The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: TheBox on black holes  (Read 16061 times)

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #275 on: 26/03/2016 12:20:53 »
Your modesty is inspirational.
Your flaming is not. Would you like to say something about black holes? Or are you just going to keep talking about me?
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #276 on: 26/03/2016 12:28:38 »
I have had enough of this crap, clearly you  think you are smarter than anyone in the world, your degree, your IQ level, a vast skill set, all irrelevant.

I know NOTHING and keep it that way , that makes me ''smarter'' than you. 

Do not insult Jeff, Jeff is one of the good ones, I will bring it to you, if you persist.
Whatever, dude. Let me tell you what crap I've had enough of. No, I'm not the smartest person in the world, but my IQ score, according to the stats, indicates you need a sample of about 8,000 people to find one as smart as me. I excel at science, always have. I graduated cum laude, which means "with honors." I'm sick and tired of being attacked by a bunch of know-it-alls and nameless, faceless, aggressive trolls who insist I don't understand things when I understand them just fine.

You wouldn't know what it's like to be in my position. You come here and talk nonsense, which is fine, you like to give people something to think about, so I haven't called you out on it, but your science is total B.S. You won't listen to anyone, you can't even tell the difference between who knows their stuff and who doesn't because you don't know your stuff. Your sophomoric iconoclasm is just plain annoying.

I'M one of the good ones, if you take me out of the context of being relentlessly trolled and flamed. Or, you can say stuff like you just said and I can give you some of the same crap I'm giving them. Makes no difference to me. Nobody cares about my feelings when they are ripping me apart. Why should I be any different?

Well firstly I am not ''ripping'' you apart, and  may I suggest to take a deep breath and stop letting words wind you up.  They are trolling you because you bite, if you know you are smart then there is no need to bite, why not ignore them as if they never existed?


If you are truly some sort of science educated person, then I am not the one who can say that is not true, and neither is anyone else. I think you mistake alternative scientific views and are getting offended by this.


Now moving on to what you have said about my ideas, nobody has ever disproved them , therefore they must be true, repeating present information does not resolve or destroy my ideas, only valued logic can do this.

So ok, you say and think you are smart, then I challenge you to destroy my logic with logic, if you fail then will you listen to me and hear out the rest of my ''story''?

Or will you just run away like everyone else does when they feel in-superior? not that I think  i am smart, I always know nothing.



So here is my challenge,

prove that any value of measurement after 0 time is not instantaneous history?







 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #277 on: 26/03/2016 12:41:00 »
Like I said run away, logged out and scampered off, when you call somebody else and say they are full of BS, you better be ready to be have your mouth closed when they are well clued up but pretend to know nothing, I don't know everything but I have a far better idea of relativity than you do.

Arrogance is truly the naivety of a person...


added- I always use axiom's with the highest value of logic, in simple terms I tell the blinking truth of relativity and do not lie to myself about what we do or do not observe.







« Last Edit: 26/03/2016 13:03:10 by Thebox »
 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #278 on: 26/03/2016 13:05:38 »
So here is my challenge,

prove that any value of measurement after 0 time is not instantaneous history?
I don't believe in zero. There is no such thing as "nothing." I believe in mass/energy conservation. I believe there was a Big Bang, but I don't think it emerged from a "point" singularity. A point has no length, width, or depth, and can contain nothing.

Logical or not, if I am to believe mass/energy conservation is absolute, there can be no such thing as "nothing" or "zero." It is a mathematical abstraction. It's useful for things like, "If I have 3 apples, and take away 3 apples, that leaves zero apples," but obviously, if you just move them across the table to perform the operation, they still exist. If you eat them, their mass and energy become part of you. They still exist that way, too. There is no such thing as zero, so I don't think there's an "after zero" either.

My hypothesis is that the universe is cyclical. Black holes to me are not an example of entropy. What a black hole is is a huge amount of mass and energy in a small space. That's "order," not "disorder." If a black hole blew up and released those contents, dissipating them throughout space, THAT would be disorder. That's what logic suggests to me, anyway. A bottle of gas is order, pop the lid off and let the gas spread throughout the room, that's disorder. I think that's what the Big Bang was: a black hole that reached a critical mass, at which point it released its contents. This version of the Big Bang has no need for an actual "zero time" measurement, just something more like a "reset button" for a stopwatch that never actually stops. Mass and energy are conserved forever, while the Big Bang is just a large scale mass/energy conversion. The universe has always existed, always will, and there will be other Big Bangs eventually.
 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #279 on: 26/03/2016 13:08:12 »
Like I said run away, logged out and scampered off, when you call somebody else and say they are full of BS, you better be ready to be have your mouth closed when they are well clued up but pretend to know nothing, I don't know everything but I have a far better idea of relativity than you do.
Still here, just visiting Google news. You called me arrogant, but you expect me to drop whatever I'm doing to have a debate with you?

Tell me what you know about Relativity. This ought to be good. Open your mouth wide and clue me right up, LOL
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #280 on: 26/03/2016 13:17:26 »
There is no such thing as zero, so I don't think there's an "after zero" either.

The evidence suggests absolute n-dimensional space with a value of k=0 or k=n   , 0 being equal to n in that nothing can be a 0 point or a visual whole finite point interior inside  an n-dimensional exterior.

Quote
My hypothesis is that the universe is cyclical. Black holes to me are not an example of entropy. What a black hole is is a huge amount of mass and energy in a small space. That's "order," not "disorder." If a black hole blew up and released those contents, dissipating them throughout space, THAT would be disorder. That's what logic suggests to me, anyway. A bottle of gas is order, pop the lid off and let the gas spread throughout the room, that's disorder. I think that's what the Big Bang was: a black hole that reached a critical mass, at which point it released its contents. This version of the Big Bang has no need for an actual "zero time" measurement, just something more like a "reset button" for a stopwatch that never actually stops. Mass and energy are conserved forever, while the Big Bang is just a large scale mass/energy conversion. The universe has always existed, always will, and there will be other Big Bangs eventually.


I would have to pull you up on the first line , where on Earth do you perceive cyclical from?    The motion of bodies is just the motion of bodies relatively travelling through absolute space.

Space does not have to be moving for the bodies to move or does the shape of cyclical, in comparison with the star saucepan formation, have relativity to absolute - space. The formation is relative to the bodies.

Shapes are of the imagination of space, only objects have shape, XYZ space is really n .




The Big bang theory can not be correct, all the matter in the visual universe would not fit into a 0 point  if we rewound  the big bang.










 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #281 on: 26/03/2016 13:18:28 »
Like I said run away, logged out and scampered off, when you call somebody else and say they are full of BS, you better be ready to be have your mouth closed when they are well clued up but pretend to know nothing, I don't know everything but I have a far better idea of relativity than you do.
Still here, just visiting Google news. You called me arrogant, but you expect me to drop whatever I'm doing to have a debate with you?

Tell me what you know about Relativity. This ought to be good. Open your mouth wide and clue me right up, LOL

Relativity is simply what two or more observers agree upon,


''noun
14.
something that is not dependent upon external conditions for existence or for its specific nature, size, etc. (opposed to relative ).''


Relative matter occupies absolute-space
« Last Edit: 26/03/2016 13:20:57 by Thebox »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #282 on: 26/03/2016 13:28:05 »
Let me give you an easy question, what is the wave-length of  the represented by the green  line?

I get 0



 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #283 on: 26/03/2016 13:41:45 »
How about another truthful model






 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #284 on: 26/03/2016 13:52:41 »
You asked what is relative, expect new, my perspective is relative.

Black holes do emit light and reflect light, but you can not see this because they are relatively too small for the inverse square  law to work.  Imagine a small dense mass that was 1000 yrds away from you, you would not observe it to be there but it would be affected its surroundings.

 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #285 on: 26/03/2016 14:28:44 »
Let me give you an easy question, what is the wave-length of  the represented by the green  line?

I get 0


There is no such thing as zero. It is a mathematical abstraction. From the Calculus book I'm tutoring myself with:

"A mathematical model is never a completely accurate representation of a physical situation--it is an idealization. A good model simplifies reality enough to permit mathematical calculations but is accurate enough to provide valuable conclusions. It is important to realize the limitations of the model. In the end, Mother Nature has the final say." [Calculus Early Transcendentals, Stewart]

Looks like Mr. Thomson absorbed that green photon:

http://www.houzz.com/photos/798010/Everybody-Wanna-Hit-of-Your-Pipe-Dream-modern-artwork-other-metro
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #286 on: 26/03/2016 14:52:27 »

There is no such thing as zero. It is a mathematical abstraction. From the Calculus book I'm tutoring myself with:


I thought you said you was smart? 


There is no such thing as zero are you mad?   there is no such thing as numbers they are abstract, you clearly are confused and are naive in believing what you are reading.   

Every single 0 point of ''empty'' space is zero, nothing, then one is any xyzt.

You are not smart at all.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #287 on: 26/03/2016 15:13:32 »
Look its really simple, take two equal length sticks ,


0.........................0

1.........................1




Do you in some way think that labelling the length 1 something , it changes  the length any or affects the length any?   That is because numbers are abstract, even the numbers of time are abstract, 1 second is a length of history from 0-1, number one is a variate and not absolute like 0 and space.


A frequency that changes in  rate measured over an absolute length does not change the length of measurement.




0→A

A→0   


The absolute length of space is an invariant.

« Last Edit: 26/03/2016 15:18:33 by Thebox »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #288 on: 26/03/2016 15:31:46 »
del

« Last Edit: 26/03/2016 15:34:50 by Thebox »
 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #289 on: 26/03/2016 16:30:12 »
del
Yeah, that was pretty smart. LOL.

Here's one of my favorite quotes: "... and just as only the very rich understand the difference between themselves and the poor, only the truly brilliant comprehend the difference between themselves and men of moderate intelligence."

https://books.google.com/books?id=p0yWHm0Qw14C&pg=PA234&lpg=PA234&dq=lawrence+g+mcdonald+just+as+only+the+rich+only+the+brilliant&source=bl&ots=tg-1S7RaQI&sig=wnGI8jBN5QHGFfVMYB2BPnnFbfU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwib4K_z4d7LAhVQymMKHU8WBlkQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=lawrence%20g%20mcdonald%20just%20as%20only%20the%20rich%20only%20the%20brilliant&f=false

Have fun with your play science, thinking outside TheBox. I'm having a real debate on anthropogenic climate change with a boring pharmacologist in another thread.
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3905
  • Thanked: 52 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #290 on: 26/03/2016 19:07:50 »
Et
Your modesty is inspirational.
Your flaming is not. Would you like to say something about black holes? Or are you just going to keep talking about me?

I see little point since none of us mere mortals here could hope to approach the level of your superior intellect. Maybe you should teach us, oh great one.
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #291 on: 27/03/2016 00:22:44 »

Have fun with your play science,


Says what authority?

Play science?


Yet I use axioms and present knowledge,

are you suggesting science is wrong?

Clearly you are not as clever as you thought you was and could not even comprehend my level of understanding.


Why do I even bother replying to clowns like you, why do I even bother with science, all my ideas will be stole and used by the predators, I don't normally drink, but tonight I am a bit drunk , so you know what, stuff all of science, I am not going to spill any more beans, you truly will never understand because the entire world is deluded and quite thick, including you.
I may just get insulting and push for  ban, or I may just ignore everyone all together, or maybe I should resort to stupid stuff which you find more interesting than the truth.














 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #292 on: 27/03/2016 15:36:12 »
Says what authority?

Play science?

Yet I use axioms and present knowledge,

are you suggesting science is wrong?

Clearly you are not as clever as you thought you was and could not even comprehend my level of understanding.

Why do I even bother replying to clowns like you, why do I even bother with science, all my ideas will be stole and used by the predators, I don't normally drink, but tonight I am a bit drunk , so you know what, stuff all of science, I am not going to spill any more beans, you truly will never understand because the entire world is deluded and quite thick, including you.
I may just get insulting and push for  ban, or I may just ignore everyone all together, or maybe I should resort to stupid stuff which you find more interesting than the truth.
I'm not suggesting science is wrong, that's for sure. The science is right.

It's all the people here talking about it that are wrong, especially you.

Science actually makes sense to me ... until I log on and read what everyone is posting. That's what doesn't make sense. Between you, Bored Chemist, alancalverd, Tim the Plumber, waitedavid137, Krash661, Sea Bass, Nacho and the rest, you guys could write an antithesis or alternative explanation for not just everything I know, but everything we know as a species.

I used to like you, when you stood up to waitedavid. But that's typical, actually. He says, I'm wrong, you say I'm wrong, but neither of you agree either. That's how it goes at physics forums, in the best of my experience. It's like talking about physics in a courtroom full of lawyers that all have their own peculiar twist on the facts. Nobody cares about the facts. Everybody is more worried about their own interpretation of the facts.

I'm here seeking clarity. These jokers obfuscate, you dilly-dally with silly ideas. Sorry, but if you were more serious about this stuff, you would try to learn it, not piece it together from a couple of facts and a lot of outside the box thinking.

You shouldn't post when you are drinking. I quit drinking over a year ago, but only a couple of years ago, I got banned from a forum posting drunk.
 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #293 on: 27/03/2016 15:39:39 »
I see little point since none of us mere mortals here could hope to approach the level of your superior intellect. Maybe you should teach us, oh great one.
I can't teach someone who doesn't want to learn.

You can lead a horse to a glacier melted by anthropogenic climate change, but you cannot make him drink.
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3905
  • Thanked: 52 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #294 on: 27/03/2016 16:27:09 »
I see little point since none of us mere mortals here could hope to approach the level of your superior intellect. Maybe you should teach us, oh great one.
I can't teach someone who doesn't want to learn.

You can lead a horse to a glacier melted by anthropogenic climate change, but you cannot make him drink.

The reason you don't get a positive reaction is that you are rude, insulting and have an overblown opinion of yourself. That is very ego-centric and excludes most sensible debate. No one is right all the time and yet you are ready to state that every member of this forum is wrong. And you wonder why you don't get a positive response?
 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #295 on: 27/03/2016 16:49:30 »
The reason you don't get a positive reaction is that you are rude, insulting and have an overblown opinion of yourself. That is very ego-centric and excludes most sensible debate. No one is right all the time and yet you are ready to state that every member of this forum is wrong. And you wonder why you don't get a positive response?
False. There are people who don't feel that way. They are the ones who treat me with respect, and engage in a discussion about science.

Sorry, but I can't really be wrong about anything here, for several reasons.

First of all, I qualify my statements regularly by noting that I am only a layman, and science is my hobby, not my occupation.

Secondly, I generally qualify my statements with words like, "it would seem," or "I think," or "this suggests," or "in my opinion,"
making it clear I am not making a statement of fact. If I state something like it's a fact, it probably is. So, if you're
countering what I see as facts, you had better take it up with the guy who worked at NASA for 30 years who taught
the Stellar Physics course I took in college, or the PhD who wrote a textbook on Quantum Physics I have on my shelf,
for example. Those are the sorts of people I get my information from, not internet forum crackpots who say they are wrong.

Thirdly, I post links to information supporting my comments at times, especially if they have a ".org" or ".gov" designation.

Finally, there are two types of non-trolls in public forums. There are people who ignore them, and there are people who engage them.
I am simply one of the latter type. I don't think people should have to be submissive to jerkfaces. I think you ought to get a handful
of feces thrown back at you like the ape you are.

Again, there's a reason you have such a low percentage of "thank yous" after that many comments. Just like you said,
"The reason you don't get a positive reaction is that you are rude, insulting and have an overblown opinion of yourself."

I started out with 3 thanks you's after only about 50 comments. It's only going down because I beat my head against brick walls like you.

Who cares? I didn't come here to kiss anybody's butt. I came here to talk about science. This is a physics forum. Say something
about physics, or please stop posting. You're not just wasting my time flaming. Everybody has to scroll through your unedifying rubbish.
« Last Edit: 27/03/2016 16:55:09 by Craig W. Thomson »
 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3905
  • Thanked: 52 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #296 on: 27/03/2016 17:44:14 »
Yet more insults. I suppose you have read the forum acceptable usage policy. So the next time you call me an ape and I deserve to have feces thrown at me please go back and read that policy. Whilst I am only pointing out your obnoxious behavior you respond by ramping up the insults. Yet you can see nothing wrong with that behavior.
 

Offline Craig W. Thomson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #297 on: 28/03/2016 17:05:57 »
Yet more insults. I suppose you have read the forum acceptable usage policy. So the next time you call me an ape and I deserve to have feces thrown at me please go back and read that policy. Whilst I am only pointing out your obnoxious behavior you respond by ramping up the insults. Yet you can see nothing wrong with that behavior.
Last time I checked, homo sapiens was a species of primate. That includes you.

Again, this is a science forum. Acceptable behavior for a science forum is talking about science, not flaming.

So, stop flaming me and say something about science, or shut your ape mouth before I shove a banana in it.
« Last Edit: 28/03/2016 17:15:37 by Craig W. Thomson »
 

Offline Thebox

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3153
  • Thanked: 44 times
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #298 on: 28/03/2016 17:37:33 »



Again, this is a science forum. Acceptable behavior for a science forum is talking about science, not flaming.


Yes that is correct

Quote
So, stop flaming me and say something about science, or shut your ape mouth before I shove a banana in it.

Then contradictory to your first statement reply with flaming and an insult, so by this self evident admittance of the second quote showing evidentially a contradiction to the first post and admitting knowing forum etiquette,  I postulate a dismissal of you from this forum for clearly trolling and ignoring your admittance of knowing forum etiquette.


How do you plead?



 

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3905
  • Thanked: 52 times
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #299 on: 28/03/2016 17:42:50 »
Your very first contribution to this thread when replying to Thebox began "I don't see it that way, but I am not missing 50% of my brain, either." So you in fact started your contribution with an unwarranted attack on a forum member. That was in reply #29. From that point on your contribution was a continuing flame war with agyejy. Since then you have continued in the same vein when being corrected by anyone that you feel is inferior to you. I didn't start the BS. You did.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: TheBox on black holes
« Reply #299 on: 28/03/2016 17:42:50 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums