A recap from the past,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NbBjNiw4tk
The cosmological constant is still very strange though..
Regards
M. Gregg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NbBjNiw4tk
The cosmological constant is still very strange though..
Regards
M. Gregg
Yes there must be lots..
The moon and the earth..oups the tides as well..(Strange the moon moves the sea).
The sun and the planets....one year..
The sun and the galaxy...
Regards
M. Gregg
Halley and Newton played with the idea the earth might be hollow.
All the maths of the time said gravity of a perfect shell should
appear the same as a perfect sphere of the same mass to an
outside observer. But inside the shell, ANYWHERE inside, gravity
from that shell would have no effect.
Other than the disappointing fact that Earth didn't turn out to
be quite as hollow as expected, the math behind the idea wasn't
wrong.
Therefore I have to wonder what really goes on inside an event
horizon? If time dilates for anything that crosses, I would think
that everything that ever tried to cross in our out would still be
stuck there. Swirling in-falling material implies that most of that
mass would be stuck in a ring, more so than a uniform shell.
But as event horizons get bigger, what happens to all the old
mass that experiences gravity cancellation inside the ring or
shell? Does this also negate the time dilation and unstick that
mass to move again and explosively decompress. Only to get
re-stuck in time as it spraypaints the new horizon from inside.
Thus I think a ring shaped mass eventually re-distributes itself
as it grows to becomes a toroidal shell. Or by same logic it could
re-distribute itself into a hollow spherical shell.
Confirmed observations of jets is why I slightly favor the Donut.
How would a near miss with a singularity, sphere, or spherical shell
direct such a large percentage of material to eject from the poles?
For a Donut with gravity null in the center, jets make perfect sense...
All the maths of the time said gravity of a perfect shell should
appear the same as a perfect sphere of the same mass to an
outside observer. But inside the shell, ANYWHERE inside, gravity
from that shell would have no effect.
Other than the disappointing fact that Earth didn't turn out to
be quite as hollow as expected, the math behind the idea wasn't
wrong.
Therefore I have to wonder what really goes on inside an event
horizon? If time dilates for anything that crosses, I would think
that everything that ever tried to cross in our out would still be
stuck there. Swirling in-falling material implies that most of that
mass would be stuck in a ring, more so than a uniform shell.
But as event horizons get bigger, what happens to all the old
mass that experiences gravity cancellation inside the ring or
shell? Does this also negate the time dilation and unstick that
mass to move again and explosively decompress. Only to get
re-stuck in time as it spraypaints the new horizon from inside.
Thus I think a ring shaped mass eventually re-distributes itself
as it grows to becomes a toroidal shell. Or by same logic it could
re-distribute itself into a hollow spherical shell.
Confirmed observations of jets is why I slightly favor the Donut.
How would a near miss with a singularity, sphere, or spherical shell
direct such a large percentage of material to eject from the poles?
For a Donut with gravity null in the center, jets make perfect sense...
Last edited:
Sure there is. The universe is filled with gravitational fields. The strength of the local gravitational field depends on how close you are to a substantial mass.
You don't have to be in or on the mass. If you are at some distance from it, the strength decreases as 1/(distance squared) from its center of mass.
Last edited:
I was simply asking myself few questions, without saying what you wrote, but only being inspired by.
Well, yes we think we "know" that "space" is composed mostly of a "nothingness" that we yet understand how to describe and measure, but does that mean that it's empty? And please pardon my diminished cognitive ability, but when your cited quotation opens with:
well, my puny little mind gets confused attempting to reconcile to your cited post
please enlighten us, sensei
For interest,
Yes another idea..
The idea of expansion seems to be gaining favour over the "Big Bang".
ie more of an inflation less of a "Bang".
Goodbye Big Bang, Hello Black Hole? A New Theory Of The Universe’s Creation
Every time I see the word inflation I get an image of someone blowing a bubble with bubble gum..
Only trouble is there is no inflation point??
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
LOL..
I guess they have dismissed the idea that the pressure outside the universe is reducing..
The vision of the science experiment with a half inflated balloon in a vacuumed bell jar comes to mind..
In the realms of ridiculous..we were squashed in a black hole (the singularity)..it (the black hole) dissipated and the pressure crushing the universe was lost and ..then expansion at the speed of light..
The black hole was a wormhole to another dimension or part of hyperspace and that's why the universe appears to be the only one..each one is separated by a wormhole..
The universe is lost in space and time.
Back to reality..but just for a laugh that would mean every black hole was another universe in the making..
Regards
M. Gregg
I guess they have dismissed the idea that the pressure outside the universe is reducing..
The vision of the science experiment with a half inflated balloon in a vacuumed bell jar comes to mind..
In the realms of ridiculous..we were squashed in a black hole (the singularity)..it (the black hole) dissipated and the pressure crushing the universe was lost and ..then expansion at the speed of light..
The black hole was a wormhole to another dimension or part of hyperspace and that's why the universe appears to be the only one..each one is separated by a wormhole..
The universe is lost in space and time.
Back to reality..but just for a laugh that would mean every black hole was another universe in the making..
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Chris, it was simply to farther expand the discussion.
Gravity varies, depending of the space we're in (physically); the mass, the magnetic pole, the sun, the earth, all the planets, the galaxies, the infinite space, and all that known jazz. ...And yet unknown too; beyond space of the universe, as we know it.
Very interesting, but most probably unlikely. ...Because try to simulate this
to the sun and the moon and the galaxies and ...
Is gravity at right angles to time the way electric is to magnetic?
Gravity and Timeflow are similar in each having only one polarity.
Where you have gravity, there is little timeflow.
Where you have timeflow, you have little gravity.
To me, these very different things seem more than casually related.
Maybe no more different than electric vs magnetic if we were to look
at Timeflow and Gravity from some favorable outside vantage point.
Gravity and Timeflow are similar in each having only one polarity.
Where you have gravity, there is little timeflow.
Where you have timeflow, you have little gravity.
To me, these very different things seem more than casually related.
Maybe no more different than electric vs magnetic if we were to look
at Timeflow and Gravity from some favorable outside vantage point.
It's the exact same thing with all the audio forums of the World Wide Web.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.