Posted on 07/29/2010 5:26:22 AM PDT by decimon
Many of the great scientists of the past believed they were showing devotion to God by discovering the rules that run HIS universe. But maybe they were just worshiping equations, eh?
It seems obvius to me that each black hole is the big bang to another universe.
That part is known as "God".
“Maybe the huge black holes at the centre of the Milky Way and other galaxies are bridges to different universes,”
And maybe that universe is made of skittles and populated by unicorns.
I posted my conjecture to this concept here about 1 year ago.
I could have sworn he said something about an isosceles triangle..
:)
...and God created both, knowing exactly how/what each would worship.
Not exactly. Assuming Big-bang, there wasn't even an empty vacuum before creation. No "space," no "time." I'd say too, no mass, and no energy. The universe just "sprang to." Time zero, no such thing as "before" that, only after.
My observation pertains after the big bang, in a universe that has space, mass, energy and so forth. That "empty" vacuum of space has more happening than an extreme mass density situated somewhere in space is counterintuitive.
Note too, my remark puts those "objects" in isolation. Taken in context, a black hole has profound effect on surrounding masses and energies. Just that inside the event horizon, time and space cease to exist. "Black hole inside a black hole" is a meaningless construct.
Scarecrow gets his brain!
I knew it!
lol!
:0)
“Shouldn’t this sort of stuff, like Multi-universe, String Theory and Big-Bang, be in the religion section?”
Maybe so, but the scientists who think this up don’t realize perhaps the extent to which they are drifting that way.
Personally, since I understand God to be the Creator, finding out more about the possibly even greater vastness of creation is exciting to me.
There is a little problem, though. If the scientists in question thought this all up on a whim while having a few brewskis, and then decided to do a press release, I’d be none the wiser. There’s no way for me to verify that they have made a genuine contribution to science here.
Twentieth century physics based on "thought experiments(TM)" is going away. This century will be dominated by plasma physics and a return of classical physics.
I’ll buy the idea that there ain’t alternate universes. But no black holes? That’s tough to swallow.
Gravity could not possibly hold galaxies together. The distance/mass relationships between our system and Alpha Centauri are typical for the Milky Way. If you scale our system so that Pluto's orbit is a yard or so wide, then the sun would be about the diameter of a human hair, Earth would be an inch or so away from the Sun, and Alpha Centauri would be more than four miles off in the distance.
What you're asking gravity to do is hold two dust motes together from four miles away; that's clearly impossible.
Scientists who ought to know better claim that having "dark matter(TM)" be 95% of the mass of the universe fixes the problem; it doesn't. All that does is reduce the four mile distance to a tenth of a mile. Gravity can't hold two dust motes together from a tenth of a mile away either, that's the distance of two of those highway markers...
That's aside from the question of why you're not having to vacuum the stuff off your carpet five times a day if it's 95% of the universe of course.
All of these other fairytale things you read about including dark energy, black holes, string theory, infinite numbers of universes and what not are the same sort of BS derived from viewing gravity as the only meaningful force in the universe and in the case of string theory and multiple universe, there is also a question of wanting to provide darwinists and evolosers with the number of universes they think they need for their BS ideology to work since they know what the odds are in the one universe we actually have.
There's also the question of the "big bang(TM)" which is also garbage science based on nothing really more than a misinterpretation of cosmic redshift, and you can do google searches on 'Halton Arp' or check out www.cosmologystatement.org for that part of it.
This isn’t a new idea. And while there are similarities to a black hole, there are differences, too.
I think it was Frank Tipler who recently wrote that classical mechanics never went away, i.e., that Einstein didn't overturn Newton. He wrote that Newton had the concepts but not the math to present them as 'proofs.'
Maybe that's where Santa Claus lives!
Maybe that's where Obama Money comes from!
Maybe that's where Obama-nomics works!Maybe that's where you can earn tenure postulating inanities!(No...that would be Univ. Ind.)
Sorry, no. There is a whirling vortex of white-hot matter around black holes that have mass nearby. A black hole has a huge gravitational potential energy. Not like a sunspot. Analogy FAIL.
Don't know about the 2nd (relativity and time dilation are well-established by experiment), but definitely agree with the first. The universe is dominated by plasma (electromagnetic) phenomena. The whole shape of our galaxy may simply be governed by electric currents over thousand-light-year scales.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.