Claim of evidence for primordial black holes

Cline at UCLA makes the claim

http://tinyurl.com/232xpky (pdf)

On Nov 5, 8:37*am, Joe Snod wrote:
Cline at UCLA makes the claim

http://tinyurl.com/232xpky(pdf)

No such thing as gravitational collapse.
This should have been a red flag a long time ago
that our perception of gravity is backwards.

john

On 11/5/10 11:27 AM, john wrote:
No such thing as gravitational collapse.
This should have been a red flag a long time ago
that our perception of gravity is backwards.

john

Gravitational collapse:
o old trees
o mines
o stars
o gas clouds

Dear Sam Wormley:

On Nov 5, 10:31*am, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 11/5/10 11:27 AM, john wrote:

No such thing as gravitational collapse.
This should have been a red flag a long time ago
that our perception of gravity is backwards.

* *Gravitational collapse:
* * *o old trees
* * *o mines
* * *o stars
* * *o gas clouds

o breasts
o bellys
o my chin
o I-35 bridge

David A. Smith

On Nov 5, 2:03*pm, dlzc wrote:
Dear Sam Wormley:

On Nov 5, 10:31*am, Sam Wormley wrote:

On 11/5/10 11:27 AM, john wrote:

No such thing as gravitational collapse.
This should have been a red flag a long time ago
that our perception of gravity is backwards.

* *Gravitational collapse:
* * *o old trees
* * *o mines
* * *o stars
* * *o gas clouds

o *breasts
o *bellys
o *my chin
o *I-35 bridge

David A. Smith

serious problems with comprehension, guys

obviously unwilling to look at your base

yes, gravity can compress things

no, gravity can't break down atoms themselves

Sam, I'm surprised you can sound so stupid.
You must be joking, yes?

john

Dear john:

On Nov 5, 8:42*pm, john wrote:
On Nov 5, 2:03*pm, dlzc wrote:
On Nov 5, 10:31*am, Sam Wormley wrote:

On 11/5/10 11:27 AM, john wrote:

No such thing as gravitational collapse.
This should have been a red flag a long time ago
that our perception of gravity is backwards.

* *Gravitational collapse:
* * *o old trees
* * *o mines
* * *o stars
* * *o gas clouds

o *breasts
o *bellys
o *my chin
o *I-35 bridge

serious problems with comprehension, guys

obviously unwilling to look at your base

yes, gravity can compress things

no, gravity can't break down atoms themselves

Sam, I'm surprised you can sound so stupid.
You must be joking, yes?

Why should he joke? We can see evidence of neutron stars, including
the very energetic surface reactions. These are too small to be made
of normal matter, essentially the entire star is a giant nucleus, with
a light coating of normal matter (usually iron). Gravity does break
down atoms. What restrains fusion? Gravity.

It is not the weak sister you seem to think it is.

David A. Smith

On Nov 5, 9:59*pm, dlzc wrote:
Dear john:

On Nov 5, 8:42*pm, john wrote:





On Nov 5, 2:03*pm, dlzc wrote:
On Nov 5, 10:31*am, Sam Wormley wrote:

On 11/5/10 11:27 AM, john wrote:

No such thing as gravitational collapse.
This should have been a red flag a long time ago
that our perception of gravity is backwards.

* *Gravitational collapse:
* * *o old trees
* * *o mines
* * *o stars
* * *o gas clouds

o *breasts
o *bellys
o *my chin
o *I-35 bridge

serious problems with comprehension, guys

obviously unwilling to look at your base

yes, gravity can compress things

no, gravity can't break down atoms themselves

Sam, I'm surprised you can sound so stupid.
You must be joking, yes?

Why should he joke? *We can see evidence of neutron stars, including
the very energetic surface reactions. *These are too small to be made
of normal matter, essentially the entire star is a giant nucleus, with
a light coating of normal matter (usually iron). *Gravity does break
down atoms. *What restrains fusion? *Gravity.

It is not the weak sister you seem to think it is.

David A. Smith- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Is a neutron star not a star that
has expended all of its fuel?
What has gravity to do with it?

If matter were wood, then neutron stars would be the ashes.

Much more compact, yes. Much less energy.
What has gravity got to do with it?
Other than help it burn, baby.
john

On Nov 5, 9:59*pm, dlzc wrote:
Dear john:

On Nov 5, 8:42*pm, john wrote:





On Nov 5, 2:03*pm, dlzc wrote:
On Nov 5, 10:31*am, Sam Wormley wrote:

On 11/5/10 11:27 AM, john wrote:

No such thing as gravitational collapse.
This should have been a red flag a long time ago
that our perception of gravity is backwards.

* *Gravitational collapse:
* * *o old trees
* * *o mines
* * *o stars
* * *o gas clouds

o *breasts
o *bellys
o *my chin
o *I-35 bridge

serious problems with comprehension, guys

obviously unwilling to look at your base

yes, gravity can compress things

no, gravity can't break down atoms themselves

Sam, I'm surprised you can sound so stupid.
You must be joking, yes?

Why should he joke? *We can see evidence of neutron stars, including
the very energetic surface reactions. *These are too small to be made
of normal matter, essentially the entire star is a giant nucleus, with
a light coating of normal matter (usually iron). *Gravity does break
down atoms. *What restrains fusion? *Gravity.

It is not the weak sister you seem to think it is.

Where does the matter come from?

You guys are all so nowhere on this one.

You think all these black holes are separated by
huge amounts of open space and only surrounded by
a bit of matter that's left over from
when matter supposedly filled all space, but the
black holes pulled almost all of it in because they
were collapsing into black holes.
So now there's a bit more matter
but as it falls into the hole there's this spray
back cause it can't all go in cleanly, so
you get magnetic jets (some spray-back!).

And there were fully-formed galaxies 12 billion light-years ago,
so now it is thought that they get 'full' at a certain point.

Not so good.

Try this.

The matter surrounding each hole is energized
and displaced spacetime which has been created
by the presence of the hole. As matter
falls back in, it is separated and energized by the spin of the
hole, and HEPs are shot out the jets. Each hole is
a standing wave of spin that remains the same,
somehow absorbing enough incoming energy to
exactly offset its outgoing energy. As such, the
hole is basically an energy distribution point.

john

On 11/5/10 10:42 PM, john wrote:


Sam, I'm surprised you can sound so stupid.
You must be joking, yes?

john

John, let us take, for example, the end states of stars.

o White Dwarf stars are observed.
o Neutron stars are observed.
o The "paw prints" of black holes are observed.

Each is a result of gravitational collapse of the star.

Ms = Solar Mass

Review of the Final States of Stars

Star are born and stars die... just like us. The big massive stars have
but short lives, a few millions of years. Stars like our sun last for a
good 10 billions of years, and the little red stars like Barnard's Star
might last for 100 billion years. How long stars live, is determined by
their mass (which must be at least 80 Jupiter masses to sustain
thermonuclear fusion of hydrogen).

There are four (4) fates for the end of stars depending on their masses
and the masses of their cores:

Red/Brown Dwarfs - less than 0.6 Ms == Main Sequence 0.076-0.8 Ms
Stars less than about 0.6 solar masses, when nuclear fuel is used up,
gravitational collapse shrinks the star, but no more than the gas
temperature-pressure-volume laws of classical physics allow. We have
not found any white dwarf less massive than 0.6 solar masses. Part of
the answer is that the universe may not be old enough for lower mass
stars to have evolved off the main sequence.

White Dwarfs - 0.6 and 1.44 Ms == Main Sequence 0.8-8 Ms

Stars with core masses between 0.6 and 1.44 solar masses are
destined to become white dwarfs. White dwarfs are degenerate matter.
Further collapse is halted by electron degeneracy pressure. See pages
456-459 in your textbook. The vast majority of stars are in this mass
range and are destined to become white dwarfs.

Neutron Stars - 1.44 and 2.9 Ms == Main Sequence 8-30 Ms
Core masses between 1.44 and 2.9 solar masses overcome electron
degeneracy pressure and collapse to form neutron stars, a star that is
essentially one gigantic nucleus. Further collapse is halted by neutron
degeneracy pressure.

Black Holes - 3 or more Ms == Main Sequence 30 Ms
But for cores with mass of 3 or more solar masses, neutron
degeneracy pressure does not stop the collapse and the star becomes a
black hole with zero physical size, but with all the mass. Gravity
really wins!

In each case, gravity eventually wins. But, to what extent is
determined by the mass and the relative pressures of the quantum
mechanical forces, electron and neutron degeneracy pressure.

On 11/5/10 11:04 PM, john wrote:
Is a neutron star not a star that
has expended all of its fuel?
What has gravity to do with it?

While there is nuclear fusion raging in the core of the star,
there is plenty of energy holding up the star against gravitational
collapse. When the energy source is exhausted, gravity wins.

John, these are things you should have learned in school.