So if not a black hole, then what?

Plasma and electricity in space. Failure of gravity-only cosmology. Exposing the myths of dark matter, dark energy, black holes, neutron stars, and other mathematical constructs. The electric model of stars. Predictions and confirmations of the electric comet.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Lloyd » Sat May 11, 2019 12:47 pm

BLACK HOLES ETC ARE ELECTRIC DOUBLE-LAYER RING CURRENTS

In this post http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=15374&p=127668#p127668 Charles Chandler is quoted saying at the end:
""Interestingly, the sizes of some "natural tokamak" candidates are within an order of magnitude of each other. This includes Mira, the Egg Nebula, and the recently published findings on the "black hole" at the center of M87. Mira has the radius of Pluto's orbit around the Sun, while the Egg Nebula and M87 are roughly ten times larger. Maybe the preference for the same size reveals physical limits, or maybe it's just a statistical preference....""

In this paper http://qdl.scs-inc.us/?top=5738 he explains that what are called black holes are apparently actually counter-streaming electric double-layers that form ring currents with powerful magnetic fields that only dissipate after millions of years. Quasars, pulsars, white dwarfs and other exotics are the same kind of circular plasma streams, similar to artificial cyclotrons. They can also be magnetic thrusters, like solenoids, which he shows is what the crab nebula is. They can also produce bipolar jets, which may be where quasar redshifts etc are measured (i.e. the electron streams outside of the ion streams/jets are catching up, racing ahead of the leading edge and doubling back to collide head-on with the ion streams, producing the receding redshift instead of an oncoming blueshift).

The sizes of such exotics so far range from the diameter of the solar system to Pluto's orbit and up to ten times larger, but the centers are hollow, because they are toruses.
Lloyd
 
Posts: 4411
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:54 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby nick c » Sat May 18, 2019 9:05 am

User avatar
nick c
Moderator
 
Posts: 2473
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
Location: connecticut

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Infinion » Fri May 31, 2019 4:56 pm

nick c wrote:Eric Lerner has a series of YouTube videos concerning the alleged M87 Black Hole.
Is It Really a Black Hole? part 1
Is It Really a Black Hole? part 2
Is It Really a Black Hole? part 3
Is It Really a Black Hole? part 4


Haha, I just came here to post those same videos.

Thunderbolts already published a video https://youtu.be/J4NffTr_GMk about the black hole 'image' but Wal Thornhill focused on the notion that a black hole could even exist, talked about the gravity problem, gravitational waves and LIGO, and how the image could be a plasmoid rather than a black hole with an accretion disk from an EU pov. But he and the Thunderbolts Project don't really get near the EHT papers, they only go so far as mentioning the press releases and the image itself. I guess they feel they don't need to because the notion of a black hole is an impossibility (to them) and the problem lies only in the interpretation.


I'd like to also mention that Sky Scholar (Pierre Marie Robataille or PMR for short) will also be making a video about the EHT papers in September after his break from youtube for the Summer to mourn the passing of his father. I'm excited to see what insights PMR has to offer from a radiology specialist's point of view.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRpN8b1bbpk
I hope Sky Scholar focuses more on the radiology aspect, as he did with the Herouni Antenna to put a big crack through the Big Bang's fundamental pillar from a thermodynamics point of view.

I'm hoping he will focus on the radio telescopes, the EHT array, and the interferometer data and Bessel function that was found in the data over the 3 or 4 night period of observation.

Edit: Forgot to mention that PMR isn't so much an EU proponent, but has gone to EU conferences to present, and his theories and ideas are very compatible with the EU. He's also partnered with Steven Crothers to make a black hole debunking series of videos. Which is why I'm hoping he won't just reiterate about black holes, but expand on the radiology side of his knowledge.
User avatar
Infinion
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2012 7:42 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Christiaan » Fri Aug 23, 2019 2:59 am

D_Archer wrote:
Hi Christiaan,

In the Electric Universe "black holes" do not exist. The best resource is Stephen Crothers, he has destroyed the "black hole" "theory" thoroughly. They are not seen as theoretical by EU but nonsense/fantasy.

EU adheres to electric laws (Maxwell etc) but also to the laws of thermodynamics, there is no need for a wall socket, energy is never destroyed but always recycled.*

Also we as tiny humans can not bound the Universe, because the Universe is all that there is. In the electric universe the universe is fractal (ever repeating). This is very good because plasma dynamics are scaelable from the smallest scale to the largest.

Regards,
Daniel


Hello Daniel...my apologies...thought I said thank you long ago...could not find it so redoing it.

Thank you for your clear n succinct answer...much appreciated!! :-))

Yip got the energy is never destroyed...bbbuuuttt...there is always a beginning situation, right?? "Energy remains constant in system A filled with (X) JOULE" Now things (start for some reason) happen in system A and yes it now satisfies all the laws...what I'm naively clarifying...is that initial moment of 'filling' system A with (x) JOULE of energy...what is that moment? How does EU guide here? I understand even the Qabalists postulate 2 more levels of nothingness beyond our perception of the 'nothingness' of Space...but still...it is bothersome to me to just kick-off so in the middle of things and having to accept it has just always been like that cause this is all there is in the first and last place...I just feel a bit lost in this.

Or perhaps, if the universe is all there is, then energy is constant, then me-myself-I-sitting here typing, is infinitely-subjective sensing and trying to wonder about what started the initial 'filling up moment' yet my universe is all there ever is and thus I'm fractacally bound to never find out? I'm the embodiment of Infinite fractal ignorance?!! Screwed there I guess!

Like you say, we are tiny humans :-))
Christiaan
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:35 pm

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Sci-Phy » Fri Aug 23, 2019 5:33 am

Hi guys,

Alot of good suggestions and alot of theories what could it be.
Although none of them are true.
What we are looking at is not an image at all, it is pure mathematics.
For something to be an image, that "something" should occupy at least one pixel.
The resolution of EHT is 60 microsec according to EHT website and 25 usec according to wikipedia.
Calculating resolution of an object they "discovered" I got resolution the size of the object 1000 times less.
1000 of such images would create one pixel!
In my calculation I was using the mass of the object and the specific gravity of the Sun to determine the radius.
If we are talking about "black hole" then specific gravity should be much much more and the is probably one billionth of pixel. What we see here is just the filter they are using.

I have some tip how to observe very small objects.
If you are looking at something very small, then image is smaller than the distance between photocells in your eye.
Just shake your head and make this image to be shared between thousands of photocells.

Cheers
Sci-Phy
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:47 am
Location: Canada

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:57 am

I have some tip how to observe very small objects.
If you are looking at something very small, then image is smaller than the distance between photocells in your eye.
Just shake your head and make this image to be shared between thousands of photocell


It is called sub-pixel dithering.

Dithering, Sampling and Image Reconstruction
http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu//ful ... 3.000.html
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Sci-Phy » Fri Aug 23, 2019 7:46 am

GaryN wrote:It is called sub-pixel dithering.


This is not the case.
Sub-pixel dithering dealing with images with the size measuring in pixels.
The image we are talking about is 1/1000th of a pixel, probably few orders less.
Dither this...

Cheers
Sci-Phy
 
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:47 am
Location: Canada

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby GaryN » Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:01 am

This is not the case.


You have to include wavefront sensing and interferometry too And lots of mathematics,
In order to change an existing paradigm you do not struggle to try and change the problematic model. You create a new model and make the old one obsolete. -Buckminster Fuller
User avatar
GaryN
 
Posts: 2664
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:18 pm
Location: Sooke, BC, Canada

Re: So if not a black hole, then what?

Unread postby Zyxzevn » Fri Aug 23, 2019 5:34 pm

Sci-Phy wrote:Hi guys,
The resolution of EHT is 60 microsec according to EHT website and 25 usec according to wikipedia.
Calculating resolution of an object they "discovered" I got resolution the size of the object 1000 times less.
1000 of such images would create one pixel!


A radio-telescope uses a whole lot of antennas that receive electromagnetic waves.
Usually they use antenna arrays for it.
By combining the signals from all the antennas together, they form a giant lens.
This is very similar to how a normal camera lens works, but this time you have to
combine the waves in a special mathematical way.
Combining all those antennas, they can get the electromagnetic waves in focus, and can get a decent resolution.
This differs per antenna group.
This is probably what you see on wikipedia.

For the black hole they did not use one radio-array, but
combined that data from many antennas over the worlds together.
That way you can create a lens that covers the whole earth, from one antenna group to another.
This increases the lens diameter from 10 km to something like 12500 km.
So the effective resolution is about 1000x better than just one array, mathematically.

One can even use the path of the earth, but then the electromagnetic wave needs to be consistent.
That trick is used in radar satellites, where the radio signal is generated and consistent.
I don't know if this can work well with radio-telescopes.
I think that they put different images on top of each other instead.

But combining the data from many different sources gives a lot of noise.
This is because of many reasons:
-the very different sky conditions of each telescope
-the movement of the ground
-the noise in the radio-signals
-the noise and resolution of the digitalization of the radio-signals.

All together this gives so much noise that the result is totally unusable.
There is no good way to combine the signals and to get a sharp image.

So they started PLAN B:
The teams decided to filter out the "wrong data".
And tried to reconstruct an image from possible models,
using bits of this filtered data.

This Plan B causes the image to be very fuzzy and uncertain.
Uncertain, because they are removing data and
working towards a thing that they think is there.

But as I explained in the other post about this, this filtering also gives a huge problem:
It is far more likely to get an "bokeh hole" image than an image of the actual object.

The bokeh hole is caused by the oceans. The oceans form a huge hole in each
mathematical lens that they can calculate.
And this similar to the bokeh effect that big lenses on cameras create.
So most of their calculated images have a hole by default.
More ** from zyxzevn at: Paradigm change and C@
User avatar
Zyxzevn
 
Posts: 995
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 4:48 pm

Previous

Return to Electric Universe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests