Charged black holes

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
To OG and Zin,
Sure, the charge of the undegenerate electron is equal to
the proton's. But what happens when the electron's miniscule mass is
crammed into the much more massive nucleus? Does the net charge still
remain neutral? If so, then I stand corrected. Any referances
appreciated, and thanks in advance.
oc

Just to set your mind at rest.
Yes, the net charge does remain neutral where equal numbers of electrons and
protons are added to a BH.

Can I prove this? No. However, charge has been conserved in all
appropriately observed cases to date, so it is reasonable to take this as
one of the fundamental principles of modern physics.

I thought you knew a bit about this stuff?

OG sezz..

I thought you knew a bit about this stuff?

Aw, thank U for the most gracious enlightenment. However, under the
flowing-space model, the flow is always *into* a BH, making it an
electrical anode or (+) terminal (conversely, flow is always `away from`
a cathode or (-) terminal). OOPs. Almost forgot. There is no flow. There
is only the "Void".G oc

OG sezz..

I thought you knew a bit about this stuff?

Aw, thank U for the most gracious enlightenment. However, under the
flowing-space model, the flow is always *into* a BH, making it an
electrical anode or (+) terminal (conversely, flow is always `away from`
a cathode or (-) terminal). OOPs. Almost forgot. There is no flow. There
is only the "Void".G oc

OG sezz..

Can I prove this? No. However, charge
has been conserved in all appropriately
observed cases to date, so it is
reasonable to take this as one of the
fundamental principles...

Hmmm... doing a little 'intuitive extrapolation' are we? I thought that
was a big no-no. Nothing but experimental proof is acceptable; gotta see
repeatable empirical evidence. No "reasonable to assume" guesswork
allowed. oc

OG sezz..

Can I prove this? No. However, charge
has been conserved in all appropriately
observed cases to date, so it is
reasonable to take this as one of the
fundamental principles...

Hmmm... doing a little 'intuitive extrapolation' are we? I thought that
was a big no-no. Nothing but experimental proof is acceptable; gotta see
repeatable empirical evidence. No "reasonable to assume" guesswork
allowed. oc

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
OG sezz..

I thought you knew a bit about this stuff?

Aw, thank U for the most gracious enlightenment. However, under the
flowing-space model, the flow is always *into* a BH, making it an
electrical anode or (+) terminal (conversely, flow is always `away from`
a cathode or (-) terminal). OOPs. Almost forgot. There is no flow. There
is only the "Void".G oc

So lets get this clear.
You are saying that under the flowing space model, space itself flows
towards or away from electrically charged objects. Towards anodes and away
from cathodes.

Just looking for clarity here.

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
OG sezz..

I thought you knew a bit about this stuff?

Aw, thank U for the most gracious enlightenment. However, under the
flowing-space model, the flow is always *into* a BH, making it an
electrical anode or (+) terminal (conversely, flow is always `away from`
a cathode or (-) terminal). OOPs. Almost forgot. There is no flow. There
is only the "Void".G oc

So lets get this clear.
You are saying that under the flowing space model, space itself flows
towards or away from electrically charged objects. Towards anodes and away
from cathodes.

Just looking for clarity here.

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
OG sezz..

Can I prove this? No. However, charge
has been conserved in all appropriately
observed cases to date, so it is
reasonable to take this as one of the
fundamental principles...

Hmmm... doing a little 'intuitive extrapolation' are we? I thought that
was a big no-no. Nothing but experimental proof is acceptable; gotta see
repeatable empirical evidence. No "reasonable to assume" guesswork
allowed. oc

Bill, you're not paying attention, you even included in your post my comment
"However, charge
has been conserved in all appropriately
observed cases to date,"

Now, to me that counts as "experimental proof". and "repeatable empirical
evidence".

From my readings "intuituve extrapolation" seems to be something else.
Please could you explain it for me again.

Thanks

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
OG sezz..

Can I prove this? No. However, charge
has been conserved in all appropriately
observed cases to date, so it is
reasonable to take this as one of the
fundamental principles...

Hmmm... doing a little 'intuitive extrapolation' are we? I thought that
was a big no-no. Nothing but experimental proof is acceptable; gotta see
repeatable empirical evidence. No "reasonable to assume" guesswork
allowed. oc

Bill, you're not paying attention, you even included in your post my comment
"However, charge
has been conserved in all appropriately
observed cases to date,"

Now, to me that counts as "experimental proof". and "repeatable empirical
evidence".

From my readings "intuituve extrapolation" seems to be something else.
Please could you explain it for me again.

Thanks

"OG" wrote in message
...

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message
...
OG sezz..

I thought you knew a bit about this stuff?

Aw, thank U for the most gracious enlightenment. However, under the
flowing-space model, the flow is always *into* a BH, making it an
electrical anode or (+) terminal (conversely, flow is always `away from`
a cathode or (-) terminal). OOPs. Almost forgot. There is no flow. There
is only the "Void".G oc

So lets get this clear.
You are saying that under the flowing space model, space itself flows
towards or away from electrically charged objects. Towards anodes and away
from cathodes.

Just looking for clarity here.

Well, you certainly are optimistic today!!!