gravity is god

Post Reply New Topic

black holes are a feature of the universe \
a place where the force of gravity as such that light can not escape
this does weird things to e=mc squared
to me it seems that unless they decay all mater will end up in one black hole
if time itself stops at the event horizon that would mean distance would be infinite
in other words another universe maybe that's were the anti matter missing from the big bang is
the words don't work bit that would make gravity the only constant
can someone help me under stand?

Black Holes evaporate releasing Hawkins Radiation.

Quick wiki on that they only evaporate if they are small so maybe not valid rebuttal
As an example, a black hole of one solar mass has a temperature of only 60 nanokelvin; in fact, such a black hole would absorb far more cosmic microwave background radiation than it emits

Gravity is my enemy when i droped my lunch onto the ground!

It's true that only small black holes evaporate RIGHT NOW. But, in the very distant future (like trillions of trillions of trillions of years from now) the cosmic microwave background will have been redshifted to almost nothing and any matter would either be too spread out or already eaten by a black hole (you are right that we can expect most matter to eventually end up in a black hole). Then they would be able to evaporate, albeit very very slowly.

Also, time doesn't stop at the event horizon of a black hole. Someone falling in (if they managed to not be torn apart into their component atoms) wouldn't even realize they'd gone past the event horizon. It's only from the outside that time seems to stop there. It's all got to do with Relativity--two people, moving at different rates or at different points in a gravity well, can have totally different views of what is happening in the universe, but THEY ARE BOTH CORRECT. It's confusing, I know, and I can't claim to truly understand why this works near a black hole.

As for the excess anti-matter from the big bang being in black holes, I doubt it. I think you're misunderstanding the problem with antimatter. Scientists aren't so much perplexed that we don't see any antimatter in the universe (mind you, it would be hard to tell) but that if matter and antimatter had been made in equal quantities at the birth of the universe then it all should have annihilated and we wouldn't exist. I don't think there would have been time for it all to be sucked into black holes before it was annihilated. Anyway, that would prompt the question of why black holes preferentially ate antimatter instead of matter (for which there would be no explanation.)--it would replace one mystery with another (of course, science does that...a lot).

Well, yes and no.

Hawking radiation is typically light emitted by a black hole in the X-ray spectrum which essentially acts as the proof of the existence of black holes. That it's possible to observe Hawking radiation is in part the evidence for their existence: it's also proof of black hole evaporation. Professor Hawkings' paper is available as a PDF file at http://prac.us.edu.pl/~ztpce/QM/CMPhawking.pdf.

The work in the early 70s was absolutely ground-breaking. To that point, black holes had been theorised (e.g., Einsteinian physics required their existence) but no-one had proved to that point that they were capable of indirect observation: Hawking radiation proves that black holes do emit radiation but that the amount is inversely proportional to their mass. In simplified terms, a super-massive black hole would give off very little radiation whilst a (hypothetical) infinitely small (-1) black hole would give off an almost infinitely massive amount of radiation.

Yet more astonishing is that, despite being theorised from the 1970s onwards they were only observed more than 30 years later: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/25805/.

HAWKINS hail:
This poor peasant does not deserve to lick the wheel marks from his chariot
As a penance for asking questioning shall place ipod on head turn to full and play "mull of kintyre"on repeat for 24 hour

In Hawking's original paper, at the outset, it is assumed that there exists a time-translational Killing vector, as is consistent with the Schwarzschild vacuum, and with Birkhoff's theorem. This implies that there will be no time evolution of the spacetime. Working in this spacetime, and considering an infalling spherical shell of matter enclosing a vacuum spherical region, Hawking proceeds to derive the Hawking Radiation, with some more or less hidden assumptions. The eventual result is that there is black-body radiation at infinity, at very late times, i.e. way out on the future extent of the event horizon. Thus the spacetime evolves. This is the nature of a body that radiates. Given that it evolves, there is no longer a time-translational Killing vector, and one has arrived at a contradiction. The very existence of the spacetime required the time-translational Killing vector, and such a spacetime is not a "near approximation" of a dynamic spacetime. Further, the event horizon has the various properties it has, which are important for the derivation, because it is a Killing horizon, and based on the existence of the time-translational Killing vector. The idea of approximate symmetries is inherently difficult, even for finite distant scales, but it becomes close to impossible to discuss approximate symmetries on infinite distance scales, such as the whole of the spacetime
wiki again
I no have much learn no understand quantum's ehh
If as stated all matter is inside one primordial black hole and just background radiation is left and time flows on to infinite a point of equilibrium will be reached leaving only gravity as god
(the word at the beginning of genesis)
please note I am not a believer

I know that to an observer entering a event horizon time still stays constant how ever if acceleration is constant from the outside you have accelerated pass c so are no longer in this universe you are in another the anti universe on the other side of the black hole
As time stopped when you entered from our view point . entering becomes the beginning of time the big bang
I view this as a snake eating its own tail or a mobius strip with its transition point being the event horizon


This is just fun

Blackholes may actually be misunderstood., but yes they are certainly releasing radiation. It is the radiation aspect that appears misunderstood.

Let me also say I hope that this is not true. If it is we are all pretty screwed. The worrying thing is, is that the observable evidence supports it.

Quasars are a real phenomena as people may know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar

Is it a real threat which is has been overlooked?

_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>

Gravity is a force. God is believed to be a man. I fail to understand your point.