Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #604214 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-03-15 14:58 -0700 |
| Last post | 2023-03-15 22:44 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 42 — 5 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 14:58 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 15:07 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 15:16 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 15:23 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 17:57 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 19:52 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 19:59 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 22:20 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-16 10:50 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-16 11:17 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-16 11:28 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-16 11:40 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-16 11:42 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-17 10:41 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-17 13:33 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-17 13:50 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-17 18:25 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-17 19:09 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-03-17 21:45 -0500
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-17 20:34 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-03-18 10:30 -0500
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 10:00 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 10:16 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 10:29 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 11:23 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 11:47 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 18:43 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-18 23:16 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-19 09:59 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-20 10:31 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-20 16:54 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-20 18:44 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-20 19:39 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-20 20:33 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-21 09:56 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-21 14:44 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-03-21 15:07 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-03-21 20:58 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-17 22:39 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-03-18 12:19 -0500
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-16 11:38 -0700
Re: Black holes don't exist because there is a universal Gamma speed limit Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-03-15 22:44 -0700
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 10:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <k7m3p4F7ff2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #604534 |
On 3/17/2023 10:34 PM, JanPB wrote: > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: >> On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: >>>>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. >>>>>>>>>>>>> False. >>>>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. >>>>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place >>>>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light >>>>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed >>>>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. >>>>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond >>>>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, >>>>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jan >>>>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? >>>>>>>>>>>> He didn't. >>>>>>>>>>> Done. >>>>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... >>>>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. >>>>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in >>>>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. >>>>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite >>>>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR >>>>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less >>>>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. >>>>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the >>>>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has >>>>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... >>>>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... >>>>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. >>>>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Jan >>>>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. >>>>>> >>>>>> That is where you are wrong. >>>>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn >>>>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 >>>>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. >>>>> >>>>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have >>>>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing >>>>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can >>>>> be ARBITRARY). >>>> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. >>> >>> It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. >>> >>>> That is why BHs are wrong. >>> >>> If it's wrong, it's not for that reason. The "speed of light" crossing >>> of the horizon is simply a measurement made by a distant observer >>> on the outside using certain types of measuring devices. The actual >>> object that's falling in does so along a trajectory that's always timelike. >>> This means it never goes faster than the speed of light. >> I wouldn't go so far as to state that the same rules of nature that >> apply to the general universe remain unquestionably unaltered inside >> an event horizon. > > They do in GR. That's what the phrase "the theory predicts that..." means. Oh please...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 10:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6daf1111-ffcd-4f10-bbaf-0adb41a64a54n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604534 |
On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> -- > > >>>>>>> Jan > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > >>>> > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > >>> > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. science knows you are wrong jan... It has known fall reaches light speed. BHs are wrong. Mitchell Raemsch > > > > > >> That is why BHs are wrong. > > > > > > If it's wrong, it's not for that reason. The "speed of light" crossing > > > of the horizon is simply a measurement made by a distant observer > > > on the outside using certain types of measuring devices. The actual > > > object that's falling in does so along a trajectory that's always timelike. > > > This means it never goes faster than the speed of light. > > I wouldn't go so far as to state that the same rules of nature that > > apply to the general universe remain unquestionably unaltered inside > > an event horizon. > They do in GR. That's what the phrase "the theory predicts that..." means. > > -- > Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 10:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <760238f6-fd7c-40f1-bd80-8161ce628783n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604599 |
On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > >>>>>>> > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > >>>>> > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > >>>> > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > >>> > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > science knows you are wrong jan... > It has known fall reaches light speed. A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself does not mean much. > BHs are wrong. Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 10:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <57cfa33a-7f7a-4aa0-a2bd-f065ac0e92d1n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604602 |
On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > >>>>> > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > does not mean much. > > > BHs are wrong. > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > -- > Jan You are a flunky jan...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 11:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <15f41ba7-52ae-448b-a9ab-b8ef7b06bd81n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604604 |
On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > does not mean much. > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > -- > > Jan > You are a flunky jan... What's "flunky"? -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 11:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d5fd3146-46f1-4457-90d1-170333cf6978n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604609 |
On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > -- > > > Jan > > You are a flunky jan... > What's "flunky"? > > -- > Jan There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an event horizon...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 18:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6fdf7378-caf0-4cc1-b290-6fe62ad64804n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604610 |
On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jan > > > You are a flunky jan... > > What's "flunky"? > > > > -- > > Jan > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > event horizon... Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 23:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <76dd8380-f5d0-4ea0-ad77-cfa060702f59n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604644 |
On Sunday, 19 March 2023 at 02:43:57 UTC+1, JanPB wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Jan > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > -- > > > Jan > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. The Shit can't be responsible for the mumble of its obedient doggies other than Jan! Of course! Isn't it obvious?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-19 09:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <42fe9938-48d1-40f3-9c57-973c5f8f8f6en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604644 |
On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Jan > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > -- > > > Jan > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > event horizon... > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond the speed of light. Fall does not reach light speed so there are no BHs. Mitchell Raemsch > -- > Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-20 10:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7150ae11-f40f-4268-92d8-ff04b79a6fdan@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604683 |
On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jan > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jan > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > event horizon... > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > speed so there are no BHs. This is not even wrong. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-20 16:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <21a5e144-c1b7-4c10-9455-3baf94050f63n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604819 |
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Jan > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > event horizon... > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > speed so there are no BHs. > This is not even wrong. > > -- > Jan Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-20 18:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <72b45ae0-0e72-41fc-b16a-ad397358f1d4n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604864 |
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 4:54:31 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jan > > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > > event horizon... > > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > > speed so there are no BHs. > > This is not even wrong. > > > > -- > > Jan > Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. According to the Schwarzschild coordinates of an observer outside. Not so for other such coordinates. Also true for visual observation by such an observer. > Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. Not sure what you mean. Schwarzschild was the first one to solve in the case of a point mass. > Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. > And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed > and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. Nothing goes FTL. Your repeating of it won't make it true. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-20 19:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9b616477-4dc0-40bb-a38b-806209110a6an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604873 |
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:44:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 4:54:31 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > > Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > > > event horizon... > > > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > > > speed so there are no BHs. > > > This is not even wrong. > > > > > > -- > > > Jan > > Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. > According to the Schwarzschild coordinates of an observer outside. > Not so for other such coordinates. Also true for visual observation > by such an observer. > > Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. > Not sure what you mean. Schwarzschild was the first one to > solve in the case of a point mass. > > Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. > > And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed > > and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. > Nothing goes FTL. Your repeating of it won't make it true. In theory it does. And you are correct that won't make the truth of BH gravity right. Mitchell Raemsch > -- > Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-20 20:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ad3de286-acf1-4d75-a54e-bb060574c796n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604875 |
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 7:39:22 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:44:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 4:54:31 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > > > Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > > > > event horizon... > > > > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > > > > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > > > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > > > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > > > > speed so there are no BHs. > > > > This is not even wrong. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jan > > > Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. > > According to the Schwarzschild coordinates of an observer outside. > > Not so for other such coordinates. Also true for visual observation > > by such an observer. > > > Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. > > Not sure what you mean. Schwarzschild was the first one to > > solve in the case of a point mass. > > > Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. > > > And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed > > > and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. > > Nothing goes FTL. Your repeating of it won't make it true. > In theory it does. And you are correct that won't make the truth of BH gravity right. Not sure what you mean by "right". GR predicts certain things about BHs and those predictions are self-consistent. Whether they are consistent with reality is what observations can decide. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-21 09:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e2263617-b611-4484-9044-2a3bb8e4e94an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604880 |
On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 8:33:21 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 7:39:22 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:44:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 4:54:31 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > > > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > > > > Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > > > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > > > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > > > > > event horizon... > > > > > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > > > > > > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > > > > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > > > > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > > > > > speed so there are no BHs. > > > > > This is not even wrong. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > Jan > > > > Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. > > > According to the Schwarzschild coordinates of an observer outside. > > > Not so for other such coordinates. Also true for visual observation > > > by such an observer. > > > > Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. > > > Not sure what you mean. Schwarzschild was the first one to > > > solve in the case of a point mass. > > > > Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. > > > > And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed > > > > and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. > > > Nothing goes FTL. Your repeating of it won't make it true. > > In theory it does. And you are correct that won't make the truth of BH gravity right. > Not sure what you mean by "right". GR predicts certain things about > BHs and those predictions are self-consistent. Whether they are > consistent with reality is what observations can decide. > > -- > Jan There is no proof of BHs. Just look a likes which makes it a different story. Even Einstein never believed. And he solved his equation first. Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-21 14:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1c6d44f3-c082-4ac4-ad5f-8d8db1bf3b1fn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604912 |
On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 9:57:01 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 8:33:21 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 7:39:22 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:44:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 4:54:31 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > > > > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > > > > > Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > > > > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > > > > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > > > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > > > > > > event horizon... > > > > > > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > > > > > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > > > > > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > > > > > > speed so there are no BHs. > > > > > > This is not even wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Jan > > > > > Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. > > > > According to the Schwarzschild coordinates of an observer outside. > > > > Not so for other such coordinates. Also true for visual observation > > > > by such an observer. > > > > > Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. > > > > Not sure what you mean. Schwarzschild was the first one to > > > > solve in the case of a point mass. > > > > > Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. > > > > > And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed > > > > > and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. > > > > Nothing goes FTL. Your repeating of it won't make it true. > > > In theory it does. And you are correct that won't make the truth of BH gravity right. > > Not sure what you mean by "right". GR predicts certain things about > > BHs and those predictions are self-consistent. Whether they are > > consistent with reality is what observations can decide. > > > > -- > > Jan > There is no proof of BHs. That's correct. >Just look a likes > which makes it a different story. Sure. But that's also true for almost everything in physics. Again you are making the standard amateur mistake by assuming some problem is peculiar to relativity. > Even Einstein never believed. > And he solved his equation first. No, it was Schwarzschild. The solutions Einstein got first were all IIRC approximations to certain orders. Schwarzschild's is the first exact non-trivial solution. Point me to a reference if I'm wrong (I'm not a good histrorian). -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-21 15:07 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <77bdc4c0-bbbe-4da3-b595-dc2b3bdf8de7n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604929 |
On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 2:44:43 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 9:57:01 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 8:33:21 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 7:39:22 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:44:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 4:54:31 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > > > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > > > > > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > > > > > > Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > > > > > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > > > > > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > > > > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > > > > > > > event horizon... > > > > > > > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > > > > > > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > > > > > > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > > > > > > > speed so there are no BHs. > > > > > > > This is not even wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. > > > > > According to the Schwarzschild coordinates of an observer outside. > > > > > Not so for other such coordinates. Also true for visual observation > > > > > by such an observer. > > > > > > Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. > > > > > Not sure what you mean. Schwarzschild was the first one to > > > > > solve in the case of a point mass. > > > > > > Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. > > > > > > And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed > > > > > > and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. > > > > > Nothing goes FTL. Your repeating of it won't make it true. > > > > In theory it does. And you are correct that won't make the truth of BH gravity right. > > > Not sure what you mean by "right". GR predicts certain things about > > > BHs and those predictions are self-consistent. Whether they are > > > consistent with reality is what observations can decide. > > > > > > -- > > > Jan > > There is no proof of BHs. > That's correct. > >Just look a likes > > which makes it a different story. > Sure. But that's also true for almost everything in physics. > Again you are making the standard amateur mistake by > assuming some problem is peculiar to relativity. > > Even Einstein never believed. > > And he solved his equation first. > No, it was Schwarzschild. No. Einstein solved his equation first. Schwarzschild wanted to believe otherwise. Science wanted to say they beat Einstein to the punch. But that is not real. ?The solutions Einstein got first were > all IIRC approximations to certain orders. Schwarzschild's is the > first exact non-trivial solution. Point me to a reference if > I'm wrong (I'm not a good histrorian). > No. Einstein solved for a completely collapsing star first or a BH. And he never believe that extreme of gravity would ever manifest jan. No BHs even according to the horse's mouth. You like to pretend jan... you took a course but what does that mean? You have failed abysmal already... Mitchell Raemsch > -- > Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-21 20:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9a4917f5-14d6-4fe1-b707-e35e51879ae2n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604933 |
On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 3:07:27 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 2:44:43 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > On Tuesday, March 21, 2023 at 9:57:01 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 8:33:21 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 7:39:22 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 6:44:24 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 4:54:31 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > On Monday, March 20, 2023 at 10:31:29 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > On Sunday, March 19, 2023 at 9:59:29 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 6:43:57 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:47:05 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 11:23:28 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:29:45 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:16:01 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 8:34:29 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 7:45:31 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> Done. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>>> Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>> be ARBITRARY). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > science knows you are wrong jan... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It has known fall reaches light speed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A coordinate speed in certain types of coordinates. This by itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not mean much. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > BHs are wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Most likely yes but not because of this "reason". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are a flunky jan... > > > > > > > > > > > > What's "flunky"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > > > > > There is no stopping time so there is no falling to light speed. > > > > > > > > > > Relativity does not say about "falling to light speed". You've just > > > > > > > Its original that you were not taught jan. > > > > > > > > > > made it up. Well, not quite: you are probably following some > > > > > > > > > > pop-sci book, they tend to be very careless with their descriptions. > > > > > > > > > > > Kip Thorne said even he made that mistake... about an > > > > > > > > > > > event horizon... > > > > > > > > > > Sure, people make mistakes. And so did you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not really in correcting Kip Thorne. He accepted my > > > > > > > > > correction to BHs accelerating fall beyond > > > > > > > > > the speed of light. Fall does not reach light > > > > > > > > > speed so there are no BHs. > > > > > > > > This is not even wrong. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > > > Falling to the speed of light where time stops is the event horizon. > > > > > > According to the Schwarzschild coordinates of an observer outside. > > > > > > Not so for other such coordinates. Also true for visual observation > > > > > > by such an observer. > > > > > > > Einstein was first to solve his equation and did not believe in it. > > > > > > Not sure what you mean. Schwarzschild was the first one to > > > > > > solve in the case of a point mass. > > > > > > > Time cannot be stopped. The strength of gravity has a limit. > > > > > > > And the atom falling at a theoretical BH reaches light speed > > > > > > > and goes FTL. Inside Gamma wins the argument jan. > > > > > > Nothing goes FTL. Your repeating of it won't make it true. > > > > > In theory it does. And you are correct that won't make the truth of BH gravity right. > > > > Not sure what you mean by "right". GR predicts certain things about > > > > BHs and those predictions are self-consistent. Whether they are > > > > consistent with reality is what observations can decide. > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Jan > > > There is no proof of BHs. > > That's correct. > > >Just look a likes > > > which makes it a different story. > > Sure. But that's also true for almost everything in physics. > > Again you are making the standard amateur mistake by > > assuming some problem is peculiar to relativity. > > > Even Einstein never believed. > > > And he solved his equation first. > > No, it was Schwarzschild. > No. Einstein solved his equation first. > Schwarzschild wanted to believe otherwise. > Science wanted to say they beat Einstein > to the punch. But that is not real. Have you seen Schwarzschild's letter to Einstein and Einstein's response? > ?The solutions Einstein got first were > > all IIRC approximations to certain orders. Schwarzschild's is the > > first exact non-trivial solution. Point me to a reference if > > I'm wrong (I'm not a good histrorian). > > > No. Einstein solved for a completely collapsing star first or a BH. AFAIK this is false. -- Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-17 22:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3ea3ccae-2570-4cd0-b9bb-9e163693a127n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #604524 |
On Saturday, 18 March 2023 at 03:45:31 UTC+1, whodat wrote: > On 3/17/2023 9:09 PM, JanPB wrote: > > On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 6:26:01 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 1:33:30 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > >>> On Friday, March 17, 2023 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:40:47 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > >>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 11:18:00 AM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > >>>>>>> On Thursday, March 16, 2023 at 10:50:24 AM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 10:20:45 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:59:17 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 7:52:09 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 5:57:41 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 3:23:49 PM UTC-7, JanPB wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, March 15, 2023 at 2:58:20 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> just as there is a speed limit there is a gravitational > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> acceleration limit. As GR's increasing speeds(accelerations) > >>>>>>>>>>>>>> still must obey fall below light speed.. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> They do. The speeds you mention are merely coordinate speeds which > >>>>>>>>>>>>> can be arbitrary, in general. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Speed is speed jan and there is a speed limit defined by Gamma. > >>>>>>>>>>> False. > >>>>>>>>>> Gamma demonstrates the speed limit the atom must obey. > >>>>>>>>>> There are no BHs. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> You won't get anywhere with this by just making stuff up. > >>>>>>>>>>>> BHs event horizons have always been know as the place > >>>>>>>>>>>> where falling reaches the speed of light > >>>>>>>>>>> False. In the Schwarzschild coordinates the falling speed > >>>>>>>>>>> tends to zero, not the speed of light. > >>>>>>>>>> Then light speed at zero hangs on the event horizon jan? > >>>>>>>>>>>> and goes beyond > >>>>>>>>>>>> inside a BH by more gravity there. > >>>>>>>>>>> Again, false. The speed always remains less than of light, > >>>>>>>>>>> that's what it means for the infalling trajectory to be timelike. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Just get off this horse, it won't get you anywhere anymore. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>>> Jan > >>>>>>>>>> Is it false jan that Einstein never believed in the BH? > >>>>>>>>>> He didn't. > >>>>>>>>> Done. > >>>>>>>> That is what they all say where they have been undone... > >>>>>>>> There is no BH in reality. > >>>>>>> Again, you are changing the subject now. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> First of all, many (most?) physicists also think BH do not exist in > >>>>>> Andthere is proof that the theory is not real. > >>>>>>> the sense of a boundary of existence at a finite distance or finite > >>>>>>> time. This is most likely a consequence of the fact that GR > >>>>>>> ignores quantum phenomena. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But again most(?) physicists think horizons do exist more or less > >>>>>>> as in the GR model. We'll see [pun intended]. > >>>>>>>> It is just an overshoot in the > >>>>>>>> theory of maximum strength. Gravity strength has > >>>>>>>> a limit instead... by Gamma... > >>>>>>>> We are seeing those super mass look a likes.... > >>>>>>>> BHs have already lost. > >>>>>>> You are again trying to smash open an open door. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Jan > >>>>>> Gamma shows the universal speed limit that gravity and acceleration must obey. > >>>>> > >>>>> But coordinate speeds are not subject to this limitation. > >>>> > >>>> That is where you are wrong. > >>> No, I am 100% correct. And I gave you a proof already: when you turn > >>> your head 90 degrees to the left, the Andromeda galaxy moves 90 > >>> degrees to the right at a coordinate speed far exceeding that of light. > >>> > >>> Coorfdinate speeds are merely accounting devices, they don't have > >>> immediate physical meaning (they do have a meaning after processing > >>> the data but they don't have a meaning as bare numbers which can > >>> be ARBITRARY). > >> Falling at the speed of light is real in BH theory jan. > > > > It's false. I have shown you the actual formulas. > > > >> That is why BHs are wrong. > > > > If it's wrong, it's not for that reason. The "speed of light" crossing > > of the horizon is simply a measurement made by a distant observer > > on the outside using certain types of measuring devices. The actual > > object that's falling in does so along a trajectory that's always timelike. > > This means it never goes faster than the speed of light. > I wouldn't go so far as to state that the same rules of nature rules of nature, of course, invented and postulated by some insane halfbraims.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-03-18 12:19 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <rqadnQH6U7ECb4j5nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #604524 |
On 3/17/23 9:45 PM, whodat wrote: > I wouldn't go so far as to state that the same rules of nature that > apply to the general universe remain unquestionably unaltered inside > an event horizon. Hmmmm. First, in GR the rules are indeed the same inside an event horizon as they are outside of it, all the way down to the singularity (but not including it). Second, for a large black hole, the gravitation perceived at the horizon can be less than that on the surface of the earth; since no local observation can discern the location of the horizon, thinking that the "rules" change discontinuously at the horizon is invoking magic. In the neighborhood of the singularity inside the horizon, all bets are off, and we have good reason to believe that GR is not valid there and some currently-unknown new physics must become important. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web