No, it isn't. Crothers, S.J., Time Warps And The M87 ‘Black Hole’, Time Warps and the M87 'Black Hole' | PSI Intl
Yes, many people do believe it, just as many people believe in ghosts, and some even say they talk to them. What is required is not belief but ratiocination. The simple facts I presented and discussed with Dr. Anwar Shiekh are sufficient for anybody to come to a reasoned conclusion, provided they are prepared to think about it instead of diffidently taking the word of the scientists reporting such unreasonable 'discoveries'. Belief has allowed the scientists to get away with outrageous phantasmagoria masquerading as science. It really is about time that reason put them in their proper place.
“”I'm neither a mathematician nor a physicist. More accurately, I'm a gardener and home handyman who does science in his spare time. —Stephen J. Crothers
No, I'm not implying anything, I've provided certain proof in very simple terms that black holes do not exist. So the Event Horizon Telescope Team did not detect a black hole in M87. Their published image is just computer graphics generated by the programs they wrote, their image a manifestation of their wishful thinking.
How can you have definitive proof of something we dont completely understand? You realize labels like blackhole and dark energy are placeholders so we can at least have a way of saying "hey that thing over there, the fuck is it?". The picture youre seeing isnt a black hole because you cant see a blackhole, light doesnt reflect off it. Instead we look at the things around it to get an idea of what it is. What you are seeing is the accretion disc of gas whirling around the thing it surrounds. The bigger the thing in the middle, typically the faster the gas revolves around it. The faster the accretion disc moves the hotter it becomes, the more it glows. There are stars hundreds and thousands of times more massive then our own sun rapidly orbiting super massive blackoles. Now thats some cool shit right there. Or when one blackhole eats another!! The math involved, the energy released... unfathomable. Dude i love this sort of thing and could go on for decades about it all.
Your reasoning is flawed. The theory of black holes violates the experimentally determined laws of physics and violates the rules of pure mathematics. Consequently the theory of black holes is certainly false. There are no such things as black holes so nobody can detect or image a black hole. One might just as well claim that ghosts exist, it's just that we don't fully understand them, and we can image them by observing things all around them. Study the arguments in this report: Crothers, S.J., Time Warps And The M87 ‘Black Hole’, https://principia-scientific.org/time-warps-and-the-m87-black-hole/
Here is another pillar of astronomy that is certainly false: Stephen J. Crothers and Pierre-Marie Robitaille, Presentation at Ohio Meeting 2019 of the American Physical Society: Stellar Mass-Luminosity and its Violation of Thermodynamics,
Such illogic is astonishing, but all too common. I share the letter below with this forum: Dr. Jaun Ramón Muñoz de Nova, Katrine Golbukov, Voctor I. Kolobov, Prof. Jeff Steinhauer I write in relation to your recent paper: Observation of thermal Hawking radiation and its temperature in an analogue black hole, Nature 569, 688–691 (2019). Recall that Hawking's black hole temperature TH is given by, TH = hc^3/16π^2kGM. By the 0th and 2nd laws of thermodynamics temperature is always intensive. Mass however is always extensive. The universal constants G, h, c, and k have no thermodynamic character and neither do pure numbers such as 16 and π. Thus, Hawking's black hole temperature relation equates temperature, an intensive thermodynamic quantity, to a combination of terms that is not intensive, thereby violating the 0th and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. Consequently, Hawking's black hole temperature is invalid and the Hawking process a fallacy [1]. Your 'thermal Hawking radiation and its temperature in an analogue black hole' therefore has no scientific validity. In the recent article [2], the Unruh Effect is mentioned. Unruh's temperature is, T = ha/4π^2kc where a is acceleration. Once again, temperature, which is intensive, is equated to a combination of terms that is not intensive. Therefore the Unruh Effect is invalid [3], by violating the 0th and 2nd laws of thermodynamics. Substituting a = g = GM/R_S^2 where R_S = 2GM/c^2 is the so-called 'Schwarzschild radius' of a black hole, Hawking's temperature equation is immediately obtained from Unruh's equation. The Bekenstein-Hawking black hole entropy S is given by, S = 8π^2kGM^2/hc Entropy is extensive and although mass M is extensive, M^2 is not extensive. This equation is therefore thermodynamically unbalanced. It is therefore invalid. I note the following remark in the Abstract of your paper: “We find that the correlation spectrum of Hawking radiation agrees well with a thermal spectrum, and its temperature is given by the surface gravity, confirming the predictions of Hawking’s theory.” The mechanism of the fallacious Hawking process cannot produce a thermal spectrum. A vibrational lattice is required to produce a thermal spectrum [4,5]. Only condensed matter has a vibrational lattice. In this regard is is important to realise that Kirchhoff's Law of Thermal Emission is false and, consequently, Planck's equation for thermal spectra is not universal [4,5]. Thus, Planck's said equation reveals the temperature of the emitter only in the case of an actual blackbody, e.g. carbon. Otherwise the temperature extracted from Planck's equation is only apparent (not the actual temperature of anything) [4,5]. Finally, it is relevant to note that the stellar mass-luminosity relation, so prized by astronomy, is invalid because it too equates temperature to a combination of terms that is not intensive, thereby violating the 0th and 2nd laws of thermodynamics [6]. A detailed paper on this issue is in preparation. Yours faithfully, Stephen J. Crothers 31st May 2019 REFERENCES [1] Robitaille P.-M., Hawking Radiation: A Violation of the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics, Meeting of the American Physical Society, APS -Spring 2018 Meeting of the APS New England Section - Event - Hawking Radiation: A Violation of the Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics. http://vixra.org/pdf/1803.0264v1.pdf [2] Thermal spectrum of analogue black hole puts Hawking radiation in a new light, https://physicsworld.com/a/thermal-...k-hole-puts-hawking-radiation-in-a-new-light/ [3] Stephen J. Crothers and Pierre-Marie Robitaille, The Unruh effect: insight from the laws of thermodynamics, 2018 Annual Meeting of the American Physical Society Mid-Atlantic Section, November 9-10, University of Maryland, College Park, College Park, MD, http://meetings.aps.org/Meeting/MAS18/Session/B01.18 http://vixra.org/pdf/1811.0157v1.pdf [4] Robitaille, P.-M., Crothers, S. J., “The Theory of Heat Radiation” Revisited: A Commentary on the Validity of Kirchhoff’s Law of Thermal Emission and Max Planck’s Claim of Universality, Progress in Physics, v. 11, p.120-132, (2015), http://www.ptep-online.com/2015/PP-41-04.PDF [5] Pierre-Marie Robitaille and Stephen J. Crothers: A History of Kirchhoff's Law of Thermal Emission, Munich 2019 Meeting of the German Physical Society, The Abstract: Verhandlungen der Deutschen Physikalischen Gesellschaft The Lecture: [6] Stephen J. Crothers and Pierre-Marie Robitaille, Eddington’s Mass-Luminosity Relationship: A Violation of the Laws of Thermodynamics, OSS19 Meeting of The American Physical Society (F02.00005) March 30, 2019, The Abstract: http://vixra.org/pdf/1903.0563v1.pdf The Lecture:
Again, blackhole is simply a placeholder for the thing that is there. Currently, by minds far far greater then your own, a blackhole is the thing that fits that model. If youre own theory was a better fit to the standard model then thats what would be in place of a black hole. So until there is such a time that there is a better fit for what truly is there, a blackhole it shall remain. The universe is so big, full of so much information that a single mind cant comprehend it all, not even your own. It. Isnt. Possible.
If that works for you sure, i mean whatever lets a guy sleep at night right? Besides, youre describing a duck, blackholes dont walk or sound like ducks. That was easy to disprove.
The duck test is a form of abductive reasoning. This is its usual expression: If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Duck test - Wikipedia Apologies if I was too obtuse.
That's not correct. The black hole is not a 'place-holder'. The astronomers and cosmologists assert every day that they are real objects. But they do not exist, so they did not detect any or image any. Your reasoning is still unscientific. The object reported to be a black hole in M87 is a radio point source. Crothers, S.J., Time Warps And The M87 ‘Black Hole’, Time Warps and the M87 'Black Hole' | PSI Intl