Jerking a Black Hole?!

[tayga]

Saying that it dosent exist is foolish of people, are you God? Do you know for sure? Are you more intelligent then some of the top scientists who've made bigger strides than you will ever have in your lifetime?

You're right, nothing is certain until the evidence is in but stating that black holes definitely DO exist is way more foolish that stating that they certainly don't. Especially when real, observable physics is taken into consideration.

That top cosmologists and astrophysicists have made great strides is debatable. Great strides in what? Certainly not in our understanding of our universe or in our ability to predict it or harness its resources. They spend taxpayers money, after all, so where's the return on investment?

[schmidty226]

Your completely right, i dont have the right but when i hear people say it dosent, thats whats getting me worked up because like myself i have no right. Of course We've made great strides. Maybe strides we dont agree on, We could get on a debate about resources but i think thats ridiculous. You have to understand (as a Civilization) We've only just begun, do you expect to get everything the first time? Just like the a Game of Risk, we have to Gamble knowing that we won't get any further than we did starting off, so when we do this enough times (if it comes to that) we will become ultimately wiser and better off then are success handed to us. Its gonna take a lot longer for us to understand then just a couple "smart" people who think they have a grip on the Laws of the Universe. For all we know, everything could be wrong. Its not out of the realm of possibility.


Dual Perspectives are essential.

[Eaol]

I believe schmidty226 has made me aware of a point.

Sparky, I've seen enough of bashing the mainstream as opposed to providing pure criticism. It's not at all helpful to post a (probably) misguided article and then insult the scientists who have done serious research (with a confirmation bias in place - oh dear, I should shut up now).

Much of EU theory is just some well-based speculation. Very plausible, but nonetheless unproven in many areas. It's still in its infancy. We humans can make mistakes. We aren't special.

I know a man who was in the Air Force for a long time, and we talk to each other about EU theory sometimes. He really doesn't like seeing people talking like you just did here, Sparky, because it means that you just went down to their* level. If they are throwing insults at you, the worst thing you can do is feed the trolls. Show some professionalism. This is exactly why physics forums on the internet are so useless. They do exactly what you do. I don't know you, I can't really judge you accurately. But please, don't ruin a first impression. Please, if you must, do this more...tongue-in-cheek.

-Eaol-

* "Their" level is more or less referring to the majority of adherents of popular science these days on the internet when confronted with a differing viewpoint, irrelevant of its merit.

[orrery]

I can say with the same confidence that most people can say that the world is round, that black holes do not exist and that the big bang is a big fraud and I will leave it at that. Some people just aren't ready to join the rest of us in the 21st century yet.

[Sparky]

Eaol, thank you for your perspective.

--bashing the mainstream as opposed to providing pure criticism. It's not at all helpful to post a (probably) misguided article and then insult the scientists who have done serious research

I am not the only one here that realizes that a logical argument with "true believers" is probably futile, and express hatred toward their arrogant, superior, condescending remarks, by mocking them. And i seem to remember a TPOD that was satirizing the belief in black holes.

"not at all helpful"?!! That is subjective!! Of all the NONSENSE posted on the forums here, some of which is non-science, disguised as science, ie., citations, consensus approved, and is allowed, therefore, seemingly "helpful", i can not express myself in similar fashion? My, apparently worthless, opinion is that, Helpful , for science based forums would be to not have a NIMI forum, and delete posts that have a conspiracy or metaphysical tone, if not blatantly expressed! But, this is not my sandbox, and if management wants to allow the mixing of nonsense beliefs with their intent to promote EU, well they make the rules and have their reasons for them...

Much of EU theory is just some well-based speculation. Very plausible, but nonetheless unproven in many areas. It's still in its infancy. We humans can make mistakes. We aren't special.

In complete agreement!! But, it has been pointed out to me that some members are considered special, especially those who hold standard cosmology theories as truths and especially if they have been decorated by those of that group.

Show some professionalism.

That is subjective, dependent upon which profession is being critiqued. And within each profession are different personalities with different manner of expression!

This is exactly why physics forums on the internet are so useless.

Unsupportable speculation. Who decides, and by what criteria, what is useful?

They do exactly what you do.

That would be accurate if you had added "sometimes", or a qualifier similarly giving me credit for my variety of expressions which most always do not include such as in the OP or toward a troll, as you labeled in,

feed the trolls.

--
Please, if you must, do this more...tongue-in-cheek.

Sorry, i am not that smart nor clever...but, i can submit a draft for your vetting....

Thank you for your good intentions and mild corrections...

Oh, was it a well fed troll that influenced your admonition.?
maybe review my response to schmidty226. Since i decided to not respond to "it", i do not read "it's" posts. I am more discriminating than some as to who i allow to influence my thinking...

thank you....

&&&&&&&

orrery, thank you for a concise, intelligent post...

[schmidty226]

Your right orrery, absolutely right.

Come on Sparky, "Oh, was it a well fed troll that influenced your admonition.?
maybe review my response to schmidty226."

Is it hard to think from multiple perspectives and while you accepted Eaol's, you fail to interpret mine. This isnt a personal attack, it has never been, but were from two totally different view points, I think it would benefit everyone else if we stop these meaningless arguments. Im waiting for you to agree so we can get on with our lives...

[Eaol]

Who decides, and by what criteria, what is useful?

Sparky, by a "useful" site, I mean one that is progressive. One that will not be bolted down by disproved dogma.

I am not the only one here that realizes that a logical argument with "true believers" is probably futile, and express hatred toward their arrogant, superior, condescending remarks, by mocking them. And i seem to remember a TPOD that was satirizing the belief in black holes.

Yeah, we're all guilty of it to a degree, I think. I don't believe any argument is futile - someone always learns something. Also, please excuse for my apparently rude behavior - I write like I talk.

-Eaol-

[orrery]

http://www.thunderbolts.info/mmarchives/090409_ei19.htm

[Sparky]

http://www.thunderbolts.info/mmarchives/090409_ei19.htm

thanks , orrery...i had not seen this info. , though i have read some of Crothers' ideas....i may have posted something by him earlier...

here is the explanation of the video your link directed me to:

Bill interviewed Stephen J. Crothers recently at the airport in Munich, after Steve had presented a recent paper to a conference.

Physics is first and foremost the study of objects. Without objects, we can have no Physics. The black hole does not belong in Physics because it is not a physical object. It is, rather, an irrational concept and as such does not even belong in Philosophy. The astronomers should not be pointing their telescopes to the skies in search of black holes. They should be reading the definition of the word object.

My warped sense of humor finds this Funny!

The video exposes that members of the establishment who claim through the literature to have found black holes, privately admit that no such thing has ever happened. Australia's Stephen Crothers flatly denies that it ever can. He offers a few more reasons from a mathematical perspective for why Black Holes don't and cannot exist. Unfortunately, mainstream journals do not have a 'Retraction' section where false claims can be retracted or a 'Dissent' section where opponents can offer evidence and arguments to expose false prophets.
- Bill Gaede

Spot on!...thanks again, orrery!


((****************&&&&&&&&&

Eaol, ""by a "useful" site, I mean one that is progressive. One that will not be bolted down by disproved dogma.""

well, have to agree with that!

Yeah, we're all guilty of it to a degree, I think. I don't believe any argument is futile - someone always learns something. Also, please excuse for my apparently rude behavior - I write like I talk.

can't agree about futile arguments with some, and the thing i learned about certain mentalities is that they have nothing of value to teach and lack ability to reason outside of their narrow
perspective, which is delusional.

I write much better than i talk, though content is the same.

Don't apologize for your gentle pokes, as i gave you the benefit of doubt, especially since i agreed on some points, and i returned them in kind.

If you look at the video orrery linked to, let me know what you think....thank you

[Eaol]

Sparky, I am not surprised by the unusually hostile responses in the comments section - the presentation, although faintly humorous, is appalling, in my opinion. Viewers will only notice the insults and arrogance and be tempted not to even look at what he is saying seriously, just writing him off as a pseudoscientific idiot.

-Eaol-

[orrery]

I have made posts about my personal griefs in the past with the tendency towards people to paint a wide brush against "mainstream science." If you are going to criticize someone's work your best method should be to isolate that person from mainstream science and give "mainstream science" an invitation to choose your option. In order to defeat the Black Hole orthodox you must first isolate them from mainstream science. You don't want to make the same mistake of throwing the baby out with the bath water. I've always preferred the KISS (keep it simple stupid) approach.

Progress on the Electric Universe Theory does seem rather slow. Updates are more dependant on NASA's launch schedule then our theoreticians. I remember dreaming daily and having to wait years for the launch of things like Galileo, Cassini, Hubble, etc. The plasma resources have left me wanting for more, surely there must be a depository for every conceivable plasma experiment that we've conducted, or a simulation software program that allows one to adjust parameters such as magnetic field strength, geometry, material, current flow. I'd like to be able to run a simulator that allows me to reproduce the conditions for generating a 'squatter man'

The proponents of Electric Universe would make a lot more progress if we helped them get Telescope time. I would love to see Halton Arp given free reign to control any telescope in the world.

Halton Arp
Lyndon Ashmore
Eric Lerner

I'd definitely like to give these guys the reigns to Arecibo or the VLA. Right now, our Astronomy Head at Arecibo is Chris Salter
Arecibo Staff:
http://www.naic.edu/vscience/staff/aodir.htm

Chris Salter:
http://www.astro.cornell.edu/people/fac ... ers_id=111
Salter is part of Cornell University and wrote "Towards an Understanding of the Galactic Distribution of Electron-Density Fluctuations" and so he's definitely been a large help in understanding the electrical nature of our Galactic Environment.

Problem is that he's still peddling that bullcrap about Dark Matter & Redshift = Distance. To me that is a huge hit on his credibility. I'd rather hand the reigns of that Telescope over to one of the previously mentioned gentlemen and really get scientific progress back on track.

I went to Purdue, the best I get from them is sites like this that are poorly organized:
http://www.physics.purdue.edu/astro/MOJ ... rces.shtml

[orrery]

http://www.vlba.nrao.edu/astro/obsprep/ ... 9+3456.htm

Take this object for instance. Click on the color gif image as well. We show a redshift of .6 but we don't get the information that gives us the .6 figure on this site.

Object was selected randomly by myself. I want as much data as possible. Environmental, how the object appears in different bandwidths, spectral data, all on one site. I want a 3d map of the surrounding environment. Really tired of fishing around and believe the astronomical community needs work on information integration for a while. The left hand doesn't seem to know what the right hand is doing and we need a more integrated approach that brings the data together. A new search algorith that brings together our knowledge and astronomy programs like "starry night" just seem insufficient.

And google sky is still a piece of crap. And go to the nrao website. Chalked full of bs on blackholes, neutron stars, pulsars, And studies of 'right after the big bang'

Makes me sick

http://www.nrao.edu/index.php/learn/radioastronomy

Directed by Fred k. Y. Lo
http://www.nrao.edu/index.php/about/director
Guy should be replaced if he keeps peddling that nonsense.

[Eaol]

I agree. :/

[Sparky]

orrery, quite informative posts!!..thank you for your perspective.

the links you supplied are ones i have not seen and appear to be ones that i need to spend some time studying... I really appreciate your contributions,,,thank you.

*******************************************
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2011/ ... llions.htm
TPOD: Billions of Suns, Billions of years
Jul 13, 2011

If redshift (z) indicates distance, then astronomers have discovered the superlative object: the most distant, the most ancient, the most luminous, the most massive.

Analysis of the object’s spectrum shows that its lines have shifted toward the red by over 700% (z=7.1). The consensus opinion is that the object—a quasar—is therefore almost 13 billion light-years away. Since its light is presumed to have taken nearly 13 billion years to reach us, the quasar formed and became fully operational less than 800 million years after the widely publicized secular Genesis Event that most astronomers truly believe created both the universe and the coordinate system in which it is described.

To appear as bright as it does at that distance, it must be giving off about 60,000 billion times the output of the Sun. To get that much energy, 2 billion Suns must be crammed into a mathematical point called a black hole.

There can be no doubt that the presumptions are absolutely true—if you have no doubt about them. If you are one of the handful of infidels who still entertains doubts, if you haven’t undergone the institutional conditioning that reduces you to acquiescence in such opinions, you may find the beliefs fatuous.

These Pictures of the Day for the last seven years have reported the considerable evidence that contradicts the initial claim that redshift indicates distance.

If the quasar is not so far away, it’s not so big and bright and old. If redshift is intrinsic and indicates intrinsic age—age since the quasar formed—the quasar could be close, small, dim, and young. In this view, quasars appear to have a peak luminosity around z=1 and to be less luminous with increasing redshift. (See Quasars, Redshifts and Controversies by Halton Arp, p. 67-70.) That would indicate that this quasar is located within the Local Group of galaxies and perhaps is a recent ejection from the Milky Way.

Mel Acheson

A mass of 2 BILLION suns !!!!! With constructs of black holes, neutron stars, and dark matter/energy, anything is apparently probable!!

When will they announce a MASS of 10 BILLION suns??!!... That will be exciting! Feeding the delusional gravity cult with more and bigger ideations!

Then the can arrogantly blather about their voodoo mathematical models, and make more absurd explanations and predictions. Yea, sure, these are people that can be reasoned with!!

And whatever number have some doubts, the cowards among them will probably say nothing against the nonsense permeating their model until after they retire, and the brave will be punished in a variety of ways if they speak out.

[Oracle_911]

The repelling gravity was found.

I think physicist (or natural philosopher) must be engineer with improved mathematical skills like Carnott, Hertz, Siemens, Coulomb, Faraday etc.

Well, math can be recognized as metalanguage, which can describe the reality, but in other hands it can describe any craziness to. So we must be careful when we use math.