Hadron collider CERN

[northstar]

By your logic, there is no proof that electrons exist, either. Most of what we observe in nature we observe indirectly. And the observations of black holes are extensive.

The observations are of effects which may be caused by something. There is no proof whatsoever that Black Holes are causing the effects.

Black holes happen to be the current best theoretical explanation for the effects observed. Kind of like how electrons are the current best theoretical match to the effects we observe in things like electronics and particle physics. If you've got a different theory for what's producing black-hole-like behaviour that astronomers observe, then propose it and back it up with observations that show it's a better theory. That's how science works.

Others have already done so, PHDs, John Moffat being only one of those. Of course they have been labelled "fringe".

[bystander]

Others have already done so, PHDs, John Moffat being only one of those. Of course they have been labelled "fringe".

Fun with John Moffat

When I think of John Moffat, (and I don't, often), I'm reminded of the song Lunatic Fringe.

• Lunatic fringe
  I know you're out there
  You're in hiding
  And you hold your meetings
  We can hear you coming
  We know what you're after
  We're wise to you this time
  We won't let you kill the laughter.
  
  Lunatic fringe
  In the twilight's last gleaming
  This is open season
  But you won't get too far
  We know you've got to blame someone
  For your own confusion
  But we're on guard this time
  Against your final solution
  
  ...
  
  Lunatic fringe
  We know you're out there
  But in these new dark ages
  There will still be light
  An eye for an eye;
  Well before you go under...
  Can you feel the resistance?
  Can you feel the thunder?

[The Code]

When I think of John Moffat, (and I don't, often), I'm reminded of the song Lunatic Fringe.

Oh, Right.. Ok .. Can you just run this part past me again please... 1 trillion , billion square light years ,, filled with energy/matter. Could you show me how i can cram it into nothing? What was that about a Lunatic Fringe?

[northstar]

Others have already done so, PHDs, John Moffat being only one of those. Of course they have been labelled "fringe".

Fun with John Moffat

When I think of John Moffat, (and I don't, often), I'm reminded of the song Lunatic Fringe.

• Lunatic fringe
  I know you're out there
  You're in hiding
  And you hold your meetings
  We can hear you coming
  We know what you're after
  We're wise to you this time
  We won't let you kill the laughter.
  
  Lunatic fringe
  In the twilight's last gleaming
  This is open season
  But you won't get too far
  We know you've got to blame someone
  For your own confusion
  But we're on guard this time
  Against your final solution
  
  ...
  
  Lunatic fringe
  We know you're out there
  But in these new dark ages
  There will still be light
  An eye for an eye;
  Well before you go under...
  Can you feel the resistance?
  Can you feel the thunder?

Strong opinion, but everyone's entitled to one, right? But it does prove what I was saying.

[bystander]

Oh, Right.. Ok .. Can you just run this part past me again please... 1 trillion , billion square light years ,, filled with energy/matter. Could you show me how i can cram it into nothing? What was that about a Lunatic Fringe?

You don't. Why would you want to? Unless, of course, you are a part of that lunatic fringe. You cannot describe conditions before space-time began, no more than you can describe the inside of a black hole. To try to do so is pure speculation, the information simply isn't available.

[northstar]

Oh, Right.. Ok .. Can you just run this part past me again please... 1 trillion , billion square light years ,, filled with energy/matter. Could you show me how i can cram it into nothing? What was that about a Lunatic Fringe?

You don't. Why would you want to? Unless, of course, you are a part of that lunatic fringe. You cannot describe conditions before space-time began, no more than you can describe the inside of a black hole. To try to do so is pure speculation, the information simply isn't available.

ALpha and Omega. Published long, long ago.

[The Code]

ALpha and Omega. Published long, long ago.

You don't. Why would you want to? Unless, of course, you are a part of that lunatic fringe. You cannot describe conditions before space-time began, no more than you can describe the inside of a black hole. To try to do so is pure speculation, the information simply isn't available.

North Star ,, I do not believe in any God, Sorry.

Bystander,,, if the universe was created the way you say,,, every single tic/second of a clock, is still here. plus the seconds of a clock 12 billion years in the future are also here as well. energy can never be destroyed ... just like the lunatic fringe.. it can never go away...

[harry]

G'day

I have been away on a close call. Not mine

So it will take a few days to collect my thoughts.

In the mean time I was sent this email.
It is only now we are starting to understand the meaning of so called black hole.

http://arxiv.org/abs/0909.2585

Radio emission and jets from microquasars
Authors: E. Gallo (MIT, Usa)
(Submitted on 14 Sep 2009)

Abstract: To some extent, all Galactic binary systems hosting a compact object are potential `microquasars', so much as all galactic nuclei may have been quasars, once upon a time. The necessary ingredients for a compact object of stellar mass to qualify as a microquasar seem to be: accretion, rotation and magnetic field. The presence of a black hole may help, but is not strictly required, since neutron star X-ray binaries and dwarf novae can be powerful jet sources as well. The above issues are broadly discussed throughout this Chapter, with a a rather trivial question in mind: why do we care? In other words: are jets a negligible phenomenon in terms of accretion power, or do they contribute significantly to dissipating gravitational potential energy? How do they influence their surroundings? The latter point is especially relevant in a broader context, as there is mounting evidence that outflows powered by super-massive black holes in external galaxies may play a crucial role in regulating the evolution of cosmic structures. Microquasars can also be thought of as a form of quasars for the impatient: what makes them appealing, despite their low number statistics with respect to quasars, are the fast variability time-scales. In the first approximation, the physics of the jet-accretion coupling in the innermost regions should be set by the mass/size of the accretor: stellar mass objects vary on 10^5-10^8 times shorter time-scales, making it possible to study variable accretion modes and related ejection phenomena over average Ph.D. time-scales. [Abridged]

and

http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.4195
Non-singular black holes from gravity-matter-brane lagrangians

Authors: Eduardo Guendelman, Alexander Kaganovich, Emil Nissimov, Svetlana Pacheva
(Submitted on 28 Aug 2009 (v1), last revised 8 Sep 2009 (this version, v3))

Abstract: We consider self-consistent coupling of bulk Einstein-Maxwell-Kalb-Ramond system to codimension-one charged lightlike p-brane with dynamical (variable) tension (LL-brane). The latter is described by a manifestly reparametrization-invariant world-volume action significantly different from the ordinary Nambu-Goto one. We show that the LL-brane is the appropriate gravitational and charge source in the Einstein-Maxwell-Kalb-Ramond equations of motion needed to generate a self-consistent solution describing non-singular black hole. The latter consists of de Sitter interior region and exterior Reissner-Nordstroem region glued together along their common horizon (it is the inner horizon from the Reissner-Nordstroem side). The matching horizon is automatically occupied by the LL-brane as a result of its world-volume lagrangian dynamics, which dynamically generates the cosmological constant in the interior region and uniquely determines the mass and charge parameters of the exterior region. Using similar techniques we construct a self-consistent wormhole solution of Einstein-Maxwell system coupled to electrically neutral LL-brane, which describes two identical copies of a non-singular black hole region being the exterior Reissner-Nordstroem region above the inner horizon, glued together along their common horizon (the inner Reissner-Nordstroem one) occupied by the LL-brane. The corresponding mass and charge parameters of the two black hole "universes" are explicitly determined by the dynamical LL-brane tension. This also provides an explicit example of Misner-Wheeler "charge without charge" phenomenon. Finally, this wormhole solution connecting two non-singular black holes can be transformed into a special case of Kantowski-Sachs bouncing cosmology solution.

[Orca]

Sigh. Once more into the breach.

Let's examine two quotes from Northstar:

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

Qute a difference between something seen and something imagined. Despite Einstein saying, "Imagination is more important than knowledge" there is no proof of any kind that Black Holes exist, so your comparison between Black Holes and stars is totally inappropriate.

Habitable by what? Creatures certainly inhabit some moons already, like those moons composed of water and covered by layers of ice, that ice cracking and spraying geysers. Where there is liquid water, there will be life. I think we have to remember that humans are not the only habitants of this universe.

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

You're saying that we know life exists outside the earth, even though we have not found a trace of evidence, yet the observations and theoretical predictions that support the existence of black holes are meaningless?

I think it is worth pointing out that practically everything we know about universe beyond our solar system is from painstaking measurements of the most feeble handful of photons collected night after night. We extrapolate from frequency and spectral lines almost everything the science of astronomy is founded on...from composition to distances to the life cycles of stars. Just a handful of photons. You seem so sure about life in the universe; but the discovery of extra solar planets are a great example of how tenuous our ability to probe the universe really is. These planets are found using the tiny shift in a star's position or the infinitesimally small changes in light when the planet transits the star. "Proof" really isn't an achievable goal; we look for evidence that either supports a theory so it can be solidified or disproves a theory and makes us start fresh.

But then, if you were really science-minded, you'd already know that theory is refined over time by repeated observation...there are no easy "yes or no" answers in true scientific research.

----

I refer you back to "your attitude of polite (misplaced) authority and compassion for the less intellectually gifted is not endearing" nor is it in the least attractive or necessary in a forum such as this. Judge not, lest ye be judged.

What if you'd gone to a Linux forum and started going off about how the superiority of Windows; if you'd gone to a religious website only to claim another religion is the true path; if you'd gone to a gardening website and told everyone that diesel is the preferred way to get rid of weeds...what reactions would you expect?

You come to a science-based astronomy forum and scoff in the face of prevailing theory with no evidence to support your claims, just obvious personal distaste for certain predictions of said theory. Again, what reaction did you expect? Mr. Peterson has displayed both competence and knowledge on the subject of this forum as well as patience with those who either lack knowledge or actively spread pseudoscience.

To lack knowledge is not a bad thing; as long as you are willing to learn. That's why this forum is here. Those of us who have a passion for astronomy are more than willing to share our hobby; we are equally willing to admit when we don't fully understand a topic so that we may expand our knowledge.

[bystander]

Bystander,,, if the universe was created the way you say,,, every single tic/second of a clock, is still here. plus the seconds of a clock 12 billion years in the future are also here as well. energy can never be destroyed ... just like the lunatic fringe.. it can never go away...

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say. I made no statements about how the universe came into being, and I certainly didn't espouse any creation theory. I did say that there is nothing known about space-time before it began. Trying to describe what came before is pointless and pure speculation.

quiet applause for orca

[northstar]

Sigh. Once more into the breach.

Let's examine two quotes from Northstar:

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

Qute a difference between something seen and something imagined. Despite Einstein saying, "Imagination is more important than knowledge" there is no proof of any kind that Black Holes exist, so your comparison between Black Holes and stars is totally inappropriate.

Habitable by what? Creatures certainly inhabit some moons already, like those moons composed of water and covered by layers of ice, that ice cracking and spraying geysers. Where there is liquid water, there will be life. I think we have to remember that humans are not the only habitants of this universe.

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

You're saying that we know life exists outside the earth, even though we have not found a trace of evidence, yet the observations and theoretical predictions that support the existence of black holes are meaningless?

I think it is worth pointing out that practically everything we know about universe beyond our solar system is from painstaking measurements of the most feeble handful of photons collected night after night. We extrapolate from frequency and spectral lines almost everything the science of astronomy is founded on...from composition to distances to the life cycles of stars. Just a handful of photons. You seem so sure about life in the universe; but the discovery of extra solar planets are a great example of how tenuous our ability to probe the universe really is. These planets are found using the tiny shift in a star's position or the infinitesimally small changes in light when the planet transits the star. "Proof" really isn't an achievable goal; we look for evidence that either supports a theory so it can be solidified or disproves a theory and makes us start fresh.

But then, if you were really science-minded, you'd already know that theory is refined over time by repeated observation...there are no easy "yes or no" answers in true scientific research.

----

I refer you back to "your attitude of polite (misplaced) authority and compassion for the less intellectually gifted is not endearing" nor is it in the least attractive or necessary in a forum such as this. Judge not, lest ye be judged.

What if you'd gone to a Linux forum and started going off about how the superiority of Windows; if you'd gone to a religious website only to claim another religion is the true path; if you'd gone to a gardening website and told everyone that diesel is the preferred way to get rid of weeds...what reactions would you expect?

You come to a science-based astronomy forum and scoff in the face of prevailing theory with no evidence to support your claims, just obvious personal distaste for certain predictions of said theory. Again, what reaction did you expect? Mr. Peterson has displayed both competence and knowledge on the subject of this forum as well as patience with those who either lack knowledge or actively spread pseudoscience.

To lack knowledge is not a bad thing; as long as you are willing to learn. That's why this forum is here. Those of us who have a passion for astronomy are more than willing to share our hobby; we are equally willing to admit when we don't fully understand a topic so that we may expand our knowledge.

I sugest politely, Orca, that you find something better to do with your time than compose long winded and purposeless and pointless and innacurate posts such as you have done here. By the way, you sound so much like Chris Peterson that if I could check your IPs I certainly would.

[northstar]

North Star ,, I do not believe in any God, Sorry.

Mark, I did not use the word 'God' 'god' or 'gad' nor any of the known names of God.

[astrolabe]

Hello North Stari,

....nor any of the known names of God.

I would argue that point but this is not the Forum to do so.

[harry]

G'day

Is there a pointless point?

[Orca]

I sugest politely, Orca, that you find something better to do with your time than compose long winded and purposeless and pointless and innacurate posts such as you have done here. By the way, you sound so much like Chris Peterson that if I could check your IPs I certainly would.

I'd suggest politely, Northstar, that you take a look at "date joined" on the side of my post and compare it to yours. You've been a member for a few days, I've been reading and posting on this board for more than four years. The idea that you would start throwing accusations around within days of joining a forum is incredible. But then, there are a lot of bad forums out there. Perhaps you've strolled in from rough territory.

Yes, that was a long post. And yes, I had serious doubts before I began writing it that I would make an impact. And, yes, the thought that in fact you, the newcomer, was someone from the past ghosting the board had indeed occurred to me. For you sound very much like a long list of disruptors and Psuedosci-Fi buffs who have graced this board over the years. But I for one gave you the benefit of the doubt and tried to explain my position.

I am not sure what makes folks like you do what you do...trolling boards to getting reactions. Eventually, if your antics get annoying enough, an Admin may move to a heavier-handed strategy to deal with you. Or you just might get bored and move on. Either way, enjoy your stay. You'll be happy in the knowledge that there will always be someone to replace you soon after you're gone.

[harry]

G'day Orca

Letting off some steam.


Hello Northstar

Sounds like you have been here before.

oops I have to go,,,,,,,,pick up the kids

[northstar]

I sugest politely, Orca, that you find something better to do with your time than compose long winded and purposeless and pointless and innacurate posts such as you have done here. By the way, you sound so much like Chris Peterson that if I could check your IPs I certainly would.

I'd suggest politely, Northstar, that you take a look at "date joined" on the side of my post and compare it to yours. You've been a member for a few days, I've been reading and posting on this board for more than four years. The idea that you would start throwing accusations around within days of joining a forum is incredible. But then, there are a lot of bad forums out there. Perhaps you've strolled in from rough territory.

Yes, that was a long post. And yes, I had serious doubts before I began writing it that I would make an impact. And, yes, the thought that in fact you, the newcomer, was someone from the past ghosting the board had indeed occurred to me. For you sound very much like a long list of disruptors and Psuedosci-Fi buffs who have graced this board over the years. But I for one gave you the benefit of the doubt and tried to explain my position.

I am not sure what makes folks like you do what you do...trolling boards to getting reactions. Eventually, if your antics get annoying enough, an Admin may move to a heavier-handed strategy to deal with you. Or you just might get bored and move on. Either way, enjoy your stay. You'll be happy in the knowledge that there will always be someone to replace you soon after you're gone.

Sorry Orca that I can no longer tolerate long-winded misplaced authorities, self-righteous pontifications, outright lies, scientific untruths, outrages against true science and accusations of 'folks like you'. It is clear that you are a pontificator and outright accuser. You would, in a court of law, be convicted of libel and slander. It is also clear that your religiosity in the name of science interferes drastically and exceptionally harmfully to the processes of free speech and free intellect. It appears you, and whoever will support you in your statements, are doomed to wander in darkness until you begin to admit you are not seeing light and scientific truth. I will be banned from this site because of your long relationship with the moderators who seem to find comfortable enjoyment and perverse pleasure hiding behind and using improperly and without hint of conscience their delete buttons. Some be it .. the false religion of Big Bang and Theory is Fact will be seen for what it is, a true darkness which the Northstar will shine against until the end of this creation. Join true freedom of thought and expression, apod forum, or stay lost in darkness which fewer and fewer viewers find inclined to participate in. Search the record .. two or three or no posts each day unless the posts are contention and argument and name calling between Chris Peterson and a couple others. You and yours have banned yourselves from intelligent thought and action .. with your moderator issuing Board Warnings without even bothering to mention what the warning is for. True Facist action in the finiest Nazi tradition, wouldn't you say? And right there at NASA. Such a shame, and no need to wonder why, with that kind of mentality, why NASA has repeated catastrophic failures of its equipment. Shame on you for allowing such catastrophes for the sake of your religiosity .. you are the priests of doom.

[northstar]

Hello North Stari,

....nor any of the known names of God.

I would argue that point but this is not the Forum to do so.

You would lose the argument, Astromisled. Read more carefully.

[Chris Peterson]

I sugest politely, Orca, that you find something better to do with your time than compose long winded and purposeless and pointless and innacurate posts such as you have done here. By the way, you sound so much like Chris Peterson that if I could check your IPs I certainly would.

And you'd find that there is no connection between us. The main thing we have in common here, anyway, is that we apparently both seek to correct the gross errors occasionally promulgated by those who lack even the slightest understanding of science. In this case, that means you. There are forums specifically created for those who wish to ramble on about pseudoscientific ideas; I think you'd enjoy them- they allow anybody to speculate about anything, with no burden to support their ideas. If you'd like advice on where to find them, I'm sure some of us can offer suggestions. But on the whole, your posts are simply out of place here. And your most recent posts are simply nasty. Are you going for a record for the number of times a single person can be banned from the same group?

[manamongzombies]

I sugest politely, Orca, that you find something better to do with your time than compose long winded and purposeless and pointless and innacurate posts such as you have done here. By the way, you sound so much like Chris Peterson that if I could check your IPs I certainly would.

And you'd find that there is no connection between us. The main thing we have in common here, anyway, is that we apparently both seek to correct the gross errors occasionally promulgated by those who lack even the slightest understanding of science. In this case, that means you. There are forums specifically created for those who wish to ramble on about pseudoscientific ideas; I think you'd enjoy them- they allow anybody to speculate about anything, with no burden to support their ideas. If you'd like advice on where to find them, I'm sure some of us can offer suggestions. But on the whole, your posts are simply out of place here. And your most recent posts are simply nasty. Are you going for a record for the number of times a single person can be banned from the same group?

Your talk about nasty, Mr. Peterson. It's obvious who the nasty little pseudo-polite zombies here are. The connection between you and Orca is obvious .. Zombies travel in groups because they're afraid of the light from the single Northstar. Watch out, Zombies, the Morning Star shines in the morning you know. Nrothstar by night .. Morning Star by day .. Zombies are doomed to walk in the darkness despite the light they say they admire.

[The Code]

North star,, sputnik,, aris blar blar blar...


Arguments are lost when you start shouting and calling names,,, There is only one way to win the argument.. And that is to Prove your self right....With out any shadow of doubt.

Mark

[apodman]

http://www.mcphee.com/shop/products/Glo ... y-Set.html
http://www.livinginthelightms.com/troll ... rking.html

[The Code]

What happens,,, if they do not find, the Higgs Boson or the other stuff they expect to find? What will that mean to current theory of everything?

Mark

[Chris Peterson]

What happens,,, if they do not find, the Higgs Boson or the other stuff they expect to find? What will that mean to current theory of everything?

There is no current "theory of everything". If they don't find the Higgs boson (and the conditions are such that there is a high degree of certainty that they ought to have), it means that the Standard Model will need revision. It probably does not mean that the model will be thrown out, since it is known already to be an excellent predictor for much of what we observe. Complex modern theories are seldom discarded completely, but are most often adjusted to fit new observations that become available.

[harry]

G'day

Mark said

There is only one way to win the argument.. And that is to Prove your self right....With out any shadow of doubt.

That is a BIG ASK.

Since there is large Shadows of doubt in cosmology.