Added: 2 years ago
From: bgaede
Views: 27,563
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (1,661)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I wanted to read the papers Mr. Crothers posted, but there is TOO MUCH MATH!!!!!

  • Why have you Overlain such a CRAPPY Sountrack to the mans comments?

    Hell !!!!!

  • @msam1970 So, you're listening to the sounds in the background and not to the scientific criticism?

  • How about the best way to know a black hole is there: calculate the movements of stars around one. How else do you explain these star's movements? They aren't being pulled by the gravity of nothing. I think this disproves your entire video, unless you can propose something else.

  • "You dismiss that a black hole is there, yet provide to other explanation"

    .

    I do provide an alternative explanation. The difference is that my explanation is rational. The poppycock that the mathematicians offer, instead, is irrational. There are no 0D singularities in Physics. There are no concepts such as event horizons ENCASING these 0D concepts.

    .

    "How else do you explain these star's movements?"

    Coming up in a video I hope to upload before the end of the year...

  • You don't need to see an event horizon to know if a black hole is there. We can use gravitational lensing to calculate mass. How do you explain extremely high areas of mass. You dismiss that a black hole is there, yet provide to other explanation.

  • Einstein's math predicted black holes and he didn't believe it, at the time. It is only since the advent of modern imaging techniques that allow us to '"see" black holes has their existence really been proven. The math proves it and astronomical imagining proves it. They aren't magical. We understand black holes. We have pictures of their effects and can measure their gravity. Also, I don't know if black holes are infinitely dense or not. Even if they are not, they still exist.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Show me the astronomical image that shows the blackhole!

  • @kc0itf Okay. To view, take out the spaces I put in the web addresses.

    chandra. harvard. edu/ press/ 09_releases/ press _032509. html

    hubblesite. org/ explore _astronomy/ black_holes/encyc_mod1_q8. html

    There are a few. I hope everyone who watched this video sees this.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Do you take us for idiots? We asked you for a blackhole! Just ONE! Instead you give us BRIGHT STARS... which are NOT BLACK!!!

    If you think those are blackholes, get your VISION CHECKED!!!

  • @kc0itf I guess you just looked at the pretty pictures and didn't read the article.

    You know some of those are not visible light images.

    It is impossible to directly see a black hole because it absorbs electromagnetic radiation due to its mass.

    You are the one who needs to get your vision checked because it is obvious you are incapable of reading. Although, that might stem from abnormally low mental faculties. I would get those checked too.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 The range of spectrum is IRRELEVANT! You can't see blackholes, PERIOD! Thus, they are UNFALSIFIABLE!  Thus, NOT science!

    Come back when you understand the SCIENTIFIC METHOD!

  • @kc0itf No, you can see their effects. You can't see the big bang, but we know that happened from evidence, just like we can see the effects of black holes, do the math, and know that they exist with reasonable certainty. If you can provide another explanation, I am open to it. Explain the data and the math. Even one would do. I would like to know how you think astrophysicists and theoretical physicists don't know what science is.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 What evidence is there for a Big Bang? Astrophysicists and theoretical "physicists" are completely OBLIVIOUS to ELECTRICITY in space!

    Galaxies behave just like the homopolar motor in your electric meter!  Are you suggesting there is a supermassive blackhole lurking in my meter on the side of my house? Knowing you, probably... you probably were SCARED TO DEATH blackholes were going to eat the earth when the LHC turned on!

    goto: thunderbolts(dot)info for the Electric Universe!

  • @kc0itf There is nothing for electricity to transfer through in space. Your hypothesis is now disproven. No, I did not think that there were going to be black holes that devoured the Earth when LHC turned on. Any physicist knows that a black hole generated by the LHC would evaporate instantly due to Hawking Radiation.

    Why would I think that a galaxy to black hole has anything to do with a meter outside your house?

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 "There is nothing for electricity to transfer through in space." Do you know what plasma is?

    Hawking Radiation? Isn't that that theory by the retard in the wheelchair using IMAGINARY "virtual" particles? How is that SCIENCE? It defies logic! Two particles SPONTANEOUSLY appear right next to a blackhole and one doesn't get sucked in?

    You believe in this BULLSHIT?!

  • @kc0itf You think that space is completely filled with plasma, and you are telling me that I believe bullshit? And yea, I will admit, quantum physics does not make sense when you use every-day logic. This is why we have this thing called math and science. What virtual particles are you talking about?

    I think it is really classy that you are insulting disabled people who have PHDs and teach at university. You must have gotten all of the lunch money you wanted in grade school.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Hawking uses "virtual" particles to support his BULLSHIT! He spends too much time in front of his computer screen!

    Where did I say space is "completely" filled with plasma?

  • @kc0itf You say it is bullshit, but I have not heard you say anything that disproves anything he says. All I know is that you don't like the physically disabled and you verge on mentally disabled.

  • @kc0itf Cosmic background radiation and an expanding universe is evidence for the Big Bang. You obviously have never taken a physics class or read a book on this.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Expanding universe? Expanding into what? The universe is ALL THERE IS, you RETARD! The CMBR is compatible with an number of different cosmologies, so proves nothing if they ALL can use it...

  • @kc0itf You think that the universe is static? Doppler red shift? Really? It is everything so it can't expand into nothing? There is also multiverse theory. I don't know if it is correct, but you completely dismissing it and disregarding the fact that the universe is expanding shows how open-minded you are.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 I think the Universe is quite DYNAMIC! But it isn't expanding... the doppler effect has ONLY been confirmed for SOUND! Mainstream physicists are ASSUMING it applies to light as well!

    Multiverse theory is SCIENCE FICTION!

  • @kc0itf Yes, damn it, doppler red shift has been proven for light. Look it up. You obviously have no regard for experimental evidence or facts, and you believe in pseudoscientific bullshit from the 1900s.

    I said that multiverse may be true. It is a hypothesis.

    If what you believe is true, and you prove it, you should be getting about 20 nobel prizes. Seeing that nothing you believe has supporting evidence, I wouldn't expect any.

    Explain to me how you think stars work?

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Anyone can get a nobel prize for rubbish, just look at "President" Obama... I'm not impressed.

    Stars are powered EXTERNALLY! Sunspots show this to be true... the reveal the "cool" inner-working of the Sun. There's NO ACTION DOWN THERE! The atmosphere is HOTTER than the SURFACE?!!? How is that possible with current models?

    Oh yes, mythical "magnetic reconnection"...

  • @kc0itf Sun spots show that parts of the surface are cooler than other parts! Do you think that atom bombs are powered externally? If you think stars are, then atom bombs are. If you think this, you obviously know nothing about science.

    What does magnetic reconnection have to do with any of this?

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 "magnetic reconnection" is the device by which the mainstream explains that the atmosphere of the Sun is HOTTER than the Surface! Please explain RATIONALLY how it works...

  • @kc0itf I just sent you a link to a pdf from Harvard.

    The atmosphere is part of the sun, so I don't see what your problem is.

    Energy is transferred to the atmosphere by radiation and along the magnetic field lines of the sun. Therefore, the sun's atmosphere is hot.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Please explain to me RATIONALLY, how does "magnetic reconnection" work?

  • @kc0itf

    cfa.harvard(dot)edu/~scranmer/­ITC/eaaa_reconn_schindler.pdf

  • @kc0itf The inability to see something directly does not make it unfalsifiable. Do you not believe that electrons exist?

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 As Bill Gaede has pointed out in another video, top physicists are UNABLE to draw a simple HYDROGEN ATOM! Are electrons ZERO SIZE? Are the whizzing about the PROTON? Are they a WAVE? Are we talking the Gaedian atom?

    Please DRAW a HYDROGEN ATOM for me!

  • @kc0itf So, let me get this straight: You don't think that electrons or protons exist?

    Hydrogen atom - one proton, one electron.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Do you believe in "dark" matter?

  • @kc0itf It is the best explanation for why we have an expanding universe thats speed of expansion is increasing and there are galaxies that have a much higher mass than normal matter can account for, so as of right now, it is the best explanation. Yes.

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 Look into the Electric Universe/Plasma Cosmology... they have no need of the hocus pocus of mainstream cosmology where 4% of the Universe is normal matter and the rest is fairy-dust!

    Plasma is the FUNDAMENTAL state of matter!

  • @kc0itf So, calculus is hocus pocus? Something that is being researched is fairy dust? All those people with PHDs have no evidence to support their claims?

    I did look that up. It says stars are electric and it is using citations from the early 1900s. You don't believe in nuclear fusion/fission either?

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 "So, calculus is hocus pocus? Something that is being researched is fairy dust? All those people with PHDs have no evidence to support their claims?"

    HORRIFYING, isn't it? College really is a SCAM!

    You didn't read very carefully... electricity POWERS the nuclear fusion/fission! Everywhere in space we see magnetic filaments... magnetic fields are ONLY generated by ELECTRIC CURRENTS! Study some electrical engineering... there's no such thing as "magnetic reconnection"...

  • @kc0itf You don't think calculus works? I took that in high school. Is high school a scam now too?

    No, electricity cannot power a fusion reaction. You think Einstein and Oppenheimer are idiots now too?

  • @TheSH1N1GAM1 "No, electricity cannot power a fusion reaction." My friend Shawn Otto would declare you to be a SCIENCE DENIER!

  • @kc0itf You are calling me a science denier when you don't think the universe is expanding? How the hell does that work? How about you link me to a published peer reviewed scientific paper by Shawn Otto?

  • @kc0itf You could also google hydrogen atom. If I need to tell you this, I really think you are trolling. So, if you don't believe in electrons, what causes electricity? You really must be trolling.

  • Comment removed

  • Sorry, I should talk to Crothers, you have no idea..

    Cheers

  • Bill: "Do you know the diff b/w an object and a concept? How does a concept differ from an object? Do you know?"

    idiot marco: " I should talk to Crothers"

    Yeah, you go and do that instead of talking nonsense, idiot marco. You have to be quite stupid to say that ´a´ black hole is a concept and then pretend that this concept swallows astronauts and clocks.

  • @marcosar2000 I ask: "Bill, do you know the diff b/w an object and a concept?

    Bill answer: object: that which has a concept.

    Take it easy with billy boy. he doesn't really know what he is talking about.

  • So, physics is not merely about "objects", Kant in XVIII century already realized it. You understand the world through concepts, little you can do avoiding abstractions in order to explain the world, and modern physics illustrate that with magnificence.. apparently you only took an introductory course, what a pity..

  • Comment removed

  • Neptune, neutrons, neutrinos, quarks, white dwarfs, the cosmic microwave background (and many astronomers say also: black holes, but let's ignore it for the moment) are a few examples, and the list goes on..

  • " It [BH] is of course a concept"

    So how does a concept swallow a spaceship, an astronaut, or a clock?

    .

    "have you ever seen a positron?"

    What does seeing have to do with whether a positron is an object or a concept?

    .

    "an ideal object, a purely theoretical one (a "concept "

    Huh? Do you know the diff b/w an object and a concept? How does a concept differ from an object? Do you know?

    .

  • @bgaede A black hole won't swallow an astronaut. It is far more complicated than simply swallowing an object. Also, there is math-based proof that black holes exist. The fact that me or you don't fully understand them doesn't mean that they don't exist.

    Also, every currently accepted theory has a mathematical proof. You sir, don't. So until you come up with a paper that proves your hypothesis, all you do by posting such videos at youtube is entertaining people.

  • 1. "A black hole won't swallow an astronaut. It is far more complicated"

    What's complicated about swallowing? A BH either sucks an object thru the event horizon or it doesn't. It can't be both or neither! But you are welcome to elaborate if you actually have an argument.

    .

    "there is math-based proof that black holes exist"

    What do you mean by 'exist'? In what way does a BH exist?

  • 2. "every currently accepted theory"

    Accepted by whom? By the monks of your religion? Who approves theories in your Church? The Pope? Do you also kiss his gold ring, Chris?

    In Science, we think and explain. We don't just accept what the Pope tells us.

  • 3. "a mathematical proof"

    Proof??? WTF?

    In Science, we don't prove anything, Chris. Proof means that YOU are convinced of the theory your priest told you.

    .

    "a paper that proves your hypothesis"

    You should take an introductory course in Science when you get to high school, Chris. In Science, we don't prove theories, much less do we prove hypotheses. Is this what they teach you at the seminary?

  • 4. "posting such videos at youtube is entertaining"

    Well, I'm glad you enjoyed them. You should also try to learn something while you're at it.

  • It is of course a concept, just like gravity, inertia, forces, atoms, wave functions, space-time and so on.. have you ever seen a positron? you simply don't understand the very spirit of theoretical physics. It happened many times in history that an ideal object, a purely theoretical one (a "concept " if you want), was later discovered in the "real" world.

  • It is also a lie that GR can not deal with many bodies, there are well defined procedures to construct initial data that represent a multi-body system, and you can evolve that data numerically; there aren't analytical solutions for such systems, but the well-posedness of the equations allows you to do that with arbitrary precision, just like engineers simulating a plane flying or water flowing through a pipe. Anyway, you can still disbelieve GR, but get to know the theory before saying crap

  • 1. "The BH concept... the formation of BHs"

    Well, marc, apparently you don´t understand the diff b/w an object and a concept. You should take an introductory course in Science before posting comments in a discipline that is currently over your head.

    In Physics, we learn the diff b/w an object and a concept on our first day. If a person can´t tell the diff, we instantly know that he hasn´t taken a beginner´s course in Physics.

  • 2. Can you tell the crowd again whether ´a´ black hole is an object or a concept? Was that just an error on your part saying that it is a concept? Can you tell the folks what the diff is b/w an object and a concept? If you can´t, you are not a physicist and you should really go to a forum where they discuss religion.

  • @bgaede Where'd you get that from? Your ass, that seems to be where you get everything

  • Singularities are not necessarily attached to BHs, and that's a real shortcoming of GR (the so called Cosmic Censorship Conjecture), but there is a lot of numerical and analytical work done that show that the formation of BHs is a possible outcome for the collapse of a number of matter models and matter distributions.

  • @marcosar2000 BRAVO

  • On the other hand there are very elegant theorems (Hawking-Penrose in the 60') that show that singularities are also a prediction of GR, and let me stress the fact that these theorems have nothing whatsoever to do with Schwarzschild's (or Hilbert's if you want) solution.

  • Furthermore, Choquet-Bruhat in the 50' demonstrated that Einstein equations are well-posed, particularly for some simple matter models like dust (O-S solution is a dust one) or a perfect fluid, so a cuasi-spherical collapse (not necessarily strictly spherical, cause we know perfect symmetry doesn't exist in nature) of this sort would also end up in a BH.

  • GR does predict black holes in a much broader sense than just static spherical symmetry: first of all, there are full dynamical solutions with matter that represent the formation of a BH (the first one, the Oppenheimer-Snyder solution, 1939).

  • First of all, I apologize for my English.. This guy is merely a clown. He speaks as if he were stuck in the 40' or so and aparently he doesn't even understand general covariance ... The BH concept is a tricky one, it could be bullshit, of course, just like any other abstract concept in theoretical physics, but it certainly does have a theoretical basis.

  • Mr. Gaede,

    These are serious topics, so please treat them in a serious manner, i.e. no pinocchio noses, no funny voices when quoting the opposition. My recommendation is that you behave and act in a more civil way and your ideas might reach a larger audience.

  • 1. "serious topics... treat them in a serious manner... behave and act in a more civil way"

    .

    My dear savage, I appreciate your concern, but it is not I who have created the circus atmosphere. I'm just following protocol...

    .

    youstupidrelativist com/Ridicule/01Rid html

  • 2. "your ideas might reach a larger audience"

    .

    In a few months the global economy will collapse. In fact, it can collapse at any moment now. WHEN that happens, the companies which produce and distribute food will no longer have any incentive (i.e., profits) to do so.

    .

    billgaede.hubpages com/hub/We-are-the-last-humans­-Part-IV

  • 3. Our species is minutes away from extinction. Therefore, I'm not concerned at all about the numbers. I have come to the conclusion that Man dies with the religion of Math 'phyz'. Only a handful of people will be exposed to the alternative theory of light and gravity presented in this site.

  • @savage1537 These are serious topics? How so? Since when is BULLSHIT serious and not just an attempt to sell a bill of goods... which we are plainly being sold by the mainstream establishment!

  • @savage1537 Gaede objects to the mathematized abstract metaphysics that has become, in the last 100 years, a substitute for real physics. Such fictions like black holes or super strings should be treated with no more serious than a Road Runner cartoon (Beep, Beep).

  • The way the video started, the gfx intro, and how the person decided to introduce the topic, I decided not to watch this video.

  • It's a black hole of fraud. Thank you both for shinning the light on these con men.  Getting a laugh at their expense is a bonus, love the voices, mr ed at the end was the best by far, did he give up his book ? very funny.

  • "love the voices"

    .

    That's one of my sons. He does voices for the people in Hollywood. He's actually pretty good.

  • Black Holes = pseudoscience = religion

    God = Religion = pseudoscience

  • "Black Holes = pseudoscience = religion"

    .

    I would only like to clarify that traditional religions invoked supernatural entities -- God, angels, spirits, the wind or the Sun turned into a god. The contemporary religion of Math 'phyz' has converted CONCEPTS such as BHs into objects. The gods of today are reified concepts. This is a new trend in the intellectual history of Man.

  • Mr. Gaede - I spent a few hours looking over his site and some of his documents. I don't have the necessary understanding of mathematical physics to critique his argument, but if you are an engineer, I'm guessing you don't really either. So how can you support his argument without understanding just because he incidentally happens to have an agreement that follows your line of anti-mathematical physics? Do you claim to have a genuine understanding of his objections in context? I'm just curious.

  • "I don't have the necessary understanding of mathematical physics to critique his argument, but if you are an engineer, I'm guessing you don't really either."

    .

    You're stuck on titles. This isn't about degrees or diplomas. We sat down with Crothers and discussed the issues in detail. We went over the Math and what each factor in Einstein's and Schwarzschild's equations means. You don't need to be a genius to understand that BHs are BS.

  • @bgaede It might be true that you are capable of understanding the math and that you went over the issues in detail with sufficient comprehension. It might not be as well.

    I have a question. Do all black holes have to reduce to a singularity? I've read about black holes with a positive diameter. Does this still violate the math? I'm under the impression that the problem Mr. Crothers asserts is that matter cannot exist as singularity, but a black hole doesn't have to be a singularity, does it?

  • "black holes with a positive diameter. Does this still violate the math?"

    .

    Then it wouldn't be a miracle! Mathematical Physics would collapse since it's only purpose is to create an alternative to traditional religions. The bread and butter of math 'phyz' is magic. If a star just shrinks to a smaller size, where's the magic? The singularity is a sine qua non component of a BH. Without it, there's no magic.

  • @bgaede But your objection misses my entire point. My very question regards what you claim: that a singularity is a sine qua non of a BH. And yet, I have read of black holes with positive diameter. It seems you do not consider it possible for a BH to have a positive diameter, is this correct?

    For instance, according to one calculation, if Earth's mass were compressed into a ball with radius = .5 mm (not a singularity), then light would not escape, and hence a black hole. Is this impossible?

  • @bgaede But your objection misses my entire point. My very question regards what you claim: that a singularity is a sine qua non of a BH. And yet, I have read of black holes with positive diameter. It seems you do not consider it possible for a BH to have a positive diameter, is this correct?

    For instance, according to one calculation, if Earth's mass were compressed into a ball with radius = .5 mm (not a singularity), then light would not escape, and hence a black hole. Is this impossible?

  • Relativity is great and all, but its not the end all to end all. There are things relativity can't explain. For another thing if black holes don't exist then astronomers must be barking up the wrong tree when they find astrophenomena that support theories of black holes. Lastly science isn't complete, we accept as fact many theories that are still theoretical in nature.

  • 1. "There are things relativity can't explain"

    Oh, what can relativity explain?

    .

    "if black holes don't exist then astronomers must be barking up the wrong tree"

    Absolutely! All of them!

  • 2. "science isn't complete"

    Science is always complete. Science consists of rational explanations. Whatever theories we have until today that are rational constitute Science.

    .

    "we accept as fact many theories that are still theoretical"

    So at your monastery theories become proven facts? Truth? No chance to challenge them?

  • If black holes do not exist, then where do my crap shit go when I flush the toilet? I checked behind my toilet and it did not dump the shit there. Hence black holes exist in every toilet. Try it for yourself guys, take a crap and flush the toilet. :-/

  • @GUARDIANOFFOR come on man , shudd, eny, finali, fuking, ver, vblack, creae, and everyvere! then you say there will be fuking regionist that will beleve something is there if even dont? "even if dont" man how can you expect anyone to take you seriously if you cant even compose basic words and spellings its like you've created an english dialect of your own.

  • look into Gaede's eyes. That's schizophrenia staring back at you. 

  • @GUARDIANOFFOR If, 'not so long ago', every doctor believed that the Earth is flat, how do you explain the fact that the ancient (sic) Greeks measured the Earth's circumference to better than 90% accuracy?

  • When you offend people, their ability to understand that you are right goes down. Why would you do that?

  • "you offend people"

    youstupidrelativist com/Ridicule/01Rid html

    .

    "their ability to understand that you are right goes down"

    In Science, we are neither right nor wrong. An explanation is either rational or irrational.

    youstupidrelativist com/02Sci/03SciRel html

  • @EpicYarnEM because he's a schizophrenic nut case trying to sell books and the organization "lulu.org" [seriously] advises him to do this crap for publicity. He's a zero argentinian nobody who sold computer secrets as a spy to the USSR. Nothing he says is try, all crazy. THIS IS A MONEY SCAM!

  • @EpicYarnEM This man seems bat-shit crazy. Even so, he's interesting to watch.

  • Well ..black holes are empty and that's why they call them holes, why black maybe because once you go black hole you never go back.

  • That's infinitely unlikely they will abandon butchering the idea of infinity any time before sinking into eternity, especially if they are the last generation of mathemagicians.

  • the hole is definitely black

    its soul is infinitely tiny

    if there's found any slack

    it's getting infinitely shiny

    its pull is infinitely strong

    its soul is definitely massive

    it's just as cool as it is long

    its push is negatively passive

  • "infinitely... infinitely... infinitely"

    youstupidrelativist com/01Math/06Numb/05Infinity html

    youstupidrelativist com/03GR/01Emp/08Z4Unbounded html

    When will the stupid idiots of Mathematics abandon the adjective "infinite"? When will they realize that the adverb "infinitely" is an even greater violation of reason? If they could just get their language straight, it would be infinitely satisfying...

  • No black hole? Even with all the evidence backing the existence of them? You aren't just disputing "rock star" physicists, you are disputing the entire astronomy community. No proof of a black hole? You sir are a flaming pile. I digress... THE EARTH IS FLAT! WE ARE ALSO AT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE! DON'T BELIEVE THE MACHINE!

  • 1. "No black hole?"

    I think there's one inside your head, iz2... You should have it checked out.

    .

    "all the evidence"

    In science, we don't deal with evidence, iz2. Evidence is in the eye of the beholder. What is evidence to you is not evidence to your priest.

  • 2. Evidence means that your priest raped you in the confession box and now you have been 'converted' to his theory. What is evidence of murder to you is just the object 'knife' to your neighbor.

  • 3. "the existence of them?"

    In Science, only objects may be said to exist. The term 'black hole' is a concept. It is irrational to say that a concept exists.

    You should make it a point to learn the fundamentals before posting, iz2. Do some reading. Open a book. It would also be wise for you to take an intro course in Physics when you get to high school. Okay? That way you don't go around saying nonsense such as that "the concept black hole exists and swallowed the object 'astronaut'."

  • 4. "you are disputing the entire astronomy community"

    Oh, I see. So this is what it's all about, huh? Authority? Now I get it...

    I'm so sorry to have offended the Mathematical Community of Hooded Monks! Where will the Inquisition end up with so many dissidents? We should just light up the pyres!

  • 5. "THE EARTH IS FLAT!"

    You're too modest, iz2! WMAP says that the entire Universe is flat!

    hetdex org/dark_energy/confirmation php

    .

    "WE ARE ALSO AT THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE!"

    The astronomers call it the 'observable' universe. Can you believe those idiots, iz2?

    atlasoftheuniverse com/universe html

  • General relativity forbids black holes?

    You can talk about your imaginary theories all day if you like and claim current theories aren't true, but don't purely make things up. General relativity predicts and requires black holes.One of the main doubts about general relativity being correct when it was first discovered was that it directly predicted these seemingly impossible objects.

  • 1. "You can talk about your imaginary theories all day"

    That's exactly what the poppycock of General Relativity is: an imaginary theory. It has no place in Science.

    .

    "General relativity predicts"

    There! You see? In Science, we don't do predictions. That's the stuff of astrologers, palm readers and mathematicians. In Science, we ONLY explain phenomena!

  • 2. "doubts about general relativity being correct"

    There you have a second one! In Science, there are no correct or incorrect, right or wrong theories. In Science, we divide theories into rational and irrational. If a theory is irrational, we chuck it into the religion basket! General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and String Theory are irrational theories and, thus, form a part of religion.

  • 3. "these seemingly impossible objects"

    There is nothing 'seemingly' about black holes. Black holes ARE irrational objects! Not one idiot of Mathematics can draw a singularity. Not one idiot of Mathematics can draw an event horizon. The reason is clear.

  • 4. Singularity, event horizon and black holes are CONCEPTS. They are not OBJECTS. In Physics, we ONLY deal with objects. In Physics, we don't move concepts around. That's why GR, QM and ST are irrational. The idiot of Math attempts to move CONCEPTS around and calls it 'doing physics'!

  • @9hello123

    Have you ever seen the video ? the original paper from k. schwars... invalidates black holes.

    you can find his original paper easily on the internet.

  • The concept of a black hole seems to be pulled of someone's brown hole...

  • Loved it!

  • @bgaede I've always been uncomfortable with the idea of black holes which simply swallow everything... However I do not deny the idea there is some form of an engine in the galactic core, but if it is a black hole, then "black" holes are the brightest known objects in the universe, far from being black at all. My view is that galactic cores recycle old matter into EM radiation, which propagates along Maxwellian spiral Aetheric threads (your ropes I guess)

  • "there is some form of an engine in the galactic core"

    Yes.

    youstupidrelativist com/06QM/10Magnet html (Fig. 3)

  • @bgaede I'll PM you, comment length is very limiting when you try to explain stuff, I guess comments were meant to troll rather than making a point...

  • I can say with certainty that black holes are a horribly outdated concept to the same degree I can say that the Earth is round. However, I am appalled at the presentation here. No wonder people are being so hostile.

  • "I am appalled at the presentation"

    Oh, what's wrong with the prez, chy? Please help me improve it. I thought I covered the most important bases, to wit, that you can't create something from nothing and that Big Bang cannot exist without something outside of it.

  • @bgaede Well, the thing is, you have points, but people on the older side of the paradigm are going to be pissed at you for insulting them. Then again, there are more informational sources around that say the same things as you. I just didn't think the way it was done here was as effective. I did laugh at it.

  • 1. "the older side of the paradigm are going to be pissed at you for insulting them"

    I am trembling...

    .

    "there are more informational sources around that say the same things as you"

    Give an example of one!

  • 2. "I just didn't think the way it was done here was as effective"

    Again, you failed to mention what went wrong. I raised the primary issues: what encloses Big Bang and can we create something from nothing. Although Creatio ex-nihilo has been around, people continue to talk about the 'creation' of matter. So, here I illustrate that such a 'theory' is inconceivable.

  • @bgaede

    1) Well, some people won't take kindly to the things you say, but that's no reason not to continue. I loved it.

    2) Well, the Thunderbolts site is one. Your video gives a unique perspective. I meant "more informational" as many other sources - not better ones. Just with different ways of presenting the subject.

  • "I meant "more informational" as many other sources - not better ones."

    Keep in mind that YT allows you 10 minutes (now 15) to make your case. And the longer you make it, the more people that are turned off. People want bullets today, something they can take to the bank, not an encyclopedia. So the vids end up being mere introductions to a deeper subject.

  • @bgaede Thanks for the video.

  • No problem!

  • @chylerreckeaolgodhul

    That is what is cool, it's funny. I may not agree with everything Gaede says, and being a physicist, much of what he says should offend me personally but you can't deny he is funny and will piss off a lot of people... Ha, ha.

  • @sergio267 Yeah, haha.

  • And listen carefully to your sensible host:

    BHs are the spawn of mathematics,

    NOT science.

    And they are just one of the more obvious symptoms...

  • Yes, I know there is no way to prove such a monstrosity is physically impossible, but then again, I went to the store to get some sushi, and none of it had any fish in it! That's not sushi, my friends. But someone is obviously buying the stuff. All I can suggest is that one backtrack all these crazy theories to their origins to understand the situation that believing in them has put our civilization. Science and Religion are the same in this regard. I left the store with peaches...
  • Black Holes make no sense.

    They suck in smart people and

    then devour their sensibilities...

  • Personally, i think everyone on the Planet is confused on to which a Black Hole is. Only one piece of the puzzle, pathetic little fights like these go back and forth with no ending. Ashame this Brainpower is being wasted.

  • "everyone on the Planet is confused on to which a Black Hole is"

    .

    The abstract mathematical concept called 'black hole' is allegedly comprised of two abstract mathematical concepts: 'a' singularity and 'an' event horizon. The proposal is that a star shrinks so much that it turns into a concept. The mathematicians allege that this spirit -- the dead soul of the star -- swallows astronauts and clocks.

    .

    Do you have another notion of the term 'black hole' that you can share with us?

  • @bgaede i dont think of it as a dead soul of a star. Black Holes and Parallel Universes are closely related in that in some they exist and in some they dont which cancels out anything that were to fall in or go past the Event Horizon. Since they theoretically bend time, Black Holes can only live in the Future, or in some way, the other way around. This also accounts for the history of the Black Holes itself.

  • @bgaede Black Holes are the peace keepers of the Universe, a concept that you wouldn't understand. Stephen Hawking knew it, but alas people rejected it because it went against something they believed strongly in. His Information was warped and turned into a joke, The Modern Black Hole is nothing compared to what it really is.

  • 1. "i dont think of it as a dead soul of a star"

    Doesn't a stupid moron such as Hawking claim that a BH is a star that has collapsed to the point where there are no more atoms in it? Yes or No?

  • 2. "Black Holes and Parallel Universes are closely related in that in some they exist and in some they dont which cancels out anything that were to fall in or go past the Event Horizon."

    Utter rubbish! The ranting of a demented individual! This makes sense only to a loony who escaped from his padded cell. What could The possibly have meant by this poppycock? Should we call you Duh?

  • 3. Look, Duh! There are no Parallel Universes. Got that much? The only Parallel U is the guy in the cell next door to you at the asylum.

    .

    The only Q a stupid moron who believes in Parallel Universes or multiverses has to answer is: "WHAT medium separates one U from another?"

  • 4. "they theoretically bend time"

    What they they bent is your brain, Duh! Please bring a chunk of time the next time you come to the conference and we'll let you have the lab all to yourself. You can spend th rest of your life in there trying to bend 'it'! Is this idiot for real! Are there really people out there who believe that they can bend time? My God, why hast thou abandoned me in this enormous lunatic asylum?

  • 5. "Black Holes can only live in the Future"

    Will someone please put Duh out of his misery! Use a stun gun if you have to, or hit him over the head with a time tunnel or somethin'!

  • 6. This is what happens when people get their education from watching Star Wars and Star Trek and the Twilight Zone. They end up like Duh.

  • 7. "Black Holes are the peace keepers of the Universe, a concept that you wouldn't understand"

    Got that right! It must take a lot of work by the entire assembly line to get a pea brain like yours that far!

  • 8. "[Stephen Hawking's] Information was warped"

    So we have warped space, warped light, and now warped information. I wonder if all the mathematicians suffer from astigmatism? All those little numbers and variables they must look at all day long...

  • 9. "and turned into a joke"

    It was a joke from the start, Duh! You mean, you took black holes seriously? The BH was supposed to make people laugh, not ponder! It's a skit performed by standup comedians, kinda like Buster Keaton and the Three Stooges. BHs are slap stick stuff. It's meant for the circus!

  • 10. "The Modern Black Hole is nothing"

    Well, you finally got one right, Duh! Yes! There is absolutely NOTHING in front of us, but a concept:

    .

    singularity + event horizon = nothing

  • @bgaede The concept was drawn up much earlier but Hawking popularized it. Im not talking about a stellar Black Hole, They are unstable and can be unpredictable at times, what i mean is they never last long. That was before his speech in 2006, at a convention. He changed his idea of the theory and what your talking about now isn't his picture. Hawking is not a Moron and its not your place to say that or anything related.

  • @bgaede Judging by your background that Taxihotel has told. You wouldn't understand an American Genius.

  • 1. "Im not talking about a stellar Black Hole"

    Oh, you've invented a different kind, Duh? I mean, here's what the dicts say...

    .

    black hole: an object in space (Collins)

    black hole: a theoretical massive object (Random)

    black hole: a region of space... Objects whose gravity field... (Wiki)

    black hole: A massive astrophysical object (Wolfram)

  • 2. "He [Hawking] changed his idea of the theory and what your talking about now isn't his picture"

    .

    Great! What I like about all these idiots is that they just make statements, but never follow up and tell you what a BH is in the alternative. We still don't know what Duh is referring to. Notice that? He just made a blank, unsubstantiated statement that a BH is not what we think it is.

    I guess we'll have to guess. Duh will never tell us.

  • 3. "You wouldn't understand an American Genius"

    .

    Well, I hate to break it to you, Duh, but Hawking is British. In fact, he's a Commander in the British Army or somethin'... The sword has already tapped his royal shoulders.

  • @bgaede A different kind? there's only two "real kinds" of BH, Stellar and Super-massive. To put into terms anyone can understand ones small and ones massive. A Dictionary's "fact" can dictated by what the "experts" or individuals say. Which means anyone can get it from an unreliable source. Since no one knows what a Black Hole is, there is no solid definition, but there are hints on what it does. Its gonna take a lot longer to understand the mystery that is a Black Hole.

  • 1. "two "real kinds" of BH, Stellar and Super-massive... ones small and ones massive"

    .

    Sounds like the same shit to me! Whether an ice cube is big or small, it's still an ice cube. Whether super-massive or not, the CONCEPT the idiots of Math refer to as 'black hole' has a CONCEPT known as 'a' singularity in the center and is encapsulated within another mathematical CONCEPT known as 'an' event horizon. Yes or no? So far we have absolutely nothing!

  • 2. "no one knows what a Black Hole is"

    This is an idiotic statement. A BH isn't anything! There is no such magical object in the U comprised of CONCEPTS!

  • 3. "there is no solid definition"

    In Science, we don't define OBJECTS. We point to them. How can you point to a mathematical singularity? How can you point to an abstract 'event horizon'? Can you point to love? Can you point to justice?

    

  • 4. "here are hints on what it does"

    There is no 'IT' yet in front of us. You are doing 'physics' with abstract CONCEPTS. That's religion! It's not Science!

  • 5. "Its gonna take a lot longer to understand the mystery that is a Black Hole."

    In Science, we don't have patience for bullshit. In Science, it is the responsibility of the presenter to tell the audience what he is talking about. It is ridiculous for the presenter to tell the crowd all the magical things 'a' BH can do and then tell them at the end of the Wonderland tale that he didn't know what he was talking about.

  • @bgaede You have taken nothing I've said into account. Basically, there isn't a Singularity inside a Black Hole. These "Idiots" are 10x smarter than you in that there ability to put two things together. Obviously you don't know what a theory is, when you know what is it, take a step back, and Fuck yourself.

  • 1. "You have taken nothing I've said into account"

    So far you have said nothing more than that there are big BHs and small BHs. You have yet to tell the crowd WHETHER a BH is an object or a concept.

    "there isn't a Singularity inside a Black Hole"

    So far you formulated an unsubstantiated statement of what it ain't. Why didn't you continue? Why can't you tell the crowd instead what a BH is or has?

  • 2. Until you do so, the religion of General Relativity claims that BHs indeed have a singularity at their centers and that this abstract concepts is encapsulated by a concept known as an 'event horizon'.

    So the ball is in your court. If you don't know, just say so.

    .

    "These "Idiots" are 10x smarter than you"

    I see now why you suck their balls, Duh. Maybe you think you'll get smarter by blowing them, huh?

    .

    "you don't know what a theory is"

    A theory is an explanation of a phenomenon. Correct?

  • @bgaede You are indeed, a Lost Person.

  • @bgaede "So far you have said nothing more than that there are big BHs and small BHs." indeed i have, that is all the information you need to "formulate" an idea and run it through its paces. A BH isn't Real, if you were smarter, anything that bends Space (theoretically) can bend Reality. I thought you could connect the two and create a united picture. But if it bends both Space and Time, (theoretically) then it can bend Reality and the time in which the Picture was taken.

  • 1. "A BH isn't Real"

    So how does this unreal, fictitious spirit gobble up matter from neighboring stars?

    .

    "anything that bends Space (theoretically) can bend Reality"

    If it bends space -- which is not an entity -- it has nothing to do with reality! In Science, we can only bend objects. We can't bend concepts.

  • 2. "if it bends both Space and Time"

    ...then we have no choice but to institutionalize you, Schmid. It suggests that you have gone a bit off your rocker.

    Now, as homework, please bend a second and bring 'it' to class when you have achieved this goal. Okay?

  • @bgaede By the "facts" you live by, i'd say you fell of your rocker and died. You are nothing but ashes of a era of stupid people like yourself. Its a shame that you waste the oxygen this Earth willingly provides.

  • @bgaede You think of Space wrongly. IF it bends reality it bends the Rules that govern the Universe, it can exist even if people say it cant. Even if it breaks every law, it can still exist. It has everything to do with Reality. And the way the Universe works. Concepts are Life based assumptions, You are misleaded by empty and wrong facts. Its all in the head.

  • "You think of Space wrongly... it bends reality it bends the Rules"

    Space bends concepts? It bends reality? It bends rules?

    "Its all in the head"

    Yes. That we can agree on, Duh.

    That's why I strongly recommend that you go see a REAL shrink, one that EXISTS. Okay?

  • @bgaede Please understand, I have no personal stake in this, I don't really care what humans believe anymore... You have a bit of it. There are no stupid 'Blackholes'. Time and Space are products of matter itself... why do I still fucking care? Humans prefer to be ignorant to everything! So, I AM GOD. Deal with that, humans. But I'm just the resonance of The Nice one... Im sure you'll ignore me anyways... Why should I care anymore? tell me. Or is Humanity is a math Joke...
  • You don't need a masters to be a good scientist. Just a curiosity in everything. And not just believing what others tell you... Do your own experimentation. But don't get lost in your math or you could warp your time-space continuum and end up back where you started. I wouldn't call Einstein and some of those guys idiots, they were lost in thought. Time and Space do not exist. What I mean to say, is that they have no properties of their own at all. People used to understand this.
  • Gravitational force is a product of matter.

    Without matter, no more force.

    If I have 5 apples, and you take away 7 of them...

    Black holes are a math joke.

    Just atom smashers,

    quantum forges...?