Starship Asterisk*

Chris L. Petersen wrote: "Non sequitur. The quotes you provide don't deal in the slightest with the points I made." Not true - SR must hold in sufficiently small regions of Einstein's gravitational field, as Einstein himself said and as Pauli reiterated. Thus the two theories must be cons...

Chris L. Petersen wrote: "Here we see a failure to understand how many theories, including SR, have realms of applicability. The fact that SR might not be able to describe a singularity does not mean it forbids it. It just means that the theory breaks down under those conditions. We don't say ...

Chris L. Petersen wrote: C.L. Petersen quoted noblackhole: "The theory is demonstrably false - neither General Relativity nor Newton's theory predict them (the Michell-Laplace dark body is not a black hole). Schwarzschild's actual solution forbids black holes." C. L. Petersen responded: &...

Chris L. Petersen wrote: "Factual error. The best supported theory and observation very strongly suggest that black holes are real. Scientifically, it is nonsense to say with certainty they don't exist. The proper skeptical attitude is that while it is possible another explanation might explai...

Chris L. Petersen wrote: " It does not happen in black holes, and matter does not come out of black holes. Nucleosynthesis may happen in relativistic jets that are powered by black holes, but those jets don't come from the black holes, they are merely redirected." Indeed, nucleosynthesis ...

Dear Forum participants, I must inform you that owing to my last post in reply to that by Chris L. Peterson, I received two emails from the moderators of this site, telling me that I will be banned if I continue to say things about Mr. Peterson that are not nice. I wonder if Mr. Peterson received a ...

Chris L. Peterson wrote: " It's not worth my time, and neither is discussing it with you. " Wonderful - spoken as a true champion of ignorance and deceit. If you had any scientific credibility to begin with, you have certainly now flushed in down the toilet. I don't think anybody here can...

Chris L. Peterson wrote: " I don't know what you mean by "scientific" in this sense. It isn't a question of science, and I wasn't addressing the science. I was addressing the method of presentation. My response was rational. " It's obvious - you responded with ridicule, not scie...

Chris L. Peterson wrote : I did not insult the author. I didn't even say he was wrong. Let's have a look again at what you said: " Lets see... we have a mathematically dense, non peer reviewed paper from somebody who had to start his own journal as a forum, and who devotes his website to the t...

Chris L. Peterson says: " Lets see... we have a mathematically dense, non peer reviewed paper from somebody who had to start his own journal as a forum, and who devotes his website to the typical crackpot "the whole world is against me" rants. And on the other hand, we have thousands ...

It is noteworthy that Chis L. Peterson has taken no account of the paper previously cited by Harry: http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/DPS-paper.pdf wherein it is clearly demonstrated that the concept of the black hole has been conjured up from a combination of erroneous mathematics and misap...

Chris Peterson wrote: " I'd suggest you read the paper linked by Harry. It is a nice summary, and quite correctly points out that a "singularity" has multiple interpretations, and there is no clear consensus on how to handle that (or if there is even a problem). " But there is a...

The fact remains that the astrophysical scientists claim that the black hole has an infinitely density point-mass singularity produced by irresistible gravitational collapse. But infinite density is forbidden by the Theory of Relativity, so black holes are fallacious, bearing in mind that they were ...

According to the theory of black holes, the hole has two tell-tale signatures (a) an event horizon and (b) an infinitely dense point-mass singularity. Nobody has ever found either. No astrophysical scientists can provide anybody with the coordinates of either. They simply interpret their observation...