And most of us accept that we are on a really large planet that is spinning and it would take some amount of energy to get off this planet. We’ve all been in cars. When the car starts to move forward suddenly and quickly, it is harder to sit forward in your seat.

But counting apples, which is just addition, and experiencing momentum and velocity in a moving vehicle, are not ideas that have changed over and over again. When I lose a sock in the wash, I assume I simply misplaced it. I don’t concoct wild theories based on static electricity creating alternate dimensions and then try and define the properties of those alternate dimensions based on math I created specifically to explain it all. I just accept the sock is gone. No need for trillions of dollars of research.

But Black Holes as well as a lot of other research needs money to keep going. Which is why they keep coming up with newer and better sounding stories. If we spent fifty billion building a satelite to locate Black Holes and after a few years the scientists said, sorry, still no clue… Money would be gone. And you mentioned Stephen Hawking? Years back Stephen said not even information can escape from a Black Hole. He bet another guy a book on Baseball Statistics, a source that will always provide information. Later Stephen decided he lost the bet, changed his theory yet again, and said information can escape a Black Hole and is not lost when it enters it. The guy was just sitting around WONDERING what a Black Hole must be like if it exists. Just wondering.

The Spaghetti Monster flung meatballs far and wide and created all the stars and other planets in the universe. The reason for the Red Shift is that flinging all those sauce-coated meatballs put a lot of red tomato sauce in the universe. That lensing effect where you think you see two of things? Many meatballs look alike. Gravity? The Spaghetti Monster has invisible noodle appendages he uses to push each of us back down to earth so we don’t fall off the planet. They are there. You just can’t see them. The missing matter in the universe? It’s inside the Spaghetti Monster. He’s hiding it, saving it for later. His stomach is of infinite size, yet smaller than anything you can imagine. And he likes to play tricks on scientists who don’t believe in him, which is why they can never seem to figure out what is going on. Creating Einstein and Newton was just part of his plan.

All of Liam’s articles are pointing out how scientists keep changing the facts. One day the facts say one thing. The next day we need to change the facts because those facts no longer show what we wanted them to show. Thus, they weren’t really facts to begin with.

There is a new religion out, meant mostly as humor, about the Great Spaghetti Monster who created the Earth long ago with his tentacles. It is just as plausible a “story” as any of the other ideas, theories, fantasies and junk we get told by scientists, our government, main stream religions…

In one of the articles above, we hear Black Holes get shot out, kicked out, pushed out… If this thing sucks everything inside it, never to be seen again, that would sort of, to me at least, imply that stuff like gravity, momentum, force, energy, jelly beans, circus clowns… have no affect on it. Thus, how would it be pushed, pulled, stretched or affected by anything? Can’t have it all ways.

The comic book reference… Superman (A character in fiction) is totally invincible. Except we want him to occasionally be in danger, so we’ll make him vulnerable to
Kyptonite (an imaginary material) that is super rare, except every bad guy will seem to get some of it, and it can kill Superman, though it never will manage to do so, and it will come from his home planet of Kryton (which we made up to fit out story) which was blown up long ago in another dimension, except somehow this stuff also manages to be here, now, in our dimension, and everyone on that planet was killed except Superman, though now, because it helps our story, fantasy, comic, some have managed to survive, seem to be here, now, in our dimension, for some reason on Earth and all of they generally fight Superman even though he is one of them, their home world was a peaceful place full of enlightened Krytonians, yet they all seem to be violent and bent on global domination, even though they are basically Gods, so what use for planets and humans would they have?

Superman can leap tall buildings in a single bound. Which is now superfluous to mention since he can fly now, as opposed to before when he could only leap really far. So the fact he can fly assumes he can “appear” to leap tall buildings. It just helped the story, theory, fantasy to have him fly, rather than arrive in a Yellow Cab to stop criminals.
And he has X-ray vision, but it’s now more useful for him to also have heat vision, so now he has that too. And he is only affected by Kryptonite, but now there is Red, Purple, Black, Orange, Green, Yellow, Fusia, Mauve, Amber, Green Tea Extract, Lavender infused Super Latte Kyrptonite that affects him too. Some good, some bad, just basically whatever we need right now to explain our story.

This is what Liam is explaining about Black Holes. A little proof. A single story. No changes. Maybe show us one to justify all the money spent concocting one theory after another.

We could use God too as an example. Loving and caring, yet creates floods that wipes everything out. People die horrible deaths from diseases and wars, yet apparently this is part of his whole loving plan for us whereby we are bound by his plan and can’t escape it, yet we have free will too and can do what we want, but that was all part of his plan too, so we didn’t really have free will, except we did because he said so. And this all came about in a lovely garden where a talking snake tricked two kids in to believing they could do stuff that was against Gods plans, and he punished them even though this was apparently his plan, because he gave them free will, except they weren’t supposed to use it, but they did, so now we’re all paying for what they did.

These miracle stories that keep changing all the time to fit the new need are getting old for some of us. Einstein? Newton? Just more people, in a long list of people with ideas and theories to explain things they don’t understand. They believed the Earth was flat and had plenty of people with plenty of ideas for how that was true too. But the problem is, they want to come up with an answer for everything. They even say– and this made me chuckle when I read it– that today we know 99% of all there is to know. That we are 1% away from totally and completely understanding everything.

More likely we are deluding ourselves in to believing we almost have the perfect story everyone will buy in to and not question.

File under “Duh.” File under, “I want my X Billion Trillion tax dollars back. File under “Scientists continue to astound themselves with what they invent and foist on an unsuspecting (and generally uninterested public”:

Dark energy may not actually exist, scientists claim

Dark energy – the mysterious substance thought to make up three-quarters of the universe – may not actually exist, claims new research.

By Richard Alleyne, Science Correspondent
18 Aug 2009

The concept of dark energy was created by cosmologists to fit Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity into reality after modern space telescopes discovered that the Universe was not behaving as it should.

According to Einstein’s work, the speed at which the Universe is expanding following the Big Bang should be slower than it actually is and this unexplained anomaly threatened to turn the whole theory upside down. In order to reconcile this problem the concept of dark energy was invented.

But now Blake Temple and Joel Smoller, mathematicians at the University of California and the University of Michigan, believe they have come up with a whole new set of calculations that allow for all the sums to add up without the need for this controversial substance.

Con’t: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/6043414/Dark-energy-may-not-actually-exist-scientists-claim.html

Thanks for your nice note. I’m looking through your response, and between the whining and bed-wetting, I couldn’t find anything resembling an answer to my simple and straightforward question.

I will repeat it for you, and anyone else:

“Please provide one paper, any paper, that states, unequivocally, and with substantiated, direct evidence (observation), that black holes exist, outside of the realm of projected fantasy or mathematical hypothesis.”

The papers and websites you did not look for are here below (and in the blogroll at the right) – and they point to the paradigm-blindness you’re suffering from.

• Big Bang?
• Electric Sky
• Encyclopedia of the Plasma Universe
• Holoscience.com
• Plasma Universe
• The Electric Universe
• Thunderbolts.info

Black Holes are said to exist in order to explain movement, light, radiation and other events. In fact, they are invoked to ‘explain’ events of any kind in the universe, where astronomers, using the gravity-only model believe that there SHOULD NOT BE movement, or light, or radiation, or other phenomenal events.

The question that should be asked is:

“Is the gravity-only model of the universe, indeed, correct? Or is it immensely incorrect, and therefore hamstringing all efforts at understanding what is plainly visible?”

So, go ask the question. Or provide an answer to my question above – tangible, observable, repeatable, predictable, non-hypothetical evidence for the existence of this impossible, infinitely-dense, invisible, any-sized, any-function object, which are never to be seen, but surely, “obviously” present, says you.

PS – And to the ‘why does it matter’ question – a fair one…

It matters because the Gov’t is spending a whole lot of tax money (mine and yours, and everybody else’s) to do hysterically stupid experiments with, in trying to prove and re-prove and otherwise claim existence for this outdated, more than quasi-religious rigid and obtuse conceptualization for how the solar system and universe work… when there are perfectly bloody-well testable theories that are dying to get off of the frigging bench and get into the game… but are being sidelined, because?

Because?

Because those who control the game, tend, once in power to suppress the better ideas, because they’ve got careers, and money, and reputations riding on it.

So, Max, prove me wrong, and read about Electrified Plasma in space, Birkeland Currents, and other, highly viable and predictive models for celestial phenomena, and then come back, and see if the invisible monster in the sky model of the universe doesn’t seem just a little… out of date.

Cheers.

You sound like you didn’t even attempt to decipher what I wrote. You seem incapable of even considering rational, scientific thought, so maybe I should just give up.

I suggested you take a look at basic gravitation. The history of black holes stems from very, very logical Newtonian mechanics. Do you believe in that? Or is the fact that you’re not floating about not enough “evidence” for you that gravity is real?

I don’t really want to try again at this point. I am disappointed I attempted to defend the most basic scientific ideas.

You wrote a long note, in which you did not cite one paper, any paper, that states, unequivocally, or even with substantiated, direct evidence (observation), that anything you wrote above is in evidence, or, true, to put it that way.

I posted links to articles to read. You didn’t even glance, did you?

This blog is one in a series:

http://liamscheff.com/daily/category/big-bang/

Please have a look through the argument against standard cosmology, and see if black hole assertions don’t start to look a little…empty.

Thanks for the effort,

Liam

The universe is indeed a strange place. Are you the kind of person who believes only what he sees with his own eyes? What if I told you that the reason your feet don’t sink down into the floor is because there are tiny negative electric fields pushing them apart? Would you dismiss this because the evidence is “invisible”–because you can’t see the fields?

While it’s healthy to be skeptical, I think it’s important to realize that science doesn’t come to be science without a great deal of evidence. Gravity, for instance–the most visible of the four forces, the one we are most acquainted with on a daily basis–seemed counterintuitive at first. Growing up in a world where our feet are bound to the ground, it’s hard to imagine that such a law does not hold eternal.

A basic understanding of Newtonian mechanics is enough to provide the ample, ample evidence for black holes. Have you heard of lensing? Astronomers for years noticed that some of their images from space showed the same object seeming duplicated. In a beautiful synchronicity, right as general relativity was being confirmed, astronomers started to realize that these images were caused by gravitational lensing from black holes and neutron stars.

A black hole is actually a very simple object to conceive of. Have you heard the term “escape velocity?” It is a simple orbital calculation,derived from Newtonian mechanics, which refers to the velocity an object must be moving in order to escape the gravitational field of another body. Any high school physics class is sufficient to calculate it; and scientists use it constantly when launching satellites. The escape velocity of earth is around 11.2 km/s. If I threw a baseball at that speed or faster–provided there was no atmosphere to burn it up–it would effectively clear the planet, never to return. But if I threw it even a tiny bit slower, it would either enter into an orbit or crash back down.

So, one property of a black hole is that it has an escape velocity much, much higher than that–specifically, the speed of light or higher. This makes for weird visualization effects, like the aforementioned “lensing.”

Another property of black holes is that they spin very fast. Have you heard of pulsars? They are neutron stars–dense (we’re talking atomic density) balls of neutrons, former stars, that also spin very fast. Have you heard of sunspots? Galileo was the first to track the path of sunspots on the sun. He discovered that the sun rotates in its orbit.

Well, when a star collapses to a neutron star or black hole, a funny thing happens–it speeds up. This happens to us, too, on earth: If you spin around in an office chair with your hands out, then bring them in suddenly, you’ll notice your speed increase. This is because you suddenly have more angular momentum.

Imagine spinning and shrinking to 1 / 100000000 your size. Your angular momentum would increase so much, that you would now be moving incredibly fast. When stars like the sun contract to neutron stars or black holes, a similar thing happens.

How can something both “suck” and “propel (blow)”? The earth and the sun do it all the time. It’s just a trick of gravity. Frequently, engineers will use what’s called a gravitational slingshot method to propel satellites. This means angling a satellite around a planet so that it speeds up or slows down. How does this work? Well, if the satellite speeds up, the planet slows down, and vice versa. It’s just like inertia here on earth–rollerskaters can give each other boosts, but one slows and the other speeds up.

However, if you don’t aim right, you might just end up smack in the sun. The sun does indeed “suck,” as all things with gravity do. It just depends how you aim your satellite as to whether it “sucks”–smashes into the planet or star– or “blows”–slingshots itself, thereby slowing down the larger body in the process.

The answers to all these questions are out there and waiting to be rediscovered by amateur scientists and astronomers. If you’re interested, I highly recommend checking out books by Carl Sagan or Stephen Hawking. They have some excellent books for the public on astronomical phenemona.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/pf/23146973.html

Merging galaxies that forcefully eject supermassive black holes have theoretically created a whole new class of astronomical object—and now scientists think they know how to find them.

Black holes that get kicked out should carry with them clusters of nearby stars, a new study says.

These stars can act as signposts and can reveal details about the now galaxy-less black hole’s past life.

In theory, hundreds of massive black holes left over from the age of galaxy formation could be lurking in the nearby universe.

“Every such black hole that’s ever been kicked out is still potentially observable, and that’s very encouraging,” said lead study author David Merritt of the Rochester Institute of Technology.

“It’s not quite what anybody has seen so far,” he said. “We’re just talking about what they would look like if you were to find them.”

Observations made with the Hubble Space Telescope and re-examined with ground telescopes have come close, Merritt said.

“People are now just starting to make the kind of observations to see these kinds of things, if they are there.”

“IF THEY ARE THERE!!”

I mean.. farcts. Fac..t..s…

But what am I being sardonic! Why so untrusting of the great scientific establishment! I mean, who else will dare to answer the reeeally big questions (“why are we here, what’s it all about, why are Americans who eat such healthy fast food so fat?”)

The blessed and sanctified ‘peer-reviewed’ (that’s them giving themselves approval) scientific establishment helps and guides us! Helps and guides… by giving us wildly speculative, confusing, arcane and convoluted answers, which are untestable, and also so removed from reality as to be unquestionable by the ‘non-experts’ who don’t speak the sacred language….

The church is dead. Long live ’science!’

They have a word for this kind of logic, you know!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/images/B00000IPAC/ref=dp_image_0?ie=UTF8&n=5174&s=music

well, right, they’ll tell you different things – but does it matter? I mean, when the experts, citing invisible objects, can also claim that they are either the size of a galaxy, or as small as an atom (and smaller)…

Did I mention that these ‘objects’ are, by theoretical definition, Invisible, and only to be inferred (I’d say implied – as in asserted), when certain activities are noticed?

That is, any expulsion of light, heat, radiation, matter that doesn’t correspond to the gravity-only theory of the universe, is then explained, ad hoc and default, by these giant swarming invisible hordes of every-sized stellar object (that are no object)…

I mean, these astronomers can investigate it, if they want, and can raise the dollars honestly, but man, at this point I want to keep my tax dollars for non-invisible research!

But, no, in terms of giant versus small, they really mean it. Galaxy sized versus sub-atomic. So… that’s some wild-eyed theory to crown king, no?

Nomenclature is a cruel mistress (“scientists agree”).

http://www.universetoday.com/2009/06/08/super-size-me-black-hole-bigger-than-previously-thought/

Six Billion Suns Big (Scientists IMAGINE!):
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/06/6-billion-suns-the-biggest-black-holes-in-the-universe-just-got-bigger.html

Black Hole 18 Billion Suns Wide – the Size of a GALAXY!! (Scientists BELIEVE!):
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/05/18-billion-suns.html

But Wait! There’s MORE!

Black Holes SMALL – ‘30+ kilometers’ in size

Since stellar black holes are small (only a few to a few tens of kilometers in size), and light that would allow us to see them cannot escape, a black hole floating alone in space would be hard, if not impossible, to see. For instance, the photograph above shows the optical companion star to the (invisible) black hole candidate Cyg X-1.

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/science/know_l2/black_holes.html

Micro Black Holes – powerful so strong that they ‘can’t even affect one atom,” (SCIENTISTS ASSERT!)
http://www.discoveringthenet.com/2008/05/atom-smasher-and-micro-black-holes.html

Black Holes SMALL as ATOM! No – of an “Atomic Nucleus!!” (Says PBS!! Who could doubt it?)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blackhole/tiny.html

Black Holes Three Times more massive than Previously Thought:
http://www.topnews.in/black-hole-discovered-be-3-times-more-massive-previously-thought-2175747

Black Holes Smaller than Previously Thought:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_black_hole

The case for micro black holes:
http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/29199

Micro Black Holes no danger:
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2008/split/871-1.html