THE WASP-18b & Space Probes Mysteries

[Bjarne]

Light from any part of the electromagnteic spectrum can escape for stars, planets (mostly infrared), plasmas, galaxies, etc. in any direction because they are not black holes.

Why do you think that X ray and gamma escape a galaxy vertical away from black holes?

Or what do you think you see here?

As I said before:

No you said : wrong
When I said:
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.
Do you still say: wrong ?

 

[Dancing David]

Wow, Bjarne, lets see collimated jets of material that is not falling into the black hole?

 

[Cuddles]

Or what do you think you see here?

Given that you are viewing the galaxy side on in that picture, it's a fair bet you're not seeing any light escaping vertically. In fact, all the light seen there must have escaped at an angle probably around 30^o to the equatorial plane of that galaxy, since that is the angle we're viewing from.

What you are probably referring to are the jets of material visible in that picture, which are not, in fact, made up of x-rays and gamma rays, but will be mostly hydrogen and helium nuclei and electrons. None of it was ever inside a black hole, however, they may well have been accelerated due to gravitational interaction with one.

 

[steenkh]

Why do you think that X ray and gamma escape a galaxy vertical away from black holes?

We do not think we see X-ray and gamma escaping from a black hole because that is impossible. That is in fact why they are called 'black'.

Or what do you think you see here?

Normal matter being processed and sent away from the black because of what happens close to the black hole. This matter has never been inside the event horizon of the black hole. The angle is probably at 90° to the accretion disk of the black hole, but it is unclear if that is in any way related to the actual axis of spin of the black hole. If that is what you are thinking of.

 

[dafydd]

We do not think we see X-ray and gamma escaping from a black hole because that is impossible. That is in fact why they are called 'black'.


Normal matter being processed and sent away from the black because of what happens close to the black hole. This matter has never been inside the event horizon of the black hole. The angle is probably at 90° to the accretion disk of the black hole, but it is unclear if that is in any way related to the actual axis of spin of the black hole. If that is what you are thinking of.

Go and read some physics textbooks Bjarne,you didn't even know these basic facts.

 

[Bjarne]

What you are probably referring to are the jets of material visible in that picture, which are not, in fact, made up of x-rays and gamma rays, but will be mostly hydrogen and helium nuclei and electrons.

Right

None of it was ever inside a black hole

Maybe, I am not so sure we know enough about black holes and what light does here.
I mean Stephen Hawking had a 10 years headache trying to understanding how light can ""disappear""

however, they may well have been accelerated due to gravitational interaction with one.

There are to my opinion: to many maybe.
Maybe we don’t know enough, and maybe black holes are not so strange.
At least these does not end up in a twin universe ( without black holes)..

 

[Reality Check]

Why do you think that X ray and gamma escape a galaxy vertical away from black holes?

http://www.redorbit.com/modules/reflib/article_images/6_3e166ea744352dc86330d77d6feb4abd.jpg

Or what do you think you see here?

No you said : wrong
When I said:
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.
Do you still say: wrong ?

Now I say that you are wrong, ignorant and cannot read:

1. Galactic jets.
2. Galactic jets are emitted from the accrual disk around black holes.
3. As I said before:
   The prevailing scientific theory (General Relativity) that has been extensively tested states:
   • If you look at an object falling into a black hole then it appears to you that it goes slower and slower. You can never see it pass the event horizon. This includes light.
   • If you are the object falling into the black hole then there is no event horizon. You pass through it in a finite amount of time. Your motion does not slow down.
   This agrees with what you posted except you ignore (or are ignorant of) the difference between the 2 observers.

 

[steenkh]

Maybe, I am not so sure we know enough about black holes and what light does here.

We know what light does there: it never gets back out. that is the definition of a black hole. It may interest you that there are other theoretical singularities that do not have an event horizon, so that light can actually escape from them.

I mean Stephen Hawking had a 10 years headache trying to understanding how light can ""disappear""

No. He was concerned about how information can disappear. That is a different thing.

 

[dafydd]

We know what light does there: it never gets back out. that is the definition of a black hole. It may interest you that there are other theoretical singularities that do not have an event horizon, so that light can actually escape from them.


No. He was concerned about how information can disappear. That is a different thing.

Indeed.Bjarne,instead of making up wild theories about black holes,why don't you just read up on the subject.

 

[Bjarne]

Indeed.Bjarne,instead of making up wild theories about black holes,why don't you just read up on the subject.

Tonight I saw a film at NGC regarding the solar system

• Neptune and Uranus should not be there where they are.
• The Kuiper belt should not be there at all.
• The Moon is not formed as we once thought
• Many exo planets should not be where they are found, because these can not have been created there where these are found.
• Jupiter’s Atmosphere must have be created further out..
• The previous theory of our solar system is wrong, and we have almost nothing to replace it.

tic tac tic tic tac........

The prevailing scientific theory (General Relativity) that has been extensively tested states:
If you look at an object falling into a black hole then it appears to you that it goes slower and slower

Finally.

 

[Dancing David]

Tonight I saw a film at NGC regarding the solar system

That is a really bad citation, now isn't it?

• Neptune and Uranus should not be there where they are.
• The Kuiper belt should not be there at all.
• The Moon is not formed as we once thought
• Many exo planets should not be where they are found, because these can not have been created there where these are found.
• Jupiter’s Atmosphere must have be created further out..
• The previous theory of our solar system is wrong, and we have almost nothing to replace it.

tic tac tic tic tac........


Finally.

Can you cite the source? Of the data?

 

[dafydd]

Tonight I saw a film at NGC regarding the solar system

• Neptune and Uranus should not be there where they are.
• The Kuiper belt should not be there at all.
• The Moon is not formed as we once thought
• Many exo planets should not be where they are found, because these can not have been created there where these are found.
• Jupiter’s Atmosphere must have be created further out..
• The previous theory of our solar system is wrong, and we have almost nothing to replace it.

tic tac tic tic tac........


Finally.

Well if it was on TV it must be true.

 

[Reality Check]

Finally.

You have just not been able to understand what I stated as usual.

Originally Posted by Bjarne
If you look into a black hole, according to the prevailing believes, motion would look like these almost stops, - also light.

Wrong.
According to the current scientific theory (as backed up by evidence), that is what it looks like to an observer outside the event horizon.
To an observer falling into the black hole there is no event horizon. Their motion does not stop and light does not stop.

The "Wrong" is in reference to your idotic "believes".

The prevailing scientific theory (General Relativity) that has been extensively tested states:

1. If you look at an object falling into a black hole then it appears to you that it goes slower and slower. You can never see it pass the event horizon. This includes light.
2. If you are the object falling into the black hole then there is no event horizon. You pass through it in a finite amount of time. Your motion does not slow down.
3. Light can never escape from a black hole regardless of what direction it goes or even if it does some magical right angle turn.

Point 1 is essentially what you said but stated better.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Here is what i expect to meassure :
http://www.science27.com/forum/Tab.jpg

How do you calculate the gravity contribution from the building? What is the total mass of the building (and from where did you get the figure). How is the mass distributed within the building? Where is the lift machinery placed? Are there other pieces of heavy machinery in the building? Are there water tanks somewhere?

You can't ignore the tidal effect. You estimate 5 minutes per measurement(which is probably optimistic). That is more than two hours of measuring for 30 floors, and the tidal force completely reverses in 6 hours. You will have a HUGE influence from tidal force.

Hans

 

[steenkh]

You can't ignore the tidal effect. You estimate 5 minutes per measurement(which is probably optimistic). That is more than two hours of measuring for 30 floors, and the tidal force completely reverses in 6 hours. You will have a HUGE influence from tidal force.

He probably reckons that if he chooses a building far away from the sea, he will not be affected by tidal forces

 

[MRC_Hans]

He probably reckons that if he chooses a building far away from the sea, he will not be affected by tidal forces

Shouldn't surprise me. However, we know which building it is: The Domus Vista. http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&id=148913

There are only two 30 story buildings in Denmark, and the other one is the Herlev Hospital. It is not likely that they will allow him to clown around in a hopsital, and anyway, Bjarne has confirmed that it is an apartment building.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

Right

Maybe, I am not so sure we know enough about black holes and what light does here.

Enough for what?

I mean Stephen Hawking had a 10 years headache trying to understanding how light can ""disappear""

Again you have only a half understanding. Anybody can make light disappear: Just shine a light on a black surface. The dilemma is something different and pertains to information.

There are to my opinion: to many maybe.
Maybe we don’t know enough, and maybe black holes are not so strange.
At least these does not end up in a twin universe ( without black holes)..

If you think there are too many maybes, then why do you add to them? All your ideas literally consist of maybes.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

Can you cite the source? Of the data?

The film will be shown again the 18/01 at NGC / DK and certainly also in many other countries as well.

http://natgeochannel.dk/schedule/daily.aspx?date=180110

Well if it was on TV it must be true.

Of course it is. NGC wouldn’t surveys telling lies.

If you look at an object falling into a black hole then it appears to you that it goes slower and slower. You can never see it pass the event horizon. This includes light.

How can you then quote: “test it”

If you are the object falling into the black hole then there is no event horizon. You pass through it in a finite amount of time. Your motion does not slow down.

This assumption is build on the believe that space will continue to deform towards the centre of a black hole.
How can we know if there is a limit where space not can deform space any further ?

I mean it’s the same question with the expansive Universe.
We have no way how we to know if there is a limit where space simple can not expand anymore and a Big Crunch begins.

Light can never escape from a black hole regardless of what direction it goes or even if it does some magical right angle turn.

If space do not continue to curves towards infinity, - WHAT does than light then do after reaching the black hole?
IT CAN’T DISSAPEAR my friend, and this is a PROBLEM, because when it is trapped inside the black hole, WHAT is it then and what is it doing there ?

How do you calculate the gravity contribution from the building? What is the total mass of the building (and from where did you get the figure).

Its build on the assumption that the building where in we want to measure is 10% of weight of the Empire state. But it doesn’t really matter, even though it is only 5% the proportional’s shown will remain the same. That’s the point.

How is the mass distributed within the building?

It’s not decisive, but rather to notice the buildings overall effect.

You can't ignore the tidal effect.

I don’t.

You estimate 5 minutes per measurement (which is probably optimistic). That is more than two hours of measuring for 30 floors, and the tidal force completely reverses in 6 hours. You will have a HUGE influence from tidal force.

It’s in fact allright only to measure in two independent rounds. – First the upper and then the lower sections. Both are independent of each other. – I mean gravity doesn’t care what is up and down, but only what is central and surface. Furthermore after the first 2 – 3 measurements you’ll already be able to see the first clear pattern. But as mentioned the tidal effect is something that can be calculated.

Bjarne
I mean Stephen Hawking had a 10 years headache trying to understanding how light can ""disappear""
Hans
Again you have only a half understanding.

Yes we certainly have.

If you think there are too many maybes, then why do you add to them? All your ideas literally consist of maybes.

No, only very few.

Do you know : seen from a photons reality either time or distance exist. It is everywhere to any time. So what is real? Yours reality - or the photons. ?
And it gets worse, because since distance doesn't exist seen from the perspective of a photon, it can't have any size or any diameter etc, - so seen from the perspective of a photon it doesn’t exist, and also not you. Isn’t that funny?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Sheesh, why do I bother? Hans

 

[steenkh]

Sheesh, why do I bother?

Quite true. He just ignores anything he does not understand, which is pretty much all of it.

A number of posts have been made that explains that light does not escape from black holes, and he just repeats his uninformed nonsense.

Several times it has been pointed out that he needs a protocol to handle measuring errors, and he just ignores it.

And so on.