Black Holes Feed On Quantum Foam, Says Cosmologist

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by cav755, Apr 2, 2014.

  1. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    Mass is that which physically occupies three dimensional space. Aether has mass. Particles of matter are condensations of aether.

    Particles of matter are discrete mass and aether is continuous mass.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225


    So you have said a million times....So? This is only a forum, and the only outlet you have for such nonsense.
    The mainstream establishment think differently, and that's what counts.
    Good luck with your continued obsession though.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    The mainstream establishment is incorrect.

    Aether has mass and is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

    Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.

    The state of displacement of the aether is gravity.

    A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

    What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.

    Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot wave; both are aether displacement waves.

    Aether displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    This sort of idea has been around for a hundred years or more, still long after black holes were first proposed. Of course they are not black holes of Einstein's singularity, but black holes made from field material, originally proposed to be precipitated from a dense aether, or maybe today such ideas as dark matter, gravitons, Higgs particles, quantum foam, etc. Instead they would be made up of a highly compressed field material such as the preceding examples, and would be more dense than neutron stars but not a vacuous singularity.

    One of the more interesting aspects of these old hypotheses is that galactic black holes would be created first from field material and then slowly these black holes would create protons and electrons at the base of their jets that would become the matter of the entire galaxy expelled by these jets, much of the material of which would settle back through gravity into a galactic bulge of dense clouds, creating stars, and a subsequent plain of rotation for spiral galaxies. There would be no big bang needed to explain the creation or existence of matter.

    I haven't seen a proposal like this one above since the late 1950's, but the name quantum foam is a new idea and wording. I expect there to be many more such proposals since the toruses observed surrounding galactic black holes do not seem large enough to explain galactic-black-hole growth and sizes related to their observable gravitational influences.

    http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/blackholes/lesson/whatisit/history.html
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2014
  8. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    The field material is the aether. Aether has mass. Particles of matter move through and displace the aether. There is no such thing as non-baryonic dark matter anchored to matter. Matter moves through and displaces the aether. What is referred to as the Milky Way's halo is the state of displacement of the aether. The Milky Way's halo is curved spacetime. What is referred to as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the aether. Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity. The state of displacement of the aether is gravity. A moving particle has an associated aether displacement wave. In a double slit experiment the particle travels through a single slit and the associated wave in the aether passes through both.

    Our Universe is a larger version of the process you describe. Our Universe is a larger version of a polar jet.

    Dark energy is aether continually emitted into the Universal jet.

    It's not the Big Bang; it's the Big Ongoing.
     
  9. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    cav755,

    I like your ideas but will only comment on them in an appropriate sub-forum.

    cheers, Forrest
     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225


    Is this just a theory of yours?
    or is it fact?
    If its a theory, where is the evidence invalidating the incumbent model, or anything supporting what you theorise?
    If its a fact, where is the proof?
    If it is either, why not get it peer reviewed?

    As I have pointed out before, you can say what you like one million times and it won't make a scrap of difference to accepted mainstream opinion which is based on evidence.
    So you are obsessively undertaking a pointless exercise and one just to satisfy your own ego and öne-upmanship paranoia you seem to have.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    So this is just a stupid obsession...no evidence, no proof, no nothing except a desire to usurp authority and the mainstream.
    Just what I thought.
     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
    http://www.akademietraunkirchen.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Healey_Two-Bohr-quotes.pdf

    Quantum theory is the deepest part of our knowledge of nature and the biggest mystery.... I think
    it's gradually teaching us to ask the right questions.... The only point is, will so many points of
    view develop that we have a disarray because it's hard to nail it down? ... You get all kinds of
    people writing all kinds of papers with all kinds of philosophical views and backgrounds. But if
    you have some really sound people talking about it, I think you'll get really sound advances....
    My feeling is that in this show, the territory we've got to get into is so broad that the only thing to
    do is to plunge into it and start making tracks, no matter if the track is leading into a swamp.
    You'll find out.”
    Quote from Wheeler, J.A.
    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
     
  13. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    Our Universe being a larger version of a black hole feeding on the aether and this allowing for the creation of particles emitted into the Universal jet is appropriate for this topic.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2014
  14. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

    Remarkably, however, an interference pattern emerges when these particles are allowed to build up one by one (see the image to the right). For example, when a laboratory apparatus was developed that could reliably fire one electron at a time through the double slit,[21] the emergence of an interference pattern suggested that each electron was interfering with itself, and therefore in some sense the electron had to be going through both slits at once[22]—an idea that contradicts our everyday experience of discrete objects. This phenomenon has also been shown to occur with atoms and even some molecules, including buckyballs.[23][24][25][26] So experiments with electrons add confirmatory evidence to the view of Dirac that electrons, protons, neutrons, and even larger entities that are ordinarily called particles nevertheless have their own wave nature and even their own specific frequencies.
    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    Woo.
    You are not very honest are you?
    It seems that those earlier on in the piece that picked you as a returned troll are correct.
    You did not refute it.
    Why do I say that?
    It's obvious that you are proposing alternative ideas, yet you do it in physics and maths, supposedly to boost your flagging credibility.
    You refuse to answer the questions that have been put to you, and just continually repeat ad-nauseum the same stuff.
    Probably a game of one upmanship also....having the last reply....Am I correct?
     
  16. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    I do not agree with your statement above as a whole but think you have worthy ideas that could be discussed in the proper forum. Realize that if you make statements as being fact you must show corroborative URL's where observation or experiment seems to agree with your statements. I think speculation and personal theory is good but its discussion must be in an appropriate forum. Realize that this subforum is a mainstream forum. For every statement made in a mainstream forum the poster should be able to corroborate by URL what he is saying. If they're alternative theories where URL's can be posted, some forums might permit that on occasion in a mainstream forum, but not an ongoing discussion of alternative theory in a mainstream forum, with or without corroboration, and regardless of what's ultimately right or wrong.

    Many new students can read these threads. They have a right to know the difference between what most scientists believe, which is taught in school, and alternative ideas and theories. There is also much alternative mainstream ideas/hypothesis like multiverses and string theory etc. Such ideas often comprise a well-known alternative voice. Then there are hypothesis proposed outside the mainstream arena. Most of these never make it to peer-reviewed papers because they are not thought to be well-written or worthy in one way or another. Another reason would be because most mainstream journals do not accept ideas contrary to known mainstream hypotheses. These alternative ideas may be valuable but they most often have just a few, or a single follower in the case of personal theory. These ideas should be discussed in the Alternative Theories Forum even if they may be totally valid in fact and well-developed theory, which you can understand would be a very rare case. Bottom line is that this is the wrong place to discuss your alternative ideas.

    Hope you can follow what I have been saying above. Even some of the smartest people cannot understand the social values of rules and etiquette from time to time. If you wish to discuss such things with me, PM me and tell me that you will be posting in the Alternative Theories Forum and I will join your conversation there if I get your message. Good Luck.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2014
  17. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    'Cosmic microwave background'
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic..._radiation#Low_multipoles_and_other_anomalies

    "With the increasingly precise data provided by WMAP, there have been a number of claims that the CMB exhibits anomalies, such as very large scale anisotropies, anomalous alignments, and non-Gaussian distributions. ... A number of groups have suggested that this could be the signature of new physics at the greatest observable scales"

    The new physics is understanding our Universe is a larger version of a polar jet.

    'Cosmos may be curved, scientists say'
    http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/09/12/cosmos-may-be-curved-scientists-say/?intcmp=features

    "Now cosmologists suggest these anomalies occur because the universe is not flat. Instead, these researchers propose the universe may be ever so slightly "open," curved in such a way that parallel lines, which never converge or diverge when traveling on a flat surface, will eventually diverge from one another, like on a saddle."

    Our Universe is open because it is a larger version of a polar jet.

    'Was the universe born spinning?'
    http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/46688

    "The universe was born spinning and continues to do so around a preferred axis"

    Our Universe spins around a preferred axis because it is a larger version of a polar jet.

    'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe'
    http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html

    "The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said."

    The clusters are headed along this path because our Universe is a larger version of a polar jet.
     
  18. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    cav755,

    "The new physics is understanding our Universe is a larger version of a polar jet."
    "Our Universe is open because it is a larger version of a polar jet."
    "Our Universe spins around a preferred axis because it is a larger version of a polar jet."
    "The clusters are headed along this path because our Universe is a larger version of a polar jet."

    I explained that you need to provide URL's corroborating your statements. These URL's do not corroborate your statements. There are known non-mainstream hypothesis that the universe as a whole is rotating but none of these hypothesis that I known of relate to polar jets. What you post seems to be your own personal hypotheses. Whether right or wrong I suggest to you that this is not the right place to present them. I will not discuss with you any further on this thread.
     
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225


    Hi forrest.
    Your quite polite methodology in trying to appeal to cav755, will fall on deaf ears.
    This is why some of us [including me] may be perceived to be sometimes a bit intolerant of him and some others.
    They refuse to adhere to the scientific methodology, they deride peer review as evil, and they claim 100% faitre complei in their unproven, untested models.
    Whether its a case of tall poppy syndrome and anti establishment bias, or just plain old delusions of grandeur, I'm not sure...probably a bit of both.
    Suffice to say, cav755 and the others of his ilk, have no other outlet for their speculatory thoughts, and consquently, to boost failing egos, see forums such as this to gain some notoriety.
    In actual fact they just lose respect of others that see through their crap.
     
  20. forrest noble Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    210
    I actually like some of his ideas but they do not seem to be related to his topic here or his initial URL posting. He makes unqualified statements without URL or other support. At least he should qualify his statements by saying "I think," "in my opinion," "according to my hypothesis/ theory," etc. Even then this is not the right forum for non-mainstream opinions but at least he would get less flack that way. I looked at the Alternative Theory Forum and have not observed him playing there. There are a fair share of polite commenters there who could give their polite opinions concerning his ideas, theories, etc. In time he would probably get some good advice on what to read, where to look for support, or other opinions concerning what might be right or wrong about his ideas. When unsupported statements are being made in a mainstream forum many will make snide remarks, challenge and criticize unsupported statements. I hope he will eventually learn, by one means or another, that mainstream forums are not the best place to make unsupported statements. Even mainstream statements can be questioned concerning corroborative support.

    I think many posters are under the delusion, I expect like cav755, that a mainstream forum is the place to tell the so-called truth-of-reality. They don't realize that these forums do not explain anything that is certain. They just explain different versions and opinions of mainstream theory, which ultimately could be totally right, or completely wrong. It is a place where students can come to read, learn, and discuss mainstream views which they learn in school, not to listen to uncorroborated alternative views.
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225


    Bingo! That's the whole crux of the matter. He along with Farsight and undefined, see themselves as above any scientific reproach by all and sundry.
     
  22. cav755 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    439
    The Big Bang is a religious belief. Any discussion of it in any thread, let alone a mainstream physics thread, is a waste of time. Students should understand this. You think you are protecting them, however, you are not.

    All of the evidence is evidence our Universe is a larger version of a black hole polar jet.
     
  23. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225


    This is what I mean forrest.
    Others have already picked him as a troll that has returned with a different handle.
    Notice how he avoids answering the tough questions, and like other trolls, just comes back with the same old nonsense.
     

Share This Page