Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
59 online now:
AZPaul3, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), nwr (3 members, 56 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,178 Year: 4,290/6,534 Month: 504/900 Week: 28/182 Day: 0/16 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Black Holes Don't Exist
Astrophile
Member
Posts: 90
From: United Kingdom
Joined: 02-10-2014


(1)
Message 76 of 174 (741869)
11-15-2014 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Colbard
11-14-2014 1:13 AM


Re: Ancient knowledge of matter
As an atheist, I shouldn't argue with you about the Bible, but you are misquoting your source.

You wrote:

For God showed them the invisible things from Him in the creation of the world, which can be clearly seen and understood by observing the things which have been created, even the knowledge of how God creates through His own eternal power.
That can be found in Romans 1:18-22.

In the King James version of the Bible, Romans 1:19-20 says,

quote:
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

You wrote:

Hebrews 11:3 - by faith we understand that God made worlds, that were framed by the word of God, so that things which are tangible are not made of tangible things, but invisible.

Hebrews 11:3 says

quote:
Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

I leave it to you and to other people on this thread to decide whether what you wrote correctly represents the meaning of the original texts.

Edited by Astrophile, : Submitted by mistake without proper proof-reading.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Colbard, posted 11-14-2014 1:13 AM Colbard has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 1:26 PM Astrophile has taken no action

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 174 (741880)
11-15-2014 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by Colbard
11-15-2014 8:25 AM


Re: QM
Nonukes the Naive writes:

How are these two statements not contradictory. You don't accept separate packages of energy, but you do believe in separated packages of energy?

When one of those packages interacts with matter (for example during the photo electric effect, what happens to the remaining packages?

Colbard writes:

The background force has two characteristics one which causes energy to be stored or not revealed the other which causes energy to be released or expressed....

None of this gibberish is remotely close to being an answer to either of my questions.

That's not your fault. It's mine. I know better than to expect any sense from you, so I guess I asked for what I got.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Colbard, posted 11-15-2014 8:25 AM Colbard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Colbard, posted 11-15-2014 8:25 PM NoNukes has taken no action

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 2644 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 78 of 174 (741892)
11-15-2014 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Son Goku
11-15-2014 7:14 AM


Re: Black Holed theory
quote:
For mass generation the standard model has two mechanisms:
(a) The Higgs Mechanism
(b) The potential energy of Strong Force interactions. For example the protons mass is 99% the potential energy of the strong force between the quarks. The internal quarks

(a) The Higgs Mechanism is pure speculation subject to bad assumptions.
(b) Strong force interactions are as of yet not fully described.

quote:
Quantum fields do not take on a constant value everywhere. In fact due to being quantum mechanical, they don't take on definitive values. You are thinking of quantum fields as if they were classical objects.
The addition of quantum mechanics makes quantum fields completely unlike any "ancient" model.

About a constant value:

The Higgs boson or Higgs particle is an elementary particle in the Standard Model of Particle physics. Its main relevance is that it is the smallest possible excitation of the Higgs field[6][7] – a field that unlike the more familiar electromagnetic field cannot be "turned off", but instead takes a constant value almost everywhere. (wiki)

Sorry, almost everywhere….

quote:
[The addition of quantum mechanics makes quantum fields completely unlike any "ancient" model]

With exception of the ultimate comparison. Both are products of a active imagination. My opinion…. I see your opinion.

quote:
No, all normal matter is an excitation of sets of quantum fields.

What about normal matter that has fallen into a black hole?

quote:
Aright here is my only real question to you. Quantum field theory predicts (due to instanton states and anomalies) that the mass of the eta prime meson is 957.67 MeV. This is exactly the mass found in particle accelerators for the eta prime meson.
So my questions are:
(a) If quantum field theory is incorrect or inaccurate, why does it get this mass correct?
(b) Do you have a theory besides quantum field theory which produces an accurate mass for the eta prime?

Great, but now describe gravity in terms of quantum field.

quote:
Quantum field theory predicts anti-matter, so I don't understand how it makes no inroads into anti-matter.

Yes and too much of it, that is one proof that it is a bad apprehension of reality. One of many failures of QFT. One of those “big things” I mention.

quote:
Why does quantum field theory need to describe everything in order to be correct? Yes, it doesn't describe gravity, but is it incorrect in what it does describe?
(Photosynthesis is not a failed theory because it doesn't describe animal digestion)

Theories are only disproved in science. It is not that QFT has not tried and failed to be a universal theory of mass, gravity and their interactions. This thread is a perfect example of the inconsistency of QM in general. Black holes are present in our universe, stars are the only real explainable source of black holes and their numbers. Yet the counter-diction of observed reality comes from calculations of QM.

A man may imagine things that are false, but he can only understand things that are true, for if the things be false, the apprehension of them is not understanding.
Isaac Newton

Photosynthesis is not a failed theory because it is observable, parts require very little speculation , the particle field concept is hypothetical and total speculation.

Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Son Goku, posted 11-15-2014 7:14 AM Son Goku has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Son Goku, posted 11-15-2014 1:23 PM zaius137 has replied

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1207
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 79 of 174 (741897)
11-15-2014 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by zaius137
11-15-2014 12:52 PM


Re: Black Holed theory
(b) Strong force interactions are as of yet not fully described.

Quantum Chromodynamics fully describes the strong force, what aspects does it not describe in your opinion?

Let me make this simple, if quantum field theory is speculation and false, then you explain to me why the eta prime has a mass of 957.67 MeV?

Or explain how quantum field theory, despite being incorrect speculation in your opinion, manages to obtain that number.

Edited by Son Goku, : No reason given.

Edited by Son Goku, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by zaius137, posted 11-15-2014 12:52 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 1:55 PM Son Goku has replied

  
Colbard
Member (Idle past 2626 days)
Posts: 300
From: Australia
Joined: 08-31-2014


Message 80 of 174 (741956)
11-15-2014 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by NoNukes
11-15-2014 11:21 AM


Re: QM
NoNukes writes:

None of this gibberish is remotely close to being an answer to either of my questions.

That's not your fault. It's mine. I know better than to expect any sense from you, so I guess I asked for what I got.

I was counting on that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by NoNukes, posted 11-15-2014 11:21 AM NoNukes has taken no action

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 2644 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 81 of 174 (742023)
11-16-2014 1:26 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Astrophile
11-15-2014 9:20 AM


Re: Ancient knowledge of matter
quote:
I leave it to you and to other people on this thread to decide whether what you wrote correctly represents the meaning of the original texts.

When I proclaimed atheism, in my ignorance, the interpretation of Romans 1 escaped me also. God gave you observable evidence of Himself in his creation. There is no scientific theory that applies to the description of the universe that is either comprehensive or complete. QFT or Relativity are incomplete descriptions of reality and restricted to either the micro or the macro. God has hidden from us, a underlying reality,that we may not peak in (event horizons prevent that). You see speculation is just that, speculation. Ancient concoctions like the aether and the Higgs boson are artifacts of ignorance.

Colbard is correct.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Astrophile, posted 11-15-2014 9:20 AM Astrophile has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by Larni, posted 11-16-2014 1:52 PM zaius137 has replied

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 82 of 174 (742030)
11-16-2014 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by zaius137
11-16-2014 1:26 PM


Re: Ancient knowledge of matter
Higgs boson

Has been found. Click here

And as the world came to quickly learn, the evidence that the Higgs particle had been detected was strong enough to cross the threshold of discovery. With the Higgs particle now officially found, the audience in Geneva broke out into wild applause, as did our little group in Aspen, and no doubt dozens of similar gatherings around the globe. Peter Higgs wiped away a tear.

With a year of hindsight, and additional data that has only served to make the case for the Higgs stronger, here’s how I would summarize the discovery’s most important implications.


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 1:26 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 1:58 PM Larni has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 2644 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 83 of 174 (742032)
11-16-2014 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Son Goku
11-15-2014 1:23 PM


Re: Black Holed theory
quote:
Quantum Chromodynamics fully describes the strong force,

You are conflating description with a demonstration of underlying axioms. Errors are prevalent in many of its calculations requiring normalization to the particular scale it is being used.

quote:
Let me make this simple, if quantum field theory is speculation and false,

QFT is a speculation that a particle is associated with a field. QFT is not false when applied to its particular scale.

quote:
Or explain how quantum field theory, despite being incorrect speculation in your opinion, manages to obtain that number.

Very good, now describe the gravitational field particle relationship.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Son Goku, posted 11-15-2014 1:23 PM Son Goku has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Son Goku, posted 11-16-2014 2:48 PM zaius137 has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 2644 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 84 of 174 (742034)
11-16-2014 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Larni
11-16-2014 1:52 PM


Re: Ancient knowledge of matter
quote:
Has been found. Click here

No it hasn’t… look here…. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/speculation?s=t


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Larni, posted 11-16-2014 1:52 PM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Theodoric, posted 11-16-2014 2:21 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 90 by Larni, posted 11-17-2014 6:33 AM zaius137 has taken no action

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 7311
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 85 of 174 (742037)
11-16-2014 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by zaius137
11-16-2014 1:58 PM


Re: Ancient knowledge of matter
Your link says nothing about the Higgs Boson

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 1:58 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 9:39 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1207
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 5.2


(3)
Message 86 of 174 (742055)
11-16-2014 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by zaius137
11-16-2014 1:55 PM


Re: Black Holed theory
You are conflating description with a demonstration of underlying axioms. Errors are prevalent in many of its calculations requiring normalization to the particular scale it is being used.

My area of research is quantum chromodynamics, can you give me an example of a calculation with errors requiring normalisation to a scale?

Very good, now describe the gravitational field particle relationship.

I never claimed QFT describes gravity, so why would I describe it? Secondly nobody knows how gravity works on a quantum scale, so I couldn't. I can't come up with quantum gravity on a forum post.

What I am arguing against is your claim that QFT is ignorant speculation and that its assumptions have not being demonstrated. I disagree with this, because QFT seems to describe matter well. Particularly the quantum field theory known as the Standard Model. If QFT is speculation how does it get the correct mass for the eta prime?

Could you just answer the question in bold, instead of asking me to do something nobody knows, nor that I ever claimed was possible?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 1:55 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 9:31 PM Son Goku has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 2644 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 87 of 174 (742095)
11-16-2014 9:31 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Son Goku
11-16-2014 2:48 PM


Black reality...
quote:
I never claimed QFT describes gravity, so why would I describe it? Secondly nobody knows how gravity works on a quantum scale, so I couldn't. I can't come up with quantum gravity on a forum post.

I know there is no solution to the quantum gravity problem. If particle field theory were consummate as stated, there would be a definable direction to a solution of quantum gravity. QFT theory must yield to Relativity in the macro universe, that being the better way to understanding.

quote:
What I am arguing against is your claim that QFT is ignorant speculation and that its assumptions have not being demonstrated. I disagree with this, because QFT seems to describe matter well. Particularly the quantum field theory known as the Standard Model. If QFT is speculation how does it get the correct mass for the eta prime?

I never claimed QFT is “ignorant” speculation. For the small scale, it has had great success. Although QFT will never provide a explanation for unpredicted nuances, like the production of mesons when probing the strong force (determined from observations). I am sorry for your discomfort when someone portrays a demurral of skepticism, QFT being a life’s profession. Discomfort is a normal reaction to such.

But particle field is speculation none the less.

You have already admitted that particle field paradigm has it’s limitations.

My perspective is an underlying symmetry to the universe, a simple extrapolation from the existence of calculable entities, demonstrates to me the existence of a universal mind. I hope there is an agreement about the preceding statement at some level, either symmetry or God. If one could exist without the other.

quote:
Could you just answer the question in bold, instead of asking me to do something nobody knows, nor that I ever claimed was possible?

It is that underlying symmetry and the implication thereof.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Son Goku, posted 11-16-2014 2:48 PM Son Goku has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Son Goku, posted 11-17-2014 5:41 AM zaius137 has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 2644 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 88 of 174 (742096)
11-16-2014 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Theodoric
11-16-2014 2:21 PM


Re: Ancient knowledge of matter
quote:
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Do the facts demonstrate a zero spin boson exhibiting a scalar pervasive field?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Theodoric, posted 11-16-2014 2:21 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Theodoric, posted 11-17-2014 10:09 AM zaius137 has replied

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1207
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 89 of 174 (742101)
11-17-2014 5:41 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by zaius137
11-16-2014 9:31 PM


Re: Black reality...
QFT theory must yield to Relativity in the macro universe, that being the better way to understanding.

QFT and Relativity are compatible, i.e. QFT does yield to relativity, (although I could have your meaning of yield wrong) it's just that general relativity is not quantum mechanical.
Quantum Fields can bend and curve spacetime under General Relativity without the theory breaking or anything going wrong mathematically. In fact this is the current theory of physics:
The standard model quantum field theory (with its fourteen fields) living in four dimensional spacetime with the stress-energy of the fields distorting the spacetime as described by general relativity.

Quantum gravity refers to any theory where spacetime/gravity itself is quantum mechanical. In current theories of physics spacetime/gravity is classical. Quantum Fields however interact perfectly well with classical spacetime.

I am sorry for your discomfort when someone portrays a demurral of skepticism, QFT being a life’s profession. Discomfort is a normal reaction to such.

There is no discomfort, for the same reason as always on this forum:
You are not saying anything detailed, simply constantly repeating: Maybe you guys are wrong

Yes, "maybe" conventional science is wrong about particle physics. You have to actual state something. For example:

Although QFT will never provide a explanation for unpredicted nuances, like the production of mesons when probing the strong force (determined from observations).

Can you explicitly say what this is. Again I have done research into the Strong Nuclear force and I am not aware of this problem. Could you say what mesons in what probings/experiments?

Maybe when you actually explicitly state a problem, I might get uncomfortable and I can avail of your free psychoanalysis. Until then, I'm waiting for you to actually state a problem.


Could you just answer the question in bold, instead of asking me to do something nobody knows, nor that I ever claimed was possible?

It is that underlying symmetry and the implication thereof.

So the reason that the eta prime has a mass of 957.67 MeV is because of:
"The underlying symmetry and implications there of".

Can you show how an underlying symmetry and its implications leads directly to a mass of 957.67 MeV for the eta prime?

I will be interested to see this, as in conventional physics, that is quantum chromodynamics, the eta prime is unusually heavy explicitly because there is no underlying symmetry associated with it. A phenomena originally known as the U(1) anomaly.

My perspective is an underlying symmetry to the universe, a simple extrapolation from the existence of calculable entities, demonstrates to me the existence of a universal mind. I hope there is an agreement about the preceding statement at some level, either symmetry or God. If one could exist without the other.

Current theoretical knowledge and experimental evidence seem to indicate that most of low energy particle physics (low energy meaning low compared with the energies of the very early universe) is largely (although not entirely) controlled and determined by certain symmetries. There are some aspects not related to symmetry, but by and large the standard model is "mostly" given its structure by symmetries.

To be more detailed, once you supply the basic structure of the Weak Force, that it acts only on left-chirality particles*, as well as some details about how the three forces interact with each other, then the rest of the theory is determined by symmetry.

Low energy gravity as described by General Relativity seems to be unrelated to any symmetry idea.

How much of this persists at higher energies, I have no idea.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 9:31 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by zaius137, posted 11-17-2014 12:28 PM Son Goku has replied

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 4000
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(1)
Message 90 of 174 (742102)
11-17-2014 6:33 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by zaius137
11-16-2014 1:58 PM


Re: Ancient knowledge of matter
Thanks for the definition of speculation. However that does not support your point. To imply that the Higgs boson is speculation is like saying germ theory is speculation.

You are taking the position of an idiot: please don't.


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by zaius137, posted 11-16-2014 1:58 PM zaius137 has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022