Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: jsaldea12 on 10/02/2019 13:23:59
-
Inviting comments from NASA, EHT, on contention NO BLACK HOLE EXIST?
Inviting comments from highly respected NASA, EHT on the two articles (A) and( B) below, namely:” Black hole is just a super giant boiling object in outer space, not invisible, light escapes” and (B) ”The gas and dust completely enveloping black hole is SOLVED”. These two articles are posted in NAKED SCIENTISTS FORUM under “New Theories Forum”.
(A)Black hole is just a super giant boiling object in outer space: not invisible, light escapes!!
Black hole is one of the greatest hunt of all astronomical societies of the world for nearly 100 years this modern 21th century!! The must intensified hunt is happening now 2017-19. What is black hole? As conceived, a structure in outer space with strong gravitational force that even light cannot escape, thus, it is invisible. But does black hole exists? Here are four indisputable evidences that prove no black hole exist in the universe:
(1)Quasars are super- giant galaxies, reputed to be the farthest, the largest, and brightest objects of the visible universe. Many distant quasars release light that travels some 10 to 13 billion light years (10-13 billion years) to reach and contact astronomical telescopes on earth. That supra-bright light of quasars is never the making of billions of satellite stars surrounding the quasars, these satellite objects are weakened the farther the travel and can never reach earth. Nor is it the light of dust and gas completely surrounding quasars, for that light from quasar that reach earth is tremendously concentrated and powerful, otherwise it cannot travel that far, billion of light years away, to reach earth. The only source of such super-powerful light is the core of quasars implicating indisputably that light escapes from the core, supposed black hole . The light that escapes is NORMAL MAKING of such object in space.
(2)The massing dust and gas that completely envelop supposed black hole, thus no black hole is visible directly , only dust and gas. Where do these dust and gas come from? A respected conglomerate of astronomers in 2017throughout the world combined their astronomical telescopes, called EHT (Event Horizon Telescope), and simultaneously pointed at Saguitarius “A” of Milky Way where the supposed black hole is hiding. The global EHT found no black hole directly but super-dense dust and gas envelopes completely the center of Milky Way. Another group of respected astrophysicists (UCLA) University of California, LA) ,who has been observing stars rotating closest to center of Milky Way for more than 15 years, commented : these dust and gas were observed being blown outward from center of Milky Way where the supposed black hole resides, and then to fall back to the center, and even goes further commented the dust and gas were blown out straight outward!!! Here is the clue why gas and dust were blown outward . Have you observed boiling water?. It boils and blows UP evaporated H2O to atmosphere. In like manner, the supposed black holes is super-heated object in space (even up to trillion Celsius), has surface which is super boiling that it blows out gas and dust outward that totally envelops and cover up supposed black hole thus is invisible! But all the electromagnetic spectrum, X_ray, ultra-violet ray, radio ray, etc. can penetrate the center of galaxy except visible light!!! and reflect back the image/information of that core to astronomical telescope, a proof that electro-magnetic=spectrum, of which includes light, escapes!. As further commented by unnamed physicist of UCLA, something like this “ there is detected massive body in the core of Milky Way but it is not the traditional black hole wherein light cannot escape but rather any materials that fall into it will never leave”. He is not far from the truth.
(3)For the first time, detected light and gravity travel, hand in hand, in super-boiling gas and hydrogen jets ejected by colliding galaxies at speed of light in the fabric of space (call it spacetime.), Concept of black hole which light cannot escape is against the law of physics: where there is fire, there is light. Light cannot be separated from fire nor fire separated from light. Both goes hand in hand inseparably and proportionately, not against one another.. The bigger the fire, proportionately, the bigger the light it produces and releases outward at the same impulse speed of 186,000 miles/sec The speed of gravity and light hand in hand finally confirmed this 2017 . In outer space, the greater the gravitational force of large stars, galaxies, quasars,, proportionately, hand in hand, the greater the light it produces and releases to outer space, not suck back light unto itself.
(4)Is supposed black hole hot or cold? The ejected jet of gas and hydrogen, of a single super massive galaxy is super hot, even by trillion celsius (the boiling gaseous sun has surface temperature of 6,000 celsius) implicating the interior of galaxies is super-hot, not cold. That the ejected jets from both sides of a super galaxy proves the core, supposed black hole, has inherent positive and negative, another evidence that the supposed black hole is no singularity, the signature of black hole?. There is no singularity in matter, not even neutron stars..
.It is worth mentioning, Dr. Albert Einstein who postulated “ A certain region in space with powerful gravitational force that even light cannot space”, later re-monickered as black hole, rejected black hole until his death in 1955. Dr. Stephen Hawking, the No. One proponent of black hole in modern time, later changed mind and recanted “event horizon” in 2004. Event horizon means the delineating line of black hole on which light cannot escape .
.In a capsule, there is no black hole, only super-giant boiling object in outer space,( like the boiling sun), and that the spewing gas and dust that completely envelop the supposed black hole is SOLVED.(artists’perception/simulation showing a big central black are merely illustration, not the actual)
:Further clarification| Where does the burning gas and dust that completely engulf come from? Dust and gas dont burn by tthemselves unless there is behind the real source, the burning core, supposedly the hidden black hole of galaxy.. Thus,, the burning gas and dust that cloths and brightens galaxies, carries with it into outer space the main source of light, the core, that stretches far into space and reaches earth, say, 13 billion light years! This is one of the strongest proof how and why light escapes from supposed black hole. jsaldea 2.4.19
.jose s. aldea
Physicist
Roxas City, Philippines
Revised Copyright/published 2018-19 (consolidation)
With copyrights/or published 2016-18
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(B)Expanded: The dust and gas that completely envelops black hole is SOLVED
Why is there that intriguing dust and gas that completely envelopes the supposed black thus makes black hole invisible? The simple explanation is like a boiling water that evaporates and release H2O into atmosphere. In like manner, black hole is super-heat object, billions of centigrades that it boils and spews gas and dust that extends far over the event horizon, call it black hole wind, thus, no matter what, black hole is invisible to VISIBLE light ray. reiterating, Black hole is liken to a boiling water which evaporates and releases H2O to atmosphere.
The fact that core of black hole is reached and detected by all other electro-magnetic spectrum, X-ray, radio ray, ultra violet ray etc. and feed back to astronomical telescopes, prove such spectrum ESCAPE black hole!!! Why visible light cannot penetrate the core of black hole. it is one nature of electromagnetic spectrum that light can only contact the SURFACE of matter, in this case the surface of glowing DUST AND GAS of galaxy, but not the interior.
As observed by conglomerate EHT group and all other astronomical groups, they have never seen visually the core of black hole, only the cover up densed gas and dust that extend far beyond the EH. That this dust and gas blown up over the EH although what is undeniably observed is that super dense object, 4 million times the mass of sun, called black hole, UNSEEN BY VISIBLE LIGHT BUT DETECTED BY ALL OTHER ELECTROAGNETIC SPECTRUM.
Now it is becoming clear what is that giant object, called black hole as its cover up dust and gas are identified to be ITS OWN release of energy that completely envelop, itself, the black hole, but, it is invisible to light. Such core of galaxy, called black hole, is just a super-giant body, no INVISIBLE black hole on which light cannot escape,. emanated/constructed on the same principle like the star, earth, that became super-super body: for black hole originated from small matters.
Further clarification: The ejected dual opposite jets of super-galaxy, , speeding almost speed of light, is super-heat, trillions Celsius. These jets are ejected from the center of galaxy, implicating the super-heat extend at its surface that it boils and spews dust and gas to extend farther outside the EH. Light cannot penetrate these dense gas and dust but only the surface thereof, thus the interior is black hole? because light cannot penetrate. But all other electro-magnetic spectrum, of which light belongs, can penetrate, X-ray, radio, etc. and can reflect info there is the giant object inside shrouded by dust and gas the making of its own self!! That there is that reflected info from the core or black hole itself proves electro-magnetic spectrum, of which light belongs, escapes!!!.
.jose s. aldea
Physicist
Roxas City
January 31, 2019…
-
NASA has better things to do.
I'm not sure who you mean by EHT.
You say it's "boiling".
To do that it must be liquid.
What liquid do you think it is made from?
-
If you want a comment from NASA, then this is the wrong place to post this.
Thanks to LIGO and VIRGO, we know that black holes exist because of their unique gravitational wave signature.
-
1n 2017, finally detected in super-collision of two black holes and confirmed repeatedly that the speed of gravitational waves and light are the same , 360,000miles per sec., . Why the same? It is because both electro-magnetic waves and ight are the function of the medium, called spacetime! But can such gravitational waves of clashing black holes cause ripples of spacetime that can reach earch after billions of light years travel. It cannot be. Here is the proof: A magnet has attraction that stretches limitedly, The sun has attraction gravity that diminishes in outer space limitedly. In like4 manner, gravitational waves which requires super-collision to cause ripples on frame of spacetime has the same limited stretch. But. Light, on the other hand, is constant, it just flows, effortlessly, no need of super-collisions. In outer space, it stretches far, far out in space, even a billion light years away, to reach earth and be seen in astronomical telescope. That detected gravitational waves, “chirp” sound, is not the making of gravitational waves…it is the making of light, that sound and image, for gravitational waves cannot travel that billion of light years to reach earth! Another proof that light escapes from the supposed black hole Jsaldea12 Feb. 11, 2019
-
Please permit further clarification. Light is the carrier of image and sound tht reachs earth, like in TVs., not gravitational waves. jsaldea12.
-
1n 2017, finally detected in super-collision of two black holes and confirmed repeatedly that the speed of gravitational waves and light are the same , 360,000miles per sec.,
Not even close. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second.
Why the same?
Because both are generated by massless fields.
It is because both electro-magnetic waves and ight are the function of the medium, called spacetime!
Citation needed.
But can such gravitational waves of clashing black holes cause ripples of spacetime that can reach earch after billions of light years travel.
Yes.
It cannot be.
And yet it is.
Here is the proof: A magnet has attraction that stretches limitedly,
No it doesn't. The strength of a magnetic field varies according to the inverse cube law. The attraction between two magnets will drop exponentially as the distance between them increases. Eventually, the attraction is so weak that you won't be able to feel it with your hands. It is, however, still there.
The sun has attraction gravity that diminishes in outer space limitedly.
Also wrong. Gravity obeys the inverse square law. It gets weaker with distance but the strength never falls to zero.
In like4 manner, gravitational waves which requires super-collision to cause ripples on frame of spacetime has the same limited stretch.
Nope. See the previous answer.
But. Light, on the other hand, is constant, it just flows, effortlessly, no need of super-collisions. In outer space, it stretches far, far out in space, even a billion light years away, to reach earth and be seen in astronomical telescope.
Light obeys the inverse square law as well. It falls off at the exact same rate as gravitational strength and electric field strength. A source of light does appear dimmer as distances increase from the source.
That detected gravitational waves, “chirp” sound, is not the making of gravitational waves…it is the making of light, that sound and image, for gravitational waves cannot travel that billion of light years to reach earth!
This demonstrates that you have no idea how LIGO and VIRGO operate. They detect gravitational waves by measuring the compressing and stretching of two laser beams set at right angles to each other. A gravitational wave will cause one beam to stretch while compressing the other simultaneously. This is a trait unique to gravitational waves. Electromagnetic waves cannot do this.
Another proof that light escapes from the supposed black hole Jsaldea12 Feb. 11, 2019
A "proof" based on faulty information. I strongly doubt that you are an actual physicist.
-
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Here are jsa12 responses:
Jsaldea12:1n 2017, finally detected in super-collision of two black holes and confirmed repeatedly that the speed of gravitational waves and light are the same , 360,000miles per sec.,
Quote:: Not even close. The speed of light is 186,000 miles per second.
Jsaldea12: Yes, 186,000 miles per sec. ( I black out!)
Quote::Because both are generated by massless fields.
Jsaldea12: That massless field is no other than the frame of spacetime
Ijsaldea12: is because both electro-magnetic waves and light are the function of the medium,
Quore:Citation needed.
jsaldea12: Don’t you know that light has a medium called spacetime and gravitational waves is also the ripple of spacetime. There is nothing in the unverse that is not occupied by spacetime. Meaning space itself has frames.!..
Quote
Jsaldea12But can such gravitational waves of clashing black holes cause ripples of spacetime that can reach earch after billions of light years trave?l.
Quote Yes.
Jsa: It cannot be.
quote :And yet it is.
Jsa: Here is the proof: A magnet has attraction that stretches limitedly,
Quote: No it doesn't. The strength of a magnetic field varies according to the inverse cube law. The attraction between two magnets will drop exponentially as the distance between them increases. Eventually, the attraction is so weak that you won't be able to feel it with your hands. It is, however, still there.
Jsa: EXACTLY
Jsa:The sun has attraction gravity that diminishes in outer space limitedly.
Quote Also wrong. Gravity obeys the inverse square law. It gets weaker with distance but the strength never falls to zero.
jsa: The longe the travel, the weaker and weaker gravity until it cannot be felt anymore.
Quote In like manner, gravitational waves which requires super-collision to cause ripples on frame of spacetime has the same limited stretch.
Jsa: Yes
Quote Nope. See the previous answer.
jsa: O yes.
Quote: But. Light, on the other hand, is constant, it just flows, effortlessly, no need of super-collisions. In outer space, it stretches far, far out in space, even a billion light years away, to reach earth and be seen in astronomical telescope.
quote:Light obeys the inverse square law as well. It falls off at the exact same rate as gravitational strength and electric field strength. A source of light does appear dimmer as distances increase from the source.
jsa: No, gravitational waves requires super-strong collision to create ripples., light just flows effortlessly..
jsa: That detected gravitational waves, “chirp” sound, is not the making of gravitational waves…it is the making of light, that sound and image, for gravitational waves cannot travel that billion of light years to reach earth!
Quote:This demonstrates that you have no idea how LIGO and VIRGO operate. They detect gravitational waves by measuring the compressing and stretching of two laser beams set at right angles to each other. A gravitational wave will cause one beam to stretch while compressing the other simultaneously. This is a trait unique to gravitational waves. Electromagnetic waves cannot do this.
jsa: I know LIGO, just as I know Michelson-Morley experiment. LIGO operates on the same principle , only LIGO applies/ works further to space measurement of gravitatiorial wave..
Jsa: Another proof that light escapes from the supposed black hole Jsaldea12 Feb. 11, 2019
quote::A "proof" based on faulty information. I strongly doubt that you are an actually a physicist.
Jsa: That the detected, confirmed speed of gravitational waves has the same speed of light of 186,000 does not mean ALL THE WAY, GRAVITATIONA WAVES CAN MAINTAIN,SUSTAIN SUCH STRENGTH that can reach earth after billion of years travel. But light has CONSTANT SPEED, very capable of surmounting such distance to reach earth. That detected “chirp” sound, by gravitational waves, was caused at the start of clash of two black holes..some billion light years BEFORE that arrives only now on earth and as captured by astronomical telescope. Only light is the carrier of images, videos, and sound, NOT gravitational waves. Jsa 2.11.19
But we are deviating from the subject: the dust and gas enveoping black hole is the making of the supposed black hole.
-
That the detected, confirmed speed of gravitational waves has the same speed of light of 186,000 does not mean ALL THE WAY, GRAVITATIONA WAVES CAN MAINTAIN,SUSTAIN SUCH STRENGTH that can reach earth after billion of years travel. But light has CONSTANT SPEED
Putting it in CAPITAL LETTERS does not make it true.
Also, why do you write this at the bottom of your posts?
.jose s. aldea
Physicist
Roxas City
It's pretty clear that you are not a physicist by any worthwhile definition.
-
That gravitational waves is the signature of black hole? It takes a supra-energy release of two clashing supposed black hole to extract such ripples called gravitational waves . Just how extremely difficult is that to create that kind of waves is unimaginable.Thus, how can such supra- tight ripples sustain and reach earth after , say, 10 billion light years. But the question is how can that gravitational waves be the signature of black hole, just because it speeds off, with light, as detected at the supra- heat jets emanating from the center of super-galaxy, where the supposed black hole resides. The supra-jets on both sides of the super galaxy means simply there is a very dense giant object at the center with inherent positive and negative , like earth, sun, with north and south poles , that is supra-boiling that it manifests such supra-boiling at the surface, spewing dust and gas that entirely covers up that large boiling object in the center of super-galaxy, but because of the cover-up dust and gas, that object cannot be seen by visible light, thus it is invisible? No, it is not invisible, just entirely clothed by dust and gas, it is not black hole. jsa 2.12.19
-
Light interacts with matter through the electromagnetic force.
Gravity interacts with matter through the gravitational force.
Gravity is about 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000 times weaker than the electromagnetic force.
So, if light can get across galaxies without getting stopped by something in the way, why don't you think that gravity can?
Obviously, because gravity is so weak (a fly can overcome the gravity of the whole planet), it is hard to detect gravity waves.
Even large complex detectors like LIGO can only spot the signals from truly huge events.
They can see the collision of two black holes.
We know it's two black holes; mainly because nothing else would generate a big enough signal.
Incidentally, NASA is not a member of this forum so they are never going to reply.
-
jsa: The longe the travel, the weaker and weaker gravity until it cannot be felt anymore.
If you understood the inverse square law, you would know that gravitational field strength never goes all the way to zero, regardless the of the distances involved.
Just how extremely difficult is that to create that kind of waves is unimaginable.
This is the argument from incredulity fallacy.
jsa: I know LIGO, just as I know Michelson-Morley experiment. LIGO operates on the same principle , only LIGO applies/ works further to space measurement of gravitatiorial wave..
If you knew how LIGO worked, then you would know that it can't detect light or any other form of electromagnetic radiation.
-
A scientist,, Priyamvada Natarajan, proposed, as early as 2017, “that the gas and dust (enveloping supposed black hole) could be cosmic wind. She theorized black holes could produce a sort of cosmic wind — a hot, fast-moving gas that could drift for thousands of light years and form stars on the edges of galaxies.”.
A number of highly qualified physicists had detected the gas and dust as “fountain” arising from the center of galaxy where black hole resides. But the description of an unnamed UCLA physicist was becoming concrete to identifying that gas and dust ejected from the center of galaxy and return back to the center, and even observed further the gas and dust were blown out straight outward. As observed further by UCLA unnamed physicist, something like this: “ detected beneath the dust and gas is giant physical object, not the traditional black hole on which light cannot escape, but that matter tha comes close to the object will be sucked in never to come out. He is closest to reality. I believe there are many other physicists who think otherwise the concept of black hole is not right..
This revelation of undersigned that the dust and gas enveloping supposed black hole is nothing but its own making: the core, where supposed black hole resides, is simply boiling billion to trillion Celsius interiorly, and expelling to the surface boiling evaorating dust and gas that returns back to the surface of the supposed black hole. This revelation is not a small matter, NASA, EHT, and other astrophysics have no reason to ignore.
…. About the gravitational waves detected by Laser Interferometer Gravitational Observatory (LIGO). Respected LEGO uses laser, concentrated light, to detect the “chirp” sound, “ as converted from electro-magnetic data”, and input to photo detector. All the process. from detection of interference of light to conversion to sound “ chirp” , involves the making of electro-magnetic spectrum, especially visible light, because. light is the visible carrier of image and sound. Jsaldea12 Feb..12, 2019.
-
…. About the gravitational waves detected by Laser Interferometer Gravitational Observatory (LIGO). Respected LEGO uses laser, concentrated light, to detect the “chirp” sound, “ as converted from electro-magnetic data”, and input to photo detector. All the process. from detection of interference of light to conversion to sound “ chirp” , involves the making of electro-magnetic spectrum, especially visible light, because. light is the visible carrier of image and sound. Jsaldea12 Feb..12, 2019.
Yes, it detects the laser light that the machine itself produces. It can't detect light from astronomical sources (the pipes that the laser beams are sent through are underground). Again, light doesn't mimic the stretch-strain signature of a gravitational wave anyhow, so if a foreign light signal did somehow get through, the scientists observing would know it.
-
She theorized black holes could produce a sort of cosmic wind — a hot, fast-moving gas that could drift for thousands of light years and form stars on the edges of galaxies.”.
Prove that she said that.
All the process. from detection of interference of light to conversion to sound “ chirp” , involves the making of electro-magnetic spectrum, especially visible light, because. light is the visible carrier of image and sound.
No.
You are simply wrong.
The detection process is that the gravity wave moves some lumps of metal.
The lasers + stuff measure that movement, but they are lasers based inside the machine.
Glad to see you stopped lying about being a physicist.
-
i am a natural scientisat- inventor. How can you explain this statement from LIGO itself::
."LIGO has detected both merging black holes and merging neutron stars, and the differences in their signals is quite striking. As expected, LIGO's first black hole merger detection produced a signal just two-tenths of a second long! The signal was converted from electromagnetic data into an audible sound we call a "chirp".. Note "THE SIGNAL WAS CONVERTED FROM MAGNETIC DATA INTO AN AUDIBLE SOUND WE CALL A "CHIRP". Something you miss to know:: there is nothing, nothing in matter, planets, stars, galaxies, even all occupying spacetime, without inherent positive and negative. property... Spacetime is real with unseparated positive and negative. But as communications are transmitted from radio, TV, satellites, s through the air, through SPACETIME, such transmissions are separated into positive and negative, otherwise no radio, no TV, no internet..
Reiterating, it is the too dense dust and gas that envelops supposed holes that makes it invisible but it is not invisible, it is just that light can only contact the surface, the surface which is the clothing all over dust ahd gas. Without that dust and gas, that supposed black hole is bare, just like the visible planets, the stars. THERE IS NO BLACK HOLE. jsaldea12. Feb. 12,.2019.
-
Adding: both gravitational waves and light are the function of spacetime. jsa
-
i am a natural scientisat- inventor
It is pretty obvious from your posts that you are not any kind of scientist. Your grammar and spelling is also appalling.
-
I have proven to you by my posts what a genuine physicist is, not depending but original like Newton, like Einstein. By now you know me. Do you agree that gravitational waves and light waves are the function, the making of spacetime.? That there is nothing in this universe without positive and negative property? Even you have such inate property. Both male and female, each, is endowed with positive and negative property. jsa FEB. 12, 2019
-
I have proven to you by my posts what a genuine physicist is, not depending but original like Newton, like Einstein. By now you know me. Do you agree that gravitational waves and light waves are the function, the making of spacetime.? That there is nothing in this universe without positive and negative property? Even you have such inate property. Both male and female, each, is endowed with positive and negative property. jsa FEB. 12, 2019
I have proven to you by my posts what a genuine physicist is, not depending but original like Newton, like Einstein.
No you havent. You do realise the Newton and Einstein didnt just think up their ideas out of thin air do you? They had a good understanding of what went before. This is the problem with people like you, you compare yourselves to great physicists claiming you are 'original', but are to lazy to actually do the hard work of learning the subject first. All you have proved is your foolishness.
-
Note "THE SIGNAL WAS CONVERTED FROM MAGNETIC DATA INTO AN AUDIBLE SOUND WE CALL A "CHIRP"
The electromagnetic data they speak of is from the laser beam in the apparatus.
-
Where did that electronic beam get its source. jsa 2.13.19
-
Where did that electronic beam get its source. jsa 2.13.19
There is a laser in the apparatus that produces the laser beam. What is being measured are changes in the laser beam.
-
Request response..Reiterating, it is the too dense dust and gas that envelops supposed black holes hole that makes it invisible but it is not invisible, it is just that light can only contact the surface, the surface which is the clothing all over dust ahd gas. Without that dust and gas, that supposed black hole is bare, just like the visible planets, the stars. THERE IS NO BLACK HOLE. jsaldea12. Feb. 12,.2019.
-
See, concentratee LIGHT, laser, is being used., NOT only in the apparatus.
-
See, concentratee LIGHT, laser, is being used., NOT only in the apparatus.
It is difficult for me to understand what you are trying to say. Are you suggesting that laser beams come from outer space now? Or that LIGO, despite having its sensors sealed away from the outside world inside of steel tubes, can somehow detect light from cosmological sources light-years away?
Here is an important quote about LIGO from https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/page/what-is-ligo:
LIGO is blind. Unlike optical or radio telescopes, LIGO cannot see electromagnetic radiation (e.g., visible light, radio waves, microwaves) nor does it have to because gravitational waves are not part of the electromagnetic spectrum. In fact, electromagnetic radiation from space is so unimportant to LIGO that its detector components are completely isolated and sheltered from the outside world.
-
But does not gravitational waves has INHERENT POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PROPERTY, SPACETIME HAS POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PRPERTY, NEUTRINOS HAS POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PROPERTY. Gravitational waves and light waves are both ripples on skein of all-occipying spacetime with inherent positive and negative property, inherent since emanation or creation/construcction of the universe... That laser is being used in astronomical LIGO telescope to capture colliding black hole, as well as in underground 4 kilometers vacuum arms, is very cleaar that laser, light, is very instrumental in capturing that "chirp" sound. Without laser, can we capture that "chirp"? Or could it be that "cirp" is the signature of gravitational waves, separate from light waves but using light as carrier of that sound. Regards.
But please answer my query too: That dust and gas that completely envelops supposed black hole makes it invisible, but it is INVISIBLE as al the dlectro-amgnetic spectrum, X-ray, radio ray, etc. can penetrate ahd detect there is that giant object, super boiling inside that its super-energetic boiling is manifested in its surface, like a boiling water that evaporates, only instead of H2O, gas and dust boils and is expelled.., that this expelled gas and dust extends far into space, farther than the barrier EH, and when it cools at that far distance as outer space is super-cool, the dust and gas cools and is sucked back by the gravitational force of the giant object. That the dust and gas is expelled farrther than the barrier EH proves light can escape very well the supposed black hole. Repeating: THERE IS NO BLACK HOLE !!! jsa 2.13.19.
-
Correction:But please answer my query too: That dust and gas that completely envelops supposed black hole that makes it invisible, but it IS NOT INVISIBLE as all the electro-amgnetic spectrum, X-ray, radio ray, etc. can penetrate ahd detect there is that giant object, super boiling inside that its super-energetic boiling is manifested in its surface, like a boiling water that evaporates, only instead of H2O, it is gas and dust that boils and is expelled.., that this expelled gas and dust extends far into space, farther than the barrier EH, and when it cools at that far distance as outer space is super-cool, the dust and gas cools and is sucked back by the gravitational force of the giant object. That the dust and gas is expelled farrther than the barrier EH proves that light can escape very well the supposed black hole. Repeating: THERE IS NO BLACK HOLE !!! jsa 2.13.19.
-
But does not gravitational waves has INHERENT POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PROPERTY,
Since they are waves, I suppose you could say that they have positive or negative amplitude at certain points.
SPACETIME HAS POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PRPERTY
I don't know what this would mean.
NEUTRINOS HAS POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE PROPERTY.
You mean by the fact that they have antiparticles?
Gravitational waves and light waves are both ripples on skein of all-occipying spacetime with inherent positive and negative property, inherent since emanation or creation/construcction of the universe...
Gravitational waves certainly are, but I know of no experiments that have demonstrated that to be true of light. It would be better to say that light represents "ripples" in the electromagnetic field.
That laser is being used in astronomical LIGO telescope to capture colliding black hole, as well as in underground 4 kilometers vacuum arms, is very cleaar that laser, light, is very instrumental in capturing that "chirp" sound. Without laser, can we capture that "chirp"? Or could it be that "cirp" is the signature of gravitational waves, separate from light waves but using light as carrier of that sound. Regards.
Yes, but none of that has anything to do with light coming from cosmological sources.
But please answer my query too: That dust and gas that completely envelops supposed black hole makes it invisible, but it is INVISIBLE as al the dlectro-amgnetic spectrum, X-ray, radio ray, etc. can penetrate ahd detect there is that giant object, super boiling inside that its super-energetic boiling is manifested in its surface, like a boiling water that evaporates, only instead of H2O, gas and dust boils and is expelled.., that this expelled gas and dust extends far into space, farther than the barrier EH, and when it cools at that far distance as outer space is super-cool, the dust and gas cools and is sucked back by the gravitational force of the giant object. That the dust and gas is expelled farrther than the barrier EH proves light can escape very well the supposed black hole.
Light emitted outside of the event horizon (by hot matter in the accretion disk) can escape, of course. That's because it isn't actually inside of the black hole.
Repeating: THERE IS NO BLACK HOLE !!!
Repeating that won't make it correct.
-
Light emitted outside of the event horizon (by hot matter in the accretion disk) can escape, of course. That's because it isn't actually inside of the black hole? jsaldea12
-
Sorry, pneumonia is getting not good.
-
Sorry, pneumonia is getting not good.
I am sorry to hear that you are ill. I'm sure everyone here thinks the same.
I wish you a speedy recovery. In the meantime, I recommend that you don't waste your energy on posting here, but focus it on getting well instead.
-
Getting well.
Please this is not without respect to LIGO Team, just to clarify and give better understanding. .About the laser interferometer of LIGO on two arm tubes on tunnel some 4 km. long. It is exhausted of air , vacuummed, "blind" so that no cosmic rays, noise, etc. for instance, can interfer with the laser beam, is this not? Perhaps a respected LIGO scientist can . But that vacuumed tubes is not not pefectly vacuum, it still contain frame of eall-inclusive spacetime which has positive and negative property.
The4 dust and gas that completely surrounds supposed black hole, all black holes without exception, does not come from outside accretion the galaxy. . It comes from the center of supposed black hole, it is not accretion.. The accretion period is over, the galaxies are settled,as evidenced by billions of settled stars rotating the galaxies. See? Refer to my elaborate explanations in this forum what and why is there that cover=up dust and gas that is the making of said black hole, .. that glow as they completely envelops supposed black hole. Need to repeat. Conclusion is same: There is no black hole that is invisible and no light can escape. josaldea12 . Feb..14,.2019 ..
-
I see what that “blind “ means in LIGO. It appears like this: In conjunction with the utilization of two distant laser interferometers , 2,000 miles apart, pointing to same colliding black hole, a double blind fake interfering is injected, like placebo in medicine. .later on wshen magnetic data is gathered, the result is compared, selected the genuine gravitational waves from the placebo. . But this is not main point, neither is the fact that gravitational waves can be detected by X-ray, light, radio etc. The main point is that in ejected super-jets from supposed black hole, both light and gravitational waves move at speed of light, hand in hand!!! not against one another. It agrees with the unwritten law of physics that is impliedly stated: where there is fire, there is light, the bigger the fire, proportionately the bigger the light, in outer space, the bigger the fire ball of super-galaxy, the greater the light it produces that can travel billions of light years capable of reaching earth, not the light from the secondary source, glowing dust and gas, but that light from the primary source, that core, supposed black hole.. Thus, that the gravitational waves and light, hand in hand, escapes supposed black hole is one empirical evidence that there is no black hole that is invisible, and no light can escape. xxx Jsaldea Feb. 14, 2019 xxx
-
NASA and EHT are not responding.
Regards to you all jsaldea12 Feb 16, 2019
-
NASA and EHT are not responding.
Regards to you all jsaldea12 Feb 16, 2019
If you want them to respond you need to contact them directly.
-
I contact them through e-mails. Will try again. Hoping postively response..through my e-mail or through Naked forum. jsadea12 Feb.16, 2019
-
I contact them through e-mails. Will try again. Hoping postively response..through my e-mail or through Naked forum. jsadea12 Feb.16, 2019
As has been stated before, NASA will not respond via Naked Science forum. Do you seriously think that they will?
-
NASA
Thru contact:Sheryl.E.Baca@nasa.gov,
Dear Ms. Baca:
Please click
on: https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=76107.0
Re-Inviting comments from NASA, EHT on contention no black hole exists.
REITERATING, would appreciate comments from NASA.
Thank you. Regards.
Very truly yours,
Jose s. aldea
Roxas City, Philippines
2.16.19
"
It is dissapointing that the unquesttionably qualified directly involved " Event Horizon Team" blocked my e-mail.
If this revelation of undersigned is just ordinary, it is OK, but it is a very big matter: contention: No black hole exists. Let them respond. jsa Feb. 17, 2019
-
So, you spammed NASA.
Why did you think that was a good idea?If this revelation of undersigned is just ordinary
It's not a "revelation", it's a mistake.
Let them respond.
They responded; by ignoring + blocking you.
-
Trying to tackle the intriguing issue whether black hole is real because IT is ACTUAL is one of the biggest challenge in modern astronomy.. Surely EHT, NASA, as well as other respected astronomical societies have read in passing the brief posting (re-Inviting comments from NASA, EHT that Black hole is just a super- giant boiling object in space…) which Naked Science, kindly, posted in Google. I have presented, cannot be ignored, evidences after evidences why there is no black hole which no light can escape, thus, is invisible. Hope you will re-post that article forum to Google. (Again regards and thank you for being concerned when undersigned was sick. But now, he is recovering, hope so) Jsaldea12 feb. 17, 2019
-
I have presented, cannot be ignored, evidences after evidences why there is no black hole which no light can escape, thus, is invisible.
No, you did not.
-
Trying to tackle the intriguing issue whether black hole is real because IT is ACTUAL is one of the biggest challenge in modern astronomy.. Surely EHT, NASA, as well as other respected astronomical societies have read in passing the brief posting (re-Inviting comments from NASA, EHT that Black hole is just a super- giant boiling object in space…) which Naked Science, kindly, posted in Google. I have presented, cannot be ignored, evidences after evidences why there is no black hole which no light can escape, thus, is invisible. Hope you will re-post that article forum to Google. (Again regards and thank you for being concerned when undersigned was sick. But now, he is recovering, hope so) Jsaldea12 feb. 17, 2019
Do you honestly think they monitor google and this site so they can respond to the ideas of some crank?
-
Can you repute the proofs/ evidences I presented? It is just that it is hard to accept the truth. there is no black hole. jsaldea12 Feb. 17, 2019
-
Can you repute the proofs/ evidences I presented? It is just that it is hard to accept the truth. there is no black hole. jsaldea12 Feb. 17, 2019
Due to your English, I can barely understand what you are trying to present. It seems pretty clear from what you have written and from your replies to Kryptid's helpful information, that you do not understand how LIGO actually works.
-
...which Naked Science, kindly, posted in Google.
So, you also don't know how Google works.
Wouldn't it be better if you stopped posting stuff until you actually learned how things work?
-
Can you repute the proofs/ evidences I presented?
We already have. LIGO unambiguously detected the collisions of black holes.
-
Why do you say that the detected speed of gravitational waves and light waves, both with electro-magnetic property, on ejected super heated jets of super-galaxies are the same, and if both are detected , how do LIGO re- assure that both have same speed of light. Final query: why do you say that the same speed of gravitational waves and light waves affirm black hole. LIGO never said that .. jsaldea Feb. 18, 2019.
-
How LIGO works? I KNOW!!! jsaldea12Feb. 18, 2019.
-
Why do you say that the detected speed of gravitational waves and light waves, both with electro-magnetic property,
When were gravitational waves ever demonstrated by experiment to have electromagnetic properties? Please don't try to use your own hypotheses as evidence, because they aren't.
on ejected super heated jets of super-galaxies are the same, and if both are detected , how do LIGO re- assure that both have same speed of light.
There are multiple detectors involved. Measuring the difference in time involved between detection at one site and another site allows for calculation of speed.
Final query: why do you say that the same speed of gravitational waves and light waves affirm black hole. LIGO never said that ..
LIGO never said that and neither did I. It's the particular pattern that the gravitational waves exhibited that demonstrate that black holes are what produced them. I have a book on this subject written by Kip Thorne from 1994 that describes what a signal from a black hole merger would like if detected by a gravitational wave detector. So we have known for quite some time exactly what it would look like.
-
It was respected Forum King Kriptid who said: “Thanks to LIGO and VIRGO, we know that black holes exist because of their unique gravitational wave signayure” . Nevertheless both have inherent positive and negative property, the same inherent positive and negative property of spacetime. Reiterating, transmission of radio signals, TVs signals, thru the air, thru undivided property of spacetime but upon receptions by antennas, directly to internet cables, etc. both positive and negative separate otherwise no radio, no tv, no internet. Astronomical telescopes from two separate places, 2,000 miles away, provide the data, feed it to laser interferometers underground tunnels, arms,some 2,000 miles long, completely emptied of air, thus vacuumed The point is all the way after astronomical telescope pick up the collision of galaxiy, to the arms of interferometers, to photo detector, light is being used, laser. Because light waves and gravitational waves are the function, the making of waves on the fabric of spacetime and inside the arms of laser interferometers, is the all-encompassing fabric of spacetime.. But why does the super-jets, super-heated,jettisoned from super-galaxy become the signature of black hole. Because of super-compaction, super-gravitational force exerted to eject that jet.? But the SAME giant object, not a supposed black hole, can eject same jets!! . Jsaldea12 feb. 18, 2019.
By the way, I knew respected Dr. Kip Thorne, unfortunately, he never responded, just received..
.. : .
-
It was respected Forum King Kriptid who said:
Forum titles here are automatically given based on post count. If you are implying that I am calling myself a "forum king", then you are mistaken.
Nevertheless both have inherent positive and negative property, the same inherent positive and negative property of spacetime.
I'm sure I've asked this before, but what are these positive and negative properties you are talking about?
Astronomical telescopes from two separate places, 2,000 miles away, provide the data, feed it to laser interferometers underground tunnels
You've got it backwards. The interferometers are providing the data.
arms,some 2,000 miles long, completely emptied of air, thus vacuumed
The arms are not 2,000 miles long. They are only 4 kilometers long.
The point is all the way after astronomical telescope pick up the collision of galaxiy
They aren't detecting the collision of galaxies, they detecting the collisions of neutron stars and black holes.
Because light waves and gravitational waves are the function, the making of waves on the fabric of spacetime
You have yet to establish that light waves are function of the fabric of space-time.
But why does the super-jets, super-heated,jettisoned from super-galaxy become the signature of black hole.
They aren't the signature of the black holes that LIGO is detecting.
But the SAME giant object, not a supposed black hole, can eject same jets!!
That has nothing at all to do with LIGO's gravitational wave detections so it's irrelevant.
-
By the way, I knew respected Dr. Kip Thorne, unfortunately, he never responded, just received.
Have you realised why he did that?
-
Let us stick to issue: Why do you say that the collision of two black hole is proof of existence of black hole? jsaldea12 Fedb. 20, 2019
-
Ah forget my grammar, just read between the lines.. jsaldea
-
Why do you say that the collision of two black hole is proof of existence of black hole?
Because, if they did not exist, they could not collide.
How did you not understand that obvious fact?
-
It is pretty obvious from your posts that you are not any kind of scientist. Your grammar and spelling is also appalling.
Did you mean "Your grammar and spelling is are also appalling"
It's really not the issue.
The problem isn't grammar, the problem is comprehensibility.
-
Let us stick to issue: Why do you say that the collision of two black hole is proof of existence of black hole? jsaldea12 Fedb. 20, 2019
You can read what lead LIGO to conclude it was a black hole merger here: https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1602/1602.03837.pdf
Here are some quotes of interest from the paper:
The signal sweeps upwards in frequency from 35 to 250 Hz with a peak gravitational-wave strain of 1.0 × 10−21. It matches the waveform predicted by general relativity for the inspiral and merger of a pair of black holes and the ringdown of the resulting single black hole. Over 0.2 s, the signal increases in frequency and amplitude in about 8 cycles from 35 to 150 Hz, where the amplitude reaches a maximum. The most plausible explanation for this evolution is the inspiral of two orbiting masses, m1 and m2, due to gravitational-wave emission.
The basic features of GW150914 point to it being produced by the coalescence of two black holes—i.e., their orbital inspiral and merger, and subsequent final black hole ringdown.
Estimating f and f_ from the data in Fig. 1, we obtain a chirp mass of M ≃ 30M⊙, implying that the total mass M ¼ m1 þ m2 is ≳70M⊙ in the detector frame. This bounds the sum of the Schwarzschild radii of the binary components to 2GM=c2 ≳ 210 km. To reach an orbital frequency of 75 Hz (half the gravitational-wave frequency) the objects must have been very close and very compact; equal Newtonian point masses orbiting at this frequency would be only ≃350 km apart. A pair of neutron stars, while compact, would not have the required mass, while a black hole neutron star binary with the deduced chirp mass would have a very large total mass, and would thus merge at much lower frequency. This leaves black holes as the only known objects compact enough to reach an orbital frequency of 75 Hz without contact. Furthermore, the decay of the waveform after it peaks is consistent with the damped oscillations of a black hole relaxing to a final stationary Kerr configuration.
The LIGO detectors have observed gravitational waves from the merger of two stellar-mass black holes. The detected waveform matches the predictions of general relativity for the inspiral and merger of a pair of black holes and the ringdown of the resulting single black hole. These observations demonstrate the existence of binary stellar-mass black hole systems. This is the first direct detection of gravitational waves and the first observation of a binary black hole merger.
Kip S. Thorne had this to say about gravitational waves coming from a black hole merger in his book "Black Holes and Time Warps", published in 1994:
If we can decipher it, the ripples' symphony will contain a wealth of information:
The symphony will contain a signature that says, "I come from a pair of black holes that are spiraling together and coalescing." This will be the kind of absolutely unequivocal black-hole signature that astronomers thus far have searched for in vain using light and X-rays (Chapter 8 ) and radio waves (Chapter 9). Because the light, X-rays and radio waves are produced far outside a hole's horizon, and because they are emitted by a type of material (hot, high-speed electrons) that is completely different from that of which the hole is made (pure spacetime curvature), and because they can be strongly distorted by propagating through intervening matter, they can bring us but little information about the hole, and no definitive signature. The ripples of curvature (gravitational waves), by contrast, are produced very near the coalescing holes' horizons, they are made of the same material (a warpage of the fabric of spacetime) as the holes, they are not distorted at all by propagating through intervening matter- and, as a consequence, they can bring us detailed information about the holes and an unequivocal black-hole signature.
-
Correction: The arm length, each, of LIGO is 4 kilometers. Forget that remark with respected Dr. Kip Thorne.
Respected EHT has not yet made an official statement whether that object at the core of Milky Way is truly invisible that light annot escape.
Here iare further evidences: That the blown out fire-blast dust and gas, originating from the boiling core of Milky Way, extends far out from the limitng EH, proves it escapes with light. That the speed of light and gravity are the same , both, goes, hand in hand, ourtward into space is emperical evidence of the unwritten law of physics which states where there is fire, there is light... jsa 2.22.19
-
Respected EHT has not yet made an official statement whether that object at the core of Milky Way is truly invisible that light annot escape.
So what is your contention, exactly? That black holes do not exist or merely the lesser claim that the object at the center of the Milky Way (Sagittarius A*) is not a black hole?
That the blown out fire-blast dust and gas, originating from the boiling core of Milky Way, extends far out from the limitng EH, proves it escapes with light.
What evidence do you have that it came from inside of the event horizon?
-
Do read all my postings why the dust and gas completely covering supposed black hole is itself the making of that supposed black hole.!! Nearly all the photos shown in the internets showing black holes at the center of galaxies are artist perspective. All galaxies , actual, have total dust and gas covering all over centers of galaxies. No matter how more EHT will add more astronomical telescopes, to get higher resolutions, they will always see actual image of gas and dusts., why because light is the carrier of image and informations, and light can not penetrate the dust and gas!!!.
In 2004, Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne had arguments because Hawking declared no EH and Throne contends there is. Jsa 2.23.19
-
Do read all my postings why the dust and gas completely covering supposed black hole is itself the making of that supposed black hole.!! Nearly all the photos shown in the internets showing black holes at the center of galaxies are artist perspective. All galaxies , actual, have total dust and gas covering all over centers of galaxies.
So then you are talking about the supermassive black holes at the center of galaxies, not the stellar-mass black holes detected with LIGO and VIRGO.
No matter how more EHT will add more astronomical telescopes, to get higher resolutions, they will always see actual image of gas and dusts., why because light is the carrier of image and informations, and light can not penetrate the dust and gas!!!.
So if the Event Horizon Telescope does publish images showing the event horizon, what will you say about that?
In 2004, Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne had arguments because Hawking declared no EH and Throne contends there is. Jsa 2.23.19
All Hawking did was replace an absolute horizon with an apparent horizon, the latter of which can fluctuate to allow Hawking radiation to carry information away about what went into the black hole. That Hawking radiation is still extremely weak, so it cannot be what creates the jets.
-
Please permit me to post:Do read all my postings why the dust and gas completely covering supposed black hole is itself the making of that supposed black hole.!! Nearly all the photos shown in the internets showing black holes at the center of galaxies are artist perspective. All galaxies , actual, have total dust and gas covering all over centers of galaxies. No matter how more EHT will add more astronomical telescopes, to get higher resolutions, they will always see actual image of gas and dusts., why because light is the carrier of image and informations, and light can not penetrate the dust and gas!!!.
In 2004, Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne had arguments because Hawking declared no EH and Throne contends there is. Jsa 2.23.19
-
Do read all my postings why the dust and gas completely covering supposed black hole is itself the making of that supposed black hole.!!
Why would I bother?
You can not explain the results from the LIGO experiment without involving black holes (or something very similar).
And since the experiment shows that black holes exist, there's nothing that you could write which would change that fact.
-
because light is the carrier of image and informations,
You can not see a car that is hidden behind a building.
That does not mean the car is not there.
And, even if you can not see it, you may be able to hear it.
So light is not the only carrier of information.
Another information carrier is a gravity wave. And those have brought us evidence of the existence of black holes.
-
Please permit me to post:Do read all my postings why the dust and gas completely covering supposed black hole is itself the making of that supposed black hole.!! Nearly all the photos shown in the internets showing black holes at the center of galaxies are artist perspective. All galaxies , actual, have total dust and gas covering all over centers of galaxies. No matter how more EHT will add more astronomical telescopes, to get higher resolutions, they will always see actual image of gas and dusts., why because light is the carrier of image and informations, and light can not penetrate the dust and gas!!!.
In 2004, Stephen Hawking and Kip Thorne had arguments because Hawking declared no EH and Throne contends there is. Jsa 2.23.19
You already said all of that in post #59...
-
The controversial “Hawking Radiation” that led to the arguments between Hawking and Thorne, and also Preskill, is nothing but that brightened burning gas and dust that completely cover-up the falsely conceived black hole!! That dust and gas its own making because in the first place there is no black hole. Please read all my numerious postings why.. jsa 2.24.19.
-
The controversial “Hawking Radiation” that led to the arguments between Hawking and Thorne, and also Preskill, is nothing but that brightened burning gas and dust that completely cover-up the falsely conceived black hole!!
I see that you do not know what Hawking radiation is. If you did, you would know that around a supermassive black hole it is so weak that the temperature is near absolute zero. So it isn't "brightened, burning gas", it's actually very cold in all cases except for very small black holes.
! That dust and gas its own making because in the first place there is no black hole. Please read all my numerious postings why.. jsa 2.24.19.
Your postings are wrong. LIGO showed them to be wrong when it detected gravitational waves from colliding black holes. I even posted a link to the original paper explaining why those waves had to come from merging black holes.
-
Please do not delete.The controversial “Hawking Radiation” that led to the arguments between Hawking and Thorne, and also Preskill, is nothing but that brightened burning gas and dust that completely cover-up the falsely conceived black hole!! That dust and gas its own making because in the first place there is no black hole. Please read all my numerious postings why.. jsa 2.24.19.
-
Please do not delete.The controversial “Hawking Radiation” that led to the arguments between Hawking and Thorne, and also Preskill, is nothing but that brightened burning gas and dust that completely cover-up the falsely conceived black hole!! That dust and gas its own making because in the first place there is no black hole. Please read all my numerious postings why.. jsa 2.24.19.
You already said all of this in post #65. And it's all still wrong.
-
Quoted: I see that you do not know what Hawking radiation is. If you did, you would know that around a supermassive black hole it is so weak that the temperature is near absolute zero. So it isn't "brightened, burning gas", it's actually very cold in all cases except for very small black holes.
Jsaldea: Wrong. Hre is proof:That ejected jet as jettisoned from interior of super-galaxy is super heated gas and dust. This super-heated dust and gas is squeezed from the interior of core of super-galaxy due to its super gravity. It cools when its jettison extend several light years at almost or 1/3 the speed of light. FEB 24.
Quoted:Your postings are wrong. LIGO showed them to be wrong when it detected gravitational waves from colliding black holes. I even posted a link to the original paper explaining why those waves had to come from merging black holes
Jsaldea12:That the colliding false black holes was detected creates ripples of gravitational waves … does not mean it affirms black hole. By the way, just think, light easily creates waves on skein of spacetime and it takes very tremendous pressure, takes collision of false black holes to do that, it implies, gravity is short-range, obeys the law of inverse while light does not. FEB. 24, 2019
-
Jsaldea: Wrong. Hre is proof:That ejected jet as jettisoned from interior of super-galaxy is super heated gas and dust. This super-heated dust and gas is squeezed from the interior of core of super-galaxy due to its super gravity. It cools when its jettison extend several light years at almost or 1/3 the speed of light. FEB 24.
How is that proof that it is the same thing as Hawking radiation? It's not even remotely similar.
Jsaldea12:That the colliding false black holes was detected creates ripples of gravitational waves … does not mean it affirms black hole.
Of course it does. The LIGO paper even explained why they couldn't be something of a less extreme nature like neutron stars.
By the way, just think, light easily creates waves on skein of spacetime
According to who?
takes collision of false black holes to do that
What is a "false" black hole and how is it different from a real black hole?
implies, gravity is short-range
How?
obeys the law of inverse while light does not. FEB. 24, 2019
Light absolutely does obey the inverse square law. A light source twice as far away appears four times as dim. It falls off at the exact same rate as the force of gravity:
-
The controversial “Hawking Radiation” that led to the arguments between Hawking and Thorne, and also Preskill, is nothing but that brightened burning gas and dust that completely cover-up the falsely conceived black hole!! That dust and gas its own making because in the first place there is no black hole. Please read all my numerious postings why.. jsa 2.24.19.
Quoted: I see that you do not know what Hawking radiation is. If you did, you would know that around a supermassive black hole it is so weak that the temperature is near absolute zero. So it isn't "brightened, burning gas", it's actually very cold in all cases except for very small black holes.
Jsaldea: Wrong. Hre is proof:That ejected jet as jettisoned from interior of super-galaxy is super heated gas and dust. This super-heated dust and gas is squeezed from the interior of core of super-galaxy due to its super gravity. It cools when its jettison extend several light years at almost or 1/3 the speed of light. FEB 24.
Quoted:Your postings are wrong. LIGO showed them to be wrong when it detected gravitational waves from colliding black holes. I even posted a link to the original paper explaining why those waves had to come from merging black holes
Jsaldea12:That the colliding false black holes was detected creates ripples of gravitational waves … does not mean it affirms black hole. By the way, just think, light easily creates waves on skein of spacetime and it takes very tremendous pressure, takes collision of false black holes to do that, it implies, gravity is short-range, obeys the law of inverse while light does not. FEB. 24, 2019
-
So, you still don't understand Hawking radiation.
The stuff you talk about "That ejected jet as jettisoned from interior of super-galaxy is super heated gas and dust. This super-heated dust and gas is squeezed from the interior of core of super-galaxy due to its super gravity. It cools when its jettison extend several light years at almost or 1/3 the speed of light"
Is not Hawking radiation. It's essentially the radiation produced by stuff crashing itnto other stuff as they rush into the hole.
hat the colliding false black holes was detected creates ripples of gravitational waves … does not mean it affirms black hole.
A collision of false black holes would prove nothing.
But the collision of real ones proved that they exist.
" By the way, just think, light easily creates waves on skein of spacetime and it takes very tremendous pressure, takes collision of false black holes to do that, it implies, gravity is short-range, obeys the law of inverse while light does not. "
None of that makes enough sense to comment on.
Please try again.
-
I was referring to light waves and gravitational waves, both as upper layer and bottom layer, respectively, functions of fabric/skein of spacetime. Light waves is easily, effortlessly created, like sailboat, in the upper layer of the fabric of spacetime while the deep-residing gravitational waves (not the ordinary gravity waves), at the bottom of fabric, requires supreme extreme effort, like the collision of supposed black holes, to shake the bottom frame/skein of spacetime. In this case, though both obey the inverse square law but because light dwells at the top layer and the shaking gravitational waves at the bottom layer, light appears to have a wider and longer range of inverse law than gravitational waves. . jsaldea12 feb. 24, 2019..
-
oth as upper layer and bottom layer, respectively, functions of fabric/skein of spacetime.
That seem to be some woo you have invented.
the deep-residing gravitational waves (not the ordinary gravity waves), at the bottom of fabric,
Ditto
ight appears to have a wider and longer range of inverse law than gravitational waves.
Both light and gravity waves have infinite ranges.
-
The controversial “Hawking Radiation” that led to the arguments between Hawking and Thorne, and also Preskill, is nothing but that brightened burning gas and dust that completely cover-up the falsely conceived black hole!! That dust and gas its own making because in the first place there is no black hole. Please read all my numerious postings why.. jsa 2.24.19.
Quoted: I see that you do not know what Hawking radiation is. If you did, you would know that around a supermassive black hole it is so weak that the temperature is near absolute zero. So it isn't "brightened, burning gas", it's actually very cold in all cases except for very small black holes.
Wrong. Hre is proof:That ejected jet as jettisoned from interior of super-galaxy is super heated gas and dust. This super-heated dust and gas is squeezed from the interior of core of super-galaxy due to its super gravity. It super-cools when its jettison extend several light years at almost or 1/3 the speed of light. jsaFEB 24.
Quoted:Your postings are wrong. LIGO showed them to be wrong when it detected gravitational waves from colliding black holes. I even posted a link to the original paper explaining why those waves had to come from merging black holes
That the colliding false black holes was detected creates ripples of gravitational waves … does not mean it affirms black hole. By the way, just think, light easily creates waves on skein of spacetime and it takes very tremendous pressure, takes collision of false black holes to do that, it implies, gravity is short-range, obeys the law of inverse while light does not. jsa FEB. 24, 2019
I was referring to light waves and gravitational waves, both as upper layer and bottom layer, respectively, functions of fabric/skein of spacetime. Light waves is easily, effortlessly created, like sailboat creating waves, in the upper layer of the fabric of spacetime while the deep-residing gravitational waves (like submarine creating waves in deep sea), at the bottom of fabric, requires supra-extreme effort, like the collision of supposed black holes, to shake the bottom fabric/skein of spacetime. In this case, though both obey the inverse square law but because light dwells at the top layer and the shaking gravitational waves at the bottom layer, light appears to have a wider and longer range of inverse law than gravitational waves. . jsaldea12 feb. 24, 2019..
-
The controversial “Hawking Radiation” that led to the arguments between Hawking and Thorne, and also Preskill, is nothing but that brightened burning gas and dust that completely cover-up the falsely conceived black hole!! That dust and gas its own making because in the first place there is no black hole. Please read all my numerious postings why.. jsa 2.24.19.
Quoted: I see that you do not know what Hawking radiation is. If you did, you would know that around a supermassive black hole it is so weak that the temperature is near absolute zero. So it isn't "brightened, burning gas", it's actually very cold in all cases except for very small black holes.
Wrong. Hre is proof:That ejected jet as jettisoned from interior of super-galaxy is super heated gas and dust. This super-heated dust and gas is squeezed from the interior of core of super-galaxy due to its super gravity. It super-cools when its jettison extend several light years at almost or 1/3 the speed of light. jsaFEB 24.
Quoted:Your postings are wrong. LIGO showed them to be wrong when it detected gravitational waves from colliding black holes. I even posted a link to the original paper explaining why those waves had to come from merging black holes
That the colliding false black holes was detected creates ripples of gravitational waves … does not mean it affirms black hole. By the way, just think, light easily creates waves on skein of spacetime and it takes very tremendous pressure, takes collision of false black holes to do that, it implies, gravity is short-range, obeys the law of inverse while light does not. jsa FEB. 24, 2019
I was referring to light waves and gravitational waves, both as upper layer and bottom layer, respectively, functions of fabric/skein of spacetime. Light waves is easily, effortlessly created, like sailboat creating waves, in the upper layer of the fabric of spacetime while the deep-residing gravitational waves (like submarine creating waves in deep sea), at the bottom of fabric, requires supra-extreme effort, like the collision of supposed black holes, to shake the bottom fabric/skein of spacetime. In this case, though both obey the inverse square law but because light dwells at the top layer and the shaking gravitational waves at the bottom layer, light appears to have a wider and longer range of inverse law than gravitational waves. . jsaldea12 feb. 24, 2019..
Why do you keep repeating stuff which has already been shown to be wrong?
-
I was referring to light waves and gravitational waves, both as upper layer and bottom layer, respectively, functions of fabric/skein of spacetime. Light waves is easily, effortlessly created, like sailboat, in the upper layer of the fabric of spacetime while the deep-residing gravitational waves (not the ordinary gravity waves), at the bottom of fabric, requires supreme extreme effort, like the collision of supposed black holes, to shake the bottom frame/skein of spacetime.
Since when did space-time have an "upper layer" or "bottom layer"? What does that even mean? Please link us to some evidence (from a reputable source).
In this case, though both obey the inverse square law but because light dwells at the top layer and the shaking gravitational waves at the bottom layer, light appears to have a wider and longer range of inverse law than gravitational waves. . jsaldea12 feb. 24, 2019..
What does "a wide and longer range of inverse law" even mean? Either something obeys the inverse square law or it doesn't.
-
Please post this, do not delete my posting because at last the argument between Hawking, Thorne, Preskill, is over now. That boiling, evaporating gas and dust that radiate light, that completely cover-up supposed black holeI is NOW finally identified as one and the same. What did Wikipedia says: “Hawking radiation is blackbody radiation that is predicted to be released by black holes, due to quantum effects near the event horizon. It is named after the physicist Stephen Hawking, who provided a theoretical argument for its existence in 1974” Please read between the lines of Hawking .and mine and know the uncanny similarity, except that he identified it as black body radiation,while I finally identified it a black body gas and dust. Read between the lines of Hawking and mine and know both are one and the same. Jsaldea12 2.25.19
-
Please post this, do not delete my posting
Nobody is deleting your posts, so why do you keep saying this?
That boiling, evaporating gas and dust that radiate light, that completely cover-up supposed black holeI is NOW finally identified as one and the same.
By who (other than you, I mean)?
What did Wikipedia says: “Hawking radiation is blackbody radiation that is predicted to be released by black holes, due to quantum effects near the event horizon. It is named after the physicist Stephen Hawking, who provided a theoretical argument for its existence in 1974” Please read between the lines of Hawking .and mine and know the uncanny similarity, except that he identified it as black body radiation,while I finally identified it a black body gas and dust. Read between the lines of Hawking and mine and know both are one and the same. Jsaldea12 2.25.19
Alright, why don't we see just how similar Hawking radiation is to the heat and radiation detected from Sagittarius A*? You can use the following calculator to see what the temperature and luminosity Hawking radiation has for a given black hole mass: http://xaonon.dyndns.org/hawking/
The mass of Sagittarius A* is around 4,000,000 solar masses. When we put this mass into the calculator, we get a temperature of ~1.5 x 10-14 kelvins and a luminosity of ~5.6 x 10-42 watts. That means that the Hawking radiation given off by Sagittarius A* is almost 20,000,000,000,000 times colder than the vacuum of space and 250,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times dimmer than a firefly's flash.
Your proposal that this radiation is responsible for the multi-million degree temperatures around the black hole is beyond ridiculous.
-
Nevertheless both have inherent positive and negative property,
Why do you make up dross like that?How LIGO works? I KNOW!!! jsaldea12Feb. 18, 2019.
Then why do you keep saying things that are wrong?
-
ead between the lines of Hawking and mine and know both are one and the same.
No, they differ by at least a factor of 1,000,000,000,000,000 or so.
That's quite wrong.