What an interesting thread!
So many things to respond to…
First, thanks to uk-astro, Qev, Dr. Skeptic, Martin and others for “keeping it real”.
Harry’s skepticism seems to be based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how science works. Mathematics is the language of science. Belief and opinion are worthless unless they can by supported by the math. If a theory relies on the assumption that 1+1=3 then the theory is wrong. (end of discussion!)
A hundred years ago Einstein used some very simple mathematical principles (Maxwell’s equations and the Lorentz boost) to give the world the “theory” of Special Relativity. At the time these predictions seemed absurd but experiment after experiment has proved SR to be right to an amazing certainty. Math does not lie.
Later he used a more complicated mathematical concept (Riemann geometry) to show that gravity propagates at the speed of light and developed the “theory” of General Relativity. He once again amazed the world with the correctness of his predictions.
If you disagree with GR or any other theory provided by actual scientists, then prove it! Show the math, if it’s true, I’ll listen to you otherwise…
Harry might benefit from relying less on internet articles than published, edited and peer reviewed articles that exist on paper.
Anyway, I have some questions that maybe some of the “big dogs” mentioned above can help me with.
To uk-astro:
What is the reason that a magnetic field cannot penetrate and exit the Schwarzschild radius of a black hole? What does happen to the field lines that enter the event horizon and why don’t they emerge to satisfy Gauss’ law? (this has been bugging me for a while).
Wheeler said that “black holes have no hair” but it seems to me that this might be peach fuzz.
If a magnetic field can “flow through” the event horizon then the charged particles that fall into the horizon would be partially responsible for creating the incredible jets that expel plasma for thousands of light years. The velocity of such particles as they approach the speed of light might account for the huge power of the jets. If the field lines don’t flow through the horizon, then what do they actually do?
Also, there is a very interesting analogy between gravity and electro-magnetism (a.k.a. GEM). Do you think there exists an analog between black holes created by high mass density and something created by high enough charge density?
To dcmp:
I think the balloon analogy is a very good model to explain the lack of an “edge” to the universe. We know from linear algebra that dimensions within a metric need to be orthogonal. Anyone using a simple oscilloscope understands this. Since we humans can really only visualize 3 dimensions, one can imagine a spatially 2 dimension universe combined with one dimension of time. The surface area of the balloon represents “space” and the radius of the balloon represents time. This provides a model of the universe that is “finite but unbounded” consistent with the current theory. Even inflation “falls” into this model since a non-linear pressure is required to blow up the balloon. 
;
To Martin:
M-theory is the only reasonable solution (in my opinion) that can compete with the concept that time began at the Big Bang. I’m waiting for an answer from minds like Ed Whitten’s for this.
Moonshadow
