I was just thinking..
A quick bit of fantasy..
If all the theories have some merit..
The holographic.
String and M. theory.
Brane theory.
We are looking at a universe with an "outside" skin of information projecting a 4D reality. If we were in a black hole the outside would be the event horizon containing the information. The start of the black hole would be a singularity. The entropy would be Hawking Radiation. Strings would be quantum bits.
Now for a moment I let myself believe this might be true, and then a strange feeling of vulnerability. If we assumed there is no outside that would be an interesting and fitting thought because nothing escapes a black hole so we would only see at best case the event horizon or CMB. There would be a humongous gap between matter if there is any and the event horizon.
Then the thought is a black hole flat or spherical..ie is a black hole viewable from all angles or does it look like a galaxy (disc)
It would be interesting should this be the case because everything would be an illusion. Physics would it still apply? or is it inseparably linked to our reality?
Then the thought if we do live on entities all asking what is going on because they don't know either..😀
Anyway back to reality
PS interestingly that would mean there are black holes within black holes..just for fun of course!
If we are in a black hole there are black holes in our universe..I guess if the LHC could make them its easy in a black hole.
The holographic bits or strings are the quantum foam..also known as the wave function or probability wave (reality).
Regards
M. Gregg
A quick bit of fantasy..
If all the theories have some merit..
The holographic.
String and M. theory.
Brane theory.
We are looking at a universe with an "outside" skin of information projecting a 4D reality. If we were in a black hole the outside would be the event horizon containing the information. The start of the black hole would be a singularity. The entropy would be Hawking Radiation. Strings would be quantum bits.
Now for a moment I let myself believe this might be true, and then a strange feeling of vulnerability. If we assumed there is no outside that would be an interesting and fitting thought because nothing escapes a black hole so we would only see at best case the event horizon or CMB. There would be a humongous gap between matter if there is any and the event horizon.
Then the thought is a black hole flat or spherical..ie is a black hole viewable from all angles or does it look like a galaxy (disc)
It would be interesting should this be the case because everything would be an illusion. Physics would it still apply? or is it inseparably linked to our reality?
Then the thought if we do live on entities all asking what is going on because they don't know either..😀
Anyway back to reality
PS interestingly that would mean there are black holes within black holes..just for fun of course!
If we are in a black hole there are black holes in our universe..I guess if the LHC could make them its easy in a black hole.
The holographic bits or strings are the quantum foam..also known as the wave function or probability wave (reality).
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
I reflected for a moment on,
Where would that leave us?
If we could zoom out we would be so wrong about everything.
Regards
M. Gregg
Where would that leave us?
If we could zoom out we would be so wrong about everything.
Regards
M. Gregg
Still for a laugh,
If any of the black hole idea was true:
Could I accept we haven't got a theory of everything YES.
We are working with an incomplete model.
Could I accept the universe is expanding into nothing YES.
Its inside a black hole.
Why is gravity weak..because it can only collapse so far then it would have to equalise ie can't go any further. (the quantum foam)
Can I accept some of the models of the shape of the universe YES.
whats the shape of the "Core" of a black hole?
What is reality..good question.
Could I accept membranes so close but you can't see or touch them Yes. One planck length is close enough.
Can I accept the strange quantum ideas if we are in a black hole then its all quantum based.
Of course its all fantasy because it if wasn't where is the black hole? in a universe of nothing but black holes after total entropy has taken place?
OR..thats another possible maybe!
Back to reality. 😀..LOL a Multiverse of nothing..
Regards
M. Gregg
If any of the black hole idea was true:
Could I accept we haven't got a theory of everything YES.
We are working with an incomplete model.
Could I accept the universe is expanding into nothing YES.
Its inside a black hole.
Why is gravity weak..because it can only collapse so far then it would have to equalise ie can't go any further. (the quantum foam)
Can I accept some of the models of the shape of the universe YES.
whats the shape of the "Core" of a black hole?
What is reality..good question.
Could I accept membranes so close but you can't see or touch them Yes. One planck length is close enough.
Can I accept the strange quantum ideas if we are in a black hole then its all quantum based.
Of course its all fantasy because it if wasn't where is the black hole? in a universe of nothing but black holes after total entropy has taken place?
OR..thats another possible maybe!
Back to reality. 😀..LOL a Multiverse of nothing..
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Notion of anything falling into a hole is ridiculous for the following reasons:
1) It would take forever, and forever hasn't happened yet.
2) At the horizon, anything falling has already accelerated
to light speed and cannot accelerate further.
3) If it could somehow fall "in", would require gain of mass
or energy out of nothing, and would grow the hole more
than input. Since self-feeding holes havn't consumed the
universe, its a safe bet that isn't whats going on.
1) It would take forever, and forever hasn't happened yet.
2) At the horizon, anything falling has already accelerated
to light speed and cannot accelerate further.
3) If it could somehow fall "in", would require gain of mass
or energy out of nothing, and would grow the hole more
than input. Since self-feeding holes havn't consumed the
universe, its a safe bet that isn't whats going on.
Who said anything about something falling into a black hole?
Black holes form from a singularity where matter falls into itself under gravitational collapse.
Ie a black hole is the result of a phenomena..(Star collapse etc)
The point you make about self feeding black holes is another strange one.
If black holes absorb light they are self feeding even if the energy stays on the event horizon.
So black holes don't just form from nothing..they are energy based the same as everything else.
The idea that forever hasn't happened yet?
How do you know the universe isn't cycling and forever is representative of reoccurring forever?
Forever is time based..if time stops how long is forever?
Forever has no meaning at T=0<<you cannot remember the past or look to the future and now doesn't exist.
It takes time to unfold any event even thinking. If T=0 there can be no movement of energy or matter in any form even thought.
So without the fourth dimension can the other three exist?
Energy is created in time. ie even a wave function requires time.
There can be no probability waves because the chance of something happening is T=0
There must be something within the black hole or there would be no Hawking radiation..where two particles that would self annihilate cannot do so because one half of the equation is absorbed. So virtual particles become separated and the emission is the hawking radiation.
A virtual particle is something that forms and self annihilates at the moment it becomes real.
So I find it hard to believe that time stops on the event horizon or there could be no radiation and black holes would not evaporate.
(Black holes emit energy)
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
There is no singularity. Impossible, unnecessary,
something for nothing, falling up nonsense. Stuff
only falls when it can reach a lower energy state.
Can't reach a lower energy state by exceeding the
speed of light. Going off the straight line of space
that's bent around the hole, why??? Nonsense.
A shell works equally well without all the nonsense.
Would further argue that shell is a Donut. But that's
an entirely different if completely identical rant...
Horizons evaporate. Quit feeding one long enough,
and it'll go BANG. Requires no Hawking radiation.
Just that inside Newton's hollow shell, there is no
pull of gravity to compress anything, and a normal
flow of time. Compressed stuff decompresses and
gets caught again on the way out. Self-emptying.
When an unfed horizon ceases to grow faster than
stuff on the way out is making its escape, BANG.
Did we have a big BANG, or did Hawking have a
big evaporating hole? How does your singularity
rise to the surface to evaporate? I call nonsense...
something for nothing, falling up nonsense. Stuff
only falls when it can reach a lower energy state.
Can't reach a lower energy state by exceeding the
speed of light. Going off the straight line of space
that's bent around the hole, why??? Nonsense.
A shell works equally well without all the nonsense.
Would further argue that shell is a Donut. But that's
an entirely different if completely identical rant...
Horizons evaporate. Quit feeding one long enough,
and it'll go BANG. Requires no Hawking radiation.
Just that inside Newton's hollow shell, there is no
pull of gravity to compress anything, and a normal
flow of time. Compressed stuff decompresses and
gets caught again on the way out. Self-emptying.
When an unfed horizon ceases to grow faster than
stuff on the way out is making its escape, BANG.
Did we have a big BANG, or did Hawking have a
big evaporating hole? How does your singularity
rise to the surface to evaporate? I call nonsense...
Last edited:
A singularity (if one could exist) goes bang only when mass
or energy has evaporated to less than Chandrasekhar's limit.
Since our bang was a little bigger than that, go figure...
A horizon goes BANG when you stop feeding it for a long
while. There is no size limit for a horizon. There is no size
limit for the resulting BANG.
Would further argue that many donut horizons BANG'd
everywhere, in unison, in a universe of fixed infinite size.
But that's an entirely different if completely identical rant...
or energy has evaporated to less than Chandrasekhar's limit.
Since our bang was a little bigger than that, go figure...
A horizon goes BANG when you stop feeding it for a long
while. There is no size limit for a horizon. There is no size
limit for the resulting BANG.
Would further argue that many donut horizons BANG'd
everywhere, in unison, in a universe of fixed infinite size.
But that's an entirely different if completely identical rant...
Last edited:
You don't need gravity,
the strong nuclear force will bind like charges together and overcome repulsion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_force
There is no evidence that a black hole can become over massive.
There is a supermassive black hole at the centre of the milkyway.
Also two black holes can collide and combine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
You only need to look at a magnetic field for virtual photons.
Regards
M. Gregg
the strong nuclear force will bind like charges together and overcome repulsion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_force
There is no evidence that a black hole can become over massive.
There is a supermassive black hole at the centre of the milkyway.
Also two black holes can collide and combine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation
You only need to look at a magnetic field for virtual photons.
Regards
M. Gregg
Last edited:
Interesting that gravity escapes a hole, though mass and light do not.
Interesting that magnetism escapes a hole, though never hear what
happens with the electric field. For either to grow, requires electro-
magnetic propagation, which we assume cannot escape from "inside".
good argument for everything of interest happens just outside.
Of course, if charged motion occurs in the accretion disk, and the
donut shell, then magnetism is free to loop through the empty hole
in the donut without ever having to intersect the horizon.
Donut horizon around a virtual rigularity explains jets much better
than a spherical horizon around a virtual singularity. Either flavor
of whatchamularity you believe is an illusion, merely the center of
the shell's mass. Reality remains in orbit.
I can agree for magnetism confining jets to a straight line, but can't
fathom they suddenly turn right angles twice to slip past a spherical
horizon. Nonsense again. A Donut horizon presents no such problem.
Imagining real actual singularities might as well be channeling Elvis.
But that's an entirely different if completely identical rant...
Triple chilli cheeze donut...
----
I incorrectly used Chandrasekhar's limit for the collapse to a hole.
Its for the collapse of a dwarf to a neutron star. Takes about 3x
more to make a hole.
At distances less than 0.7 femtometers, the strong nuclear force
turns repulsive. Gravity has to overcome that, or no donut.
Interesting that magnetism escapes a hole, though never hear what
happens with the electric field. For either to grow, requires electro-
magnetic propagation, which we assume cannot escape from "inside".
good argument for everything of interest happens just outside.
Of course, if charged motion occurs in the accretion disk, and the
donut shell, then magnetism is free to loop through the empty hole
in the donut without ever having to intersect the horizon.
Donut horizon around a virtual rigularity explains jets much better
than a spherical horizon around a virtual singularity. Either flavor
of whatchamularity you believe is an illusion, merely the center of
the shell's mass. Reality remains in orbit.
I can agree for magnetism confining jets to a straight line, but can't
fathom they suddenly turn right angles twice to slip past a spherical
horizon. Nonsense again. A Donut horizon presents no such problem.
Imagining real actual singularities might as well be channeling Elvis.
But that's an entirely different if completely identical rant...
Triple chilli cheeze donut...
----
I incorrectly used Chandrasekhar's limit for the collapse to a hole.
Its for the collapse of a dwarf to a neutron star. Takes about 3x
more to make a hole.
At distances less than 0.7 femtometers, the strong nuclear force
turns repulsive. Gravity has to overcome that, or no donut.
Last edited:
So which is right- the Fermilab Holodetector micromapping, "proving" we don't live in a holographic universe, or ANU experiments studying the behavior of quantum particle behavior, which suggests that reality does not exist until measured, at the quantum level?
I'm taking the liberty of making measured to have the same meaning as observed, in this one case.
I'm taking the liberty of making measured to have the same meaning as observed, in this one case.
Why ask them?
Because of our intense desire to know, we must.
Do I think they would be better company?
They would not be "company". We would be assimilated and then would cease to exist as "Us". We would become "them". But, then "Us" and "Them" would no longer exist as we would become "one". No longer needing to ask, as all knowledge of the "collective" would be known. Would there still be a desire to know more? Maybe there would be no more to know.
We'll have to ask "Them" when they get here!
weird logic.... very weird logic...
. I know a very good psychiater... perhaps it's helpfull 😉
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...iverse-and-why-its-a-headache-for-scientists/
Evidence mounts for multi-donuts gone splodie!
Unibanger pinheads explain or debunk...
Evidence mounts for multi-donuts gone splodie!
Unibanger pinheads explain or debunk...
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.