ACG52

So because of a resemblance to pictures you think they're moon rocks. Even though they were dug up 240,000 miles away from the moon, and there's no possible way they could have gotten there? I think that's a step or two beyond silly. But then, as you said, it is Texas.

So you were digging, and found some rocks underground. Why would you possible think they were moon rocks?

Given the problems many drivers have dealing with 2 dimensions, adding a third dimension is a recipe for disaster.

How did your friend get these rocks? If there's no documentation attesting to it's provenance, all you have are some rocks.

Here's a suggestion. Why don't you take 15 minutes or so and look up superconductivity. Here, I'll save you the trouble of a google search: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconductivity It's really simple to find some basic information BEFORE you post nonsense.

The link is a somewhat vague and nonsensical piece of writing. Oh, sorry, you wrote it, didn't you. So your post is just a little piece of self-promotion.

It doesn't decay. It boils because the container is hotter than it's boiling point. Just like boiling water doesn't 'decay'. And it has nothing to do with 'EM waves'. There are some really huge gaps in whatever education you've received so far.

Try what out? Look at the equation you yourself provided (the corrected version). It clearly shows that as r increases, F decreases by the square. First of all, let me say I had the wrong number for the orbit of Mercury, it should be 4.6 million km. Also, I had the wrong figure for the size of a 1 solar mass BH. It's only 10 km. (that's what happens when you try to rely on memory instead of looking it up) So the equation is F = G * m1m2/ r2 So let us set m1 = to 1 solar mass = 2 * 1030 kg. Earth is m2 = 6 * 1024 kg G = 6.6 * 10-10 km3/kg/s2 So for our 1 solar BH, at the event horizon F = 6.6 * 10-10 * (2 * 1030 *( 6 * 1024 )) / 102 = 79.2 * 1042 km/s2 For our 1 solar BH at the distance of Earth (1.5 * 108 km) we get F = 6.6* 10-10 * (2 * 1030 (6 * 1024 ) )/ 2.25 * 1016 = 35.2 * 1028 km/s2. This is the acceleration at Earths orbit. 1028 is one hell of a lot smaller than 1042 It's also the same acceleration we would get if the Sun were not a Black Hole, but simply a normal star of 1 solar mass. Edited to get my math right.

It does create a higher acceleration, but only at the smaller radius. As the radius increases, the acceleration falls off. A higher acceleration with a smaller radius does not increase the 'range'. And you've got the equation wrong. It's F = (G * m)/r2 You forgot to square the radius.

No, it looks like a hole because it spherical and non-radiating. The frame dragging is what makes it look like it's surrounded by a hurricane of stellar gas, and what compresses the gas so that it radiates. A non-rotating BH would still look like a hole in space (assuming you could see it at all) without the swirling gasses. What you have to remember is two things. The first is that the total gravitational field of a Black Hole is no greater than the equivalent number of solar masses (the solar mass is the usual unit of measurement for the mass of a hole). The reason it's a Black Hole is because that mass is concentrated in a very small volume. For instance, a one solar mass black hole would have an event horizon at about 146,000 km, which is within the orbit of Mercury. Which means that anything getting that close would be sucked into the hole. But the total mass is still only 1 solar mass, which means the total gravitational field is the same as the sun's. So if the sun were to suddenly collapse into a BH, the Earth would not notice any gravitational effect, i.e. our orbit would be unchanged. The supermassive BH at the center of the Milky Way is about 4 million solar masses, but the event horizon is only 6.25 light hours, or about the orbit of Uranus. So objects further than that could avoid being sucked in. In fact, there are stars in orbit around the BH as close as 15 light hours, or about 2.5 times the distance of Uranus from the sun. The second point is that the force of gravity falls off with the square of the distance, which means it diminishes pretty quickly, which of course ties in with the first point. So in spite of it's huge mass and high gravity, Supermassive Black Holes have a very limited area of dominance. The most massive SBH detected so far is 17 Billion solar masses. It makes up about 59 percent of the central bulge, and 14 percent of the total mass of the compact, lenticular galaxy NGC 1277 which lies 220 million light-years away. But the stars outside the central bulge and in it's spiral arms orbit the SBH just as though the bulge were made up of 29 Billion normal stars.

There is no void. A rotating Black Hole actually drags space along in the direction of rotation, an phenomena known as frame dragging (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame-dragging). It's this rotation which gives rise to the swirling of the accretion disk, and collimates the radiation into the polar jets. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relativistic_jet#Relativistic_jet

The Alcubierre drive, which is the warp drive being discussed, is a totally speculative drive, based on a possible solution to Einstein's field equations. It does however, call for the use of 'exotic matter' with negative mass, which does not exist in our universe. So it is unlikely that it is actually possible.

If the book was 80 years old, then most of the information in it would be outdated.

No. What's there is a swirling cloud of gas surrounding the event horizon, which is heated by friction to the point where it generates x-rays and gamma rays, which then radiate perpendicular to the Black Holes rotational axis. The x-rays and gamma rays are not generated from inside the event horizon, but are external.

Nobody who's had a 'theory' debunked says, 'yep they debunked it'. They all say 'they had closed minds'.

For some unfathomable reason, those who are most ignorant seem to feel there is value in making things up and then proclaiming they're 'original', or 'thinking out of the box'. If your 'original' thought has no relationship to reality, it's worthless.

I'm not sure that meant anything.

Yes, oddly enough it was already taken when I signed up here. I like to keep the same name across all forums, but ce la vie.

Except TEW makes no predictions, just a lot of assertions. TEW and the Little paper, were well discussed and debunked over a year ago here: http://www.thescienceforum.com/pseudoscien...-mechanics.html He just waits a while and then starts over again.

The black hole in the center of the milky way is 4 million solar masses. The BH in the Andromeda galaxy is 100 million solar masses. The most massive BH observed is 17 BILLION solar masses. So what do you figure the maximum size of the BH is. And why would there be a maximum size? And how would energy be expelled when nothing can travel faster than light, and the escape velocity of a BH is c? from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accretion_disc

The swirling of the accreation cloud heats the gas in the cloud hot enough to produce x-rays and gamma-rays. visible light produced by the cloud would also escape, but the heat of the cloud is way too high to produce visible light.. The BH itself does not radiate light. The only way to see something which doesn't radiate on it's own is by reflection, but there is no reflection from a BH.

As long as you're not passed the event horizon, you can supply enough energy to prevent being sucked in. Once you're passed the EH, no amount of energy can pull you out. Any planets spiraling in towards the event horizon do so because their orbital velocities are too little to establish them in an orbit. It doesn't No, the x-rays and gamma rays are produced in the swirling acreation cloud outside the BH.

A dimension is simply a possible direction of movement. It is not another universe, or a place at all.

Great. Does your hypothesis predict the relative abundances of primordial hydrogen, helium, lithium and deuterium? Does it predict the black body spectrum of the CMBR? Does it explain cosmological red-shift? If so, please provide the calculated percentages.

No, it's not. As long as it's outside the event horizon, it can leave. You're certainly one of the stupider cranks we've encountered lately.