BLACK HOLES Tutorial based on observations and GR

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by paddoboy, Sep 9, 2015.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Last edited: Sep 26, 2015
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Some points in summing:

    [1]In line with explaining the effects on matter/energy and spacetime, plus the laws of physics and GR, BHs are a logical conclusion, and at this overwhelmingly thought to exist by most astronomers.

    [2] BH's have no more than three properties often called the "no hair theorem": Mass, Spin and Charge.
    Charge is negated rather quickly, while spin over much longer periods.

    [3]The EH of a BH is the point of no return and where the escape velocity equals "c"

    [4]Although no information can cross beyond the EH, we are allowed to logically and reasonably assign properties such as angular momentum to the spacetime making up the BH, and the mass.

    [5]Every mass has its own Schwarzchild radius, beyond which compulsory collapse to BH status is inevitable.

    [6]No observer will ever see anyone or anything cross the BH EH due to gravitational time dilation.

    [7] From the PoV of a person falling in, and ignoring tidal gravity effects, he crosses as per normal with no time dilation of any sort.

    [8]The effects of tidal gravitation will overcome all other forces, including the strong nuclear, on its one way trip to the EH, and depending on the criticality in the spacetime curvature of the BH.

    [9] BHs come in three general sizes: micro/quantum size BHs that are thought to have been created at the BB: stellar size BHs: and SMBHs of gigantic proportions and most probably residing at the heart of most galaxies.

    [10]BHs can come in three types: Schwarzchild, a BH with only mass but no spin or charge: Kerr-Newman: A BH with mass, charge and spin: and a Reissner-Norstrom, a BH with mass and charge only:

    [11] Hawking radiation, a quantum effect not as yet observed, but a reasonable extension of particle pair production, act to evaporate the BH over time. Those time scales are immense and compare to the projected life of the universe.

    Perhaps I need to add one more point to the above addendum to the tutorial......
    The Singularity:
    The definition as per Kip Thorne in his book, Black Holes and Time Warps [probably the world's foremost authority on BH's] is as follows:

    " A region of spacetime, where spacetime curvature becomes so strong that the general relativistic laws break down and the laws of quantum gravity take over. If one tries to describe a singularity with GR alone, one finds [incorrectly] that tidal gravity and infinite curvature are infinitely strong there. Quantum gravity probably replaces those infinities with quantum foam" .
    Last edited: Sep 26, 2015
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member


    Why are you jumping in to answer a question I put to The God?

    Good for you, then.

    Who? Them, or me? What are you talking about?

    To decide whether an error bar is acceptable or unacceptable, you have to actually decide what your criteria of acceptability are. That makes the degree of unacceptable very relevant.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Because it was the right answer and because I felt like it. I won't be saying much about you for reasons that are obvious to me and irrelevant to everybody else. Good for you also.
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Here is an interesting BH paper that aligns with most I have said, and added other features I have missed........

    Spinning Black Hole

    Edmund Bertschinger & Edwin F. Taylor

    24 Black holes are macroscopic [large-scale] objects with masses 25 varying from a few solar masses to billions of solar masses. 26 When stationary and isolated, they are all, every single one of 27 them, described exactly by the Doran solution. This is the only 28 instance we have of an exact description of a macroscopic 29 object. The only elements in the construction of black holes 30 are our basic concepts of space and time. They are thus the 31 most perfect macroscopic objects in the universe. They are the 32 simplest objects as well. 33 —Subrahmanyan (“Chandra”) Chandrasekhar [edited]
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Ok. It's just that your post read like you had some kind of issue with what I wrote, and I was wondering what that might be. Never mind.
  10. Engell79 Registered Senior Member

    Hi paddoboy
    An enjoyabel read, thank you for the effort.
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Hya Engell79!
    Glad you enjoyed it.
    Apologies to the village Idiot that took it off track somewhat though.
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Here is an Interesting/fun paper put together by a couple of well known experts.....Edmund Bertschinger & Edwin F. Taylor
    This paper covers such aspects as .......
    "Box 1. Eggbeater Spacetime?"
    Being “spaghettified” as you approach the center of a black hole is bad enough. But according to some calculations, your atoms will be scrambled by violent, chaotic tidal forces before you reach the center—especially if you fall into a young black hole. The first theory of the creation of a black hole by J. Robert Oppenheimer and Hartland Snyder (1939) assumed that the collapsing structure is spherically symmetric. Their result is a black hole that settles quickly into a placid final state. A diver who approaches the singularity at the center of the Oppenheimer-Snyder black hole is stretched with steadily increasing force along the r-direction and compressed steadily and increasingly from all sides perpendicular to the r-direction. A real astronomical collapse is rarely spherically symmetric. Theory shows that when a black hole forms, the asymmetries exterior to the event horizon are quickly radiated away in the form of gravitational waves—in a few seconds measured on a distant clock! However, the gravitational radiation captured inside the event horizon evolves and influences spacetime inside the black hole. So what happens? There is no way to verify any predictions about events inside the event horizon (Objection 1), but that does not stop us from making them! Vladimir Belinsky, Isaac Markovich Khalatnikov, Evgeny Mikhailovich Lifshitz, and independently Charles Misner discovered that Einstein’s equations predict more than one kind of singularity. Their theory says that as a diving observer approaches the center point, spacetime can oscillate chaotically, squeezing and stretching the poor traveler in random directions like an electric mixer (eggbeater). These oscillations increase in both amplitude and frequency as the astronaut approaches the singularity of the black hole. Any physical object, no matter what stresses it can endure, is necessarily utterly destroyed at an eggbeater singularity. However, there is some theoretical evidence that eggbeater oscillations will die away, so an astronaut who waits a while to dive after the black hole has formed may not encounter them. Before these eggbeater oscillations die away—if they do— spacetime in the chaotic regions is definitely NOT described by the Schwarzschild metric! In the present chapter we assume the non-spinning black hole under exploration is an ancient one and that we can ignore possible eggbeater oscillations of spacetime. We predict (and hope!) that as our astronaut colony approaches the center, the “spacetime weather” is clear and calm. (#eggbeater)

    Box 2. Local shell coordinates expressed in global rain coordinates

    Box 3. An Infinite Number of Global Coordinate Systems

    Box 4. Local rain coordinates expressed in global rain coordinates

    Box 5. Embedding diagrams for Schwarzschild and global rain coordinates.

    Box 8. The River Model

    Box 9. The Planck length

    An Interesting comment I thought was the following.

    Comment 6. You know some relativity that Einstein missed! 443 Chapter 5 says that Einstein took seven years to appreciate that global 444 coordinate separations have no measurable meaning. Actually, he never fully 445 understood this fundamental idea. At a Paris conference in 1922—seven years 446 after he completed general relativity—Einstein worried about what would happen at a location where the denominator of the dr2 447 term in the Schwarzschild metric, 448 namely (1 − 2M/r), goes to zero. He said it would be “an unimaginable disaster 449 for the theory; and it is very difficult to say a priori what would occur physically, 450 because the theory would cease to apply.” (In 1933 the Belgian priest Georges 451 Lemaˆıtre recognized that the apparent singularity in Schwarzschild coordinates 452 at r = 2M is “fictional.”) Einstein was also baffled by the dT dr cross term in the 453 global rain metric (32) presented to him by Paul Painleve and rejected his ´ 454 solution out of hand. This led to the eclipse of this metric for decades. 455 Congratulations: You know some relativity that Einstein did not understand!

    And before any of my alternative cosmological adversaries jump on me, no as yet I do not understand all this interesting paper by recognised experts, but I'm going to give it a good try in the weeks ahead!
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    In the OP tutorial, mini/quantum size BH's was only briefly mentioned.
    These quantum size BH's are speculated to have been created in the very first moment of the evolution of spacetime and the BB.

    It has also raised much furore with some re the energy levels being explored at the LHC, which are within those levels at which these quantum BH's, are speculated to have been created.
    Talk of the Earth being swallowed and such other doomsday scenarios, do not though hold too much water.
    Firstly HR would evaporate these little buggers in a very short time, and this would be the means by which they would be detected.
    Secondly, such tiny BH's and their tiny radiuses would see them pass through massive objects such as the Earth without too much interactions.
  14. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

  15. Farsight

    This is rubbish, paddoboy. You would know this if you actually read the Einstein digital papers instead of lapping up some Chicken-Little tosh by some arrogant quack who thinks he knows better than Einstein. Look at this, this tells you all you need to know, you can work the rest out yourself:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    With you and your arrogant quack remark, are you standing in front of a mirror?
    Einstein doubted BH's period in the early days, and he would be literally rolling in his grave at the amount of times you take him out of context and misrepresent him.
    You have also been banned from many forums for your general nonsensical claims, and have been shown to be a fraud on this forum by at least two others.
    Do better.
  17. Farsight

    I've only been banned for correcting people who brook no dissent, and I have not been shown to be a fraud by anybody.

    And your abuse will not change what Einstein said.
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    My abuse???Where? All I did was repeat what you said.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    If you are unable to stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
    On the other fraudulent remarks, you have been banned for preaching non mainstream woo, nothing more nothing less. You also most certainly have been shown to be a fraud, who even at one time claimed to have a TOE.
    Your continued leaning on Einstein does not disguise those facts one little bit.
  19. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    People will either learn the actual science, and find out how grossly wrong some of the ideas here are, or they won't. Who cares if they are happy with the poor textual analysis provided by some posters here?

    It's not like the level of fraud that alternative medicine practitioners do. One poster here attempted to sell their own poor textual analysis as a self-published book, and where did it get them? They spent their own money on books that were likely pulped, their reputation is tattered, and likely the have seen repercussions in their personal and family life. That this person continues to attack others rather than try to learn any of the mathematics of relativity theory (after over a decade) is just a sign that we should be somewhat sad, not angry.
    paddoboy and Kristoffer like this.

Share This Page