The pointing out of black hole failure
in [Relativity]
|
From: BURT on 6 May 2010 22:04 On May 6, 6:57 pm, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > On 5/6/2010 7:53 PM, BURT wrote: > > > > > > > On May 6, 5:08 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > >> On 5/6/2010 6:44 PM, BURT wrote: > > >>> On May 6, 4:23 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > >>>> On 5/6/2010 4:32 PM, BURT wrote: > > >>>>> On May 6, 1:39 pm, purple<pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On 5/6/2010 2:54 PM, PD wrote: > >>>>>> He's never done otherwise. We can readily see how far he's gotten > >>>>>> in physics and in life.- Hide quoted text - > > >>>>> The only way to win is not to play the game. > > >>>> "Not playing the game" precludes winning. > > >>>>> Black hole theory is wrong. > > >>>> At the limits, every model begins to go wrong. > > >>> Right. Black holes have been demonstrated theoretically wrong. > > >> No. > > >>> GR can predict only a limiting case and is therefore incomplete. > > >> At the limits, every model begins to go wrong. > > >>> A limited acceleration theory is a theory of limited gravity strength > >>> which is a more complete theory. > > >> Where's your proof?- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > My proof is that you are wrong. > > Bwahahahahahahahahaha! > > All I did was ask you to provide a proof. You have not.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Why do I need to prove anything to anyone? No. It can be seen that GR violates SR motion laws and therefore is a limited case of a more complete theory of gravity one that has limited strength or acceleration as Einstein said. Mitch Raemsch
From: PD on 7 May 2010 08:47 On May 6, 5:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 6, 2:52 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 6, 4:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 6, 1:39 pm, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > > > On 5/6/2010 2:54 PM, PD wrote: > > > > > > On May 6, 2:20 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > > > >> I challenge you to show that GR does not cause falling at light speed. > > > > >> I challenge Kip Thorne's excuse. How much do you want to bet that in > > > > >> the future you will find out you were wrong to deny what I have said? > > > > >> I can wait. How about you? > > > > > >> Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > You're acting a little like the paranoid schizophrenic dubbed Magnetic > > > > > who was on a while ago demanding that it be proven to him that the LHC > > > > > was safe, and he was advocating that everyone at CERN be shot until > > > > > someone would take the time to try to dispel his demons. > > > > > > Mitch, you won't get very far in life, let alone physics, by casting > > > > > fabricated assertions and then demanding that the assertions be proven > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > PD > > > > > He's never done otherwise. We can readily see how far he's gotten > > > > in physics and in life.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > The only way to win is not to play the game. > > > You mean the welfare and posting-from-the-library game? > > > > Black hole theory is wrong. > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > I just like to point out the failures in black hole theory. There aren't failures in black hole theory. There are failures in what is circulating around in your head and what you are mislabeling as black hole theory. There is no real connection between the black hole theory in your head and the real black hole theory. > Einstein > never accepted a completely collapsed star and Stephen Hawking pointed > out that the math at the extreme of the theory predicts GR's own > downfall. > > Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 7 May 2010 14:27 On May 7, 5:47 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 6, 5:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 6, 2:52 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 6, 4:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 6, 1:39 pm, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 5/6/2010 2:54 PM, PD wrote: > > > > > > > On May 6, 2:20 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > >> I challenge you to show that GR does not cause falling at light speed. > > > > > >> I challenge Kip Thorne's excuse. How much do you want to bet that in > > > > > >> the future you will find out you were wrong to deny what I have said? > > > > > >> I can wait. How about you? > > > > > > >> Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > You're acting a little like the paranoid schizophrenic dubbed Magnetic > > > > > > who was on a while ago demanding that it be proven to him that the LHC > > > > > > was safe, and he was advocating that everyone at CERN be shot until > > > > > > someone would take the time to try to dispel his demons. > > > > > > > Mitch, you won't get very far in life, let alone physics, by casting > > > > > > fabricated assertions and then demanding that the assertions be proven > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > PD > > > > > > He's never done otherwise. We can readily see how far he's gotten > > > > > in physics and in life.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > The only way to win is not to play the game. > > > > You mean the welfare and posting-from-the-library game? > > > > > Black hole theory is wrong. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > I just like to point out the failures in black hole theory. > > There aren't failures in black hole theory. There are failures in what > is circulating around in your head and what you are mislabeling as > black hole theory. There is no real connection between the black hole > theory in your head and the real black hole theory. > > > > > Einstein > > never accepted a completely collapsed star and Stephen Hawking pointed > > out that the math at the extreme of the theory predicts GR's own > > downfall. > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show The theory of gravity or GR by Einstein is still incomplete. Can you show there are no corrections to be made? Was Stephen Hawking wrong in saying what he said about the singularity? The theory needs to become more complete. The new theory will be a theory based on limited strength acceleration/gravity. Mitch Raemsch
From: PD on 7 May 2010 14:41 On May 7, 1:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 7, 5:47 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On May 6, 5:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 6, 2:52 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 6, 4:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 6, 1:39 pm, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On 5/6/2010 2:54 PM, PD wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 6, 2:20 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > >> I challenge you to show that GR does not cause falling at light speed. > > > > > > >> I challenge Kip Thorne's excuse. How much do you want to bet that in > > > > > > >> the future you will find out you were wrong to deny what I have said? > > > > > > >> I can wait. How about you? > > > > > > > >> Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > You're acting a little like the paranoid schizophrenic dubbed Magnetic > > > > > > > who was on a while ago demanding that it be proven to him that the LHC > > > > > > > was safe, and he was advocating that everyone at CERN be shot until > > > > > > > someone would take the time to try to dispel his demons. > > > > > > > > Mitch, you won't get very far in life, let alone physics, by casting > > > > > > > fabricated assertions and then demanding that the assertions be proven > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > PD > > > > > > > He's never done otherwise. We can readily see how far he's gotten > > > > > > in physics and in life.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > The only way to win is not to play the game. > > > > > You mean the welfare and posting-from-the-library game? > > > > > > Black hole theory is wrong. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > I just like to point out the failures in black hole theory. > > > There aren't failures in black hole theory. There are failures in what > > is circulating around in your head and what you are mislabeling as > > black hole theory. There is no real connection between the black hole > > theory in your head and the real black hole theory. > > > > Einstein > > > never accepted a completely collapsed star and Stephen Hawking pointed > > > out that the math at the extreme of the theory predicts GR's own > > > downfall. > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show > > The theory of gravity or GR by Einstein is still incomplete. Incomplete is different than failed. Our understanding of genetics is incomplete. This doesn't make genetics full of failures. Same is true for our understanding of earthquakes. This doesn't make geological theories full of failures. > Can you show there are no corrections to be made? Was Stephen Hawking > wrong in saying what he said about the singularity? > > The theory needs to become more complete. The new theory will be a > theory based on limited strength acceleration/gravity. Yes, of course there is work to do. Physics isn't finished. This is a much different statement than wild and unsupported claims that it's all wrong, Mitch.
From: BURT on 7 May 2010 14:49
On May 7, 11:41 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 7, 1:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 7, 5:47 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 6, 5:42 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 6, 2:52 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 6, 4:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 6, 1:39 pm, purple <pur...(a)colorme.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 5/6/2010 2:54 PM, PD wrote: > > > > > > > > > On May 6, 2:20 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > >> I challenge you to show that GR does not cause falling at light speed. > > > > > > > >> I challenge Kip Thorne's excuse. How much do you want to bet that in > > > > > > > >> the future you will find out you were wrong to deny what I have said? > > > > > > > >> I can wait. How about you? > > > > > > > > >> Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > You're acting a little like the paranoid schizophrenic dubbed Magnetic > > > > > > > > who was on a while ago demanding that it be proven to him that the LHC > > > > > > > > was safe, and he was advocating that everyone at CERN be shot until > > > > > > > > someone would take the time to try to dispel his demons. > > > > > > > > > Mitch, you won't get very far in life, let alone physics, by casting > > > > > > > > fabricated assertions and then demanding that the assertions be proven > > > > > > > > wrong. > > > > > > > > > PD > > > > > > > > He's never done otherwise. We can readily see how far he's gotten > > > > > > > in physics and in life.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > The only way to win is not to play the game. > > > > > > You mean the welfare and posting-from-the-library game? > > > > > > > Black hole theory is wrong. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > I just like to point out the failures in black hole theory. > > > > There aren't failures in black hole theory. There are failures in what > > > is circulating around in your head and what you are mislabeling as > > > black hole theory. There is no real connection between the black hole > > > theory in your head and the real black hole theory. > > > > > Einstein > > > > never accepted a completely collapsed star and Stephen Hawking pointed > > > > out that the math at the extreme of the theory predicts GR's own > > > > downfall. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show > > > The theory of gravity or GR by Einstein is still incomplete. > > Incomplete is different than failed. Our understanding of genetics is > incomplete. This doesn't make genetics full of failures. Same is true > for our understanding of earthquakes. This doesn't make geological > theories full of failures. > > > Can you show there are no corrections to be made? Was Stephen Hawking > > wrong in saying what he said about the singularity? > > > The theory needs to become more complete. The new theory will be a > > theory based on limited strength acceleration/gravity. > > Yes, of course there is work to do. Physics isn't finished. This is a > much different statement than wild and unsupported claims that it's > all wrong, Mitch.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - An incomplete theory doesn't work all the way. What GR predicts at its extreme is where the theory of GR fails. The new theory is a limited acceleration or gravity strength below the speed of light. Mitch Raemsch |