Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: Can A Powerful Black Hole Put light in Orbit?
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 14:32:10 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <pu3epa$tk9$3@pcls7.std.com>
References: <ptr9gg$44b$1@gioia.aioe.org> <4ebec126-7ea3-43db-9825-7fcb00092dd8@googlegroups.com>  <ptrdji$bva$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ptrg1h$hcl$1@gioia.aioe.org>  <56de4757-0a43-4e26-85de-b8b19384e36f@googlegroups.com> <ptsfjr$bqr$2@gioia.aioe.org>  <6c9f9459-ced5-42ee-b13f-dbc3907cc126@googlegroups.com> <ptsshn$t9c$1@gioia.aioe.org>  <4fa792b5-80a3-4daa-925c-3e6c29e29530@googlegroups.com> <c61ceb77-d733-4cf7-b60f-6b04bb598068@googlegroups.com>  <55de53d3-fe42-434f-a42f-ea2e2a24e7d3@PointedEars.de> <2f9870ce-0648-4bab-bfb4-06f46b956697@googlegroups.com>  <ab00a450-75fc-4ac0-98f4-ceeee07b2a9d@googlegroups.com> <4f1a0960-34af-8c7b-8e67-70da356ac4c9@PointedEars.de>  <dc503b58-e4ae-462e-8d91-99d0db7d9471@googlegroups.com> <40f00e14-cbf8-3d13-6d61-fe98c047444b@PointedEars.de>  <2fd1403c-b59c-4ec3-9aff-de9e8f54420d@googlegroups.com> <pu22sr$1504$1@gioia.aioe.org>  <137e6d62-83d8-496e-bed4-8420baa605eb@googlegroups.com> <pu37k8$uuq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <1a1123e5-751a-47a2-b95b-13ada6f57e07@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1543847530 30345 192.74.137.71 (3 Dec 2018 14:32:10 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2018 14:32:10 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: nn/6.6.5
Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:716372

john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes:

>>>QM is wrong

It seems rather dumb of you, after being told you can't use Newtonian
mechanics, you use Newtonian mechanics anyway and (as predicted) get the
wrong answer, then you blame it on QM.

>Everything gives off and absorbs energy.
>Small planets have lots coming in and absorb very little, so lots comes out
>the other side; small gravity.
>A planets surface gravity peaks when they absorb everything coming in, 
>so nothing  comes out the other side.

Gravitational shielding. Proven nonexistent. FAIL.


>As planets get larger still, they give off more energy, and surface gravity=
>decreases again.
>When they give off as much as comes in, gravity is zero at their surface.
>After that, their surface gravity becomes more and more negative.

Put down the pipe, John. Do you realize what would happen to a planet
with negative gravity?

Well, it would be impossible to form, so perhaps you can claim "it doesn't
matter!" for that reason.