Where Do Black Holes Lead?

reply to post by DrTodd


I would just like to point out that you are getting YOUR information from a .org that anyone can edit and change. Not too convincing. Sorry

From what I've read about black holes, I find it hard to imagine a million sun masses fitting into a space that is infinitely small. At one time, I thought that black holes had a depth to them. The event horizon, which we've become so familiar with, is an area where the actual gravititational pull of the balck hole begins and matter within this region can't overcome its influence. It's my belief that within this horizon, the light would be blindingly bright. As we get closer to the infinite point we call the black hole, matter as we know it would be torn and shredded, not to protons, neutrons and electrons, but to the very particles that make up our three elementary particles. With this in mind, this quanta soup would be condensed into something that can't be obeserved under even the most powerful microscopes while retaining the gravitational force of the original mass.

At this same time though, jets of matter will be ejected into space at nearly the speed of light from the black holes "North" and South" poles.

I've got to go now, but I find this subject extremely interesting.

[edit on 13/2/09 by Intelearthling]

reply to post by Yarium

although you stand a strong point matter can never be destroyed only changed even if its reduced to atoms it still exist but if the black hole does crush the atoms it will cause a nuclear reaction

I know whats in a black hole.... Its another universe, not as in a doorway to another but as in a universe exists deep inside, just as this universe is in a black hole in a even bigger universe called a gigaverse, and so on ad infinitum.

Black Holes "suck" in and bring matter to its smallest point, once inside, without the forces of the funnel, the matter slowly combines again and begins to create stars, galaxies, planets and what not, though on a smaller scale.

This entire universe is the size of a pea on another universe. If you were to see one of the gigaverses your mind would truly explode.

In reply to most people...

You don't know for sure that a Black Hole isn't a hole or not, we can't verify this at the moment. Hopefully we will find out what they actually do with the "stuff" they suck in.

And plus, if they try to send a camera down a black hole it will be destroyed instantly(obviously) so as of right now, there is NO way to tell what is inside of one.


My thoughts...

There has to be a reason for black holes, maybe it's a method of transport, but probably not.

The stuff the black hole is sucking in is spinning so fast that it just disappears? I believe not, I think that there is so much pressure inside of a black hole that all the stuff gets squished into one little tiny ball and eventually that ball explodes and spreads all the matter out. This forms a galaxy..

^ there are just my thoughts..just thought I'd share.

A few more things...

What happens if a Black Hole takes in a planet?
Does the planet break up during the spinning process?

Thanks, Brandon.

Black holes spew matter and energy back out to the outer reaches of their galaxies through folds in space time. The paritcles are so small and spaced out from other particles that it is like a mist. These particals are undetectible until they begin to gather and form gases which in sufficient quantities will eventully gather to form new stars.

Think of a black hole a sprinkler system spitting out particles all of the place, but spread so far that we cannot see it from here "Dark Matter". Allthough they are spread far from each other they still have gravity. This gravity is what we see as dark energy.

One day when they prove this...think back to ATS and you can say you read it here first.

X

Take a plastic trash bag and put your hand inside it till you find the bottom and then pull it out so that in the end it's inside out. That's a black hole. What's on the other side of a black hole is an inside out universe like ours where light is dark and dark is light. matter is anti. Time flows backwards. yet on that side it's as normal to them as this is to us. I have a theory, a belief that what those on the other side see are called stars. Our stars are their black holes. Our black holes are their stars. Cool hypothesis don't you think...?

A black hole is a highly dense collapse star with mega-gravity. The gravity is so strong, not even light can escape. The opposite is a White Hole. Look into that.

I think Black Holes lead to every point in the Universe.

Text

I totally agree. On one side theres the black hole that sucks matter in and on the other, its the white hole that spits the matter out.

Originally posted by GeniusLogan15
Text

I totally agree. On one side theres the black hole that sucks matter in and on the other, its the white hole that spits the matter out.

One theory is a black hole and a white hole are the same animal just viewed differently. At the poles of a black hole radiation is emitted we just may be looking directly down on a black hole. The truly itriguing theory is were already in a black hole. This explains several problems including why we know dark matter has to be there but cant detect it.In a black hole universe dark matter does not need to be present. So if its correct your already seeing whats beyond the event horizon of a black hole your in one!

Heres 2 links you can check out on the new theory:

adsabs.harvard.edu...

www.wired.com...

reply to post by dragonridr


Maybe! Or maybe the universe is flat. Thats what some scientists say. That there is more than one univers. The "UNI" in univers means one. So if there is more, They would be known as Multiverse. If the universe is flat and there is more than one, There probally going parallell with eachother and the black holes go from one to another. Is there any way we can get there? That would be cool.

From the minimal research that I did over the last 20 minutes or so, I've read that black holes, invisible stars, or whatever you prefer to call them were first theorized about in the late 1700's. The first time some astronomer detected one with their highly advanced telescopic technolgy was probably within the last 10 to 20 years.

I find it hard to believe any so-called theories, facts, laws, or what have you, presented in this thread hold any merit whatsoever. These mysterious pockets of mass and energy have only been theorized about for barely over 200 years, and recent technology has only allowed us to begin to better understand them for little over a decade. Considering black holes have come and gone and evolved over the last 15 billion years (if you're a big bang believer), I would say that 200 years of human theorizing and maybe 15 years of our observation are hardly long enough to come to any concise and credible conclusion about the idiosyncrasies of these phenomena.

I must ask, why do we have to understand them anyway? It is not like we are going to be under any immediate threat from a black hole in our life time, is there? Can we not put the resources being used for this field of study to much more practical uses, like feeding the hungry, or understanding and detering human violence?

I did enjoy reading the thread, but in the end, in my opinion, it is really all just speculation, but I digress, because as Einstein said himself--"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS

Most of the time when you see a black hole in a book or on tv, internet, etc it seems to be going through the galaxy instead of just being a one way portal or hole.

Most of the time when you see a black hole in a book or on tv, internet, etc (better yet, all of the time), it is drawn by an artist. No one, i repeat, absolutely no one has ever and will ever see a black hole, because by definition they can't be seen and (this is my opinion on the matter) they simply don't exist. They can't exist, time stops at the event horizon, so how can matter fall in and besides, the center of a black hole is supposed to be a singularity. Singularities don't exist, they are a mathematical construct created in the mind. A point doesn't exist, a point is nothing more than a coordinate.

There, my view on things

reply to post by KrisFromGenk


Your not actually correct we can see a black hole. In fact if there is matter around the black hole we can see it! Perhaps the first object to be generally recognized as a black hole is the X-ray binary star Cygnus X-1 The newly found black hole is estimated to be six to eight times as massive as our Sun, larger than some but smaller than many. It lies approximately 6,000 light-years away, 62 degrees above the galactic plane. It was spotted because of the motion it imparts on a nearby normal star, one smaller than our Sun, which orbits it every 4.1 hours.

Further there is at least 10 more we spotted and that doesn't count the super massive black holes at the center of galaxies.

reply to post by dragonridr


Sorry but I don't agree. What you see is an effect where a theory is built on and adjusted to comply with the effects we see. Cosequence of this is that you have to start inventing all sorts of things to make your theory work, like dark matter and the likes.

to recap Stephen Crothers at the Conference of the German Physical Society, Munich, March 9-13, 2009:

• “Schwarzschild’s solution” is not Schwarzschild’s solution. Schwarzschild’s actual solution does not predict black holes. The quantity ‘r’ appearing in the so-called “Schwarzschild solution” is not a distance of any kind. This simple fact completely subverts all claims for black holes.

• Despite claims for discovery of black holes, nobody has ever found a black hole; no infinitely dense point-mass singularity and no event horizon have ever been found. There is no physical evidence for the existence of infinitely dense point-masses.

• It takes an infinite amount of observer time to verify the presence of an event horizon, but nobody has been and nobody will be around for an infinite amount of time. No observer, no observing instruments, no photons, no matter can be present in a spacetime that by construction contains no matter.

• The black hole is fictitious and so there are no black hole generated gravitational waves. The international search for black holes and their gravitational waves is ill-fated.

• The Michell-Laplace dark body is not a black hole. Newton’s theory of gravitation does not predict black holes. General Relativity does not predict black holes. Black holes were spawned by (incorrect) theory, not by observation. The search for black holes is destined to find none.

• No celestial body has ever been observed to undergo irresistible gravitational collapse. There is no laboratory evidence for irresistible gravitational collapse. Infinitely dense point-mass singularities howsoever formed cannot be reconciled with Special Relativity, i.e. they violate Special Relativity, and therefore violate General Relativity.

• General Relativity cannot account for the simple experimental fact that two fixed bodies will approach one another upon release. There are no known solutions to Einstein’s field equations for two or more masses and there is no existence theorem by which it can even be asserted that his field equations contain latent solutions for such configurations of matter. All claims for black hole interactions are invalid.

• Einstein’s gravitational waves are fictitious; Einstein’s gravitational energy cannot be localised; so the international search for Einstein’s gravitational waves is destined to detect nothing. No gravitational waves have been detected.

• Einstein’s field equations violate the experimentally well-established usual conservation of energy and momentum, and therefore violate the experimental evidence.

www.holoscience.com...



I'm not saying they don't exist, I'm just saying, the more I read about them, the more I think they don't exist.

reply to post by KrisFromGenk


Im sorry i think ill put my money on Stehen Hawkings

Einstein’s theory demonstrates that space-time is curved by the presence of matter. Hawking said it is like putting a heavy ball on a rubber sheet, the sheet bends and if you increase the weight of the ball then eventually, at a critical mass and size, the ball will make a bottomless hole in the sheet that particles can get into, but not out of. Stars do the same to the curving of space and time, and at a critical mass and size a star will collapse into a black hole.

And i think you need to look into relativity Einstein theory does indeed support as well as predict black holes. And to be honest neither of us are near smart enough to argue with him few people are.



Oh wanted to add a PS it is no longer believed nothing escapes a black hole

Hawking also described how he discovered that particles could slowly leak out of black holes and release energy. A miniature black hole of the mass of a mountain could generate enough power to supply the world’s energy needs. However, the energy would be difficult to harness as the power could not be maintained in a power station. It would drop through the floor and end up at the center of the Earth.

[edit on 5/14/09 by dragonridr]

Originally posted by dragonridr

And i think you need to look into relativity Einstein theory does indeed support as well as predict black holes. And to be honest neither of us are near smart enough to argue with him few people are.

The geometrical facts already enunciated above are sufficient to prove the black hole a fallacy. On a much simpler level the black hole is inconsistent with the Theory of Relativity. The alleged singularity of the black hole is infinitely dense. Now Special Relativity forbids infinite density because infinite density implies that a material body can acquire the speed of light in vacuum (or equivalently that there is infinite energy), which violates the fundamental premise of Special Relativity. General Relativity, by definition, cannot violate Special Relativity, and so it too forbids infinite density. Thus, the Theory of Relativity forbids infinitely dense point-mass singularities and hence forbids black holes. Consequently, all alleged black hole phenomena are meaningless.

www.thunderbolts.info...

reply to post by dragonridr


Thats true. none of us our. But einstein and the other scientists back then didn't have the technology to do what we do noe. Right? So some of their theories might be wrong. Black holes are visual, and are caused by dead stars. We can determine more about what is out there and what is on the other side of black holes. Also if there really is other life. I believe there is. Einstein was good and will be written down in history but there still is some people that might be better.

Originally posted by GeniusLogan15

Black holes are visual, and are caused by dead stars.

Show me one.