Black holes may not exist!

[Undefined]

Hi MD. My radio taxi for Sydney has been delayed by a minor emergency detour on the way to pick me up, so I have (so they told me on the phone) about 15-20 mins to wait. So...

Change happens over a duration of time. If at t=0 there was no "occurrence" of "you" and then at t=1 there you are, then time happened, PERIOD! MOVE? Yeah, than means to travel a DISTANCE in space. Travel a distance in space? That took time... Next!

May I ask where exactly IS that t=0 and how did you identify it as such?

Careful, don't depend on further abstractions to try and explain that starting abstraction, mate.

Consider: There IS NO such real thng as "t=0, since as I pointed out, there is no such real thing as 'time'.

What you unwittingly do when using such terms/concepts is to arbitrarily and abstractly choose 'boundary conditions' that effectively segment a volume/area/length of SPACE, and then observe/note the DYNAMICAL PROCESSES you observe within that chosen space. You the choose to allocate abstractly a 'starting state' to some chosen 'occurrence' of some discernible energy/motion-space state feature IN that space, and further note and compare the evolution of the dynamics in that space and arrive at some abstract analytical arrangement of the cause and effect stages of the features changing due to process RATES of various scales/direction within that space.


Your abstract derivation of a 'time dimension' is purely a graphing dimension ONLY, and the 'timing values' such as t=0 for some starting state/feature and t=1, or t=2 etc is just you comparing different occurrences/states changes ACROSS/IN that space according to the process rates involved. As each process can be identified and selected as 'standard rate' and then compared with other process rates to give a 'timing' value for any chosen subdivision of the dynamical occurrences within the boundaries of your chosen space, then you are using an arbitrary t=0 which applies ONLY to the subdivision of process in/across space which YOU applied when making the analytical construct.


See? here is NO t=0 except/unless YOU arbitrarily and abstractly 'create' it for th purposes of your own construct/analysis. Other constructs and analyses will start from a different arbitrary t=0. Other processes will have their own 'timing' rates attributed to them by YOU and YOU compare these to produce some sort of 'sense' of cause and effect OVER/IN space dynamics....not in 'time' dynamics.

Again, MD, everyone, be careful not to fall in the trap of your own making when arbitrarily subdividing space and dynamical process therein/across space and thinking that YOUR abstractly introduced times (t=0 or t=2 etc) are 'real things'. They are not. Only motion/change in/across space is real. All else is abstract analytical conveniences/devices based on arbitrary choices for 'start' and 'intermediate' and 'end' OF SOME ARBITRARILY CHOSEN SUBDIVISION of space-energy/motion PROCESS in that space. All the rest of the universal energy/motion space process as a whole can be subdivided into segments, and each segment will 'start' from an arbitrary/imaginary 't=0' which an observer brings to that analysis, not to the universe as a whole process of motion/energy changes in/across the whole infinite universal energy-space.

Time to drop all the fantasies and concentrate on what's real, MD, everyone. Ask Maxila to explain it to you if you are still not there yet, as I don't have much time lately. Cheers!

 

[Motor Daddy]

May I ask where exactly IS that t=0 and how did you identify it as such?

T=0 is the exact point in time that the stop watch is started. It can happen at any point in space, you can be at a point in space and start a stop watch at t=0. You can then travel (or not) to your little heart's content. You can travel any distance that you can, and do. When you decide that enough is enough and you STOP the stop watch at a specific point in space at a specific point in time, then you know the distance and elapsed time. THEN you can do some fancy math and decide just how damn fast you were traveling, or how much you accelerated from a dead stop at the start line to the 1/8th mile point of the 1/4 mile track. You can know the EXACT distance and EXACT elapsed time at any point in the 1320. You say you started the clock at t=0 at the start line and then traveled to the 12.0853856 foot mark in .00000003 seconds? Then we have something to work with. Enough of this illusion Einstein BS!

 

[paddoboy]

Time to drop all the fantasies and concentrate on what's real, MD, everyone. Ask Maxila to explain it to you if you are still not there yet, as I don't have much time lately. Cheers!

Good to see you addressing the anti brigade undefined, there are a few others about also.


Then of course you need to convince the mainstream sector re your opinions as to what is and isn't real or an abstraction.....
That though is subjective I suggest, and I have yet to see anyone refute the measuring/warping twisting of space/time by GP-B.
Your attitude seems to be that whatever you cannot touch, smell, see is an abstraction.
I couldn't disagree with you more, and also offer DM along with space, time, space/time, FoR's, BH's [past present and future] as candidates for what I see as real.
Again, from my position, what you need to do is somehow unite all the anti mainstream GR factions in this thread into a united force.
There are so far around five or six different anti proposals, at different levels of pseudo quality to work through.

 

[paddoboy]

Time to drop all the fantasies and concentrate on what's real, MD, everyone. Ask Maxila to explain it to you if you are still not there yet, as I don't have much time lately. Cheers!

Good to see you addressing the anti brigade undefined, there are a few others about also.


Then of course you need to convince the mainstream sector re your opinions as to what is and isn't real or an abstraction.....
That though is subjective I suggest, and I have yet to see anyone refute the measuring/warping twisting of space/time by GP-B.
Your attitude seems to be that whatever you cannot touch, smell, see is an abstraction.
I couldn't disagree with you more, and also offer DM along with space, time, space/time, FoR's, BH's [past present and future] as candidates for what I see as real.
Again, from my position, what you need to do is somehow unite all the anti mainstream GR factions in this thread into a united force.
There are so far around five or six different anti proposals, at different levels of pseudo quality to work through.
Then get that united position peer reviewed.
And I ask you that in the nicest possible way.

 

[brucep]

Farsight said:

"Somewhere along the line relativity changed, and what's now considered to be mainstream doesn't match Einstein and the evidence.

Let me go a bit further and throw down the gauntlet here: I'd say that some of the stuff touted as mainstream is Emperor's New Clothes pseudoscience trash that doesn't stand a moment's scrutiny. And that some of the physicists touted as being great aren't great, and instead are mere celebrity quacks whose contribution to physics is zip."

Farsight has been making these assertions for as long as he's been posting at this forum. I think it's about time for him to show some evidence supporting these specific assertions. Like in the immediate future. As in now. Since Farsight asserts that the Schwarzschild coordinates are preferred coordinates [actually the only real set of coordinates, LOL] you can start here.

Start by scrutinizing the transformation from remote Schwarzschild bookkeeper coordinates to the local rain coordinates [in the link]. Explain why the remote coordinates are preferred over the rain coordinates.

chapter 7 [7.4] inside BH.
http://exploringblackholes.com/

Then you can provide some evidence that "Somewhere along the line relativity changed, and what's now considered to be mainstream doesn't match Einstein and the evidence."

Act like a grownup and get it done. Alphanumeric told you to only post in the alternative threads until you can quit trolling the science threads with nonsense.

 

[Undefined]

Hi MD. The taxi despatcher just called to advise the taxi is nearing the turn off to my village, so just quickly...

T=0 is the exact point in time that the stop watch is started. It can happen at any point in space, you can be at a point in space and start a stop watch at t=0. You can then travel (or not) to your little heart's content. You can travel any distance that you can, and do. When you decide that enough is enough and you STOP the stop watch at a specific point in space at a specific point in time, then you know the distance and elapsed time. THEN you can do some fancy math and decide just how damn fast you were traveling, or how much you accelerated from a dead stop at the start line to the 1/8th mile point of the 1/4 mile track. You can know the EXACT distance and EXACT elapsed time at any point in the 1320. You say you started the clock at t=0 at the start line and then traveled to the 12.0853856 foot mark in .00000003 seconds? Then we have something to work with. Enough of this illusion Einstein BS!

Your stopwatch is another 'occurrence in the chosen construct you made to subdivide arbitrarily the space/process to be considered within the boundary conditions set by your construct. The watch is starting standard part of the overall processes you compare with the other within that space boundaries construct. Time exists as a tool to connect cause and effect in a chosen set of comparison process rates occurring in.across space only, and only in your chosen space of study where YOU determine which process/occurrence you will use as the starting t=0 and starting reference 'standard' for further comparisons.

See? The stopwatch is not 'rime', it is a comparison/starting state/location/rate etc TOOL for you to apply within the boundaries of the process/space under observation/measuring/comparisons made.

The results are useful, but the time and the standard start/reference boundary conditions are arbitrarily allocated by you for your abstract exercise interpreting the real motion/energy process in/across space. Time is your thing in self-selected circumstances/studies, non existent to the universal process in/across space REALITY overall.

 

[brucep]

Hi MD. The taxi despatcher just called to advise the taxi is nearing the turn off to my village, so just quickly...

Your stopwatch is another 'occurrence in the chosen construct you made to subdivide arbitrarily the space/process to be considered within the boundary conditions set by your construct. The watch is starting standard part of the overall processes you compare with the other within that space boundaries construct. Time exists as a tool to connect cause and effect in a chosen set of comparison process rates occurring in.across space only, and only in your chosen space of study where YOU determine which process/occurrence you will use as the starting t=0 and starting reference 'standard' for further comparisons.

See? The stopwatch is not 'rime', it is a comparison/starting state/location/rate etc TOOL for you to apply within the boundaries of the process/space under observation/measuring/comparisons made.

The results are useful, but the time and the standard start/reference boundary conditions are arbitrarily allocated by you for your abstract exercise interpreting the real motion/energy process in/across space. Time is your thing in self-selected circumstances/studies, non existent to the universal process in/across space REALITY overall.

Try making sense the next time you're waiting for the taxi cab.

 

[Motor Daddy]

Your stopwatch is another 'occurrence in the chosen construct you made to subdivide arbitrarily the space/process to be considered within the boundary conditions set by your construct. The watch is starting standard part of the overall processes you compare with the other within that space boundaries construct. Time exists as a tool to connect cause and effect in a chosen set of comparison process rates occurring in.across space only, and only in your chosen space of study where YOU determine which process/occurrence you will use as the starting t=0 and starting reference 'standard' for further comparisons.

See? The stopwatch is not 'rime', it is a comparison/starting state/location/rate etc TOOL for you to apply within the boundaries of the process/space under observation/measuring/comparisons made.

The results are useful, but the time and the standard start/reference boundary conditions are arbitrarily allocated by you for your abstract exercise interpreting the real motion/energy process in/across space. Time is your thing in self-selected circumstances/studies, non existent to the universal process in/across space REALITY overall.

Hi Undefined, everyone!

The time is not important. WHEN you start the stop watch, that is a single point in time. WHERE you are at that point in time is a single point in space. So when you start a stop watch you automatically have a start point in space, and a start point in time. All that is left to do is to stop the stop watch at a specific point in space at a specific point in time. When you do that you have two points in space and two points in time. That's all you need!

 

[Undefined]

Good to see you addressing the anti brigade undefined, there are a few others about also.


Then of course you need to convince the mainstream sector re your opinions as to what is and isn't real or an abstraction.....
That though is subjective I suggest, and I have yet to see anyone refute the measuring/warping twisting of space/time by GP-B.
Your attitude seems to be that whatever you cannot touch, smell, see is an abstraction.
I couldn't disagree with you more, and also offer DM along with space, time, space/time, FoR's, BH's [past present and future] as candidates for what I see as real.
Again, from my position, what you need to do is somehow unite all the anti mainstream GR factions in this thread into a united force.
There are so far around five or six different anti proposals, at different levels of pseudo quality to work through.
Then get that united position peer reviewed.
And I ask you that in the nicest possible way.

Paddoboy, really mate! There (my bolding) you just again misrepresented what I have said/observed, and then proceeded to make your further opinion based on your own misunderstandings. Please stop it.

The abstractions I speak of are the INTERPRETATIONS and the abstract space-time mathematical model from which the interpretations are made. The example in this instance is the Big Bang and BH interpretations of hat is 'fact' and what is essentially still hypothetical speculation in the absence of any evidence (seen OR unseen) of what obtains in the BH horizon/interior states. OK?

I and everyone an 'see' the effects of GRAVITY, and we can understand that the space surrounding mass is SOMEHOW affected/curved etc to produce the observed behaviour/phenomena, but NO actual real explanation of the mechanism by which the surrounding space is affected, and what the extremal limits may be of such effects when GR/SR abstractions from abstract space-time models meet the reality of such extreme energy-space conditions near/inside BHs.

That is what is being discussed by ME, not your 'misattribution' to me of what YOU misunderstand as me saying. So enough already with your scattergun commentary based on what YOU misapprehend of my stance/observations. OK?


And slow down the wiki linking, or they will soon be forced to charge you a fee for unusual and unnecessary overuse of a valuable resource! They might even accuse you of inadvertently engaging in a kind of 'denial of service attack' on wiki if their server is so tied up with your constant stream of 'reference requests/downloads, hey! (tongue in cheek Oz humour, mate).

Right, I can hear the taxi pulling up, so I'll see/read you all again tomorrow or next day. Cheers, paddo, everyone.

 

[Undefined]

Try making sense the next time you're waiting for the taxi cab.

Try doing some original thinking to advance from the abstractions impasse you are in before posting the same old stuff one can read on wiki. Things are moving on mate. Try to keep up and eschew the tired old 'personal' stuff. m'kay?

 

[Undefined]

Hi Undefined, everyone!

The time is not important. WHEN you start the stop watch, that is a single point in time. WHERE you are at that point in time is a single point in space. So when you start a stop watch you automatically have a start point in space, and a start point in time. All that is left to do is to stop the stop watch at a specific point in space at a specific point in time. When you do that you have two points in space and two points in time. That's all you need!

I agree that your abstract analytical overlay (time) on the real observables involved (space and motion/energy processing in/across that space) is USEFUL. No objections there.

Only problem is that the arguments/exchanges here (from both 'sides') keep to such abstract overlays instead of moving on to the reality itself (space and motion/energy processes observed....where 'time' is OUR ad hoc tool for making/conveying/comparing cause and effect etc) and so will never go anywhere 'real' that either side can claim AS real explanation rather than mere abstraction (however useful those abstractions have been so far).

That was all I meant to caution about. Use time as you wish, but don't depend on it when further discussion gets us past those abstract space-time interpretations.

Toodles!

 

[Motor Daddy]

That was all I meant to caution about. Use time as you wish, but don't depend on it when further discussion gets us past those abstract space-time interpretations.

Time is to a stop watch as a meter is to a meter stick. They are measuring devices. We invented a measuring device to measure time (clock) and space (meter stick). We apply those measuring device to the real world like you take a measuring stick and line it up with what you want to measure. The purpose in all that? To be able to communicate a STANDARD to another human being. Period.

 

[brucep]

Try doing some original thinking to advance from the abstractions impasse you are in before posting the same old stuff one can read on wiki. Things are moving on mate. Try to keep up and eschew the tired old 'personal' stuff. m'kay?

What you're doing isn't original thinking it's illiterate nonsense. Original thinking is what Guth and Linde did when they started research for inflation. Or what led Jacob Bekenstein to correlate black hole physics with thermodynamics. What you're doing is trolling forums with bullshit.

 

[brucep]

Farsight said:

"Somewhere along the line relativity changed, and what's now considered to be mainstream doesn't match Einstein and the evidence.

Let me go a bit further and throw down the gauntlet here: I'd say that some of the stuff touted as mainstream is Emperor's New Clothes pseudoscience trash that doesn't stand a moment's scrutiny. And that some of the physicists touted as being great aren't great, and instead are mere celebrity quacks whose contribution to physics is zip."

Farsight has been making these assertions for as long as he's been posting at this forum. I think it's about time for him to show some evidence supporting these specific assertions. Like in the immediate future. As in now. Since Farsight asserts that the Schwarzschild coordinates are preferred coordinates [actually the only real set of coordinates, LOL] you can start here.

Start by scrutinizing the transformation from remote Schwarzschild bookkeeper coordinates to the local rain coordinates [in the link]. Explain why the remote coordinates are preferred over the rain coordinates.

chapter 7 [7.4] inside BH.
http://exploringblackholes.com/

Then you can provide some evidence that "Somewhere along the line relativity changed, and what's now considered to be mainstream doesn't match Einstein and the evidence."

Act like a grownup and get it done. Alphanumeric told you to only post in the alternative threads until you can quit trolling the science threads with nonsense.

Farsight

How's the 'scrutiny' going? Figured out you're full of crap yet? It's my opinion that if you don't provide some empirical evidence for these assertions, you made, you should be forever banned from posting in the science threads of this forum.

"Somewhere along the line relativity changed, and what's now considered to be mainstream doesn't match Einstein and the evidence.

Let me go a bit further and throw down the gauntlet here: I'd say that some of the stuff touted as mainstream is Emperor's New Clothes pseudoscience trash that doesn't stand a moment's scrutiny. And that some of the physicists touted as being great aren't great, and instead are mere celebrity quacks whose contribution to physics is zip."

Farsight has been making these assertions for as long as he's been posting at this forum. I think it's about time for him to show some evidence supporting these specific assertions. Like in the immediate future. As in now. Since Farsight asserts that the Schwarzschild coordinates are preferred coordinates [actually the only real set of coordinates, LOL] you can start here.

 

[Trapped]

Farsight

How's the 'scrutiny' going? Figured out you're full of crap yet?

Hey Bruce!


Hows the trolling/baiting going on? Anyone figured out yet this is what you are doing?

 

[paddoboy]

Paddoboy, really mate! There (my bolding) you just again misrepresented what I have said/observed, and then proceeded to make your further opinion based on your own misunderstandings. Please stop it.

The abstractions I speak of are the INTERPRETATIONS and the abstract space-time mathematical model from which the interpretations are made. The example in this instance is the Big Bang and BH interpretations of hat is 'fact' and what is essentially still hypothetical speculation in the absence of any evidence (seen OR unseen) of what obtains in the BH horizon/interior states. OK?

I'm misinterpreting nothing.....It's there in black and white what you said.
Yes, the BB and BH's are fact, and the theoretical opinions of what is at and/or near a BH EH, is based on what GR tells us.
You just happen to disagree.
One of the anti mainstream opinions is that the BH does not exist...Not sure how you can get that to align with the many other anti mainstream interpretations re what happens at the EH that has been spewed forth in this thread.

And slow down the wiki linking, or they will soon be forced to charge you a fee for unusual and unnecessary overuse of a valuable resource! They might even accuse you of inadvertently engaging in a kind of 'denial of service attack' on wiki if their server is so tied up with your constant stream of 'reference requests/downloads, hey! (tongue in cheek Oz humour, mate).

Well considering I only gave one WIKI link amongst other more reputable links such as
http://hubblesite.org/explore_astron..._mod3_q15.html
and
http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html#q3
and
http://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/schw.html
and

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physic...s/fall_in.html

I would suggest that it is you misinterpreting what I'm saying and posting.

 

[brucep]

Hey Bruce!


Hows the trolling/baiting going on? Anyone figured out yet this is what you are doing?

I'm asking him to do what he says he can do. Just like I did with you. I expect he's going to fail also. In fact a Trapped sock puppet was banned so why weren't you?

 

[paddoboy]

Oh, and undefined, you mention a few times about me being a mainstream cheer leader.
It's a real shame you were not a party to another forum that I was once participating in.....I was a real Maverick there!

All my efforts here reflect is my distaste for the 'would be's if they could be's" the smart arse UNI student, who after a couple of years extra study, sets out to rewrite a 100 years of science/cosmology/SR/GR
Some will be rewritten, that's for sure...That is part of the scientific method and peer review system that the anti brigade here hate so much.
But we also know enough today to realize/expect that theories such as the BB, SR/GR have that much going for them, that they will not ever be scrapped at all......The BB will be entailed in any future QGT, I'm confident of that...and SR/GR will remain as viable as ever, within their domain of applicablity.
Now that should stir up a hornet's nest!!

 

[paddoboy]

continued:
And undefined, any rewriting of scientific theory and thinking, will not, I repeat will not, be done on any tin pot science forums [apologies to the administrators] but per the usual accepted scientific method and peer review.
The Lunatic fringe will not have a say in it.
Have I said that before?

 

[brucep]

Oh, and undefined, you mention a few times about me being a mainstream cheer leader.
It's a real shame you were not a party to another forum that I was once participating in.....I was a real Maverick there!

All my efforts here reflect is my distaste for the 'would be's if they could be's" the smart arse UNI student, who after a couple of years extra study, sets out to rewrite a 100 years of science/cosmology/SR/GR
Some will be rewritten, that's for sure...That is part of the scientific method and peer review system that the anti brigade here hate so much.
But we also know enough today to realize/expect that theories such as the BB, SR/GR have that much going for them, that they will not ever be scrapped at all......The BB will be entailed in any future QGT, I'm confident of that...and SR/GR will remain as viable as ever, within their domain of applicablity.
Now that should stir up a hornet's nest!!

It's 'overall' anti-intellectualism. I read a recent post by Mr_Homm lamenting the trend towards anti-intellectualism. BTW Alphanumeric once explained to me that string theory recovers inflation in it's semi-classical domain of applicability. As it does GR, in it's classical domain, and the standard model in it's energy domain.