Scientists just found the biggest supermassive black hole ever

He doesnt understand because of another unseen force. Dark Matter. Which since he cant see, therefore doesnt comprehend. He cant even explain gravity. He just writes things like "spooky" and how he is slapping you. LOL. Einstein would be so impressed.

 

Then....you should be all for it......right?

 

was it you claiming milo or which ever mathematician you want to rant on, did not take into account a 4th dimension?

Do you even comprehend 'time' as in layers? ie... a picture is like a layer (snapshot) in time.

Do you know that it is the 'fields' that are so important in defining nature versus particle physics and it is the entanglement of all within that 'layer' (snapshop in time), that is what is missing, in the very physics that you believe are true?

For example: where is entanglement in the physics of a collasping black hole?

If you want me to explain why the physics are wrong, then just ask.

 

and you dont know even the basics?

basic wiki -
The galaxy rotation problem is the discrepancy between the observed galaxy rotation curves and the Newtonian-Keplerian prediction assuming a centrally-dominated mass associated with the observed luminous material. If masses of galaxies are derived solely from the luminosities and the mass-to-light ratios in the disk and core portions of spiral galaxies are assumed to be close to that of stars, the masses derived from the kinematics of the observed rotation and the law of gravity do not match.

i apparently read more material than the NONE

i am honest with the evidence and the sciences.

 

i told you the EVIDENCE, (hubble) dont fit the mathematical predictions.

You can look that up quite easily and find that claim is true.

As far as why? The mathematical paradigm defining the distribution of energy, is incorrect.

Planck incorporated a direction to d/t based on his paper, that since the copenhagen meeting has been the foundation of todays physics.

it's wrong

 

A) no that wasnt me you. You are confused by forums, but not physics?
B) I've already asked you to explain using your own words how you think a sun works. You refuse to do so because you cant.

 

i love the armchair kind

And so now your answer is tail mudd (dark sh't)

- - - Updated - - -

i love the armchair kind

And so now your answer is tail mudd (dark sh't)

 

you dont do physics


True physicist dont rant dark matter.

sure i can.

same way volcanos do

 

It was Prometheusbound that keeps bringing up the 4th dimension.

 

One thing Einstein was clearly right about was his prediction of gravitational distortions of spacetime, e.g.:

http://www.space.com/8830-massive-black-hole-bends-light-magnify-distant-galaxy.html

Massive Black Hole Bends Light to Magnify Distant Galaxy

...

 

The physics may well be wrong .. wouldn't be the first time. So far, however you have said nothing that casts doubt on the physics in relation to time dialation or black holes.

 

Where did I say I was a physicist? LOL Thats what you said.
But seriously your scientific explanation of how the sun works is that it is a volcano?

 

Scientific "beliefs" are "beliefs" the same way that religious "beliefs" are "beliefs". Science can be reproduced. It can be tested by people who don't share the same "beliefs" as anyone else who ran the same experiments before.

Have black holes been seen? No, of course not, because black holes bend space around themselves and don't allow radiation (other than Hawking radiation, but that's a special case due to Quantum Mechanics), including light, to escape.

What we have directly observed is the presence of something that can only be explained by the presence of a black hole. That there is no radiation emitted from the object, which has a calculated mass of roughly 4 million times the mass of our sun, pretty much means it must be a black hole, or something exactly like a black hole.

 

You apparently dont know how to ask a quality question.

I will open up the fact:
Black holes dont exist as collapsing/ed matter.

I already offered the item on the hubble evidence. In reality, there is nothing more required than EVIDENCE.


Science does not require educating the ignorant!

 

matter/energy can magnify em signals

and nothing in all of nature represents gravity is magnifying.

 

sure i did.

Look up the galaxy mass curve. it shares the evidence that what was thought of rotating galaxies does not fit the math.

But some have hard time overcoming a belief, with evidence. That is what this thread is sharing to everyone; idiots will accept the belief before measuring the evidence.

 

which is as funny as asking how the sun works, without math to comprehend.

you need to comprehend how the mass/energy/time works

not that you open your mouth, nasty spews and no one can stop it!

 

Now that is a scientific mind!

Thank You!!!!

No black holes??/ Check!

Mirage also bends 'radiation' and the best measurable definition. Note: that the eddington experiment shows the exact same thing.

Why is it the 'only' explanation?

ARE the electromagnetic fields including in the physics that you are accepting to define what is observed?

a hurricane aint emitting from its hole and yet the fields are EXACTLY why the mass is rotating around that center.

 

Hurricanes =do= emit air from the center of the cyclone. That a hurricane can be photographed is proof of that. That the high altitude out-flow anti-cyclone is made up of air from the tropical cyclone is also proof.

(Note -- my original comment had a typo that I couldn't catch because my posts were being held for moderator approval. I intended to write ''Scientific "beliefs" aren't "beliefs" the same way that religious "beliefs" are "beliefs"''. Religious beliefs have no supporting evidence, and political beliefs are often little more than opinions. Scientific beliefs can be tested, reproduced, disproven, etc. They are objective FACTS, not simple opinions.)

 

is any of that mass 'lit', that could be seen by hubble, as in a galaxy?

What is H radiation of a galaxy?

i am teaching you to bridge concepts so the comprehension will be easier.

Galaxies are of mass, too. Hurricanes are storms associating (rotating). Galaxies are solar systems associating are too!

mods aint approving/disproving your posts.

You're not even on the radar except that you are in a contest of character differences with me.

and nothing in all the universe to test, reproduce or any scientific capacity to represent a collapsing dense mass (black hole) to cause a rotation of galaxies.


What you need to comprehend is the black hole is believed description of what is observed. Kind of like, lightning being from the hand of zeus; a belief to describe what is observed.

 

The outflow of a tropical cyclone absolutely can be observed and both the predicted and observed behaviors match -- rising warm, moist air creates a low-level low, which draws air in from the surrounding area. The air that has been drawn in comes out the top where it creates a high-level higher pressure system.

What is Hawking Radiation? Use Google.

Science doesn't work that way. Science is objective. It doesn't care about "bridging" concepts, unless they agree with the objective facts. Mass curves space-time. This isn't just a "belief", it's a measured, tested, observable, objective FACT. It is a fact that the greater the mass, the greater the curvature of space-time.

Yes, but objects don't orbit the center of mass. If you have a binary star system, the two starts will orbit each other, about their center of mass. However, a third body, located at or near the center of mass, will not behave as though the mass of those two starts is located at the center of mass. That's how we know there is something THERE, and that the central stars of the Milky Way are orbiting a super-massive object which does not emit radiation.

Zeus's hand was never observed.

HTH.