Black Holes Don't Exist, Say Physicists

[Influx]

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2007 ... s-don.html

[altonhare]

What we think are black holes, says Krauss in a paper co-authored with colleagues at Case Western Reserve, could be misidentified remnants of stars possessing a tremendous -- but not infinite -- amount of gravity.

ahyuck gee wiz why don't we explain this data with a uhh, ahmm, what's da werd... rational theory?

Aren't ahhh, eermmm, uhhh, what's that thingy, a contradiction; ain't those bad for scientific thoeries?

Black hole theory embodies so many contradictions traditional religion doesn't even stand a chance in a "contradiction competition". I'd be a bible-thumpin' Baptist before I'd take black holes seriously.

[junglelord]

What we think are black holes, says Krauss in a paper co-authored with colleagues at Case Western Reserve, could be misidentified remnants of stars possessing a tremendous -- but not infinite -- amount of gravity.

ahyuck gee wiz why don't we explain this data with a uhh, ahmm, what's da werd... rational theory?

Aren't ahhh, eermmm, uhhh, what's that thingy, a contradiction; ain't those bad for scientific thoeries?

Black hole theory embodies so many contradictions traditional religion doesn't even stand a chance in a "contradiction competition". I'd be a bible-thumpin' Baptist before I'd take black holes seriously.

Some rebuttal....
Just because you do not believe in something does not make it false.

Therefore since some valid proof is needed, I will present it here clear and simple. There are two simple reasons why it is invalid and it is easy to learn or to teach and it is important to be confident to do both if one is to be knowledable on the subject and where the errors occur. Lets begin the lesson.

ric = 0

This is the first thing is important. That means that there is no matter in the black hole. You cannot divide by 0. That is the mistake. How can a black hole interact with matter if it has no matter? How can a black hole have mass if it has no matter?

The second is the so-called “Schwarzschild solution” from which the “Schwarzschild black hole” is alleged, is not even Schwarzschild’s solution. This is easily verified by simply reading Schwarzschild’s first paper on the subject

(he wrote two papers), available here:
http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.c ... schild.pdf
Like the so called Maxwell Equations of Heaviside, the main problem is no one reads original work, they just believe what they are told. I suggest you read Maxwell, Schwarschild, Tesla, Birkeland, do not take second hand information from anyone, do your home work and show yourself approved by reading the original. I always read the original, not someones corrupt rewrite. For instance Heaviside is corrupt and this is sold as Maxwells work over and over. Oh really? What about Schwarzschild? Did he really create a black hole? NO!

Schwarzschild’s actual solution does not admit the black hole. There is no event horizon associated with his actual solution. The so-called “Schwarzschild solution” is a corruption, by David Hilbert (Dec 1916,) of the solution obtained by Schwarzschild (Nov/Dec 1915, published 1916) and also a corruption of the solution obtained independently by Johannes Droste (May 1916, published 1917).

A full detailed explanation is given by Stephen Crothers on the Thunderblog webpage. Go forth into the EU and teach wisely.

[Influx]

Some rebuttal....
Just because you do not believe in something does not make it false.

Just because scientists believe in something does not make it real. The street goes both ways! Mathematical constructs do not prove anything, measurable and observable phenomena that agrees with the math, well that might. So far no black holes have been seen, measured or studied, despite the huge effort by astronomers. English has the capacity to be used in both ways, fictional and nonfictional. So does math! Which is just a language! If our civilization becomes extinct, how will future archaeologists tell the difference between the numerous fictional and nonfictional writing? If only a small group of people understands a language, how will the rest of us know what they say is true! If we can observe their claims in nature, or preform some sort of a test to verify their clams, than we will know what they claim is true. Since I have not seen a convincing observation of a black hole, I do not have to agree with them! However, the scientist have build their whole cosmology on something that has not yet been observed in nature! Dangerous grounds. What happens if they never find a black hole? Better have a new theory lined up real quick! Methinks EU is the best candidate!

[Solar]

[
Some rebuttal....
Just because you do not believe in something does not make it false.

Enjoyed your post but chill out. I'm certain that the reason that the word "believe" was used is because of the author's recognition that - that is precisely what it takes to sustain and perpetuate the mathematical entity known as a "black hole".

[GaryN]

If the Universe is infinitely self similar, and over the 43 presently detectable orders of magnitude it appears to be, then wouldn't it follow that magnetically confined charge is all there is in the 'material' world, and that black holes are no different? Confining 10 billion trillion volts (the most ever recorded, from a cosmic ray) or more would take 'quite a lot' of magnetism. Is gravity a resultant of charge and EM?

[tangointhenight]

Some rebuttal....
Just because you do not believe in something does not make it false.

Just because scientists believe in something does not make it real. The street goes both ways! Mathematical constructs do not prove anything, measurable and observable phenomena that agrees with the math, well that might. So far no black holes have been seen, measured or studied, despite the huge effort by astronomers. English has the capacity to be used in both ways, fictional and nonfictional. So does math! Which is just a language! If our civilization becomes extinct, how will future archaeologists tell the difference between the numerous fictional and nonfictional writing? If only a small group of people understands a language, how will the rest of us know what they say is true! If we can observe their claims in nature, or preform some sort of a test to verify their clams, than we will know what they claim is true. Since I have not seen a convincing observation of a black hole, I do not have to agree with them! However, the scientist have build their whole cosmology on something that has not yet been observed in nature! Dangerous grounds. What happens if they never find a black hole? Better have a new theory lined up real quick! Methinks EU is the best candidate!

Lets just say that gravity is electrical , then a very electricity active star could have so much gravity that the photons don't even escape. Really black holes aren't that irrational of a idea.

[Tzunamii]

Some rebuttal....
Just because you do not believe in something does not make it false.

Just because scientists believe in something does not make it real. The street goes both ways! Mathematical constructs do not prove anything, measurable and observable phenomena that agrees with the math, well that might. So far no black holes have been seen, measured or studied, despite the huge effort by astronomers. English has the capacity to be used in both ways, fictional and nonfictional. So does math! Which is just a language! If our civilization becomes extinct, how will future archaeologists tell the difference between the numerous fictional and nonfictional writing? If only a small group of people understands a language, how will the rest of us know what they say is true! If we can observe their claims in nature, or preform some sort of a test to verify their clams, than we will know what they claim is true. Since I have not seen a convincing observation of a black hole, I do not have to agree with them! However, the scientist have build their whole cosmology on something that has not yet been observed in nature! Dangerous grounds. What happens if they never find a black hole? Better have a new theory lined up real quick! Methinks EU is the best candidate!

Lets just say that gravity is electrical , then a very electricity active star could have so much gravity that the photons don't even escape. Really black holes aren't that irrational of a idea.

Black holes are an Incredibly irrational idea, filled with dogmatic philosophies, not testable science (testable being the part that makes it science).
A Dent in the Space-Time Fabric? 1
A Dent in the Space-Time Fabric? (2)
A Flickering “Black Hole”
The Black Hole at the Heart of Astronomy
Black holes tear logic apart
Recently added to the sites Media page, Einstein's Idiots # 19 - Stephen Crothers: Why Black Holes Don't Exist
The idea of a an extreme attractive force is Not irrational, but the mechanisms and hocus pocus Hawkings and the rest of the clowns conjure up are downright silly, bordering on insulting.
All to keep the funding comming in!! Hallaluja!!
I feel nothing but contempt for the establishment that lets such garbage be taught as Science.
They are bullies that intimidate up & comers into conforming, "or else".
Most people Dont question "the Professionals", & will assume they have their best interest in mind, when all they have in mind is their Funding.
Here is a good example of what kind of games proponants of the establishment play.
Somewhere, out there, P.T. Barnum is laughing.

[flyingcloud]

m ore unexplained, unexpected "black hole" phenomenom

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 163735.htm

Spectacular Flaring In Extragalactic Jet From M87's Black Hole

ScienceDaily (Apr. 14, 2009) — A flare-up in a jet of matter blasting from a monster black holeis giving astronomers an incredible light show.

The outburst is coming froma blob of matter, called HST-1, embedded in the jet, apowerful narrow beam of hot gas produced by a supermassive black hole residing in the core of the giant elliptical galaxy M87. HST-1 is so bright that it is outshining even M87's brilliant core, whose monster black hole is one of the most massive yet discovered.

The glowing gas clump has taken astronomers on a rollercoaster ride of suspense. Astronomers watched HST-1 brighten steadily for several years, then fade, and then brighten again. They say it's hard to predict what will happen next.

NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has been following the surprising activity for seven years, providing the most detailed ultraviolet-light view of the event. Other telescopes have been monitoring HST-1 in other wavelengths, including radio and X-rays. The Chandra X-ray Observatory was the first to report the brightening in 2000. HST-1 was first discovered and named by Hubble astronomers in 1999. The gas knot is 214 light-years from the galaxy's core.

The flare-up may provide insights into the variability of black hole jets in distant galaxies, which are difficult to study because they are too far away. M87 is located 54 million light-years away in the Virgo Cluster, a region of the nearby universe with the highest density of galaxies.

"I did not expect the jet in M87 or any other jet powered by accretion onto a black hole to increase in brightness in the way that this jet does,"says astronomer Juan Madrid of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, who conducted the Hubble study. "It grew 90 times brighter than normal. But the question is, does this happen to every single jet or active nucleus, or are we seeing some odd behavior from M87?"

I can't go on....

[tangointhenight]

What we think are black holes, says Krauss in a paper co-authored with colleagues at Case Western Reserve, could be misidentified remnants of stars possessing a tremendous -- but not infinite -- amount of gravity.

ahyuck gee wiz why don't we explain this data with a uhh, ahmm, what's da werd... rational theory?

Aren't ahhh, eermmm, uhhh, what's that thingy, a contradiction; ain't those bad for scientific thoeries?

Black hole theory embodies so many contradictions traditional religion doesn't even stand a chance in a "contradiction competition". I'd be a bible-thumpin' Baptist before I'd take black holes seriously.

Thousands of years ago humans had no idea the atom existed. A few hundred years ago we didn't even know the virus existed.
And with our primitive technology, how can you say black holes don't exist, or even God doesn't. Science breaks apart when humans become close minded.
Real scientists have open minds even to the most illogical explanation.

[nick c]

hello tangointhenight,

.... how can you say black holes don't exist....

It's easy, you just inhale and push the air through your vocal chords and it comes out like this..."black holes don't exist." Actually, it's because they are the result of the assumptions that gravity is the only force at work in the large scale of the cosmos and that matter can be collapsed to an infinitesmily small point. These, as will be shown, are not realistic assumptions.

Real scientists have open minds even to the most illogical explanation.

If you are saying that the concept of black holes is illogical, than I agree. While scientists must have open minds, they must also reject that which is illogical for that which has a simpler or more logical explanation.

Science breaks apart when humans become close minded.

That is true, and then they start believing in irrational things like black holes. Black holes are a mathematical fantasy. Mainstream science has accepted black holes by ignoring the behaviors of plasmas, and the fact that the electric force is many orders of magnitude more powerful than gravity.
But don't take my word, read the articles.

Check out the links in Tzunamii's post, to which I would add:
[url2=http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest.htm]The Black Hole Catastrophe and the Collapse of Spacetime [/url2]
[url2=http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=qwk0u6cc]The Madness of Black Holes[/url2]
[url2=http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/guest1.htm]Bringing The Black Hole Fallacy Into Focus[/url2]

nick c

[MGmirkin]

Lets just say that gravity is electrical, then a very electricity active star could have so much gravity that the photons don't even escape. Really black holes aren't that irrational of a idea.

Let's not... Gravity =/= electric current. A very electrically active star would probably hop up a few notches on the ol' arc-welder scale (not a technical term), but that would not equate (as far as I know) to increased gravity.

For info on what the EU says, as expounded by Thornhill, see:

Electric Gravity in an Electric Universe

As long as we're being moderately rigorous about referring back to original sources, that is... Too much misinfo and disinfo and outright misunderstandings out there. When in doubt, go back to the source (the horse's mouth, so-to-speak).

Regards,
~Michael Gmirkin

P.S. Yes, in fact, "Divide by Zero" is relatively irrational. That astronomers seem to think it's okay... *Sigh*

[tangointhenight]

Well, the point is that we live on a dust speck compared to the universe. Our galaxy alone is 100,000 light years. It would take millions of years to figure out the universe.

Observation is not enough. You can observe a bird from a mile away and you would never figure out how it flies. Same with our universe, we watch it, and speculate how it behaves. The point is we don't know anything, we never been their. Even if the experiments match, doesn't mean that is how it is up their. Because you have no means of going their and testing it.

[webolife]

Careful, Tango, all we really have as raw data in science is observation. We observe, we perceive patterns and connections, we conceive of interelationships, we build our explanations, then we predict future observations. Between the conceive and build stage, we try to make sense of it all through our limited previous experience, perspective, and beliefs. Because all data essentially comes to us through "light", it behooves us to have a good grasp on what light is. It is what we see. And, unlike the musings of heisenbergian uncertainty, I believe we can believe what we see. Everything else, "lightwaves", "photons", light escaping or not from unseen physics-defying objects, are just concepts.

[Total Science]

Black holes and gravitation are absurd myths and gravity is electromagnetic.