>>13455923>First thing I discovered was that supermassive black holes at the center of the galaxy do not have nearly enough mass to hold the galaxy together by gravity, let alone the so called dark matter halo.The supermassive black hole doesn't hold the whole galaxy together, the mass of the galaxy itself does that. You could have a galaxy with no central black hole. I don't see how dark matter comes into this: what's wrong with having a big halo of dark matter held together by its own gravity?
>Once I figured out that there could be no mass under the event horizon, the black hole became able to make wormholes.In a sense there is no mass under the event horizon: it's the horizon that matters to an outside observer, but an infalling observer still passes the horizon. This has nothing to do with wormholes, and I don't see how you made that leap.
>There is evidence for this as black hole spins align with one another over millions of light years. Of course they do. They are entangled by Einstein Rosen bridges.The planets in the solar system also orbit in the same plane and spin in the same direction. It isn't entanglement, it's just classical mechanics.
>It may be that black hole entanglement is an extention of string theory meaning that through string theory gravity and quantum mechanics may be both unified and explained as the properties of strings: entanglement, tension, torsion and waves.Sure, but that has nothing to do with what you've said.
Look up ER = EPR, that seems to be similar to what you're thinking about (including the links to string theory) without the bs.
