Prev:  Breed like rabbits, die like rabbits.
Next: Einstein Proved Right - Again!
From: BURT on 23 Mar 2010 20:04
On Mar 23, 4:59 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 3:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 4:34 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 22, 3:26 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 20, 10:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > General Relativity contradicts the Special Theory in the case of a
> > > > > black hole horizon. There is an end to time giving an infinite red
> > > > > shift and a speed of light freefall.  And if there is more gravity
> > > > > inside that speed of light fall for energy must increase beyond C..
>
> > > > > Gravity at the extreme of black holes proves to be a failure. We need
> > > > > a kind of limited gravity theory that discounts black holes.
>
> > > > Wal-Mart might be able to help you out, but it would have to be
> > > > Chinese black holes.
>
> > > This post no content.
>
> > GR violates SR at the event horizon by causing the end of time and
> > light speed freefall. And if there is even more gravity inside a black
> > hole acceleration ought to push matter faster than light. Black holes
> > are a theoretical failure. Even Hawking pointed this out. The
> > singularity is a problem but so is the event horizon.
>
> So they don't exist?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Massive redshifts exist. We are not seeing black holes.

Mitch Raemsch
From: Don Stockbauer on 23 Mar 2010 21:20
On Mar 23, 7:04 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 4:59 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 3:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 23, 4:34 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 22, 3:26 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 20, 10:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > General Relativity contradicts the Special Theory in the case of a
> > > > > > black hole horizon. There is an end to time giving an infinite red
> > > > > > shift and a speed of light freefall.  And if there is more gravity
> > > > > > inside that speed of light fall for energy must increase beyond C.
>
> > > > > > Gravity at the extreme of black holes proves to be a failure. We need
> > > > > > a kind of limited gravity theory that discounts black holes.
>
> > > > > Wal-Mart might be able to help you out, but it would have to be
> > > > > Chinese black holes.
>
> > > > This post no content.
>
> > > GR violates SR at the event horizon by causing the end of time and
> > > light speed freefall. And if there is even more gravity inside a black
> > > hole acceleration ought to push matter faster than light. Black holes
> > > are a theoretical failure. Even Hawking pointed this out. The
> > > singularity is a problem but so is the event horizon.
>
> > So they don't exist?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Massive redshifts exist. We are not seeing black holes.
>

I don't see you. Yet I detect your communication.

From: BURT on 23 Mar 2010 21:42
On Mar 23, 6:20 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 7:04 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 4:59 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 23, 3:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 23, 4:34 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 22, 3:26 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Mar 20, 10:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > General Relativity contradicts the Special Theory in the case of a
> > > > > > > black hole horizon. There is an end to time giving an infinite red
> > > > > > > shift and a speed of light freefall.  And if there is more gravity
> > > > > > > inside that speed of light fall for energy must increase beyond C.
>
> > > > > > > Gravity at the extreme of black holes proves to be a failure. We need
> > > > > > > a kind of limited gravity theory that discounts black holes.
>
> > > > > > Wal-Mart might be able to help you out, but it would have to be
> > > > > > Chinese black holes.
>
> > > > > This post no content.
>
> > > > GR violates SR at the event horizon by causing the end of time and
> > > > light speed freefall. And if there is even more gravity inside a black
> > > > hole acceleration ought to push matter faster than light. Black holes
> > > > are a theoretical failure. Even Hawking pointed this out. The
> > > > singularity is a problem but so is the event horizon.
>
> > > So they don't exist?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Massive redshifts exist. We are not seeing black holes.
>
> I don't see you.  Yet I detect your communication.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

How do you detect fast enough if you do not use the fastest
comuminacting force of light?

Mitch Raemsch
From: Don Stockbauer on 23 Mar 2010 23:58
On Mar 23, 8:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 6:20 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 7:04 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 23, 4:59 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 23, 3:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 23, 4:34 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Mar 22, 3:26 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Mar 20, 10:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > General Relativity contradicts the Special Theory in the case of a
> > > > > > > > black hole horizon. There is an end to time giving an infinite red
> > > > > > > > shift and a speed of light freefall.  And if there is more gravity
> > > > > > > > inside that speed of light fall for energy must increase beyond C.
>
> > > > > > > > Gravity at the extreme of black holes proves to be a failure. We need
> > > > > > > > a kind of limited gravity theory that discounts black holes..
>
> > > > > > > Wal-Mart might be able to help you out, but it would have to be
> > > > > > > Chinese black holes.
>
> > > > > > This post no content.
>
> > > > > GR violates SR at the event horizon by causing the end of time and
> > > > > light speed freefall. And if there is even more gravity inside a black
> > > > > hole acceleration ought to push matter faster than light. Black holes
> > > > > are a theoretical failure. Even Hawking pointed this out. The
> > > > > singularity is a problem but so is the event horizon.
>
> > > > So they don't exist?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > Massive redshifts exist. We are not seeing black holes.
>
> > I don't see you.  Yet I detect your communication.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> How do you detect fast enough if you do not use the fastest
> comuminacting force of light?

Usenet notes do travel at the speed of light, or some large fraction
of it when traveling through wire. So, what do you think I use if I'm
"not using the fastest comuminacting force of light"?
From: BURT on 24 Mar 2010 00:27
On Mar 23, 8:58 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 23, 8:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 23, 6:20 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 23, 7:04 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mar 23, 4:59 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mar 23, 3:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Mar 23, 4:34 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Mar 22, 3:26 am, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Mar 20, 10:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > General Relativity contradicts the Special Theory in the case of a
> > > > > > > > > black hole horizon. There is an end to time giving an infinite red
> > > > > > > > > shift and a speed of light freefall.  And if there is more gravity
> > > > > > > > > inside that speed of light fall for energy must increase beyond C.
>
> > > > > > > > > Gravity at the extreme of black holes proves to be a failure. We need
> > > > > > > > > a kind of limited gravity theory that discounts black holes.
>
> > > > > > > > Wal-Mart might be able to help you out, but it would have to be
> > > > > > > > Chinese black holes.
>
> > > > > > > This post no content.
>
> > > > > > GR violates SR at the event horizon by causing the end of time and
> > > > > > light speed freefall. And if there is even more gravity inside a black
> > > > > > hole acceleration ought to push matter faster than light. Black holes
> > > > > > are a theoretical failure. Even Hawking pointed this out. The
> > > > > > singularity is a problem but so is the event horizon.
>
> > > > > So they don't exist?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > Massive redshifts exist. We are not seeing black holes.
>
> > > I don't see you.  Yet I detect your communication.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > How do you detect fast enough if you do not use the fastest
> > comuminacting force of light?
>
> Usenet notes do travel at the speed of light, or some large fraction
> of it when traveling through wire.  So, what do you think I use if I'm
> "not using  the fastest comuminacting force of light"?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Falling at light speed at the extreme of GR gravity theory is a
violation of the Special Theory's motion law. Matter cannot reach
light speed. That is why black holes are wrong theory.

Mitch Raemsch
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev:  Breed like rabbits, die like rabbits.
Next: Einstein Proved Right - Again!