Here is why Black Holes dont exist

This has been bugging me since the "photo" of an "actual black hole" came out a couple months back, i had been pondering a heady explanation too nerdy for Hip Forums, until I realized there was a far simpler way to do it

And here it is:

You have five oranges
You give those 5 oranges to someone else
How many oranges do you now have?
Most of you will say 0

Ok, next you have 5 peaches
You give those 5 peaches to someone else
How many peaches do you now have?
0?

Ok, well 0=0, ........thus oranges=peaches














That is, zero is undefinied. If you never had any of those oranges or peaches in the first place and tried to convince someone you now have zero of either of them, they wouldnt believe you as they never saw any oranges or peaches

In the same kind of way, anything divided by 0 is also not defined, it is NOT infinity. It is NOT a number.

If it were, and if 1/0 = Infinity, 2/0 = Infinity, then it would follow 1=2

Any Mathematician that calls himself a Mathematician is going to tell you 1/0 is undefined, it is NOT Infinity. And there are plenty of videos on youtube explaining this

And Yet Every Cosmologist on the planet will tell you something divided by 0 = Infinity, as thats what the solutions to the Field equations that give rise to Black Holes are based on:



Now you dont have to worry about most of the gobbildy gook in this equation, just the part with lower case r, the radius of the thing

If a black hole is defined as containing in the middle of it, and infinite point of density radius = 0

Then the right side of the equation actually breaks down to => - undefined + underfined + 0

It does not mean infinity!

End of part one: Before I go any further into more heady stuff, this is all you need to know. Ask yourself why every mathematician in the world will tell you Something/0 is undefined. Every Cosmologist will tell you something/0 = Infinity, then into the usual - nothing can escape a black hole not even light, a sentence you've heard a thousand times. There are "experts" in both the fields of maths and cosmology

equation above first appeared in 1916 and no one has really made any progress since then ( a few other solutions for different black holes, but same kind of thing)

From the event horizon inward anyway, 103 years so far a whole bunch of people talking out of their ass

Or put it an even simpler way, if there was even one single person on the planet currently or that had ever lived that was an "expert" on whats in the middle of these things, we would all already know

 

Part 2: Karl Schwarzschild


All he really did was:

- Start off with the assumption that a radius= 0 was even possible, or even meant anything
- Fiddle around with the field equations
- Assume something / 0 is infinity
- Hence infinite point of density, r=0

Well, technically wasnt him, but he started it

And this on the simplest solution for something that was never going to exist in the real world, a thing with no charge, no momentum and with nothing in the universe with it:

"In Einstein's theory of general relativity, the Schwarzschild metric (also known as the Schwarzschild vacuum or Schwarzschild solution) is the solution to the Einstein field equations that describes the gravitational field outside a spherical mass, on the assumption that the electric charge of the mass, angular momentum of the mass, and universal cosmological constant are all zero. The solution is a useful approximation for describing slowly rotating astronomical objects such as many stars and planets, including Earth and the Sun. It was found by Karl Schwarzschild in 1916, and around the same time independently by Johannes Droste, who published his much more complete and modern-looking discussion only four months after Schwarzschild."

 

Lol

 

Here's why black holes existin' or not existin' don't matter.........

Cause it don't. The Earth's gonna keep on pluggin' along, the sun's still gonna shine, and folks are still gonna be assholes to each other regardless of the answer.

 

Until our solar system gets absorbed by a black hole

 

Fuck off with your intellectual probabilities

 

If not, our sun is going to eventually Red Giant and destroy the Earth anyways.

 

HOORAY NOTHING MATTERS!

 

An unneccesary (and likely either false or ultimately subjective ) conclusion. Especially this:

Although a certainty, will happen many millennia in the future
Being sucked in a black hole eventually seems a possibility as well, but not that certain.

So if we start investing in space exploration now, our descendants (whatever freakish aliens we may become ) may be able to escape such threats

 

i passionately believe in aiming for that : )

 

Stay pure......remain human

 

I didn't specify a timeframe, are you quibbling over that or mentioning it to dissuade driftrue's nihilism?

New black holes are born out of the remanants of Very Massive Dying Stars. From brief research (google search), it doesn't appear there are any stars in our local bubble which are massive enough to create a black hole. Unless there is another way Black holes of substantial mass form, this outcome seems highly unlikely. I think it's suffice to say we would have had to evacuate the Solar System due to the sun expanding by then.

However there was an episode of a show called Hyperspace hosted by Sam Neil of Jurrasic Park fame (Alan) where the exact premise of a Black Hole in our solar system is explored. I saw it kind of half asleep, so maybe I missed some things but it all seemed hypothetical to illustrate the power of black holes rather than make predictions of them occurring here.

 

dissuade is a really nice word

 

The latter (obviously i thought)

They may not start in our solar system but since they and their absorption power could keep growing the closest one might eventually become a threat. This could even happen before our sun turns into a red giant (hypothetically of course)

 

The black hole theory that sounded plausible to me was that in the absence of heat, the structure holding atoms together is at it's weakest. Then for reasons unknown, possibly magnetic, the atoms simply fall apart, leaving primary particles. This would decrease their volume drastically, leaving their density as nothing experienced or even calculated by scientists. Almost like a nuclear reaction in reverse.
Needless to say, this is pure hypothesis, but it makes sense, particularly if once triggered, it becomes a chain reaction.

 

A classic example, in that video it says, dying star collapses, it is compacted into "a single microscopic point" which in itself isnt correct even based on the theories the writers were basing the show on. An infinite point of density means radius = 0. "Microscopic" is bigger than zero

And the video itself uses the phrase, not even light, and yet the cgi shows two giant jets propelling crap out, including light, from the black hole poles.

The nature of the video, its target audience, doesnt delve into those jets. There is a two hour one on Netflix, that simply says we dont understand enough about these jets. At least thats one that gets to a point if saying, you know what, we dont know.

This is what Im actually on about, there is no infinite point of density in these things, that idea is solely reliant on the assumption something divided by zero = infinity

These things, more like those waste shredders in your kitchen sink if you have one, everything gets sucked down to ridiculous density, but then gets to a point where everything gets shredded, things get small enough, then quantum laws take over, one of those spacial dimensions turns into a probability function, shit goes somewhere we just havent worked out where yet.

Anytime you see a video like that, the phrase "nothing can escape, not even light" is pre Stephen Hawking theories, whilst offen at the same time any graphic showing those yets in post Hawking stuff

 

How's this VG?



Seems concise and accurate to the laymen, such as myself. Black Holes are real objects but there are questions regarding singularities being at their center.

 

Well he at least at one stage says "we dont know" and he is on the Joe Rogan show, so he is not going to get too involved.

Its kind of like when a magician uses misdirection, and Im not saying someone like Cox is intentionally doing it, but he is only going to talk about what he does know, everything on the outside of these things. Then the average joe just gets the impression we know all there is to know, even though not a single question about whats on the inside is even asked, let alone answered