Black Hole Evaporation?, Curvature aint energy

The mass at the center of a black hole can't reach the surface unless the black hole is microscopic - smaller than the probability waves of the matter itself.

Only these microscopic "black holes" could evaporate. Mass don't leak.

If you don't believe me then you can answer the question: How does mass or energy leave the center and travel to the surface?

It can't.

I'll take on any commers.

Curvature aint energy. It lowers energy.

NICK,

I don't think that black holes evaporate. I think they are annihilated. I think the use of the word evaporate is just an inaccuracy that seeks to resolve the time involved, 10'64 years I think. The universe in contrast is only 10'10 years old right now.

Good question, though, because are they annihilated? You can argue that entropy doesn't apply to black holes. I suppose that is because in such a limited system entropy is actually more energy consuming than stasis.

Now consider Hawking radiation, the idea that virtual particles materializing in pairs are separated and one half goes into the singularity and the other half is free to roam space. Negative energy being sucked in is supposed to annihilate a black hole over time. It annihilates its equivalent inside. What happens, though, when a black hole is super massive, say the size of a quasar? When a super massive black hole has cleared all of the eligible matter in its event space what is left for it? Only virtual particles are left for it. Virtual particles spread over a super-sized event horizon. An event horizon large enough to produce enough virtual particles, in other words, such that it has a real effect on the nature of the singularity.

Is it possible that quasars pulse because the singularity is changing constantly from negative to positive as a result of its interaction with the virtual environment in which it finds itself. Yeah, this might be a leap, but hypothsize that the singularity might change its form of energy, its label, because of its environment. If it is doing this it could be like a ball released in a bowl going from potential to kenetic energy and back again. As it goes along the ball encounters resistence within the system that has nothing to do with the intended path of energy, so energy demands to be placed elsewhere. The question is then, is the quasar system closed so that energy has no place else to go? Assume that the venting of energy is a result of the quasar expelling virtual energy, not energy related to its mass.

http://channels.netscape.com/tech/story.js...051014KBS01_GTY

New evidence of massive black hole in our galaxy



LONDON (Reuters) - Chinese scientists said on Wednesday they had gathered evidence that shows a giant object in the center of our galaxy is a super-massive black hole.

Zhi-Qiang Shen and researchers at the Shanghai Astronomical Observatory captured radio waves emitted just beyond the edge of the mysterious object, known as Sagittarius A, with a system of 10 radio telescopes spread across the United States.

In a report in the science journal Nature they said it "provides strong evidence that Sgr A is a super-massive black hole."

The celestial objects that suck in everything around them including light are among the most mysterious objects in the universe. They are formed when matter from a dying star collapses under its own gravity.


Black holes have been described as the ultimate victory over gravity because of their ability to suck in stars and other galactic features.


Scientists have long suspected the presence of a black hole in the center of the Galaxy. Astronomers believe it is four million times more massive than our Sun.


The research reported in Nature suggests the black hole is as wide as the radius of the Earth's orbit.


"These observations provide strong evidence that Sgr A is indeed a black hole, and afford a glimpse of the behavior of the matter that is about to flow into it," said Christopher Reynolds, of the University of Maryland in the United States, in a commentary in the journal.


He described the findings as a further step toward capturing an image of the shadow around the edge of a black hole, which would be a classic test of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity.


The theory predicts that massive bodies -- planets, stars or black holes -- actually twist time and space around as they spin.
11/02/05 13:01


© Copyright Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of Reuters Ltd.

Black holes doesn't exists, but all collapsars are gravastars, in fact.

The classical theory of black holes is neglecting the energy of space-time curvature surrounding the black hole alone, predicting the space-time horizont - which is incorrect conclusion, of course. The Aether wave theory supposes, no just a matter - but all spacetime deformations are source of gravity energy, giving a spacetime metastable character.

Black holes do "evaporate" ........their energy is induced gravitationally causing the galaxy to rotate.....the loss of mass is proportional to the kinetic energy gain of orbiting matter........what's the big deal???

For a greater understand of Blackholes, their formation and the relationship with gravity, please follow the link:

http://forum.physorg.com/index.php?showtopic=3697&hl=

No Donut.

Know that mass at the center of a black hole can't be transmitted up through the surface?

There is no energy in curvature and the mass is in the center hawking,

Quote:

No Donut.

Know that mass at the center of a black hole can't be transmitted up through the surface?

Fantastic news Nick.........Where can I purchase a copy of your immensely interesting book of erroneous facts?......and the Galaxy rotated.

No Donut. Mass/energy is conserved in GR orbits.

Who says that the galaxies didn't start out already moving? Do you think that all was at absolute rest?

And what happens to the mass of particles at the center of a galaxy or a black hole? Do they drop below their set rest mass when they lose energy?
I don't think so!

You can't sap any more energy out of a fundamental particle without causing it to no longer be fundamental.

Maybe you can explain better. Otherwise it's bunk. And thanks for your comment on my fact about hawking's work.

Nick,

Your 1st statement, quote:

Who says that the galaxies didn't start out already moving? Do you think that all was at absolute rest?

Some physicists believe that there was surplus spin energy leftover from the big-bang......codswallop!

My crackpot theory suggests:

Black holes fill the universe with energy (before and after) the manifestation of matter and that this energy is absorbed by gravitational inductance by every particle in our universe, therefore it is sapped big and bad.

A loss of energy is simply a loss of mass!

Then comes your second point, quote:

And what happens to the mass of particles at the center of a galaxy or a black hole? Do they drop below their set rest mass when they lose energy?

My crackpot theory also suggests:

Maybe!..... As I've hypothesized matter will destabilize at zero kelvin into photons by hyperfield collapse. It's only the 2.7K backgound that prevents this from happening.

Don't always rely on info supplied by accepted goofballs....this crank is hoping to make the "big-time"......or die pissing people off!

You can't see there is a problem with how much energy you can get out of a particle?

It ought to be pointed out... to everyone.

A fundamental particle isn't going to be fundamental anymore if you can drop it below its rest mass. This is a problem with Hawking's physics. And I'll be the first to point it out.

Hi Donut.

It is possble what are called "black holes" are a creative force. After all we see stuff coming out their poles. Black holes eject.

Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --

An object's natural state is to move in a uniform motion unless acted upon by another force. Basic newton.

Therefore, moving galaxies would be somewhat of a a given.

Who says black holes have a 'center'? A rotating black hole takes the shape of an elliptical ring, yet it is a singularity. Does this incongruity suggest also that a more typical black hole might have a center? If so it goes a long way toward suggesting that black holes, in spite of their uniformity, might contain information. If they contain information there probably is a way for them to undergo entropy, at least at the level at which information is pertinent to their existence.

I was suggesting that it might be possible that black holes can effect a symbiotic relationship with the quantum field under certain very constrained circumstances. That type of relationship couldn't take place unless there is information, or the ability for information in the nature of at least a rotating black hole. In something like the cosmic equivalent of a hurricane super-massive black holes might be demonstrating the ability of black holes to handle information.

Who says they have a center?

I do EG.

You are confusing their surface or event horizon with the black hole's heart which is a singlularity. A rotating black hole has an elliptical horizon but the singularity is supposed to be a single point. No ellipse there.

The truth is there are no black holes because there are no event horizons. There are only Dark Holes where light comes out but is more redshifted the closer it is emitted to the singularity. There is No Infinite Redshift (as predicted in GR) which is what an Event Horizon actuallly is. Unless you are going to say there is energyless light?

Black holes are proven wrong by the following equations:
Event horizon = Infinite redshift = Energyless light

Nick,

Any center would be undifferentiated from any edge. No, I wasn't confusing the event horizon with the phenomena. I was inferring that for such an elliptical event horizon to exist the black hole has to transmit information. That transmission could be any number of ways; binary (on or off) in its entirety or only effected at what now becomes a definable edge.

In other words, maybe they do have a center. I think the existence of said center relies on the black hole's relationship to the quantum field. This is possible because all that is necessary to separate virtual matter and anti-matter is an extensive magnetic field, like what I would like to suggest exists perpendicular to the direction of rotation of a super-massive black hole. The fact that the whole system is rotating only helps the particles separate. So, I think quasars emit energy because of the release of energy when matter and anti-matter again collide along the axis of the magnetic field. Any pulsing would be the result of some threshold, like may be a need for a certain amount of either matter or anti-matter to exist before it can make the trip to the magnetic axis. That is assuming that the rate of creation of virtual particles is a constant across the volume of space considered.