We are told, "The centre of a black hole is a singularity"

The definition of a singularity, says it cannot have spin.

Black holes have been observed spinning, near the speed of light.

Therefore there is some science, not yet explained to me.

And of course, the best part of both Relativity and Quantum Theory is that they pretty much do away with the need for any sort of intelligent creator.

Dr. Albert Einstein strongly disagrees with you. ...

I am very sure you do not know that.

I can also have a very good guess that your understanding and use of the word "God" is also quite different to what Einstein was careful not to fully explain...

And that is definitely for another thread.


Now back to the topic for this thread...

Keep searchin',
Martin

Au fait

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

E=mc2

Where is gravity and time being found in this equation? Anything more or else?

Is Albert Einstein better at explain gravity and time than Isaac Newton?

There is a time span of 10 years between Einstein's Special and General Law of Relativity. What are these theories all about? Is it all just physics and mathematics?

The opposite of a black hole is The Big Bang. We assume that the Universe was created by means of an explosion.

Can anyone prove that the 3-5 main forces governing our Universe once was preceded by a so-called Superforce and that this force possibly was the main reason that the Universe was formed as well and is currently expanding (inflating)?

We are told, "The centre of a black hole is a singularity"

The definition of a singularity, says it cannot have spin.

Conundrum? [smile] to preserve angular momentum. Obvious from the outside not the inside. There is a need to place yourself inside as well as outside of the box. As I have said here before, are we on the inside looking out, or, are we on the outside looking in? Either way, you gain insight to the other.

Black holes have been observed spinning, near the speed of light.

Therefore there is some science, not yet explained to me.

No one has seen a black hole. I do stress this point for a reason.

What has been observed is happening just outside of the event horizon.

And of course this begs the question..."Is the singularity spin faster than the speed of light since what going on outside is near the speed of light?" and if you believe that is impossible..."What the hell is going on inside to cause such speeds of material outside of the event horizon!"

The closest thing we have is our atomic model. We assume they have spin although the don't have a mass of zero. However....

The solutions to the Einstein equations which describe a spinning black hole don't give a pointlike singularity but a ring singularity with the same axis of rotation as the black hole itself. Ring singularity is a term used in general relativity to describe the altering gravitational singularity of a rotating black hole, or a Kerr black hole. So, if particles go in with angular momentum, the black hole itself has angular momentum.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

What you are wishing is what you are believing.

P.S. I thought this was the Science (non-Seti) board

Around here, "science" means "things that I believe really really really a lot."

We are told, "The centre of a black hole is a singularity"

The definition of a singularity, says it cannot have spin.

Conundrum? [smile] to preserve angular momentum. Obvious from the outside not the inside. There is a need to place yourself inside as well as outside of the box. As I have said here before, are we on the inside looking out, or, are we on the outside looking in? Either way, you gain insight to the other.

Black holes have been observed spinning, near the speed of light.

Therefore there is some science, not yet explained to me.

No one has seen a black hole. I do stress this point for a reason.

What has been observed is happening just outside of the event horizon.

And of course this begs the question..."Is the singularity spin faster than the speed of light since what going on outside is near the speed of light?" and if you believe that is impossible..."What the hell is going on inside to cause such speeds of material outside of the event horizon!"

The closest thing we have is our atomic model. We assume they have spin although the don't have a mass of zero. However....

The solutions to the Einstein equations which describe a spinning black hole don't give a pointlike singularity but a ring singularity with the same axis of rotation as the black hole itself. Ring singularity is a term used in general relativity to describe the altering gravitational singularity of a rotating black hole, or a Kerr black hole. So, if particles go in with angular momentum, the black hole itself has angular momentum.

Now I have to ask are you beginning to learn?

Or
Is the normal I.D. speaking. "One who doesn't know what he is talking about." As this post contradicts some of your previous.

Previous I.D. messages, so you don't have to scroll through many pages.
Message 1409610

I believe in Karl Schwarzschild radii.

Funny thing about this subject is that the math is taken on faith. Now don't get all worked about this people. Take a deep breath...

The math in my opinion is correct. The story that is around the math is sound logic. But you believe, as I do in something you cannot see and you believe this because of logic and a faith.

Your belief system is no different than mine.

_____________________________________________________________________

Message 1409901

[quote]It is not. The singularity/blackhole is not. What you see is going on just outside of event horizon. This is a true and accurate statement.

But you can clearly see the object within the activity just outside of the event horizon. It is literally a "black hole".

The singularity/blackhole is smaller then an atom. You do not see the singularity/blackhole. You do not even see the event horizon. What you see is what is going on just outside of the event horizon, this is just a fact.

Thank you for your time in this matter...

_____________________________________________________________________

Message 1409917

The singularity/blackhole is smaller then an atom.

Where did you get idea?

When I teach; I like to be as correct as possible. To do other wise is a disservice to the person and a lie by me even if unintentional. So when I speak I bother to do some research. I am human and from time to time I am very wrong. But not today.

_____________________________________________________________________

Message 1410160

What is growing?

Mass for sure is growing.

Is size growing?

In this case does mass and size grow like the forming of a planet?

NASA says NOPE!

... Time is constant throughout the universe, ...

Apparently not so, if you assume that it is the speed of light that is the constant in our universe.


Also note that we have no direct way in which to measure or understand that 'thing' we call "time". (All that our "time measurements" actually do is to merely measure "distance" in various ways...)


Now... What if the speed of light were not constant? Do we still have a workable and consistent universe?

Keep searchin',
Martin

The speed of light is not constant in the Universe.

The definition of the speed of light makes it quite specific. What we refer to as the speed of light is the speed in a Vacuum.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiKGWT--c0A

My apologies: It appears that my post awhile back has moved this thread somewhat off-topic. Specifically, because I mentioned the idea of 'perfection' it was taken as an endorsement for the existence of some intelligent designer by one of our local trolls.

For the record: I am at best an agnostic with strong atheistic leanings. As far as I understand both relativity and the quantum, any intelligent designer is not required. (In essence, quantum theory can explain how it started, relativity can explain how it evolved. No God, or designer, or whatever, required.)

Again, my apologies for derailing things and lets get back to the point of this thread: black holes.

And remember, the most important rule to the smooth running of any message board is:

---

I'm extremely glad that it's not just me thinking that then.

Cheers.

I'm extremely glad that it's not just me thinking that then.

Cheers.

LOL. Lots of trolls around most every message board that I am a member of, but I am fairly new here and I don't want to be seen as one of them, even if saying so gets me in trouble with the local constabulary.

---

All,

I believe point of view is required. To me most all of you are trolls.

I do believe it was myself that has brought us BACK to topic, and rather eloquently I might add.

I will also add Dr. Einstein did not believe God would play dice and I am also a believer the the causal agent would not do such a thing. Yet, Dr. Einstein is the one that has given us the model of the black hole.

I have been told here my faith is---rather selective, and my answer to that is---"So is everyone's faith.", why should mine be any different.

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

I believe point of view is required. To me most all of you are trolls.

Why would you willingly come to a forum that you believe is filled with trolls?

I will also add Dr. Einstein did not believe God would play dice and I am also a believer the the causal agent would not do such a thing. Yet, Dr. Einstein is the one that has given us the model of the black hole.

Einstein's personal belief in a God does not mean is assumption about one existing was correct.

I have been told here my faith is---rather selective, and my answer to that is---"So is everyone's faith.", why should mine be any different.

Sure, for others who actually have faith. I've also heard the statement, "Never judge another man until you've walked a mile in his shoes" - why don't you try walking in the shoes of someone who lacks faith before you insist that they have faith.

...and before you argue it, yes, I used to have faith and know what the other side is like.

I believe point of view is required. To me most all of you are trolls.

Why would you willingly come to a forum that you believe is filled with trolls?

I will also add Dr. Einstein did not believe God would play dice and I am also a believer the the causal agent would not do such a thing. Yet, Dr. Einstein is the one that has given us the model of the black hole.

Einstein's personal belief in a God does not mean is assumption about one existing was correct.

I have been told here my faith is---rather selective, and my answer to that is---"So is everyone's faith.", why should mine be any different.

Sure, for others who actually have faith. I've also heard the statement, "Never judge another man until you've walked a mile in his shoes" - why don't you try walking in the shoes of someone who lacks faith before you insist that they have faith.

...and before you argue it, yes, I used to have faith and know what the other side is like.

No Name,

Why do you assume I have always had faith?

And why do you assume Dr. E incorrect?

Once again we move off topic. Keep your questions in mind and apply them to a thread that will allow this line of questioning---patience.

Thank you,
Robert

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

Why do you assume I have always had faith?

So then you admit that people can lack faith.

And why do you assume Dr. E incorrect?

Because we've progressed enough in science and discovery since Einstein has passed to know that there's not too many places for the God of the gaps to exist anymore.

Once again we move off topic.

It's not your thread to decide. Einstein is the one that theorized the existence of black holes, and you constantly refer back to Einstein's belief in a God as an example of science done right (in your view). And discussing faith because of one scientist seems to be quite prudent to the discussion.

Try not to be so rigid in your interpretations.

Why do you assume I have always had faith?

So then you admit that people can lack faith.

And why do you assume Dr. E incorrect?

Because we've progressed enough in science and discovery since Einstein has passed to know that there's not too many places for the God of the gaps to exist anymore.

Once again we move off topic.

It's not your thread to decide. Einstein is the one that theorized the existence of black holes, and you constantly refer back to Einstein's belief in a God as an example of science done right (in your view). And discussing faith because of one scientist seems to be quite prudent to the discussion.

Try not to be so rigid in your interpretations.

No Name,

This is SciManStevs thread. He has the right to steer this thread.

Thank you,
Robert

---

Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...

And of course this begs the question..."Is the singularity spin faster than the speed of light since what going on outside is near the speed of light?" and if you believe that is impossible..."What the hell is going on inside to cause such speeds of material outside of the event horizon!"

I just looked at this again, and you do spout some rubbish.

If an object is spinning, what is the relationship between the speed at the circumference and the speed near the centre?

Consider what the speed of a helicopter blade is 1 foot from the center and 40 foot from the center.

This is SciManStevs thread. He has the right to steer this thread.

Indeed it is, and he doesn't seem to mind. Stop acting like you're a Mod and let people enjoy the discussions wherever they carry themselves.

This thread is about Black Holes. Not religion. Please get back on topic.