Page 1 of 3 [ 46 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Aspiedextrous
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 12
Location: New Zealand

09 Mar 2011, 5:02 am

black holes are a feature of the universe \
a place where the force of gravity as such that light can not escape
this does weird things to e=mc squared
to me it seems that unless they decay all mater will end up in one black hole
if time itself stops at the event horizon that would mean distance would be infinite
in other words another universe maybe that's were the anti matter missing from the big bang is
the words don't work bit that would make gravity the only constant
can someone help me under stand?



iceb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,562
Location: London UK

09 Mar 2011, 5:11 am

Black Holes evaporate releasing Hawkins Radiation.


_________________
Wisdom must be gathered, it cannot be given.


Aspiedextrous
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 12
Location: New Zealand

09 Mar 2011, 5:31 am

Quick wiki on that they only evaporate if they are small so maybe not valid rebuttal
As an example, a black hole of one solar mass has a temperature of only 60 nanokelvin; in fact, such a black hole would absorb far more cosmic microwave background radiation than it emits



bigbadbeast2007
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 26 Oct 2007
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 268

09 Mar 2011, 7:00 am

Gravity is my enemy when i droped my lunch onto the ground! :evil:



AstroGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2011
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,582

09 Mar 2011, 10:29 am

It's true that only small black holes evaporate RIGHT NOW. But, in the very distant future (like trillions of trillions of trillions of years from now) the cosmic microwave background will have been redshifted to almost nothing and any matter would either be too spread out or already eaten by a black hole (you are right that we can expect most matter to eventually end up in a black hole). Then they would be able to evaporate, albeit very very slowly.

Also, time doesn't stop at the event horizon of a black hole. Someone falling in (if they managed to not be torn apart into their component atoms) wouldn't even realize they'd gone past the event horizon. It's only from the outside that time seems to stop there. It's all got to do with Relativity--two people, moving at different rates or at different points in a gravity well, can have totally different views of what is happening in the universe, but THEY ARE BOTH CORRECT. It's confusing, I know, and I can't claim to truly understand why this works near a black hole.

As for the excess anti-matter from the big bang being in black holes, I doubt it. I think you're misunderstanding the problem with antimatter. Scientists aren't so much perplexed that we don't see any antimatter in the universe (mind you, it would be hard to tell) but that if matter and antimatter had been made in equal quantities at the birth of the universe then it all should have annihilated and we wouldn't exist. I don't think there would have been time for it all to be sucked into black holes before it was annihilated. Anyway, that would prompt the question of why black holes preferentially ate antimatter instead of matter (for which there would be no explanation.)--it would replace one mystery with another (of course, science does that...a lot).



Aspie_SE10
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 461

09 Mar 2011, 11:28 am

Well, yes and no.

Hawking radiation is typically light emitted by a black hole in the X-ray spectrum which essentially acts as the proof of the existence of black holes. That it's possible to observe Hawking radiation is in part the evidence for their existence: it's also proof of black hole evaporation. Professor Hawkings' paper is available as a PDF file at http://prac.us.edu.pl/~ztpce/QM/CMPhawking.pdf.

The work in the early 70s was absolutely ground-breaking. To that point, black holes had been theorised (e.g., Einsteinian physics required their existence) but no-one had proved to that point that they were capable of indirect observation: Hawking radiation proves that black holes do emit radiation but that the amount is inversely proportional to their mass. In simplified terms, a super-massive black hole would give off very little radiation whilst a (hypothetical) infinitely small (-1) black hole would give off an almost infinitely massive amount of radiation.

Yet more astonishing is that, despite being theorised from the 1970s onwards they were only observed more than 30 years later: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25805/.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,349
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

09 Mar 2011, 12:28 pm

Aspiedextrous wrote:
Quick wiki on that they only evaporate if they are small so maybe not valid rebuttal
As an example, a black hole of one solar mass has a temperature of only 60 nanokelvin; in fact, such a black hole would absorb far more cosmic microwave background radiation than it emits


All black holes eveporate due to Hawking Radiation, it's just that the larger ones evaporate more slowly.



Aspiedextrous
Butterfly
Butterfly

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 12
Location: New Zealand

09 Mar 2011, 3:11 pm

HAWKINS hail: :hail:
This poor peasant does not deserve to lick the wheel marks from his chariot
As a penance for asking questioning shall place ipod on head turn to full and play "mull of kintyre"on repeat for 24 hour

In Hawking's original paper, at the outset, it is assumed that there exists a time-translational Killing vector, as is consistent with the Schwarzschild vacuum, and with Birkhoff's theorem. This implies that there will be no time evolution of the spacetime. Working in this spacetime, and considering an infalling spherical shell of matter enclosing a vacuum spherical region, Hawking proceeds to derive the Hawking Radiation, with some more or less hidden assumptions. The eventual result is that there is black-body radiation at infinity, at very late times, i.e. way out on the future extent of the event horizon. Thus the spacetime evolves. This is the nature of a body that radiates. Given that it evolves, there is no longer a time-translational Killing vector, and one has arrived at a contradiction. The very existence of the spacetime required the time-translational Killing vector, and such a spacetime is not a "near approximation" of a dynamic spacetime. Further, the event horizon has the various properties it has, which are important for the derivation, because it is a Killing horizon, and based on the existence of the time-translational Killing vector. The idea of approximate symmetries is inherently difficult, even for finite distant scales, but it becomes close to impossible to discuss approximate symmetries on infinite distance scales, such as the whole of the spacetime
wiki again
I no have much learn no understand quantum's ehh
If as stated all matter is inside one primordial black hole and just background radiation is left and time flows on to infinite a point of equilibrium will be reached leaving only gravity as god
(the word at the beginning of genesis)
please note I am not a believer

I know that to an observer entering a event horizon time still stays constant how ever if acceleration is constant from the outside you have accelerated pass c so are no longer in this universe you are in another the anti universe on the other side of the black hole
As time stopped when you entered from our view point . entering becomes the beginning of time the big bang
I view this as a snake eating its own tail or a mobius strip with its transition point being the event horizon


This is just fun :D



PatrickNeville
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Sep 2010
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,136
Location: Scotland

10 Mar 2011, 3:34 am

Blackholes may actually be misunderstood., but yes they are certainly releasing radiation. It is the radiation aspect that appears misunderstood.

Let me also say I hope that this is not true. If it is we are all pretty screwed. The worrying thing is, is that the observable evidence supports it.

Quasars are a real phenomena as people may know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar

Is it a real threat which is has been overlooked?

Quote:
"History has shown that the most significant scientific breakthroughs were not deduced from the existing theoretical framework, but rather arose as marked departures from conventional thinking. Generally such new views challenged long-cherished assumptions espoused by the established paradigm and were therefore actively resisted by the old guard."


Maybe this is just that. I repeat, MAYBE.

Dr. LaViolette has a respected theory of sub quantum kinetics which has been used to underpin or complement a lot of other scientific hypothesis, so I believe his hypothesis about the superwave should at least be given some thought. The guy wrote a book about it, which is one of several books and papers he has published on a variety of subjects:

http://www.amazon.com/Earth-Under-Fire- ... 0964202514

For the record, I can't say I totally believe in this as an absolute truth because I lack the scientific understanding to know how the physics behind it works. The information is all here for people if they want to learn about it.

The researcher, in the interview carefully says it is all hypothetical and makes no effort to say that it has to be absolutely correct.

http://starburstfound.org/

Quote:
"One key area of Starburst research is concerned with the investigation of Galactic superwaves, intense cosmic ray particle barrages that travel to us from the center of our Galaxy and that last for periods of up to a few thousand years. Astronomical and geological evidence indicates that the last major superwave impacted our solar system around 12,000 to 16,000 years ago and produced abrupt changes of the Earth's climate. The land animal extinction episode which occurred during this interval was the worst in several million years. It is estimated that approximately one or two superwaves strong enough to trigger an ice age are presently on their way to us from their birth place 23,000 light years away. There is a finite chance that one such event could arrive within the next few decades.

Less intense superwaves, which recur with considerable frequency, could also pose a threat. There is evidence that the Galactic Center has erupted as many as ten times in the past two millennia, the most recent event occurring about 700 years ago. While these low intensity events could have passed unnoticed in earlier centuries, today they could be extremely hazardous. The electromagnetic radiation pulse accompanying such a superwave would be far more intense than any gamma ray pulse we have experienced in modern times. It could knock out electrical power grids and communication networks on a global scale and possibly even inadvertently trigger nuclear missile launchings. Consequently, study of this phenomenon deserves a very high priority.

Starburst researcher Dr. Paul LaViolette began alerting the scientific community to the existence of superwaves in 1983 through his published papers and scientific conference presentations (see paper archive). He also raised the public awareness about the superwave phenomenon through his book Earth Under Fire as well as through various magazine articles.

Many aspects of Dr. LaViolette's superwave theory have since been verified by various observations; see the following list of predictions and their subsequent verification. The most recent are the findings announced by a group of scientists at the May 2007 American Geophysical Union conference. They report discovering high concentrations of extraterrestrial material at the Alleröd/Younger Dryas boundary that marks the final horizon in the extinction of the Pleistocene megafauna. They suggest that this debris was deposited by a large comet that either impacted the Earth or exploded in the atmosphere. Although they suggest that the comet was part of a supernova remnant shell that was passing through the solar system at that time, LaViolette shows that it is more likely that entry of this comet as well as associated meteors and cometary dust was triggered by the passage of a Galactic superwaveand that several other effects were involved as well such as the occurrence of giant solar flares. A critique of the Firestone-West supernova comet theory and discussion of these recent verifications of the superwave theory is presented in the paper "The Cause of the Megafaunal Extinction: Supernova or Galactic Core Outburst?". "



This interview is 2 hours 20 minutes long:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oURVtGKW ... r_embedded

I found a list of successful predictions he has made relating to the Superwave itself:

http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Predict.html

And predictions to do with Sub Quantum Kinetics:

http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Predict2.html

Also a bit of background info about the man as well:

http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/LaViolette.html

Since I am a bit lost when it comes to the some of the scientific concepts I try not to promote them without understanding them myself.

However, the part I can relate to the most is that there are certain substances more abundant towards the centre of our galaxy, and periodically "something" is pushing them to our solar system.

I send this video to a guy I know and got this reply:

Quote:
"Sub Quantum Kinetics has been used in a few theoretical physics papers. It essentially states that "big bangs" happen on a galactic, not universal scale, and that at the center of the galaxy there isn't a supermassive black hole but a supermassive "generator" star which explodes outwards through the galaxy every so often, the evidence for which can be found in the ice cores and the effects of which can be seen ion other galaxies as the superwave propagates throughout them."


So Dr. LaViolette has respected science published and has had several predictions verified through ice core samples. That itself should be enough to convince any sane person to look into this further. I've already had it dismissed entirely as conspiracy none-sense by some, even though the information was right in front of them to go through.

Saturns rings are also an indicator of the superwave as well due to the materials not merging into one or perhaps a few rings as scientists expected. The more logical explanation is that the materials arrived thousands of years ago, not millions or billions.

Research seems to indicate we may be over due for a wave hitting us.

We have this year had a possible indicator of one travelling towards us as well, in the form of what may be a gravity wave, which would seriously effects planet. We have recently seen an exponential rise in geological instability, bigger by far than anything since records began:

The gravity wave which would travel slightly faster than that could be what has been causing the sudden rise of instability.

http://networkedblogs.com/cECJQ

I am also quite sure people are aware of the pole shifts. The gravity wave is potentially what caused that to occur so suddenly.

"Press Releases and Media Publicity"

http://starburstfound.org/PR/PR.html

Here are over 20 papers he has published:

http://starburstfound.org/downloads/archive.html

"The Cause of the Megafaunal Extinction: Supernova or Galactic Core Outburst?"

http://starburstfound.org/YDextinct/p1.html

All the information people should need is above. If wild accusations of conspiracy are thrown at it without first looking at the evidence to decide if this science is accurate or not, then please do not comment. If people are willing to look at the information then discussion becomes more productive.


_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here> ;)


SammichEater
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2011
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,903

10 Mar 2011, 10:28 pm

Gravity is a force. God is believed to be a man. I fail to understand your point.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 85
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Mar 2011, 10:21 am

SammichEater wrote:
Gravity is a force. God is believed to be a man. I fail to understand your point.


According to the General Theory of Relativity gravitation is curvature of the space-time manifold. It is a special kind of tensor.

In Newtonian theory, gravitation is a vector.

ruveyn



iceb
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,562
Location: London UK

11 Mar 2011, 5:16 pm

Aspiedextrous wrote:
HAWKINS hail: :hail:


:hail: :hail: :hail:


_________________
Wisdom must be gathered, it cannot be given.


Aspie_SE10
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jan 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 461

11 Mar 2011, 5:54 pm

iceb wrote:
Aspiedextrous wrote:
HAWKINS hail: :hail:


:hail: :hail: :hail:


I know that this is a pain in the backside, and I hate to pick people up on this, but his name is...

Stephen William HAWKING (not Hawkins).

If you happen to be in Cambridge, and, more specifically, around either Trinity or Gonville and Caius College, it's important to keep an eye out for a motorised chair coming past at high speed!



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 85
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

11 Mar 2011, 10:01 pm

PatrickNeville wrote:

The gravity wave which would travel slightly faster than that could be what has been causing the sudden rise of instability.



A gravity wave has yet to be detected. So far LIGO, which has cost hundreds of millions of dollars has come up dry.

ruveyn



wavefreak58
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,419
Location: Western New York

11 Mar 2011, 10:58 pm

ruveyn wrote:
PatrickNeville wrote:

The gravity wave which would travel slightly faster than that could be what has been causing the sudden rise of instability.



A gravity wave has yet to be detected. So far LIGO, which has cost hundreds of millions of dollars has come up dry.

ruveyn


What are the implications of a negative result?


_________________
When God made me He didn't use a mold. I'm FREEHAND baby!
The road to my hell is paved with your good intentions.


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 85
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

12 Mar 2011, 9:02 am

wavefreak58 wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
PatrickNeville wrote:

The gravity wave which would travel slightly faster than that could be what has been causing the sudden rise of instability.



A gravity wave has yet to be detected. So far LIGO, which has cost hundreds of millions of dollars has come up dry.

ruveyn


What are the implications of a negative result?


It is hard to say. Perhaps gravitational waves are so weak that our technology is not adequate. Or perhaps the theory of general relativity is deficient and needs to be fixed or replaced. Gravitation is 10^40 times weaker than the electromagnetic interaction. Gravity waves are inherently hard to detect, if they exist at all.

ruveyn