There's a Black Hole at the Cosmic Core

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by Peter Lamont, Jul 21, 2012.

  1. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    OK I misspoke there. You would not see the other ship approaching at c.

    What I was focused on was the closing speed, which is defined from the frame of the two ship's mutual destination. When I said, "you will see", I was still talking about closing speeds and should have phrased it differently.

    I have read some discussions that question what exactly each ship would "see", but they would add nothing to this discussion and are for the most part disputed interpretations.

    I would still contend that an observer on either ship, with the knowledge of his own velocity relative to his destination, could calculate the closing speed of the two ships, as defined in the frame of the destination. That closing speed could be in excess of c, without either ship's velocity being in excess of c.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. wlminex Banned Banned

    I wonder about two photons, approaching each other - "head-on" - at velocity c. Each of the photons has velocity c and will travel X distance in Y time. Is not the 'closing speed' then 2xc relative to a reference frame 'outside' that of the photon pair? The photons should then 'meet' (interact) at a distance X/2. Non-locality and LF contraction not considered in this example.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Peter Lamont Registered Member

    Hi, Quantum Quack!
    That Dumbest guy! I took the trouble to explain, 'Inward Expansion' to him and asked him to get back to me and tell me what he thought of it - but he's on some high horse, talking about 'feces,' I really don't want anything to do with the guy. I guess that's me. I don't think you think too much of him, either.

    You understand this Inward Expansion, I'm sure. Inward Expansions all accelerate because they are drawn by an attractive force emminating from a Central Point.

    Outward Expansions originate from a central point. Inward Expansions accelerate to a central point. Something I haven't said, is that of course, Inward Expansions all reach a TerminalnVelocity, before being 'swallowed.'

    Outward Expansions all slow down (and stop.) Now, what exactly happens on the outer edge of the Heliosphere I don't think is understood perfectly by anyone. We do however, have sattelites that have been that far. Let's see what they tell us about what's going on there!

    Inward Expansions all speed up, it's just the nature of the beast! I can show these Inward Expansions occur in Nature, without having to invent, make up (fabricate) any non-existant, repulsive (Yech...) forces. There's only one problem, they're all Inward.

    I don't have to tell you, you've probably noticed - most of my accelerating expansion models (and the expansion of the Observable Universe is accelerating - so I'm not too far off base) involve air. That's because air is such an 'elastic' medium, kinda like Gravity, to me. If you jump up, you won't hit your head. It will be as if you have stretched an elastic band from the ground. Elastic Gravity will gently pull you back.

    This theory is bitterly repressed, that's why they moved me. All I can do, sometimes is pass out handouts. Once, one man came running back to me, 'This is against Einstein,' he said. This bothered me greatly.
    When I got back, later that day, I was sitting by my computer, totally dejected, and I heard a voice. The voice said, 'Write!.'
    I remember I was trembling. "Write what?' I asked.
    And the voice said.'Write that you alone agree with me, that my Cosmological Constant was my biggest blunder! Write that henceforth, you are 'Einstein's Disciple.' And then he was gone. All there was was a faint hint of tobacco smoke - he smoked a pipe, didn't he?
    I like to tell that story - I don't mind, it really happened. Sometimes I call myself that, 'ED.'

    Did you ever have anything like that happen to you, Quantum Quack?
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Peter Lamont Registered Member

    Look Origin,
    This argument you're having with 'Only Me,' has got to stop. Why don't you and him start a new thread, then you could argue yourself blue in the face. It's my opinion, by the way - he knows a lot more about SR and GR than you do!

    I said you were slippery. You denied it. I said I explained Inward Expansion to you, which mentioned the 'Nozzle' the air was approaching - while this air was demonstrating how all Inward Expansions accelerate as they go, rather in the way the expansion of the Observable Universe is expanding - and you (slippery) tell me you haven't 'addressed' nozzles and you're a Chemical Engineer! That's Post# 41, or possibly #44, I forget. You can find it, slippery. No, you're full of misinformation, piss and vinegar.
    You're blind to everything I show you.
    No, I don't want to talk to you!
  8. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    The above was not a constructive post/comment!

    And if you hang around long enough you will find that discussions and threads have a life of their own. There is no way to avoid tangential discussions, that would at the same time encourage a reasonable exchange of ideas and information.

    Origin and I are just fine, as far as I am concerned, and I don't think his understanding of SR and GR is at all deficient, misunderstandings and differences of opinion and interpretation aside. He does not claim to be an expert working in the field and neither do I.
  9. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    I thought you had misspoke, no problem. I still have some disagreement with the rest of your post but I could easily be wrong so I'm good.
  10. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Gee whiz, where did that come from? Have you been drinking or something?
  11. Peter Lamont Registered Member

    Only Me,
    I find what you write absolutely fascinating, and your wide understanding of SR and GR show me that you have a high education in this field. Your excellent knowledge enriches my thread, and from you I have learned much. However as I requested of Origin, why don't you start a new thread? And not use mine to spread your views!

    .......I want you to come down to Earth.

    I agree with Einstein, that Gravity is merely a distortion of space-time, but for the purposes of argument, I like to call it Simple Gravity, if that's okay?

    Now, I want to ask you for something - something I think I probably asked you for before - an expansion that speeds up (accelerates) but not your Universe. Solar Wind not withstanding.

    I'm not asking for much, such a thing is common enough, I think. An example? The restriction in a Venturi Tube causes the air in the tube to speed up and lose pressure (expand). Wouldn't you agree? That's mine, now it's your turn.

    The reason I'm asking is because the expansion of the Observable Universe is also speeding up.

    Nobody has seen the Universe, by the way. It might be expanding or it might be contracting. It'smy opinion that knowing what the Observable Universe is doing can assist us in our investigation as to what the Universe is doing. If, for example, we (in the Observable Universe) were going in, rather than out, wouldn't that help us determine what the rest of the Universe was doing?

    Knowing as you must, that the expansion of the Observable Universe is accelerating - your example (of a speeding up expansion) might also help us determine what the Observable Universe is doing. Good luck, Only Me. If you can't come up with one, please don't worry.
  12. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    but Peter , we, oops sorry, science, don't know what the universe is "doing" science only have an idea of what the universe has done or was doing billions of years ago...remember the light speed information model...
    so this:
    should read:
    see? my old auto tech teacher once said after 60 minutes on Electronic Fuel Injection Systems....."'tis all Bullshit" 'tis all bullshit....:m:
    and you think you have problems...[chuckle]
  13. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Since both photons travel a distance of X, independent of the other, the total distance would be 2X.

    Since photons have a velocity of c, the closing speed would be 2c.

    But this is only directly observed by an observer located where the photons will meet, who knows that the photons will travel a combined distance of 2X in the time it takes one photon to travel X... Thus the closing speed is 2c.

    Nothing ever travels faster than c.
  14. normal e.t. pet Registered Member

    Hello, I have been a reader of sciforum for while. Folloewd this post for while. I AM NOT SCIENTIST OR PHYSIST but Black Holes have always intrested me I guess. Peter Lamont keep asking for something falling in not acelorating. I have parchuted before and was told to hold body to slow down certin way. Not sure if I under stand example for for not your universe but for freefalling for jummping out of planes count for inward speedup? Somhow remembered when you jump gravity makes you speed up faster and faster but not after certain speed. My dad said is terminal velocity. found this on google " " do not understand it that much but seems like air only lets you go so fast afterwhile? Not scienist but know you cant breath in space cause no air but could be something else slowing down for resistants beside air?
    Sorry not relly smart like people I read here and never been in space but is skydiver falling only so fast example that Peter Lamont asking for or is that not count because nobody ever parchuted except our universe? On youtube watched video of parachute on Mars recently but even though no air to breath it stiil worked. That still our universe though right?
    Would really like to learn more cause would suck giong into black hole. Here is what I think again how to get to webplace about fallig in and not speedig up any more again.
    hope I not make anybody mad. Had hard time figuring out how to type and make here so am trying. IM a user name now. From movie E. T. old song from some movie about space or something that goes we'd make good pets cause earlyer sombody said aliens make us so not missing link I though maybe like we make wolfs pet long time ago and now dogs. So maybe aliens take friendly guerillas and peticized? Any way maybe I started out NORMAL E.T. PET ok?
  15. normal e.t. pet Registered Member

    Sorry, but forgot to ask in my first reply. after I typed it I was rereading all the other pages again and rememberd wanted to ask about how many kinds of deceleration cause you sai d 2 kinds of acelleration cause when falling out of planes youcan hold ou your arms and slow down. Not fliyng vortex on bird wings I dont thinka nd cant make you stop. But is that still acelerrating but slower? but remmember they told us deccellertonn may spelled diferant.
    Think you said that it is maybe negative accelertion but yo'ure dont start fallign up! right? I probly shouldnt not have typed this account im' kinda tired but weerd seems like I getto learn alot from smarter poeple like you and probly never got moneyto able to goto collages some day. sorry not really grate at sounding rigt when I' write but I relly tired now sorry. by
  16. Peter Lamont Registered Member

    Yeah, Only Me, but I have to stand by what I wrote. This thread isn't about things travelling at 'relativistic velocities,' it's much more basic than that. I love Einstein, personally. But that's neither here nor there!

    What concerns me is the 'accelerating expansion of the Observable Universe.' That's what this thread is about, more than anything. Don't get me wrong - I read everything that you wrote, more than once, sometimes. It's absolutely fascinating, if you don't mind me saying.

    My suggestion that you start a thread on 'Relativistic Velocities' was not meant as a criticism, more as a compliment, but that's for you to judge. This thread doesn't go near that subject. This thread is about 'backyard physics,' if you like. It's just that I have so many questions and all I'm trying to do is answer them. You could help me!

    One way you could help me, Only Me, is to come up with an accelerating expansion that is not your Universe (or the Solar Wind, which is debatable). If you would fill this 'fairly easy' request for me I would be thrilled.

    I think I've asked you for this item a few times now. If it's too much work, just tell me. Come on, Only Me, you can do it!
  17. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Why do you want someone to come up with an example of this expansion silliness? According to you the universe is accelerating into a black hole at the cosmic core. Despite the comical errors this sentence is fraught with, the idea by definition is not an expansion but a contraction.
  18. normal e.t. pet Registered Member

    Peter Lamont, Sorry if bothring you but reading from really smart people like you help me get smarter. Was really tired last night and took long time to figgure how to type and ask questions. to make show up so I could read! You ideas make me help to get smarter to do that so Iam maybe smarter already.
    do not nkow whole bunch about black holes but scary to get sucks in one or fall in one but seem even worse than america getting hotter on account of usv's. Maybe more worse because hotter just hotter but black wholes kill evrybody right.
    Was interweb place I tried show you about what was you meaning about slowing down or speed up?
    I know I not spell evry things write but you smarter people helps me to learn.
    Other things I wrighted before really questions cause you seemed to know about what you said about know missing links. Cause we kindof look like guerillas but knot Twins all the way. Makbe was skinny dinosore cause no hair on them in pictures and we only have some hair like maybe halve dinos and monkey together cause our cats make kittens look like mom and dad but not twins too right.
    Dont get mad couse maybe I try to learn from you and make more peopl learn and then maybe we can make big parachute or something else to not make us go in black holes maybe not evrybody but worlds need smarter peopl like you and maybe you coulb be maybe hero and save evrybody and we all be hapier!!!
    Sorry was so tired last night but if not to hard you would teell me explain about 2 kinds of acelleration maybe not spell rihgt but hope you know what i mean. not like im bbing mean too you in army they said acelrate and decelrate when they maked us jump out of planes and put arms out but not flap like birds cause stupid peopl cant fly! Any way feels like you make me smarter when i read you stuff an would like to be able to help you worn people help not falling into black holes ok by now is neet to read stuff on computer I writs because not just letter i print on printer. maybe your fault im' get littlle bit smarter allready! Sorry now by but maybe you tell me about diffrent types i asked. maybe other people wunt to no too! ok by now really
  19. Peter Lamont Registered Member

  20. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Peter, this thread is in the Pseudoscience folder so you can present pretty much any idea you like. That does not mean that there will be no one who questions your logic or the source of your information, from a scientific point of view.

    Every example that you have suggested it seems to me requires some compression preceding the decompression and expansion. It fits well with everyday experience, but it from what I can tell has very little to connect it to the universe generally.

    I guess you could say, from a completely naive interpretation, that the big bang followed a highly compressed state, which led to a rapid even accelerating expansion, but even that is terribly flawed, as far as science is concerned.

    Attempting to explain the accelerating expansion of the universe as being the work of some massive black hole, just does not make any sense. For one thing the universe appears to be expanding in all directions and at an accelerating rate. For a black hole to be responsible for that, it would have to be larger than the universe and hollow with the universe inside it. Such that the shell of a black hole was accelerating the universe.., apart and toward that shell....

    If the black hole were at the core or center of the universe, we would not be seen an associated accelerating expansion. Instead we would be seeing everything moving toward the black hole and the distances would be getting smaller not the other way around.

    None of this makes any sense. You cannot explain the things we see happening at cosmological scales by what happens, as compressed air escapes through a small opening.

    When observations of redshifted light suggested that galaxies were moving away from one another, and perhaps over great distances, even at velocities that could approach and/or exceed the speed of light, the best explanation within the context of the best descriptive cosmological theory we have, is that it is space itself that is expanding. A little bit everywhere, in a manner that over very great distances the velocity of that expansion becomes observable in the redshifting of light from distance sources.

    When observation, fairly recent as these things go, suggested that that expansion of space was actually speeding up, the concept that some sort of dark energy, meaning unknown and previously unmeasure energy, was opposing gravity in the deep dark regions of space between galactic clusters, such that instead of being drawn together under the influence of their mutual gravities, they apear to be being driven apart at an accelerating rate. The cause, as the name dark energy suggests is yet unconfirmed. Meaning no one knows why or how just that this appears to be what is happening.

    These have been watered down attempts to describe what appears to be happening at very large scales, in a lay oriented manner.

    Since this is a discussion in pseudoscience, on more than one occassion I have been tempted to toss out some wild fringe based explanation. I have resisted, mostly because even though it is in pseudoscience, it seems that you and a few others are taking the discussion seriously, and I am reluctant to add fuel to a fire that does not appear to me to be leading anyone to a greater understanding or insight into the underlying dynamics involved.
  21. Peter Lamont Registered Member

    Origin, slippery, this time I gotcha!

    I refer to your post # 112. I say that Loss of Pressure was caused by Acceleration (I think Daniel Bernoulli was the first to associate Loss of Pressure with Acceleration) but in your Post # 112 you say, 'Your statement that Acceleration leads to a Loss of Pressure is (and I quote:- ) 'NONSENSIBLE.'

    Well, let's see, shall we? 1) The air entering a Venturi Tube will Accelerate at the restriction. Do you Agree/Disagree?

    I assume you agree... I don't know how much Physics you know - if any!

    Okay, here's the next question:- 2) At the restriction, does the air Gain Pressure, or does it Lose Pressure?

    The answer is:- 1) Agree and
    2) Lose Pressure.

    I hope you realise the air entering a Venturi Tube will Accelerate at the restriction. I hope you can also realise that this air Loses Pressure at the restriction - I mean, that's what Venturi's are all about, isn't it - that Loss of Pressure?

    Now, are you saying that it's just co-incidence, that in this case Acceleration causes Loss of Pressure, but Daniel Bernoulli said it was a Law of Science. And I agree!

    Argue your way out of this one, Slippery. Or will you just ignore this post? Yeah, you probably will.
  22. Peter Lamont Registered Member

    Only Me,
    In 1998 they were looking to see how fast the expansion was slowing down (in the manner of any Outward Expansion) and they found instead the expansion was speeding up (accelerating). Now, instead of questioning their Big-Bang, Modern Scientists promptly came up with, invented (fabricated) a new force no one had ever heard of before - Anti-Gravity.

    They had to re-name it Dark Energy, a much 'cooler' sounding name, and much easier to sell - especially as Wiki says Anti-Gravity doesn't exist!

    Something else, nobody has seen the Universe. Your expansion of the Universe is entirely without evidence. I'm a scientist - I look for evidence. What we know, and this is so important, as it helps us see what the rest of the Universe is doing, is that the expansion of the Observable Universe (that tiny part of the universe that we can know about) - the expansion of the Observable Universe is accelerating.

    Because I've been looking for them, I've become good at spotting them - these expansions that accelerate. I must have given you ten by now, ten examples of systems that accelerate as they expand. In addition I've asked several people to help me find them, but nobody has been able to right now.

    So those ten accelerating expansions are all I know of, and all anybody looking at this thread knows of (unless everybody's keeping them secret) and when I look at them, I notice something...

    But first you have to understand that I like to use 'air' in my models (of expansions that speed up) and this air, of course, comes at an atmospheric pressure (14 psi?) so yes, there is compression at the beginning. THat pressure, 'compression' as you call it, matters little to me, all that's important to me during the experiment, is the accelerating expansion (the expansion of the Observable Universe is accelerating - so I'm not too far off course.

    Okay, about these accelerating expansions - I can't help but notice something:- They're all Inward.

    You see, the reason the expansion and everything else is accelerating, is because they are being pulled -toward a Central Point
    by some attractive force. I have already explained, this attractive force could be a Low Air Pressure, or it could be induced by an electric motor, or gasoline or even Gravity. This is also how it is in experiment.

    Each Galaxy is a vortex -it says that in Wiki, under 'Vortices.' That means our Milky Way must ultimately conform to the rules of being a (free) vortex. Now, the outside of any such vortex turns only slowly, I hope we can agree on that?

    As we are pulled in (toward the center of the Galaxy) we will accelerate - are we still together?

    Now to me, Pressure and Volume are related, but 'Inversely.' That is to say that when you increase one, you decrease the other, and vice-versa. This also agrees with Robert Boyle of Boyle's Law. Acceleration causes Low Pressure and that's Expansion. This expansion is caused by our acceleration thru' Space, toward the black hole at the center of our galaxy.

    At the center of a galaxy is a black hole. Can we agree on that.

    Well my point here is that this acceleration, toward the black hole is accompanied by expansion. If you're falling, in Space, you don't know you are falling - conforming with Gravity, all forces acting on you will seem to be even. With all forces even, a system will expand evenly, with the items furthest away expanding fastest.

    Now, at a black hole is a zone that is totally cold (any heat gets eaten) and dark (same for light) totally decompressed and completely expanded.

    You have a problem believing all this expansion can fit into a black hole, and I guess it is paradoxical in a way, but look for a second at a vacuum cleaner - at the nozzle is a minimum pressure and a maximum expansion, but you also have to understand
    the speed - things are being removed faster than they are arriving. It's exactly the same for a black hole.

    Well, that's what's happening within our Milky Way. The Expansion going on, together with the Acceleration, are due solely to Gravity emminating from the Central Point of the Galaxie's Center of Mass, the black hole at the center.

    This accelerating expansion is perhaps number 11, and again, it's Inward! But they all are - it's the attractive force emminating from a Central Point, in this case a black hole.

    Because every Accelerating Expansion I can find is Inward (well it has to be - the attractive force) it forces me to conclude that since the expansion of the Observable Universe is accelerating - we can only be going in. There must be some attractive force, Mable - drawing us in. It can only be the Center of Mass of the Universe.

    What do you think is causing the expansion of the Observable Universe to speed up. I think you should tell me?
  23. Peter Lamont Registered Member

    Quantum Quack,
    The Big-Bang Theory is a backward looking theory, all about what happened (supposedly) 14 billion years ago. My Mable Theory is a forward looking theory, all about what's going to happen in the future, 14 billion years from now.

    I understand completely that you talk about the Observable Universe as it was, in the past - but you should understand on your part that I like to talk about the Observable Universe the way it is, and how it will be.

    What's more important, the future or the past? How many eyes do you have looking backwards, and how many eyes do you have looking forward? What's more important, the future or the past?

    If someone comes up with a forward looking theory, don't you think you should pay attention? The Mable Theory fits that bill. Any speeding up expansion is inward... We're going in. Drawn by the center of mass of the Universe.

    This theory, the Mable Theory, is the mirror image of the Big-Bang Theory, so one of us has got it backwards! Now the Big-Bangers have the Bible on their side, but they live in a Universe operated by Anti-Gravity. That's all Dark Energy is - Anti-Gravity. I live in a Universe operated by Gravity. It's Gravity that keeps the moon orbiting Earth....

    Where does Gravity run out? It doesn't - it's Universal according to Newton. That's good enough for me!

    If Gravity rules, it's no surprise that we're going in. That's actually why the expansion is accelerating - we're falling into the C of M of the Universe. That's what I used to believe, anyway. What's there at the center of mass? Depends entirely on the Rate of Acceleration of the Observable Universe thru' Space, in relation to whatever is there, at the center.

    Thanks, Quantum Quack for your kindness. I always liked you. You're something special, IMO!

Share This Page