No. It's an important topic to discuss. I like talking about it and when i first posted the OP's post (it's my words (word for word) he just copied and pasted it here) on a philosophy and science forum I was really onto something and opened up a few people to a new way of thinking. I thought progress was being made with this thread as well as nobody has dared to try to tackle any of my points. I thought this was a philosophy forum? I don't see any philosophers besides me. But I think the notion that Black Holes do not exist is such a profound statement, where there is no other real proponent so affluent in scientifically proving the statement as I am, that it needs to be heard again and again until a societal discussion occurs. To me changing people's hearts on things they have been force fed by the media, government and school institutions is imperative. This is so big in many ways we need to fix it.
Dude.. right off the bat, you're idea of what a black hole is wrong. A black hole is like dark energy, in that it's not fully understood and currently a placeholder term. They are called black because we think of black as an absence of light. Your argument about light being everywhere is ridiculous, there is no visible light in a sealed box. There might be radio waves and x-rays and gamma rays, but no visible light. Black is the absence of visible light and a black hole is a region is spacetime where the gravity is so strong, that any and all visible light that strikes it's surface cannot escape and gets sucked in. If it can't escape, it can't reflect back to the observer to give it a color attribute. For all we know, a black hole could be orange.. it's just that red and yellow wavelengths can't reflect off it's surface because it captures all visible (and then some) light. If you took a baseball and increased it's gravity to the point where light cannot even escape it.. it'd be a black hole. All you would see is a silhouette of a baseball.. not even able to see 3D textures, it would look like a literal hole in spacetime. Grab a basketball and increase it's gravity to where light cannot escape it's gravity.. boom, got yourself a black hole. That is all a black hole is.. a region in space where gravity is so strong, that light cannot escape.. therefore it cannot reflect back to an observer. It could be red, blue, green, magenta, white, clear, gold.. pick any known color in the universe.. underneath that surface where light cannot escape it's gravity, it could be that color. That is why a black hole is called a black hole.
thank you for your post kind sir. First of all, your first sentence reminds me of... EXCELLENT DUDE Secondly and lastly you have to prove that dark energy exists and that it's possible for something to be so powerful that not even light can escape it. These are just regurgitated ideas you are espousing. You have to prove them first to have an argument. It's not possible for something to be so powerful that light cannot escape. The more gravity that an object has, the brighter and hotter it gets. A star LOSES it's energy and density as it dies, it cannot and will not create MORE energy. That's like saying a dead person is more affectionate and energetic than they were when they were alive. It's just not possible. You are brainwashed like most people and I feel pity for you. There is not enough energy there in a dying star to create anything more than a weak vacuum with hardly any destructive abilities to it's surrounding planets other than it's traveling spiraling hot gasses. The planets themselves closest to the dead star however would generally remain in tact, just scorched to hell from the star's "decomposed" remains.
Not trying to be a dick.. but again, right off the bat you demonstrate your miscomprehension on dark concepts. It isn't called dark energy because it is energy that light cannot escape.. because we know light can travel through it. It is called dark because it is unknown to us. We have yet to directly observe dark energy.. we have only observed it's effects. That dark in dark energy is the same kind of dark in the dark side of the moon. It's not that it's literally dark, the sun hits the dark side of the moon. It was called that during the time when we couldn't observe it.. it was dark to us. That is what dark energy is.. energy we have yet to see. As we discover more and more different types of energy.. that 70ish% of dark energy in the universe will decrease. Say we discover that the electromagnetic spectrum goes beyond gamma rays and radio waves.. then there will be 60ish% dark energy in the universe. Then we discover that the spectrum goes even further, we will be at 50% dark energy.. and so on. I don't have to prove something that is currently unknown to us.. because that is what it means for energy to be dark to us, that it is unknown to us.
ok, again, you have to prove these concepts to be real. You can't just read a science magazine or article online and expect me to think you have the answers when you have not shown any gesture to prove them to be true. All you are doing is repeating what you have heard. Dark Energy is a hoax. http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2011/06/-dark...
ah yes you're one of those people. YOu think everything is an illusion and there is tangible evidence of anything. So are you me posting in the future? LOL The amount of mental illness the scientific mainstream community as a whole pumps out is about as much as it took the evidence of vaccine related deaths and illness being for me to believe it was a bad thing.
Uh no that's what you were getting at...you're basically saying any scientific hypothesis or theory is fake because you or I didn't observe it ourselves...technically everything we experience is subjective and have to put faith in objective information
I have never said this and you cannot quote where I did - because I didn't say it. I said science cannot provide you with answers you have to postulate your own theories about whatever the scientific community throws at you. True science is individual, solitary investigation of events, matter and the manipulation of the world. To be a true scientist you must think for yourself. If someone says Jesus exists, and you believe it, does that make it true? Thank you Socrates. http://www.gurteen.com/gurteen/gurteen.nsf/id/X001...
Did you develop the equipment and program the software to make these calculations and then work with a team to calculate the closest mathematical equations or did you read someone elses work and make a subjective decision to believe those "facts" and not others presented? Do others scientists support you hypnotists by repeating your results using the scientific method? If not you have no theories..Sorry all subjective
"All you are doing is repeating what you have heard." says the guy who links stuff from other people. The only thing I am repeating is what the common sense parts of my brain are telling me.. that dark energy is named dark energy because it is unknown energy. Even in the article YOU posted.. it says "However, to this day no one actually knows what dark energy is, or where it comes from.". That is dark energy, unknown energy. You can't reasonably ask me to prove that there is something unknown.. that is like asking for proof for Bigfoot's nonexistence. You really need to go all the way back to the first step with dark energy and dark matter and black holes before you philosophically reach for the top.. and then I will be interested in continuing this. Til then, no thanks.
You're saying i can't be correct in my hypothesis of Dark Energy and Black Holes junk science because I didn't invent an abacus, calculator or personal computer? LOL that is literally the most ridiculous rebuttal I have EVER heard in my life. I can write a program with this computer I'm using to type this message to you all that "proves" time travel is real and my computer is actually Yoda from star wars trying to communicate with me telepathically. You can't prove me wrong you didn't build the computer!
ROFL i link to other articles not to prove my point, as I have already articulated MY OWN ideas. I am simply showing you that other people feel the same way. It's ok to have peer review and exchange of ideas. Now you think it's not ok? LOL this is the funniest thread in my life. The article's author is not praising the female who says dark energy does not exist. That's mainstream science for ya, biased and hating on the next Nikola Tesla. Have fun with that.
Dude dont know if you hacked my account in 2007 but i did not make this thread Did you go to UJ university ?
no you probably just don't remember posting it. You posted it november 30th 2007. But i didn't hack anyone's account I don't even know how to. Did you have a dorm room mate? I don't know. But you only COPY AND PASTED what I wrote in another thread on another forum site. That's probably why you don't remember posting this thread.
i know, you met me in another forum I'm sure of it. Anyway, so any other comments that I can rebut today (to everyone else)