Starship Asterisk*

We propose degenerate fermionic dark matter to explain the flat-top density profile of the cluster A1689 recently observed.

noblackhole wrote: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 similar threat from the moderators for the perjorative remarks he has leveled at the author of the paper cited by Harry, and at me.

It is quite indicative that when presented with evidence, scientists flatly refuse to even look at the evidence, when the evidence clearly rebukes their claims, and in place of scientific response, resort to anything but science to dismiss the facts out of hand. Apparently Einstein's recommendation is strictly adhered to: if the facts don't suit the theory, change the facts!

Doum wrote:
The center of many galaxy have black hole with the mass of billion of suns. Wich was accumulate to that level of mass by many interactions between black hole and suns and all matter in that galaxy that are close to the center of that galaxy.

aristarchusinexile wrote:The centre of many galaxies are observed to exhibit characteristics which are said may be caused by Black Holes. That does not say the characteristics are caused by Black Holes.

mark swain wrote:I have my beliefs , but i fear most on here do not want to here it. because it involves a radical new way of thinking.

plus it upsets me to see peoples hard work go down the drain. I wish i,d never read that paper. 20 years ago i told my missus that would happen one day..it does not please me.

mark

aristarchusinexile wrote:

mark swain wrote:I have my beliefs , but i fear most on here do not want to here it. because it involves a radical new way of thinking.

plus it upsets me to see peoples hard work go down the drain. I wish i,d never read that paper. 20 years ago i told my missus that would happen one day..it does not please me.

mark

You're a genuinely humourous invidividual, especially if you think you might persuade everyone to think the same as you do. Disagreement seems an inviolable part of human discussion.

Using recent advance in numerical relativity, three-dimensional simulations of the formation of black holes through gravitational collapse of rotating stars have been performed with unprecedented accuracy. In the case of rotating neutron stars, unstable to quasi-radial oscillations, the complete transition from one stationary solution of Einstein's equations to another, including the formation of horizons and gravitational wave emission has been demonstrated. In the case of differentially rotating supermassive stars, non-axisymmetric dynamical instabilities can lead to fragmentation and prompt collapse to supermassive black holes. Here, we present a summary of recent, detailed numerical simulations by Baiotti et al.

mark swain wrote:... about anti-matter and matter. If They both got created in the same place the universe would not exist? Was they created separately? How the hell could this happen? What is the force that brings them to kill each other?

http://www.haydenplanetarium.org/tyson/category/subjects/quark wrote:Strong theoretical evidence suggests that an episode in the very early universe, perhaps during one of the force splits, endowed the universe with a remarkable asymmetry, in which particles of matter barely outnumbered particles of antimatter by a billion-and-one to a billion. That small difference in population hardly got noticed amid the continuous creation, annihilation, and re-creation of quarks and antiquarks, electrons and antielectrons (better known as positrons), and neutrinos and antineutrinos. The odd man out had plenty of opportunities to find someone to annihilate with, and so did everybody else. But not for much longer. As the cosmos continued to expand and cool, it became the size of the solar system, with a temperature dropping rapidly past a trillion degrees Kelvin. A millionth of a second had passed since the beginning.

This tepid universe was no longer hot enough or dense enough to cook quarks, and so they all grabbed dance partners, creating a permanent new family of heavy particles called hadrons (from the Greek hadros, meaning "thick"). That quark-to-hadron transition soon resulted in the emergence of protons and neutrons as well as other, less familiar heavy particles, all composed of various combinations of quark species. The slight matter-antimatter asymmetry afflicting the quark-lepton soup now passed to the hadrons, but with extraordinary consequences.

As the universe cooled, the amount of energy available for the spontaneous creation of basic particles dropped. During the hadron era, ambient photons could no longer invoke E = mc2 to manufacture quark-antiquark pairs. Not only that, the photons that emerged from all the remaining annihilations lost energy to the ever-expanding universe and dropped below the threshold required to create hadron-antihadron pairs. For every billion annihilations—leaving a billion photons in their wake—a single hadron survived. Those loners would ultimately get to have all the fun: serving as the source of galaxies, stars, planets, and people.

Without the billion-and-one to a billion imbalance between matter and antimatter, all mass in the universe would have annihilated, leaving a cosmos made of photons and nothing else—the ultimate let-there-be-light scenario.

By now, one second of time has passed.

The universe has grown to a few light-years across, about the distance from the Sun to its closest neighboring stars. At a billion degrees, it's still plenty hot—and still able to cook electrons, which, along with their positron counterparts, continue to pop in and out of existence. But in the ever-expanding, ever-cooling universe, their days (seconds, really) are numbered. What was true for hadrons is true for electrons: eventually only one electron in a billion survives. The rest get annihilated, together with their antimatter sidekicks the positrons, in a sea of photons.

Right about now, one electron for every proton has been "frozen" into existence.

mark swain wrote:The question, i can not get answered is: Hard.. Its about anti-matter and matter. If They both got created in the same place the universe would not exist? Was they created separately? How the hell could this happen? What is the force that brings them to kill each other? Because Anti-matter/matter comes together to make energy, What is the opposite of them both?

Chris Peterson wrote:... very confusing to follow.

harry wrote:The BBT and Black holes have a direct relationship.
Nucleosynthesis of matter coming out of black holes is quite similar to the BBT.

noblackhole wrote:Indeed, nucleosynthesis cannot occur in black holes since the latter are figments of the imagination.

It is by now clear that Gamma ray Bursts originate from an electron positron plasma formed during the process of gravitational collapse to a Black Hole. It is crucial to identify the initial conditions in the neutron star core originating such a collapse which give origin to the vast electrodynamics process originating such an electron positron plasma during the late phases of the collapse as the horizon of the Black Hole is reached. We present a new approach, based on a ultra-relativistic Thomas-Fermi approach, to the nuclear matter in bulk enforcing the condition of global charge neutrality as opposed to the local charge neutrality usually imposed. A new ground state is found that can differ by 1049 ergs from the ones where local charge neutrality is implemented. Electric fields close to the critical value can exist at the surface of the core at the onset of the gravitational instability. We outline consequences of these results in nuclear physics, in the formation process of neutron stars and the supernovae emission in the X and Gamma rays as well as possibly in the process of ejection of the remnant.

harry wrote:It is true that Main stream says that nothing can escape a black hole.
But! than again there are scientists like Steven Hawkings and others that feel that is not the case.

harry wrote:If a black hole existed with a singularity than I would agree that nothing could escape from a black hole. Since singularities do not exist in reality than the center of the so called black hole must obey the laws of physics.

noblackhole wrote:Black holes were conjured up theoretically, not from observations. The theory came first, and observations have been subsequently misconstrued in attempts to legitimise the theory.

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.

Since the black hole is a false theoretical entity it does not exist. It is indeed a figment of the imagination. Scientifically, it is nonsense to say that a false theoretical entity actually exists.