To me that was the best part of it going through undergrad. That and no math–if you could reason physically, the chemistry worked itself out.
These guys really did a crazy thing, it’s just hard to describe in non-chemical geek words 
1 Like
Makes sense given Autistic-Savants. Low functioning on social scales, but adapted to ridiculous various types of talents.
I am an excellent driver…
1 Like
You want to turn your world upside down? Check this out… No such thing as Black Holes. Whether, you believe this or not, well, just look at the evidence. Just anecdotally, there is no actual evidence of what we believe Black Holes actually are, right? You cannot see them, touch them, or experience them in any real way. This is really new stuff. So, do they exist?
Prepare to have your mind warped, you may never be the same…
Scientists argue:
http://discovermagazine.com/2015/april/20-no-such-thing-as-a-black-hole
Wrong.
From my understanding their gravity effect can be seen. From your article:
[quote] the many — scratch that; the countless — observations that have been made on quite black hole-ish objects found throughout the Universe.
Of course this leads me to ask: if there really are “no black holes” then what’s causing the stars in the center of our galaxy to move like this?
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap001220.html
[/quote]
I couldn’t read much of your second article due to ads, but talks more about the behavior of black holes, not challenging that a gravitational event horizon exists.
What did you read that led you to the conclusion that there is no evidence of them?
It doesnt really say that. Once again pat says something stupid and wrong. Surprise. suprise.
A quote from the second article: "The study, published on the open-access research site arXiv, does, in fact, include the words “there are no black holes.” But the sentence continues on: “—in the sense of regimes from which light can’t escape to infinity. There are, however, apparent horizons which persist for a period of time.”
I just brought them up for discussion, because this is new scientific threshold stuff. I didn’t say they exist or do not. Though the explanation for why they may appear to exist I found intriguing.
I am not arguing a side here. It fits the thread.
I don’t have a side, whether or not black holes exist don’t affect my daily life on this blue rock, not for the time being anyway.
Wait. You’ve personally seen\ experienced a black hole and live to tell about it?
This is actually addressed in one of the three articles I posted. You need something incredibly dense with tremendous gravity to sling stars around, they do not have to be ‘black holes’ that end in a singularity. The main claim I saw what that the event horizon prevents us from see what’s beyond.
No, that’s not what you said, and not what I claimed.
You said there is no actual evidence. There is. You said because we cannot see, touch, or experience them they are not real. That is not true, we can observe their behavior.
So your issue is with the term “black hole”?
You’re talking about something that we don’t fully understand and have theories about their behavior, but there is something there. Your original claim was black holes don’t exist, which is VERY misleading. Clearly there are different interpretations of their behavior, but there is something there. Your articles didn’t support the claim you were making.
I don’t have an issue, but apparently you do. I was posting new theories going around the scientific world right now. That’s it.
Go read the articles I posted. I am not trying to have a long-dick contest with you.
Nope. I have an issue with you saying that there is no such things as black holes, look at the evidence, and the evidence doesn’t support what you’re saying. Call them whatever you want, there is evidence they exist.
I did, and I’m challenging the conclusion because the articles you posted didn’t say what you said.
I didn’t say it. I advertised to get people to read the articles.
The articles did. And nobody is saying they ‘don’t exist’ per se, they are questioning them now.
If you have a question please direct them to Discovery Magazine, Popular Mechanics and Universe Today. They are the ones who made the claims, I am just the messenger.
This is what I said:
“You want to turn your world upside down? Check this out… No such thing as Black Holes. Whether, you believe this or not, well, just look at the evidence. Just anecdotally, there is no actual evidence of what we believe Black Holes actually are, right? You cannot see them, touch them, or experience them in any real way. This is really new stuff. So, do they exist?
Prepare to have your mind warped, you may never be the same…”
Perhaps I should have put a question mark after the 3rd sentence, the other part is simply “Hey, check this out!”
And you cannot prove black holes existed, ever. Nobody could. That’s why people are challenging the theory. Sure you can ‘see’ their effect, but can you prove that it’s a black hole and nothing else? It could be the amalgamation of what comes next after a neutron star for all we know, as it would fit the properties.
I was advertising the articles, nothing more. I put forth evidence for people to make up their own minds. The purpose of my ‘statement’ was to draw people in. I made no conclusions, other than other than causal evidence is the only evidence we have. We have no direct measurements of black holes.
Go ahead, find me an exact measurement of a black hole that was determined solely by the black hole and not the event horizon or it’s apparent gravity. Remember, it has to be direct evidence given by the black hole itself and nothing else.
I won’t hold my breath, because it doesn’t exist. But please, by all means, try…
I said anecdotally there is no actual evidence… And there damn sure isn’t any direct evidence.
But you can sure as hell proof em!
(Carry on, I’m not as smart as you science-y folks, but I do enjoy lurking for knowledge)
lol, thanks P.
I really have no idea why Drew is pissed off about something I literally didn’t do. All I wanted to do was contribute cutting edge ideas in science on a science thread. I apparently put my dick in his Corn Flakes today…
1 Like
Yep. That’ll do it.
But you did. You literally quoted yourself saying it as a conclusion from the article. I was pointing out that the articles did not say that and it was more of a clickbait headline and then the articles went into a technicality of the features of what we normally would consider a black hole. @corndiggity provided the quote from the article, here it is again, where it admits that saying there are no black holes isn’t an accurate representation of what the study says:
"The study, published on the open-access research site arXiv, does, in fact, include the words “there are no black holes.” But the sentence continues on: “—in the sense of regimes from which light can’t escape to infinity. There are, however, apparent horizons which persist for a period of time.”
They didn’t make the claims you are saying they are making.
It depends on what you mean by prove. Prove the exact nature? Of course not, which is what your articles discuss. Prove that there is a massive gravitational pull in an area where light doesn’t escape? Yes, that is how black holes were discovered.
Do you mean you personally have no evidence? Because there is anecdotal evidence of their behavior as well as specific scientific research. The first notice of the gravitational pull of a black hole was anecdotal by the definition of the word (personal observation).
Not mad, more amused at how you got to your conclusion, because it is not supported.
I’ll drop it. For anyone following along, black holes do exist, but we don’t yet understand their nature and there are a lot of theories (some seem pretty crazy) about what is beyond the event horizon.
Edit: Most importantly, I don’t like cornflakes, regardless of how many dicks are in them
I didn’t make a conclusion…
1 Like
Was that while taking pictures of it to send to Kim Jong-un?
2 Likes
This is why the word prove is rarely employed in serious scientific work. Consider: I assume most of us are on-board with the notion that the Sun is the center of the solar system, and the planets orbit it. But has this notion ever been proven? And how would one ‘prove’ this, even in theory?
3 Likes