PSI Blog 20170404 Black Holes
Disappear into Nothing?
From George Coyne:
Glenn:
As you know orthodox physicists claim
this happens to a star in black holes: “According to General Relativity, it
collapses all the way down to nothing. Not just "very small", but
smaller and smaller until it's exactly zero in size. Density becomes infinite.”
http://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/2240/what-is-a-singularity-what-is-at-the-center-of-a-black-hole-specifically-regar
That is absurd and preposterous. How can supporters of GRT believe this nonsense? Why do they not understand that just as you cannot go from nothing to something, it is impossible for something to become nothing?
[GB: George:
Congratulations on turning up another
of the wild contradictions in cosmogony. The primary deficiency of the
cosmogonists and regressive physicists is that they do not have sufficient
principles. In progressive physics we adhere to the Fifth Assumption of
Science, conservation (Matter and the motion of matter can be neither
created nor destroyed). The whole of the Big Bang Theory, like most religions, is
a violation of conservation. The opposite, indeterministic
assumption, is creation, the proposition that something
could be created out of nothing. If you can believe that, then it is entirely
logical to believe that something could disappear into nothing. I am not sure
and I am not really interested in how all this stems from GRT. Einstein’s idea
that the universe is 4-dimensional is without merit, like the rest of
relativity (except for the E=mc2
equation, which was used by Einstein, but not discovered by him).
As we explained in our UCT book,[1]
the misnamed “Black Holes” are simply the super dense nuclei of rotating or
formerly rotating galaxies. Vortices like these accrete matter as they rotate
and excrete matter when they stop rotating. In other words, galactic nuclei are
where stars go to die (via a little gravitational push). When the rotation of a
galactic nucleus slows, it can excrete matter that eventually forms new stars
per your second heads up:
The second link falsifies the first
link. The regressive idea that a black hole could become infinitely dense assumes
that the rotation necessary for the densification of the
nucleus of a vortex could continue forever. This is not the case, because, like
all microcosms, black holes have a macrocosm. Resistance provided by the
macrocosm eventually slows vortex rotation. This principle is outlined in the Sixth
Assumption of Science, complementarity (All things are
subject to divergence and convergence from other things). In other words,
microcosms in the Infinite Universe form via convergence and eventually
dissipate via divergence. Cosmogonists would do well to get a set of
fundamental assumptions so they could avoid such wild calculations that only
get published because they support the current paradigm.]
[1]
Puetz, Stephen J., and
Borchardt, Glenn, 2011, Universal cycle theory: Neomechanics of the hierarchically
infinite universe: Denver, CO, Outskirts Press, 626 p.
[http://www.scientificphilosophy.com/].