0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 16:21:15Let me highlight some of the observations that contradict the BBT:1. Energy - What is the source of energy that is needed for the BBT? This is the ultimate question for the BBT.That's not a contradiction.the simple answer is " we don't know". It's not as if we were there at the time taking measurements.
Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 16:21:15Let me highlight some of the observations that contradict the BBT:1. Energy - What is the source of energy that is needed for the BBT? This is the ultimate question for the BBT.
Well, for one, the BBT does not attempt to explain from where everything came. Secondly, it seems the total energy of the universe is zero, so there's no need for a source of zero energy.
7. Energy source for the BBTWhy our scientists don't try to explain the scenario before the BBT?Could it be that there was something before the Big bang or just nothing?I agree to accept the idea that something could be created out of nothing.Darwin has told us that one living cell could be the source for the whole variety of life that we see. Therefore, we all can agree that first living cell could be created out of nothing. However, how can we agree that everything could be created at the same moment from nothing or even from something if our universe is infinite?The BBT doesn't explain what is the source of energy for all the matter in the Universe.It is just stated:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang"The Big Bang theory is a cosmological model of the observable universe from the earliest known periods through its subsequent large-scale evolution The model describes how the universe expanded from an initial state of very high-density and high-temperature"So, what is the source for that high density and high temperature?What is the meaning of high density?Density of what? Is it some sort of a matter? If so, than why do we need the Big bang if the matter is already there? How any sort of density can be converted into real matter by bang without any energy transformation as electromagnetic field?Please be aware - Not even one word about energy in the BBT…How could it be that our scientists speak on the name of science and the first law of thermodynamics (when it comes to different theory), while they don't have a basic clue for the source of energy (or high density) for the BBT activity?
Energy transformationsThe requested energy for electron-positron pair is 1.022 MeV. That energy had been taken from the energy of the SMBH by the transformation of the magnetic field.So, theoretically, the SMBH had lost 1.022Mev (due to the creation of the particle pair) and gain only half of that as the mass of a falling in particleHowever, at the moment of the creation the orbital velocity is almost at the speed of light. That speed is given for free from the Ultra gravity force of the SMBH.Hence, the Kinetic orbital velocity of each particle -with mass m at the moment of creation (assuming that its velocity is the speed of light) is as follow:Ek = 1/2 m v^2 = 1/2 m c^2Each falling in particle (as electron for example) is increasing the total mass of the BH by only 0.511 MeV.However, it also increases the spin of the SMBH due to Conservation of momentum and Tidal. We only discuss on a tiny particle. However, unlimited number of falling in particles can have a similar impact as a falling star with the same total mass.So the SMBH gravity force had contributed Ultra rotational energy to the created particle pair for free. Some of that rotational energy is transformed back to the SMBH due to Conservation of momentum and due to Tidal energy transformation.Please remember that Tidal forces transform existing orbital or rotational energy into heat energy.Therefore, this process doesn't contradict the first law of thermodynamicsSince the total amount of orbital/rotational energy in a New particle pair around the SMBH is ultra high (and it is for free due to the SMBH mighty gravity force), Conservation of momentum, tidal heating process, SMBH Spin, Transformation of energy by magnetic force to new creation particles pair cycle can go on forever.Hence, as the universe age is infinite, than unlimited number of falling in particles should increase dramatically the total Energy & mass of the BH and converts it over time to a SMBH without violating the first law of thermodynamics.
15. Photon SphereI'm really excited. I have just found an article which confirms the creation zone of new particles between the accretion ring and the event horizon.This aria is called – Photon sphere (I was not aware about that name).Please look at the following image:https://www.physicscentral.com/explore/action/black-hole.cfmIt is stated:"Just outside the event horizon of the BH, gravity is strong enough to bend their paths so that we see a bright ring surrounding a roughly circular dark shadow."However, they think that this radiation is coming from the outwards accretion disc or actually from the plasma in that accretion disc:"Although the black hole itself is dark, photons are emitted from nearby hot plasma in jets or an accretion disc.""As charged particles go around, they accelerate, causing the emission of electromagnetic radiation."This is a severe mistake.As Newton has told us very clear in his cannon ball experimental, matter that moves to lower radius, can't increase the orbital velocity and can't get higher orbital acceleration.Therefore, the only way to generate this radiation between the event horizon to the innermost accretion ring, is by new created particle pairs at the photon sphere.Due to the location of that zone it is also clear that the orbital velocity should be much higher than just 0.3c (as it is in the accretion disc). I would assume that the orbital velocity at the Photon sphere is almost as high as the speed of light.The innermost accretion ring is called – innermost stable orbit. That shows that our scientists see the difference between the stable orbit at the innermost excretion ring to the aria of the new pair production that is called Photon sphere.They also claim that the plasma in the accretion disc is made of broken Atoms - free electrons and nuclei."Black holes trap nearby gases in their gravitational pull and whip them around in an orbit at immense speeds. The gas material gets very hot and breaks apart into its constituent positive nuclei and negative electrons, not bound together as an atom. This hot mass of free electrons and nuclei is called a plasma."But they don't understand that the process works the other way. The excretion disc doesn't break down the atoms to positive nuclei and negative electrons in that plasma. If that was the case, than as most of that matter is ejected outwards, we should see mainly broken atoms that are ejected from the excretion disc. However, we mainly see real Atoms and molecular that are ejected from the excretion disc. That ejected matter is actually ejected upwards/downwards as Twin molecular jet stream.Therefore, the excretion disc is actually forming new Atoms and molecular from the new created particles that are ejected to that aria from the Photon sphere.
Well, if you don't know abut the source of energy for the BBT, than how can you support this theory?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 28/03/2020 16:21:15Yes I doLOL, you don't even understand how conservation of energy works.
Yes I do
Once that first BH is created
Quote from: Dave Lev on 29/03/2020 11:46:48Once that first BH is createdAnd how did that happen?
Based on theory
The Black body radiation in the CMB is a clear indication that our Universe is Infinite in its size.
QuoteThe Black body radiation in the CMB is a clear indication that our Universe is Infinite in its size.Non sequitur.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 23/03/2020 17:03:10There really isn't any point adding 14 and 15 when 1 is clearly wrong.Didn't you see my reply at:https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=78586.0
There really isn't any point adding 14 and 15 when 1 is clearly wrong.
Let's focus on the Black body radiation in the CMB:Black Body https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body "An ideal body is now defined, called a blackbody. A blackbody allows all incident radiation to pass into it (no reflected energy) and internally absorbs all the incident radiation (no energy transmitted through the body). This is true for radiation of all wavelengths and for all angles of incidence. Hence the blackbody is a perfect absorber for all incident radiation.[10]" In the article it is also stated that: "An approximate realization of a black body as a tiny hole in an insulated enclosure" 1.This insulated enclosure could be a box at any size. As long as it is insulated enclosure box, we should get the Black body radiation inside that box. Let's assume that we can set a box of isolated enclosure in the open space at the size of 1BLY. The Milky way will be located inside that box. It is quite clear that the internal radiation will be a black body radiation. 2. Let's set 1000 1BLY boxes next to each with a similar density. So, we get a bar of 1000BLY. As the radiation at each 1BLY box is black body, than if we eliminate the walls between the boxes in that bar, we still should get a black body radiation inside that 1000 BLY Bar. So, as long as the 1000Bly bar is isolated enclosure than we must get the black body radiation.. 3. Now, let's add to this bar an infinite no of 1BLY boxes, and eliminate the walls between the boxes, Therefore, we should get an infinite bar (with the same density at any location in the bar). In this case it is clear that as long the infinite bar is still isolated enclosure we should get a black body radiation in that bar. 4. However, as it goes to the infinity, it is clear that even if we open the walls of the last end box (which is located at the infinity), it shouldn't have any negative impact on the internal black body radiation in that bar (assuming that we measure the radiation far enough from that last open walls). So, we have got an infinite bar with open ended walls which still has an internal black body radiation. Let's call it B- bar. 5. If we now set an infinite number of B- bar, one above the other. We should get an infinite rectangle. We already know that this infinite rectangle has an open ended (Left & right) and it has a black body radiation.In the same token, if we open the Up/down edges (at the infinity) we still should have a black body radiation in that infinite rectangle. Let's call it C-rectangle 6. If we set an infinite number of C- rectangle, one after the other. We should get an infinite cube (It goes to the infinity in all directions.) This cube goes to the infinity and has an open ended at all directions. So, technically, there is no end for this cube, it is an infinite cube and therefore it should hold an internal black body radiation. Conclusions:The black body radiation in our Universe proves that it MUST be infinite.Any location at this universe is located at the infinity from any edge. Therefore, any location in that universe could be considered as a center. In the same token we should get a black body radiation at any point.Therefore, Kryptid is fully correct in his following message:Quote from: Kryptid on 13/01/2020 07:31:47As far as we can tell, the Universe as a whole doesn't have a center. Alternatively, you could argue that every point in space everywhere is the "center". However, that could be correct ONLY if our universe is infinite.
As far as we can tell, the Universe as a whole doesn't have a center. Alternatively, you could argue that every point in space everywhere is the "center".
Lets try to understand how black body radiation works at the Sun.It is quite clear that as long as the radiation is at the surface of the Sun, than it has a black body radiation.However, as it is emitted from the Sun, the black body radiation is lost.Therefore, the surface of the Sun acts as isolated enclosure.In the same token, also in atmosphere of our planet we find a black body radiation.So, that Atmosphere is another example of black body radiation in isolated enclosure .Therefore, our universe could hold black body radiation ONLY in the following conditions:1. If it is Finite – It must be in isolated enclosure. Therefore, there must be walls around the Universe. What is the chance for that?2. If it is Infinite – As I have proved, infinite Universe acts as a finite Universe in isolated enclosure.Conclusion:The ONLY possibility to see a black body radiation in the CMB is when the Universe is INFINITE
Why don't you read my answer:
The Milky way will be located inside that box. It is quite clear that the internal radiation will be a black body radiation.
Non-sequiturs piled on top of non-sequiturs...
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/889405/black-hole-big-bang-theory-wrong-big-bounce-universe-space"Big Bang theory wrong: Black hole found that's so big and old it makes Big Bang IMPOSSIBLE""The black hole is 13 billion light years from Earth, meaning that it formed just 690 million years after the Big Bang when stars were only just beginning to take shape"."Professor Simcoe said: "If you start with a seed like a big star, and let it grow at the maximum possible rate, and start at the moment of the Big Bang, you could never make something with 800 million solar masses – it's unrealistic""The discovery put the Big Bang theory in doubt""The universe was just not old enough to make a black hole that big. It's very puzzling.”
You miss the point of the "small hole in a container" as BBR source, the walls of the container have to do the emitting and the radiation has to be observed from outside.
I can get a pretty good approximation to BBR from a candle flame.
That does not mean that a candle flame is infinitely large.
Is it clear to you by now?
Agree, but as long as we see a BBR coming out from that candle flame, it shows that there is some sort of photosphere around that source of light.
It was clear to me when I Learned it 30 years or more ago.
in order to get a black body signature in the radiation the light should be reflected by internal surfaces of the body or photosphere.
Therefore, the "small hole in a container" or a Cavity with a tinny hole is only used to sample the internal radiation
Do you still not understand that it doesn't apply if you are inside the container or if there are light sources inside the container with different effective temperatures?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 04/04/2020 09:50:32Agree, but as long as we see a BBR coming out from that candle flame, it shows that there is some sort of photosphere around that source of light.NoWhat "photosphere" are you going to pretend exists around a red hot iron bar?
Photosphere is a perfect example for black body radiation:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_body#/media/File:Idealized_photosphere.png"The photosphere contains photons of light nearly in thermal equilibrium, and some escape into space as near-black-body radiation."
If you think that my conclusion about the size/age of the universe is "non-sequiturs", than would you kindly tell us about the real size of our Universe?
We do not discuss about "red hot iron bar" so what do you want to show in this question?
What "photosphere" are you going to pretend exists around a red hot iron bar?
Therefore, inside the cavity there must be a BBR