On 04/01/2016 12:08 PM, JAAKKO KURHI wrote:
'Yousuf Khan[_2_ Wrote:
;1307469']On 26/12/2015 1:55 PM, JAAKKO KURHI wrote:-
“The black hole is made up of highly compressed matter, even the light
cannot escape.”
The ways an atom is constructed don’t work well in technical aspect
because the atom is structurally weak to take any externally applied
pressure. Let us leave the light issue as is and concentrate on how
much
pressure the atomic construction can take. The structurally weak
construction of an atom is due to orbiting electrons, specifically
the
long distances from the nucleus to orbiting electrons, makes electrons
subject to collapse way before extreme pressure is applied.-

This is called the Pauli Exclusion Principle for electrons. No two
electrons with the same direction of spin can occupy the same orbital of

an atom at the same time. This is the force that counteracts the total
collapse of a white dwarf from becoming a black hole.


In a black hole, even the Pauli Exclusion principle for nucleons is
bypassed, and there is no force available to counteract its final
collapse into a black hole.
-
The reason
for collapsing electrons is, because the pull force from the nucleus
and the orbiting force of electrons has to be in balance (equilibrium)
in order to make an atomic orbiting system feasible. So it takes small
amounts of compressing energy to throw electrons off from their
orbits,
thus forces are out of balance and electrons are pulled into the
nucleus.-

You seem to be arguing for an electron centrifugal force here. The
electrons aren't orbiting the atom like planets orbiting the Sun, so
there's no counteracting centrifugal force, like there is for planets.
The "orbital" of an electron is not the same as an "orbit" of a planet.

-
So the nucleus has gained .01% into its mass, and this total
mass from an atom isn’t further compressible regardless the strength
of
applicable forces within the black hole. Therefore, the large size of
the black hole in the milky way galaxy is made up of these collapsed
atoms, which are physically incompressible in volume, thus the total
mass has to be much larger in size and weight than previously
calculated
compressible atomic mass. In conclusion, the primeval masses contend
of
the black hole in one galaxy doesn’t fit into one big atom or a
marble
ball size object, which is said to be a source for all matter in the
universe. Furthermore, redefining an atomic mass as compressible into
infinite, does not resolve the electron’s collapsing issue. Is there
explanation to this disparity?-

You've just described a neutron star, not a black hole.

Yousuf Khan





The orbital is a statistical cloud inside which the electron is likely
to be. However, the electron isn't moving around inside this orbital, it
is just popping in and out of existence within this region. The electron
pops in and out of its region due to quantum mechanics.

Results obtained by quantum mechanics are not applicable unless they
have support from the abstract of classical mechanics, coupled with
logical understanding. Fast-moving electrons on them orbiting baths
can’t change direction to pop in and out. In theory, this pop-up and in
and out action require a lot of extra energy to accomplish, therefore,
the pop-up concept has no mechanical nor logical support. Furthermore,
the science has not visually observed electrons, and their existence
have been debated more than a hundred years without reaching mechanical
confirmation. In support of electron existence and how they function
there are internet pages full of lookalike illustrations for an atomic
structure, including electrons circling the nucleus as they orbit within
their designated shells. So, from where the theoretical force comes
that can prevent electrons from collapsing when the extreme gravity is
applied?

No, they do not need support from classical mechanics, because these are
quantum systems, and classical mechanics doesn't apply at this scale.
Trust me, this debate was held nearly 100 years ago, and people argued
just like you, except it was already quite clear back then that
classical physics was no longer in charge at this level. Nothing at this
level can be explained by classical physics, no matter how much you want
it to.

You've just described a neutron star, not a black hole

My point is to demonstrate that there is much more highly compressed
matter in the universe that can originate from a small extremely high
compressed object. zerotemperature.com The problems seem to lie in
loosely used compression terms because the science doesn’t specify what
is compressible. From the beginning, it’s critical to specify as a
condition of a primeval mass particle before deciding how to used it and
much it can compress. The neutron star compared to the black hole in the
center of a galaxy, both which are equally compressed objects, but in
lack of compression value the issue becomes arbitrary. Thus, is an
atomic mass compressible?

A neutron star is in no way as equally compressed as a black hole. The
reason that a black hole can become more compressed than a neutron star
is because it destroys the matter particles, and turns them into energy
particles. Energy particles don't obey the Fermionic statistics, such as
the Pauli Exclusion Principle. Instead they obey the Bosonic statistics,
which state that you can have as many energy particles occupying the
same position in space as you like, at the same time.

Yousuf Khan