The Big Hoax Theory, Black holes and Gravity

Gopher, as much as I love your threads, you're wrong about light. And black holes are ex-stars. There are also photographs of them, I think something like a dozen or so at the centre of our galaxy alone.


2006 April 27
<CENTER>NGC 4696: Energy from a Black Hole
Composite Image Credit: X-ray in red - NASA/ CXC/S.Allen (Kavli Inst., Stanford) et al.;
Radio in blue - NRAO/G.Taylor (VLA); Infrared in green - NASA/ESA/W.Harris (McMaster Univ.) </CENTER>Explanation: In many cosmic environments, when material falls toward a black hole energy is produced as some of the matter is blasted back out in jets. In fact, such black hole "engines" appear to be the most efficient in the Universe, at least on a galactic scale. This composite image illustrates one example of an elliptical galaxy with an efficient black hole engine, NGC 4696. The large galaxy is the brightest member of the Centaurus galaxy cluster, some 150 million light-years away. Exploring NGC 4696 in x-rays (red) astronomers can measure the rate at which infalling matter fuels the supermassive black hole and compare it to the energy output in the jets to produce giant radio emitting bubbles. The bubbles, shown here in blue, are about 10,000 light-years across. The results confirm that the process is much more efficient than producing energy through nuclear reactions - not to mention using fossil fuels. Astronomers also suggest that as the black hole pumps out energy and heats the surrounding gas, star formation is ultimately shut off, limiting the size of large galaxies like NGC 4696.

MelT

 

Black holes do exist however I think we don't know enough about them to actually conclude something. I'm talking about the properties they have and the rules they follow.

Lately I've been intrigued by the concept of "dark matter" and "dark energy." Wiki those topics and just read the synopsis. It's the idea that something is holding our universe together. It's the foundation and structure that defines how fast a galaxy spins, where space gas accumulates, or how stars burn.

Gravity, light, energy, mass, wavelengths, etc. I think there's a few more "real world" phenomena that has yet to be discovered and it involves the 90% of our universe that we don't understand.

They're doing studies now to see if light exerts gravity.

 

I'm an ex-amateur astronomer, but still an enthusiast. I know about dark matter and energy,
http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/dark_energy/

and of course there are things we don't understand in cosmology, that's not in question. But we don't have to know everything about the universe before we can begin to understand individual parts of it. Black holes=real.

We aren't guessing at the existence of black holes, we know they're there - we're just unsure of all their properties.

MelT

 

I would love to repsond about black holes and gravity but I don't do as good of a job like the guy on NovaScienceNow. Then again theories are just that, a theory. Someday a new scientist will discover something revolutionary that will force people to make new theories. I like science.

 

I didnt read all your post, just skimed most of it, but from what i saw your logic is full of holes and false statements, if you want me to go into i can but i still have a hangover and work to do... (If this sounded mean or if i am being too forward or something its probably due to my massive headache...)

 

Exactly. Why can't people except that science is not always right.

 

No one said it was always right, in fact a lot of it is wrong, thats why there are so many opposing theories and stuff, science isn't about being right, its about trying to prove things and theories right.

 

Isn't it funny that christians always accuse science of being flawed because it's not always right, especially when science doesn't claim to be - but christianity does.

Christianity it tells itself, is inerrant:

Science, "We're working our way towards a full understanding..."
Christianity, "We have a full understanding...and we are the ONLY truth."

So, being honest, which really should be told to give it a rest because it's not 'always right', christianity or science?


MelT

 

I hate it when people try to bash things they obviously don't understand.

 

I would say MelT has a rather good understanding of the subject matter. Just because his conclusion might not line up with your view of the world does not mean he does not understand, nor does it mean he is wrong.

People do accept that, quite readily, all the time. I have seen no one suggest anything else.

 

What part of it are you accusing me of not understanding. Very odd thing to say when you have no idea what I know on the subject.

MelT

 

Not just light, your understanding of planets too. You said:

You can. It's super-dense, has massive gravity and will attract everything, including light. Everything of any mass bends light towards itself, not just black holes.

No it's not. Light is both a particle and a wave form.

No there isn't. Without a light source there are no photons within the box.

What you're saying above is that Jupiter is a light source. It isn't, Jupiter reflects the light of the sun in the same way that the moon does, that's why it seems to shine.

No again. Hawking Radiation or something very similar leaks out.

Main question though - why would the entire scientific community falisify the existence of the black holes they've already found? Why would their discovery in tens of galaxies be a common lie throughout every branch of cosmolgy? It's one thing to say that black holes may not exist, I can live with that, but calling it a 'Bg Hoax Theory'? Why the need for it to be a big conspiracy? Why dramatise it?

What you're talking about was posted here, it's the work of just one scientist and the article goes on to say what others think about his theory:

"...http://forum.grasscity.com/spirituality-philosophy/159650-do-black-holes-really-exist-maybe-not.html

"... "I strongly disagree," says Nobel laureate Gerard 't Hooft of Utrecht University in the Netherlands. "The process he describes can in no way produce enough radiation to make a black hole disappear as quickly as he is suggesting." The horizon forms long before the hole can evaporate, 't Hooft told New Scientist.

Lab testSteve Giddings of the University of California in Santa Barbara, US, is also sceptical. "Well-understood findings apparently conflict with their picture," he told New Scientist. "To my knowledge, there hasn't been an attempt to understand how they are getting results that differ from these calculations, which would be an important step to understanding if this is a solid result."...."

MelT

 

nice MelT...saved me some time


i would rep u but i dont think it would add to urs

 

I hate to say this, but just because YOU do not understand the science behind a black hole, at least on the gravity side of things, doesn't mean that they don't exist. There are a lot of things that definitely do exist that we are largely in the dark about, such as the human brain and how it functions. We know some, but we haven't even begun to scratch the surface. I'm pretty sure brains exist and that I can think. I'm also pretty sure black holes exist.

 

Er, the site you listed says that black holes exist. You're not helping your case man.

 

Is there any evidence that black holes exist?
---------------------------------------------
Yes.