What exactly are Black Holes!

[koundinya]

There is lot of misinformation circulating on Black holes that too from today's scientist who unable to unravel the mystery of it's existence.

Black Holes actually are recycle bins in the cosmos situated at the Centre of each and Every Galaxies formed by breakaway Star Clusters (Super Novas in other terms).

They are not Worm Holes to other Dimensions. They also do not create Universes, their job is to recycle old Stars into New Stars and spit them back.

Function of Black holes is to manipulate Energy and Matter but don't create anything.

https://cdn.images.express.co.uk/img/dynamic/151/590x/black-hole-805769.jpg

[shaberon]

Maybe. It's one of the main philosophical divides in science.

If Einstein was wrong, there's no such thing, and he wasn't all that confident in himself.

The problem with black holes is that by definition they cannot be directly observed. All some of us are saying is that Relativity might not be the ultimate, final word, and possibly it is governed by quantum effects or other unobservables such as Dark Energy.

The thing that is observed is more curious around Sagittarius A* at the galactic core. A normal gamma or x ray picture is almost completely dark, but, the core makes massive lobes of the stuff which dwarf the Milky Way:

http://www.solstation.com/x-objects/gal3bub.jpg



Supposed to be formed by a mega black hole. I don't know, I am just considering the Electric Universe ideas, along with the full set of Maxwell's quarternion equations posted around here somewhere.

Something is definitely there, but, whatever it is doing is not creation, mostly the job of nebulae.

[johnf]

The op consists of some interesting statements, but no sources, or other information to back those statements up.
Shaberon's post seems consistent with much that scientists of various schools have said.
If there is more behind the op I would really like to see that.


John

[silvanelf]

Black Holes actually are recycle bins in the cosmos situated at the Centre of each and Every Galaxies formed by breakaway Star Clusters (Super Novas in other terms).

They are not Worm Holes to other Dimensions. They also do not create Universes, their job is to recycle old Stars into New Stars and spit them back.

Function of Black holes is to manipulate Energy and Matter but don't create anything.


Not correct. If Black Holes exist, then White Holes should be possible as well -- that does not imply that they really exist. White Holes are just the opposite of Black Holes: White Holes are spitting matter and/or radiation in an unpredictable way ... or they are quiet and they are spitting nothing at all.

About White Holes (wikipedia) (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole)

Now you can glue a Black and a White Hole together: that's a Worm Hole.

Does it all makes any sense? I don't know. But it's just the logical consequence of Einstein's theory of general relativity.

Another issue of the mainstream theory is the unsolved question, how to "marry" Einstein's theory with quantum physics. This is an important issue, because there are strong reasons to assume that quantum phenomena become prevalent in the vicinity of a Black Hole. But a useful theory in reference to quantum gravity does not exist, the physicists have to rely on crude approximations. A few years ago Hawking created an uproar within the physics community, because he claimed:
Stephen Hawking: 'There are no black holes'


Stephen Hawking: 'There are no black holes'

Notion of an 'event horizon', from which nothing can escape, is incompatible with quantum theory, physicist claims.

https://www.nature.com/news/stephen-hawking-there-are-no-black-holes-1.14583

A while later researchers claimed that they have resolved the contradictions, but I don't trust them. But you should know that the majority of physicists disagree with Hawking. The "conventional wisdom" of physics says, that Black Holes "evaporate" after some billions of years.

In my personal opinion Einstein's general relativity reminds me of an old cupboard, which is on the verge of breaking apart at the next moment. Shush! :silent:

Strongly recommended, if you want to hear some explanations from a real expert:

Sabine Hossenfelder's blog (http://backreaction.blogspot.com/)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79s6UVljjU0

[Inversion]

The super massive black hole in the center of our galaxy Sagittarius A* is estimated to be 4,600,000 solar masses. TON 618 is currently the record holder at 64-66 billion solar masses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCsYpwZcWf8
Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TON_618)

The emission lines in the spectrum of TON 618 have been found to be unusually wide,[6] indicating that the gas is travelling very fast; the full width half maxima of TON 618 has been the largest of the 29 QSO's, with hints of 7,000 km/s speeds of infalling material by a direct measure of the Hβ line, indication of a very strong gravitational force.[2] From this measure, the mass of the central black hole of TON 618 is at least 66 billion solar masses.[2] This is considered one of the highest masses ever recorded for such an object; higher than the mass of all stars in the Milky Way galaxy combined, which is 64 billion solar masses,[8] and 15,300 times more massive than Sagittarius A*, the Milky Way's central black hole. With such high mass, TON 618 may fall into a proposed new classification of ultramassive black holes.[9][10] A black hole of this mass has a Schwarzschild radius of 1,300 AU (about 390 billion km in diameter) which is more than 40 times the distance from Neptune to the Sun.

[Mike Gorman]

The narrator on that Nasa video sounds just like that Douglas Adams Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy bloke, similar style of narration(!) "The universe is big, I mean really big, ....'

Would not a Star be the logical opposite to a black hole- a white hole would be the full expression of an energy source, spitting out the full spectrum of energy and matter?
I also gained the idea that the 'big bang' did not exist, I like Arthur Young's idea of an eternal Torus, that is self sustaining - gathering itself through the middle and endlessly unfolding, like a massive fractal. But what do I know.

[Merkaba360]

I think black holes are the edge of perception. According to holographics , if you have no pattern (chaos) on the surface of the sphere/merkaba/torus/coccoon/egg/bubble (apple on the tree of life), then the reference beam (broadband , tree of life branches) hits the surface and no hologram is projected inside the sphere. So, just as the reference beam and assemblage point on the surface projects prisms of chakras or suns into small or large bubble spheres, the lack of information can project dark spots inside the torus spheres. I suppose then we could say that black holes represent chaos(patternless).

[Ernie Nemeth]

I think it is a matter of perspective. There are two worlds, two universes. A star is one side of the equation, the black hole is the other. Looking from our universe,a black hole is the 'back side' of a star in the other universe. The star is the 'front side'. It is the same object, relative to the position of the observer.

Stars and black holes are the boundaries of an energy vortex that manifests matter and energy. It is not a runaway fusion reactor that crushes matter into tighter more massive atoms at its center. The center is the vortex, a hole in space/time. The matter manifests at the circumference, the edges of the boundary layer. These vertices are inter-connected through a lattice of unknown composition, perhaps to do with the fact that the density of the vacuum is near infinite.

Some of the earliest scientific assumptions made about the nature of the universe involved the conservation laws. These were basically mind exercises that teased logical analysis out of common sense observations. Some of these laws seem very obvious, yet many have been proven false. For instance we now know that matter and energy, and their associated anti-partners are created spontaneously out of the vacuum of space in pairs. Yet the most fundamental of the conservation laws asserts that that cannot happen. And much of the latter work in theoretical physics relies on the fact that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. Yet we know they can and do all the time.

Other conservation laws follow the same convoluted and illogical history. The most modern of the conservation laws involves conserving sub-atomic spin, colour, charge, and sign, among others.

But if conservation laws are fact and since matter and energy do manifest spontaneously then the universe must have an unseen component or higher dimension or other unknown property that can conserve state by changing some universal aspect so far undiscovered.

If that is the truth then stars and black holes are most likely transformers that manage the reversal of this universal aspect, whose science and physics have yet to even be realized let alone understood.