Notices

View Poll Results: Is this a good theory?

Voters
8. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    0 0%
  • No

    6 75.00%
  • Too confusing

    0 0%
  • Maybe.

    2 25.00%
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Black Hole Theory

  1. #1 Black Hole Theory 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hometown
    Posts
    2
    I came up with this one day, while studying some current theories out there.

    I thought..

    Hey, this all leads to black holes...

    And then, i noticed, my theory must be somewhat correct.


    Well, here it is;

    Black holes do not destroy material, or send it through a 'warp hole.' The material gets 'absorbed' into it. The gravitational pull is great enough to compress the materials inside of it to the smallest it can get. At this point, the gravitational pull would have moved the atoms around, so that they are in a single long chain, and that their atoms get re-arranged, so that they become hydrogen atoms; The lowest-energy element. The neutrons are expelled, in the form of an almost invisible beam of energy. At a certain point in the black hole's life, they eventually become more and more stable, meaning their gravitational pull wants to go back to normal. To do this, though, it must 'release' all of its absorbed material, in the form of two highly charged 'beams' of energy, on each flat side of the black hole. These, in turn, make giant 'bubbles' where the beams are. Eventually, many black holes will form to create a 'super' black hole, which in turn, will get bigger and bigger as it absorbs material. Eventually, it will absorb all the material in the universe. In time, it will try to become stable. It will then send out all of its material in one giant 'burst', hence the rapid expansion of the universe.

    This is backed by the Law of Conservation of Matter, MSA785 {A black hole, which has been sending out its material}, and the fact that hydrogen was the first element introduced into the universe.


    Neat, huh?


    Laughing Man:
    "What i thought i'd do is pretend to be one of those deaf mutes..."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Black Hole Theory 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hometown
    Posts
    2
    Please, reply if you agree, disagree, or whatever your mind is set to. Thanks!


    Laughing Man:
    "What i thought i'd do is pretend to be one of those deaf mutes..."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    How do neutrons get expelled from a black hole, from which by definition, nothing escapes?
    What is the flat side of a black hole?
    How will a black hole absorb all the material in an expanding universe? Its gravitational field, outside of the black hole itself, is no greater than that of the mass, from which it is formed, that is not a black hole.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: Black Hole Theory 
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Polaristundra

    The gravitational pull is great enough to compress the materials inside of it to the smallest it can get. At this point, the gravitational pull would have moved the atoms around, so that they are in a single long chain, and that their atoms get re-arranged, so that they become hydrogen atoms; The lowest-energy element.
    The "smallest it can get" is definitely smaller than an atom. Even neutron stars which has less gravity than a black hole compress atoms down. No atoms in long chains or otherwise. In addition, hydrogen is not the lowest energy element, Iron is (specifically the isotope Iron 56)
    The neutrons are expelled, in the form of an almost invisible beam of energy.
    As pointed out before, how can the neutrons escape? On top of that, free neutrons are not stable, thye have a half-life of 15 only 15 min, decaying into a proton, electron and anti-neutrino. (After 15 minutes half of the neutrons will have decayed. Protns and electrons are charged particles that would produce very visible jets.

    At a certain point in the black hole's life, they eventually become more and more stable, meaning their gravitational pull wants to go back to normal.
    This statement is absolutely meaningless. A black hole takes in everything and releases nothing, that is about as stable as you can get. A black hole's gravitational pull is proportional to its mass. What is "abnormal" about that? What do you consider "normal".
    To do this, though, it must 'release' all of its absorbed material, in the form of two highly charged 'beams' of energy, on each flat side of the black hole.
    Again, black holes, by definition, do not release anything.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,096
    Like all ideas, yours needs work. As pointed out, nothing escapes a black hole (other than gravity, since gravity cannot stop gravity). Jets we see coming from black holes form because "they are messy eaters" taking in as little as 1% of matter from accretion disks. Incredibly powerful magnetic fields whip up the rest and send it away from the magnetic poles. We have seen atoms in such jets which means that they cannot have been inside the black hole.

    My idea is that inside a black hole there is a sphere of fundamental particles (electrons, quarks, etc) in which all parts are trying to spin at almost light speed.

    We know neutrons can survive gravity which produces an escape velocity of 2/3 c, as in a neutron star, so a black hole is not that much worse. Hydrogen is a proton and an electron so two hydrogen atoms could end up as a neutron, which cannot survive a black hole.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    297
    Big Bounce is quite an old idea, but ever since the discovery that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, it seems unlikely for all matter to contract into a single point again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •