Just Proven: Black Holes DON'T EXIST!

BREAKING! BRKG!!!

WITH TEARS STREAMING DOWN MY FACE AS I WRITE THIS.

There. That should do it.

Many physicists and astronomers believe that our universe originated from a singularity that began expanding with the Big Bang. However, if singularities do not exist, then physicists have to rethink their ideas of the Big Bang and whether it ever happened.

But we have to first understand that all these scientist are indoctrinated into sub par knowledge from birth so even coming to this conclusion based off of bunk science in the first place is kinda like learning to drive at cooking school.

The paper, which was recently submitted to ArXiv, an online repository of physics papers that is not peer-reviewed, offers exact numerical solutions to this problem and was done in collaboration with Harald Peiffer, an expert on numerical relativity at the University of Toronto. An earlier paper, by Mersini-Houghton, originally submitted to ArXiv in June, was published in the journal Physics Letters B, and offers approximate solutions to the problem.

Good thread OP

5*

Very interesting stuff.

they don't have to re-think anything as far as black holes. this paper is nonsense and she is a moran

this is not science..

Repost Thread

From the link

"Experimental evidence may one day provide physical proof as to whether or not black holes exist in the universe."

It doesn't claim to settle anything...it's just an alternative theory based on her math. One which, again from the link “Physicists have been trying to merge these two theories – Einstein’s theory of gravity and quantum mechanics – for decades, but this scenario brings these two theories together, into harmony,” said Mersini-Houghton. “And that’s a big deal.”

Just more proof of how stupidly silly us humans are.

again, if she was on to something this would have been peer reviewed and would actually be a big story. Who are you going to go with...einstein and hawking, or some loon who cant get anything this ground breaking a peer reviewed seal of approval?? She's making UNC look retarded

[link to www.extremetech.com]

Exactly 40 years after famed theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking brought event horizons and black holes into the public eye, he is now claiming that black holes don’t actually exist. Instead of all-consuming event horizons and black holes which nothing can escape from, Hawking now proposes that there are “apparent horizons” which suck in matter and energy — but only temporarily, before eventually releasing them again.

To be clear, Hawking isn’t proposing that black holes don’t exist — just that black holes, as we’ve understood them for the last 40 years or so (thanks to work done by Hawking and others), don’t exist. The current understanding is that black holes are surrounded by an event horizon — a boundary in spacetime which only allow matter and energy to pass through one way, towards the black hole. It is, in other words, the point of no return. This is why black holes appear black — energy can’t escape, and so they produce no light and no heat. In thermodynamics terms, a black hole is a perfect black body — an object that absorbs all energy and radiation.

The problem with this theory, though, is that it’s based on general relativity. In recent years, as our understanding of quantum theory has improved, numerous conflicts have arisen, especially in places where both theories apply — such as black holes and event horizons. Basically, quantum mechanics has a big issue with the idea that event horizons completely and utterly destroy information — a big no-no in the world of quantum. Hawking’s new proposal tries to ameliorate this conflict between the two theories.

That is the reaction the vast majority of humans have when confronted with new theories.

Nothing new.

No. that's my opinion as a trained scientist because that's just how it fucking works. if shes not full of crap she can give all her theories, equations, whatever to any university to replicate and come to the same conclusion themselves. she has not done that, which for a story like this....complete BS. put down the tinfoil for once and take some science classes at JUCO you will get some understanding

It is my duty to inform all on this thread that any attempt to refute, or even question, well-established Zionistic mathematics and Standard Model cosmology is ANTI-SEMITIC!

lol

Again, people getting mad and defensive, trying to throw around ad hominems, to protect their set in stone beliefs, is nothing new.

Just because YOU discount the information, doesn't make it B.S Or not interesting. Such an ego you have.


Stay classy

that's not ego. scientists don't just believe everything. they have to be able to replicate her findings to be peer reviewed. cry all you want but until that happens trust me this is bullshit

The "peer review" system is an incestuous joke, and is in place solely to protect the status quo of grant-seeking "scientists."

;damned:

In your opinion.

Not Fact.

Like I said in the other thread, this hasn't been peer-reviewed, nor will it be, so it's only the author that is making this claim with only the math to support it.

If they could also offer explanations for all the current data and observations regarding black holes using this math, that'd be something to look at.

However I'm not holding my breath. I learned from the BICEP2 results not to get excited about something until it's been confirmed by more than one entity.

All the B.S "Glabal warming" papers are peer reviewed. lol That kills it right there

Can you give us an example?

I understand, but it shouldn't be discounted all together either

Which one(s) are bullshit?

because global warming is a fact moran. the only debate is if it's man made or not. go do some homework

Of course not, but this is not on track to be validated by anyone else on Earth.

Duh

Thanks OP!

5* and Green.

Some of us appreciate the thread.

Yep. It's a system desiged to bolster the esteem and bank accounts of an entrenched bunch of smug Pharisees.

I seem to recall it was Niels Bohr who said something to the effect that old scientists have to die off before new theories can begin to get accepted, or words to that effect.