Strange

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interior_Schwarzschild_metric

This is very common. Many of the things we think we remember as children are things we have been told about as others. Memory is very unreliable and malleable (for example, the experiments where people are "given" memories of meeting Bugs Bunny at Disneyworld, which is obviously impossible.)

I can't see anything in that study to support those sorts of conclusions. As far as I can tell, the compare the amount of variation against population size. There doesn't appear to be anything about comparing humans to chimpanzees. But this is not my area of expertise. Hopefully someone more knowledgable will be able to comment. (I didn't look at many of the other web pages you linked to, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were all just copying the same original misrepresentation of the research.)

I just noticed that the interior Schwarzschild solution is for a uniform density. I guess this means it is not a realistic description of what actually happens inside a black hole.

What don't you understand? I will try to explain it more simply for you.

And the measurement of boiling point proves this is wrong. Everyone measures the same thing. It is not dependent on belief. That is not how it works. It has nothing to do with wether a person looks at it or not. It is nothing to do with the observer effect. You are making up things that don't happen (varying boiling point, fantasy physics) to support your point of view. That doesn't seem very rational. But neither is believing in "chem trails". Actually, you can. You just provide evidence. On the other hand, you can't change the view of believers because their beliefs trump evidence. They will find ways to explain it away. Or just ignore it (one Creationist said that "if the Bible and reality disagree then it must be reality that is wrong").

Don't apologise. This is a bit like trying to find out what goes on inside a black hole: "Can you tell me what you can see?" "It's ..." "Oh, he's gone."

And theory says ... ? I am assuming there is only one theoretical answer. (Based on the fact that, as far as I now, we only have one theory describing black holes: GR.) Maybe that is not the case. Also, does the type of black hole matter? Is a Schwarzschild black hole different from a Kerr black hole in this respect?

What is this fallacy called? Maybe it is just a plain old straw man. Hydropower and dams have negative environmental effects. But any form of power generation does. It is about balancing costs and benefits. Hydropower has killed more people (and removed more land from cultivation) than nuclear, but I suspect more people are anti-nuclear on principle. If the biggest concern is CO2 then both of these are probably better than coal. If the biggest concern is cost or US jobs or the land around your house or the profits from your oil well, then the choice will be different. But none of these are "good" in any sense (other than they generate power) some are just less bad than others in various ways.

But can you explain why you feel you need to keep creating new accounts to plug your idea?

As the immediately preceding post is about to be deleted, all I can say is: see what I mean? It is a shame that he is so obsessively stuck on one track, he couldn't even post something relevant to a post that was inspired by him as the latest crazy example. Ho hum.

Indeed. Talk it over with your classmates, professional colleagues, etc. Get their feedback first. If they don't show you the obvious flaws, then add the necessary detail and submit to a journal. And you are surprised it was rejected?

If one or more of the initial statements are true, then the final one must also be. It is just a more general statement of all of them. But feel free to present your "logic" and the data that "demonstrates" it is false.

Because earthquakes happen every day. The fact you don't understand why this is significant is a large part of the problem.

I am really curious why some posters are so desperate that they will create multiple accounts to keep posting, even if only suspended for a few days. Do they really think that their idea is so important, it must be heard? Do they just think that rules don't apply to them? Unfortunately, the people who could answer those questions probably can't because they have been banned! Should this be classified as mental illness?

Once within the event horizon.

They probably did: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_language#Homo_sapiens

None of them lead to the event horizon! They all lead to the singularity. (Actually, maybe not orthogonal but ...)

You are still in three-dimensional space, so there are still three orthogonal directions.

Another curious thing is that if you free fall towards the singularity you will get there very quickly. If you try and avoid that, for example, by using your rocket engines to go in a different direction, you will actually get to the singularity sooner. (Don't ask me to explain why that is, but I was told it is the case by someone who can do the math.)

There also seems to be an implication that the people who could do the math are incapable of coming up with new ideas themselves. Of course, they are but they quickly reject 99% of the ideas they have with a quick "back of the envelope" calculation. I was searching for an Asimov anecdote but came across this essay by him instead: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/531911/isaac-asimov-asks-how-do-people-get-new-ideas/

Just to be clear, the number of people who have measured the boiling point of water in different places around the world, at sea level and other altitudes, must be in the millions: it is a basic physics class experiment. No one has ever reported a different boiling point because they "believe" it should be different.

And you are wrong.

Lucky guess! (Based on the second point I made.)

I am. It just isn't very interesting. What about all the days when you didn't dream of earthquakes. How many of those were followed by an earthquake? Don't know? Then your data is of no value.