Where do black holes come from ?

While it can be said “. Objects whose gravitational fields are too strong for light to escape were first considered in the 18th century by John Michell  and Pierre-Simon Laplace” Is where the first conception of black holes came from.

However it is relativity and Einstein that really pushed black holes into the forefront of mainstream science.

”  He found a new way to describe gravity. It was not a force, as Sir Isaac Newton had proposed, but a consequence of a distortion in space and time, conceived together in his theory as ‘space-time’. According to Einstein, matter and energy exist on a background of space and time. Objects distort the fabric of space-time based on their mass- more massive objects have a greater effect.”

So the thing to remember here is that this is theory. It is not based on empirical science.

Yet the impact these mythical  constructs are diverting research into real events by fixing the game.

“While black holes, themselves, are invisible, their presence exerts a powerful gravitational force on nearby gas and stars, causing everything to orbit at tremendous speeds. As the matter nears the event horizon, it accelerates until it approaches the speed of light and in the process acquires tremendous energy. Some of this energy is converted into radiation.”

A black hole is in the middle of our galaxy. A Quasar has a black hole in it. A big star when it dies is said to have a black hole.  It continues..

Halton Arp ” No one has ever seen a black hole; they are theoretical objects. The basic idea behind a black hole – that gravity can become infinite and compress a large volume of matter to an infinitesimal point (or ‘singularity’) – is irrational and illogical; nothing finite can ever become infinitely large or small, for these are mathematical abstractions.”:

“Galaxies M87 and NGC 6605 are emitting jets of material and are supposed to have supermassive black holes at their centres. According to D.P., black-hole supporters thought the jets were fed by a doughnut-shaped dust cloud around the M87 black hole and an accretion disc of attracted matter around the NGC 6605 black hole, but observations have failed to find evidence of either.

David Pratt says it is significant that matter is nearly always seen moving away from galactic nuclei, instead of towards them as the black-hole theory requires. This is also true of our own galaxy, and the radiation coming from its centre does not match that expected to come from a black hole. Several scientists have concluded that the centres of active galaxies are regions of matter creation rather than matter destruction. D.P. refers to G. de Purucker’s remarks about laya centres, which energy can flow both into and out of. He adds that every point of space is in a sense a laya centre, and that every entity, every atom, every human, and every celestial body has a laya centre at its core, for every physical form is animated from within outwards.

Mainstream scientists tell us that black holes form by the gravitational collapse of extremely massive stars, and some speculate that large volumes of interstellar gas can collapse into supermassive black holes at the centres of galaxies. During this process, gravity allegedly becomes infinitely strong, crushing matter to an infinitesimal point of infinite density and infinite ‘spacetime curvature’. This ‘singularity’, as it is called, is surrounded by a gravitational field so intense that nothing entering a black hole’s boundary can ever escape, not even light. Theorists predict that black holes can emit extremely tiny amounts of heat radiation, so that a typical black hole will evaporate in about a million trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion years.

As pointed out in ‘Big bang, black holes, and common sense’, the existence of black holes as defined above can be rejected simply on the grounds of logic and common sense. In the real world, nothing finite can become infinite or infinitesimal; nor can the boundless universe originate from an infinitesimal point, as the big-bang theory claims. As for the notion of ‘curved space’, which Einstein invented to ‘explain’ gravity, several scientists, and also G. de Purucker, have dismissed it as a mathematical delusion. Inside a black hole, ‘spacetime’ supposedly becomes so distorted that space becomes time and time becomes space. Aard Bol is silent about all this – which is not surprising, as it’s unlikely that he has found a way to turn the finite into the infinite, or space into time!

Leaving aside the weird theories about what goes on inside a black hole, what evidence is there that such objects exist? Black holes can never be observed directly, so scientists look for indirect evidence of them: namely, their gravitational effects on matter in their vicinity, and radiation coming from their direct environment (attributed to material falling into them). However, as Fred Hoyle and other critically-minded astronomers have noted, the available evidence merely points to the existence of highly condensed aggregates of matter which produce very strong gravitational fields – but these objects generally appear to be undergoing explosive activity rather than swallowing things up.

The black-hole theory has great difficulty explaining why gas is universally seen moving radially outward from galactic nuclei. It insists that matter must first be attracted towards a hypothetical black hole from surrounding space, and some of it may then somehow get flung in the opposite direction. In the previous article, I mentioned several observations showing that the postulated disks and clouds of gas and dust surrounding ‘black holes’ are often missing; this implies that the gas or radiation speeding outwards originates within the central object itself – which would, by definition, be impossible if it were really a black hole. After space-telescope observations in 1995 failed to detect material around hypothetical black holes at the centre of many quasars, the astronomer heading the investigation called the discovery ‘a giant leap backward’; this major problem for the black-hole theory has still not been solved.”

Credit

http://davidpratt.info/bol.htm

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Where do black holes come from ?

    1. There is no direct evidence of black holes, there are observations, which are tethered to black hole theory using suppositions.
      Black holes are supposedly everywhere but there is no empirical evidence.
      An example of black hole theory distorting research or inquiring minds is the subject of quasars.
      Wikki “Quasars (/ˈkweɪzɑr/) or quasi-stellar radio sources are the most energetic and distant members of a class of objects called active galactic nuclei (AGN). Quasars are extremely luminous and were first identified as being high redshift sources of electromagnetic energy, including radio waves and visible light, that appeared to be similar to stars, rather than extended sources similar to galaxies. Their spectra contain very broad emission lines, unlike any known from stars, hence the name “quasi-stellar.” Their luminosity can be 100 times greater than that of the Milky Way.[2] Most quasars were formed approximately 12 billion years ago caused by collisions of galaxies and their central black holes merging to form a supermassive black hole.”

      Like

      1. So would you agree that science is dominated by the assumption that gravity is the cause of most, if not all, interstellar objects? This brings us to another point. If gravity is not the main force in the Universe that causes these things, then why does most everyone believe this? Is it because it is being taught dogmatically in all schools across the world? Who expounds this dogma and why?

        Like

      2. Yes I do agree that this dogmatic approach to science theory has sidelined the entire education system. To understand exactly what happened with science one has to look at the history of science last century. Last century was changed profoundly in terms of mans standard of living by science. We now enjoy a standard of living by utilising electricity and wireless communication, that would have only been dreamed of the century before. This is science we should still be pursuing but the course of history changed with the demolition of Wardenclyffe. So the spot light was shifted, now we find we have a lot of sophisticated mathematics that have the effect of bamboozling the populace and creating a worship type of scenario, the high priests of this artform do not tolerate people straying from the path. This sounds like a good story right ? It is the truth and the proof is in Halton Arps discoveries and his subsequent treatment by the establishment which banished him by barring his use of telescopes. Why ?, because of his discovery of the red shift factor which the big bang is so fond of (the doppler effect). He discovered red shift had a relationship with the age of galaxies and it wasn’t all about velocity. He found quasars linked with plasma filaments to a companion galaxy, his theory that galaxies eject quasars is backed up with hard evidence. This is true science in its purity, but instead we have dark matter and dark energy.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s