A Hawking black hole
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: EINSTEIN WAS NOT RIGHT - SPACE AND TIME DO NOT BEND
Next: Yet Another SD Rodrian Prediction True: Gravity is NOT an attractive force between bodies
From: BURT on 15 Jun 2010 18:29 If particles of energy are being created near the event horizon surface as Hawking said there is a problem. He has only negative matter and energy falling in when an equal amount of positive matter will always have the same chance to fall in and instead the negative energy to float away. So Hawking's black hole really has quantum thermodynamic stability of mass. And therefore could never decay. Black holes are out because they violate laws of energy and motion. Einstein worked against the complete collapse of a star. Even Hawking said that GR fails by predicting singularities at a center of gravity of a black hole. Mitch Raemsch
From: guskz on 15 Jun 2010 23:31 On Jun 15, 6:29 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > If particles of energy are being created near the event horizon > surface as Hawking said there is a problem. He has only negative > matter and energy falling in when an equal amount of positive matter > will always have the same chance to fall in and instead the negative > energy to float away. > > So Hawking's black hole really has quantum thermodynamic stability of > mass. And therefore could never decay. > > Black holes are out because they violate laws of energy and motion. > Einstein worked against the complete collapse of a star. Even Hawking > said that GR fails by predicting singularities at a center of gravity > of a black hole. > > Mitch Raemsch Hawking has not one but two theories. His 1st theory that black holes emit light at the event horizon makes mathematical sense, so any distant light (stars, etc... including CMBR) would both fall & eject at the event horizon. #2. Is more of a fairy tale, to determine the life of a black hole. It's foundation is that there is invisible particles that come into existence everywhere, then fade away. And that they also appear at the black hole and cause it to evaporate.
From: BURT on 17 Jun 2010 14:52
On Jun 15, 8:31 pm, "gu...(a)hotmail.com" <gu...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 6:29 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > If particles of energy are being created near the event horizon > > surface as Hawking said there is a problem. He has only negative > > matter and energy falling in when an equal amount of positive matter > > will always have the same chance to fall in and instead the negative > > energy to float away. > > > So Hawking's black hole really has quantum thermodynamic stability of > > mass. And therefore could never decay. > > > Black holes are out because they violate laws of energy and motion. > > Einstein worked against the complete collapse of a star. Even Hawking > > said that GR fails by predicting singularities at a center of gravity > > of a black hole. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Hawking has not one but two theories. > > His 1st theory that black holes emit light at the event horizon makes > mathematical sense, so any distant light (stars, etc... including > CMBR) would both fall & eject at the event horizon. > > #2. Is more of a fairy tale, to determine the life of a black hole. > It's foundation is that there is invisible particles that come into > existence everywhere, then fade away. And that they also appear at the > black hole and cause it to evaporate. In Hawking's evaporating black hole he does not note that positive matter can fall in the negative matter instead floating away from the event horizon. This other half of the phenomenon would make black holes stable. Equal amounts of matter and anti matter would fall in. Mitch Raemsch |