/sci/ - Science & Math » Thread #13504706

139KiB, 1600x900, 27BLACKHOLEWEEK1-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600.jpg

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Wed 11 Aug 16:59:39 2021 No.13504706 View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>13504729 >>13508000 >>13512262 >>13512376 >>13512387 >>13516411 >>13516456 >>13523760

Nothing with real rest mass exists on the event horizon (2GM) nor can any particle cross the event horizon.

Why do physicists comtradict this?

The interior of a black hole is negatively curved inverted spacetime.

Black holes and the universe before the big bang can be described by asymptotic Darkness.

The behavior of dark matter and long distance supermassive black hole alignment are a result of Einstein Rosen bridges.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Aug 2021 17:02:14 No.13504729 Report

Quoted By: >>13505405

>>13504706
Write a paper and send it to a journal
No one gives a fuck about your constant threads
Publish or kill yourself

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 11 Aug 2021 17:07:24 No.13504764 Report

Quoted By: >>13505405 >>13513728

black holes aren't special. stop treating them as something unique. it's just a region with a shitload of mass. if your popular formulas fail to describe a region with a lot of mass because it is spinning, the problem lies with you.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1625081837305.gif, 659KiB, 700x500

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Wed 11 Aug 2021 19:33:02 No.13505405 Report

Quoted By: >>13509309 >>13515007

>>13504764
>>13504729

Don't be a killjoy. I'd like to see some feedback.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Aug 2021 03:57:27 No.13507739 Report

Quoted By:

Sssb

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Aug 2021 05:31:10 No.13508000 Report

Quoted By: >>13509288

>>13504706
Secure tripcode alert.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Thu 12 Aug 2021 14:16:22 No.13509288 Report

Quoted By:

>>13508000

Trips is trips.

Nice trips.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 12 Aug 2021 14:20:57 No.13509309 Report

Quoted By: >>13509958

>>13505405
The feedback is you're talking bullshit that even /x/ would disregard.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Thu 12 Aug 2021 16:52:51 No.13509958 Report

Quoted By: >>13512394 >>13516338 >>13518108

>>13509309

I have had zero people able to disprove the point of mass being excluded from the event horizon.

You don't have shit to say either. Otherwise you'd have said it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 03:00:18 No.13512215 Report

Quoted By:

Event horizon exists only in the imagination of external relatively stationary observer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 03:16:28 No.13512262 Report

Quoted By:

>>13504706
The event horizon is just the point of no return. Why would an object falling in to a black hole fail to move past this point? To an observer it may appear that way, but only because a black hole is a black body. I'm probably way in over my head here though.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 04:03:58 No.13512376 Report

Quoted By:

>>13504706
The event horizon does not exist. Neither does the radiation or the black hole singularity. It's just subjective perspective.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 04:07:30 No.13512387 Report

Quoted By: >>13513120

>>13504706
Ah look, it's the retard who got BTFO in his own thread and then deleted it: https://boards.fireden.net/sci/thread/13474626/#13474626

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 04:10:54 No.13512394 Report

Quoted By: >>13513120 >>13513354

>>13509958
>I have had zero people able to disprove the point of mass being excluded from the event horizon.
You're a delusional liar. You've been given the exact calculation for the worldline of a raindrop passing the event horizon. You confuse mass not being able to remain on the event horizon with mass not being able to pass through it. It's that simple.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 10:45:02 No.13513120 Report

Quoted By: >>13513808

>>13512394

The last time I talked to you I got my thread pruned and I got a ban.

Again. I did the math for your coordinate system. They collapsed at event horizon. As predicted.

Furthermore the.law og general covariance indicates that the form of physics will not change under coordinate transformation. Thus the null surface of the event horizon is null in all coordinate systems.

The whole concept of transforming away the null surface is flawed.

>>13512387

OPs can't delete their own threads I got jannied when somebody here either bonked me or made a false report on my thread.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 10:53:10 No.13513135 Report

Quoted By: >>13513159 >>13513168

There is no "interior" to black holes, the "interior" of the black hole is outside the curved 4d space-time manifold

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO pseudosphere 2.jpg, 20KiB, 233x483

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 11:06:48 No.13513159 Report

Quoted By:

>>13513135

There is an interior because the geometry is known. If we put aside asymptotic darkness then the lone black hole has a singularity center and a coordinate singularity perimeter. This is a match for a known 3D surface, taken up one dimension.

It is a hyper-pseudosphere. Thus, the interior is negatively curved and gravitationally repulsive. The geometry is of a white hole.

Add asymptotic Darkness back into the mix and a large number of these white holes will be popping up and competing for mass.

More to come.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 20210727_184957.jpg, 4MiB, 4160x3120

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 11:11:07 No.13513168 Report

Quoted By: >>13513193 >>13515056

>>13513135

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interior_Schwarzschild_metric

Also, this article indicates that the interior of the black hole has a greater volume than a flat space two sphere.

In the same way, the area of a negatively curved saddle is greater than a flat circle of the same radius.

The conclusion is the same: the surface is negatively curved.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 11:25:39 No.13513193 Report

Quoted By:

>>13513168
>greater volume than a flat space two sphere of the same radius.*

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 12:43:33 No.13513354 Report

Quoted By: >>13513625

>>13512394
>You confuse mass not being able to remain on the event horizon with mass not being able to pass through it. It's that simple.
Exactly. I told OP this weeks ago but he never learns.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 14:14:02 No.13513625 Report

Quoted By: >>13513705 >>13513847 >>13513987

>>13513354

I say that particles cannot exist on the event horizon. You say they cannot remain on the event horizon. I told you then and I tell you now, this is a distinction without a difference. There are zero coordinates on a null surface compatible with massive particles for any period of time.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 14:32:20 No.13513705 Report

Quoted By:

>>13513625

Even saying 'period of time' is a contradiction in terms.

The spacetime coordinates of a null surface excludes the possibility of any and all massive particles.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 14:37:00 No.13513728 Report

Quoted By:

>>13504764
>Just
>The universe is just a place with a shit load of stuff

Why are you even on sci if you don't care about anything?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 14:39:03 No.13513743 Report

Quoted By: >>13513782

You're the dumbest tripfaggot in the history of 4chan

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 14:47:06 No.13513782 Report

Quoted By: >>13513811

>>13513743
I think you underestimate the achievements of his competition. At some point the on an arbitrary scale of stupidity approaches infinity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 14:51:52 No.13513808 Report

Quoted By: >>13513835

>>13513120
>They collapsed at event horizon.
What collapsed and how is it relevant to the particle's movement?

>Thus the null surface of the event horizon is null in all coordinate systems.
No one said otherwise. How is it relevant to the particle's movement?

The last time we talked I asked you whether you acknowledge the speed of the particle is sqrt(2M/r) in GP. You never answered.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 14:52:20 No.13513811 Report

Quoted By: >>13513883

>>13513782

But do stupidity and tripfaggotry converge up to infinity?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:01:43 No.13513835 Report

Quoted By: >>13513872

>>13513808

I'm not walking into another ban by strolling down your favorite function that collapses to zero coordinate argument.

Where y = sqrt(2m/r) the coordinates are singular in order to cancel the singularity inherent to the metric but it cannot change the nature of the surface.

The null surface of the event horizon remains null.

This is true for all coordinate transformations.

That's the law of general covariance.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:08:04 No.13513847 Report

Quoted By: >>13513878

>>13513625
>I say that particles cannot exist on the event horizon.
Based on...?

>this is a distinction without a difference.
The difference was already explained to you. Passing through a surface is not remaining on it. Remaining on it means that you sieve some nonzero amount of time on the surface. Only light can do this by moving on the surface at the speed of light. Everything else is pulled through. You already know this, you're just in denial.

>There are zero coordinates on a null surface compatible with massive particles for any period of time.
Because it doesn't spend any period of time on the surface, it passes through!

>Even saying 'period of time' is a contradiction in terms.
Right, so your argument is contradictory.

>The spacetime coordinates of a null surface excludes the possibility of any and all massive particles.
You're just using ambiguous language. The surface excludes the possibility of massive particles remaining on the surface, nothing more.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:13:33 No.13513872 Report

Quoted By: >>13513879 >>13513911

>>13513835
>Where y = sqrt(2m/r) the coordinates are singular in order to cancel the singularity inherent to the metric but it cannot change the nature of the surface.
No need to change the nature of the surface, the question is whether the particle passes through it in proper time. It does. You lose.

Your entire argument boils down to your misinterpretation of "null surface" as impenetrable. No matter how many times it's shown to you that this is false, you simply repeat it. It's a dogma, and you can't even explain why you believe it.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:14:31 No.13513878 Report

Quoted By: >>13514063

>>13513847
>it doesn't spend any period of time on the surface

Ok. I don't know how many times you have to reread this to understand what it means, but you wrote it and I completely agree with you here.

This is my argument and you're repeating it back to me not knowing what that means.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:14:34 No.13513879 Report

Quoted By: >>13514084

>>13513872
>misinterpretation of "null surface"
Oh God I remember you. You're the fag I BTFO'd a few weeks ago who didn't understand what null surface meant.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:15:35 No.13513883 Report

Quoted By:

>>13513811
To describe the kinds of stupidity expressed on this board we would have to pour immense ressources and time into developing the science of improving and perfecting the human mind to a level where a subject would be to us as we are to yeast cells. Then our paragon of human achievement would have to invent a new and all-encompassing mathematical language. And then he -might be be able to calculate how much of a faggot you are and how stupid this thread is. Maybe.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO D3JjQRRU0AAsdvI.jpg, 36KiB, 1200x900

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:21:53 No.13513911 Report

Quoted By: >>13514079

>>13513872

I absolutely can.

Particles must move through timelike surfaces along timelike paths. They cannot move through null surfaces on null paths. Only light does that.

Here is a diagram of the null geodesics approaching the event horizon. As you can see as the light cone close they converge at the event horizon becoming a definite null surface. A surface defined as null cannot be timelike. A timelike worldline, by definition cannot exist there. You are being dogmatic. You prepresume particles cross the event horizon. I am using the exact terms of particles moving through spacetime. Every obvious fact of null surfaces spits your presumption back in your face.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:28:25 No.13513938 Report

Quoted By: >>13513949

what is it about black holes that makes them the number one most popular popsci topic of discussion amongst the brainlet soience fangoys?
is it the comic bookish aspects of the spectacular, unrealistic and completely non disprovable conjectures which go along with the topic that make black holes so popular amongst the scientist posers and wannabes?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:30:25 No.13513949 Report

Quoted By:

>>13513938

Pasta's up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:38:16 No.13513987 Report

Quoted By: >>13514012

>>13513625
I'll try to reason with you one last time. Consider a particle in $\mathbb{R}^3$ (3-dimensional space) travelling along a trajectory described by the function $\gamma: \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3, t \mapsto \gamma(t)$ . The domain of the function $\gamma$ should be thought about as time. The velocity of the particle at time t is given by the vector $\gamma'(t)$ . I'm doing this on $\mathbb{R}^3$ instead of a 4-dimensional Lorentzian manifold since I know by our previous interaction that you're not really acquainted with differential geometry, so don't complain about this. Now suppose you require that the velocity of the particle is never parallel to the xy-plane i.e. the z-component of the velocity is never 0 (You should think of this as the condition that the particle is moving on a timelike curve and the xy-plane as a null hypersurface). Your claim is analogous to saying that because of this restriction on the velocity of the particle, $\gamma$ can never intersect the xy-plane. This is of course completely false as you can see using the example (or several other examples of this form) $\gamma(t) = (42, 87, 1)(t - 1)$ . This curve $\gamma$ intersects the xy-plane at t = 1 and its velocity $\gamma'(t) = (42, 87, 1)$ is never parallel to the xy-plane because the z-coordinate is always non-zero. The takeaway here should be that you can intersect something transverally instead of tangentially.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:43:52 No.13514012 Report

Quoted By: >>13514027 >>13514039

>>13513987

I've already been told by another poster in this thread, not me!

A [massive particle] does not spend any period of time on [the event horizon null] surface.

Is that statement true or false?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:46:42 No.13514027 Report

Quoted By: >>13514052

>>13514012
It doesn't spend a non-zero amount time. Crossing the event horizon is something that happens instantaneously. See my example. The curve crosses the xy-plane at t = 1

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO reddit.jpg, 72KiB, 1415x485

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:48:41 No.13514039 Report

Quoted By: >>13514067

>>13514012
>Is that statement true or false?
you're a popsci fag

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:51:27 No.13514052 Report

Quoted By: >>13514068

>>13514027

Nice hoop jumping.

So to conclude the amount of time spent on the event horizon cannot be non zero. Therefore the amount of time must be zero. Therefore it is never on the evnt horizon therefore the only way to get it below the horizon is to have a worldline with a zero value at the horizon and non zero above and below.

You're breaking the world line to cross the horizon. You've just thrown out proper time and everything else vital to relativity.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:53:58 No.13514063 Report

Quoted By: >>13514094

>>13513878
Then the surface being null is a non sequitur, since passing through a surface is not spending any time on it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:54:16 No.13514065 Report

Quoted By: >>13518654

give it to me straight, lads
is there are universe inside every black hole?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:55:47 No.13514067 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514039

I want you all to know that I do actually like it here.

I wouldn't go anywhere else with anyone else.

If you think I'm not worth discussion, hey the Eagle never lost so much time as when it submitted to learn from the crow.

I just remain unconvinved of the authority of the matterand I want to push an alternative. Here better than anywhere, right?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:55:47 No.13514068 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514052
> Therefore it is never on the evnt horizon
Fucking hell, I give up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:57:54 No.13514079 Report

Quoted By: >>13514158

>>13513911
>Particles must move through timelike surfaces along timelike paths. They cannot move through null surfaces on null paths.
Wrong, they cannot move ON null surfaces. Again, you're using ambiguous language.

>You prepresume particles cross the event horizon.
No I don't. I simply calculated the worldline of a particle approaching it abs it passes right through in finite proper time. No matter how much you try to distract with non sequitur and misrepresentations, there is no getting around that simple fact. The particle passes through, demonstrably.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 15:58:55 No.13514084 Report

Quoted By:

>>13513879
It sounds like you responded to the wrong person.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:01:08 No.13514093 Report

Quoted By:

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:01:08 No.13514094 Report

Quoted By: >>13514614

>>13514063

Don't throw your hands up. This post is an actual non sequitur.

Even light, as fast as it is, has to go place to place on an unbroken path and spends time in every coordinate through which it moves. True for worldlines as well.

But not the event horizon? Please.

You can't throw away a world line just because it breaks at the event horizon.

If you want to get below the event horizon you'll probably need to have a quantum tunneling explanation because it obviously breaks relativity.

Good luck unifying physics and enjoy your nobel prize.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:15:08 No.13514158 Report

Quoted By: >>13514189 >>13514687

>>13514079
>demonstrably

Experimental results, please.

Again, I've been sitting here as everyone has been repeating back to me the worldline spends zero time on the event horizon.

Fucking exactly!

I have spent zero time in Tokyo Japan. You know why? I've never been there!

A massive particle spends zero time on the event horizon because it never goes there.

Why do massive particles spend zero time there? Because it's not timelike! It's null!

I can go around this loop a thousand times, it always comes back the same result.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:23:01 No.13514189 Report

Quoted By: >>13514208

>>13514158
Throw an object in the air. How long does it spend on the highest position? How long does it spend on any intermediate position?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:25:58 No.13514208 Report

Quoted By: >>13514234 >>13514244

>>13514189

Throw a proton into a black hole. When does the front of the proton hit the event horizon? When does the back if the proton go under the horizon?

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1602108940148.jpg, 10KiB, 261x173

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:31:29 No.13514234 Report

Quoted By: >>13514251

>>13514208
>front of the proton

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:32:39 No.13514244 Report

Quoted By: >>13514280

>>13514208
You're just being a troll now

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:34:42 No.13514251 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514234
Ok. You got me.

When does the black hole facing side touch the event horizon? When does the opposite side tuck below the horizon?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:39:19 No.13514280 Report

Quoted By: >>13514635

>>13514244

I'd think this is a pretty simple question for any other region of timelike space.

I admit I may have thrown on some hyperbole but every particle with spacial dimension can be described as moving through coordinates.

The point I'm making is that such cannot be the case when every coordinate along a massive particle or an object composed of massive particles are said to spend zero time on the event horizon.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 16:58:39 No.13514346 Report

Quoted By: >>13514360

Wait if from the outside it looks like entities never fully cross in, could you use black holes as a wacky form of near-permanent information storage?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 17:01:40 No.13514360 Report

Quoted By: >>13514453

>>13514346

How do you get the information up and out of the gravity well?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 17:22:40 No.13514453 Report

Quoted By: >>13514518

>>13514360
Visually, if you can see "it" that's information in the fork of light, isn't it?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 17:35:33 No.13514518 Report

Quoted By: >>13514533

>>13514453

Say I toss a sign into a black hole with an electric sign with the world's brightest lights.

As the sign falls it the light is redshifted.

By my theory the sign will be destroyed and turned into asymptotic Darkness. By current theory it falls below the event horizon and vanishes.

Regardless of what happens at the event horizon that redshift will eventually mean that the light will eventually fade away.

Someday nobody will ever know what the sign said.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 17:37:58 No.13514533 Report

Quoted By: >>13514647

>>13514518
Yeah but how long is that someday? It probably beats the longevity of any known data storage technology.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 17:56:52 No.13514614 Report

Quoted By: >>13514692

>>13514094
>Even light, as fast as it is, has to go place to place on an unbroken path and spends time in every coordinate through which it moves.
How much time? Hint: 0. It's OK, you'll learn basic calculus eventually.

>You can't throw away a world line just because it breaks at the event horizon.
No one's throwing anything away except you. It's easy to understand why a worldline for a particle in coordinates that follow its proper time is going to pass through the event horizon, but the worldline in some other coordinates may not. It's because it takes infinite time for an outside observer to see the particle passing through.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:01:49 No.13514635 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514280
OP is just being a huge faggot by playinh word games with an infinitesimally small duratiom and a point in time. Any particle I'm aware of, massive or not, traverses in a continuous manner. The event horizon is no exception you dingus. You've even said so yourself, so I know you know how you're trolling here. Spending time on a point t2-t1<>0, where (x,y,z) is constant) and existing on a point (t=arbitrary value on (x,y,z)) are different. Nothing can meet the first criteria to my knowledge. You can have non-massive particles traverse along the event horizon "surface" and return to the same point at another time. Nothing DWELLS there. Everything can traverse through the point or surface.

Stopping being retarded and trolling

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:04:51 No.13514647 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514533

It gets more complicated because in addition to redshift time is also slowing down. The rate at which the sign emits light decreases so another variable is the rate at which light being emitted going down will make the sign more dim.

There are a lot of variables to work out.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:16:37 No.13514687 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514158
>Experimental results, please.
Sure, go fly into a black hole. That's the only way you'll get experimental results. Otherwise, mathematical proof should suffice.

>I have spent zero time in Tokyo Japan. You know why? I've never been there!
If Tokyo was a single point or a line then you could have been there without spending any time there, by moving through it. What is so hard to understand about this?

>Why do massive particles spend zero time there?
Because they pass through it without traveling on it.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:17:35 No.13514692 Report

Quoted By: >>13514706 >>13514779

>>13514614

Of course the time light spends in each point is zero. It travels on null paths.

Come to an object, a particle or train car, what have you.

None of these paths will be null. The object has a front and a back. Take the train car and throw it in. At some point, if we assume the train is made of unobtainium strength then it must go within the horizon. It cannot be without length if it is made of particles. It must pass through the event horizon at every coordinate along it's axis. Even if the time each coordinate spends is infinitesimal it is each is still a coordinate in time.

If the front of the car is below the horizon and the back of the car is above the horizon then the horizon must be in between the cars.

It can't be, though because we agree that massive particles cannot be on the horizon. The front of the train cannot have the event horizon between it and the back of the train because those particles would be within a null surface.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:20:12 No.13514706 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514692
>If the front of the train is below the horizon and the back of the car is above the horizon then the horizon must be in between the cars.*

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:34:28 No.13514779 Report

Quoted By: >>13514799 >>13514810

>>13514692
>Of course the time light spends in each point is zero. It travels on null paths.
Non sequitur. But thanks for admitting you were wrong when you claimed light spends time in each coordinate.

>None of these paths will be null.
No one said they are.

>The object has a front and a back.
The object is made of particles that don't have fronts and backs. Those are what all forces are actually acting upon. What a silly argument. You're really getting desperate now.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:38:30 No.13514799 Report

Quoted By: >>13514824

>>13514779

There is a point in time for light to be at every coordinate. The pulse passes. If I was inarticulate about that, ok. It's on me.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:41:43 No.13514810 Report

Quoted By: >>13514888

>>13514779

If you want to make the event horizon infinitely thin then I can break down the argument to quarks if I have to.

Nothing with mass will ever occupy the null surface of the event Orion and because everything with mass has thickness then there will always be an arrangement when the event horizon will be between two points on a particle and thus violate the laws of the null surface.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:46:49 No.13514824 Report

Quoted By: >>13514838

>>13514799
>There is a point in time for light to be at every coordinate.
That doesn't mean light spends time at the coordinate. A "point in time" with 0 length. You're again playing word games.

There is a point in time at which the raindrop passes through the event horizon too. You've completely lost the plot.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:51:53 No.13514838 Report

Quoted By: >>13514845 >>13514915

>>13514824

When the rain drop passes through the event horizon then there will be spacetime coordinates where the top and the bottom of the drop will have the horizon between them.

This, again, is impossible because the horizon is null and we agree that it cannot be coordinated with massive particles.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 18:54:11 No.13514845 Report

Quoted By: >>13514920

>>13514838

If, however we assume that timelike space exists only above the horizon and that worldliness must terminate above 2GM the problem disappears.

But you don't even see it as a problem, do you?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 19:02:35 No.13514888 Report

Quoted By: >>13514901

>>13514810
>If you want to make the event horizon infinitely thin
It has nothing to do with what I want. Do you understand what a surface is?

>Nothing with mass will ever occupy the null surface
If occupy means remain on, sure. Otherwise, wrong. But please keep playing word games. I'm sure if you keep changing the words you'll eventually fool people into thinking you're saying something meaningful.

>everything with mass has thickness
They are treated as point masses when calculating the worldline. Non sequitur.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 19:06:17 No.13514901 Report

Quoted By: >>13514943

>>13514888

Even as calculating them as point masses you know you cannot coordinate them to the horizon.

Do all your particles vanish above the horizon to reappear below without one event horizon coordination?

I think they have to and if you've not been blocking me out then you must know why. Null means null.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 19:10:43 No.13514915 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514838
>When the rain drop passes through the event horizon then there will be spacetime coordinates where the top and the bottom of the drop will have the horizon between them.
Oh, really? Then why is the position of the raindrop a coordinate point? Just stop embarrassing yourself.

>This, again, is impossible because the horizon is null and we agree that it cannot be coordinated with massive particles.
What does "coordinated with massive particles" mean? It doesn't matter how many times you rephrase it, a massove particle passing through a null surface is perfectly fine, because a null surface only prevents massive particles from traveling ON the surface. It's the and thing as saying a particle has to move closer to the black hole when it reaches the event horizon. It can't stay at the same distance as the event horizon for any amount of time. You already know this, you're just trolling.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 19:12:29 No.13514920 Report

Quoted By:

>>13514845
>that worldliness must terminate above 2GM
But they don't. This was demonstrated to you. Exactly what you asked for. So your assumption fails. Accept it instead of having a schizo tantrum.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 19:16:43 No.13514943 Report

Quoted By: >>13515358

>>13514901
>Even as calculating them as point masses you know you cannot coordinate them to the horizon.
Gibberish. I can calculate a wordline in coordinates filtering the proper time of the particle, and it passes right through the EH. You will never refute this, and all the gibberish you can spout won't distract from it. You lost.

>Do all your particles vanish above the horizon to reappear below without one event horizon coordination?
No. Enough with the delusional strawmen.

>Null means null.
It also means particles cannot remain on the EV, and no one claimed they did. Nice distraction.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 19:33:37 No.13515007 Report

Quoted By:

>>13505405
My feedback is you should try doing some actual fucking research and publish a paper instead of making the same thread on /sci/ 36 times a week.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 19:45:39 No.13515056 Report

Quoted By:

>>13513168
>solution that treats matter as an incompressible, irrotational, non-viscous fluid without shear or stress
>being a remotely applicable model for a thing that, by its very nature violates all of these assumptions

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 21:14:15 No.13515358 Report

Quoted By: >>13515490 >>13516101

>>13514943

Your problem is you think you can treat null space as though it was timelike space. You hide behind proper time but any path drawn on coordinates can have its proper time measured. Doesn't make them correct when we already agree that the horizon is massless all over at all times.

I think outer differences are intractable.

What about my other claims.

Black holes have more volume than a 2 sphere of the same radius. Is there another explanation besides a negatively curved interior?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 21:44:14 No.13515490 Report

Quoted By: >>13515517

>>13515358
>Your problem is you think you can treat null space as though it was timelike space.
No.

>You hide behind proper time
LOL. How can I "hide" behind a basic fact that disproves your entire argument?

>Doesn't make them correct
Doesn't make what correct?

>when we already agree that the horizon is massless all over at all times.
That's not what we agreed. We agreed that masses cannot remain on the EH. Apparently the only strategy you have left is a continuous barrage of misrepresentations based on ambiguous language. Fuck off.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 21:49:34 No.13515517 Report

Quoted By: >>13515792

>>13515490

You're just frustraiting yourself by refusing to be able to communicate my concept back to me.

If I were to sumarize your theory back to you it is that the coordinate singularity of the event horizon is not an inhibition to massive particles because particles can pass through the event horizon without existing on the event horizon.

Can you repeat my oosition back to me the same way?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 22:16:03 No.13515606 Report

Quoted By: >>13515694

Ok, anyway, I would rank my claim that black hole interiors are white holes and negatively curved spacetime as lower in terms of triggering than my event horizon claims.

They contain more volume than a 2-sphere of the same radius and that corresponds to area of a circle vs a saddle as I have demonstrated above.

Furthermore the black hole model of origin singularity and perimeter coordinate singularity matches a pseudosphere with an additional dimension in the case of black holes.

If you calm down I'd like to hear your ooinion there as well.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 1628359868064.jpg, 52KiB, 500x620

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 22:33:09 No.13515694 Report

Quoted By: >>13515799 >>13515991

>>13515606
Every time I think, "this time he wont be able to rile them up, hes done it like 14 times now." And then you rile them all up again.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 22:51:26 No.13515792 Report

Quoted By: >>13515971

>>13515517
No, that's not my theory, because "existing on the event horizon" is ambiguous. Existing at a point in time or existing for some nonzero amount of time?

I've already summarized your argument several times. You misinterpret not being able to remain on the event horizon as not being able to pass through it.

What is even the point of this? You already know the particle passes through the event horizon in finite proper time. You've akready seen the worldline. You have no response. You lost.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO MAINIMG.png, 213KiB, 351x317

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 22:52:26 No.13515799 Report

Quoted By:

>>13515694
>Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH claiming his prize after emerging victorious in the Jannie High Jump, colorized (circa 2021)

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 23:30:09 No.13515971 Report

Quoted By: >>13516162

>>13515792

No. I absolutly do not recognize that particles pass through the event horizon.

Wordlines are timelike. A timelike worldline on a lightlike null surface is impossible.

All you need to get proper time is to draw a line and calculate it's length through the spacetime. So if you draw a worldline across the event horizon of course you can formulate the proper time. What you have to understand is that you can't draw it across a null space to begin with. That's an out of bounds penalty.

World lines must exist in space that is at least minimally timelike. Not null. Not lightlike.

But ignore that. The interior of a black hole is negatively curved for reasons listed above. Thoughts?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 23:33:54 No.13515991 Report

Quoted By: >>13516052

>>13515694

Dude. I'm the worst.

I chased a black hole physicist off his own hangout board once.

This is where I belong.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 23:46:10 No.13516044 Report

Quoted By: >>13516297

OK. How about this?

I've got minkowski space in front of me. 45° light cone angles on either side.

I draw a world line from the apex of the light cone to point B.

The arc of point B from the origin i 50°.

This is a world line. I can measure its proper time. But this world line is impossible. Why? Because it's arc means that it passed through the null surface of the light cone. It went faster than light, on other words.

What I am saying is that with the equivalence principal in play crossing the null surface of the event horizon is no less impossible.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 13 Aug 2021 23:47:41 No.13516052 Report

Quoted By: >>13516066 >>13526432

>>13515991
Agreed, you do belong on the wastebin of the internet reserved and gate-kept by dregs. This place is your defacto home, as you will be among your kind.

Your definitions are yours and your alone, and thus have no collective meaning or value to anyone else. "Worldline", "timelike", "lightlike", and your particular way of measuring time is not shared by others, and you are met with with two problems. First, you are incapable of properly conveying your thoughts or even remaining consistent in your stated claims. Second, people more intelligent that you deciphered your babble and explained to your closed mind how your model of reality is non-sensical. You're now an island of one with no friends, and you now have many enemies who would gladly toss you across an event horizon so you could experience both the other side of it and consider how wrong you were before your imminent death.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Fri 13 Aug 2021 23:53:09 No.13516066 Report

Quoted By: >>13516112

>>13516052

"I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul."

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 00:02:44 No.13516101 Report

Quoted By:

>>13515358
Your problem is you're trying to interpret relativity based on what you read in a cliffnotes version that spent several days as a dog's chewtoy

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 00:07:05 No.13516112 Report

Quoted By: >>13516212

>>13516066
Your points are worthless to me. My win condition is you continuing to post on this website, wasting your precious, precious time trying to enlighten your kin while they call you retarded. My second, subsequent win condition is you realizing that this method of entertainment and gratification were actually opportunities lost to the void of your poor decisions. I'll be more than content with just the first.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 00:20:43 No.13516162 Report

Quoted By: >>13516212

>>13515971
>I absolutly do not recognize that particles pass through the event horizon.
I know you don't recognize it, but you already know it. It's been demonstrated to you.

>A timelike worldline on a lightlike null surface is impossible.
It's not "on" it, or just crosses it. Prove it can't cross it.

>So if you draw a worldline across the event horizon of course you can formulate the proper time.
No one arbitrarily "drew" a worldline, it's calculated from the Schwarzschild metric.

>What you have to understand is that you can't draw it across a null space to begin with.
But you can, and this was shown to you. So why are you still repeating falsified claims?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 00:24:01 No.13516173 Report

Quoted By:

Hi, can I ask a few questions about black holes?
Can black holes spin fast? At speeds comparable to a pulsar?
If they do spin quickly, does this have any noticeable effect on the gravitational field?
Can all black holes be considered perfectly spherical?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 00:39:06 No.13516212 Report

Quoted By: >>13516308

>>13516112

I was born and bred in a briar patch.

>>13516162

Falsified? Please. I've seen less hand waving from airport ground crews.

I want you to come at the problem from the other side.

A black hole has more volume than a flatspace two sphere of the same radius. I submit to you that this means the interior must have negative curvature.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 01:04:44 No.13516297 Report

Quoted By:

>>13516044
I don't see how this is relevant to anything in this thread. First of all, Minkowski space isn't curved. Second, a raindrop never passes never touches the boundaries of the lightcone in GP.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO Screenshot_20210805-083328_Drive.jpg, 314KiB, 843x683

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 01:07:22 No.13516308 Report

Quoted By: >>13516852 >>13518634

>>13516212
The only one handwaving is you. You were given exactly what you asked for. The particle passes through the event horizon. You have no response. You lose.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 01:15:27 No.13516338 Report

Quoted By:

>>13509958
There is a proportional amount of 1 dimensional space expansion to account for all of the displaced mass. That expansion is lateral, to the three dimensional space-time curvature.
Whether our Universe is a simulation or not, it behaves like one here.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 01:43:22 No.13516411 Report

Quoted By:

>>13504706
>Why do physicists comtradict this?

You fucking can't spell and think you can criticize people with years more education than you have and degrees they have acquired because they are way smarter than you.

Shut up.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 02:00:41 No.13516456 Report

Quoted By: >>13516865

>>13504706
what happens when the black hole forms? where does the mass that was in the space now beyond the event horizon go, besides still obviously being there because it's still warping spacetime?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 05:04:01 No.13516852 Report

Quoted By: >>13517704

>>13516308

You keep on focusing on our apparent intractable difference. Give me a comment on the other points I have presented. All your accusations are coming off as projection and I just need a little more cooperation here.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 05:10:17 No.13516865 Report

Quoted By:

>>13516456

Mass does not move beyond the event horizon. Mass exists on a permanent trajectory above the horizon and it becomes a phase of matter called asymptotic Darkness.

Due to time dilation however the particles don't exist long enough relative their own frame of reference to ever detect the nature of the asymptotic darkness. To those particles they are instantaneously irradiated by Hawking radiation, which of course won't happen for another hundred octodozillian years.

That is how I hypothesize it, anyhow.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 10:48:16 No.13517548 Report

Quoted By: >>13518091

Thoughts on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_star and white holes?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 11:00:49 No.13517568 Report

Quoted By:

>Why do physicists comtradict this?
Because they happen to know physics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 11:47:04 No.13517704 Report

Quoted By:

>>13516852
>You keep on focusing on our apparent intractable difference.
What difference? You ignoring the obvious proof you're wrong is not a "difference." It's denial. And no, I'm not going to let you distract with irrelevancies until you admit your argument is wrong.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 12:03:54 No.13517755 Report

Quoted By: >>13517795 >>13517802

I NEED eventhorizon to publish a paper. I just need it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 12:19:55 No.13517795 Report

Quoted By:

>>13517755
He doesn't know basic calculus, so how do you expect him to write a scientific paper? He is only capable of mashing buzzwords he doesn't understand together. Actually that would make him great at writing a paper.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 12:22:47 No.13517802 Report

Quoted By:

>>13517755
Jeezus. What is their minimum bribe? I am sure the /sci bros will get it together.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 13:54:33 No.13518060 Report

Quoted By: >>13518570

The criticism of me here is not wrong. I'm not educated in calculus I don't have the wherewithal to make a paper.

But the concept is simple. If you don't reject it out of hand every principal lays itself out and my other claims present, if not validation then I hope interest enough for someone to try.

I'm busy today but the feedback I got was great. Thanks anon. Will post later.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 14:02:04 No.13518091 Report

Quoted By:

>>13517548

White holes are a vital part of my concept of asymptotic Darkness. It's the boiling of the soup.

I can't claim to have an informed opinion on Plank stars.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO keepdancing.gif, 4MiB, 477x477

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 14:04:51 No.13518108 Report

Quoted By: >>13518162 >>13518654 >>13518715

>>13509958
There is zero math that supports the idea that the event horizon contains mass. That wouldn't even make logistical sense with what we know about mass for regular objects like planets and stars. You can't just suggest an alternative that would break physics and math as we know it and NOT have anything concrete to support it, let alone prove it.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 14:22:55 No.13518162 Report

Quoted By:

>>13518108
>There is zero math that supports the idea that the event horizon contains mass.

I cannot argue with this. More than that,, It's the crux to all of my claims.

If the event horizon never has mass then mass cannot get to the interior.

The interior is repulsive white hole gravity anyway but step one before overturning that apple cart is people understanding that there's no way for mass particles to get in on the first hand.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 16:26:29 No.13518570 Report

Quoted By: >>13518609

>>13518060
>But the concept is simple
The concept is simply wrong. Particles passing through the event horizon don't remain on the event horizon, so your argument is a non sequitur.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 16:38:18 No.13518609 Report

Quoted By: >>13518634

>>13518570

Is "non sequitur" your go-to flag for 'I'm actually intelligent?'

I'm tired of being run through the ringer of your incredulity.

Let's just agree that mass on the event horizon is the real non sequitur.

You can't do it even if you tried.

I'm of the opinion that an indestructible room with no door cannot be entered.

I don't know why this means radically different things for us but that difference is apparently intractable and you have no comment on any of my other claims so stop being so passionate. Don't let it drive you crazy that I can say what I want on the containment area of the internet.

I am an irritating person. Don't let me get to you.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 16:49:08 No.13518634 Report

Quoted By: >>13518654

>>13518609
>You can't do it even if you tried.
I already did: >>13516308

Loser. You literally have no response.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 16:56:45 No.13518654 Report

Quoted By: >>13518715

>>13518634

I don't have to make any response.

It's been made for me. Repeatedly. By others.
>>13518108
Is a good example.

>>13514065

There is an universe inside you, anon.

What are you doing to make it real?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 17:16:43 No.13518715 Report

Quoted By: >>13518752

>>13518654
>I don't have to make any response.
Right, it would be pointless since there is no way for to get around mathematical proof.

>>>13518108 #
>Is a good example
This is a very good example of how you misinterpret basic concepts. The EH not containing mass = mass doesn't remain on the EH.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 17:26:11 No.13518752 Report

Quoted By: >>13518799

>>13518715
>The EH not containing mass = mass doesn't remain on the EH.

Agreed. The amount of time mass is present on the event horizon is zero. The coordinates of space on the event horizon that contain mass are non existent.

I love that we agree.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 17:36:55 No.13518799 Report

Quoted By: >>13518821 >>13518845

>>13518752
>The amount of time mass is present on the event horizon is zero. The coordinates of space on the event horizon that contain mass are non existent.
Again you misrepresent basic concepts. Those two sentences are not equivalent since passing through the event horizon is spending 0 time on it while having coordinates on it. And these coordinates can easily be calculated in GP. Do you really think that lying over and over again is helping you?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 17:43:52 No.13518821 Report

Quoted By: >>13518997

>>13518799

We're just selling popcorn at this point.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 17:51:46 No.13518845 Report

Quoted By: >>13518930

>>13518799
This, you can construct many virtual surfaces in space and deduce that there can be a flux of mass that passes through it. The EH is just a special case where there is only going to be mass flux in one direction. An object of non-zero volume can be on entirely on either side, or exist on both sides of this surface. Tripfag's formulation of his words can be dismissed as meaningless because it's obvious that an object of 3-volume cannot entirely exist within a 2-volume; that's not special to the EH, it's the reality of the definition of any arbitrary surface. The EH isn't a physical thing though, it's an abstraction. Pure surfaces in general are abstractions.

Here's a good question that tripfag needs to address: if mass cannot pass through the EH, then how can a black hole's mass increase?

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 18:23:59 No.13518930 Report

Quoted By: >>13521713

>>13518845

Black holes increase mass by being made of material asymptotic Darkness.

Before the big bang the entire universe was made of this stuff. It was the asymptotic darkness epoch. Supermassive black holes are shrapnel left over from the epoch.

If nothing crosses the event horizon then mass around the event horizon becomes dense enough to invert spacetime. It makes new black holes. Around those black holes the process repeats.

I called it spacetime boiling when I thought about it for myself a physicist told me it was already independently discovered and it's called asymptotic Darkness.

If I can convince anybody of the concept then people will be studying asymptotic Darkness to understand the last bits of astrophysics.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 18:40:26 No.13518997 Report

Quoted By: >>13519014

>>13518821
I'm glad you can find getting BTFO entertaining.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 18:45:27 No.13519014 Report

Quoted By: >>13519033

>>13518997

Don't aspire to be a keyboard warrior.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 14 Aug 2021 18:53:28 No.13519033 Report

Quoted By: >>13519099 >>13523394

>>13519014
Sure, as soon as you stop posting pseudoscientific claims you know are false.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO giphy.gif, 512KiB, 500x495

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sat 14 Aug 2021 19:09:48 No.13519099 Report

Quoted By: >>13523293

>>13519033

Fascist.

Fun things are fun.

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH

Eventhorizon !!ujqPq/OqEFH Sun 15 Aug 2021 11:40:16 No.13521713 Report

Quoted By:

>>13518930

Quick reminder that it was the dark matter problem that got me onto black holes. I theorize that asymptotic Darkness can also form Einstein-Rosen bridges which curve our universe.

Anonymous

View Same Google iqdb SauceNAO 153-1537001_dank-meme-trader-pep (...).png, 448KiB, 386x613

Anonymous Sun 15 Aug 2021 12:03:47 No.13521759 Report

Quoted By:

Btw, High Life has two nice looking black-holes even horizon scenes
Just sayin' in case anyone is intrested, also there is cum in the movie

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Aug 2021 21:59:20 No.13523293 Report

Quoted By:

>>13519099
You need to study math so you can btfo all these non-believers

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 15 Aug 2021 22:34:25 No.13523394 Report

Quoted By:

>>13519033
>pseudoscientific

You just described today's dumbed-down academia.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Aug 2021 00:29:52 No.13523760 Report

Quoted By:

>>13504706
I would preface my counterargument with the following: you sir, are a tripfaggot and should promptly kys

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 16 Aug 2021 02:32:00 No.13524059 Report

Quoted By:

A black hole is basically just an unusually energetic photon. That's why it's impossible to catch up with it (apparent horizon always below you) and also to escape it (you already reached lightspeed from outside POV, gg). It's a bit counter-intutive, because you'd think a photon would be brigt, but once you realize its direction of tarvel is warped by its own gravity so much that it's esentialy pointed at itself, but at some point in the future, it becomes quite obvious why.
It's literally a photon at rest, at least in 3 dimensions.

Nobody

Nobody Mon 16 Aug 2021 19:47:00 No.13526432 Report

Quoted By:

>>13516052
>and you now have many enemies who would gladly toss you across an event horizon so you could experience both the other side of it
lmao

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

Your latest searches