Origin of life elsewhere and close together
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Scientists present first bread-and-butter results_from_LHC_collisions
Next: Who is really the 'personality' that calls himself 'Inertial'??!!
From: bpuharic on 13 Jun 2010 20:37 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:28:14 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromitch(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >I am pointing out that black holes violate laws. actually they show the limits of our laws. Kip Thorne made an >excuse so that people could go on believing in them when if you make >the right correction black holes no longer exist. A theory of limited >gravity/acceleration strength is the correction to infinite gravity at >a singularity. there was an interesting article recently in scientific american recently stating that black holes may, indeed, not exist. if the collapse of a large star does not happen instantaneously, the time it takes to collapse transfers enough energy out of the star to prevent its collapse to a black hole, according to the article. plus, if space is quantized then black holes can not form singularities
From: BURT on 13 Jun 2010 20:42 On Jun 13, 5:37�pm, bpuharic <w...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:28:14 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> > wrote: > > >I am pointing out that black holes violate laws. > > actually they show the limits of our laws. > > �Kip Thorne made an > > >excuse so that people could go on believing in them when if you make > >the right correction black holes no longer exist. A theory of limited > >gravity/acceleration strength is the correction to infinite gravity at > >a singularity. > > there was an interesting article recently in scientific american > recently stating that black holes may, indeed, not exist. if the > collapse of a large star does not happen instantaneously, the time it > takes to collapse transfers enough energy out of the star to prevent > its collapse to a black hole, according to the article. plus, if space > is quantized then black holes can not form singularities Well if they violate laws then they can't exist. When you make the corrections they go away. Einstein never believed in a complete collapse of a star. And he will be proven to be right. Mitch Raemsch
From: bpuharic on 13 Jun 2010 20:48 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:42:15 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromitch(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Jun 13, 5:37�pm, bpuharic <w...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:28:14 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >> there was an interesting article recently in scientific american >> recently stating that black holes may, indeed, not exist. if the >> collapse of a large star does not happen instantaneously, the time it >> takes to collapse transfers enough energy out of the star to prevent >> its collapse to a black hole, according to the article. plus, if space >> is quantized then black holes can not form singularities > >Well if they violate laws then they can't exist. When you make the >corrections they go away. Einstein never believed in a complete >collapse of a star. And he will be proven to be right. > you seem not to know what a law of nature is. natural laws can be violated IF they're not natural laws. our current laws regarding relativity and QM are limited in their abilities to describe certain features of nature. you keep predicting events that you say will happen. care to tell us when you've been right about something that's actually happened in the past? anyone can puff up his chest about something that will happen 1000 years from now. hell, i could say that, in1000 years no one will believe in god.
From: Desertphile on 13 Jun 2010 22:42 On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:37:30 -0400, bpuharic <wf3h(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:28:14 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromitch(a)yahoo.com> > wrote: > >I am pointing out that black holes violate laws. ROTFL! Good bloody *GODS* that's hilarious! > actually they show the limits of our laws. > >Kip Thorne made an > >excuse so that people could go on believing in them when if you make > >the right correction black holes no longer exist. A theory of limited > >gravity/acceleration strength is the correction to infinite gravity at > >a singularity. > there was an interesting article recently in scientific american > recently stating that black holes may, indeed, not exist. if the > collapse of a large star does not happen instantaneously, the time it > takes to collapse transfers enough energy out of the star to prevent > its collapse to a black hole, according to the article. plus, if space > is quantized then black holes can not form singularities What is Cygnus X-1? -- http://desertphile.org Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water "Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz
From: BURT on 13 Jun 2010 22:49
On Jun 13, 7:42�pm, Desertphile <desertph...(a)invalid-address.net> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 20:37:30 -0400, bpuharic <w...(a)comcast.net> > wrote: > > > On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 17:28:14 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> > > wrote: > > >I am pointing out that black holes violate laws. > > ROTFL! Good bloody *GODS* that's hilarious! > > > actually they show the limits of our laws. > > >Kip Thorne made an > > >excuse so that people could go on believing in them when if you make > > >the right correction black holes no longer exist. A theory of limited > > >gravity/acceleration strength is the correction to infinite gravity at > > >a singularity. > > there was an interesting article recently in scientific american > > recently stating that black holes may, indeed, not exist. if the > > collapse of a large star does not happen instantaneously, the time it > > takes to collapse transfers enough energy out of the star to prevent > > its collapse to a black hole, according to the article. plus, if space > > is quantized then black holes can not form singularities > > What is Cygnus X-1? I don't know you tell me. I believe it is a neutron star form. It is a gravity red shift in time large enough to appear as a black hole. To cut it short. There is no final collapse of a star. If you want to argue black holes you must first correct the laws that they break. Mitch Raemsch > --http://desertphile.org > Desertphile's Desert Soliloquy. WARNING: view with plenty of water > "Why aren't resurrections from the dead noteworthy?" -- Jim Rutz |