What exactly is a black hole?

What exactly is a black hole?
Simulation of material orbiting close to a black hole. Credit: ESO/Gravity Consortium/L. Calçada

What is a black hole? In an article that has just appeared in the journal Nature Astronomy, LMU philosopher Erik Curiel shows that physicists use different definitions of the concept, depending on their own particular fields of interest.

A black hole is conventionally thought of as an astronomical object that irrevocably consumes all matter and radiation which comes within its sphere of influence. Physically, a black hole is defined by the presence of a singularity, i.e., a region of space, bounded by an '', within which the mass/energy density becomes infinite, and the normally well-behaved laws of physics no longer apply. However, as an article in the January issue of the journal Nature Astronomy demonstrates, a precise and agreed definition of this 'singular' state proves to be frustratingly elusive. Its author, Dr. Erik Curiel of the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy at LMU, summarizes the problem as follows: "The properties of black holes are the subject of investigations in a range of subdisciplines of physics – in optical physics, in quantum physics and of course in astrophysics. But each of these specialties approaches the problem with its own specific set of theoretical concepts."

Erik Curiel studied philosophy as well as theoretical physics at Harvard University and the University of Chicago, and the primary aim of his current DFG-funded is to develop a precise philosophical description of certain puzzling aspects of modern physics. "Phenomena such as black holes belong to a realm that is inaccessible to observation and experiment. Work based on the assumption that black holes exist therefore involves a level of speculation that is unusual even for the field of theoretical ." However, this difficulty is what makes the physical approach to the nature of black holes so interesting from the philosophical point of view. "The physical perspective on black holes is itself inextricably bound up with philosophical issues relating to ontological, metaphysical and methodological considerations," says Curiel.

"Surprising" and "eye-opening" insights

During the preparation of his philosophical analysis of the concept of black holes for Nature Astronomy, the author spoke to physicists involved in a wide range of research fields. In the course of these conversations, he was given quite different definitions of a black hole. Importantly, however, each was used in a self-consistent way within the bounds of the specialist discipline concerned. Curiel himself describes these discussions as "surprising" and "eye-opening."

For astrophysicist Avi Loeb, "a black hole is the ultimate prison: once you check in, you can never get out." On the other hand, theoretical physicist Domenico Giulini regards it as "conceptually problematical to think of black holes as objects in space, things that can move and be pushed around."

Curiel's own take-home-message is that the very diversity of definitions of is a positive sign, as it enables physicists to approach the phenomenon from a variety of physical perspectives. However, in order to make productive use of this diversity of viewpoints, it will be important to cultivate a greater awareness of the differences in emphasis between them.


Explore further

Study shows first evidence of winds outside black holes throughout their mealtimes

More information: Erik Curiel. The many definitions of a black hole, Nature Astronomy (2018). DOI: 10.1038/s41550-018-0602-1
Journal information: Nature Astronomy

Citation: What exactly is a black hole? (2019, February 14) retrieved 26 June 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-02-black-hole.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
1789 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Feb 14, 2019
And I thought a BH was defined as an object having an escape velocity >= c

Feb 14, 2019
Oh boy here we go. This is what you get when philosophers try to talk about science. See the Sokal Affair.

Feb 14, 2019
This is what you get when philosophers try to talk about science.


Or what you get when mathematicians try to talk about reality.

Feb 14, 2019
Or what you get when mathematicians try to talk about reality.


Sorry? Which mathematicians were involved in the observation of the orbits of the stars around Sgr A*? And what is wrong with the maths that shows that a ~ 4m solar mass object is there? Or that predicted the gravitational redshift of the star S2, as it made its closest approach to the BH?


Feb 14, 2019
Since math is embedded in C it seems like you're saying you can't talk about reality.

I'd agree with that statement. I've fixed a lot of operator precedence bugs made by assholes just like you.

Feb 14, 2019
Since math is embedded in C it seems like you're saying you can't talk about reality.

I'd agree with that statement. I've fixed a lot of operator precedence bugs made by assholes like you.


Oof.

Feb 14, 2019
The philosophy of science is, surprisingly, a valuable source of insights into reality as expressed within the praxis of science. It can be a little subtle.


Feb 14, 2019
What exactly is a black hole?

The ultimate prize, incorporating the hopes and dreams of the all too common merger maniac. Proving black hole existence will validate the confusion of the math fairies and the science maniacs who follow them down the rabbit hole of illogical fantasy.

Yes, something is there, just not exactly what the math fairies contend.

Feb 14, 2019
Yes, something is there, just not exactly what the math fairies contend.


Explain the orbits of the stars around Sgr A* without a BH.

Feb 14, 2019
You mean like the answer to

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Maybe you can do that one for us, @Tuxfrod.

Feb 14, 2019
Oh boy here we go. This is what you get when philosophers try to talk about science. See the Sokal Affair.

I rarely disagree with what you write, DS, but did you miss the part where he studied theoretical physics at Harvard?

I'm often exasperated at the stuff philosophers say about topics they don't appear to understand - as I'm sure you are - but to me, this situation seems different.

Feb 14, 2019
The problem here is that not much of this has to do with science. I guess I got turned off when I started hearing a bunch of spouting about how there's "no definition" of a black hole. There most certainly is and it's found in the Swarzchild solution to GRT.

Not being able to describe things in natural language is a hoodoo for philosophers that they need to get over in order to be relevant.

Feb 14, 2019
But still, 5 stars for you. Well expressed. I don't agree, but then again that's not really what matters, is it?

Feb 14, 2019
What is a Black Hole ?

Opinion Michael E. Thomas

Black Holes are the result of a matter anti-matter disintegration, and are intergalactic multi-dimensional power generators, where sub atomic particles along with other exotic multi-dimensional energies powering each area of their influence in the galaxy. In the future these exotic and unique energies could be harnessed, if understood, exotic multi-dimensional energies and will provide opportunities for futuristic galactic travel in the universe.

Feb 14, 2019
A problem is that so many define such objects purely in terms of everyday experience. And there are many aspects of everyday experience that so many think must apply everywhere.
For example, the reciprocity of observation. If you observe something, it must observe you. Does that hold in a black hole? Certainly, by theory, no one can look in, but can someone inside a black hole look out? If everything, like light. In the universe falls into a black hole, if it's not reflected out, they can see us but we can't see them. But what do they see? A universe acting by different laws. But it can be said that the universe has a mutual observation, begun during the instantaneous formation of the universe, of everything else, and that observation causes laws to exist and apply everywhere. If that doesn't hold for a black hole, how can it exist based on laws that apply out here?

Feb 14, 2019
In this time and space

The day is rapidly approaching
The Day of the Picci
in March
when all will be revealed
to one and all
the first self portrait
of the one and only
the ony one
not 25,0000Lys away
are own
are very own
are private blackhole
will
in March
revealed in full Technicolor
The Black Canvas

Feb 14, 2019
[are own
are very own
are private blackhole


It's 'our', FFS!

Feb 14, 2019
Although I am not a philosopher nor technically trained I have been spending a lot of time lately thinking about black holes as well of quantum mechanics (currently slogging through "Beyond Weird" by Phillip Ball. One thing that has me confused is the size of black holes. It seems to be measured by the effect of the amount of mass and its gravitational interactions with its surroundings. Size doesn't seem to be applicable although where the event horizon begins does seem to be related to the amount of mass. As three dimensional matter approaches the event horizon, time from the point of view the observer, seems to slow to such a degree that an object cannot be seen to enter the black hole but appear to be converted to a two dimensional object on the surface of the black hole. Once inside the black hole the three dimensional matter is converted into zero dimensions. This all sounds, to me, suspiciously like the 'inverse' of what I understand of the big bang.

Feb 14, 2019
Corrected for grammaticality's
JDs new role as the English moderator

In this time and space
the day is rapidly approaching
The Day of the Picci
in March
when all will be revealed
to one and all
the first self portrait
of the one and only
the only one
not 25,0000Lys away
our own
our very own
our private blackhole
will
in march
be revealed in full Technicolor
The Black Canvas

Give credit where credit is due
The Day of the Picci is fore soothed to occur by JD

Feb 14, 2019
Sorry? Which mathematicians were involved in the observation of the orbits of the stars around Sgr A*?


4.6 million solar masses doesn't mean a black hole, it just means a lot of mass!!! lol

Feb 14, 2019
Sorry? Which mathematicians were involved in the observation of the orbits of the stars around Sgr A*?


4.6 million solar masses doesn't mean a black hole, it just means a lot of mass!!! lol


And what is this mass? Why isn't it shining like a bastard?

Feb 14, 2019
Sorry? Which mathematicians were involved in the observation of the orbits of the stars around Sgr A*?


4.6 million solar masses doesn't mean a black hole, it just means a lot of mass!!! lol


And what is this mass? Why isn't it shining like a bastard?

Because it is grey and therefore quite dim. Likely, light can escape only radially, or in periodic periods of instability. Simply not logical that the density increases without bounds. And SQK predicts a limit and a means for stopping the ultimate contraction, explaining many confusing recent observations that still bewilder the committed merger maniac, like you!

Feb 14, 2019
Because it is grey and therefore quite dim.


Lol. What a dick!

Feb 14, 2019
Because it is grey and therefore quite dim.


Lol. What a dick!


On the other hand, whatever grey matter Tuxford has doesn't seem to stop him being dim!

Feb 14, 2019
Sorry? Which mathematicians were involved in the observation of the orbits of the stars around Sgr A*?

4.6 million solar masses doesn't mean a black hole, it just means a lot of mass!!! lol

And what is this mass? Why isn't it shining like a bastard?

Because it is grey and therefore quite dim. Likely, light can escape only radially, or in periodic periods of instability. Simply not logical that the density increases without bounds. And SQK predicts a limit and a means for stopping the ultimate contraction, explaining many confusing recent observations that still bewilder the committed merger maniac, like you!

Tuxford, all will be revealed in a few days
We are being buttered up
For
The Day of the Picci
It is the make or break day - if you live in a hole, that is!

Feb 14, 2019
This is the problem with scientists attempting to explain their theories to the layman.

The theorist throws out a thousand speculations. Some become popular memes. In our modern misogynist militaristic society, Big Bang is popular.

As in our rampantly racist society, Black Hole is an anti-mene that grossly offends the bigots. Compelling them to adopt all sorts of cult anti-science woo to express their displeasure.

Feb 14, 2019
And I thought a BH was defined as an object having an escape velocity >= c

By that definition, the observable universe would be a black hole.

Feb 14, 2019
Oh boy here we go. This is what you get when philosophers try to talk about science. See the Sokal Affair.

This article isn't anything remotely like postmodern lit-review commentary. Consistency and operationality of definitions is an important part of science.

Feb 14, 2019
This is what you get when philosophers try to talk about science.


Or what you get when mathematicians try to talk about reality.

I'd think mathematicians uniquely qualified to talk about a mathematical universe. :)

But if you replace "reality" with "soft sciences", I'd agree this happens at times. Some of the most whacked-out opinions on politics and psychology I've ever heard have come from mathematicians who don't realize that truth in soft sciences isn't primarily the result of applying logic directly; rather, it's primarily determined by the informational heuristics you use to gather and process data that is inconsistent and never crystal-clear.

Feb 14, 2019
What exactly is a black hole?

The ultimate prize, incorporating the hopes and dreams of the all too common merger maniac. Proving black hole existence will validate the confusion of the math fairies and the science maniacs who follow them down the rabbit hole of illogical fantasy.

Yes, something is there, just not exactly what the math fairies contend.

"Math fairies" and "science maniacs"? Seriously?

People who decry science and mathematics rarely know anything substantial about either.

Feb 14, 2019
Getting back to the science in this article:
" Physically, a black hole is defined by the presence of a singularity, i.e., a region of space, bounded by an 'event horizon', within which the mass/energy density becomes infinite, and the normally well-behaved laws of physics no longer apply."

Whatever the hell is going on within the perimeters of the phenomena called a "Black Hole"? Inside & outside &
ring-around-the-rosie.

When all those nicely typed, neatly-packaged & carefully filed categories of stodgy, "Laws of the Universe", are rendered like cheeze-whiz?

What Constant is left? Unchanging, never slackening, never exhausted, force of Nature? Gravity, Rah! Rah! Rah!

From the evidence, a power like no other. Never rests. Never runs out of energy to attract.
A remorselessly Cosmic influence.

Gravity Rules! & if we fail to understand the Rules? Tantrum all you want to Gravity's indifference.

"Stygian Oubliette" is a more correct term dor Black Hole.


Feb 14, 2019
Yes, something is there, just not exactly what the math fairies contend.


Explain the orbits of the stars around Sgr A* without a BH.

Exactly. A black hole is what we predict because that's the only thing that fits the mathematics we use to describe gravity, and there's too much mass in that general location to be anything other than a supermassive black hole.

To be fair, it's possible there's a massive object or set of objects which aren't black holes, if something else happens when mass (or information) density gets too high. But gravity would have to work very differently at pretty arbitrary point, and none of our data suggest it would.

There's buzz in science media about "black holes might not exist", and Mike Rowe of Dirty Jobs actually used "black holes might not exist" to defend "global warming might not exist". But most science media is hot garbage when it comes to fringe theory.

Feb 14, 2019
And what is this mass? Why isn't it shining like a bstrd?


Something's shining like a bastard, and it prevents them from actually seeing the center (was my assumption). There's millions of stars in the way.

This shows an image of the milky way in various wavelengths. You can't see a black hole or black hole gap in the high res images I assume either.

https://astronomy...y-center

Feb 14, 2019
And what is this mass? Why isn't it shining like a bstrd?


Something's shining like a bastard, and it prevents them from actually seeing the center (was my assumption). There's millions of stars in the way.

This shows an image of the milky way in various wavelengths. You can't see a black hole or black hole gap in the high res images I assume either.

https://astronomy...y-center


Dust between us and the galactic centre obscures it. However, we can see point sources, such as stars. Hence the observations of the stars orbiting the SMBH. If they are a just a few solar masses, why can't we see a 4m solar mass 'star' just 120 AU away from its pericentre? An object that we do see as a permanent radio source, and occasionally in IR as matter is accreted onto it. Pretty convoluted reasoning needed to explain it as anything other than a SMBH.

http://www.astro....roup/gc/

Feb 14, 2019

"The anthropic principle is a philosophical consideration that observations of the universe must be compatible with the conscious and sapient life that observes it. Some proponents of the anthropic principle reason that it explains why this universe has the age and the fundamental physical constants necessary to accommodate conscious life. As a result, they believe it is unremarkable that this universe has fundamental constants that happen to fall within the narrow range thought to be compatible with life.[1][2] The strong anthropic principle (SAP), as explained by John D. Barrow and Frank Tipler, states that this is all the case because the universe is in some sense compelled to eventually have conscious and sapient life emerge within it." -Wikipedia

Feb 14, 2019
"Tipler's Omega Point ideas have received vigorous criticism by physicists and skeptics.[12][13][14] Some critics say its arguments violate the Copernican principle, that it incorrectly applies the laws of probability, and that it is really a theology or metaphysics principle made to sound plausible to laypeople by using the esoteric language of physics. Martin Gardner dubbed the Final Anthropic Principle, (FAP), the "completely ridiculous anthropic principle" (CRAP)." -Wikipedia

Feb 14, 2019
""The physical perspective on black holes is itself inextricably bound up with philosophical issues relating to ontological, metaphysical and methodological considerations," says Curiel.


Feb 14, 2019
Another theory of mine might be dubbed "The Dynamic Anthropic Principle" defined such that the physical laws of any nascent universe might be altered somehow by conscious entities within an "originating" universe. And then, those universes with physical laws that allowed for the evolution and creation of sentient entities capable of contemplating and effecting these physical laws, would tend to be inhabited by such sentient entities who would presume a purpose to do likewise, despite, perhaps, having no physical relationship with the resulting universe thereafter.

Then, the predominance of anthropic universes falls into place from a probabilistic standpoint. Obviously this still would leave a niggling chicken and egg problem, and a much bigger question of "How are these anthropic universes created or effected?" Black holes? High Energy Physics? Supercolliders?

To me, the most appealing thing about my Dynamic Anthropic Principle is that it gives life an obvious purpose,

Feb 14, 2019
In other news, philosophers shows that physicists use different definitions of the concept "particle", depending on their own particular fields of interest.

In further news, comments show that non-physicists wants to define black holes as anything or nothing, never mind the actual science.

Feb 14, 2019
@JaxPavan
Thank you for presenting this "Anthroponic Principle". I looked it up in Wikipaedia and have discovered that it agrees with ~85% of my own philosophy/beliefs. That it is a combination of Mathematics, Science & the Philosophy of Logic and Reason is quite intriguing, and is similar to the philosophy of the Science of Creation theory. Not everyone agrees with that either until they delve into it further to find that it makes good sense.

Feb 14, 2019
@JaxPavan
Throughout recorded human history - and even prior - the human mind has been indulging in Philosophy each time one gives an opinion; an idea; a theory or hypotheses - all the things of which are conceived by the human mind and passed on to others through speech or writings that convey that philosophical expression. It is rarely recognised as Philosophical expression - but what else could it be - when it emanates from the Mind and Consciousness.
It seems that most scientists/researchers are unaware that even mathematical equations are also a form of Philosophy, and there are some who prefer to have complete separation of the two - which is not possible unless the Mind shuts down.

Feb 14, 2019
I looked it up in Wikipaedia and have discovered that it agrees with ~85% of my own philosophy/beliefs.


Says an idiot that understands f*** all about science. Tosser.

Feb 14, 2019
This Philosopher's Hole

This hole is philosopher's gold
we cannot see
as it is oft pointed out
that if we could see
we still can not see this hole
because of the very substance of this hole
obscures this hole
the dust, the plasma of this universe
obscures this hole
so by a quirk of fate
a quirk of nature
that no matter how we try
our every efforts are thwarted
so as we accept this fact
even though our little cupeths overfloweth with sadness
even the most optimistic reality based Toe
cannot theorise a solution to this impasse
so what to do to find a solution to this holy problem
as holy is correct as even ordained priests have challenged this hole
to no avail
that we are left with scant possibilities
we have to theorise
we have to postulate
there is only one escape out this hole
in Philosophy we find our escape
this hole exists in our imagination
that our escape our answers
lie
solely
In Philosophy

Feb 14, 2019
^^^^^^ Piss off, Granville, you are bleeding clueless. Idiot.

Feb 14, 2019
In search of black holes and dark matter astrophysicists are relying on indirect observations. It would seem that the measurement of the event horizon of a black hole directly would be a direct evidence. However, by the nature of a horizon, any real measurement of the event horizon will be indirect. The Event Horizon Telescope will get picture of the silhouette of the Sgr A* which is due to optical effects of spacetime outside of the event horizon. The result will be determined by the simple quality of the resulting image that does not depend on the properties of the spacetime within the image. So, it will be also indirect and an existence of BH is a hypothesis.
https://www.acade...ilky_Way

Feb 14, 2019
Ha, does it really matter? Whether one is an astrophysicist, mathematician...each to own will deal with problems in their domain. We have all become used to the term 'Black Hole' and know what it refers too, in a general way. Perhaps in the future we might discover definite variations, some have 'this property',some have 'that property' and some have neither. Perhaps a classification will be necessary but until then let the scientist get on with research. Surely it is these people who should provide a 'definition' when they are confident they have one. Well, as a layman that's how I see it, ha!

Feb 14, 2019
This article isn't anything remotely like postmodern lit-review commentary. Consistency and operationality of definitions is an important part of science.
But we do have a consistent and operational definition, as I said: the Schwarzchild solution to general relativity theory. It's the best one we're gonna get unless we crack the quantum gravity puzzle (and even that presumes it will hold answers; most physicists think so, but until we see it we won't know for sure).

Now, it's perfectly valid to study and write about how physicists conceive of black holes; and in fact their conceptions are important, and well within the proper scope of philosophy. But to claim that these conceptions are somehow indicative of the actual nature of black holes is a category error. And that is indeed what this author claims.

That is the seat and source of my objection.

I think philosophy took a wrong turn right about the time Derridism took over.

Feb 14, 2019
I looked it up in Wikipaedia and have discovered that it agrees with ~85% of my own philosophy/beliefs.


Says an idiot that understands f*** all about science. Tosser.
says jonesybonesy

You already know that I'm not a scientist, and neither are you - both self-admitted, and yet somehow you expect that I should know everything there is to know about science research and math. As I am still a mere scholar and interested observer - it may take approximately 200 more years for me to get on the same level as A. Einstein before he gave up his ghost/Soul.
You always seem to be bitter and perturbed every time you comment in these physorg phorums. I cannot imagine what could cause such a malady on your part. Perhaps the strain of maintaining your superiority complex in these phorums is too debilitating and you may need a rest from this science website to ease your fevered brow.
Why you have taken issue on what I have told Jax wrt my philosophy and beliefs, I don't know

Feb 14, 2019
Defining a Black Hole by the singularity is logically flawed and inconsistent with physical law that tells us that we can not now nor ever know what goes inside the event horizon.

The singularity, which Einstein considered an error of the 1/0 (division by zero) kind, can not be established empirically and is a physical possibility with a mechanism for the compaction of matter inside the singularity yet to be explained.

The only kind of Black Hole that can be confirmed is a region of space with a mass and radius within the Schwarzschild limit for Black Holes, everything else is conjecture at best.

The non-rotating uncharged Black Hole is defined first, then variations (charged, rotating) next. Singularity is not required in a definition.

Feb 14, 2019
@Mimath, there are indeed classifications. There is the static uncharged black hole of the Swarzchild solution. There are three other solutions. The Kerr solution describes a black hole that rotates. The Reissner-Nordstrom solution describes a black hole that has an electric charge. The Kerr-Newman solution describes a black hole with both electric charge and angular momentum.

These are the properties that can be observed outside the event horizon. So even without knowing what happens inside the event horizon, some classification is still possible. It's not at all clear that anything further is knowable; quantum gravity might tell us more, but we only presume that, we do not know it and won't until a quantum gravity theory is discovered.

Feb 14, 2019
Defining a Black Hole by the singularity is logically flawed and inconsistent with physical law that tells us that we can not now nor ever know what goes inside the event horizon.
The supposed singularity tells us that black holes give ridiculous solutions for what's happening inside the event horizon. Every time a singularity has appeared in physics, it has indicated the limits of a theory. These are the limits of GRT.

I would argue, however, that there remains the strong probability that a good theory of quantum gravity will provide information on what to expect inside the event horizon. How we would ever confirm it is another question but physicists are ingenious and we might be able not only to figure it out but show evidence to substantiate it. So, on that point only, I disagree; but perhaps you didn't wish to open that box and look in it, and I can't blame you since I won't either.

Feb 14, 2019
@Jax, I misrated your first post as one star. I was incorrect and I apologize.

Feb 14, 2019
Yes, something is there, just not exactly what the math fairies contend.


Explain the orbits of the stars around Sgr A* without a BH.

Exactly. A black hole is what we predict because that's the only thing that fits the mathematics we use to describe gravity, and there's too much mass in that general location to be anything other than a supermassive black hole.
The problem isn't just the mass; it's the lack of anything radiating except in radio and deep infrared.

One has to note that this is consistent with a black hole that isn't absorbing much matter. We are perhaps lucky; if it were active we might not be here since the radiation would kill our biosphere.

Meanwhile, the EHT project has collected data and is now crunching it. We will see what that shows with their first data release.

Feb 14, 2019
Hey, @Surveillance_Russian_Unit, tell us the correct answer to this:

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Feb 14, 2019
If you assholes keep using sockpuppets to downvote people I'm gonna pwn ya. No point in being honest with the dishonest. If you play games prepare to be played nastier than you can play. I don't like being harassed and my response is to harass back. You will find that mud hurts everyone's eyes.

Feb 14, 2019
Still waiting for an answer to

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Feb 14, 2019
And how can people who can't do grade school arithmetic have anything to say about nuclear physics?

Time to erase the idiocracy.

Feb 15, 2019
Phenomena such as black holes belong to a realm that is inaccessible to observation
But isn't it the curvature of spacetime that dictates things like escape velocity for matter, and not the other way around? I think observation of a post-merger ringdown (or lack thereof) should provide some pretty good access to the inaccessible. The event horizon doesn't seem to be any kind of barrier that prevents the gravitational force of the trapped mass from escaping...

Feb 15, 2019
No point in being honest with the dishonest.

And you have convinced yourself that everyone else is dishonest, which is why you do nothing but lie and obfuscate.

Feb 15, 2019
LOL

I'm not the one who can't solve

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

You're either dishonest or stupid.

Your call snowflake.

Feb 15, 2019
@Mimath, there are indeed classifications. There is the static uncharged black hole of the Swarzchild solution. There are three other solutions. The Kerr solution describes a black hole that rotates. The Reissner-Nordstrom solution describes a black hole that has an electric charge. The Kerr-Newman solution....
These are the properties that can be observed outside the event horizon. So even without knowing what happens inside the event horizon, some classification is still possible. It's not at all clear that anything further is knowable; quantum gravity might tell us more, but we only presume that, we do not know it and won't until a quantum gravity theory is discovered.

Yes, agreed. I am aware of those you mention, I was just really having a poke at philosophers trying 'to be clever' (?) as it were. I don't have a problem with philosophers and sometimes get involved with discussions elsewhere but I do try to keep the two topics separate.

Feb 15, 2019
Sorry? Which mathematicians were involved in the observation of the orbits of the stars around Sgr A*?

4.6 million solar masses doesn't mean a black hole, it just means a lot of mass!!! lol

And what is this mass? Why isn't it shining like a bastard?

Because it is grey and therefore quite dim. Likely, light can escape only radially, or in periodic periods of instability. Simply not logical that the density increases without bounds. And SQK predicts a limit and a means for stopping the ultimate contraction, explaining many confusing recent observations that still bewilder the committed merger maniac, like you!

Tuxford, all will be revealed in a few days
We are being buttered up
For
The Day of the Picci
It is the make or break day - if you live in a hole, that is!
says granville

I'll believe it when I actually SEE it.
:)

Feb 15, 2019
Amusing to see trolls bloviating upon black holes when they can't even answer

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Poor trolls. NOT. Answer it or make it obvious you have not the slightest idea what you're talking about. We need to eliminate the stupids.

Feb 15, 2019
Gots me some troll-bane here. Gonna use it all the time.

Feb 15, 2019
No point in being honest with the dishonest.

And you have convinced yourself that everyone else is dishonest, which is why you do nothing but lie and obfuscate.
says cantdrive85

Da Schniebo may be suffering from a bad case of glioblastoma (brain tumour) as he has been trolling me into many physorg phorums and is now demanding that I solve his arithmetic problem for him. He appears to have an obsession that induces him to troll and tell lies about commenters.
This is nothing new, but now Da Schniebo's obsessions appears to have risen to a fever pitch.
He was trolling and telling lies about RealityCheck and Benni - and has now turned his attention to me.
I will ask some friends who are in the medical field of psychiatry to monitor Da Schniebo's comments to see if they will make a diagnosis as to Da Schniebo's mental state without seeing him in person. If he has a brain tumour, then it could be life threatening and not be aware of it.

Feb 15, 2019
Still no answer, huh troll?

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Nothing else you say will make any difference, and every time you swerve to avoid answering you look more and more idiotic.

I got your number, troll. it's

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Feb 15, 2019
I mean, come on, a child could solve this. And they do, every day.

You're a stupid and you're showing it to everyone.

Feb 15, 2019
Still no answer, huh troll?


You are in too much of a rush... patience.
These things take time to research, the web is a confusing place.


Feb 15, 2019
Considering you can type it into google and get the answer I have to say that I'm unimpressed with the complexities of the intertubeules.

Feb 15, 2019
2 + 2 / 2 = 2 + 2 / 2

"What exactly is a black hole?"
It's a rumor that grows soo big, stuff starts to orbit it. ;)

Feb 15, 2019
A Hole in a Bind

In this mathematical entity Hole
a mathematic conundrum has arisen
from this Holes nether regions
an apparently simplistic puzzle of complicated proportions
fittingly fitting for a Hole of simplistic complexity

2 + 2 / 2 = ?
what could this mean
a: (2+2)/2 = 2
or
b: 2+(2/2) = 3
or
c: (2/2)+(2/2) = 2
or
d: 2/2 = 1 so 2+1 = 3
or
e: 2/2 and 2/2 to 1+1 = 2
there we have in all simplicity
without the security of bracketing in the first instance, 2 + 2 / 2 = ?
There is no way of discerning what this hole in its complicated simplicity is discerning

Feb 15, 2019
What exactly is a black hole?

A fictional gravity monster conjured up by plasma ignoramuses to continue the proliferation of their pseudoscientific maths claptrap.

Feb 15, 2019
Granville.
So you are saying "2 + 2/2 =" is unsolvable as written?
Impressive lack of education. And here you are talking about black holes.

Feb 15, 2019
What exactly is a black hole?

A fictional gravity monster conjured up by plasma ignoramuses to continue the proliferation of their pseudoscientific maths claptrap.


Then explain the observations, dumbo.

Feb 15, 2019
Still no answer, huh troll?

2 + 2 / 2 = ?
2 + 2 / 2 = Eternal Neutron

Nothing else you say will make any difference, and every time you swerve to avoid answering you look more and more idiotic.

I got your number, troll. it's

2 + 2 / 2 = ?
=Eternal Neutron

Feb 15, 2019
2 + 2 / 2 = ?
what could this mean


BODMAS, dickhead.

Feb 15, 2019
Still waiting for the answer. After you answer it, justify your answer. It's not like you haven't been told over and over and directed to confirming sources over and over. If you can't answer it, then you're obviously unqualified to express opinions on astyrophysics or any other kind of physics for that matter.

Feb 15, 2019
Still no answer, huh troll?

2 + 2 / 2 = ?
2 + 2 / 2 = Eternal Neutron

Nothing else you say will make any difference, and every time you swerve to avoid answering you look more and more idiotic.

I got your number, troll. it's

2 + 2 / 2 = ?
=Eternal Neutron


Still here, shitforbrains? Surprising, given how badly you were shown up on the neutron lifetime crap that you believe.

Feb 15, 2019
Maybe we'll get these idiots to make another 500-post thread about

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

while they try to squirm their way out of answering it.

Feb 15, 2019
2 + 2 / 2 = ?
2 + 2 / 2 = Eternal Neutron

Wrong. The answer is INFINITE DENSITY on a FINITE STELLAR MASS.

Feb 15, 2019
Maybe we'll get these idiots to make another 500-post thread about

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

while they try to squirm their way out of answering it.

The answer is of course = Da Schitt fooling himself into thinking he's smart, while actually confirming just how stupid he is.

BTW Da Schitt, you are only fooling yourself, using that jonesdave sock puppet to upvote yourself. Let me guess, that's your boyfriend's name.
LMAO.

Feb 15, 2019
Maybe we'll get these idiots to make another 500-post thread about

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

while they try to squirm their way out of answering it.

2 + 2 / 2 = Schneibo's Eternal Neutron

Feb 15, 2019
Wrong. Try again.

Feb 15, 2019
Without Brackets is Unsolvable

Without brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is open to interoperation - so has a probability of the answer being 2 or 3
due
to the possible permutations - there is the probability of two answers
there is 50/50 probability of the answer equalling 3
there is 50/50 probability of the answer equalling 2
because
all division takes place inside brackets
which is the first interoperation
Whether we like it or not, 2 + 2 / 2 = ? without brackets is unsolvable
so the person
who
is presenting 2 + 2 / 2 = ?
is the person who puts 2 + 2 / 2 = ? in brackets
because
then there is only one answer
which
in this case
this person
is
non
other
than
The Right Honourable Da Schneib

Feb 15, 2019
to the possible permutations - there is the probability of two answers


No there is not. I told you - BODMAS. There is only one correct answer. This is early high school stuff at best.

Feb 15, 2019
Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable
to the possible permutations - there is the probability of two answers


No there is not. I told you - BODMAS. There is only one correct answer. This is early high school stuff at best.

Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable
Everybody was not born yesterday

Feb 15, 2019
Everybody was not born yesterday


You obviously were! Can't even do maths that a 13 year old should be able to do. BODMAS, you cretin. Look it up.

Feb 15, 2019
There we have it folks. For the world to see.

According to Granville:

"Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable"

Hey Granville. Solve this for x.

x + y/2 = z

Feb 15, 2019
If the history of science is any guide, the reality of black hole observation or research will eventually diverge from even the most accurate of today's predictive models. Indeed, it seems whenever science is able to look more and more closely at anything with an established mathematical model, the result is a refinement of that model to match the empirical observations.

I would argue the refinement process is both infinite and that which distinguishes reality from mathematics (or simulation). And, I choose to believe we are real.

From the perspective of black holes, both science and philosophy stand a great distance from the ability to make those observations and those refinements.

Feb 15, 2019
Everybody was not born yesterday
there is the probability of two answers

No there is not. I told you - BODMAS. There is only one correct answer

Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable
There we have it folks. For the world to see.
According to Granville:
Hey Granville. Solve this for x. x + y/2 = z

This is phys.org even the simplest calculation is fraught with pit holes
which is the purpose of 2 + 2 / 2 = ?
even when supposedly is correct
until The Right Honourable Da Schneib
wets a finger and tests the direction the wind is blowing
no amount of answers contains the correct answer
because
how is
the Right Honourable Da Schneib going to keep this going
Da Schneib is intending to drag this out to the 499th comment
in the sure and certain knowledge
Some delusional soul maketh the final 500th comment

Feb 15, 2019
Here you go Granville

x + y/2 = z

Now subtract y/2 from both sides of the equation.

x = z - y/2

Notice how to 2 follows with the y?

Now let x =2 and y = 2

2 = z - 2/2

Now what is z equal to?

Feb 15, 2019
Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable


Wrong. Took me less than a second.

Feb 15, 2019
jimmybobber and jonesdave
jonesdave> Wrong. Took me less than a second

keep up the good work
we will all look in from time to time
when you have completed 200 comments a piece
your obligation will be complete
then you can retire to the comfort of your bridges
and
relax as the world passes by

Feb 15, 2019
^^^^^^Dumbass Granny can't do basic arithmetic! Lol.

https://www.quora...-2+2-2-3

Feb 15, 2019
the result is a refinement of that model to match the empirical observations.

I would argue the refinement process is both infinite and that which distinguishes reality from mathematics (or simulation). And, I choose to believe we are real.

From the perspective of black holes, both science and philosophy stand a great distance from the ability to make those observations and those refinements.
.......there haven't been any "observations" of a BH "empirical" or otherwise.


Feb 15, 2019
.......there haven't been any "observations" of a BH "empirical" or otherwise.


Explain the orbits of the stars around Sgr A* shitforbrains. What is 4m solar masses, and visible only in radio and, occasionally, IR?

Feb 15, 2019
Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable


Wrong. Took me less than a second.

Hey Da Schitts, is that how long it takes for you to bend over for your boyfriend?
LMAO

Feb 15, 2019
Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable


Wrong. Took me less than a second.

Hey Da Schitts, is that how long it takes for you to bend over for your boyfriend?
LMAO


F***wit.

Feb 15, 2019
to the possible permutations - there is the probability of two answers


No there is not. I told you - BODMAS. There is only one correct answer. This is early high school stuff at best.
says jonesy

Then why haven't YOU given the correct answer already? Are you afraid that YOUR answer will also be wrong? That everyone will think less of you if your answer is incorrect?
Give it a try, jonesybonesy, Don't worry - Da Schithead is not gonna be your forever troll if you give the wrong answer to 2 + 2/2 =

Feb 15, 2019
to the possible permutations - there is the probability of two answers


No there is not. I told you - BODMAS. There is only one correct answer. This is early high school stuff at best.
says jonesy

Then why haven't YOU given the correct answer already? Are you afraid that YOUR answer will also be wrong? That everyone will think less of you if your answer is incorrect?
Give it a try, jonesybonesy, Don't worry - Da Schithead is not gonna be your forever troll if you give the wrong answer to 2 + 2/2 =


I linked to the correct answer, you ignorant tosser. D comes before A, so you have 2 + 1. Simple.

Feb 15, 2019
Without Brackets 2 + 2 / 2 = ? is Unsolvable


Wrong. Took me less than a second.

Hey Da Schitts, is that how long it takes for you to bend over for your boyfriend?
LMAO


F***wit.
says jonesy

I see that you have decided to answer goracles query in relation to Da Schniebo's having a boyfriend. Does that mean that YOU are Da Schnieb's boyfriend? Are you gay, jonesy?
Oh, don't worry - we won't think any less of you if you and Da Schniebo are lovers.
~snicker

Feb 15, 2019
^^^^^^^F***wit.

Feb 15, 2019
If the history of science is any guide, the reality of black hole observation or research will eventually diverge from even the most accurate of today's predictive models. Indeed, it seems whenever science is able to look more and more closely at anything with an established mathematical model, the result is a refinement of that model to match the empirical observations.

I would argue the refinement process is both infinite and that which distinguishes reality from mathematics (or simulation). And, I choose to believe we are real.

From the perspective of black holes, both science and philosophy stand a great distance from the ability to make those observations and those refinements.
says JaxPavan

I must agree with your assessment. Observations are and should always be refined when there may be some disagreement with the simulations such as the S2 orbiting of the alleged and proposed Black Hole in SgrA. There is always something new that hadn't been observed.

Feb 15, 2019
-contd-
Established mathematical models are defended by the science community vigorously as long as the observations of the object in question have remained stable, going unchanged. But when changes occur with those observations - then there is most often a rush to see how the maths (and simulations) could possibly have been wrong.
This is why we are here arguing and debating the strengths and weaknesses of the alleged existence of Black Holes, while scientists continue to test the "waters" of their maths and observations.
For all we know - this so-called "Black Hole" may be the entrance to another Universe - which would certainly not be unreasonable. IMO

Feb 15, 2019
Plasmatic gamma radiative glowing clouds Lyrs from Holes

Not 25,000 Lys hence are 4billion stars compressed into a star like dimension
surrounded
in billions of solar mass in the form of dust and plasma of multi light year radius
glowing in gamma radiation
by stellar distances
at arm's length, relatively speaking
normally
plasmatic gamma radiative glowing clouds Lyrs from Holes, are visible at 25,000
this article
What exactly is a black hole?
needs some further investigate work to ascertain as to why this highly visible activity Lys our side of Holes light radius is in invisible
When hairy Holes are predicted to emit visible photons just outside our side of no escape of Holes light radius

Feb 15, 2019
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Shut up you uneducated fool.

Feb 15, 2019
Black Holes, Dark Matter and Dark Energy, are what you surrender to when the true nature of gravity evades your intellect. So, until the next Einstein comes along and free us from this quagmire, we do our best to wax philosophical.
Here's my contribution to the general ignorance. The Universe was born and continues to expand into what we believe is, nothingness. Black Holes are precisely that, the absence of space, time or anything.

Feb 15, 2019
Black Holes are precisely that, the absence of space, time or anything.


Then how is Sgr A* masquerading as a 4m solar mass object, as shown by the orbits of the stars in the galactic centre? How is it causing ***gravitational*** redshift, if nothing is there? Dear me.

Feb 15, 2019
Each Hole is a gateway to inner Universes

Theory, speculation, postulation is all this Hole exists of
SEU> For all we know - this so-called "Black Hole" may be the entrance to another Universe

There is more to this inner universe in our Galactic Holes
quite simply
total the number of galaxies
multiply their stars
add the dust and plasma between stars
input into Holes favourite formula R = 2GM/C²
will reveal its escape velocity is its light radius, its event horizon
so
each Galactic Hole is a gate way to separate Universes
An Undeniable Fact
As we live and breathe in our 15billion light radius!

Feb 15, 2019
^^^^^^^ More from the clown who can't even do simple arithmetic! Lol.

Feb 15, 2019
Plasmatic gamma radiative glowing clouds Lyrs from Holes

Not 25,000 Lys hence are 4billion stars compressed into a star like dimension
surrounded
in billions of solar mass in the form of dust and plasma of multi light year radius
glowing in gamma radiation
by stellar distances
at arm's length, relatively speaking
normally
plasmatic gamma radiative glowing clouds Lyrs from Holes, are visible at 25,000
this article
What exactly is a black hole?
needs some further investigate work to ascertain as to why this highly visible activity Lys our side of Holes light radius is in invisible
When hairy Holes are predicted to emit visible photons just outside our side of no escape of Holes light radius
says granville

Ahhh the Torus encompassing ~4 billion Stars within a diaphanous enclosure. Yes, I recall that physorg article well. It even had included a nice artist's impression of the Torus and its contents.
Dust and plasma surrounding it (presumably) on all sides.

Feb 15, 2019
each Galactic Hole is a gate way to separate Universes
....."galactic Hole"? What is that?

input into Holes favourite formula R = 2GM/C
will reveal its escape velocity is its light radius,
.......if it were possible to tally all the mass in the Universe, there still would not be a gravity field strong enough to prevent electro-magnetic waves from reaching lightspeed.

The ONLY way of preventing EM Energy from reaching lightspeed is by reducing it's frequency to zero, there is not enough gravity in the Universe to do this due to the limited quantity of mass available.

Gravity is mass dependent, am immutable law of physics, therefore the total quantity of gravity is limited by the FINITE quantity of mass available to sustain it, therefore it is never possible to reduce the frequency of an EM Wave to zero because infinite gravity does not exist.

Feb 15, 2019
@Benni & granville

Speaking of the Torus that was alleged to hold those billions of Stars (physorg article), IF there was a cosmic provision for some sort of "plumbing" to be included in the "house" of the Universe in which we exist, whereby a recycling process takes place of Star material, dust/gas that is transformed by some sort of mixing/tumbling from one location to another via a "wormhole", i.e. from the location of what is claimed to be a Black Hole - where Star material is pulled into a "Tunnel/Wormhole" that is an actual viaduct from that certain location - through whatever amount of distance and time that it takes (perhaps a shorter distance and time if the wormhole is folded to lessen distance) and then finally winding up inside the Torus where billions of Stars are created and eventually distributed throughout the Universe in, more or less, an assembly line of Star-shipping to locations further afield.
Too far out, you say? I have seen a wormhole in the heavens

Feb 15, 2019
Benni, by implication
each Galactic Hole is a gate way to separate Universes
....."galactic Hole"? What is that?

input into Holes favourite formula R = 2GM/C
will reveal its escape velocity is its light radius,
......
The ONLY way of preventing EM Energy from reaching lightspeed is by reducing it's frequency to zero, there is not enough gravity in the Universe to do this due to the limited quantity of mass available.

Gravity is mass dependent, am immutable law of physics, therefore the total quantity of gravity is limited by the FINITE quantity of mass available to sustain it, therefore it is never possible to reduce the frequency of an EM Wave to zero because infinite gravity does not exist.

There is not enough inertial mass in this theoretical Hole
to reduce photons energy to zero, to reduce the frequency of an EM Wave to zero
A Holes escape velocity
then
Exists below light speed

Feb 15, 2019
Which Benni, is why I said; Theory, speculation, postulation is all this Hole exists of

Each Hole is a gateway to inner Universes
Theory, speculation, postulation is all this Hole exists of

this Hole is physics little escapism
Where everyone can let their minds wonder in Theory, speculation, postulation

Feb 15, 2019
each Galactic Hole is a gate way to separate Universes
....."galactic Hole"? What is that?

input into Holes favourite formula R = 2GM/C
will reveal its escape velocity is its light radius,
.......if it were possible to tally all the mass in the Universe, there still would not be a gravity field strong enough to prevent electro-magnetic waves from reaching lightspeed.

The ONLY way of preventing EM Energy from reaching lightspeed is by reducing it's frequency to zero, there is not enough gravity in the Universe to do this due to the limited quantity of mass available.

Gravity is mass dependent, am immutable law of physics, therefore the total quantity of gravity is limited by the FINITE quantity of mass available to sustain it, therefore it is never possible to reduce the frequency of an EM Wave to zero because infinite gravity does not exist.


Lol. What a tosser! Stick to mopping floors, shitforbrains.

Feb 15, 2019
IF there was a cosmic provision for some sort of "plumbing" to be included in the "house" of the Universe in which we exist, whereby a recycling process takes place of Star material, dust/gas that is transformed by some sort of mixing/tumbling from one location to another via a "wormhole", i.e. from the location of what is claimed to be a Black Hole - where Star material is pulled into a "Tunnel/Wormhole" that is an actual viaduct from that certain location


.........all such material would move at a rate of speed far less than that of EM Waves.

I do believe however as you suggest, that there is a "recycling process", that eventually ALL EM Waves transform to mass along their transit routes throughout the Universe. It is for this reason that I believe the Universe can exist for time without end.

All that plasma inside the torus in question could likely be one of the means of the Mass/Energy transformation processes recycling energy back to mass.

Feb 15, 2019
^^^^^^^^Hahahahahahaha! 3 scientifically illiterate twats discussing things that they have no understanding of! Hilarious.

Feb 15, 2019
This Hole is a gateway to our imagination
@Benni & granville

SEU> Speaking of the Torus that was alleged to hold those billions of Stars (physorg article), IF there was a cosmic provision for some sort of "plumbing" to be included in the "house" of the Universe in which we exist, whereby a recycling process takes place of Star material, dust/gas that is transformed by some sort of mixing/tumbling from one location to another via a "wormhole",

These holes, wormholes, are part of our tapestry of imagination
A secret garden to another world
https://www.youtu...NnZJXCLc

Feb 15, 2019
There is not enough inertial mass in this theoretical Hole
to reduce photons energy to zero, to reduce the frequency of an EM Wave to zero
A Holes escape velocity
then
Exists below light speed
........right on.


Feb 15, 2019
@Jonesdave Check out this link. http://sebpearce.com/bullXXit/
Replace the "XX" with "sh". It gets censored here.

Here's an example. Sounds like a mix of Granville and SEU and Benni.

"Only a prophet of the dreamscape may foster this quantum shift of being. You may be ruled by ego without realizing it. Do not let it destroy the truth of your myth. Without empathy, one cannot believe.

How should you navigate this sentient quantum soup? Being, look within and strengthen yourself. Although you may not realize it, you are endless..

The dreamtime is overflowing with ultrasonic energy. To roam the circuit is to become one with it. We exist as morphogenetic fields.

Stagnation is born in the gap where conscious living has been excluded. Yes, it is possible to confront the things that can exterminate us, but not without growth on our side. The complexity of the present time seems to demand a deepening of our brains if we are going to survive."

Feb 15, 2019
They still don't get it, after days. These people are innumerate. All you have to do is punch

2 + 2 / 2 =

into the Windows calculator app. Or any good calculator. Or into the Google search bar.

What do you even say to this level of incompetence? There's certainly no point in discussing physics of any kind with them- they can't do math at the gradeschool level. They can't even use a calculator.

Feb 15, 2019
@Da Schneib

I wrote "2 + 2 / 2 = " on my whiteboard at work. It sparks conversation at work. I had a good laugh with my lead today about it.


Feb 15, 2019
I'd seen that BS generator before, @jimmy. It's a pretty funny one.

Feb 15, 2019
@Da Schneib
@Mimath, there are indeed classifications. There is the static uncharged black hole of the Swarzchild solution. There are three other solutions. The Kerr solution describes a black hole that rotates. The Reissner-Nordstrom solution describes a black hole that has an electric charge. The Kerr-Newman solution describes a black hole with both electric charge and angular momentum.

These are the properties that can be observed outside the event horizon. So even without knowing what happens inside the event horizon, some classification is still possible. It's not at all clear that anything further is knowable; quantum gravity might tell us more, but we only presume that, we do not know it and won't until a quantum gravity theory is discovered.

How about the Planck Star hypothesis? I seem to remember it being suggested (somewhere) that such exotic states might also involve BH's.

Feb 15, 2019
Which Benni, is why I said; Theory, speculation, postulation is all this Hole exists of

Each Hole is a gateway to inner Universes
Theory, speculation, postulation is all this Hole exists of

this Hole is physics little escapism
Where everyone can let their minds wonder in Theory, speculation, postulation
says granville

Absolutely - and Black Holes are a "safety net" to preserve the "Probability" factor of Spooky Science that has its basis in the math equations that are meant to explain WHY all of those Stars are wandering about the centre of the Milky Way galaxy. The exact centre of most anything, be it a sink drain that has water draining into it; a whirlpool within a pond or lake; or the exact centre of a galaxy - the water draining is in chaotic motion - whirlpools in motion are similar to a galaxy in motion, where the contents of the centre tend to clump together in chaotic fashion and Stars are moving and crisscrossing haphazardly as when traffic lights are out

Feb 15, 2019
Black holes are a consequence of general relativity theory, which you cannot possibly understand since you can't even use a calculator to solve

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Feb 15, 2019
Stupids always downrate posts they are incompetent and incontinent to understand.

Feb 15, 2019
ROFLOL
I solved that measly little farce of a math problem on my trusty little calculator as soon as it was presented in the other phorum by Da Schithead.
As did Benni and granville.
Too funny

Feb 15, 2019
But you don't have the courage to post it.

Because you don't understand why it's right. Despite proof (and this isn't some physics theory, it's math which has proofs) you are afraid.

Just sayin'.

Deniers don't have any balls.

Feb 15, 2019
Tell us some more why yuo have have no balls. Cowards always have some story about how they were threatened by ever-dangerous facts and gave up their balls.

Feb 15, 2019
Reminder:

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

Say the answer. Simple as that. EIther you got the balls or you don't.

Liar deniers always lie and deny and deflect and obfuscate. You have no balls.

Keep in mind anyone can type this equation into a Windows calculator app and find out you are lying. Must scare the shit out of you given the obvious results.

Feb 15, 2019
I am loving trolling you with well-known math. Please continue trying to counter with process arguments. You have no balls.

Feb 15, 2019
LOL We knew that Da Schithead would become obsessed and keep repeating and trolling continuously, then follow us into other physorg phorums to troll us and repeat the mantra continuously again.
It was and is too funny. Benni and granville were quite amused at the obsession on display. Mental illness at its best.

Feb 15, 2019
You cannot answer and have no balls.

This is how you try to troll. It's not working, eunuch. Who did you sacrifice your balls for, eunuch? Trump owns your balls.

Feb 15, 2019
Let's see now.
2 + 2/2 is, of course 3
because 2 divided by 2 equals 1, then add it to 2 where the answer is 3
easy peasy
Learned it in 6th form

Feb 15, 2019
Your bullshit is being shown on whiteboards and ridiculed.

I guess you can't grow any balls, you gave them up. Just a eunuch with a "revolutionary" Russian propaganda you are trying to grow to replace your testicles.

Feb 15, 2019
You cannot answer and have no balls.

This is how you try to troll. It's not working, eunuch. Who did you sacrifice your balls for, eunuch? Trump owns your balls.
says Da Schithead

Balls again? Are you gay? You seem obsessed with the male genitalia so you must be gay.
Not that we have anything against you for your being gay since it IS YOUR CHOICE.

Feb 15, 2019
Good, then you admit @Benni lied.

877.0 + 878.4 / 2

does not equal 877.5 or anything even close to it.

Thanks. Your balls are still very small and incapable of making progeny. This is a good thing. Stupids shouldn't procreate.

Feb 15, 2019
Let's see now.
2 + 2/2 is, of course 3
because 2 divided by 2 equals 1, then add it to 2 where the answer is 3
easy peasy
Learned it in 6th form


Nope, learned it a few posts upthread where I had to spell it out for you. Easy once you've been given the answer, isn't it? And you must have been in the retards class if you didn't learn BODMAS until 6th form!

Feb 15, 2019
Considering it took you days to find the correct answer, or more likely to admit to it, this is just more evidence you lie.

Be interesting to see how @Benni tries to lie about you.

Feb 15, 2019
I had been in hospital for about a year with a broken arm and leg. Couldn't attend classes, therefor missed a lot of schoolwork. But my instructor came by to give me some lessons and said that I was a good student. Beautiful lady she was.
I never got the chance to see your links, as I had other better things to do yesterday

Feb 15, 2019
Yuo been a stupid since you been born because your psychotic parents transmitted their disease to you.

So now we know @Benni lied as shown by its buttbuddy @SRU.

Feb 15, 2019
OH NOOOO
So Da Schithead has to bring parentage into his idiocy to prolong his obsession with me, eh? LOL
Still got butts on your mind, eh Da Schithead?
What a sad sack.

Feb 15, 2019
I had been in hospital for about a year with a broken arm and leg. Couldn't attend classes, therefor missed a lot of schoolwork. But my instructor came by to give me some lessons and said that I was a good student. Beautiful lady she was.
I never got the chance to see your links, as I had other better things to do yesterday


You didn't miss anything, schneibo has been wandering out in the weeds & tall grass still trying to learn 6th grade math.

Feb 15, 2019
Standard trolling to try to avoid the obvious consequences of it's ball-less cowardice.

None of these liar deniers has the balls to stand against truth.

2 + 2 / 2 = 3

And

877.0 + 878.4 / 2 ≠ 877.8

Feb 15, 2019
LOL
Well, I'd like to keep this tirade going to see Da Schithead make a further fool of herself, but I'm quite ravenous for some juicy steak, so CYA

Feb 15, 2019
LOL
Well, I'd like to keep this tirade going to see Da Schithead make a further fool of herself, but I'm quite ravenous for some juicy steak, so CYA


Same

Feb 15, 2019
Like most trolls the ball-less @SRU lies again.

877.0 + 878.4 / 2 ≠ 877.8

You can't even properly use calculators. Or Google.

@Benni gets pwnt by its own supposed supporter.

You lied @Benni. Your own supposed supporters admit it.

I don't know why you post here any more. You're a stupid and your own partisans admit it.

Feb 15, 2019
Venomous verbs of ruthless candour plagiarise assassins fervour
A friend in need is a friend that bleeds
Let bitter silence infect the wounds

-Marillion "Assassing"

Feb 15, 2019
Rats fleeing the drowning ship.

Feb 15, 2019
Couldn't attend classes, therefor missed a lot of schoolwork.
No balls at all. Excuses for why you are abandoning the sinking ship. I'm sure @Benni will be pleased /s.

You have no balls and have demonstrated it. A eunuch. Good you can't spawn.

Feb 15, 2019
You could have found this out a week ago- more than likely you did and refused to admit it. Pressed hard enough you give up your leader.

No balls.

The correct answer is

2 + 2 / 2 = 3

Punch it into google or your calculator. That's the answer you'll get because they're programmed with operator precedence.

@Benni doesn't know math and won't learn. This is your leader? Pathetic.

Feb 15, 2019
It seriously appears that you didn't think anyone would check on google or their calculator.

Stupid is as stupid does.

I have no idea why individuals who can't even operate a simple calculator have anything to say on a physics site that they think anyone will take seriously.

Feb 15, 2019
I never got the chance to see your links, as I had other better things to do yesterday


Yep, so busy that you posted minutes either side of where I had to tell you the answer! Fraud.

Feb 15, 2019
So basically the question is whether the trolls are lying or stupid.

It doesn't really matter which.

This is the corner we've been backing them into. Looks like we won.

Feb 15, 2019
So much for @Benni's fairy stories about neutron decay.

Suck it, trolls.

Feb 15, 2019
So basically the question is whether the trolls are lying or stupid.

It doesn't really matter which.

This is the corner we've been backing them into. Looks like we won.


LOL Looks more like you've lost.

Feb 15, 2019
No, looks like you're still trolling, lying, and denying.

You yourself admitted it was 3. Are you denying that now?

And if it's 3 then @Benni is lying or stupid.

And you know it and you're lying.

Suck it, troll.

Tolja I got your number. It's 3.

Feb 15, 2019
Standard troll tactics:

1. Make a ridiculous claim.
2. Claim anyone who denies the ridiculous claim is lying.
3. Ignore math.
4. Lie about what you said when your non-math claims are proven ridiculous too.
5. Lie some more.
6. Claim opponents are gay.
7. Claim you were "right all along."

Have I missed any?

Feb 15, 2019
I never got the chance to see your links, as I had other better things to do yesterday


Yep, so busy that you posted minutes either side of where I had to tell you the answer! Fraud.
says jonesCojones

ROFLOL Yes. In answer to your boyfriend Da Schniebo's insistence that I give it the answer, which I did. I could have done it yesterday but I wanted to see your boyfriend Da Schniebo practically beg for the answer. And it did.

Feb 15, 2019
@SRU lies again: you said 3.

Standard troll tactic #4. Lie about what you yourself said.

@SRU always calls anyone who disagrees with it "gay."

Gradeschool insults to go with its gradeschool math.

Feb 15, 2019
ROFLOL Yes. In answer to your boyfriend Da Schniebo's insistence that I give it the answer, which I did. I could have done it yesterday but I wanted to see your boyfriend Da Schniebo practically beg for the answer. And it did.


Fraud. Lying fraud. Not very convincing lying fraud.

Feb 15, 2019
Insults never work against math. Stupids always reveal themselves when reality comes down.

Next idiotic maneuver: "GAY POP COSMOLOGY MATH"

Feb 15, 2019
Oh, and just so it's clear: the fallacy involved in calling someone "gay" is the Poisoning the Well Fallacy.

https://en.wikipe...the_well

When you see people making these claims, you will know they are attempting to influence you with fallacious arguments.

Feb 16, 2019
Meanwhile, I am secure enough in my long-established heterosexual sexual identity not to denigrate those with different ones. Apparently @SRU isn't and secritly wants to fuck underage boys in the ass and has a hangup about it. I seriously hope people who want to have sex with minors go to prison. And that may well be where @SRU is.

Bring it troll child molester. Guess they don't hunt you molesters down in Russia.


Feb 16, 2019
Next up: @SRU child molester denigrates the Moscow Times.

Waiting for you over here, Sergei. You better leave before your endemic child molestation is fully revealed. I can poison the well too. And I have a lot more ammunition.

Russians fuck their children. There isn't anything more to say.

Feb 16, 2019
If I was you, @SRU I'd give up on the whole "gay" thing.

But you're not very bright so I expect you won't. It won't work much better than denying math. Or denying your child molestatation history which you have acknowledged in your own words. Yuo wouldn't know about these things if you hadn't done them.

Feb 16, 2019
Yup Da Schniebo is gay. That's why it can't let go of it.
ROFLOL

Feb 16, 2019
And so what I said is confirmed.

You're a Russian child molester. Thanks for confirming it. Vladimir.

Feb 16, 2019
No wonder you know what assfucking is all about and can describe it in physiological terminology.

Your fantasies about me are obviously your own experiences fucking little boys. Do you jack off to these fantasies? Seems most Russians do.

Feb 16, 2019
Is this the driving force behind your obsession with black holes?

Feb 16, 2019
@SPRT = @SEU Pervert Russian Troll. Spurt seems appropriate here.

Feb 16, 2019
@SPRT fucks babies.

https://themoscow...ne-20452

Now bring it. Next I'll post some articles about how you eat them after you're done and that's why your reported birth rates are so low.

Feb 16, 2019
What's next, @Soviet_Pervert_Unit?

You fuck and eat babies. And threaten the parents to keep it sekrit.

Nobody cares what you say on the physics site. Go away.

Everyone here sees you fighting to protect your "rights" to fuck and eat babies. Go post on the "Christian" forums. They'll be glad to have you.

Feb 16, 2019
I would advise you to see your psychiatrist and a Neurosurgeon ASAP. Your speech and behaviours are strong indications that you may have a growing brain tumour inside your skull. Or at the very least, you are having severe psychopathological mental issues which also cause you to be suffering from obsessive/compulsive personality disorder.
Whether you take my advice or not is your choice. But as such, the filth that you are spewing in this science website is appalling. I am almost certain that nobody in their right mind appreciates having to read your filthy lies. I will block your comments as you are a rude and violent human - quite typical of many modern humans of the past 2 centuries that I have come across.

Feb 16, 2019
I don't understand why the @Soviet_Pervert_Unit is whining. You open the box, don't whine about what's inside, pervert who fucks babies and eats them. You're prolly serving time for it right now and this is your library period.

Feb 16, 2019
Simple lesson: don't lie about me.

If you do expect far worse coming back at you stronger and harder than you can handle. Just like you're failing to handle this.

You may leave now.

Feb 16, 2019
AWWW....bad Valentines, Da Schitts?
Did the boyfriend fail to hit the "sweet spot"?
Did the boyfriend ignore you?

2 + 2/2 = Da Schitts dumped.

LMAO.

Feb 16, 2019
Pah, as if I'd even bother to read anything @tehalgore has to say.

Feb 16, 2019
I never got the chance to see your links, as I had other better things to do yesterday


Yep, so busy that you posted minutes either side of where I had to tell you the answer! Fraud.

says jones'cojones

The answer was right there in Google Search. I already saw it after jimmybobs suggested to do a Search on that and others. Did you really think that I was waiting for YOU to answer the question? Really? LOL

Feb 16, 2019
@SEU

You had to google the answer to "2 + 2/2 =" ?

Feb 17, 2019
@TrickQuestion:

"" This is what you get when philosophers try to talk about science.

Or what you get when mathematicians try to talk about reality.""

"I'd think mathematicians uniquely qualified to talk about a mathematical universe. :)

But if you replace "reality" with "soft sciences", I'd agree this happens at times. Some of the most whacked-out opinions on politics and psychology I've ever heard have come from mathematicians who don't realize that truth in soft sciences isn't primarily the result of applying logic directly; rather, it's primarily determined by the informational heuristics you use to gather and process data that is inconsistent and never crystal-clear."

Oliver Wendell Homes, Jr. wrote: ""The Life of the law has not been logic. It has been experience.""

tbctd


Feb 17, 2019
contd.

Social science - like the legal system - deals with illogical human beings. Science deals with logical laws that govern our universe and that, hopefully for our sake, do not change from day to day based upon the "experience" of our universe.

That's why I long ago told a lawyer acquaintance of mine who also had a Ph.D in mathematics that I felt he would make a damn poor lawyer. He was befuddled by human behavior and wanted to compartmentalize everyone and their actions into some corner of some "logical" Venn Diagram he had constructed in his mind.

But that does not work very well in describing human actions.

Feb 17, 2019
Correction:

"That's why I long ago told a lawyer acquaintance of mine who also had a Ph.D in mathematics that I felt he would make a damn poor JUDGE]" - not lawyer.

Feb 17, 2019
Good luck measuring the mass of the SMBH at the galactic centre without using maths. No amount of philosophising will get you to Kepler's third law. If you can't do maths, you can't do physics.

Feb 17, 2019
A black hole of many many comments on phys.org.
Very difficult to know what become the physical laws in such extreme conditions in a black hole..

Feb 18, 2019
It's my eternal neutron, not @Da Schneib's.

Feb 19, 2019
Good luck measuring the mass of the SMBH at the galactic centre without using maths. No amount of philosophising will get you to Kepler's third law. If you can't do maths, you can't do physics.
says jones'cojones

jones'cojones believes that ONLY when the maths are done can scientists do Physics' observations for the purpose of PROVING that the maths were right in the first place.

Feb 19, 2019
Thought exercise. What if increased mass density creates multiple folds in space/time that creates the illusion of a singularity? Picture multiple layers of an onion representing the multiple folds of space/time hiding a dense core of matter. Are we certain that the objects we are referencing as singularities are not simply multiple folds of space/time fabric?

says Blair_Lawrence

Interesting POV. But it could be just Space alone, without the Time element since Time isn't a Dimension and can't dilate.
Folded over Space would be invisible but would have a disk of Matter spinning around it. Any Stars wandering into it could be stranded until it reaches the centre where it remains and can't get out.
You may be correct, and that is all that a Black Hole is. Folded up Space is able to Dilate, so that it becomes its own "Gravity Well". It wouldn't need "Mass Density" or any Mass at all. But gradually, Mass will wander into it. Corraled, you might say.

Feb 19, 2019
@Blair_Lawrence,

What is "folded space"? What are its dimensions?

@SEU,

Time isn't a dimension? Time cannot dilate? Time is definitely a dimension; if it weren't, the concept of speed would be meaningless. And time most definitely does dilate, as in "time dilation," which happens in particle accelerators every time particles are accelerated. The intensity of the local gravitational field changes the rate at which time passes; every GPS device takes advantage of this feature of time and gravity.

What would cause "folded over space" to have "a disk of matter spinning around it"? And around which axis would it be spinning?

Feb 24, 2019
@Blair_Lawrence,

I'm quite familiar with E = mc². It doesn't force an equilibrium; it defines the equivalence of mass and energy. Equations do not force reality; they reflect reality (when they are correct).

What are the equations governing the number of "space-time folds" and the "successive dilation of space-time" and "comprehensive universal equilibrium" and their relationships to each other?

Feb 24, 2019
What are the equations governing or describing "space-time folds" and "successive dilation of space-time"? The universe is not in equilibrium; it is expanding, and the rate of its expansion is accelerating. That's anything but equilibrium.

Right now it sounds like nothing but hand-waving and pretend science with fancy "science-sounding" words and phrases.

Feb 26, 2019
@observicist,
Note; to answer your question regarding "What is folded space?"

Use of the following overused expression is not meant to be trite.

The very formula E=MC2 demonstrates a universal constant and relationship supporting 'equilibrium' of mass, energy, and space. As mass condenses and increases, the space surrounding it dilates and becomes juxtaposed to the outside space that surrounds it (the beginning of the onion example). This happens because E=MC2 is forcing an equilibrium. The number of space folds is directly related to the force required to achieve equilibrium with each successive dilation of space until comprehensive universal equilibrium is achieved. This model speaks to the observed radiation that 'leaks' from the current theory of 'Black Hole'.

The universe is one smart system that will not violate it's own laws.
says Blair_Lawrence

I have taken the liberty of removing the word "time" from your space-time, since Time is intangible.

Feb 26, 2019
@SEU,

@observicist,
Note; to answer your question regarding "What is folded space?"
says Blair_Lawrence

I have taken the liberty of removing the word "time" from your space-time, since Time is intangible.


You can remove the word, "time," from the term, "space-time," but you can't remove time from space-time; time is no more intangible than my house. Space and time cannot be separated.

The rate at which time passes depends on where in space you are, and on how fast you are moving through space. No two places in space-time have the same rate of change in location in time, nor the same rate of change in location in space. You are moving constantly through both time and space.

When you make statements such as, "Time in intangible," you are exposing your ignorance of special and general relativity. Time and space are equally tangible, or equally intangible. They are inseparable, whether you like it or not. Motion in one is motion in the other.

Feb 27, 2019
@Blair_Lawrence,

@observicist

Equilibrium does not assert static. Equilibrium is dynamic because by definition it struggles with forces in an attempt to seek balance.


Equilibrium is when balance has been achieved, not before.

As to the equations; unfortunately I lack the math skill to demonstrate that symbolic metaphor. That was the premise to surface my assessment as a thought exercise.


Without any math to back it up, it's nothing but hand waving and "sciency sounding" words. It's meaningless. You have a thought, and see if math can back it up. The thing is, there is no theoretical basis for anything you wrote about "space folds." There's no empirical reason to believe such a thing happens; no observations.

Physicists don't spin wild theories without some reason to do so -- observation or theory. Just because it sounds "sciency" is not a reason.

Mar 01, 2019
@Blair_Lawrence,

Dogma?

What dogma?

Calling hand waving what it is isn't dogma, and a science degree is not required here, but is useful (as is a willingness to listen to experts, such as when my appendix hurt).

A "go fund me"?

All I've seen is @SEU denying time is a dimension.

Galileo was ridiculed, but was later proven correct. At the moment, I represent "science" saying you have nothing but hand waving, and you're behaving as if that therefore gives your ideas merit. It's an informal fallacy informally named after Galileo.

Said fallacy doesn't mean you're automatically wrong; it does mean that a superficial similarity does not guarantee similar results. The similarity here is most extremely superficial.

I will be shocked if anything comes of your "go fund me" beyond fantasy and conspiracy. Far be it from me to attempt to quash your fun, but check phys.org site rules.

I cannot and do not support this, and I bear no responsibility for it.

Mar 24, 2019
Black holes are one of the strangest things in existence. And some questions makes sense too. Whether they come from and what happens if you fool into one.

Stars are an incredibly massive collection of mostly hydrogen atoms. In their core convert hydrogen into helium, and emits a large amount of energy in the form of radiation to maintain the balance between the two forces.
Thanks for sharing this with us, it is a really helpful article.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more