Singularity Vs Quantum Theory of Gravity

Thats alright. You are a free man.

Then what is this paper all about ?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yep, and correct too.

It's a purely theoretical paper, just as I explained re the paper Hawking put out a few months ago on BH firewalls, and we had the journalistic sensationalistic headlines, "Hawking says BHs do not exist" which was taken totally out of context, but it didn't stop our enthusiastic anti mainstream science friends from jumping on the bandwagon, so to speak.
There are many of them every week, some quite Interesting, but never the less, based on pure scientific concepts.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

papers should be based on some "Impure non scientific Concepts" ??

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Yes, I forgot to put "theoretical" before "scientific", but as usual your dishonest nature took that particular phrase out of context

Why not quote all my post?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Still playing troll games Rajesh?

 

Paddo, All my post are sensible and in my language, yours are mostly copy paste, and many of the time your links are full of convenient statements. In fact it is clear that your posts can fall in the category of innocent troll, why innocent because you do not understand the facts behind the original material you copied from.

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/cosmos/P/Planck Mass

Please refer the above link, univ link as per you, it has an obvious mistake. Can you find it out ?

 

That's debatable, particularly when you [1] Cannot realise that once Schwarzchild limit is reached, further collpase is compulsory, according to GR, [2] Gravity does indeed overcome the strong nuclear force in BH's, [3]space-time curvature opposes space-time expansion, [4] Photons emitted just on and this side of a BH EH, directly radially away, will appear to hover there forever from a local FoR, [5]Talking of BH density is a meaningless concept.

There is no one, I repeat, no one that has not obtained information by reading reputable books, or reputable web sites.
To deny that is to be dishonest, and always a stand taken by anti science trolls of all persasions. Not considering being also rather dumb.
My reputable copy and pastes will certainly continue, as long as you keep making untrue, unevidenced anti mainstream science claims.

And of course we cannot forget the rather paradoxical amateurish "questions"style of your original threads and how they have changed over a few months to the forum professional BH expert with no need for referencing, reading or linking [tic mode on of course!]

 

Pad

Your anti-mainstream mindset gets in the way ....

 

And I almost forgot.....
How about the three properties that BHs can have Rajesh.You know, mass, angular momentum and charge?
Did you accept that?
Or does that fly in the face of whatever propaganda nonsense you have at the core of your crusade against accepted modern day cosmology?

 

River, As the forum knows, what you say is like water on a duck's back.
You have less credibility than Rajesh, with your beliefs in UFOs of Alien origins, Ghosts, Goblins, Giants, conspiracies in general, etc etc etc
Gullibility comes to mind.

 

Propaganda of modern day cosmology ? Well ....

 

Perhaps you would like to explain this "propaganda"?
Or is this just another typical anti science troll by river?
The same river that supports ghosts, goblins, giants, UFO Alien abductions,
Should I also add fairies at the bottom of the garden?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

This propaganda is 100 hundred old pad

While practical , as you mentioned before , and I agree , its a rather rudimentary theory of the Universe as a whole

 

Perhaps since I have generally refuted and invalidated your systematic rejection of BH cosmology Rajesh, you should be telling us why cosmologists should be feeling uncomfortable?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Actually, your post has actually revealed for all to see, the claims about the agenda you do have, and that I have been claiming for a while now..

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Thank you for that.

 

This propaganda as you call it river, has been observed and aligns with what GR tells us...again Charge, Spin and Mass.
If you have any evidence of any other property then please disclose it.
Or is this just more of the same, "wearing your anti mainstream badge" for all to see

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Why do you think this ?

 

Because you are talking through your hat?
Because you havn't a clue?
Because you have nothing to the contrary?

 

You ever hear of the NO HAIR THEOREM river?
In short the "no hair theorem" is a postulate of GR that says all BHs can be completely described by only ever three properties.

 

Galactic Jets

 

Galactic jets do not originate in, nor are they actually a part of a BH.
They do probably occur around a BH that has angular momentum and the spiraling in of mass at relativistic speeds from an accretion disk.