[Dave Lev (OP)]

The green line I added is the path which the light would take without the BH.
And the arrow shows the direction in which that light is bent.
You will see that the arrow points towards the black hole because the light is bent towards the black hole.
There really isn't anything complicated here.
You were just posting obvious nonsense.

This is nonsense
Based on your explanation an observer that is located at the end of that green line should get less light.
Less light means smaller/dimmer image of the BH.
However, when we look at the following clip
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens#/media/File:Imageedit_6_2578820362.gif
We clearly see that this isn't the case.
So, at any given moment the light that should go to different observer gets there at full light power
Hence, the reality is that any photon that is in a direct falling direction into a SMBH is banded around that SMBH and then refocused to the observer. So, nothing falls into the SMBH itself. Not even a single photon

Because they are both disks formed by accretion,

Although the SMBH' accretion disc is totally different from a dust ring around or a planet/star, none of them had been formed by accretion. .
Actually, if you monitor a dust ring around a star or planet you would verify that the ring is drifting outwards.
In that activity they are the same.
Any orbital ring must drift outwards over time
This is real science!.
So, none of them is accretion but excretion.

I keep explaining why one is hot.
You keep ignoring the simple science involved.

No.
You didn't
Please set the calculation and full explanation how you get the 10^9c due to a falling matter.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 19:33:30
500 Years ago, scientists claimed that we are the center of the Universe.

Anyone that dare yo claim the opposite had been set in jail.
That was the church, not science.
You don't seem to understand the difference.

So, what?
You behave exactly the same.
Your mission is to keep away any intention to kill your lovely theory and that was the same activity of the church in the past.
So we have changed one dictator with other dictator.
What is the big difference?
You think that you are correct and you do not wish to open yourself to any new observation that might kill the BBT?
That is exactly the same approach of the church at that time.
They have ignored the Observation in order to protect their theory and you do exactly the same.

Why is it?
Why is it so important to you to protect the BBT?
What do you gain by protecting such unrealistic theory?

You have faith in your idea, but we have evidence of the truth of ours.

As long as you can't offer the following four obligations, you have no evidence for your imagination:

So, if our scientists wish to hold their current concept them it is their obligation to do the following:
1. Find clear observation of matter as it falls into the SMBH' accretion disc (clear observation – not just imagination).
2. Show an example of orbital object in pure circular orbits that drifts inwards and increases its orbital velocity
3. Set the temp calculation how a falling matter/matter could get to that high temp of 10^9c only by that falling activity. what should be the falling velocity and what is the object that collide with it?
4. In order to gain high falling temp. it is quite clear that it must fall in at ultra high velocity. So how any falling object at ultra high falling velocity could suddenly stop near the event horizon of that SMBH, and start its pure orbital circular at almost the speed of light. Show the calculation for that activity.

So, please go ahead and set your evidence!

Sorry, your imaginary "evidence" fully contradicts the real observation.

Sometimes, what we don't see is what tells us the truth.
If I don't see a cat on my chair, I know there is no cat on the chair.

This is your biggest fatal problem.
If you don't see a falling matter into any SMBH' accretion disc in the entire Universe there is always a possibility that matter doesn't fall.
Why is it so difficult for you to accept that simple understanding?.
It is very clear that you insist that it must fall just because you wish to protect the BBT.
So, you all act as robots under the kingdom of the BBT dictator.
If we could erase the BBT from your mind you would probably get to the same conclusions as I did.
I assume that it is impossible mission to you to take out the BBT chain from you.
But if one day you would be free from that chain, you would fully accept the observations as they are.

If I don't see a cat on my chair, I know there is no cat on the chair.

Sorry, if you don't see a cat on your chair there is always a possibility that you aren't sitting on a chair!

[Bored chemist]

This is nonsense
Based on your explanation an observer that is located at the end of that green line should get less light.
Less light means smaller/dimmer image of the BH.

You are right.
That is nonsense
why did you post it?

[Bored chemist]

As long as you can't offer the following four obligations,

There's no obligation here, and it is dishonest for you to pretend that there is.

[Bored chemist]

Please set the calculation and full explanation how you get the 10^9c due to a falling matter.

A few thousand times lots is 10^9

That's better maths than you have used.

[Bored chemist]

This is your biggest fatal problem.

You tell me I have many fatal problems, yet I am not dead.
This proves that you are wrong.

[Bored chemist]

there is always a possibility that matter doesn't fall.

In your wold things may fall up.
In the real world, they do not.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

there is always a possibility that matter doesn't fall.

In your wold things may fall up.
In the real world, they do not.

Dear BC
In real world we must accept the observation as is.
In real world we observe that the orbital velocity of the plasma in the innermost SMBH' accretion disc is faster than the orbital velocity at the outermost disc.
In real world we observe that the plasma in the inner disc is hotter then the plasma in the outer disc. So, if the temp of the outer side is 10^9c, what is the real temp at the inner side?
In real world we observe that the matter in the inner disc is falling inwards into the SMBH as UFI while the matter from the outer disc is ejected outwards CONSTANTLY as UFO.
In real world we have never ever observed in the same media that matter is falling inwards and ejected backwards/ outwards at the same moment. So, while we do observe matter from the open space as it falls on our planet, we do not observe matter as it is ejected from the planet to the open space. So matter can't fall from the open space and then be ejected to the open space through the same media. NEVER and EVER.
In real world the real meaning of that constant UFO outflow from the SMBH' accretion disc to the Bulge/open space is that nothing can fall back through the same media!!!
In real world the real meaning that matter had never ever been observed as it falls into the ANY SMBH' accretion disc (out of the billions there) is that matter doesn't fall into that disc.
In real word there is only one explanation for what we do observe - New particle pair activity is in action near the event horizon of that SMBH.

In real world there is no room for dark matter or dark energy. Our scientists have never ever observed any sort of dark matter or dark energy. They even confirm that they call it dark because they simply don't know what is it. So, any scientist that discuss about the existence of dark matter or dark energy is LIAR..
In real world if you don't know than please step away and don't tell us that what you don't know is the correct knowledge. At least don't LIE to yourself.


We are living today in the in the BBT kingdom that is based on LIES and imagination
You BC are fully controlled by that dictator kingdom.
You have no freedom to think real science. You are obliged to think BBT science.
In this BBT Kingdom any observation that contradicts the BBT laws must be rejected and covered by lies.
In this BBT Kingdom any person that dares to discuss against its laws should be highlighted as a defected personality or be ejected from the kingdom.
This BBT kingdom works as any other dark dictator kingdom in our history.
They have a simple law.
Sell the same lies to your people again and again. Eventually most of them must believe you. Reject, eliminate or kill anyone that doesn't accept your lies.

Therefore, in our BBT kingdom they tell us that they have observed matter as it falls into the accretion disc and all of us must believe to those lies although we all know that it is LIE
Bravo to the BBT kingdom!!
This kingdom is based on lies. So, even if you are just believer to those lies you are part of this LIAR and dictator kingdom.


We don't want this kind of lies and dictator.
We don't want liars even if they are called as grownups or BBT scientists.
We want real science.
Let's accept the observation as is.
Let's accept Einstein wisdom as he stated that the Universe must generate constantly new matter in order to keep it steady.
No more lies. No more BBT imagination kingdom.
Please go home and take with you all the dark staff including wrong laws and all the other supportive nonsense as density wave.
We will base our knowledge ONLY on observation and by using real democracy we will find the ultimate understanding for our universe.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

I have one last question:
You claim that the activities on planets and moons must be similar to the activities at the SMBH.
Hence, as matter falls from space to our planet, then it is a clear indication FOR YOU that matter must also fall from the open space into the SMBH.
In order to prove that the activity at the SMBH is identical to the activity at a planet you have offered the rings around a planet.
So as there is an accretion ring around the SMBH there is ring around a planet.
So far so good for you -  as this concept supports the BBT.

However, if one activity at the planet is the same to activity at the SMBH, why other activity at the SMBH can't be the same as the activity on the planet?.
We clearly observe a constant UFO that is ejected from the SMBH to the open space.
So, as you claim that they both are same, then please show the UFO outflow from our planet or moon to the open space.
Why the SMBH is forced to work according the observations on any planet/moon while a Planet/moon has no obligation to work according the observation on the SMBH?
Hence, if you wish to force the SMBH to eat his food from outside, then I wish to force any planet/moon to eject a constant UFO to the open space.
Only if you can show that each planet and each moon in our solar system is ejecting a constant UFO to the open space as we clearly observe on the SMBH, Then I'm ready to accept your imagination that matter falls into the SMBH as we observe on earth.

Same same in one direction must be same same in the other direction!

So, please go ahead and find the constant outflow stream of that UFO from our moon / planet and then give a call.

[Bored chemist]

In real world we must accept the observation as is.

That is correct.

So we accept that energy is conserved, things fall down and that light is bent towards a black hole in gravitational lensing.

And we do not accept the nonsense you talk.

In order to prove that the activity at the SMBH is identical

Nobody said "identical"- that's just you telling lies to try to support your nonsense.

So, as you claim that they both are same, then please show the UFO outflow from our planet or moon to the open space.

That's why helium is rare in the Earth's atmosphere.
It had enough energy to leave, and it did.

It's not as dramatic as the ultrafast stuff, but that's because the Earth's gravity is much weaker.
There are also other factors.
For the Earth, the effect of the magnetic field on charged particles is more significant. Here's some molecules getting flung around. Some of them end up leaving.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora.

That's an observation, by the way.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 10:22:43
So, as you claim that they both are same, then please show the UFO outflow from our planet or moon to the open space.

That's why helium is rare in the Earth's atmosphere.
It had enough energy to leave, and it did.

Sorry.
That was not my intention.
Our scientists claim that the same matter that falls into the SMBH' accretion from the open space is ejected outwards from that accretion disc as that UFO into the open space.
We OBSERVE the UFO but we have never ever observed any matter that falls into the SMBH accretion disc from outside.
Therefore, it is your obligation to show that the same matter that falls into the planet from the space is then ejected outwards as UFO from through the same media/atmosphere.
Not other kind of matter or gas, not through different media or atmosphere - just same same same.

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 05:37:31
In real world we must accept the observation as is.

That is correct.

So we accept that energy is conserved, things fall down and that light is bent towards a black hole in gravitational lensing.

You clearly claim that we must accept the observation as is – but you lie as you don't accept the observation as is.
Energy conservation is a physics law. It isn't an observation.
So, how can you highlight it is as observation?
If you really confirm that In real world we must accept the observation as is than please - let's focus ONLY on real observation.

We see the UFO as it is ejected from the SMBH but we have never seen any falling matter.
You keep on with your lies that "things fall down and that light is bent towards a black hole in gravitational lensing" while we have never ever observed any things as they fall into the SMBH from outside.
The light which you have highlighted before (in green) didn't bend into the SMBH but is was banded around the SMBH.
So, in reality you have no observation for anything  (not even light) that falls into the SMBH or its accretion disc. You just hope that light and things from outside fall into the SMBH without any real observation to support this imagination..
If you wish to use the earth as an example for things that fall down, then please show the same things as they are ejected outwards from the earth to space as UFO
Exactly the same matter that falls on Earth must be ejected outwards from the earth as UFO.
Same - same
Good luck

[Bored chemist]

It isn't an observation.

Yes it is.

So, how can you highlight it is as observation?

My gas bill rises in Winter.
Calorimetry works.

Now, can you show absolutely any example at all of energy not being conserved?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Quote from: Dave Lev on Today at 14:04:36
It isn't an observation.

Yes it is.

Sorry, law is law and observation is observation.
Unfortunately you can't see the difference as you are fully controlled by the BBT Kingdom.

We have proved today that if matter falls inwards it can't be ejected outwards
In the same token if matter is ejected outwards no matter can fall inwards.
Therefore, the assumption that matter from outside falls on the accretion disc and then rejected outwards is based on the BBT imagination.
That imagination should be ended.
If matter falls inwards, it falls to stay inwards - as we OBSERVE on Earth.
If matter is ejected outwards, then matter can't fall inwards - as we OBSERVE on the SMBH.

So please let the BBT kingdom know that the game is over and their kingdom had been destroyed.
Now you are a free man.
You are free to think as a free man.
You are free to understand that a law is a law and observation is an observation.

The SMBH generates all the new matter at the accretion disc without any help from outside.
Surprisingly, that new matter activity doesn't contradict the conservation law.
The SMBH generates Ultra High Electromagnetic force and Ultra high Gravity force.
Those SMBH' EM + Gravity forces is the base for the pair particle creation near its event horizon.
Both particles have positive mass but carry opposite charged.
As one particle falls in it increases the total SMBH mass, the other one is ejected outwards and become a new member at the inner most side of the accretion disc.
At that stage, the orbital velocity of that ejected particle is as high as the speed of light. Its temp might be significantly higher than the 10^9c. That particle would be fully controlled under the Mighty EM power at the accretion disc. By the time that it would get to the outermost of the disc it would be transformed from a neglected particle to real atom or molecular.
Most of the atoms would become Hydrogen Atoms but we should find there all the Atoms and all the molecular that we know including Gold and water.
There is no need for supernova to generate the variety of atoms and molecular in our planet or in our body.
It is already there at the outermost side of the accretion disc.
During this process the SMBH is losing some energy.
However, due to the ultra high tidal forces on that SMBH it regain the requested energy that is needed for this production.
Therefore, there is no contradiction between the conservation law to the new particle creation process.
As long as new energy is added to the SMBH by tidal forces new particles would continue to be created.

So, the SMBH increases its mass by one particle out of the two that is falling in and contribute the other particle to our Universe.
This process would keep our universe at a steady state forever and ever.

[Kryptid]

This BBT kingdom works as any other dark dictator kingdom in our history.
They have a simple law.
Sell the same lies to your people again and again. Eventually most of them must believe you. Reject, eliminate or kill anyone that doesn't accept your lies.

People are killed for not accepting the Big Bang theory? Are you serious?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

People are killed for not accepting the Big Bang theory? Are you serious?

Not really killed as in the old time, but ejected from the main stream community.
For some of them it is as difficult as a real kill.

[Bored chemist]

Now, can you show absolutely any example at all of energy not being conserved?

[Bored chemist]

People are killed for not accepting the Big Bang theory? Are you serious?

Not really killed as in the old time, but ejected from the main stream community.
For some of them it is as difficult as a real kill.

Have you any evidence to support this fantasy of yours?

[charles1948]

Now, can you show absolutely any example at all of energy not being conserved?

Is it - a  fridge magnet?  it keeps clinging on to the fridge wall.  Despite gravity trying to  continually drag it downwards.

The magnet conserves its energy to cling on.

[Bored chemist]

Is it - a  fridge magnet? 

No.

[Kryptid]

Permanent magnets don't expend energy to fight gravity any more than a table does. Force isn't energy.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

Permanent magnets don't expend energy to fight gravity any more than a table does. Force isn't energy.

I hope that you agree that gravity force can set Tidal force.
Tidal force can generate conducting fluids within the interior of the SMBH.
Therefore it increases the SMBH EM field.
The EM is used to generate new particle pairs.
As one falls into the SMBH the other one is ejected outwards
More particles mean more gravity force.
More gravity force means more tidal force.
More tidal force means more EM field.
More EM field means more particle pairs and so on.

That activity fully meets the observation:
1. UFO is ejected from the outer side of the disc
2. UFI is falling into the SMBH from the inner side of the disc.
3. The plasma temp at the Inner side is higher than the outer side.
4. The orbital velocity of the Inner side is higher than the outer side.

Hence, due to tidal force we get new particle pair creation at the accretion disc.
Therefore, there is no need for any matter to fall into the SMBH or to its accretion disc from outside.
The SMBH' Accretion disc gets new created particles from inside and ejects its matter outside.
So it should be called - excretion disc instead of accretion disc!!!