New Theory of Black Holes

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ecthy


You know exactly I was talking about your mentioning of that Schwarzschild thing which a layman obviously knows nothing about. But just keep on alling people stupid, it supports my point

I'd like to point out that I went on to explain what the Schwarzschild radius was. With a little bit of patience you would have seen that. My followup post simply took a bit of time to write as I had to integrate a simple, though not tivial expression after rewriting.

[Tattila the Hun]

I'm bloody tired of the neo-racism in astronomy. Why aren't there white holes? White dwarves, sure, small insignificant things. But something huge, powerfull, sure, it needs to be named "black" something. Why not Tyrone, or Darnell, while they're at it? Hmmpuh.

[Lorizael]

Don't forget Red Dwarves... as if our genocide of the Native Americans wasn't enough.

[Hueij]

What I'm wondering about is why Berz left the Babylonians and Atlantis out of his theory.

[Japher]

I was having a good day.

And then I opened this thread.

Thanks.

[RGBVideo]

You fundamentally misunderstood what a black hole is, who taught you science?

Originally posted by Berzerker
Actually my theory, I think

Are black holes really black?

No, we cant see them physically because they're so heavy for their size they sink below the visible horizon. Put a bowling ball on a mattress and it sinks down but you can still see the upper part of the ball. But if the ball is heavy enough it will sink down below the horizontal (visible horizon) of the mattress.

But as you approach the ball you can begin to see it because you're now on the curvature of space created by the ball or black hole. Think of a ship caught in a whirlpool, as the ship approaches the center passengers can look down and see the "black hole". Sound reasonable?

[DrS]

Actually my theory, I think

Are black holes really black?

No, we cant see them physically because they're so heavy for their size they sink below the visible horizon. Put a bowling ball on a mattress and it sinks down but you can still see the upper part of the ball. But if the ball is heavy enough it will sink down below the horizontal (visible horizon) of the mattress.

But as you approach the ball you can begin to see it because you're now on the curvature of space created by the ball or black hole. Think of a ship caught in a whirlpool, as the ship approaches the center passengers can look down and see the "black hole". Sound reasonable?

It's not a bad thought. The problem is that the 'ball on a mattress' analogy is just an analogy. You're taking properties of the analogy and attempting to use them to say something about the original problem. It's similar to a strawman argument.

I'm not sure what happens to space very near a black hole. I don't think anybody can know at present, because big G is almost certainly an approximation of something far more complicated, and yet unknown.

[RGBVideo]

hi DrS

Originally posted by DrS
...

Welcome to Apolyton

Did KrazyHorse bring you here?

[Kuciwalker]

Re: You fundamentally misunderstood what a black hole is, who taught you science?

Originally posted by VJ

[DrS]

Nah, I was originally here 8 yrs ago, then I stepped out for 5.

Just poking around to see what's up.

[Lorizael]

You missed the best years of Apolyton. It's all down hill from here.

[Jon Miller]

Where were you at?

Jon Miller

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by DrS
Nah, I was originally here 8 yrs ago, then I stepped out for 5.

Just poking around to see what's up.

That's what they all say :unconvinced:

[Blaupanzer]

I'm glad that KH knows one thing well. Otherwise he'd have no basis whatsoever to criticize people. What would he be like if he studied human relations instead? Do you think he'd sound intelligent enuff in that case to know better than insult an audience filled with people he does not know. Somehow I doubt it.

[KrazyHorse]

I know a number of things quite well, which is more than most human beings can honestly claim.