[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Appeared flaws in computation of temperature and   popping virtual particles in black hole.:

(A)The scientific complex computation of temperature of black hole is as follows:

T = (ħc3)/(8πGMkB), where:

“T” is the temperature in kelvins
“ħ” is the reduced Planck constant (1.0545718 x 10-34 J⋅s)
“c” is the speed of light (299,792,458 m/s)
“G” is the gravitational constant (6.674 x 10-11 m3⋅kg-1⋅s-2)
“M” is the mass of the black hole (in kilograms)
“kB” is the Boltzmann constant (1.38064852 x 10-23 J⋅K-1)

Since Sagittarius A* has a mass of around 4 x 106 solar masses, and the Sun has a mass of 1.9885 x 1030 kg, that would give Sagittarius A* a mass of (4 x 106)(1.9885 x 1030) = 7.954 x 1036 kg. So now that we have all of the values we need, I’ll put them into the equation and find out the temperature contribution from the Hawking radiation:

T = (ħc3)/(8πGMkB)
T = ((1.0545718 x 10-34)(299,792,458)3)/(8π(6.674 x 10-11)(7.954 x 1036)(1.38064852 x 10-23))
T = ((1.0545718 x 10-34)(2.6944 x 1025))/(25.132741(5.3084996 x 1026)(1.38064852 x 10-23))
T = (2.84143825792 x 10-9)/(25.132741(7,329.172116))
T = (2.84143825792 x 10-9)/(184,202.1845)
T = 1.54256 x 10-14 kelvins

Since the microwave background is at 2.725 kelvins, then (2.725)/(1.54256 x 10-14) = 1.766544 x 1014. That makes the Hawking radiation about 1.766544 x 1014 times colder than the background of space (these calculations are a little more precise than my earlier ones).meaning the temperature of radiation is 30,000,000,000,000 TIMES COLDER than outer space

Jsaldea  comment: There appears something wrong with that incredible figure 30 BILLION TIMES COLDER. Because there is only ONE reference absolute zero which is minus 273.15 degrees Celsius), atoms would stop moving. Thus, it is suggested that to be realistic, the following simple computation is suggested.
:     Mass of Sagittarius A 4,000,000 mass of sun.
      Absolute zero temperature 273.15 degrees Celsius
     CMBR ………………………….2.725 kelvin
       4,000,000 / (270.42 x 3)  = temperature of 1.99 above absolute zero, (net of CMBR)

B. The existing concept of virtual pair of particles that appears, due to vacuum fluctuation,  at the edge of Hawking event horizon  is that  half of the pair, positive, is sucked by black hole and the other half pair negative is repelled to outer space known as Hawking Radiation. This is wrong. When virtual particle appears, it is not in separable two half pair, it is  real particle, with indestructible inseparable ;positive and negative one pair.. Jsa roxas city 3.9. 2019.,

Jsaldea 12  roxas city 3.9, 2019

[Kryptid]

There appears something wrong with that incredible figure 30 BILLION TIMES COLDER. Because there is only ONE reference absolute zero which is minus 273.15 degrees Celsius), atoms would stop moving.

For the second time, I am not saying that Hawking radiation is colder than absolute zero. It isn't. The temperature of the Hawking radiation is 0.0000000000000154256 kelvins. That is still greater than 0 kelvins.

So where is the error at? Which step was miscalculated?

Thus, it is suggested that to be realistic, the following simple computation is suggested.

How did you derive that equation? It looks like something you came up with out of nowhere. You need to demonstrate mathematically that your equation falls naturally out of known physics principles. That's how the original Hawking radiation temperature equation was derived.

This is wrong. When virtual particle appears, it is not in separable two half pair, it is  real particle, with indestructible inseparable ;positive and negative one pair.

That's just something you made up. If it isn't, then please provide support for this statement from a reputable, scientific source.

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Quoted: For the second time, I am not saying that Hawking radiation is colder than absolute zero. It isn't. The temperature of the Hawking radiation is 0.0000000000000154256 kelvins. That is still greater than 0 kelvins.

Jsa: .Reiterating, am presenting very rational  equation based on absolute zero. You are presenting it in unrational  trillion times greater  (not greater but  above absolute zero).. If you think that way,, nothing can change your inflexible  mind., but I say, it tests rationally your mind.. By the trillion times?  Beside hawking radiation is at the edge of event horizon. Even horizon which Dr. Hawking himself denied in 2004. So this computation by the billion?? is your EVIDENCE of hawking radiation? he he.
 
Quoted: How did you derive that equation? It looks like something you came up with out of nowhere. You need to demonstrate mathematically that your equation falls naturally out of known physics principles. That's how the original Hawking radiation temperature equation was derived.

Jsa: That simple equation I presented is based on known physics principle, based on limit absolute zero temperature of - 273.15 C. your equation has no limit, by trillion times?? Divide 1 by 3, by 3, by 3 etc. and you get unlimited figures but no last  figure ending in zero..9.11.19
.
Jsa:  Reiterating, when vacuum space (Einstein spacetime) fluctuates and virtual particles appear,, it is not in separable two half pair, it is  real particle, with indestructible inseparable ;positive and negative one pair This is the inherent law of matter: positive and negative inseparable, indivisible. Thus, the concept (theory) that half pair of virtual particle is pulled by EH and the other half is expelled back to outer space is WRONG..ther is no such thing as monopole. All positive, and all negative. Lastly virtual particles are too much micro-thin to accumulate and form that giant  accretion disk .3.11,19

[Kryptid]

Jsa: .Reiterating, am presenting very rational  equation based on absolute zero.

If it's rational, then give me a step-by-step of how you derived it.

You are presenting it in unrational  trillion times greater  (not greater but  above absolute zero).. If you think that way,, nothing can change your inflexible  mind., but I say, it tests rationally your mind.. By the trillion times?  Beside hawking radiation is at the edge of event horizon. Even horizon which Dr. Hawking himself denied in 2004. So this computation by the billion?? is your EVIDENCE of hawking radiation? he he.

The derivation of the equation has been presented to you in another thread before. It comes from known physics. It isn't something that someone randomly made up like your equation is. You have yet to point out the mathematical error in the derivation.

Jsa: That simple equation I presented is based on known physics principle, based on limit absolute zero temperature of - 273.15 C.

So show me a step-by-step breakdown on how you derived it.

your equation has no limit, by trillion times?? Divide 1 by 3, by 3, by 3 etc. and you get unlimited figures but no last  figure ending in zero..9.11.19

It isn't "my" equation. It's the one that is actually used by astrophysicists. You know, the ones who actually do this kind of thing as their job? The ones who understand the math that you have yet to find an error in?

Jsa:  Reiterating, when vacuum space (Einstein spacetime) fluctuates and virtual particles appear,, it is not in separable two half pair, it is  real particle, with indestructible inseparable ;positive and negative one pair This is the inherent law of matter: positive and negative inseparable, indivisible. Thus, the concept (theory) that half pair of virtual particle is pulled by EH and the other half is expelled back to outer space is WRONG..ther is no such thing as monopole. All positive, and all negative.

You're just repeating the same made-up stuff as usual.

Lastly virtual particles are too much micro-thin to accumulate and form that giant  accretion disk .3.11,19

Nobody (except for you) ever said that the accretion disk came from virtual particles, so this is the straw-man fallacy.

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Quote: The derivation of the equation has been presented to you in another thread before. It comes from known physics. It isn't something that someone randomly made up like your equation is. You have yet to point out the mathematical error in the derivation.

Jsa: I have been pointing it out to you but you refuse to listen. Is that rational that you arrive at trillion times !!!! colder??? When the basis is only figure of absolute zero is -173.15C. Imagine a trillion times above -173.15C? It is just like how Einstein solved the4 anomalous precession of mercury. Well I presented it in SIMPLE MATH HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT CAN  UNDERSTAND.. DO YOU BEIEVE THAT.

Quote: So show me a step-by-step breakdown on how you derived it.

Jsa: I have shown it to you but you don’t accept.. IS THE COMPUTATION YOU SHOWED YOUR PROOF OR EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION? DO RESPOND. Because that is not evidence, just theory.

Quote: You're just repeating the same made-up stuff as usual.

Jsa: you are referring to the positive and negative property? Please understand. There is nothing in matter of the universe without inherent positive and negative .property. You yourself is proof: you have positive and negative property. Each male and female has comlete ositive and negative. It is the direction that makes it positive or negative. By the way you have heard of the law: for every action there is corresponding re4action. 3.11.19

[Bored chemist]

It isn't something that someone randomly made up like your equation is.

Wrong again twice.
It's not his equation and it's not  randomly made up. The derivation is given here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
but I don't expect you to understand it.

There appears something wrong with that incredible figure 30 BILLION TIMES COLDER. Because there is only ONE reference absolute zero which is minus 273.15 degrees Celsius), atoms would stop moving.

No they don't.
In principle, even if you could get to absolute zero, the atoms would still move.
The fact that you don't know this proves that you don't know what you are talking about.

S THE COMPUTATION YOU SHOWED YOUR PROOF OR EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?

No.
As we already pointed out, nobody has ever observed Hawking radiation. It's entirely theoretical.

There is nothing in matter of the universe without inherent positive and negative .property.

Mass.
Nothing has negative mass.
Once again, you are wrong in obvious ways.
Why would ew take you seriously when you keep making childish mistakes like that?

By the way you have heard of the law: for every action there is corresponding re4action.

Yes, I have heard of it.
It refers to forces and nothing else.
Why did you think it was relevant here?

Did you not understand it?

[Kryptid]

I have been pointing it out to you but you refuse to listen.

When did that happen? Did someone forget to carry a two? Was there a square when there should have been a square root? Which particular mathematical error was made? Which step of the process produced the error?

Is that rational that you arrive at trillion times !!!! colder???

If that figure is incorrect, then show me mathematically where the error is. Saying it's wrong because you don't think it's rational is not proof of anything. You need to point out the actual error in the math. You keep avoiding that.

When the basis is only figure of absolute zero is -173.15C

Absolute zero is -273.15 degrees Celsius.

Imagine a trillion times above -173.15C?

It isn't a trillion times above absolute zero. Whatever that means. Zero multiplied by any other number is still zero. So a trillion times zero is still zero. You apparently don't understand what I'm talking about.

Well I presented it in SIMPLE MATH HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT CAN  UNDERSTAND.. DO YOU BEIEVE THAT.

The equation you presented seemed to be something you made up. If it isn't made up, then show me the derivation.

I have shown it to you but you don’t accept.

But you didn't. All you did was post the equation. You didn't show me how you derived it. Do you know what it means to derive an equation?

IS THE COMPUTATION YOU SHOWED YOUR PROOF OR EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION? DO RESPOND.

It isn't proof. There is no such thing as proof in science. It is, however, evidence. It's evidence because it falls naturally out of the known laws of physics.

Because that is not evidence, just theory.

So now you don't know what the definition of a scientific theory is. It isn't the same as the use of the word "theory" in common language.

you are referring to the positive and negative property? Please understand. There is nothing in matter of the universe without inherent positive and negative .property. You yourself is proof: you have positive and negative property. Each male and female has comlete ositive and negative. It is the direction that makes it positive or negative.

The part that you made up is that you can't separate positive from negative. You start off with the observation that you can't separate north and south poles of a magnet and you erroneously come to the conclusion that the exact same principle must apply to all other entities in the Universe. It doesn't. I also pointed out in another thread that there are lizards which have only females. So if you consider males and females to represent positive and negative, those lizards prove you wrong. They neither have nor need males to reproduce. So there's a negative (or positive) by itself.

By the way you have heard of the law: for every action there is corresponding re4action.

That has nothing to do with the non-existence of magnetic monopoles.

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

jsa: IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION? In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.
QUOTED:No.As we already pointed out, nobody has ever observed Hawking radiation. JSA: It's entirely theoretical ? NO FURTHER COMMENT.
.
Jsa: You ask me to present evidences ?. Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation. The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side. It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole  3.12.19,

[Kryptid]

IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?

No, its derivation is the evidence.

In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.

So you think that you have to put a temperature into an equation in order to get a different temperature out of it? That isn't how that works.

Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation.

Hawking radiation doesn't require the existence of a singularity so that's a non-sequitur.

The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side.

Positive and negative in what sense? Is one jet a positive charge and the other a negative charge? Or is one a positive temperature and the other a negative temperature?

It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 

Non-sequitur.

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

 Jsa:IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?
NS: No, its derivation is the evidence
Jsa: Now it is just derivation? Before you repeatedly speak of EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION. eXplain your derivation..

Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.

Ns: So you think that you have to put a temperature into an equation in order to get a different temperature out of it? That isn't how that works.

Jsa: All computations are ultimately  pegged to one absolute zero temperature. Without absolute temperature as the basis, how did you arrived at 30 trillion colder? How can you arrive at correct computation. 3.13.19

Jsa:Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation.

ns:Hawking radiation doesn't require the existence of a singularity so that's a non-sequitur.

jsa: Wrong. The aingularity is the hallmark signature of black hole. That point singularity.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side.

ns: Positive and negative in what sense? Is one jet a positive charge and the other a negative charge? Or is one a positive temperature and the other a negative temperature?
jsa: You are very familiar of north pole and south pole.or positive and negative. All stars, planets, galaxies have north poles and south poles. .the indisputable evidence of the duality of matters.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 3.13.19

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

oday at 23:59:33 »
 Jsa:IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?
NS: No, its derivation is the evidence
Jsa: Now it is just derivation? Before you repeatedly speak of EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION. eXplain your derivation..

Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.

Ns: So you think that you have to put a temperature into an equation in order to get a different temperature out of it? That isn't how that works.

Jsa: All computations are ultimately  pegged to one absolute zero temperature. Without absolute temperature as the basis, how did you arrived at 30 trillion colder? How can you arrive at correct computation. 3.13.19

Jsa:Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation.

ns:Hawking radiation doesn't require the existence of a singularity so that's a non-sequitur.

jsa: Wrong. The aingularity is the hallmark signature of black hole. That point singularity.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side.

ns: Positive and negative in what sense? Is one jet a positive charge and the other a negative charge? Or is one a positive temperature and the other a negative temperature?
jsa: You are very familiar of north pole and south pole.or positive and negative. All stars, planets, galaxies have north poles and south poles. .the indisputable evidence of the duality of matters.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 3.13.19


oday at 23:59:33 »
 Jsa:IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?
NS: No, its derivation is the evidence
Jsa: Now it is just derivation? Before you repeatedly speak of EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION. eXplain your derivation..

Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.

Ns: So you think that you have to put a temperature into an equation in order to get a different temperature out of it? That isn't how that works.

Jsa: All computations are ultimately  pegged to one absolute zero temperature. Without absolute temperature as the basis, how did you arrived at 30 trillion colder? How can you arrive at correct computation. 3.13.19

Jsa:Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation.

ns:Hawking radiation doesn't require the existence of a singularity so that's a non-sequitur.

jsa: Wrong. The aingularity is the hallmark signature of black hole. That point singularity.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side.

ns: Positive and negative in what sense? Is one jet a positive charge and the other a negative charge? Or is one a positive temperature and the other a negative temperature?
jsa: You are very familiar of north pole and south pole.or positive and negative. All stars, planets, galaxies have north poles and south poles. .the indisputable evidence of the duality of matters.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 3.13.19




  Logged
________________________________________

oday at 23:59:33 »
 Jsa:IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?
NS: No, its derivation is the evidence
Jsa: Now it is just derivation? Before you repeatedly speak of EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION. eXplain your derivation..

Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.

Ns: So you think that you have to put a temperature into an equation in order to get a different temperature out of it? That isn't how that works.

Jsa: All computations are ultimately  pegged to one absolute zero temperature. Without absolute temperature as the basis, how did you arrived at 30 trillion colder? How can you arrive at correct computation. 3.13.19

Jsa:Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation.

ns:Hawking radiation doesn't require the existence of a singularity so that's a non-sequitur.

jsa: Wrong. The aingularity is the hallmark signature of black hole. That point singularity.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side.

ns: Positive and negative in what sense? Is one jet a positive charge and the other a negative charge? Or is one a positive temperature and the other a negative temperature?
jsa: You are very familiar of north pole and south pole.or positive and negative. All stars, planets, galaxies have north poles and south poles. .the indisputable evidence of the duality of matters.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 3.13.19




  Logged
________________________________________

oday at 23:59:33 »
 Jsa:IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?
NS: No, its derivation is the evidence
Jsa: Now it is just derivation? Before you repeatedly speak of EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION. eXplain your derivation..

Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.

Ns: So you think that you have to put a temperature into an equation in order to get a different temperature out of it? That isn't how that works.

Jsa: All computations are ultimately  pegged to one absolute zero temperature. Without absolute temperature as the basis, how did you arrived at 30 trillion colder? How can you arrive at correct computation. 3.13.19

Jsa:Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation.

ns:Hawking radiation doesn't require the existence of a singularity so that's a non-sequitur.

jsa: Wrong. The aingularity is the hallmark signature of black hole. That point singularity.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side.

ns: Positive and negative in what sense? Is one jet a positive charge and the other a negative charge? Or is one a positive temperature and the other a negative temperature?
jsa: You are very familiar of north pole and south pole.or positive and negative. All stars, planets, galaxies have north poles and south poles. .the indisputable evidence of the duality of matters.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 3.13.19




  Logged
________________________________________

oday at 23:59:33 »
 Jsa:IS THE COMPUTATION YOU PRESENTED WITH “TRILLION TIMES COLDER”  YOUR   EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION?
NS: No, its derivation is the evidence
Jsa: Now it is just derivation? Before you repeatedly speak of EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION. eXplain your derivation..

Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:In your equation, the absolute zero Kelvin of -273.15 degrees Celsius is MISSING  when all computations of temperature is PEGGED at that absolute zero.

Ns: So you think that you have to put a temperature into an equation in order to get a different temperature out of it? That isn't how that works.

Jsa: All computations are ultimately  pegged to one absolute zero temperature. Without absolute temperature as the basis, how did you arrived at 30 trillion colder? How can you arrive at correct computation. 3.13.19

Jsa:Here is another indisputable evidence, there is no singularity in the supposed black hole in the first place,  thus, no hawking radiation.

ns:Hawking radiation doesn't require the existence of a singularity so that's a non-sequitur.

jsa: Wrong. The aingularity is the hallmark signature of black hole. That point singularity.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:The super jets, trillion C and expelling at almost the speed of light,  from opposite sides of the  center of super-galaxies are indisputably positive on one side and negative on the opposite side.

ns: Positive and negative in what sense? Is one jet a positive charge and the other a negative charge? Or is one a positive temperature and the other a negative temperature?
jsa: You are very familiar of north pole and south pole.or positive and negative. All stars, planets, galaxies have north poles and south poles. .the indisputable evidence of the duality of matters.
Quote from: jsaldea12 on Today at 12:10:32
Jsa:It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 3.13.19




  Logged
________________________________________



 

[Kryptid]

Jsa: Now it is just derivation? Before you repeatedly speak of EVIDENCE OF HAWKING RADIATION. eXplain your derivation..

It's not "my" derivation. This paper explains the derivation: https://arxiv.org/pdf/hep-th/0409024.pdf

Wikipedia also has a shorter, less exhaustive derivation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation#Emission_process

Jsa: All computations are ultimately  pegged to one absolute zero temperature. Without absolute temperature as the basis, how did you arrived at 30 trillion colder? How can you arrive at correct computation. 3.13.19

What does it mean to say that it is "pegged" at absolute zero? The temperature component of the equation is already contained within it (it's a part of the Boltzmann constant, which is expressed as energy divided by temperature): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_constant

jsa: Wrong. The aingularity is the hallmark signature of black hole. That point singularity.

Einstein's conception of black holes had a singularity, but it isn't a requirement. The requirement for something to be a black hole is that all of its mass is contained inside of its own Schwarzschild radius: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzschild_radius. Anything in such a configuration behaves as a black hole, regardless of what it looks like on the inside.

jsa: You are very familiar of north pole and south pole.or positive and negative. All stars, planets, galaxies have north poles and south poles. .the indisputable evidence of the duality of matters.

What does that have to do with being positive or negative?

Jsa:It means the core, is not supposed black hole, it is just a super-giant object, like the sun, planets, and all other objects in space, with positive and negative, north pole and south pole 3.13.19

Non-sequitur. Planets, galaxies and stars having north and south poles doesn't have anything to do with whether black holes exist or not.

Also, why did you post the same thing five times in a row?

[Kryptid]

Why make another topic about the exact same thing?

[Bored chemist]

Why make another topic about the exact same thing?

Because he's foolish enough to think the outcome will change?

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

NS: Einstein's conception of black holes had a singularity,
jsa: Einstein denied vehemently singularity until his death in 1954. 3.15.19

[Bored chemist]

NS: Einstein's conception of black holes had a singularity,
jsa: Einstein denied vehemently singularity until his death in 1954. 3.15.19

Who or what is "NS"?

Did you understand the comment that says

Einstein's conception of black holes had a singularity, but it isn't a requirement.

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

Jsa: Dr. Einstein denied vehemently against black hole whose ultimate end is singularity. Funny, his General Relativity is being used as reference to justify black hole.. Now, does not that super-jets ejected from BOTH OPPOSITE SIDEs OF SUPER-GALAXIES ACTUALLY ESCAPE FROM BLACK HOLE. That super jets have temperature of several trillion C and travelling at almost the speed of light and stretching, like fireman hose,  several thousand light years. These jets reveal the  content of the deep interior of the super-super gravitational pressurized  core of super-galaxies, see? And here is most of all, that super-jets from opposite sides of super-galaxies prove there is north pole and south pole, like earth, sun, again, for all matters, makes no difference whether it is galaxies, stars, planets, etc. have both indisputable, indestructible  positive and negative property in one. Now, show me a super galaxies with only one jet, no other jet at opposite side. The inherent law is operating: it is always the two together. March 16, 2019

[Bored chemist]

Why do you keep starting new threads to say the same wrong things?

You already have one here
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=76437.msg570000#msg570000

[Kryptid]

Now, does not that super-jets ejected from BOTH OPPOSITE SIDEs OF SUPER-GALAXIES ACTUALLY ESCAPE FROM BLACK HOLE.

They are travelling away from the black hole, yes. You have yet to show that they actually came from inside of the black hole. Just because a rocket ship travels away from the Earth doesn't mean that it came from inside of the Earth, now does it?

[jsaldea12 (OP)]

jsa Please disclose my last posting 3.16.19