 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsSpace ScienceAstronomyAmateur AstronomySpace FlightSpace StationShuttleSpace HistorySpace PolicySETI SpaceKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Space Forum / Astronomy / July 2006Mini-Bangs and Supernova Bangs
My critical mass density of a black hole theory I can relate to a supernova with the critical mass density to create a black hole. I'll go a step further and add all supernovas that produce black holes explode with the same force.(radiation) This is now proven. That helps what I keep posting."All mini-bangs produce universes exactly alike right down to the equal number of electrons. What I should have said first was I'm talking about type 11 supernovae We do use the word "critical" in describing BH for that is the critical area known as the event horizon. Best to keep in mind the force of gravity can be infinitely strong,and faster speed you need to over come it,and light the fastest speed the universe can achieve is not fast enough when a black hole has turned all its mass into gravitation A black hole is gravity all the way to the singularity Bert > My critical mass density of a black hole theory I can relate to a > supernova with the critical mass density to create a black hole. I'll go > a step further and add all supernovas that produce black holes explode > with the same force.(radiation) This is now proven. Citation? > That helps what I > keep posting."All mini-bangs produce universes exactly alike right down > to the equal number of electrons. Right down to the size of your nose? > What I should have said first was I'm > talking about type 11 supernovae We do use the word "critical" in > describing BH for that is the critical area known as the event horizon. > Best to keep in mind the force of gravity can be infinitely strong, This cannot be observationally verified. > and > faster speed you need to over come it,and light the fastest speed the > universe can achieve is not fast enough But to momentum there is no limit. > when a black hole has turned all > its mass into gravitation A black hole is gravity all the way to the > singularity Bert Black hole singularities do not exist. Even Hawkings implies such with his theory that black holes evaporate and information escapes before a singularity can form. Double-A Double-A Why do you take Hawking's black holes over my black holes. I say black holes can only grow larger ,and he says over time they can get smaller(evaporate) I can show black holes in emerged in space(center of galaxies) getting larger. Where does Hawking show them getting smaller. Hawking is not one of my ideals. Momentum you say can go infinitely fast,begs the question. What is moving? Bert > Double-A Why do you take Hawking's black holes over my black holes. Well sorry Bert, but Hawking's theories do carry a great deal more weight in the scientific community than yours do. > I > say black holes can only grow larger ,and he says over time they can get > smaller(evaporate) I can show black holes in emerged in space(center of > galaxies) getting larger. Where does Hawking show them getting smaller. > Hawking is not one of my ideals. Momentum you say can go infinitely > fast,begs the question. What is moving? Bert Let's say a test particle falling into a supposed black hole is moving. In classical Newtonian physics, one would expect it to accelerate to way past the speed of light. But in SR, we say it cannot go faster than c, however it does continue gathering momentum as it falls, but instead of greater speed, it increases in what it is sometimes called relativistic mass. So by simple reasoning, the momentum it accumulated falling in, must equal the momentum necessary to carry it out again. Just because the escape velocity may be greater than c, doesn't of itself mean that something cannot escape an object. For instance, a rocket under steady power could escape the Earth without ever reaching the Earth's escape velocity. But I couldn't get any good discussion on this because scientists only want to think of black holes in terms of GR, not SR. Double-A Double-A Even matter falling into the event horrizon does not reach 'c' 99.999999999999999999999999999999999 of 'c' yes I'm smarter than Hawking,and I know it Beert > Double-A Even matter falling into the event horrizon does not reach 'c' > 99.999999999999999999999999999999999 of 'c' yes I'm smarter than > Hawking,and I know it Beert Hey, Bert, I don't want to hear about who's smarter than who. I want someone to say, "Your're right, because ... ," or "Your're wrong because a} ... , b) ... , c) ... , d) ... ." Discussion is a way we can learn. Double-A They all have this in common. Their energy weakens the square of the distance,just like the EM force,and gravity. That begs the question now that the universe has gotten so much larger are shock waves traveling through space to weak as compared with shock waves 12 billion years ago that helped create the stars? Bert > They all have this in common. Their energy weakens the square of the > distance,just like the EM force,and gravity. That's simple geometry, Bert. The area of the surface of a sphere increases as the square of its radius. Therefore, anything coming out from a central body is spread thinner across that surface by the inverse of the square of the radius. > That begs the question now > that the universe has gotten so much larger are shock waves traveling > through space to weak as compared with shock waves 12 billion years ago > that helped create the stars? Bert Probably. Double-A Double-A Space dilutes all fields,and particles as they spread out going through it,so "right you are". My fastest picture ever taken of light shows how it fans out.from its source. oc always told us the universe was much denser 12 billion years ago That means shock waves were not needed at the spacetime when supernova stars came to be oc was bringing out that denser meant stronger gravitation Bert You did it again, BEERTbrain! That's the INVERSE square, fool! Can't you use a perfectly good term for a change? Weakens the square my a.s! Truly wimpy writing by a Nobel hopeful! Saul Levy >They all have this in common. Their energy weakens the square of the >distance,just like the EM force,and gravity. That begs the question now >that the universe has gotten so much larger are shock waves traveling >through space to weak as compared with shock waves 12 billion years ago >that helped create the stars? Bert |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.