Black Holes

[Sapius]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>pp: I would strongly recommend that you seek "black holes" in a search engine, instead of asking what one feels or believes about the issue (including me). That would be far more educational.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But of course! What I have said is no more than a personl subjective experience, and all the Scientific Theories are basically knowledge which we are discovering through logic. But there will come a point in mental evoluion when most of us will no longer need to understand through logic, but through direct experience.

For now, please ignore my story and continue with basic education, it is also very important and will lead someone to break out of logical thinking, for we do not know any other way except that for now.

------------------
....just IMHO though.

[pplaverita]

Hey, Sapius, you didn't have to reply. I wasn't actually referring to you. Don't see yourself as the immediate and exclusive target of my comments (...no matter how scoffing they might be).

------------------
Never onlyne

[Sapius]

Sorry, PP, I thought that since I was the only one who said what I "felt or believed" about the issue, it was addressed to me.
I didn't know you were talking to the world.

*********



------------------
....just IMHO though.

[TastinGood]

I was about to post the very same thing.


------------------
"If Lincoln had thought being the President was such a longshot, we'd have nobody's picture on the one dollar bill" -Arthur Fonzerelli (The Fonz)

[Buckminster Fuller]

Grrrr you people! creating seperate concepts where there are none! look it's time space already, ok!? and it is no big leap to connect black holes with time since they are both a facit of time and space , time and space being essentialy the same thing. Go ahead tell me time and space are not the same...go on I dare ya.

------------------

[SHATOUSHKA]

ummm...

ok.

i feel obligated to step in here. for some reason i get the sensation that we are forgetting that (unfortunately?) this is a public forum, which means that all sorts of people, with all sorts of concepts are posting here.
i understand that for some issues like these are simple matters of fact while for others, they are as transparent and flighty.
i will not dare say that i applaud random comments. however, there are those here that may be enticed into being educated.

one of the purposes of creating the 'define philosophy' thread was to (somewhat) get a grasp of where everyone is at.
that is why i did not recommend a dictionary answer to that thread.
you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.
this maybe true. however, the point of the matter is to lead the horse.

i have tried, in the past, to create a forum which is like stepping stones in commincation. i have since learned that this is a failing operation.
because this forum is public--AND because it is small, the flow of new traffic creates impossibility in establishing progress (in the mentioned path).

for reasons beyond my control, this forum, this messageboard provider, is simply based on elective chat. *sigh*

this is discouraging. but i must roll with the punches, so to speak, as the 'others' have to.

there are some on this board that are taking sublime note of profound (and not-so-profound) posts.

if such cases arise that need specific attention, posters are more than welcome, in fact, encouraged to email.

the point is, to remember that you will not be able to affect all...but to see through to the ones that are listening.

...and i assure you, we are listening.



------------------
~~share some greased tea with me~~
General Philosophy

[Mr. Robin]

Dear B.F., contrary to what you have been taught, (as I am quite certain that you were NOT the person who came up with the idea of 'space-time') there has been postulated, by a British scientist, the idea that time itself does not actually exist.
As for myself, I couldn't AGREE with the guy more, as he is correct, just that I am not at present disposition to PROVE to you why.
There is a HUGE differance between an educated parrot, and a thinker, but the differances are subtle when you have only the words of the person, and a small amount at that, from which to detect this.
As for Black Holes and Space-time, the present theory (Me being the parrot here) states that it is a gravity well that occurs in space time, and as all matter passing the event horizon accelerates PAST lightspeed (that is why there is no emmission of light, it must therefore travel faster then light, hence the Tachyonic idea)and that exceeds the abilities of us, collectively, presently, to know what is actually going on.
Presently, we speculate, (read GUESS! or, best educated guesstimate) as that is about all that can be done as we cannot travel to the center of our galaxcy to find out, it is better then fourty thousand light years away, and if you could travel at the speed of light it would take you fourty thousand years to get there. Your life, if average, will be about 72 years for a male, 78+ for a female

------------------

[Mr. Robin]

WoW!, if it were not for the idea that I think that it is silly to laugh at anothers ignorance (as I should be laughing at my own...that's why!) I would clearly be LOL to the max at this page.
Black holes are places in space were it is theorized that something exists that is so gravitationally powerful that not even light can escape it's gravitational force.
Very recently the Hubble space telscope captured pictures of an object that had been tracked as circling a place in space wherein the orbit of the object disappeared and reappeared in a timely enought fashion. It was postulated that this was a black hole that was being orbited. (A luminous object would 'appear' to vanish from sight while it passed behind a black hole as the gravitational forces at work would absorb any emitted light, and would re-appear as it came out from behind)
In the sequence of photos that Hubble provided the object suddenly disappeared from view, and has since never-ever re-appeared, hence it is thought that the object fell past the event horizon of the black hole. This is one of the best available pieces of evidence, currently available, for proving the existance of black holes.
As for the theories about the origins, it is currently speculated that black holes form from Neutron stars, the last stage of a Neutron stars 'life', and that the Neutron star collapses into a very powerfull gravitational source, a gravity well is what it is called, one so powerfull that even light cannot escape it's pull.
What is surmisable from that is that, any particle (matter) that passes a black holes 'event horizon' goes Tachyonic, (the theoretical particle that travels faster then light) and that the temerature on the inside of the event horizon would plug in at -1K. Both of those insights are, currently, completely new, and originating from myself.
One who has studied Hawking's work, understands that Hawking radiation is not a true form of particulate radiation as it is as a result of the interface of the event horizon with it's temporal environment, as in the radiation does NOT originate from the black hole itself, but from the environmental interaction that the black hole generates.
At the center of a black hole, NOBODY knows what is actually there, mathematics breaks down, thought is moot, as nothing can be resolved/proven, they are thought to exist in the centers of all galaxcies, but this is an unproven conclusion, even though there is evidence as viewed from the levels of activity.
Sapius's statement about the twig in a stream is lovely, nice, works fine for twigs in streams, but the scientist who study gravity will tell you that that is exactly one of the dlemas/problems that they have seen clear evidence of, the very fact that the stars on the outer edges of the discs of galaxcies turn with a velocity that cooresponds to the velocity at the centers, they DO NOT turn at a coorespondingly slower rate as the twig in the water does.
Want more, just ask....P.S., go ask a physics proffessor what they think of the idea that the event horizons inner temp is = =1K, cause they don't/haven't thought that one out just yet.
Tanks, for your time!

------------------


[This message has been edited by Mr. Robin (edited October 12, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Mr. Robin (edited October 12, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Mr. Robin (edited October 12, 2001).]