Black holes do not exist

river said:
Not now either .
Click to expand...
Are you sure? Why not

This is not real?
20190410-78m-4000x2330.jpg

The first picture of a black hole was made using observations of the center of galaxy M87 taken by the Event Horizon Telescope. The image shows a bright ring formed as light bends in the intense gravity around a black hole 6.5 billion times the Sun’s mass.
Credits: Event Horizon Telescope Collaboration

or this
cygnus_a_vla.jpg

Radio data from the National Science Foundation’s Very Large Array facility was used to construct this image of Cygnus A, the brightest radio source in the sky located outside our galaxy. Long, thin particle jets produced by a supermassive black hole in the galaxy’s center link to vast lobes where speeding electrons trapped by magnetic fields emit radio waves. From tip to tip, the structure spans half a million light-years.
Credits: NRAO/AUI

https://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/starsgalaxies/black_hole_description.html

If you are distracted by the emission of radio waves, they do not come from the center of the black hole but from the stretched lobes far from the center and the event horizon.
 
Last edited:
river said:
Yes

Because Galaxies show no physical evidence of black-holes . Nothing .
Click to expand...
I just showed you evidence. You think they're lying?

Are you overlooking that spacetime is a fluid medium and galaxies rotate in this medium, What happens when you rotate an object in a fluid? You create a whirlpool, which is a hole in the medium with the water surface taking a steep downward attitude, swallowing everything that enters the whirlpool, depending on its size, just like it is known that a strong ocean maelstroms have swallowed small boats.
In narrow ocean straits with fast flowing water, whirlpools are often caused by tides. Many stories tell of ships being sucked into a maelstrom, although only smaller craft are actually in danger.[2] Smaller whirlpools appear at river rapids[3] and can be observed downstream of artificial structures such as weirs and dams. Large cataracts, such as Niagara Falls, produce strong whirlpools.
Click to expand...
Whirlpool that has a downdraft is referred to as Vortex in proper terms. Below are some of the largest and notable whirlpools in the world
Click to expand...
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-world-s-largest-whirlpools.html

Imagine a whirlpool the size of 1,000 light-years across ? With a near vertical slope where everything past the event horizon falls into, to be reduced to compressed elemental particles.

Explaining quasars
The researchers are excited to find the most massive black hole ever measured.
“Just imagining a black hole that is so huge is cool,” said Jens Thomas, an astronomer at the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Germany and one of the study’s authors.
Click to expand...
But the finding is also exciting because it lends support to astronomers’ current understanding of quasars, distant galaxies with massive central black holes that emit huge amounts of light as they gobble up nearby matter in a process called accretion. Studying quasars made astronomers think that black holes 10 billion or more solar masses must exist for some of these faraway quasars to be so bright.
Click to expand...
“Finally, we managed to find one nearby, which sort of confirms that our idea of how quasars work and how the accretion on black holes can explain them makes sense,” said study author Roberto Saglia, also of the Max Planck Institute.
Click to expand...
https://astronomy.com/news/2019/12/this-huge-galaxy-has-the-biggest-black-hole-ever-measured#

If we can observe whirlpools, maelstroms, and tornadoes on earth, why should we question similar phenomena in space?
 
Last edited:
river said:
Obviously . But that doesn't mean what I said isn't true .
Click to expand...
Oh I believe you speak the truth. You are saying that if you cannot observe it, it doesn't exist, or has not existed, or will not exist?

How big do you think the universe is, that you expect to observe all that's there? You can only see a sliver of the EM wave spectrum. Does that mean the rest of the spectrum doesn't exist?

A butterfly can see ultra violet.
Butterflies are thought to have the widest visual range of any animal. Butterflies can use ultraviolet markings to find healthier mates. Ultraviolet patterns also help certain species of butterflies appear similar to predators, while differentiating themselves to potential mates.Aug 15, 2011
Click to expand...
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...-can-see-or-glow-in-ultraviolet-light/243634/
Infrared light has longer wavelengths and lower energy than visible light and cannot be seen with the human eye. Mosquitoes, vampire bats, bed bugs, and some snake and beetle species, however, can use portions of the infrared spectrum for vision.
Sometimes humans can “see” infrared energy in the form of heat.Oct 17, 2013
Click to expand...
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/infrared-vision/#

Can you see atoms or molecules? If not, how is it that you exist?

Moved to my consciousness thread.

I have real trouble understanding your perspective. That bothers me.
 
Last edited:
Write4U said:
Oh I believe you speak the truth. You are saying that if you cannot observe it, it doesn't exist, or has not existed, or will not exist?

How big do you think the universe is, that you expect to observe all that's there? You can only see a sliver of the EM wave spectrum. Does that mean the rest of the spectrum doesn't exist?

A butterfly can see ultra violet.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...-can-see-or-glow-in-ultraviolet-light/243634/

https://www.nationalgeographic.org/media/infrared-vision/#

Can you see atoms or molecules? If not, how is it that you exist?

The subconscious interoceptive part of your brain doesn't knows you exist, yet it regulates your homeostasis. The only time it tells you something is when it goes wrong. The conscious perceptive part does know you exist, but it cannot control your homeostasis.

From Perception to Attention - Discovering the Brain - NCBI ...
Perception part of brain https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234148/#


I have real trouble understanding your perspective. That bothers me.
Click to expand...

Highlighted

No what I'm saying , is observe , objectively . Think about Galactic Jets , from both poles .

You have alot to think about .

Birds see in the ultraviolet as well , as do bees .
 
river said:
Highlighted

No what I'm saying , is observe , objectively . Think about Galactic Jets , from both poles ..
Click to expand...
I just demonstrated that the jets you see do not always come from black holes, but from quasars which are dense but not dense enough to be black holes, because you can actually see them.....:confused:

The pictures I posted show jets not coming from the poles but from outside the event horizon.
 
Write4U said:
I just demonstrated that the jets you see do not always come from black holes, but from quasars which are dense but not dense enough to be black holes, because you can actually see them.....:confused:

The pictures I posted show jets not coming from the poles but from outside the event horizon.
Click to expand...

So Galactic jets , which is what this thread is about , is not from black holes either .
 
Well, let's see;

If nothing can escape a black hole, why do some black holes have jets? (Intermediate)
It has been seen that black holes throw out jets of high speed particles at almost the speed of light from it's poles along it's spin axis. Since a black hole has so strong a gravitational field inside the Schwartzschild radius that nothing (not even photons) can escape, how come these material particles escape and what force accelerates them to such high speed?

You are correct that high speed particles are accelerated away from the black hole in jets along the black hole's rotation axis. This jet phenomenon manifests itself on the scale of supermassive black holes as Active Galactic Nuclei and on the stellar black hole scale as "microquasars".
Click to expand...
Likely the physics is similar in both cases even though the size scales are very different. The short answer to your question is the particles that form Astronomers still study the details of jet formation and acceleration, but the prevailing idea is its due to strong magnetic fields.
Click to expand...
Imagine an accretion disk around a black hole. Because of the high temperatures in the disk, the gas is ionized and forms a plasma. There are also likely strong magnetic fields that thread through the disk, and because of the laws of electromagnetism, are essentially "frozen into" the accretion disk. That means as the particles spiral into the black hole they drag the magnetic fields causing them to twist. Eventually the magnetic fields will become so strong that instead of the particles dragging the magnetic field accelerates the particles toward the poles. They then go flying out in the form of jets.
Click to expand...
It turns out that jets are a common theme in astrophysics. In addition to being seen around black holes, they're also seen around star forming regions. Astrophysicists think that jets serve an important function of getting rid of angular momentum in a system. Otherwise the accretion disk or protostar would fly apart because conservation of angular momentum would require it to spin very rapidly.
Click to expand...
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/th...y-do-some-black-holes-have-jets-intermediate#
 
Last edited:
river said: ↑
So Galactic jets , which is what this thread is about , is not from black holes either .
Click to expand...

Write4U said:
Not the ones emitting from the poles. Does anybody claim those jets are from black holes?
Click to expand...

Yet at the center of every Galactic Core is a Black hole . According to the current mainstream theory , The conundrum continues .
 
Imagine an accretion disk around a black hole. Because of the high temperatures in the disk, the gas is ionized and forms a plasma. There are also likely strong magnetic fields that thread through the disk, and because of the laws of electromagnetism, are essentially "frozen into" the accretion disk. That means as the particles spiral into the black hole they drag the magnetic fields causing them to twist. Eventually the magnetic fields will become so strong that instead of the particles dragging the magnetic field accelerates the particles toward the poles. They then go flying out in the form of jets.
Click to expand...

Very good . But not good enough .

Which three dimensionally physically means that there was no black hole to begin with .
 
river said:
Because Galaxies show no physical evidence of black-holes . Nothing .
Click to expand...

Moderator note: river has been warned for knowingly telling a lie.

He has been a member for here long enough that he cannot plausibly claim to be unaware of the physical evidence for black holes. Moreover, he was shown some, just a few posts above.
 
river said:
Yet at the center of every Galactic Core is a Black hole . According to the current mainstream theory , The conundrum continues .
Click to expand...
Why is that a conundrum? A spinning massive object at the center of a black hole? Maybe that's what forms spiral galaxies when they get big enough.

David Bohm demonstrated conservation of information in a rotating medium. (Laminar Flow)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top