black holes may be evolving

[L Gilbert]

The maths underpinning Darwin's theory of natural selection could explain how the universe may be 'designed' to make black holes.

Did the universe evolve to make black holes?

Nuts. Something messed up my title

 

[Walter]

The Bamster evolved.

 

[Angstrom]

So we are inside a living thing, and we are all (our body) a universe to the infinitely smaller.

Makes sense.

 

[darkbeaver]

The Black Hole Catastrophe and the Collapse of Spacetime

 

[Dexter Sinister]

The usual BS from thunderbolts.info, this time a straw man fallacy. Mr. Crothers in the cited article first incorrectly defines a black hole, then argues that it theoretically can't exist (which of course is true in the terms he defines it), and concludes that therefore the whole edifice of modern cosmology is false. It's a little better quality than the usual BS, Crothers at least can do some mathematics, but still BS.

 

[darkbeaver]

Would you tells us the correct definition?

 

[Cliffy]

Would you tells us the correct definition?

Black holes can easily be found by squatting over a mirror and looking just behind the genitals. For some people, it can be found by looking in their ears. Black holes are everywhere, man.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Would you tells us the correct definition?

Surely you could look up something as basic as that. I will merely point out that he defined it as a point of infinite density surrounded by an event horizon, which is not what general relativity says it is. I also looked up Mr. Crothers and found his personal web site, where I read his rant about how he was kicked out of a physics Ph.D. program because of discrimination against his unorthodox ideas. Along the way he claimed that half a dozen working academic physicists had never heard of the Schwarzchild solution, including one whose work I've read some of who does talk about it, writing at a time long before Crothers encountered him. I knew about it as an undergraduate, it's inconceivable that half a dozen professional physicists wouldn't have heard of it. He cannot be telling the truth.

 

[darkbeaver]

This investigation arose out of discussions the author conducted with Professor H. P. Robertson and with Drs. V. Bargmann and P. Bergmann on the mathematical and physical significance of the Schwarzschild singularity. The problem quite naturally leads to the question, answered by this paper in the negative, as to whether physical models are capable of exhibiting such a singularity. -Albert Einstein

 

[Dexter Sinister]

I don't believe you know enough about general relativity to understand what that means or what the current thinking is on singularities, but in any event it has no bearing on Mr. Crothers' credibility, which is zero. He's trying to wear the mantle of Galileo, and failing.

 

[darkbeaver]

Mr. Crothers' credibility and credentials are unimpeachable. You seem to have developed a sudden dislike of mathematics. What do your SkeptiPro.com junk websites say about it, I wonder? I can't wait for their reply.

 

[L Gilbert]

The Bamster evolved.

Well, apparently he's one up on you then.

Why don't you keep your political crap out of the science forums?

The Black Hole Catastrophe and the Collapse of Spacetime

Not going to bother pointing out the holes in Crothers' wingnut postulations but I will link to someone who has: mathematics of black hole denialism - JREF Forum

 

[darkbeaver]

From Randi'sRentaSkeptic.org, give me a break! Still it's interesting reading. I don't often read fiction anymore but it might out me to sleep.

Einstein Was Wrong | Libertarian News


This paper is being continually updated with revisions and new findings.

In each of the four experiments, which were conducted in fall 2005 and spring 2006, ideological subgroups failed to update their beliefs when presented with corrective information that runs counter to their predispositions. Indeed, in several cases, we find that corrections actually strengthened misperceptions among the most strongly committed subjects.
​

- When Corrections Fail: The persistence of political misperceptions

Introduction

It is often claimed that Einstein’s theories of relativity have withstood every test thrown at them. This article attempts to challenge that claim by presenting a list of predictive failures, falsifying observations, and alternative explanations that better agree with the general rule of Occam’s razor. In science, it is generally accepted that the theory with the least amount of hypothetical postulates is superior to one with more. It was primarily on this basis that Einstein’s version of relativity won out over Lorentz’s, as Einstein was able to demonstrate a way to calculate relativistic mechanics without the need for an aether. However, as time has progressed, the amount of hypothetical entities required by Einstein’s theories has grown exponentially.

 

[coldstream]

The whole construct of Black Holes is based on the same type of exotic mathematics that gave us quantum mechanics, superstrings, .. with 11 dimensions, the expanding universe.. and other cosmological phenomenon.. that have two things in common.. they are utterly unprovable by empirical or experimental methods.. and they are totally without utility.

They rely exclusively on abstract formulas that produce only attributed results .. assessed by a closed cult, an aesthetic conceit, by a priestly class of academics. Just like the Big Bang.. the theory behind them seems to be collapsing as even their value as providing some localized predictive reliability is coming under question.

Spengler warned that science in late stage civilization would devolve into number forms.. it would abandon it proofs and technological utilities and project boundless belief systems.

 

[Cliffy]

Spengler warned that science in late stage civilization would devolve into number forms.. it would abandon it proofs and technological utilities and project boundless belief systems.

Hmmm... sounds an awful lot like religion, 'specially lak dat ol' tyme religion (the archaic kind).

 

[Dexter Sinister]

.. they are utterly unprovable by empirical or experimental methods.. and they are totally without utility.

Impressive. Your ignorance is even vaster than the dim rodent's. He at least has an alternative, BS though it is. Are you unaware, for instance, that the computer you use to post here depends critically on our understanding of quantum effects for its operation, and the system of global positioning satellites depends critically on general relativity for its accuracy?

 

[Liberalman]

Gerbils are afraid of black holes.

 

[coldstream]

Impressive. Your ignorance is even vaster than the dim rodent's. He at least has an alternative, BS though it is. Are you unaware, for instance, that the computer you use to post here depends critically on our understanding of quantum effects for its operation, and the system of global positioning satellites depends critically on general relativity for its accuracy?

That's completely untrue. Science in the 20th century divided into that governed by the scientific method.. based on hypothesis and experiment.. that it is true science.... and that governed by mathematical abstraction.. which even Cliffy, in his confused state, rightly ascribed as having the character of a religion.

All of the technological advances in computing, communication, medicine, mechanics, chemistry, metallurgy are a function of the former. As for the latter, you would be hard pressed to ascribe ONE useful technological development that has been produced... after the Second World War.. to Quantum Mechanics, Superstrings, Cosmological Speculation (Big Bang, dark matter, inflation.. the whole corrupt construct is becoming evermore complex and absurd as real astronomical observation undermines it)..or for that matter the 'True Cross' of General Relativity. They all came from mechanical, chemical, metallurgical, electrical labs.. NOT those of physics. Science loses its seminal inspiration when it divorces itself from technology.. and becomes a philosophy.

The orthodox scientific culture in major universities.. which is that which bamboozles funding from government and industry.. is now completely in the hands of Cosmologists.. which sequesters for itself the largest parts of grants.. and decides who gets tenure and Nobel Prizes. I can guarantee you that the E10 billion CERN Collider will produce absolutely nothing of any value in a technological sense. And i predict that the state of culture, society, science and technology.. will be in an advanced state of decay by latter quarter of the 21st Century.

Hmmm... sounds an awful lot like religion, 'specially lak dat ol' tyme religion (the archaic kind).

If you'd ever read some real theology, Cliffy.. not the pop religious tracts that comprise the Fundamentalist literature and those of Eastern mysticism.. you'd realize that like 'true' science.. 'true' religion is also founded on hypothesis, reason and observation (guided by revelation). from which the thesis is derived. That divide is there as well in our time.

 

[Cliffy]

If you'd ever read some real theology, Cliffy.. not the pop religious tracts that comprise the fundamentalists literature.. you'd realize that like 'real' science.. real 'religion' is also founded on reason and observation. That divide is there as well in our time.

Sorry dude, but I was raised catholic and am well versed in catholic ideology and history, as well as history of both western and eastern ideologies. The catholic church is based on population control, not spiritual development. I know catholics who have somehow managed to find their spiritual bearings within that archaic institution but, like any religion, most are just sheeple being fleeced by the hierarchy of the organization. The vatican is a black hole as far as I'm concerned

 

[coldstream]

The catholic church is based on population control, not spiritual development.

:roll: .. you can start by reading Humanae Vitae, Cliffy.. the encyclical on human sexuality..