Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 85 (8936 total)
22 online now:
Tangle (1 member, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: ssope
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 861,617 Year: 16,653/19,786 Month: 778/2,598 Week: 24/251 Day: 1/23 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Accretion Theory and an alternative
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1150
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 7.2


(2)
Message 18 of 257 (655962)
03-15-2012 4:53 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Jet Thomson
03-15-2012 3:16 AM


Re: Sponge and stick vs. physics and math
Amazing what a stick and sponge can do that no known physics or math can do, that is, show where stars come from.

A sponge on a stick is missing several features of galactic dynamics, as Dr Adequate has mentioned gravitational attraction between various components of the sponge and the water are negligible, where as they are the dominant effect for galaxies.
Secondly current numerical simulations of galactic dynamics match the evidence perfectly. In light of this, could you explain what current math and physics can't do with regard to galactic dynamics?

I understand that it is hard to accept the idea that super massive black holes are 'liquid light' from someone who can hardly write or do math, but it goes way beyond any thing Einstein was able to do, and that is explain the nature of Black holes.

A short historical note, it was not Einstein who discovered black holes, but Schwarschild. Black holes are objects predicted by General Relativity. We currently observe super-dense objects in the center of galaxies that behave exactly like the black holes of General Relativity. Hence I do not see what is missing in the current model of black holes, a side from an explanation of what occurs at the singularity, but this has no effect on galactic dynamics anyway.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-15-2012 3:16 AM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-15-2012 11:27 PM Son Goku has responded
 Message 35 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-16-2012 12:07 PM Son Goku has not yet responded

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1150
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 7.2


(8)
Message 33 of 257 (656044)
03-16-2012 6:02 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Jet Thomson
03-15-2012 11:27 PM


Re: Sponge and stick vs. physics and math
If we see a star pulled into the black hole, I'm finished.

Well we have indirectly known this for years. Billions of tons of matter go towards the hole and a good deal less comes out. However if this isn't enough for you, we have actually directly seen it. The most direct observation was by David Lazzati and his team, you can see some details here:
http://www.nature.com/...ournal/v476/n7361/full/476405a.html

Edited by Son Goku, : Typo


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-15-2012 11:27 PM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-16-2012 5:51 PM Son Goku has responded

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1150
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 7.2


(3)
Message 93 of 257 (656332)
03-17-2012 6:15 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Jet Thomson
03-16-2012 5:51 PM


Re: Sponge and stick vs. physics and math
Re: Sponge and stick vs. physics and math
I was refering to our own galatic center which we are watching closely and have so far seen nothing. Observations beyond our galaxy pure speculation.

In my initial post I provided a link describing a direct observation of a star being consumed by a black hole, could you explain:

(a) How a direct observation constitutes "pure speculation"?
(b) Why observations of other galaxies are more dubious than observations of our own?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-16-2012 5:51 PM Jet Thomson has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-18-2012 7:56 PM Son Goku has not yet responded

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1150
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 7.2


(1)
Message 222 of 257 (656922)
03-23-2012 6:18 AM
Reply to: Message 220 by Jet Thomson
03-23-2012 2:09 AM


Re: Ejecta from the sun
Hello Jet,

Earlier in the thread you claimed that if we saw a black hole eating a star your theories were "finished". I provided you with a link to such a report and you claimed that it didn't count because the black hole is outside our galaxy. You never explained why black holes outside our galaxy don't count. Could you do so?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 220 by Jet Thomson, posted 03-23-2012 2:09 AM Jet Thomson has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019