Proof against black-holes

[Corvus]

But you could never be sucked into one by its gravity
because that gravity which is said to move at the velocity of light,
would not be able to escape, for 2 reasons in the opening post.

The black-hole is a completely illogical mess of ideas.
That nobody noticed these contradictions suggests that when the aliens arrive,
they gonna make us into a planet of slaves.

Your reasons are illogical and entirely disconnected with actual science.

 

[Corvus]

That nobody noticed these contradictions suggests that when the aliens arrive,
they gonna make us into a planet of slaves.

Rigggght. I see, kid gloves I think.

 

[Corvus]

You appear to be agreeing that gravity waves can arise outside of the event horizon.

I assume they originate when binary black holes spiral into each other, the gravitational waves emanating from the barycenter of the gravitational system. I am not entirely sure, either way it doesn't matter at all. Black holes have no effect of the gravity waves they propagate while accelerating.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I don't think you understand what the relativistic definition of gravity is. It is space time curvature, this is an important thing to know.

So you reckon that Hawking does not understand what velocity is?
Or is it that you say that the velocity-of-light is not a distance covered in time?
Typing words that are conflations and regurgitation of contemporary sophistry is not 'knowing'.
Being able to ascertain the logic in the following is a contradiction, is : knowing.

That
if something travelling at the velocity of light cannot escape the 'black-hole', (IE light)
then
something else travelling at that same velocity also cannot escape the 'black-hole' (IE 'gravitational-waves)

thus the notion of a 'black-hole' having any gravitational effect
is
a blatant contradiction

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Your reasons are illogical and entirely disconnected with actual science.

a vague claim devoid of anything to back it up
other than regurgitated repetition of conflated concepts

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Rigggght. I see, kid gloves I think.

you wouldn't dare threaten me like that to my face,
that's why you feel safe doing so on a forum

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

I assume they originate when binary black holes spiral into each other, the gravitational waves emanating from the barycenter of the gravitational system. I am not entirely sure, either way it doesn't matter at all. Black holes have no effect of the gravity waves they propagate while accelerating.

So now the black-holes are not the source of their own gravity?
Perhaps you should go back to reading 'a brief history of time'
just to ascertain what the theory is actually claiming before you
even begin to determine its logical status, rather than regurgitating
the copy-paste Chinese whispers of the www.

Lets return to Hawking:

The source of the gravitational waves has nothing to do with the barycenter as the origin.
So now you can be sure that your perspective of the theory is entirely inaccurate,
regardless of that self-same theory's illogical structure.

moreover, when you say

Black holes have no effect of the gravity waves they propagate while accelerating

I would suggest rereading your own sentences as they do not even qualify as decipherable English.

 

[Corvus]

you wouldn't dare threaten me like that to my face,
that's why you feel safe doing so on a forum

What are you talking about?

 

[Corvus]

So now the black-holes are not the source of their own gravity?
Perhaps you should go back to reading 'a brief history of time'
just to ascertain what the theory is actually claiming before you
even begin to determine its logical status, rather than regurgitating
the copy-paste Chinese whispers of the www.

Lets return to Hawking:

The source of the gravitational waves has nothing to do with the barycenter as the origin.
So now you can be sure that your perspective of the theory is entirely inaccurate,
regardless of that self-same theory's illogical structure.

moreover, when you say

I would suggest rereading your own sentences as they do not even qualify as decipherable English.

Go away. I have no interest in discussing this or any subject with you. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Corvus]

Black holes exist and black holes do not have any effect on the gravitational waves they produce when accelerating, Jonathon, get over it. Your incredulity and ignorance is not my problem, blather all you will. I am not going to give your silly arguments any credit by responding further. Grow up. Utterly ridiculous. You are talking completely laughable gibberish. What a joke.

Only matter and light are affected by gravity. Not waves/ripples in space time.

''
A gravitational wave* is a concept predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity. General relativity states that mass distorts both space and time in the same way a heavy bowling ball will distort a trampoline.

When an object accelerates, it creates ripples in space-time, just like a boat causes ripples in a pond (and also similarly an accelerating electrical charge produces an electromagnetic wave). These space-time ripples are gravitational waves. They are extremely weak so are very difficult to detect. Missions like LISA or LIGO hope to spot gravitation waves detecting small changes in the distances between objects at set distances; satellites for LISA and mirrors for LIGO. As the strength of the wave depends on the mass of the object our best hope of detecting gravitational waves comes from detecting two black holes or pulsars collapsing into each other.

Gravitational waves have been inferred from watching two pulsars spinning and noticing they are slowing down, due to losing energy from emitting gravitational waves.'' What is a gravitational wave?| Explore | physics.org

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Go away. I have no interest in discussing this or any subject with you. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

Now you want me to go away from my own thread?
How is that reasonable?

 

[Corvus]

The irony is the only reason we know gravitational waves exist (outside of theory) from inferred observation, is by analyzing pulsars collapsing into each other. The very objects you irrationally claim can't exist. You must be super special.

 

[Corvus]

How is that reasonable?

Please don't reply to me anymore on this subject.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

Please don't reply to me anymore on this subject.

Only if you stop posting your dogma on my thread.

 

[Corvus]

Only if you stop posting your dogma on my thread.

This isn't 'your' thread.

 

[YmirGF]

This isn't 'your' thread.

True. Me? I'm still waiting for the proof that black holes do not exist. So far, said proofs are pretty pathetic.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

This isn't 'your' thread.

It bloody well is my thread!
Certainly is not yours!
And if you don't want to converse, then why do you keep replying?

 

[Corvus]

True. Me? I'm still waiting for the proof that black holes do not exist. So far, said proofs are pretty pathetic.

He should take a peek at Saggitarius A* the supermassive black hole at the center of the galaxy.

 

[Corvus]

It bloody well is my thread!
Certainly is not yours!
And if you don't want to converse, then why do you keep replying?

It isn't. You are just the author of the title.
Say something sensible and I might relent.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

True. Me? I'm still waiting for the proof that black holes do not exist. So far, said proofs are pretty pathetic.

So you are incapable of seeing how nothing is supposed to get past the event horizon for two reasons,
and yet nobody realized that they had already assumed that the gravity was getting past the event horizon?

Perhaps the words *BLATANT CONTRADICTION* are not in your dictionary?
Or is it that your attention span cannot process more than a couple of sentences?

A 30 page proof would then be beyond your ken completely:
http://flight-light-and-spin.com/LIGO/Analysis-GW150914-Bain.pdf