black hole

[god-of-course]

virtual particle pairs would steal energy from black holes, one of the pair gets sucked in instead of disappearing and in the process the other steal the energy it takes to escape. then cancelling out a positive particle when it finds one, while the other would appear to us to have been emitted from the hole. So its kinda like a particle is beamed out of the hole

is this true? i mean does it happen?

[ericfost]

Yes it happens, its called Hawking Radiation.

[Dinosaur]

There is good reason to believe that it can happen, but I doubt that there is any experimental evidence.

[ceptimus]

The really strange bit, is that although some mass is falling into the hole, the mass of the black hole actually decreases. There is so much energy given off by the process that it more than negates the mass (energy is equivalent to mass by Einstein's famous formula). Black holes can eventually evaporate away by this means.

This is only what I've read - I have no personal experince of black holes :)

[bigjnorman]

Question: "does hawking radiation exist"
Answer: According to our current theories, yes it has been proven by Stephen Hawking.

Of course, however, the validity of hawking's proof stems on the assumption that our current theories are entirely accurate.

[Kirk Gaulden]

How does a star produce massive amounts of string gravity?
Where does it come from?
How does it relate to Newton theories of motion and GR?

[blackholesun]

Originally posted by Kirk Gaulden
How does a star produce massive amounts of string gravity?
Where does it come from?
How does it relate to Newton theories of motion and GR?

:bugeye:

Well bypassing string thoery for a second, black holes can be explained in GR by density. The mass of a very large star is held together by pressure from the inner reaction and gravity squeezing the star. As the star burns all its fuel, internal fusion pressure drops, causing the mass to collapes in on itself due to all that mass (still a lot left over even after fusion is finished). The gravitational field is so great that it even forces the Pauli Exclusion Principle to fail (that's why a neutron star doesn't form instead for a very high mass star). Density continues to increase past the point where density becomes infinite and forms a singularity. The singularity is just a point where space-time becomes 'unlocalized' so to speak.

[Kirk Gaulden]

As a man of science for 16 years can you help me understand what causes the density in words and mathematics?

If you've learned all that you care to check out the site on hyperspace and electrodynamic spin gravity...

[Myriad360]

Read "A Brief History in Time" By Hawkins. Ever particle has a negative (-) pair it is grouped with. When particle orbit a black hole (i.e. the fuzzy looking light spun off from the black hole that is the center of our galaxy), there is a certain attraction for the negative particle to the center of the black hole, since there is already a large amount of dense, hot positive energy (from my understanding). The negative pairs fall in, and due to E=mc^2 , since the energy is being effected more and more by incoming negative energy, the mass decreases. -E=-mc^2 . Thus, the mass gets less and less and the black hole evaperates.

[Kirk Gaulden]

a manifold field effect was responsible as a bosonic-ferimon dynamic where these pairs exchange and absorb materials
until equivalence is maintained?

This as a response to over unity particles for the equivalence principal?

[Myriad360]

Yes! Almost. Except that when you consider the "infinite" density (I myself am not sure if I agree with this), you experience the infinite energy of the molecular "combustion" (actually fusion I think), which adds a little twist to things. But yes, it is ultimately trying to achieve unity. A black hole's dynamics are certainly mind numbing, but I think it can be agreed that this process can occur. My only question is does that mean the universe is getting less dense, due to not only the spreading of planets and the evaporating of black holes? I feel like if everything eventually ended up in a black hole, then there would be enough force to push the universe back to a big crunch, and then a big bang (a cycle). If black holes do evaporate, then was there only one big bang? What was before that? My observations from nature suggest to me a cycle (planets as spheres in orbits, seasons, etc.), but at this time I feel like I happen to agree with theory that would not agree with my previous thoughts. Have you read the book "A Brief Histor In Time"? If you are familuar with the torus-around-the-globe theory, big bang at the north pole, etc. , would you agree with the possibility for total entropy to occur at the equator, so to speak? And if so, what about the reverse occurances leading to the big crunch in this theory? Would it seem possible?

[Kirk Gaulden]

You need to read up on the quantum vacuum...

There are four realities that I understand in time related to time
positive, neutral, negative and no-time:

They also involve denisty of matterisms, where all forms of time come together to create a vortex of no-time, where darkmatter,
luminal matter, and neutral matter come together, this also creates a vortex of energy gravitational, interial, and vacuum or
neutral energy;

governed by galilean transformations known as quaerternion
transformations that deals with particles of time such as gravitons
u=the {x,y,z,t} to the quarternions {i,j,k,l} which represent
velocity of radius r^4 which causes a sink in space-time:

presented as u=v^2*{x_i,y_j,z_k,t_l}*r^4, these sets refer to
time/gravity or activation of the three different realities cancelling
time dilation. This can and will be extended in the future...

[Crisp]

"... governed by galilean transformations ..."

This I do not understand, can you explain what a Galilean transformation is ? How does this relate to:

"... time dilation"

What exactly do you mean by time dilatation ?

Bye!

Crisp

[bigjnorman]

Kirk Gaulden is the man, he is smart!

[Kirk Gaulden]

I also have a disk that shows science called Hyper Physics...

You can access it at this site:www.phy-astr.gsu.edu

Georgia State University.

[Crisp]

I can't find it, care to explain it in your own words ?

Bye!

Crisp

[Myriad360]

Hey man, is there any books you would recommend on the subject? Something indroductory and progressive?

[Kirk Gaulden]

Anything on Galilean topology or the History of Topology you'll
only find these at college book stores or libraries.

The basics deals with the already curved locale of space-time
co-ordiates for measurements of space-time mathematically,
enhancing or condensing subatomic structure of particles to
virtually change their representation of matter for photon interaction in a manifold field effect of axis torsion.

[Crisp]

No they don't.

Still waiting for your explanation on galilean transformations and time dilatation though...

[Dinosaur]

Kirk Gaulden the site you posted is very interesting.

Are you a master of double talk?

[Kirk Gaulden]

listening to people that do not want to learn, you're wasting your time...

Look up Space-Time Topology and study it, and Geometery the
math in the said post does refer to particle transformation.

[Crisp]

But you do cleverly seem to evade questions like explaining a simple concept such as Galilean transformations. Still care to give it a shot ? And while you're at it, try a laymen's explanation of time dilatation aswell. You can use formula's if you like, I think I know how to read them.

Bye!

Crisp

[Kirk Gaulden]

I do not have the functions on my keyboard to write anolog functions on this venue, I am using common law functions that leave out certain response times. If you cannot read into them
then thats your problem...


bye!

[Kirk Gaulden]

16pihu/r^4 represents:

16pihu = four levels of angular momentum + linear {x,y,z}t

causing inward flucuation of an inertia torsion field at quarternion
generation of virtual transformation acceleration {i,j,k}l from
the quantum vacuum planck string.

u = the veloctiy of space-time as electrodynamic spin of gravity

Similar to a 4D gyro...

[Dinosaur]

Kirk Gaulden: You are really good at what you do. It is fun watching a master of the art.

[AleinAllei]

But what exactly is a black hole ? can someone please tell me !
sry not as smart !

[Kirk Gaulden]

A singularity or blackhole is a gravity star taken over by what sci-fi
calls subspace or manifold field effect that restores energy to
what sci-fi calls hyperspace or zero point energy, where energy
is neutralized by dark matter or super gravity into 3 dimensions of time into the quantum vacuum seeing that time dilation is a
barrier between the polarized vacuums, time exist as no-time
that can be controlled.

I repeat the purpose of a blackhole is renormalization or the purpose of energy distribution dimensionally of Einsteins Equivalancy Principal, Machs Principal, Newtons Laws of Motion,
and Space-Time Geometry;

You can study more of this by looking up these theories on Internet Encyclodedia or different word search engines.

[Crisp]

My god, will somebody please stop this nonsense ??!?!??!

[AleinAllei]

thanks kirk !! but crisp what nonsense are u talken about?

[(Q)]

Kirk Gaulden directs:

You can study more of this by looking up these theories on Internet Encyclodedia or different word search engines.

Ok, lets do just that. Below are the first links found in a search engine that relate to black holes and singularities. It appears there is nothing contained within these links that pertain to your so-called theories.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole

http://www.bartleby.com/65/bl/blackhol.html

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/htmltest/rjn_bht.html

http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/schw.shtml

http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html

Can you produce the ‘studies’ you refer?

Or are you merely blowing smoke out your a$$?

:D

[Kirk Gaulden]

Space-time, and Newtons Laws of Motion pertaining to Galilean Tranformation of Quarternions or Maxwells Heavy Side Equations
related to Torsion Induction of Inertia.

;)

[Crisp]

Originally posted by AleinAllei
thanks kirk !! but crisp what nonsense are u talken about?

Well, read back in this thread and you'll understand ;).

Q, I think it is the later.

Bye!

Crisp

[(Q)]

Kirk Gaulden wriggles and wiggles:

To understand singularities you must also study:

Space-time, and Newtons Laws of Motion pertaining to Galilean Tranformation of Quarternions or Maxwells Heavy Side Equations
related to Torsion Induction of Inertia.

Again, none of these have anything to do with the smoke coming out you’re a$$.

You really have no idea what you’re talking about, do you?

Have you ever picked up a book? Aside from using it to balance out your table legs?

:rolleyes:

[Kirk Gaulden]

Fool,

Reread your theories pages on radius of topology in Geometry
your thoughts are not the thoughts of a reasonable person.

Your math also stinks! Radial Geometry states 4pir^2 as a circle,
16pir^4 represents a 4D spacial area inside of the sphere.

16piu/r^4: represents the velocity of the essence of {x,y,z,t} curved velocity of mass.

{i,j,k,l}: represents electrodynamic spin axial torsion co-ordinates of the accelerated mass using the interia induction of subatomic
particles that is already present, thinking outside of the box as over unity.

Channeling virtual particle induction from the quantum vacuum.

When you were in diapers I had already completed the simple
geometry in highschool, i am far more advanced than you childern.

[(Q)]

Kirk Gaulden loses it:

Fool,… i am far more advanced than you childern.

If by advanced you mean a state of confusion and arrested coherency, I whole-heartedly agree.

When you were in diapers I had already completed the simple
geometry in highschool

Failed that too, huh? Well, I hear high school math and physics are available on-line - saves you the trouble of leaving the house and having to pack around 'Depends'.

Should I be calling you, “Pops?”


:D

[Crisp]

"represents electrodynamic spin axial torsion co-ordinates of the accelerated mass using the interia induction of subatomic particles that is already present, thinking outside of the box as over unity."

I hereby confirm that this sentence was formed by randomly picking words from a physics lexicon.

[bigjnorman]

he he he, kirk is so smart, he can copy and paste the most advanced phrases and make them sound almost like they make some sort of sense!

[bigjnorman]

and THEN ask someone to explain density to him, HA

[curioucity]

Hi

I'm looking for one thread containing some 'story' about person A who stays on earth watching person B who get sucked in by a black hole. Do any of you happen to remember the thread?
thanks

[Dinosaur]

Kirk Gaulden: I have put all your concise explanations from this thread into a file so I can learn from them later.

You are a master at what you do.

[AleinAllei]

I thought this thread was on black holes . What is it now ? lol

[Vortexx]

Pretty soon it is expected we can study mini black holes in laboratory:

http://www.nature.com/nsu/011004/011004-8.html

While these black holes are expected to be shortlived and pose no real danger, I wonder what will happen if researchers decide to "feed"" the tiny black hole with copius amonts of laserphotons at the instant of its creation, wouldn't they be able to grow it ?

Growing and Stabillizing a peanut size black hole in a magnetic bottle could be a terrific source of Energy in the shape of Hawkings radiation, basically you throw all your disposable junk in the mini black hole and it spits it out as pure energy...

Would have to be a reasonable large bottle though to make sure the black hole evaporates in time before it can make contact with the outside world should the magnetic containment fail for whatever reason....

Let's call it the Paul Dixon Device....

[eburacum45]

Mini black holes are a wonderful way to convert mass to energy; we over at Orion's Arm have been considering them as high powered space drives.

There are problems, though;
they would be very difficult to make, involving collisions between heavy but small lumps of mass moving at incredibly high speeds.

If you had one, say a 1000 tonne black hole, it would evaporate in 200 seconds- so to stop this happening you would have to feed the black hole with one tonne of mass per 0.2 seconds to keep it stable.

This would be a difficult feat, as a black hole of 1000 tonnes mass is smaller than a proton.

--------------
SF worldbuilding at
http://www.orionsarm.com/main.html

[Vortexx]

Those are some truly mind boggeling numbers!

How can one concentrate that amount of "feed" in such a short time in such a tiny space......

....Maybe you would have to feed it a stream of other mini black holes from multiple angles, that are created allmost simultaniously until it has grown to respectable size, from that point feed it with nuclear and toxi wastes and the an occaisional gamma laser burst to "aid the digestion"

Even if you use 50 percent of the Hawkings radiation to feed back energy to the black hole to sustain its existence, it could serve pretty well as ultimate waste disposal and energy factory.

but you don't wanna let this hungry bird out of the cage and should the feed of energy suddenly stop, the hole would start to evaporate at exponential speed, creating a huge explosion...

[Dinosaur]

As far as I know, the evaporation of Black Holes is a theoretical concept unsupported by any experimental evidence.

Astronomical observations have supported the concept of Black Holes with huge masses.

While I have great respect for Hawking, I would not like to see anybody deliberately creating a mini Black Hole until Hawking radiation is verified experimentally.

A mini Black Hole that did not evaporate is a potentially dangerous object. Paul Dixon is warning us about the wrong danger.

BTW: Before Hawking, there was a delightful SciFi story about a mini Black Hole found on Mars by the first astronauts to get there. The Black Hole had charge and was in the midst of some apparatus that used electromagnetic effects to cause the mini black Hole to oscillate. It seemed to be an interstellar communications device using gravitational waves (cute concept). The astronauts fooled around and released the mini Black Hole which immediately fell toward the center of Mars. When It got to the center, it had a maximum velocity and continued on to the other side of mars. It kept oscillating. Due to the rotation of Mars, it took a different path through the center on each yo-yo through the planet. Mars was soon eaten and became a Black Hole. If a mini Black Hole did not evaporate, this would be the expected result of its getting free of containment apparatus.

[apolo]

The only thing I can add to this discussion is, that I beleive DINOSAUR
is right. "The evaporation of black holes is a purely theoretical consept, that has never been proven.

As a matter of fact I think I've read somewhere that someone actualy proved it could not work.

Regards APOLO

[David Mayes]

Originally posted by Dinosaur
[]As far as I know, the evaporation of Black Holes is a theoretical concept unsupported by any experimental evidence.
]

Is there any empirical support for a black hole?

This is what Davies and Gribbin said in 1992: "Thus one often hears it said that Stephan Hawking discovered that black holes are not black but emit heat radiation. This statement refers solely to a mathematical investigation...nobody has yet seen a black hole or much less detected any heat radiation from one"

[Mark]

Originally posted by Dinosaur

BTW: ...Before Hawking, there was a delightful SciFi story about a mini Black Hole found on Mars by the first astronauts to get there. The Black Hole had charge and was in the midst of some apparatus that used electromagnetic effects to cause the mini black Hole to oscillate. It seemed to be an interstellar communications device using gravitational waves (cute concept). ...

I think we read the same story. It was by Larry Niven.
two of the astronaut/scientists who found the communication device, call them A and B, had a personal feud
A was so furious with B that when B was underneath the
apparatus A switched off the container field and the hole fell through B and cut a track out of him, so he died.
Then, as you say, the miniature hole fell thru mars and got into that yo-yo "orbit"

that story was written in the 60s I suppose, certainly before Hawking's result about evaporation!
the fact that we both remember it sort of proves that it was memorable----it was maybe also a little terrifying in a cold quiet way.

Niven's greatest work is probably Ringworld, do you agree?

[Mark]

Originally posted by David Mayes
Is there any empirical support for a black hole?


there is ample observational support for the existence of supermassive black holes

no empirical evidence is ever absolutely conclusive but the SUPPORTING evidence, to use your word, is substantial.

An Xray source has been observed at the center of our galaxy and a star has been observed to orbit this object showing that the mass is several million solar masses
and the star is seen to come in close during its highly elliptical orbit---giving an estimate of the diameter of the thing and therefore its density. Attempts have been made to try to imagine things of that high a density and no one has found any explanation for it besides that it is a black hole.

It makes Xrays (as stuff falls in) the way a BH should. It is the size and density expected of a BH. There is currently no other explanation.
So this is supportive evidence.
And furthermore black holes are seen in other galaxies---that is supermassive objects, sometimes several, in the central region of the galaxy, that behave as BH are expected to behave and radiate (by stuff falling in, not Hawking radiation!) as they are expected to radiate, and are clearly very dense (more dense than any other known type of object).

The hole at Milkyway center was written about a lot in 2003 IIRC and the main observations of it were at ESO (European Southern Observatory) but also at HST (Hubble) IIRC. I do not have a link but you can probably find something about it with Google. Or maybe someone else here has the link.
The most complete study was by a French team, as I recall.
The star orbiting it was tracked for almost a full ellipse. The period of the orbit around the BH was on the order of 10 years, as I recall, and it swung in amazingly close. They had diagrams plotting the orbit. It was fine work.

Hawking radiation is a separate topic---no observational evidence for that!

[David Mayes]

Originally posted by Mark
[]there is ample observational support for the existence of supermassive black holes

And all this has occured since Davies book in 92?

Hawking radiation is a separate topic---no observational evidence for that!

Ok, I'll get back to you on this subject.

[Mark]

Originally posted by David Mayes
And all this has occured since Davies book in 92?


improved observation tools since 1992 have revolutionized astronomy

pace of new discovery since 1998 has been especially fast

in cosmology a new picture of the universe called the "concordance model" or the consensus model has emerged since 1998 with an unprecedented extent of agreement among cosmologists on the basic parameters

would advise you look for reading material that is recent
unless you are primarily interested in the history of astronomy
which I agree is very interesting in its own right!

would you like links to online cosmology surveys?

[David Mayes]

I'll read "one" well explained link.

Thanks.

[Mark]

Originally posted by David Mayes
I'll read "one" well explained link.

Thanks.

Does anybody out there have a favorite?
If several people suggest
"recent survey of cosmology" online articles then
Dave can take his choice from the menu!

[Mark]

My favorite survey of cosmology may not be best one for you
but anyway here it is

http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/March03/Lineweaver/Lineweaver_contents.html

and the PDF version takes longer but gives cleaner easier to read copy

http://arxiv.org/astro-ph/0305179


Anything by Ned Wright or by Michael Turner is also apt to be good, but I especially like Lineweaver's graphs and figures.

anybody else have a favorite?

[Dinosaur]

Mark: Ring World by Larry Niven was certainly an excellent novel. His best? Maybe. I would not vote against it as his best.

BTW: I mentioned that hawking radiation is a theoretical concept with no observational evience supporting it. However, I tend to believe that the theory is correct.

[Mark]

Originally posted by Dinosaur
Mark: Ring World by Larry Niven was certainly an excellent novel. His best? Maybe. I would not vote against it as his best.

BTW: I mentioned that hawking radiation is a theoretical concept with no observational evience supporting it. However, I tend to believe that the theory is correct.

Me too, and you know Unruh radiation?
I have a vague memory of someone at SLAC doing an experiment around year 2000 that touched on the Unruh temperature----the temperature associated with an accelerated frame.
Did I just dream this? Did you hear about some experimental confirmation of the Unruh temperature?

That would be a way of confirming, or lending credibility, without actually needing to observe a BH. However I dont feel the need of confirmation in this case because am just not skeptical enough of Hawking radiation. complete beliver! ;)