Black Holes .

[paddoboy]

You think I'm anti-science? What give you that idea?

Because you basically failed to at least review as to what a scientific theory really is?
Because you seem to support river, whose reputation is gullible at best and positively anti science at worst?
Because when you are given reasonable answers [as per what a scientific theory really is] you fail to acknowledge it and the fact that you are wrong?

 

[davewhite04]

So you seriously believe that I had never heard of a scientific theory? I'm pretty sure river knows.

 

[DaveC426913]

You think I'm anti-science? What give you that idea?

See post 217 for an extant example.

 

[davewhite04]

Is this is what's meant for the saying "feeding the trolls", if it ain't it is now.

 

[DaveC426913]

Is this is what's meant for the saying "feeding the trolls", if it ain't it is now.

Correct. We are indulging you, that - with a few pats in the right direction - perhaps you can yet be saved.

 

[paddoboy]

So you seriously believe that I had never heard of a scientific theory?

Well had you? I mean as distinct from how a theory is defined every day?

I'm pretty sure river knows.

Are you? Why do you think he is banned from the sciences sections? Like I said, river's only "quality" is gullibility.
You could ask him if you like about the atomic war between Alien species on Mars?

 

[DaveC426913]

Are you? Why do you think he is banned from the sciences sections? Like I said, river's only "quality" is gullibility.
You could ask him if you like about the atomic war between Alien species on Mars?

Ask him why he thinks DHMO should be banned as a lethal substance.

 

[river]

DMHO stands for what ?

 

[river]

Well had you? I mean as distinct from how a theory is defined every day?

Are you? Why do you think he is banned from the sciences sections? Like I said, river's only "quality" is gullibility.
You could ask him if you like about the atomic war between Alien species on Mars?

What gullibility ?

You see I think , you are gullible .

BH have no essence , no material , physical essence upon which it is derived .

If you can can tell me otherwise I look forward to your post .

 

[DaveC426913]

DMHO stands for what ?

What gullibility ?

This should go viral.

river: you heard about DHMO, and how it can kill humans of inhaled. It is in almost everything we eat, and can dissolve many common materials.

You grew alarmed that such a toxin was so prevalent, and agreed that it should be banned.

And then we told you DHMO is di-hydrogen monoxide - better known as ... water.

You demonstrated a complete lack of effort to learn any facts about the substance before deciding you needed to take a stand on banning it.

That is a cartoonish level of gullibility. It shows how easily you can be manipulated into believing even the most transparent, and trivially-refutable non-facts.

The take away lesson here is:ask all the questions you want - but for your own sake, don't try to make claims about things of which you are ignorant.

Such as this nonsense:

BH have no essence , no material , physical essence upon which it is derived .

 

[river]

This should go viral.

river: you heard about DHMO, and how it can kill humans of inhaled. It is in almost everything we eat, and can dissolve many common materials.

You grew alarmed that such a toxin was so prevalent, and agreed that it should be banned.

And then we told you DHMO is di-hydrogen monoxide - better known as ... water.

You demonstrated a complete lack of effort to learn any facts about the substance before deciding you needed to take a stand on banning it.

That is a cartoonish level of gullibility. It shows easily you can be manipulated into believing even the most transparent, and trivially-refutable non-facts.

The take away lesson here is:ask all the questions you want - but for your own sake, don't try to make claims about things of which you are ignorant.

Such as this nonsense:

I forgot .

 

[river]

river said: ↑
BH have no essence , no material , physical essence upon which it is derived .

Tell me otherwise .

 

[DaveC426913]

Tell me otherwise .

Have done so, several times.

You're not interested in learning. You only ask enough questions until you can start making ignorant assertions. Why should I keep falling for that trick?


That's why you've been banned from the science forums.

 

[river]

Have done so, several times.

You're not interested in learning. You only ask enough questions until you can start making ignorant assertions. Why should I keep falling for that trick?


That's why you've been banned from the science forums.

It's not a trick question , it is a legitimate question ; in order for a BH to become upon what form of energy or matter is it based ?

What is this singularity based upon ?

 

[DaveC426913]

It's not a trick question , it is a legitimate question ; in order for a BH to become upon what form of energy or matter is it based ?
What is this singularity based upon ?

That's two different questions - one about a black hole, the other about the singularity at its centre.

When you say "based upon", what kind of answer are you looking for? Do you want to know how black holes form, and what properties they have?


I'm not falling for it, river. I've been patient explaining things to you before, but I've been down this road with you too many times. You will only listen long enough to decide that you know enough to decide it's nonsense.

 

[river]

river said: ↑
It's not a trick question , it is a legitimate question ; in order for a BH to become upon what form of energy or matter is it based ?
What is this singularity based upon ?

That's two different questions - one about a black hole, the other about the singularity at its centre.

When you say "based upon", what kind of answer are you looking for? Do you want to know how black holes form, and what properties they have?


I'm not falling for it, river. I've been patient explaining things to you before, but I've been down this road with you too many times. You will only listen long enough to decide that you know enough to decide it's nonsense.

Yet what the BH is based upon ; you can't answer .

A singularity has to have a physical aspect to it .

 

[DaveC426913]

Yet what the BH is based upon ; you can't answer .
A singularity has to have a physical aspect to it .

The fact that you don't understand the answer is your loss.

But thank you for confirming my suspicion that you have no interest in learning the first thing about the science involved.

You do realize that science will somehow manage to survive despite your rejection of it?

 

[river]

river said: ↑
Yet what the BH is based upon ; you can't answer .
A singularity has to have a physical aspect to it .

The fact that you don't understand the answer is your loss.

But thank you for confirming my suspicion that you have no interest in learning the first thing about the science involved.

You do realize that science will somehow manage to survive despite your rejection of it?

You realize that science evolves . In thought . In History of science .

From the Greeks . To Newton ; to Einstein . To the present day , 2019 .

 

[DaveC426913]

You realize that science evolves . In thought . In History of science .

From the Greeks . To Newton ; to Einstein . To the present day , 2019 .

Yes. In Newton's time we had no black holes.
In Einstein's time, we do.
Our understanding of physics has evolved as we learn more.

 

[river]

river said: ↑
You realize that science evolves . In thought . In History of science .

From the Greeks . To Newton ; to Einstein . To the present day , 2019 .

Yes. In Newton's time we had no black holes.
In Einstein's time, we do.
Our understanding of physics has evolved as we learn more.

Indeed

Question is upon what is the BH based ? Beyond the mathematics .

Mathematics of BH needs a physical attribute to it to be a real .

What physical properties does the singularty have ?