Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: guest46746 on 23/09/2018 23:36:13

Title: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: guest46746 on 23/09/2018 23:36:13
Ask yourself what form of "oscillation"  is amenable to the super compression of a black hole?

We know a black hole oscillates.
We know neutrinos oscillate.

We know black holes periodically spew Birkeland currents  into space at near the speed of light.
We know that neutrinos can travel at the speed of light. Traveling at the speed of light is a form of super compression.

We know that neutrinos can alter their oscillations to conform to their environment that their passing through. Does this characteristic allow it to occupy the same space/field as other neutrinos in a black hole environment or in a  speed of light environment?

So is it  beyond plausibility that black holes are comprised of neutrinos?
Neutrinos fit the needed attributes associated with the parameters a black hole existence.
The only impediment is whether the gravitational force of a black hole is powerful enough to capture and contain neutrinos that are within its proximity and traveling at the speed of light.

The counter is that normal gravity found in a typical solar system has no effect on neutrinos.

So, if black holes are comprised of neutrinos, and they are capable of emitting plasma energy and they oscillate, they have some characteristics of a star. The fact that Stars are a producer of neutrinos merely completes a cycle. Stars emits neutrinos, neutrinos are captured and contained in black holes. Neutrinos are spewed out of black holes via Birkeland currents. The spewed neutrinos are recycled into Universe and eventually new galaxy. The approximate lifetime of a neutrino is 10 to the 40th power, almost qualifies as an eternity. lol

Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: guest46746 on 23/09/2018 23:42:29
We know that neutrinos can alter their oscillations to conform to their environment that they're passing through.


I'm an idiot! lol
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: guest46746 on 24/09/2018 16:43:31
I would further speculate that star eruptions can be predicted by an increase in neutrino output.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Professor Mega-Mind on 24/09/2018 20:59:52
             Neutrino Black Hole
 Since fusion produces Repulsive (Everyone hates 'em) Neutrinos , it should definitely be possible to predict a black-hole accretion-disk outburst .  Their flight path near black-holes should be similar to that of photons .  When ingested , the same ultimate compression would happen to them , that happens to all matter & energy that falls into a black hole : Egg !...P.M.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: evan_au on 24/09/2018 22:33:40
Quote from: Pesqueira
We know black holes periodically spew Birkeland currents  into space at near the speed of light.
Birkeland currents are induced in the Earth and Earth's ionosphere by the solar wind.
I have not seen them applied to black holes.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland_current

Perhaps you are thinking of relativistic jets ejected along the axis of an accretion disk around a black hole or neutron star?
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysical_jet
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: evan_au on 25/09/2018 12:07:36
Quote from: Pesqueira
I would further speculate that star eruptions can be predicted by an increase in neutrino output
Neutrinos are released when protons turn into neutrons during nucleosynthesis (these reactions also involve an electron or positron).
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_nucleosynthesis#Hydrogen_fusion

There are many kinds of stellar eruptions, but not all of them involve nucleosynthesis.
- Flares occur on the surface of the star, driven by twisted magnetic fields. They do not have the density or temperature for nucleosynthesis
- When stars get hot enough to start synthesis of new elements (eg switching from burning hydrogen to burning helium or carbon, I expect that these would produce neutrinos with a different energy spectrum. So I expect that these significant milestones in the life of a star could be detected via a nearby neutrino detector.
- When stars collapse in a supernova, nucleosynthesis occurs at a phenomenal rate, creating a massive burst of neutrinos. Just such a burst was detected for a supernova in 1987. It is thought that the neutrinos would pass the visible surface of the star several hours before the visible-light flash.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SN_1987A#Neutrino_emissions
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: evan_au on 14/10/2018 09:29:36
Quote from: Pesqueira
Could neutrinos form black holes?
No, because neutrinos don't "clump", and you need a very dense clump of matter to produce a black hole.

In contrast, matter clumps easily to form stars, and the fact that matter can radiate energy as electromagnetic waves allows the matter to cool down and condense. When a large star exhausts all it's fuel to produce an iron core, it can no longer itself against its own gravity, and it collapses beyond a neutron star to form a black hole.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_II_supernova#Core_collapse

Quote
We know a black hole oscillates
Please tell us how you know this.

I have seen merging black holes oscillate for perhaps 1ms after merging, but then it stops.

I have seen oscillations in X-Ray emissions from the accretion disk around a black hole (like water swirling into a drainpipe), but this is swirling matter outside the event horizon, nothing to do with the black hole itself.

Quote
We know neutrinos oscillate... We know that neutrinos can travel at the speed of light.
These two statements are mutually exclusive.
- If neutrinos traveled at the speed of light, they would not oscillate
- Neutrinos do oscillate, therefore they do not travel at the speed of light
- Although they do travel very close to the speed of light
- Physicists would love to know just how much slower than c neutrinos travel - that would give some clues to their mass, a number which is poorly constrained at present.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino_oscillation

Quote
So is it  beyond plausibility that black holes are comprised of neutrinos?
Yes.

Quote
The only impediment is whether the gravitational force of a black hole is powerful enough to capture and contain neutrinos that are within its proximity and traveling at the speed of light.
By definition, the escape velocity of a black hole exceeds the speed of light.
The speed of a neutrino is less than the speed of light, so a neutrino inside a black hole will be contained in there.

Neutrinos don't clump, so they can't form a black hole.
But if normal matter has already clumped to form a black hole, a neutrino that intersects with the event horizon will be captured by the black hole, and will add to the mass of the black hole.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 05/11/2018 07:59:43
Ask yourself what form of "oscillation"  is amenable to the super compression of a black hole?
We know a black hole oscillates.
We know neutrinos oscillate.

We know black holes periodically spew Birkeland currents  into space at near the speed of light.
We know that neutrinos can travel at the speed of light. Traveling at the speed of light is a form of super compression.

We know that neutrinos can alter their oscillations to conform to their environment that their passing through. Does this characteristic allow it to occupy the same space/field as other neutrinos in a black hole environment or in a  speed of light environment?

So is it  beyond plausibility that black holes are comprised of neutrinos?
Neutrinos fit the needed attributes associated with the parameters a black hole existence.
The only impediment is whether the gravitational force of a black hole is powerful enough to capture and contain neutrinos that are within its proximity and traveling at the speed of light.

The counter is that normal gravity found in a typical solar system has no effect on neutrinos.

So, if black holes are comprised of neutrinos, and they are capable of emitting plasma energy and they oscillate, they have some characteristics of a star. The fact that Stars are a producer of neutrinos merely completes a cycle. Stars emits neutrinos, neutrinos are captured and contained in black holes. Neutrinos are spewed out of black holes via Birkeland currents. The spewed neutrinos are recycled into Universe and eventually new galaxy. The approximate lifetime of a neutrino is 10 to the 40th power, almost qualifies as an eternity. lol
The free-photon is the primary quantum particle (Williamson)(Ranzan). If a photon bites its own tail & forms a loop it becomes a confined-photon (Williamson), which is an elementary particle (eg electron quark etc). All matter (confined-photons) has mass, & all light (free-photons) has mass.
There are no virtual particles, there are no gravitons, no gluons, no pions, no Higgs etc.
Ranzan says that a neutrino is made of two (possibly helical i think) photons sharing the same axis (the EMC fields negate). Hencely a neutrino has twice the mass of a single photon, & the destruction of a neutrino produces a pair of photons.

If free-neutrinos can form a loop & become confined-neutrinos then these might give us dark elementary particles (ie dark electrons & dark quarks etc). Dark elementary particles however would not be able to form a dark atom (ie a dark nucleus with orbiting dark electrons), they would immediately form something similar to the matter found in super-dense neutron stars, & thusly give us dark matter. Such dark matter might form dark dust, dark asteroids, dark planets, dark stars. If massive enough a dark star might also be a blackhole, ie where free-photons cannot escape --  &, if supermassive, where neutrinos cannot escape.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 05/11/2018 16:21:30
The free-photon is the primary quantum particle (Williamson)(Ranzan). If a photon bites its own tail & forms a loop it becomes a confined-photon (Williamson), which is an elementary particle (eg electron quark etc). All matter (confined-photons) has mass, & all light (free-photons) has mass.
There are no virtual particles, there are no gravitons, no gluons, no pions, no Higgs etc.
Ranzan says that a neutrino is made of two (possibly helical i think) photons sharing the same axis (the EMC fields negate). Hencely a neutrino has twice the mass of a single photon, & the destruction of a neutrino produces a pair of photons.

If free-neutrinos can form a loop & become confined-neutrinos then these might give us dark elementary particles (ie dark electrons & dark quarks etc). Dark elementary particles however would not be able to form a dark atom (ie a dark nucleus with orbiting dark electrons), they would immediately form something similar to the matter found in super-dense neutron stars, & thusly give us dark matter. Such dark matter might form dark dust, dark asteroids, dark planets, dark stars. If massive enough a dark star might also be a blackhole, ie where free-photons cannot escape --  &, if supermassive, where neutrinos cannot escape.

Please post a reference to the experiments where these claims were tested in a falsifiable manner.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: guest46746 on 05/11/2018 18:48:18
Please post a reference to the experiments where these claims were tested in a falsifiable manner.

I would remind everyone that hypothesis are just that. The one that expresses MA's viewpoint can be found at

  https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Electromagnetic-wave-of-a-Photon-generated-along-traveling_fig2_286929821

 The author has a PHD credential with 12 published papers on this and several other related matters! lol


What's in your wallet? lol
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 05/11/2018 20:57:21
I would remind everyone that hypothesis are just that.

That's perfectly fine and all, but the way he worded his statements like "The free-photon is the primary quantum particle" and "Hencely a neutrino has twice the mass of a single photon, & the destruction of a neutrino produces a pair of photons" makes it sound like he is declaring these to be facts and not merely hypotheses.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 05/11/2018 21:09:00
Please post a reference to the experiments where these claims were tested in a falsifiable manner.
A few articles & links are below -- which themselves mention articles & links. Some of the stuff is in books but might be found on www with luck.
I dont think that Williamson or Ranzan have done any experiments -- but they refer to others.

Restoring the Physical Meaning of Energy -- Distinguishing between the apparent energy and the real energy of moving mass --Conrad Ranzan  ---Correspondence: C. Ranzan, Director, DSSU -- Author’s website: www.CellularUniverse.org      http://www.cellularuniverse.org/R10RestoringIntrinsicEnergy-Ranzan.pdf
[1] Williamson J. G. and Leary S.J., “Absolute relativity and the quantisation of light”, SPIE Optics + Photonics,
San Diego, 9570-41 (9-13 August 2015).
[2] Williamson J. G., “A new theory of light and matter”. FFP14, Marseille, France, (2014).
http://ffp14.cpt.univ-mrs.fr/DOCUMENTS/PREPRINTS/WILLIAMSON_John_preprint.pdf
On the nature of the photon and the electron – J G Williamson –
http://www.cybsoc.org/electremdense2008v3.pdf
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 05/11/2018 21:15:54
I would remind everyone that hypothesis are just that.
That's perfectly fine and all, but the way he worded his statements like "The free-photon is the primary quantum particle" and "Hencely a neutrino has twice the mass of a single photon, & the destruction of a neutrino produces a pair of photons" makes it sound like he is declaring these to be facts and not merely hypotheses.
I agree that my lazy wordage hints at a well established model, whereaz it aint. But i reckon that much of modern science is a bit that way -- almost everything we now know will be shown to be wrong or partly wrong. Me myself i dont believe in a nuclear atom (with electrons orbiting a nucleus).
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 05/11/2018 21:22:36
I agree that my lazy wordage hints at a well established model, whereaz it aint.

Alright, glad that got cleared up. The model you speak of violates conservation laws.

Me myself i dont believe in a nuclear atom (with electrons orbiting a nucleus).

Then what do you believe atoms are like?
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 05/11/2018 22:12:22
I agree that my lazy wordage hints at a well established model, whereaz it aint.
Alright, glad that got cleared up. The model you speak of violates conservation laws.
Me myself i dont believe in a nuclear atom (with electrons orbiting a nucleus).
Then what do you believe atoms are like?
I dont believe in conservation. For example a free-photon has a mass of say 1 -- but that same photon when it becomes a confined-photon might have a mass of 1,000,000. Williamson says that mass depends on the nature of the confinement -- eg on the tightness of the loop.

I like the ideas of Miles Mathis. He in effect says that atoms are molecular -- they are made up of alpha particles -- & electrons buzz around in certain locations.
I remember that someone (it might have been at Oxford) a few years back showed that atoms have shape -- which supports Mathis.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 05/11/2018 23:14:04
I dont believe in conservation. For example a free-photon has a mass of say 1 -- but that same photon when it becomes a confined-photon might have a mass of 1,000,000. Williamson says that mass depends on the nature of the confinement -- eg on the tightness of the loop.

Your science denialism never ceases to amaze me. Please point me to a peer-reviewed study where conservation of electric charge and/or mass were clearly violated.

Quote
I like the ideas of Miles Mathis. He in effect says that atoms are molecular -- they are made up of alpha particles -- & electrons buzz around in certain locations.

If that was true, we would know it. We have the ability to experimentally determine the shape of nuclei: https://www.nature.com/news/pear-shaped-nucleus-boosts-search-for-new-physics-1.12952

Quote
I remember that someone (it might have been at Oxford) a few years back showed that atoms have shape -- which supports Mathis.

Of course they have shape. They aren't one-dimensional points.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 05/11/2018 23:54:22
I dont believe in conservation. For example a free-photon has a mass of say 1 -- but that same photon when it becomes a confined-photon might have a mass of 1,000,000. Williamson says that mass depends on the nature of the confinement -- eg on the tightness of the loop.
Your science denialism never ceases to amaze me. Please point me to a peer-reviewed study where conservation of electric charge and/or mass were clearly violated.  Comment:  Lets start with the invention of the neutrino to fill an energy hole. And then all of the other fake particles & fake virtual particles to fill charge energy mass holes -- every particle is a hole. No worries -- just invent another particle -- but hell dont touch my conservation.
Quote
I like the ideas of Miles Mathis. He in effect says that atoms are molecular -- they are made up of alpha particles -- & electrons buzz around in certain locations.
If that was true, we would know it. We have the ability to experimentally determine the shape of nuclei: https://www.nature.com/news/pear-shaped-nucleus-boosts-search-for-new-physics-1.12952
Quote
I remember that someone (it might have been at Oxford) a few years back showed that atoms have shape -- which supports Mathis.
Of course they have shape. They aren't one-dimensional points.
 Comment:  And they aint spherical. But time will tell.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 06/11/2018 01:01:01
Comment:  Lets start with the invention of the neutrino to fill an energy hole. And then all of the other fake particles & fake virtual particles to fill charge energy mass holes -- every particle is a hole. No worries -- just invent another particle -- but hell dont touch my conservation.

So you already forgot about that link I showed you about how we can generate neutrinos on demand and send messages with them, huh? Not to mention that we can detect antineutrinos being given off by nuclear reactors: https://permalink.lanl.gov/object/tr?what=info:lanl-repo/lareport/LA-UR-97-2534-02

Quote
Comment:  And they aint spherical. But time will tell.

So where is the photograph you mention showing them to not to have spherical symmetry? Not that all atoms are spherical anyway. Orbital theory predicts a variety of shapes (only s orbitals are spherical).

Where is your response to my statement about our ability to investigate the shape of an atomic nucleus?
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 06/11/2018 01:30:10
Comment:  Lets start with the invention of the neutrino to fill an energy hole. And then all of the other fake particles & fake virtual particles to fill charge energy mass holes -- every particle is a hole. No worries -- just invent another particle -- but hell dont touch my conservation.
So you already forgot about that link I showed you about how we can generate neutrinos on demand and send messages with them, huh? Not to mention that we can detect antineutrinos being given off by nuclear reactors: https://permalink.lanl.gov/object/tr?what=info:lanl-repo/lareport/LA-UR-97-2534-02
Quote
Comment:  And they aint spherical. But time will tell.
So where is the photograph you mention showing them to not to have spherical symmetry? Not that all atoms are spherical anyway. Orbital theory predicts a variety of shapes (only s orbitals are spherical). Where is your response to my statement about our ability to investigate the shape of an atomic nucleus?
I would like to believe in neutrinos, but at present i am not 100%. However my interested & ideas changed when i read Ranzan's or Williamson's idea that a neutrino is made up of 2 photons joined such that their charge electro magneto fields cancel. I karnt remember whether taking this one step further & considering the possibility of a neutrino biting its own tail & forming a dark particle (& hencely dark matter)(& dark stars)(& blackholes) was my idea (see my initial posting on this  thread). I will add to that posting in a few minutes.

Re the shape of nuclei i havent looked into it -- i would be ok with a model having no nucleus (with no silly orbiting electrons) the atom being made up of alpha particles -- & i would be happy with a nucleus but with the nucleus made up of alpha particles making a peculiar shape. But all of that is well outside my limited comprehension & memory -- & it doesnt concern much my core interests, aether & gravity & the photon & photinos & centrifuging aether -- photinos & centrifuging of aether being my 2 pet areas (at present).
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 06/11/2018 01:38:55
Re the shape of nuclei i havent looked into it -- i would be ok with a model having no nucleus (with no silly orbiting electrons) the atom being made up of alpha particles -- & i would be happy with a nucleus but with the nucleus made up of alpha particles making a peculiar shape. But all of that is well outside my limited comprehension & memory -- & it doesnt concern much my core interests, aether & gravity & the photon & photinos & centrifuging aether -- photinos & centrifuging of aether being my 2 pet areas (at present).

Then please try to do the required prerequisite research before making the empty claim that thousands physicists and chemists with access to multi-million dollar experimental equipment have gotten the structure of the atom wrong for many decades.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 06/11/2018 02:10:10
Re the shape of nuclei i havent looked into it -- i would be ok with a model having no nucleus (with no silly orbiting electrons) the atom being made up of alpha particles -- & i would be happy with a nucleus but with the nucleus made up of alpha particles making a peculiar shape. But all of that is well outside my limited comprehension & memory -- & it doesnt concern much my core interests, aether & gravity & the photon & photaenos & centrifuging aether -- photaenos & centrifuging of aether being my 2 pet areas (at present).
Then please try to do the required prerequisite research before making the empty claim that thousands physicists and chemists with access to multi-million dollar experimental equipment have gotten the structure of the atom wrong for many decades.
The standard model of the atom is rubbish. Most of thems particles & virtual particles are rubbish. Even electrons & protons & neutrons are suspect. There are lots of articles out there by scientists over a long period of time -- i merely repeat their claims. U must know better than i re the modern shortfalls & holes in quantum stuff -- the models work ok up to a point -- needing virtual particles to fill the holes.
It is well known that one neutrino is always associated with two photons.
It is well know that atomic reactions love to emit alpha particles.

The biggest hole in standard physics that i see is the lack of good ideas re charge fields electro fields & magneto fields. I fix that -- my photaeno idea is the only good idea out there.
Followed by the lack of good ideas re mass & gravity & inertia (gravity field stuff). Cahill & Ranzan fix that.

These 4 fields must impinge on the standard atom model (2 fields actually, electro & magneto fields are secondary effects that follow from the primary field the charge field). I doubt that the strong force field & the weak force field exist (unless being a special case of the 4). But i dont think i have time to follow up on that sort of stuff.
But it all impinges on this  thread re neutrinos forming blackholes (its a great question). My answer is that free-neutrinos cannot form a blackhole (but they contribute to dark mass i think) -- but confined neutrinos are the number one main paramount cause of dark matter.

The difference tween dark mass & dark matter is subtle.
Free photons have mass & free neutrinos have dark mass (Ranzan calls this sort of mass mass-equivalence).
I reckon that in a way that mass (moving freely at c) is a different kind of mass compared to the mass of confined photons (matter)(elementary particles)(electrons quarks etc) & confined neutrinos (dark matter)(if they exist).
Free mass (moving at c) & confined mass (stationary) create gravity in a slightly different way (i can explain).
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 06/11/2018 03:12:06
Miscellaineous additional ramblings re neutrinos & blackholes.
Free-neutrinos (invisible) might form confined-neutrinos (invisible), ie dark elementary particles, ie dark matter.
Dark particles make dark matter (eg dark dust)(dark planets)(dark stars).
Ordinary matter (confined photons) cannot form anything dark or black unless the mass is large enough to trap light.

Hencely we might have five kinds of Dark Matter –
(1) dark mass made of free-neutrinos (because they have mass but are invisible) –
(2) dark matter made of confined neutrinos (ditto) –
(3) blackholes made of confined photons (if massive enough)(because visible light cannot escape)(hencely black) –
(4) blackholes made of confined neutrinos (if massive enough)(light cannot escape) –
(5) blackholes made of a combination of confined neutrinos & confined photons.

Free-photons & free-neutrinos both propagate at c (potentially)(if not near mass).
Free-photons & free-neutrinos both suffer an equal slowing near mass (near but not in) hencely c reduces to c'.
Free-photons are slowed in plasma & air & water & glass, hencely c' reduces to c'' (& free neutrinos are not slowed).

If massive enough, dark-matter can form blackholes (free-photons cannot escape)(but free-neutrinos might escape).
My definition of a blackhole is that light cannot escape (u might have blue Cherenkov light escaping)(blueholes).

A blackhole need not be supermassive – it merely needs an atmosphere where c"/n is less than the escape velocity – c being reduced to c' by the nearness of mass, & c' being reduced to c" by the plasma air water glass.

Ordinary matter can gravitationally clump with dark matter to form greyholes (just jesting) which if massive enough are blackholes.

Edit -- I just had a thort -- a 5 million million tonne black asteroid would be the same size as a 1 tonne ordinary asteroid (based on a black asteroid made of dark matter having the same density as a neutron star). Hencely a black asteroid would make a very small splash or crater -- it would plunge down to probly the center of the Earth, due in part to its speed, & due in part to its large wt (& small size) -- & then sit there.
Hencely i think that Earth has a core of dark matter -- & praps most of Earth's mass is dark matter.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 06/11/2018 05:40:50
There are lots of articles out there by scientists over a long period of time -- i merely repeat their claims.

I've seen a lot of people do that exact same thing when it comes to articles written by young Earth creationists. They repeat the claims without investigating whether the person who wrote the article understood what they were talking about. They are almost always rife with quote mining, straw-man attacks, arguments from consequences, ignorance of methodologies and a general misunderstanding of the issues. You have even admitted to not having a good understanding of the atomic nucleus and the experiments relevant to it, so your ability to recognize a bogus article that goes against experiment has already been compromised.

You think that the vast majority of physicists out there are morons that don't know how to properly run their equipment or interpret their data. You think they are too stupid to consider solutions that you think are logical. Yet you consistently trust fringe explanations that have significantly less solidly verified data over what is done by actual professionals who have much more sophisticated and sensitive equipment. You seem to think that the only good reason why most physicists believe what they believe is "conspiracy", which is practically not an explanation at all.

That being said, I give up. I cannot argue against someone with this kind of immobile mindset. I tried it against Thebox and consistently failed. I'm not wasting my time doing it again.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 06/11/2018 21:45:47
There are lots of articles out there by scientists over a long period of time -- i merely repeat their claims.

I've seen a lot of people do that exact same thing when it comes to articles written by young Earth creationists. They repeat the claims without investigating whether the person who wrote the article understood what they were talking about. They are almost always rife with quote mining, straw-man attacks, arguments from consequences, ignorance of methodologies and a general misunderstanding of the issues. You have even admitted to not having a good understanding of the atomic nucleus and the experiments relevant to it, so your ability to recognize a bogus article that goes against experiment has already been compromised.

You think that the vast majority of physicists out there are morons that don't know how to properly run their equipment or interpret their data. You think they are too stupid to consider solutions that you think are logical. Yet you consistently trust fringe explanations that have significantly less solidly verified data over what is done by actual professionals who have much more sophisticated and sensitive equipment. You seem to think that the only good reason why most physicists believe what they believe is "conspiracy", which is practically not an explanation at all.

That being said, I give up. I cannot argue against someone with this kind of immobile mindset. I tried it against Thebox and consistently failed. I'm not wasting my time doing it again.
I spent many minutes typing a nice response to this including a listing of some of the articles on my computer re censorship etc but then accidentally erased it. So all i will say for readers here is that on www there are lots of articles & websites re science censorship -- once u find a good one just follow the links etc etc -- u will have months of reading.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 01/03/2019 08:18:19
I reckon that what we have is two kinds of matter, (1) matter made by photons & (2) dark matter made by neutrinos (dark photons)(two joined photons).  An elementary particle is made when a free photon bites its tail & becomes a confined photon.  Likewise an elementary dark particle might be made by a neutrino becoming a confined neutrino.

The first problem is that a dark electron might not have any charge.  Likewise a dark proton.  If so then all dark elementary particles would mimic neutrons, & they might have praps twice the mass of their non-dark sibling.  Hencely we would not have any dark electrons orbiting a dark nucleus, we would just have a small nucleus. 
We would not have dark atoms or dark molecules.  We would have neutron particles, neutron planets, neutron stars.  All with much the same densities, ie very dense.  And all would be a kind of blackhole. 

A free neutrino probly has twice the mass (or quasi-mass) of a free photon.  A neutrino is invisible to the human eye, hencely dark.

Dark particles would form larger DPs by virtue of gravity.  Radiating away excess heat would not be a problem.  Dark particles would of course radiate electric fields which would of course cancel giving a nett charge of zero.  But electric charge radiation does not require energy, or at least it does not carry energy (but can in some instances).  This applies to all electric radiation whether cancelling or not.  Heat would be radiated away in the same way as for non-dark matter, via the emission of hi energy photons or neutrinos. 

Dark matter would aggregate with non-dark matter.  But here we have a problem.  Would dark particles migrate to the nucleus of an atom?  This would in effect create an isotope, & might cause fission. 
I think that most dark particles would soon make their way to the center of mass of any large body.  I think that Earth has dark matter inside, likewise the Moon & the Sun.

Dark matter can orbit the Sun etc, but i dont see how DM (eg a dark clump) can orbit inside ordinary matter (eg Earth), the DM would meet a lot of resistance.

I dont see the need for an exotic attraction force for DM, gravity would be enough.  Or, yes it would need an exotic force, but that force would be due to centrifuging of aether, due to the spins of the dark elementary particles (spinning at say c kmps).  This is a faux-gravity if u like.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Kryptid on 01/03/2019 17:38:05
Dark matter

I thought you said dark matter was something invented by mainstream scientists to "prop up" relativity? Now you're speaking of it as if you too believe it's out there.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 01/03/2019 21:16:18
Dark matter
I thought you said dark matter was something invented by mainstream scientists to "prop up" relativity? Now you're speaking of it as if you too believe it's out there.
I doubt that there is a new exotic substance that is the DM (but it aint impossible). However i agree that an old exotic substance might give DM, namely that dark photons (neutrinos) might make dark particles etc etc. Here when i agree i am agreeing with myself because i thort of it myself less than a year ago.  And i was pleased & surprised to see this thread "Could Neutrinos form Black Holes?" started by guest46746 on 23Sep2018 (so ok i am agreeing with him/her too).

But i very much doubt that it is DM of some kind tricking us & giving a pseudo 1/R gravity in spiral galaxies, & that Newton's & Einstein's 1/RR gravity is universally true & correct. This tricky DM would have to outmass the ordinary mass of a spiral galaxy by a factor of over 10 to 1, & praps by a factor of 100 to 1 if not for being smart & tricky (smart enough to take on a certain cunning formation).  And if much of that DM resided in the center of stars & planets (which is what i reckon would happen) then a factor of even 1000 to 1 wouldnt do the trick.

But it gets worse. Einsteinians say that DM is tricky smart & slippery. Being slippery it can take on its smart formation & retain it, thumbing its nose at any passing OM.  In fact it is so slippery that it can pass throo OM.  So slippery that it can orbit throo OM, almost for ever.

I reckon that dark confined photons (confined neutrinos) emit dark radiation. Dark radiation is a doublet of ordinary em radiation (photaenos), 180 deg out of phase, hencely negating or cancelling.  DM emits dark photons & dark em radiation.
Re photaenos, there are no dark photaenos. Dark em radiation is due to a cancelling of out of phase photaenos.

One problem for DM is its electrons & protons have no nett charge (& no electrostatic & electrodynamic forces).  Therefore DM cant make ordinary atoms (with electrons orbiting a nucleus). All of the electrons & quarks in DM act like neutrons, hencely such a DM is a blob of various kinds of neutrons, held together gravitationally, small dense clumps & blobs.

And these blobs are indeed slippery, attracted only by gravity.  Eventually the blobs migrate to the center of planets & stars, where they can have little or no effect on 1/R & 1/RR.  I think that a DM Earth would have a diameter of only about 1 km.  A DM Sun would have a diameter of say 70 km.
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: Bored chemist on 02/03/2019 01:19:34
I reckon that dark confined photons (confined neutrinos) emit dark radiation. Dark radiation is a doublet of ordinary em radiation (photaenos), 180 deg out of phase, hencely negating or cancelling.  DM emits dark photons & dark em radiation.

Reality reckons differently.
Almost all the confabulations you  stung together there have already been refuted
Title: Re: Could neutrinos form black holes?
Post by: mad aetherist on 02/03/2019 03:06:27
I reckon that dark confined photons (confined neutrinos) emit dark radiation. Dark radiation is a doublet of ordinary em radiation (photaenos), 180 deg out of phase, hencely negating or cancelling.  DM emits dark photons & dark em radiation.
Reality reckons differently. Almost all the confabulations you  stung together there have already been refuted.
Dark matter if it exists can be detected say six ways.......................................................
(1) em radiation (but if DM emits dark em radiation then that Dark em cant be detected).
(2) photons (but if DM emits dark photons then thems Dps cant be detected).
(3) gravitational attraction (which can of course be detected directly)(& calculated indirectly).
(4) lensing (a form of (3)).
(5) eclipsing (ie blocking of photons from far away stars).
(6) collision (u would be able to feel DM if u grabbed it or if u collided with it).

(6) Is a bit problematic, DM being dense & slippery would easily puncture ordinary atomic matter.

If all of my DMs have been refuted then that leaves other kinds of DM not yet refuted.