My Math Forum  

Go Back   My Math Forum > Science Forums > Physics

Physics Physics Forum


Thanks Tree12Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
November 10th, 2014, 05:48 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
From: Germany

Posts: 179
Thanks: 1

Math Focus: Number Theory
Are we living in a @ light speed spinning black hole?



http://www.sciencepubco.com/index.ph...view/2765/1192

Throughout the cosmic evolution, currently believed cosmic ‘critical density’ can be shown to be a default result of the ‘positively
curved’ light speed rotating black hole universe ‘volume density’. As there is no observational or experimental evidence to Friedmann’s
second assumption, the density classification scheme of Friedmann cosmology must be reviewed at fundamental level and possibly can
be relinquished. The observed cosmic redshift can be reinterpreted as an index of ‘cosmological’ thermodynamic light emission mechanism. Clearly speaking during cosmic evolution, at any time in the past, in hydrogen atom- emitted photon energy was always inversely
proportional to the cosmic temperature. Thus past light emitted from older galaxy’s excited hydrogen atom will show redshift with reference to the current laboratory data. Note that there will be no change in the energy of the emitted photon during its journey from the distant galaxy to the observer. In no way ‘redshift’ seems to be connected with ‘galaxy receding’. By considering the ‘Stoney mass’ as the
initial mass of the baby cosmic black hole, past and current physical and thermal parameters (like angular velocity, growth rate, age,
redshift, thermal energy density and matter density) of the cosmic black hole can be understood. For a cosmic temperature of 3000 K,
obtained redshift is 1100. From now onwards, CMBR temperature can be called as ‘Comic Black Hole’s Thermal Radiation’ temperature
and can be expressed as ‘CBHTR’ temperature. Current cosmic black hole is growing at a rate of 14.66 km/sec in a decelerating mode.
Uncertainty relation and all other microscopic physical constants play a crucial role in understanding the halt of the present cosmic expansion. In view of the confirmed zero rate of change in inverse of the Fine structure ratio (from the ground based laboratory experimental results), zero rate of change in the current CMBR temperature (from satellite data) and zero rate of change in the current Hubble’s
constant (from satellite data), it can be suggested that, current cosmic expansion is almost all saturated and at present there is no significant cosmic acceleration.
**************

I think this paper prooved it?!
M_B_S is offline  
 
November 10th, 2014, 06:33 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2014
From: Glasgow

Posts: 2,164
Thanks: 736

Math Focus: Physics, mathematical modelling, numerical and computational solutions
The link doesn't work. Can you try a different one?
Benit13 is offline  
November 10th, 2014, 10:47 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
From: Germany

Posts: 179
Thanks: 1

Math Focus: Number Theory
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benit13 View Post
The link doesn't work. Can you try a different one?
Basics of the decelerating black hole universe

viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:1405.0330, Basics of the Decelerating Black Hole Universe

International Journal of Advanced Astronomy, 2 (1) (2014) 8-22, doi: 10.14419/ijaa.v2i1.2765



Older Paper:

http://www.ptep-online.com/index_fil...0/PP-21-02.PDF

Last edited by M_B_S; November 10th, 2014 at 10:54 AM.
M_B_S is offline  
November 10th, 2014, 12:30 PM   #4
Global Moderator
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
From: UTC -5

Posts: 16,046
Thanks: 938

Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms
Quote:
Originally Posted by M_B_S View Post
International Journal of Advanced Astronomy
Published by Science Publishing Corporation, which is listed as a predatory publisher:
LIST OF PUBLISHERS | Scholarly Open Access

Its website appears to be have been pulled. I'd be rather cautious about the results published here. (Caution is pretty good advice in general, but applies even more strongly here.)
Thanks from topsquark
CRGreathouse is offline  
November 10th, 2014, 02:03 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
From: Germany

Posts: 179
Thanks: 1

Math Focus: Number Theory
American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics

Mmh

Have you read it?!


American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics
American Journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics :: Science Publishing Group
M_B_S is offline  
November 10th, 2014, 05:37 PM   #6
Math Team
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2013
From: The Astral plane

Posts: 2,305
Thanks: 962

Math Focus: Wibbly wobbly timey-wimey stuff.
I read the Abstract in the link posted and I can't really say anything directly against it except for the fact it contains many ideas I've never heard in the mainstream...but there's no real sin in that. However I looked at the list of references and I admit that it doesn't give me a lot of comfort about the theory. For example, Hawking's "layman's level" book "A Brief History of Time" is cited as well as reference [21] U.V.S. Seshavatharam. The Primordial Cosmic Black Hole and the Cosmic Axis of Evil. International Journal of Astronomy, 1(2): 20-37, (2012). I didn't look it up but the title gives me no confidence at all.

That being said there has been a lot of serious speculation that the Universe started with a singularity and we are still within its Schwarzchild radius, so I won't discard the article out of hand, either.

-Dan
topsquark is offline  
November 10th, 2014, 06:01 PM   #7
Global Moderator
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
From: UTC -5

Posts: 16,046
Thanks: 938

Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms
I think that the idea that the whole universe is in a black hole is unsurprising; I've often considered that to be the case. But this paper gives me no confidence that it is true.
Thanks from topsquark
CRGreathouse is offline  
November 10th, 2014, 10:40 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
From: Germany

Posts: 179
Thanks: 1

Math Focus: Number Theory
Thanks for your answers!

But what do you say to the mathematical "proof" of the Hubble Constant H_u?


It would be a realy easy solution of mother nature if our Universe is a @ light speed spinning Black Hole. (No Hair Unification)

The main argument I think is the fact that there is NO physical singularity in a spinning Black Hole.

E_u = (M_u*C³)/(C²-V²)^(1/2)

M_u = (T_u* C³)/(2*G)

=> E_u = (T_u*M_u*C^6)/(2*G*((C²-V²)^(1/2)) ; V=0

=> E_u = T_u*M_u*C^5/(2*G) Kerr where T_u = 1/H_u

=> E_u = (M_u*C^5)/(2*G*H_u)

So logical follows if we are in a Black Hole the Black Hole = Our Universe is gaining mass=energy in time because it is a Black Hole in a Black Hole Multiverse (BHM).

http://www.insidescience.org/content...w-universe/566

(Prof. Kaku on BHM)

Last edited by M_B_S; November 10th, 2014 at 10:56 PM.
M_B_S is offline  
November 11th, 2014, 05:15 AM   #9
Global Moderator
 
CRGreathouse's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
From: UTC -5

Posts: 16,046
Thanks: 938

Math Focus: Number theory, computational mathematics, combinatorics, FOM, symbolic logic, TCS, algorithms
Quote:
Originally Posted by M_B_S View Post
It would be a realy easy solution of mother nature if our Universe is a @ light speed spinning Black Hole.
What do you mean by "really easy solution of mother nature" here?

I should also mention that there's very good reason to think that massive particles can't travel at the speed of light, so I don't accept that the rotation is that fast (if I concede the general idea that we're inside a black hole, which as I've said sounds entirely plausible to me).

Quote:
Originally Posted by M_B_S View Post
The main argument I think is the fact that there is NO physical singularity in a spinning Black Hole.

E_u = (M_u*C³)/(C²-V²)^(1/2)

M_u = (T_u* C³)/(2*G)

=> E_u = (T_u*M_u*C^6)/(2*G*((C²-V²)^(1/2)) ; V=0

=> E_u = T_u*M_u*C^5/(2*G) Kerr where T_u = 1/H_u

=> E_u = (M_u*C^5)/(2*G*H_u)
There seems to be an obvious singularity (as there should be!) if it's spinning at c. Are you doing something funny with renormalization here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by M_B_S View Post
So logical follows if we are in a Black Hole the Black Hole = Our Universe is gaining mass=energy in time because it is a Black Hole in a Black Hole Multiverse (BHM).
That would seem to be a strike against the conjecture, no?
Thanks from topsquark
CRGreathouse is offline  
November 11th, 2014, 06:05 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2013
From: Germany

Posts: 179
Thanks: 1

Math Focus: Number Theory
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRGreathouse View Post
What do you mean by "really easy solution of mother nature" here?
A)
I should also mention that there's very good reason to think that massive particles can't travel at the speed of light, so I don't accept that the rotation is that fast (if I concede the general idea that we're inside a black hole, which as I've said sounds entirely plausible to me).


B)
There seems to be an obvious singularity (as there should be!) if it's spinning at c. Are you doing something funny with renormalization here?


C)
That would seem to be a strike against the conjecture, no?
************************************************** ***************

A) Solution: all matter in a Black Hole is destroyed to massless particles = photons in time.

=>B) Big Bang

B) There will be light:= Genesis of a new born Universe

C) Matter is created by photon collidering (=>Gravitation)

Experiment soon: http://www.photonics.com/Article.aspx?AID=56211

=> Creation of new Black Holes possible Universes


M_B_S

Last edited by M_B_S; November 11th, 2014 at 06:16 AM.
M_B_S is offline  
Reply

  My Math Forum > Science Forums > Physics

Tags
black, hole, light, living, speed, spinning



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fractal dimension of snowflake falling into black hole BenFRayfield Physics 1 February 17th, 2014 11:13 AM
Whats inside a black hole? BenFRayfield Physics 0 September 21st, 2013 05:25 PM
Doc Browns Dilemna- My Delorean won't reach light speed HenryMolaison Physics 6 June 24th, 2013 04:36 PM
Frames of reference and the speed of light proglote Physics 23 August 26th, 2011 06:01 AM
How does the inverse square law of light effect light intens moore778899 Elementary Math 0 January 16th, 2011 07:20 AM





Copyright © 2019 My Math Forum. All rights reserved.