Am I the only person who does not think black holes are real? - How can they be real?

You're misinterpreting what the constant 'c' (as in E = mc^2) is. C is the speed of light in a vacuum, it's the top speed a massless particle (like a photon) can achieve. The speed of any random photon is usually somewhat less than c, especially on Earth where the atmosphere does slow them down a little. Say I have a car and its top speed is 100mph. That does not mean my car can't go 80mph, or 20mph, or even 0mph, it just means that it can't go over 100mph. The relativistic effects you're trying to describe are consequences of a particle with mass speeding up close to light speed, and aren't relevant to the discussion of slowing down massless particles at all.
 
Christ Cried said:
I am unconcerned with your lack of concern. Your inability to understand something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Do you understand every protein-enzyme interaction going on in your body? No, you don't, nobody does.
Click to expand...

I doubt it is real. Time is a symptom of perception to create a sense of linearity between a set of events constantly changing from moment to moment. Einstein creating his own definition of time in a laboratory does it make it any more real then your avatar. Perhaps if it was applicable to anything other then dark spots deep in space and slight refractions of light and time differences in sattelites then I could "understand it better." I simply chose not to understand nonsense, which clearly it is.

As for "understanding" it I have probably spent the most time in this thread describing what it actually is supposed to be and how contradictive the elements that go into the hypothesis actually are. Be it as it is, if people want to believe in this sort of thing and time will be frozen in place in all practicality at the entrance of an event horizon millions of light years into space so be it.

I can't stop that. I can't stop kids from believing in Santa Clause either. Whatever makes the world happier.

An Account said:
You're misinterpreting what the constant 'c' (as in E = mc^2) is. C is the speed of light in a vacuum, it's the top speed a massless particle (like a photon) can achieve. The speed of any random photon is usually somewhat less than c, especially on Earth where the atmosphere does slow them down a little. Say I have a car and its top speed is 100mph. That does not mean my car can't go 80mph, or 20mph, or even 0mph, it just means that it can't go over 100mph. The relativistic effects you're trying to describe are consequences of a particle with mass speeding up close to light speed, and aren't relevant to the discussion of slowing down massless particles at all.
Click to expand...

It is relevant if the concept of slowing down particles involves gravity trapping light when here on earth light bounces off the earth no problem and the gravity has no effect on the light. Does the atmosphere really slow down light particles? If light from the sun hits a satellite orbiting Mars does the light bounce off and come back to earth in less time then it does if it hits the satellite with less gravity? I mean it would have to. I know no one has measured this but if they had I doubt there would be a difference. Except for the tons of examples which prove there is a difference. Which is by the way, 0 examples.

Dial M for Misgender said:
Our galaxy would not exist as a cohesive structure if it wasn't for the black hole at the center of it. It's much more complicated to try to explain away black holes at this point. It would basically mean we were wrong about everything.
Click to expand...

I know that is the problem. With our understanding of everything off our planet and our knowledge that our galaxy would not exist without the black hole at the center of it keeping everything so cohesive it would be impossible to explain away the theory because then we would be wrong about everything else as well. Imagine that.

It would be like building an electric engine in a car based on the idea that it worked on combustion somehow the way gasoline engines do, then finding out it doesn't and having to completely re discover how the electric engine worked in the first place. In such a scenario it would be better to just not admit we are wrong so we would have to go back to the drawing board and start from phase 1.

Therefore, light does stay at the same speed, except in the presence of gravity, time changes for the observer moving at a faster speed, space time is for sure real and black holes are for sure real and function exactly as we think they do, the photo taken of the incident deep in space is for sure a black hole and my understanding of how such quantum physics works is sound and without a doubt. My faith could not be stronger, much like a man who goes to church and prays to his father every day.

Let us pray, oh heavenly father.....
 
  • Dumb
  • Autistic
Reactions: Shiversblood, KimCoppolaAficionado and Buster O'Keefe
If photons are massless, then explain Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I thought the reason why we can't accurately determine the precise location of subatomic particles was because the photons exert a force on the particles before being reflected to our eyes, which pushes the particles ever so slightly.

Also, I thought black holes emitted x-rays, gamma rays and other nonsense, so there are more ways to prove their existence than pictures from (((the scientific community))).
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: KimCoppolaAficionado and Christ Cried
Shroom King said:
If photons are massless, then explain Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I thought the reason why we can't accurately determine the precise location of subatomic particles was because the photons exert a force on the particles before being reflected to our eyes, which pushes the particles ever so slightly.

Also, I thought black holes emitted x-rays, gamma rays and other nonsense, so there are more ways to prove their existence than pictures from (((the scientific community))).
Click to expand...
The uncertainty principle is a fundamental relation between position and momentum as well as time and energy, it's insurmountable.
 
formershroomeryuser said:
It is relevant if the concept of slowing down particles involves gravity trapping light when here on earth light bounces off the earth no problem and the gravity has no effect on the light. Does the atmosphere really slow down light particles? If light from the sun hits a satellite orbiting Mars does the light bounce off and come back to earth in less time then it does if it hits the satellite with less gravity? I mean it would have to. I know no one has measured this but if they had I doubt there would be a difference. Except for the tons of examples which prove there is a difference. Which is by the way, 0 examples.



I know that is the problem. With our understanding of everything off our planet and our knowledge that our galaxy would not exist without the black hole at the center of it keeping everything so cohesive it would be impossible to explain away the theory because then we would be wrong about everything else as well. Imagine that.

It would be like building an electric engine in a car based on the idea that it worked on combustion somehow the way gasoline engines do, then finding out it doesn't and having to completely re discover how the electric engine worked in the first place. In such a scenario it would be better to just not admit we are wrong so we would have to go back to the drawing board and start from phase 1.

Therefore, light does stay at the same speed, except in the presence of gravity, time changes for the observer moving at a faster speed, space time is for sure real and black holes are for sure real and function exactly as we think they do, the photo taken of the incident deep in space is for sure a black hole and my understanding of how such quantum physics works is sound and without a doubt. My faith could not be stronger, much like a man who goes to church and prays to his father every day.

Let us pray, oh heavenly father.....
Click to expand...
Shroom King said:
If photons are massless, then explain Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I thought the reason why we can't accurately determine the precise location of subatomic particles was because the photons exert a force on the particles before being reflected to our eyes, which pushes the particles ever so slightly.

Also, I thought black holes emitted x-rays, gamma rays and other nonsense, so there are more ways to prove their existence than pictures from (((the scientific community))).
Click to expand...

Do fuck off to General Discussion.
 
  • Agree
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: KimCoppolaAficionado, Shroom King, AprilRains and 1 other person
Shroom King said:
If photons are massless, then explain Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. I thought the reason why we can't accurately determine the precise location of subatomic particles was because the photons exert a force on the particles before being reflected to our eyes, which pushes the particles ever so slightly.

Also, I thought black holes emitted x-rays, gamma rays and other nonsense, so there are more ways to prove their existence than pictures from (((the scientific community))).
Click to expand...

I will start with the last thing you said then the first thing you said. X rays gamma rays and "other nonsense" being emitted deep in space is certainly not an all for one factor to explain the existence of something such as a black hole. I have always wondered if a star died how long its light would be seen years after it is gone by observers who are light years away. Also why would the radiation the star leaves behind disappear instantly? Of course this would apply to supernova's and not dwarf stars that are remnants of stars long since exhausted like our star will one day become. Seriously though, if a star explodes why is the radiation going to disappear right away?

Ok next. The uncertainty principle:

"In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle (also known as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle) is any of a variety of mathematical inequalities[1] asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, known as complementary variables or canonically conjugate variables such as position x and momentum p, can be known or, depending on interpretation, to what extent such conjugate properties maintain their approximate meaning, as the mathematical framework of quantum physics does not support the notion of simultaneously well-defined conjugate properties expressed by a single value.

Introduced first in 1927, by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, it states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa.[2] "

So let's say light is not massless for a second. Let us say it is a particle. This would indicate according to Heisenberg that as a moving particle then isolating the position of the particle when it is moving it is difficult and likewise if it is still like in a black hole...... Or whatever it is inside the black hole, less moving or whatever I never did understand what they say actually happens to light particles in a black hole, but lets say still for the sake of the argument then trying to figure out its momentum from that point of view would be really difficult.

Now here is the mind blowing part. Lol not at all trying to sound sarcastic. From the position of earth and observing a gravitational phenomenon at closest at least a few million light years away, wether it is essentially still inside the singularity or moving violently as space and time are sucked up and threshed about like being inside a blender wouldn't it be difficult to observe in all its qualities from our point of view moving in space or our point of view relatively still from the point of view of such a distance in space from where we are?

Hahaha! Insurmountable I imagine! I would think from our limited point of view quantifying the exact physics of the speed of light, its effect from gravity, space time itself, and the difference in space time from the point of view of an observer would be really difficult. Haha or maybe I am wrong and we have this nailed down to a T. In which case I think if time and space distortion physics or "quantum physics" if you will were nailed down to a T and we knew wormholes existed that could tunnel an object or person through one time plane to another and all the physics involved then we would have a formula for the energy needed to create time travel, or a formula entirely disproving that time travel could ever exist.
 
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: Shiversblood, KimCoppolaAficionado and AprilRains
Who to believe the smartest people in the world including perhaps the most brilliant scientists who ever lived or this fucking guy. If you really want to have your mind blown check out Penrose's "Conformal Theory of the Universe". In his opinion black holes literally might be evidence of a prior universe from which ours spawned. It's over my head but he claims you can see it the CMB chart.

physicsworld.com

New evidence for cyclic universe claimed by Roger Penrose and colleagues – Physics World

Cosmic microwave hot spots could point to black holes from before the Big Bang, but some physicists disagree
physicsworld.com
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Dumb
Reactions: AprilRains and formershroomeryuser
formershroomeryuser said:
I will start with the last thing you said then the first thing you said. X rays gamma rays and "other nonsense" being emitted deep in space is certainly not an all for one factor to explain the existence of something such as a black hole. I have always wondered if a star died how long its light would be seen years after it is gone by observers who are light years away. Also why would the radiation the star leaves behind disappear instantly? Of course this would apply to supernova's and not dwarf stars that are remnants of stars long since exhausted like our star will one day become. Seriously though, if a star explodes why is the radiation going to disappear right away?

Ok next. The uncertainty principle:

"In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principle (also known as Heisenberg's uncertainty principle) is any of a variety of mathematical inequalities[1] asserting a fundamental limit to the precision with which certain pairs of physical properties of a particle, known as complementary variables or canonically conjugate variables such as position x and momentum p, can be known or, depending on interpretation, to what extent such conjugate properties maintain their approximate meaning, as the mathematical framework of quantum physics does not support the notion of simultaneously well-defined conjugate properties expressed by a single value.

Introduced first in 1927, by the German physicist Werner Heisenberg, it states that the more precisely the position of some particle is determined, the less precisely its momentum can be known, and vice versa.[2] "

So let's say light is not massless for a second. Let us say it is a particle. This would indicate according to Heisenberg that as a moving particle then isolating the position of the particle when it is moving it is difficult and likewise if it is still like in a black hole...... Or whatever it is inside the black hole, less moving or whatever I never did understand what they say actually happens to light particles in a black hole, but lets say still for the sake of the argument then trying to figure out its momentum from that point of view would be really difficult.

Now here is the mind blowing part. Lol not at all trying to sound sarcastic. From the position of earth and observing a gravitational phenomenon at closest at least a few million light years away, wether it is essentially still inside the singularity or moving violently as space and time are sucked up and threshed about like being inside a blender wouldn't it be difficult to observe in all its qualities from our point of view moving in space or our point of view relatively still from the point of view of such a distance in space from where we are?

Hahaha! Insurmountable I imagine! I would think from our limited point of view quantifying the exact physics of the speed of light, its effect from gravity, space time itself, and the difference in space time from the point of view of an observer would be really difficult. Haha or maybe I am wrong and we have this nailed down to a T. In which case I think if time and space distortion physics or "quantum physics" if you will were nailed down to a T and we knew wormholes existed that could tunnel an object or person through one time plane to another and all the physics involved then we would have a formula for the energy needed to create time travel, or a formula entirely disproving that time travel could ever exist.
Click to expand...
wow! really you should print out this post and hand it to prospective employers during job interviews so they know how smart you are
 
  • Like
  • Dumb
Reactions: KimCoppolaAficionado, AprilRains and formershroomeryuser
Kaede Did Nothing Wrong said:
wow! really you should print out this post and hand it to prospective employers during job interviews so they know how smart you are
Click to expand...

I already fucking did. I got fired the next day when they saw the radiation charts though. Who wouldn't believe a parapelegic and a guy who created a formula that helped invent the atom bomb then married his cousin and cried the rest of his life about how bad he felt helping kill millions of people then made a bunch of money off of it.

These guys I had the job interview with swore some guy named Stephen sent them personal letters before he died claiming there is a space ship that will take you to see this event and he would give them the contact but they just had to suck his paralysed cock first.

Then I found out it was where you work and suddenly I did not feel so bad.
 
  • Autistic
  • Dumb
Reactions: Shiversblood, KimCoppolaAficionado and AprilRains
formershroomeryuser said:
I already fucking did. I got fired the next day when they saw the radiation charts though. Who wouldn't believe a parapelegic and a guy who created a formula that helped invent the atom bomb then married his cousin and cried the rest of his life about how bad he felt helping kill millions of people then made a bunch of money off of it.

These guys I had the job interview with swore some guy named Stephen sent them personal letters before he died claiming there is a space ship that will take you to see this event and he would give them the contact but they just had to suck his paralysed cock first.

Then I found out it was where you work and suddenly I did not feel so bad.
Click to expand...

You sure have a habit of using a lot of words to say nothing at all. Isn't it funny how people who type up massive paragraphs explaining things are usually the people who know the least about what they're discussing?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: KimCoppolaAficionado, A Cold Potato, Nekromantik2 and 1 other person
NOT Sword Fighter Super said:
Is everybody from your forum this exceptional?

Is there like an army of @Shiversblood out there?
Click to expand...

The two forums are pretty much equal. Lol being retarded gets you tons of compliments. Saying anything worth your own opinion gets you lots of bad ratings from know it all faggot college boys who read straight from textbook swearing they are so original and you opposing them and all their friends means it is time to get you banned.

Lol army of Shiversblood on both sites. Still, better then Facebook. At least you can have a discussion on one of these forums. Every time my name is tagged on Facebook I want to grab an ak 47 and go out and shoot 50 people.

Islamic content intended
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Dumb
  • Autistic
Reactions: Shiversblood, ConfederateIrishman, inexplicable ethos and 4 others
formershroomeryuser said:
The two forums are pretty much equal. Lol being exceptional gets you tons of compliments. Saying anything worth your own opinion gets you lots of bad ratings from know it all faggot college boys who read straight from textbook swearing they are so original and you opposing them and all their friends means it is time to get you banned.

Lol army of Shiversblood on both sites. Still, better then Facebook. At least you can have a discussion on one of these forums. Every time my name is tagged on Facebook I want to grab an ak 47 and go out and shoot 50 people.

Islamic content intended
Click to expand...
Hey, I never said I didn't enjoy it.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Recoil
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back