Prev: Light comming together in odd wavefunction
Next: Plate techtonics faces a problem
From: Don Stockbauer on 14 Jun 2010 05:39
On Jun 14, 12:19 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> BURT schrieb:
>
> > Science's attitude stinks. It thinks it has somehow gotten better than
> > Albert Einstein. But Einstein was right about quantum mechanics.
> > Einstein was the real winner because he was the only objective
> > scientist. Right now I don't see any body that can act as a watch dog
> > for science and its fraud. Science is full of intellectual dishonesty.
> > Such is Stephen Hawking the Time Keeper.
>
> I have some trouble with Stephan Hawking. It is actually this man, who
> guarantees the safety of the LHC, because he 'proved', that black holes
> evaporate.
>
> The so called Hawking radiation is in my eyes nonsense, starting with
> his model of black holes itself, which should be understood as a vortex,
> where the timelike future is pointing away from our sight. But that is
> nothing we would like to see happening to our planet and so we had to
> carefully reexamine his theory.

Never trust a guy who couldn't change a tire.
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jun 2010 10:18
Don Stockbauer schrieb:
> On Jun 14, 12:19 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
>> BURT schrieb:
>>
>>> Science's attitude stinks. It thinks it has somehow gotten better than
>>> Albert Einstein. But Einstein was right about quantum mechanics.
>>> Einstein was the real winner because he was the only objective
>>> scientist. Right now I don't see any body that can act as a watch dog
>>> for science and its fraud. Science is full of intellectual dishonesty.
>>> Such is Stephen Hawking the Time Keeper.
>> I have some trouble with Stephan Hawking. It is actually this man, who
>> guarantees the safety of the LHC, because he 'proved', that black holes
>> evaporate.
>>
>> The so called Hawking radiation is in my eyes nonsense, starting with
>> his model of black holes itself, which should be understood as a vortex,
>> where the timelike future is pointing away from our sight. But that is
>> nothing we would like to see happening to our planet and so we had to
>> carefully reexamine his theory.
>
> Never trust a guy who couldn't change a tire.

?
No, I just look at what he wrote. His book 'brief history of time' was
kind of hype, even though I didn't found it very convincing.
And than I think the term 'black hole' is misleading.
I compare the 'blackness' of a black hole with time. The future is kind
of black, too, so black hole are vortices, where we see some space
pacing away from us with almost or more than the speed of light. This
doesn't violate SRT, because its our measurement and in that region
nothing needs to move at all, what makes spacetime flat 'there'.
But the future cannot radiate into the past. That is %$�"#* !!
(insult censored..)

TH
From: BURT on 14 Jun 2010 14:05
On Jun 13, 10:19 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> BURT schrieb:
>
> > Science's attitude stinks. It thinks it has somehow gotten better than
> > Albert Einstein. But Einstein was right about quantum mechanics.
> > Einstein was the real winner because he was the only objective
> > scientist. Right now I don't see any body that can act as a watch dog
> > for science and its fraud. Science is full of intellectual dishonesty.
> > Such is Stephen Hawking the Time Keeper.
>
> I have some trouble with Stephan Hawking. It is actually this man, who
> guarantees the safety of the LHC, because he 'proved', that black holes
> evaporate.
>
> The so called Hawking radiation is in my eyes nonsense, starting with
> his model of black holes itself, which should be understood as a vortex,
> where the timelike future is pointing away from our sight. But that is
> nothing we would like to see happening to our planet and so we had to
> carefully reexamine his theory.
>
> TH

Hawking did see that an equal amount of positive energy will fall into
the black hole. He only has negative matter falling in.

Mitch Raemsch

From: Don Stockbauer on 14 Jun 2010 20:21
On Jun 14, 9:18 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> Don Stockbauer schrieb:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 14, 12:19 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
> >> BURT schrieb:
>
> >>> Science's attitude stinks. It thinks it has somehow gotten better than
> >>> Albert Einstein. But Einstein was right about quantum mechanics.
> >>> Einstein was the real winner because he was the only objective
> >>> scientist. Right now I don't see any body that can act as a watch dog
> >>> for science and its fraud. Science is full of intellectual dishonesty..
> >>> Such is Stephen Hawking the Time Keeper.
> >> I have some trouble with Stephan Hawking. It is actually this man, who
> >> guarantees the safety of the LHC, because he 'proved', that black holes
> >> evaporate.
>
> >> The so called Hawking radiation is in my eyes nonsense, starting with
> >> his model of black holes itself, which should be understood as a vortex,
> >> where the timelike future is pointing away from our sight. But that is
> >> nothing we would like to see happening to our planet and so we had to
> >> carefully reexamine his theory.
>
> > Never trust a guy who couldn't change a tire.
>
> ?

It just means that being able to live a normal life and do the
ordinary things that everybody does as part of everyday life is
valuable in forming insights. Hawking is trapped in his wheelchar,
apparently not thinking outside the subject of physics.
From: Thomas Heger on 15 Jun 2010 18:07
Don Stockbauer schrieb:
> On Jun 14, 9:18 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
>> Don Stockbauer schrieb:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jun 14, 12:19 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote:
>>>> BURT schrieb:
>>>>> Science's attitude stinks. It thinks it has somehow gotten better than
>>>>> Albert Einstein. But Einstein was right about quantum mechanics.
>>>>> Einstein was the real winner because he was the only objective
>>>>> scientist. Right now I don't see any body that can act as a watch dog
>>>>> for science and its fraud. Science is full of intellectual dishonesty.
>>>>> Such is Stephen Hawking the Time Keeper.
>>>> I have some trouble with Stephan Hawking. It is actually this man, who
>>>> guarantees the safety of the LHC, because he 'proved', that black holes
>>>> evaporate.
>>>> The so called Hawking radiation is in my eyes nonsense, starting with
>>>> his model of black holes itself, which should be understood as a vortex,
>>>> where the timelike future is pointing away from our sight. But that is
>>>> nothing we would like to see happening to our planet and so we had to
>>>> carefully reexamine his theory.
>>> Never trust a guy who couldn't change a tire.
>> ?
>
> It just means that being able to live a normal life and do the
> ordinary things that everybody does as part of everyday life is
> valuable in forming insights. Hawking is trapped in his wheelchar,
> apparently not thinking outside the subject of physics.

Hawking is certainly a great physicist. But I don't think, that 'Hawking
radiation' works. The idea of black holes as a superdense state of
space, that just sits there, but swallows entire galaxies, seems
implausible and illogic.
Since 'spacetime' is composed out of space and time, we had to consider
both. Meaning, if space shrinks, than time had to expand. This is the
picture of a vortex, where the timeline points away from us. This is
'black', too, because the light emitted their is pointing towards the
future from such a state, while we live in the relative past, hence
could not receive radiation from there.
If Hawking is handicapped or not is not so much of a problem for
thinking about problems like this. But it is no excuse for making
mistakes neither.

TH
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Light comming together in odd wavefunction
Next: Plate techtonics faces a problem