Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok I will have a look at the links but my post should of been more clear I guess.
a) When mentioned I can't see how black holes can come out of no where for a galaxy looking at the nature of things,
what was being referred to is , there are no things as black holes anywhere else in the construction of how things work yet there are many organizing things which look like to be in the same form.
one example would be how hair grows out of the head in a spiral formation at the crown yet there is no black hole theme. There is a flow of direction in the same design and its seen in other things yet no black hole force .
b) also I was thinking this morning , I thought hold on , I don't think people are understanding the simple question from last night,
so will try the new re-phrasing with an analogy,
-a car is rolling down a hill,
-the hill is not just a regular hill but has a magnetic sheet underneath the soil
-how can the car( galaxy) roll or have any motion at all in this circumstance?
the black hole is suggested to be the greatest force known and its suggested from what I understand a galaxy unit is in motion throughout the universe.
( anyway no big deal and they prob have it covered, it seems very curious since it can't be proven.
Why are countries still being coerced to dump BILLIONS of dollars into this junk that is absolutely going nowhere?
So, black holes were proven with empirical evidence. But now they actually aren't and if they ARE in fact what we believe them to be...we might learn something from them, or not.
I'm wondering if the people who disagreed with Hawking's theories last year were "flat earthers" or are the people disagreeing with him now, the "flat earthers."
I'm wondering if the people who disagreed with Hawking's theories last year were "flat earthers" or are the people disagreeing with him now, the "flat earthers."
Or are the people who agree with him now (and then) the "flat earthers"
Remember, the heretics were a minority in the dark ages..mostly everybody believed the earth was flat. And why was that?
in other words you cant explain how a number of stars are found orbiting a dark region of space at the center of the galaxy, but since you cant see anything there its obviously not a black hole. remember that when the first planets were found, no one actually saw the planets, the calculated the planets orbits by how hard the planet pulled on the star it was orbiting. they have done the same thing with black holes. they found the stars orbiting a black region of space, calculated the orbits of several stars, and realized that there had to be a reason for this. and what else could it be but a black hole? have you an answer for this? judging by your posts i would say not, and until you can come up with a probable answer, you fly in the face of many experts who have studied this phenomenon. come back when you have a real answer.
As I predicted. I rest my case.
And where is your list of alleged black hole universes and alleged big bang universes? It's quite apparent that you don't know the subject matter.
Stephen J. Crothers
Last edited by Stephen J. Crothers; 03-28-2014 at 05:27 PM..
Reason: Orthography
Why are countries still being coerced to dump BILLIONS of dollars into this junk that is absolutely going nowhere?
So, black holes were proven with empirical evidence. But now they actually aren't and if they ARE in fact what we believe them to be...we might learn something from them, or not.
Sometimes, people a lot smarter than you or me need to take the long view of a phenomenon and study it out as far as it goes without having a full understanding of the eventual utility of it. This is how a lot of advancement throughout human history has occurred. It was not all planned and instantaneous, and it did not work out "perfectly" the first time. Your suggestion that anything that doesn't present a clear path to derive YOU with tangible benefit is "junk science" is extremely narrow-minded and underscores a misunderstanding of the fundamental nature of the scientific method.
Sometimes, people a lot smarter than you or me need to take the long view of a phenomenon and study it out as far as it goes without having a full understanding of the eventual utility of it. This is how a lot of advancement throughout human history has occurred. It was not all planned and instantaneous, and it did not work out "perfectly" the first time. Your suggestion that anything that doesn't present a clear path to derive YOU with tangible benefit is "junk science" is extremely narrow-minded and underscores a misunderstanding of the fundamental nature of the scientific method.
No, try this.
*I* understand exactly how science *works*....The problem is that science is not infallible and it is not immune to corruption. The same way Jihadists hide behind peace loving Muslims who assure us all that it is a Religion of acceptance and love....swindlers hide behind the purity of the *concept* of science. I know very well how theories work....Science is a theory in and of itself. At least how it "works"..it works in theory.
We can sit here and roll off example after example of theories where theoretical physicists models did not sit with observations...they don't like that very much. So what do most of these astrophysicists do? Throw more math at it!
Admittedly, the math is beyond my capabilities (and most)...but the REAL issue is that it is also beyond the policy makers of the world...so these physicists become the policymakers of sorts.
So, the benefit of science being "open ended" means nothing can stick and what one theorist saw yesterday wasn't what they are seeing today...and they don't know what it is. So you have a zero sum game...
So, the benefit of science being "open ended" means nothing can stick and what one theorist saw yesterday wasn't what they are seeing today...and they don't know what it is. So you have a zero sum game.
I don't think that you know what "zero sum game" means.
Remember, the heretics were a minority in the dark ages..mostly everybody believed the earth was flat. And why was that?
Ignoring that most everybody in the Western world knew that it was spherical by the time of classical Greece, the dark ages was a prescientific age. Whatever they believed, rightly or wrongly, had nothing to do with science.
Science is a human enterprise, and like all other human enterprises it is imperfect. But unlike most other human enterprises, it actually values and rewards self correction.
This is why, for all its human imperfection, science remains the single most pragmatically successful human enterprise in all of history. This is why science cures disease, increases crop yields and puts humans in space while religion, philosophy, politics and art does not.
It is not clear to me why you find that upsetting.
I don't think that you know what "zero sum game" means.
Cumulative winnings for "scientists" = cumulative losses....
Nobody has won anything at all from black hole theory. Just billions of dollars in a bunch of peoples pockets and a loss to whoever funded it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
