Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #646446 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-08-18 14:54 -0500 |
| Last post | 2017-08-26 01:53 +0000 |
| Articles | 13 on this page of 173 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 14:54 -0500
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 13:01 -0700
Re: Black Holes violate the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-08-18 20:26 -0500
Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 23:07 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-08-19 03:26 -0400
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 06:05 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-21 09:26 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-21 09:34 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 08:18 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 06:53 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 15:50 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 14:50 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-21 15:39 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 15:50 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 15:59 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 23:42 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 17:16 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 18:04 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-22 02:24 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 01:18 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 19:09 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-22 02:39 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 20:00 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 20:40 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 20:49 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-22 13:49 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 14:58 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 23:35 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 17:06 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-23 00:43 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 18:03 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 01:34 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 19:32 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 19:50 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 09:02 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 13:20 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 16:38 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 13:46 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 13:54 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 14:38 -0700
Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 15:32 -0700
Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 15:54 -0700
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 10:24 -0500
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 09:10 -0700
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-24 17:09 +0000
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 12:14 -0500
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 11:41 -0700
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 15:05 -0700
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 22:10 +0000
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-24 22:07 +0000
Re: Thermodynamics, and its flipside ( gravity ), define everything. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 08:31 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 16:39 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-22 13:47 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-22 13:53 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 07:51 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-22 15:35 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 08:25 -0500
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-22 17:58 -0400
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 21:05 -0400
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 01:18 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-08-22 18:00 -0400
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-22 23:35 +0000
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 02:34 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 13:51 -0700
Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 23:15 -0700
Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 23:22 -0700
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-19 11:16 +0000
Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. NobelPrize.ORG @. - 2017-08-19 07:45 -0700
Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-19 08:32 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-19 17:46 +0000
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-19 14:08 -0500
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-19 17:20 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 00:34 +0000
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 00:36 +0000
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-20 01:33 +0000
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-08-19 21:04 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 10:07 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 10:57 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-20 11:17 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-20 11:19 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 11:00 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-20 18:29 +0000
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-20 18:26 +0000
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 11:58 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-21 16:39 +0000
Black Holes are math kook babble john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 11:46 -0700
Re: Retarded precessing spinny things are kook babble moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-21 20:07 +0000
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 15:09 -0500
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 14:13 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-20 18:07 -0500
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-20 16:31 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. Serg io <invalid@invalid.com> - 2017-08-21 08:33 -0500
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 07:00 -0700
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2017-08-19 12:45 -0400
Re: Odd Bodkin gets the Nobel prize, along with Bert. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2017-08-21 07:04 -0500
Re: Black Holes violate the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-08-21 18:00 -0500
Re: More data, from more observers, is needed. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-08-23 10:41 -0500
Re: We can't see Sgr A* PROPER, directly. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 11:55 -0700
Re: We can't see Sgr A* PROPER, directly. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-24 00:03 -0700
Re: We can't see Sgr A* PROPER, directly. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-23 21:26 +0000
Re: We can't see Sgr A* PROPER, directly. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 14:32 -0700
Re: We can't see Sgr A* PROPER, directly. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 16:48 -0500
Re: We can't see Sgr A* PROPER, directly. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-23 22:12 +0000
Re: We can't see Sgr A* PROPER, directly. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-23 16:46 -0500
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-23 23:01 +0000
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nezumi.demon.co.uk> - 2017-08-24 10:14 +0100
Re: A TRUE singularity has infinite precision, not +/- 45 AU. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-24 17:04 +0000
Re: There is no evidence that TRUE black holes exist, none. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-24 15:40 -0700
Re: There is no evidence that TRUE black holes exist, none. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 20:04 +0200
Re: Slowing lased photons to near ZERO meters/second. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 20:05 +0200
Re: Starting/Stopping light. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 21:45 +0200
Posting an email address to Usenet is just wrong. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-25 17:55 -0700
Re: Posting an email address to Usenet is just wrong. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-26 03:23 +0200
Give it your best shot, Thomas Lahn. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-25 19:08 -0700
Re: Give it your best shot, ****** ****. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-26 14:15 +0200
Thomas Lahn would ban URL's. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-26 13:36 -0700
Re: ****** **** would ban URL's. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-27 01:46 +0200
Re: Thomas Lahn's GoogleGroups Spam Remover. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2017-08-28 15:55 -0700
Google Groups spam filter (was: Thomas Lahn's GoogleGroups Spam Remover.) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-31 18:04 +0200
If this Wikipedia article is wrong, please fix it. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-25 18:39 -0700
Slow light (was: If this Wikipedia article is wrong, please fix it.) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-26 03:55 +0200
Viewed from earth, everything near an ideal event horizon appears frozen. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-25 19:47 -0700
Re: If this Wikipedia article is wrong, please fix it. benj <nobody@yahoo.com> - 2017-08-26 01:52 -0400
Re: kNode hasn't heard of MIME/HTML ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-26 03:47 +0200
The DEFAULT "Subject:" line is NEITHER mandatory or desirable. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-25 19:29 -0700
Re: The DEFAULT "Subject:" line is NEITHER mandatory or desirable. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-26 15:36 +0000
Usenet isn't Wikipedia; threads branch and morph, topics change. Jeff-Relf.Me @. - 2017-08-26 11:56 -0700
Re: Usenet isn't Wikipedia; threads branch and morph, topics change. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-27 04:31 +0000
Re: There is no evidence that TRUE black holes exist, none. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-08-25 12:28 -0700
Re: There is no evidence that TRUE black holes exist, none. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 12:44 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 14:34 +0200
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 06:22 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 16:14 +0200
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 07:18 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 07:49 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 18:25 +0200
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 10:44 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 13:05 -0500
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-25 16:09 +0000
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-25 15:37 +0000
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 08:51 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 13:01 -0500
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 19:22 +0200
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-25 18:48 +0000
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 12:22 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 12:25 -0700
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 21:27 +0200
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-25 21:54 +0000
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-26 03:01 +0200
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-08-26 03:31 +0000
Re: Sgr* isn't even a "black hole", much less a PRECISELY known singularity. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-08-25 21:52 +0200
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2017-09-04 14:34 -0400
Re: Take your own advice, Tom Roberts. Ethel Ocallaghan <unlgclo@awlwaac.ag> - 2017-09-05 11:40 +0000
Re: "Black Holes" are forever a notion, never measured. moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-09-05 14:04 +0000
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-08-19 00:00 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-21 08:18 -0500
Re: Black Holes violate the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-20 16:01 -0700
Re: Black Holes violate the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2017-08-21 12:54 -0700
For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 14:44 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 22:15 +0000
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 15:26 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-18 18:54 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-08-18 21:06 -0500
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 10:25 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-25 10:55 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-25 14:17 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-25 15:27 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2017-08-25 15:37 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2017-08-25 15:50 -0700
For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 16:29 -0700
For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-08-25 17:03 -0700
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-26 01:53 +0000
Re: For Sefton, on whether gravity is ever infinite or not. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-08-26 01:53 +0000
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
| From | "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 15:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d90dc51a-6e5c-4eb4-a0bc-325181819167@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646446 |
On Friday, August 18, 2017 at 12:54:19 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > John Sefton is incensed about the idea of a black hole, because he read > somewhere that the central idea of a black hole is infinite gravity, and > he will insist that gravity has to be finite (even though he believes > the size of the universe is infinite). And because he believes this is > the central lynchpin of black holes, then a belief in finite gravity > means to him that black holes are denied. > > But John is kinda missing the boat on what makes a black hole. > > First of all, let's get straight what a black hole is. A black hole > happens when a sufficiently large but FINITE amount of matter falls > inside a sufficiently small but FINITE radius. This radius is called the > Schwarzchild radius. That radius is r = 2GM/c^2. All you have to do is > get more mass than M inside that radius r, and you will have a black > hole. A black hole simply means that ANYTHING that falls inside this > radius will never get out or send anything out. Things outside of this > radius can be perfectly happy, orbiting around and never falling in. The > idea of a black hole swallowing everything on the OUTSIDE of this radius > is just bullshit, gradeschool bullshit. Some stuff will fall in, sure, > just like some stuff falls into the sun, but the planets have not fallen > into the sun for billions of years. > > So far, there is absolutely nothing about infinite anything here. > > So now the question is, why don't ALL stars compress under gravity and > become black holes. The reason is that there are sources of outward > pressure, obviously, and if the outward pressure equals the inward pull > of gravity, then collapse doesn't proceed. > > In ordinary burning stars, what provides the outward pressure is heat > from nuclear fusion. Heat pushes matter outward, as anyone who has > watched a firecracker knows. If gravity is enough to pull it in (more > than a firecracker's gravity, for sure), then there can be a balance, > which is like our sun. > > When the fuel for fusion is gone, then there is no fusion to provide > heat to push things outward, and the star starts to collapse, until a > new outward force pushes it out. That outward force is almost exactly > the same thing that makes a metal solid. It's called electron > degeneracy, and it's basically the Pauli exclusion principle at work. > Electrons in the same state cannot get too close to each other, because > they are fermions. It's this repulsion, not from electrostatics, but > from Fermi statistics and the Pauli principle, that makes metal solid, > and it also makes burnt-out stars resist gravitational collapse. > > But if you get enough gravitational pressure coming from the further > collapse, then you can introduce something that only happens extremely > rarely in solid materials, and that's the electron being squeezed into > the nucleus for long enough periods of time that it interacts with a > proton and generates a neutron. Do this enough, and all of the atoms > collapse into the size of their nuclei, which is a trillion times > smaller and more dense. Since there are equal numbers of protons and > electrons, you're going to end up with something like a solid again, but > now made up entirely of neutrons. The good news is that neutrons are > also fermions, and the Pauli exclusion principle also applies to them, > and so you can't just squeeze neutrons together forever, before they > want to push each other away and you now have outward pressure. When > that balances gravity, then you have a stable neutron star, of which > we've seen plenty. > > But if this neutron star collapse brings enough mass close enough > together that you're inside the Schwarzchild radius, then gravity is > strong enough to not be balanced by neutron degeneracy. So then another > collapse happens just like the previous ones. The difference here is > that we're not aware of any other layer of degeneracy pressure that > might cause another balance with gravity. So AS FAR AS WE KNOW, there is > nothing to stop the collapse from gravity and it is ASSUMED that it will > just continue unstopped. However, as this all happens inside the > Schwarzchild radius, we WILL NEVER KNOW anyway, because we can't see > anything coming out to tell us what's going on. > > All of this is to point out that infinite gravity is NOT a logical > must-have for black-holes. All that is needed is enough FINITE gravity > to overcome the FINITE neutron degeneracy pressure, and you'll have a > black hole, and what happens inside after that is moot. > > So John .... get over it. The crap comic book stuff you read about black > holes is cheapo, sloppy, popularization nonsense. > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Yes gravity force goes to infinity.It creates when it is the strongest force.BHs can only in gain weight and density.Alway keep in mind G=EMC^2 TreBert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 18:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <on85hb$qa5$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #646465 |
Glazier, you have shown, as seen in PS1 below, that you get very angry when somebody disagrees with you. > Bert, you also have posted that you really hate the reminders that follow your posts as show in PS2. > So, Bert, all you have to do is to post a single sentence that says something like: > ***** "I, Glazier get irate, like most other posters do, ***** when they do disagree with me, Bert, which is ***** why I posted what I wrote in PS1 -- Trebert". > That's all, Bert. Do that and PS1 and PS2 will NOT be posted anymore. > > [PS1] .... which, if so, will not be posted anymore: > Glazier really aims to tell them the same thing that Bert told... (1) On 9Aug2017 to Paul Cardinale <pcardinale@volcanomail.com> Paul, you are too low witted to understand what I post.Its way over your head.Your sitting on your brain.Sad but true TreBert > (2) On 06Dec2014, to "benj" <nobody@gmail.com>: Reality is you, Benj always post under me for you are an ass kisser. For Christmas I'll shit on your kisser. <http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg> Benj, you can thank me in advance. - TreBert.... & addinng > On 03Aug2017: benj, you eat shit and your shitty brain is coming out your ears. > (3) On 07Feb 2015 & on 08Feb2015, Jew Pig Glazier wrote: Harlow Campbell HVAC, Mr.HVAC@gmail.com, Saul Levy <saullevy1@cox.net & Jacoby Benj, <nobody@gmail.com>: "I'll be sitting on your faces to take a shit & say: "Open wide". <http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg> > > [PS2].... which, if so, will not be posted anymore: > <http://pbs.twimg.com/media/A8MGOU-CQAEaZw4.jpg>, _____ Glazier, the Turd-man of Anaheim ________ <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-Undertaker> <http://tinyurl.com/Jew-Swine-Glazier-cries> <http://tinyurl.com/SwineBert-s-WRONG-Predictions> <http://tinyurl.com/Herbert-Glazier-s-Reprieve> <http://tinyurl.com/Loudmouth-Glazier-8Feb2017>, <http://tinyurl.com/The-Chosen-Graveyard-Vandal>. <http://tinyurl.com/Blog-of-2-fecal-kikes-Mar2017>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-18 21:06 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <dc6fpc1rlvv66tl8lbod235a89637p1jhe@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #646446 |
On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 14:54:14 -0500, Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> wrote: Good explanation, and a good example of why I read these newsgroups. Two things worth noting: > ... Things outside of this radius can be perfectly happy, orbiting > around and never falling in.... There actually is a minimum stable orbit outside the event horizon. A brief explanation of that can be found, e.g. here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innermost_stable_circular_orbit ... or in more detail, e.g. here: https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/46332/what-happens-to-orbits-at-small-radii-in-general-relativity/46527#46527 Also, the same people who tell us that infinite gravity probably won't work are also trying to explain why point objects with mass, like electrons, don't behave like black holes. I'm not bright enough to figure stuff like that out on my own, but happy in a world that will always provide us with new puzzles. [grin] -- Goat
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 10:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20d605c7-d824-4e4f-9a56-8eb242a767a1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646446 |
On Friday, August 18, 2017 at 12:54:19 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > John Sefton is incensed about the idea of a black hole, because he read > somewhere that the central idea of a black hole is infinite gravity, and > he will insist that gravity has to be finite (even though he believes > the size of the universe is infinite). And because he believes this is > the central lynchpin of black holes, then a belief in finite gravity > means to him that black holes are denied. > > But John is kinda missing the boat on what makes a black hole. > > First of all, let's get straight what a black hole is. A black hole > happens when a sufficiently large but FINITE amount of matter falls > inside a sufficiently small but FINITE radius. This radius is called the > Schwarzchild radius. That radius is r = 2GM/c^2. All you have to do is > get more mass than M inside that radius r, and you will have a black > hole. A black hole simply means that ANYTHING that falls inside this > radius will never get out or send anything out. Things outside of this > radius can be perfectly happy, orbiting around and never falling in. The > idea of a black hole swallowing everything on the OUTSIDE of this radius > is just bullshit, gradeschool bullshit. Some stuff will fall in, sure, > just like some stuff falls into the sun, but the planets have not fallen > into the sun for billions of years. > > So far, there is absolutely nothing about infinite anything here. > > So now the question is, why don't ALL stars compress under gravity and > become black holes. The reason is that there are sources of outward > pressure, obviously, and if the outward pressure equals the inward pull > of gravity, then collapse doesn't proceed. > > In ordinary burning stars, what provides the outward pressure is heat > from nuclear fusion. Heat pushes matter outward, as anyone who has > watched a firecracker knows. If gravity is enough to pull it in (more > than a firecracker's gravity, for sure), then there can be a balance, > which is like our sun. > > When the fuel for fusion is gone, then there is no fusion to provide > heat to push things outward, and the star starts to collapse, until a > new outward force pushes it out. That outward force is almost exactly > the same thing that makes a metal solid. It's called electron > degeneracy, and it's basically the Pauli exclusion principle at work. > Electrons in the same state cannot get too close to each other, because > they are fermions. It's this repulsion, not from electrostatics, but > from Fermi statistics and the Pauli principle, that makes metal solid, > and it also makes burnt-out stars resist gravitational collapse. > > But if you get enough gravitational pressure coming from the further > collapse, then you can introduce something that only happens extremely > rarely in solid materials, and that's the electron being squeezed into > the nucleus for long enough periods of time that it interacts with a > proton and generates a neutron. Do this enough, and all of the atoms > collapse into the size of their nuclei, which is a trillion times > smaller and more dense. Since there are equal numbers of protons and > electrons, you're going to end up with something like a solid again, but > now made up entirely of neutrons. The good news is that neutrons are > also fermions, and the Pauli exclusion principle also applies to them, > and so you can't just squeeze neutrons together forever, before they > want to push each other away and you now have outward pressure. When > that balances gravity, then you have a stable neutron star, of which > we've seen plenty. > > But if this neutron star collapse brings enough mass close enough > together that you're inside the Schwarzchild radius, then gravity is > strong enough to not be balanced by neutron degeneracy. So then another > collapse happens just like the previous ones. The difference here is > that we're not aware of any other layer of degeneracy pressure that > might cause another balance with gravity. So AS FAR AS WE KNOW, there is > nothing to stop the collapse from gravity and it is ASSUMED that it will > just continue unstopped. However, as this all happens inside the > Schwarzchild radius, we WILL NEVER KNOW anyway, because we can't see > anything coming out to tell us what's going on. > > All of this is to point out that infinite gravity is NOT a logical > must-have for black-holes. All that is needed is enough FINITE gravity > to overcome the FINITE neutron degeneracy pressure, and you'll have a > black hole, and what happens inside after that is moot. > > So John .... get over it. The crap comic book stuff you read about black > holes is cheapo, sloppy, popularization nonsense. > > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Light turns red leaving a very strong gravity field,but its speed never changes.Good reason goes with nothing leaving a BH.not even photons.Trebert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 10:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <onpo7g$795$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #647178 |
"reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> wrote to Odd Bodkin "Good reason as it goes with" <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-REAL-intent>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 14:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <31120583-1d70-4278-940f-9eb485e4dc5e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #647178 |
On Friday, August 25, 2017 at 10:25:41 AM UTC-7, reber G=emc^2 wrote: > On Friday, August 18, 2017 at 12:54:19 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > John Sefton is incensed about the idea of a black hole, because he read > > somewhere that the central idea of a black hole is infinite gravity, and > > he will insist that gravity has to be finite (even though he believes > > the size of the universe is infinite). And because he believes this is > > the central lynchpin of black holes, then a belief in finite gravity > > means to him that black holes are denied. > > > > But John is kinda missing the boat on what makes a black hole. > > > > First of all, let's get straight what a black hole is. A black hole > > happens when a sufficiently large but FINITE amount of matter falls > > inside a sufficiently small but FINITE radius. This radius is called the > > Schwarzchild radius. That radius is r = 2GM/c^2. All you have to do is > > get more mass than M inside that radius r, and you will have a black > > hole. A black hole simply means that ANYTHING that falls inside this > > radius will never get out or send anything out. Things outside of this > > radius can be perfectly happy, orbiting around and never falling in. The > > idea of a black hole swallowing everything on the OUTSIDE of this radius > > is just bullshit, gradeschool bullshit. Some stuff will fall in, sure, > > just like some stuff falls into the sun, but the planets have not fallen > > into the sun for billions of years. > > > > So far, there is absolutely nothing about infinite anything here. > > > > So now the question is, why don't ALL stars compress under gravity and > > become black holes. The reason is that there are sources of outward > > pressure, obviously, and if the outward pressure equals the inward pull > > of gravity, then collapse doesn't proceed. > > > > In ordinary burning stars, what provides the outward pressure is heat > > from nuclear fusion. Heat pushes matter outward, as anyone who has > > watched a firecracker knows. If gravity is enough to pull it in (more > > than a firecracker's gravity, for sure), then there can be a balance, > > which is like our sun. > > > > When the fuel for fusion is gone, then there is no fusion to provide > > heat to push things outward, and the star starts to collapse, until a > > new outward force pushes it out. That outward force is almost exactly > > the same thing that makes a metal solid. It's called electron > > degeneracy, and it's basically the Pauli exclusion principle at work. > > Electrons in the same state cannot get too close to each other, because > > they are fermions. It's this repulsion, not from electrostatics, but > > from Fermi statistics and the Pauli principle, that makes metal solid, > > and it also makes burnt-out stars resist gravitational collapse. > > > > But if you get enough gravitational pressure coming from the further > > collapse, then you can introduce something that only happens extremely > > rarely in solid materials, and that's the electron being squeezed into > > the nucleus for long enough periods of time that it interacts with a > > proton and generates a neutron. Do this enough, and all of the atoms > > collapse into the size of their nuclei, which is a trillion times > > smaller and more dense. Since there are equal numbers of protons and > > electrons, you're going to end up with something like a solid again, but > > now made up entirely of neutrons. The good news is that neutrons are > > also fermions, and the Pauli exclusion principle also applies to them, > > and so you can't just squeeze neutrons together forever, before they > > want to push each other away and you now have outward pressure. When > > that balances gravity, then you have a stable neutron star, of which > > we've seen plenty. > > > > But if this neutron star collapse brings enough mass close enough > > together that you're inside the Schwarzchild radius, then gravity is > > strong enough to not be balanced by neutron degeneracy. So then another > > collapse happens just like the previous ones. The difference here is > > that we're not aware of any other layer of degeneracy pressure that > > might cause another balance with gravity. So AS FAR AS WE KNOW, there is > > nothing to stop the collapse from gravity and it is ASSUMED that it will > > just continue unstopped. However, as this all happens inside the > > Schwarzchild radius, we WILL NEVER KNOW anyway, because we can't see > > anything coming out to tell us what's going on. > > > > All of this is to point out that infinite gravity is NOT a logical > > must-have for black-holes. All that is needed is enough FINITE gravity > > to overcome the FINITE neutron degeneracy pressure, and you'll have a > > black hole, and what happens inside after that is moot. > > > > So John .... get over it. The crap comic book stuff you read about black > > holes is cheapo, sloppy, popularization nonsense. > > > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > Light turns red leaving a very strong gravity field,but its speed never changes.Good reason goes with nothing leaving a BH.not even photons.Trebert Bert, even Einstein ended up admitting that the velocity of light changes within the gravitational field of the Sun. "In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Now we might think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of relativity and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in the dust. But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude that the special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlimited domain of validity; its result hold only so long as we are able to disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g. of light)." - Albert Einstein http://www.bartleby.com/173/22.html Double-A
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 15:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <onq832$qlm$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #647216 |
Abner Afterduft "Double-A" <double-a3@hush.com> who is one of the victims of <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-REAL-intent> wrote to SwineBert about <http://www.bartleby.com/173/22.html> & should ha added: <http://tinyurl.com/Tears-for-Einsteins-Misery> > So, Abner, 1) did you now exchange/buy Hitler-head Post-Stamps with "Starmaker"? 2) did you apply for that $8500/month Coder Job in Salem? :
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 15:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <73e51adc-e12c-4cd1-8b7c-dd5caa743b9d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #647235 |
On Friday, August 25, 2017 at 3:28:56 PM UTC-7, hanson wrote: > Abner Afterduft "Double-A" <double-a3@hush.com> who is one > of the victims of <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-REAL-intent> > wrote to SwineBert about <http://www.bartleby.com/173/22.html> > & should ha added: <http://tinyurl.com/Tears-for-Einsteins-Misery> > > > So, Abner, > 1) did you now exchange/buy Hitler-head Post-Stamps with "Starmaker"? > 2) did you apply for that $8500/month Coder Job in Salem? > > : Pending. Double-A
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 15:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <onq9ek$u0d$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #647237 |
>> Abner Afterduft "Double-A" <double-a3@hush.com> who is one >> of the victims of <http://tinyurl.com/Swine-Glazier-s-REAL-intent> >> wrote to SwineBert about <http://www.bartleby.com/173/22.html> >> & should have added: <http://tinyurl.com/Tears-for-Einsteins-Misery> >> > hanson wrote: >> So, Abner, >> 1) did you now exchange/buy Hitler-head Post-Stamps with "Starmaker"? >> 2) did you apply for that $8500/month Coder Job in Salem? >> Abner wrote: > Pending. > hanson wrote: IOW... "No" to both.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 16:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <656bce3e-a385-4d7c-8978-fb9d92c9a3ad@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #646446 |
Odd ".. First of all, let's get straight what a black hole is. A black hole happens when a sufficiently large but FINITE amount of matter falls inside a ...." Proof? Weren't outer stars in galaxies supposed to.... something.... but Invisible Dark Matter must be....something, somehow. That about right?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-25 17:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b525b4da-5f4d-4d9f-a81c-20ca2774dd3c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #647247 |
Odd Tell you what. When they see a bunch of Matter, jets, whatever, going INWARD and disappearing, let me know. Sounds illogical.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-26 01:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <onqkap$1rm4$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #647248 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > Tell you what. > When they see a bunch of Matter, jets, whatever, going INWARD and disappearing, Already seen. Read. > let me know. > Sounds illogical. But seen. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-26 01:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <onqkao$1rm4$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #647247 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > Odd > ".. > > First of all, let's get straight what a black hole is. A black hole > happens when a sufficiently large but FINITE amount of matter falls > inside a ...." > > Proof? Don't imagine that a black hole radiates from inside the event horizon when there is no evidence this happens. None. > Weren't outer stars in galaxies supposed to.... something.... What did you think they were supposed to do? You think GR says they are supposed to do something? > but Invisible Dark Matter must be....something, somehow. That about right? > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web