts raised by you over the validity of BH's, HR, and cosmology in general. All have been refuted many times with statements from myself based on what I have learnt, and all re-enforced with reputable professional links.
You have none.

This is bad/sloppy Physics....overcoming of this Strong Nuclear force, I have given a detailed explanation just few days back. Paddoboy has no ability to respond on that.

Here are two more realistic and professional explanations of why and how the strong nuclear force is surpassed by the effects of tidal gravity....
http://www.calpoly.edu/~rechols/6edastro102/astro112ch21sol8th.html
Neutron degeneracy pressure arises when neutrons are so close that their quantum states begin to overlap. Since no two fermions, neutrons in this case, can occupy the same quantum state, a pressure results. The combined pressure from neutron degeneracy pressure and the strong nuclear force prevent further gravitational collapse of a neutron star if the remaining supernova core (neutron star) is less than 2-3 solar masses. In a white dwarf star it is electron degeneracy pressure that is preventing gravity from collapsing the star. In this case the upper mass limit is 1.4 solar masses which is better known than for the case of a neutron star (see 30. below)


and......

This is supported by Kip Thorne in his book, "Black Holes and Time Warps" 0n page 475/476, Chapter 13 here............
http://www.plouffe.fr/simon/math/Bl...ps, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy - Thorne.pdf

 

[The God]

This is bad/sloppy Physics....overcoming of this Strong Nuclear force, I have given a detailed explanation just few days back. Paddoboy has no ability to respond on that.

...... the NDP part is ok, not much to dispute except that there are very less number of energy levels available for Neutrons, but hope he knows about Fermie Energy levels and derivation of this NDP etc. This inclusion of Nuclear force in the same breathe, is outright stupid and foolish to say the least.

The Physics of Neutron Star, for the relevant point only, is as follows..

a. The Gravitational Pressure as derived from Gravitational Potential Energy Term is inward (Collapsing type).
b. The NDP as derived from Quantum Physics involving Fermie Energy levels, Pauli's exclusion principle and Heisenberg uncertainty principle is outward ...providing resistance to Gravitational Pressure.
c. The nuclear force (all are Neutrons and very few protons in Neutron Star, and hence n-n Strong Nuclear Force is present) is inward (keeping the Neutrons together). The direction of this force is supporting Gravitational collapse in Neutron Star, not opposing. So if Paddoboy has the ability to read the real Physics behind Neutron Star, he would realise that this Strong Nuclear Force in fact reduces the limiting mass of Neutron Star. Simple, in presence of Strong Nuclear Force the Gravitational Pressure required is a bit less because Neutrons are already bonded by this SNF.

This is Physics, albeit advance, no reference required.

Tashja, I need your help, and humbly request you to please help in resolving this issue by getting some comments from any kind professor. This is with reference to Neutron Star and Strong Nuclear Force..

 

[paddoboy]

All abuses...Mixing up BH tidal forces and singularity with Neutron Star Physics...

No not at all.In fact I'm making an effort to avoid your abuse or any by myself.
I'm stating fact, pure and simple.
You claim to know more than accepted professional cosmologists.
We all know that is not so and illustrates some delusional aspect re your own outlook.
So tell me, why should we believe you over Kip Thorne and my other link?
What are your credentials? if you have any.
Do you have any link invalidating my reputable links?
These are valid reasonable observations that I will keep fronting you with while you make outrageous claims.

 

[paddoboy]

Tashja, I need your help, and humbly request you to please help in resolving this issue by getting some comments from any kind professor. This is with reference to Neutron Star and Strong Nuclear Force..

This is supported by Kip Thorne in his book, "Black Holes and Time Warps" 0n page 475/476, Chapter 13 here............
http://www.plouffe.fr/simon/math/Bl...ps, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy - Thorne.pdf


http://www.calpoly.edu/~rechols/6edastro102/astro112ch21sol8th.html

 

[The God]

This is supported by Kip Thorne in his book, "Black Holes and Time Warps" 0n page 475/476, Chapter 13 here............
http://www.plouffe.fr/simon/math/Bl...ps, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy - Thorne.pdf


http://www.calpoly.edu/~rechols/6edastro102/astro112ch21sol8th.html

Your Thorne link is not opening, the other link also mentions as follows..

30. We don't know enough about the strong nuclear force to precisely determine the maximum mass of neutron stars...

That implies that Pt#2 is loosely made....secondly combined effect of NDP and Strong nuclear force, may be the resultant of two. Your link does not say that both are opposing Gravity in a Neutron Star. Why they are club together because Gravity is on one aspect while NDP and SNF is another.....Thats my assertion to save this link from blatant inaccuracy in Pt#2.

 

[The God]

You claim to know more than accepted professional cosmologists.

No I don't claim.

What I am claiming is that my interpretation of accepted mainstream theory is absolute, wherever I raise it.
And I also claim that few of mainstream theories/hypos/ideas have many loose points and disputable aspects.

But nowhere I have wrongly interpreted the mainstream, thats what you do out of ignorance. The funny part is with you there is disagreement on the interpretation of mainstream theories, thats solely because of your lack of understanding.

 

[paddoboy]

Your Thorne link is not opening, the other link also mentions as follows..

Professor Thorne simply states that the tidal gravity effects increase to infinity at the singularity.
Obviously along the way it overcomes the strong force.

30. We don't know enough about the strong nuclear force to precisely determine the maximum mass of neutron stars...
That implies that Pt#2 is loosely made....secondly combined effect of NDP and Strong nuclear force, may be the resultant of two. Your link does not say that both are opposing Gravity in a Neutron Star. Why they are club together because Gravity is on one aspect while NDP and SNF is another.....Thats my assertion to save this link from blatant inaccuracy in Pt#2.

No it implies Neutron stars.
Tidal gravity effects increase as we get closer to the singularity and eventually the strong force is overcome. There are many other links also including QORA and other Q and A that imply I am correct, but none fits your agenda.

 

[The God]

Professor Thorne simply states that the tidal gravity effects increase to infinity at the singularity.
Obviously along the way it overcomes the strong force.

No it implies Neutron stars.
Tidal gravity effects increase as we get closer to the singularity and eventually the strong force is overcome. There are many other links also including QORA and other Q and A that imply I am correct, but none fits your agenda.

Why are you mixing Neutron Star with Singularity? And where is the tidal force during the first collapse?

You seem to have gulped too much of liquor in my party.

 

[paddoboy]

No I don't claim.

What I am claiming is that my interpretation of accepted mainstream theory is absolute, wherever I raise it.

And I and others have shown that is not true, in fact the very opposite is closer to the truth. Let me count the ways.
[1] Photons emitted just above the EH directly radially away.
[2] Compulsory collapse once Schwarzchild radius is breached.
[3]HR is not a fantasy as proposed and accepted.

And I also claim that few of mainstream theories/hypos/ideas have many loose points and disputable aspects.

No I don't claim.

Please make up your mind...are you claiming or not?
And of course with regards to mainstream theories, some certainly...others like SR/GR and Evolution are as certain as one could hope, and you have yet offered any link reputable or otherwise to dispute any cosmological theories.

But nowhere I have wrongly interpreted the mainstream, thats what you do out of ignorance. The funny part is with you there is disagreement on the interpretation of mainstream theories, thats solely because of your lack of understanding.

More baseless claims and half slurs? As usual no evidence?
Mainstream accepted science is mainstream simply because in most cases it abides by the scientific method and has passed peer review, two gross failings of anything you have yet come up with.

 

[paddoboy]

Why are you mixing Neutron Star with Singularity? And where is the tidal force during the first collapse?

FROM THE LINK:
30. We don't know enough about the strong nuclear force to precisely determine the maximum mass of neutron stars...

You seem to have gulped too much of liquor in my party.

I'm still making more sense than you. And supplying reputable links.

 

[paddoboy]

And where is the tidal force during the first collapse?

The tidal gravity effects take hold when the Schwarzchild radius is breached and BH status is reached.

 

[The God]

Back to usual nonsense.
why don't you stick to point and answer about Isolated BH?

 

[paddoboy]

Back to usual nonsense.
why don't you stick to point and answer about Isolated BH?

You are getting confused and in the wrong thread....
try the other.

 

[danshawen]

This post follows your 'like' to Paddoboy post, thus giving an inference that you are agreeing to the contents of the Paddoboy's post..Is it so?

With the possible exception of Brian Greene's books, which for some reason I can't even read a page without nausea, all the references he listed are are pretty good.

Like my former freshman physics professor, Greene seems to have a talent for fixating on and elaborating the shakiest science, like the multiverse, to name only one example. This is not a good talent; more like Hitler's talent for politics or applied Eugenics.

 

[John Connellan]

What force is responsible for degeneracy pressure?

 

[paddoboy]

What force is responsible for degeneracy pressure?

Not as simple as it sounds.Essentially it's the Pauli Exclusion Principle, which isn't actually a force per se.

 

[BennettLink]

Tashja, I need your help, and humbly request you to please help in resolving this issue by getting some comments from any kind professor. This is with reference to Neutron Star and Strong Nuclear Force..

Dear God (I always wanted to write that),

The strong nuclear force is repulsive at short range, and so raises the maximum mass of a neutron star.

Best regards,

Bennett Link
Professor
Montana State University

 

[Daecon]

Glad to see you back, professor.

 

[brucep]

What force is responsible for degeneracy pressure?

For electron degeneracy the electron. For neutron degeneracy ....... It's really an interesting subject coupled with the Pauli Exclusion Principle. The force is electro magnetic force and the strong nuclear force.