Notices
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Speculations on Singularities

  1. #1 Speculations on Singularities 
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    386
    I don't think a black hole is a singularity as described in wikipedia.

    My speculation on a singularity,
    Consider the singularity of a black hole, to get there you must travel a vortex that will get you moving faster than "visible" light, oh, and the path gets narrower like a funnel, so you will burst down to the size of the funnel mouth. Then the flow of particles(tiny but with immense force)......

    As they all formed in the same direction due to the vortex like with magnetism their force would be aligned.
    So they are deposited onto the core which rotates on the same 2d plane as the vortex but in the opposite direction, the mass build up creates greater pressure in a pole axis that runs through the core perpendicular to rotational plane. The particles being compressed eventually burst again and that is the high energy flares on the poles.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore somfooleishfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    196
    where do you get this "moving faster than visible light" from? I suspect you have a misconception that light frequency=speed. This is not so. Visible light travels at the same speed as gamma ray light, microwave light, radio waves light and even ultra low frequency light. Its all just light which always travels at "the speed of light"


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    386
    You are quite correct.
    Let me explain my stand point.
    If I were to plot on a graph ,x=time, y=distance, the travel of an orbital travelling a circumference would shape would I end up with ? (a sine or cosine, if the orbited particle is *spherical and* travelling at light speed)
    With this in mind and for all frequencies to travel at max C particle size for faster frequencies must be smaller. Or the variation in y would cause faster than light travel for the orbital.
    Another way to see this is a smaller particle having less resistance to viscosity but still limited by the same amount due to electromagnetic fields in space, this is achieved by the increased potential in smaller particles.
    In other words smaller particles are not lighter but instead heavier. Take a kilo of lead vs a kilo of hydrogen gas by volume in equilibrium.

    Because x=time the travel around the lower portion has to be in front of the travel around the top. By pivoting the lower half you can see the shape of the particle traced on any given signal.

    *Attempting to simplify, if the circumference is larger then, when considering viscosity, the amount of the medium affected is affected by size, balanced by potential*
    Last edited by Max Time Taken; August 20th, 2011 at 05:35 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Sophomore somfooleishfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    196
    Quote Originally Posted by Max Time Taken View Post
    You are quite correct.
    Let me explain my stand point.
    If I were to plot on a graph ,x=time, y=distance, the travel of an orbital travelling a circumference would shape would I end up with ? (a sine or cosine, if the orbited particle is *spherical and* travelling at light speed)
    With this in mind and for all frequencies to travel at max C particle size for faster frequencies must be smaller. Or the variation in y would cause faster than light travel for the orbital.
    Another way to see this is a smaller particle having less resistance to viscosity but still limited by the same amount due to electromagnetic fields in space, this is achieved by the increased potential in smaller particles.
    In other words smaller particles are not lighter but instead heavier. Take a kilo of lead vs a kilo of hydrogen gas by volume in equilibrium.

    Because x=time the travel around the lower portion has to be in front of the travel around the top. By pivoting the lower half you can see the shape of the particle traced on any given signal.

    *Attempting to simplify, if the circumference is larger then, when considering viscosity, the amount of the medium affected is affected by size, balanced by potential*
    I have a lot of trouble reading and understanding your posts. I'm not sure what it is I struggle with so much, I think its a combination of one/many or all of the following.
    Your grammar is not very good. You seem to talk about things that not only go over my head, but yours too. I also often struggle to see the relevance of what you are saying. You seem to have a lot of misconceptions but because I'm not educated I can't tell when you are stating accurate or inaccurate information.

    This is not intended to be insult, it is constructive criticism as I could imagine others having many of the same issues with some of your posts.
    Maybe others understand you better than I do.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    386
    It's complex. But not so hard. My communication skills are bound to be at fault to some extent.
    To draw a circle on a graph x=time,y=distance you get a sine wave. First you travel the top half , then you travel the bottom half.

    The magnetic field of space is the viscosity and the limiting factor for light speed. Maxwell equations explain this.

    So the magnetic "particles" in space must go around a moving object this is described by the waveform in the y axis.
    Lighter nucleus=larger particle with less power. (simple density)

    The amount of power in a particle affects the "stickiness" thus balancing all single particles max speed at C.

    If this is still not clear please ask more direct questions.

    Imagine a submarine travelling through the ocean, what moves fastest ? Answer : The particles separating to go around the shape.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Sophomore somfooleishfool's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    196
    OK this was alot better, this time your grammar was fine. This time it simply went way over my head Its too late (early) for me to be analysing anything properly right now. Don't bother trying to explain, it will fall on a switched off brain
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    419
    Max Time Taken, its not complex, its just your overactive imagination taking over and possibly ruining another thread.

    Particles that have mass DO NOT travel at light speed even inside a black hole.
    Particles that have no rest mass, ALWAYS travel at light speed, even inside a black hole.
    There is NO viscosity or stickiness of the vacuum or space, and what exactly is the 'magnetic field of space' ??

    You don't have an understanding of the accepted theory and mechanisms, but you are disseminating this ignorance to people who want to learn accepted theory and mechanisms. This has been explaned to you in other threads and you haven't learned. All your ramblings should be moved to pseudoscience ( moderators ??? ).

    STOP IT !!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    386
    Ok, whatever. The fibonacci spiral shows the same thing. Except that instead of the circle going 180degrees out of phase due to time, it shows a 90 degree rotation of the golden rectangle. Fibonacci spiral , considered to be the matrix. Neo, the one - single step cyclic shift.

    It is the shear/ movement of magnetic field that a body of mass passes through that limits the speed of the body of mass. Same thing just a scale issue.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: August 18th, 2010, 02:16 PM
  2. Are particles made of topological singularities?
    By Jarek Duda in forum Physics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: October 15th, 2009, 11:24 PM
  3. singularities big bang and particle
    By Powerdoc in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: October 13th, 2006, 11:30 AM
  4. black holes/singularities
    By dfx in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 4th, 2006, 08:25 AM
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
  •