![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Nature creates in pairs. For every action there is an equal action in
another direction. Inertia can become greater with more mass or greater revolving speed of the same mass. Lets relate a white hole to a black hole,as being relative to comparing an electron with a positron.(OK) How can I put this all together and create reality out of it. White holes and black holes explode in opposite directions White holes explode outward,and black holes implode inward. White holes give to the space gamma photons Black holes unleash their singularity. A white hole has no singularity at its core. A black hole has squeezed its photons into the singularity when imploding. White holes reach their critical mass faster than black holes because they spin much faster. There are as many white holes as there are flakes of snow in an endless storm.The better we get at detecting them the more and more they be. Bert |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote: Nature creates in pairs. For every action there is an equal action in another direction. Inertia can become greater with more mass or greater revolving speed of the same mass. Lets relate a white hole to a black hole,as being relative to comparing an electron with a positron.(OK) Huh!? I thought you said that gamma ray bursts were caused by black holes reaching their "critical mass"? How can I put this all together and create reality out of it. White holes and black holes explode in opposite directions White holes explode outward,and black holes implode inward. White holes give to the space gamma photons Black holes unleash their singularity. A white hole has no singularity at its core. A black hole has squeezed its photons into the singularity when imploding. White holes reach their critical mass faster than black holes because they spin much faster. There are as many white holes as there are flakes of snow in an endless storm.The better we get at detecting them the more and more they be. Bert Then how come we don't observe any white holes, or white hole candidates? There are gamma rays, yes, but we can't see what kind of object they are coming from because they come from outside our galaxy. Double-A |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Double-A" ha scritto nel messaggio
oups.com... Then how come we don't observe any white holes, or white hole candidates? There are gamma rays, yes, but we can't see what kind of object they are coming from because they come from outside our galaxy. Maybe I'm wrong but I think that Swift, in more or less one minute after detecting a GRB, can observe the source and communicate the Earth observatory the coordinates of th GRB emission. So this time Bert will have immediately a proof of how is bad to eat lots of Italian meat balls and after that thinking about white holes... Luigi Caselli |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Double-A wrote:
I thought you said that gamma ray bursts were caused by black holes reaching their "critical mass"? Known experiments on earth show that gamma bursts come from chain reaction fission (aka "the bomb"). Environmentally induced fusion processes (e.g. old sol) can also produce gammas, but they would be steady state and not transient bursts. "Bomb" fusion produce gamma bursts, but they requires a hot-cold environment to the best of our knowledge, which I say is not natural (baked alaska is man-made). Black holes, or any other accumulation, can become critical, I suppose, but we need a very well thought out scenario to make it credible. Then how come we don't observe any white holes, or white hole candidates? White holes as you infer, may only be accumulations that have not yet become large enough to create an event horizon (where photon emissions from the star can't get past). There are gamma rays, yes, but we can't see what kind of object they are coming from because they come from outside our galaxy. I don't know how to interpret that thought. I'm staying with the bow tie nebula concept where breakdown fission is the energetic event. Angelo Campanella |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi double-a You just about answered your own question by bringing in
great distance from us. I could add that white holes are say no bigger object than our Moon. Small and far. The main thinking of my post was ways to reach a critical mass. There are many ways that I see nature doing this. Not just more mass compressed by gravity over long periods of time. Heavy objects can merge into one Increase in spinning speed creates greater inertia Best to keep in mind a spinning object is continually changing direction,and changing direction is another way to increase inertia. Bert |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"G=EMC^2 Glazier" ha scritto nel messaggio
... Nature creates in pairs. For every action there is an equal action in another direction. Inertia can become greater with more mass or greater revolving speed of the same mass. Lets relate a white hole to a black hole,as being relative to comparing an electron with a positron.(OK) How can I put this all together and create reality out of it. White holes and black holes explode in opposite directions White holes explode outward,and black holes implode inward. White holes give to the space gamma photons Black holes unleash their singularity. A white hole has no singularity at its core. A black hole has squeezed its photons into the singularity when imploding. White holes reach their critical mass faster than black holes because they spin much faster. There are as many white holes as there are flakes of snow in an endless storm.The better we get at detecting them the more and more they be. Bert Did you eat lots of Italian meat balls before posting this message? We have lots of weird objects in the universe: black holes, pulsars, gravastars, quark stars, dark energy stars, whatyouwant stars and you need also white holes because you are a bit bored to have always the same boring stars... Before eating too much you said that GRB are caused by black holes when they start a new universe and, even if weird, this is much more likely than white holes... Luigi Caselli |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Luigi Caselli wrote: "G=EMC^2 Glazier" ha scritto nel messaggio ... Nature creates in pairs. For every action there is an equal action in another direction. Inertia can become greater with more mass or greater revolving speed of the same mass. Lets relate a white hole to a black hole,as being relative to comparing an electron with a positron.(OK) How can I put this all together and create reality out of it. White holes and black holes explode in opposite directions White holes explode outward,and black holes implode inward. White holes give to the space gamma photons Black holes unleash their singularity. A white hole has no singularity at its core. A black hole has squeezed its photons into the singularity when imploding. White holes reach their critical mass faster than black holes because they spin much faster. There are as many white holes as there are flakes of snow in an endless storm.The better we get at detecting them the more and more they be. Bert Did you eat lots of Italian meat balls before posting this message? And they're probably feeling rather "heavy" in his stomach after theorizing about meatball-sized singularities! We have lots of weird objects in the universe: black holes, pulsars, gravastars, quark stars, dark energy stars, whatyouwant stars and you need also white holes because you are a bit bored to have always the same boring stars... Before eating too much you said that GRB are caused by black holes when they start a new universe and, even if weird, this is much more likely than white holes... Luigi Caselli But then there's all the spaghetti. Ah! String theory! Double-A |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
nightbat wrote
Double-A wrote: Luigi Caselli wrote: "G=EMC^2 Glazier" ha scritto nel messaggio ... Nature creates in pairs. For every action there is an equal action in another direction. Inertia can become greater with more mass or greater revolving speed of the same mass. Lets relate a white hole to a black hole,as being relative to comparing an electron with a positron.(OK) How can I put this all together and create reality out of it. White holes and black holes explode in opposite directions White holes explode outward,and black holes implode inward. White holes give to the space gamma photons Black holes unleash their singularity. A white hole has no singularity at its core. A black hole has squeezed its photons into the singularity when imploding. White holes reach their critical mass faster than black holes because they spin much faster. There are as many white holes as there are flakes of snow in an endless storm.The better we get at detecting them the more and more they be. Bert Did you eat lots of Italian meat balls before posting this message? And they're probably feeling rather "heavy" in his stomach after theorizing about meatball-sized singularities! We have lots of weird objects in the universe: black holes, pulsars, gravastars, quark stars, dark energy stars, whatyouwant stars and you need also white holes because you are a bit bored to have always the same boring stars... Before eating too much you said that GRB are caused by black holes when they start a new universe and, even if weird, this is much more likely than white holes... Luigi Caselli Double-A But then there's all the spaghetti. Ah! String theory! Double-A nightbat I already addressed that Officer Double-A and Officer Bert advised not to relate his sci fi based dart thrown theories to food except to possible size of meatballs, peas, pasta, pizza, Mexican sweet potato pies, sardines, glasses or bottles of Bud Light and boilermakers. I stand respectfully helpful even though he makes us hungry and thirsty for take out space food. (:~) carry on, the nightbat |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi Luigi Let me say I love Italian meat balls. Tonight I will have a
meat ball sub on Italian bread.Garlic Yes lots of cheese,and plenty sauce Yes. I always posted nature creates in pairs,and does so as part of her balancing act(yes) That to me means Black holes,and their twin 'white' holes'. Why not? Naturally this is not in Google,and that makes it not believable. It is not easy to give reality to an object that can't be seen unless it explodes into gamma photons. I do the best I can.I think people like my cooking better than my cosmological theories. In reality its a matter of taste. Bert PS Got a call from Kevin and the weather was 81 in Rome. He will be eating real Italian food. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Short Gamma-Ray Bursts: New Models Shed Light on Enigmatic Explosions(Forwarded) | Andrew Yee | Astronomy Misc | 1 | September 7th 04 02:53 PM |
Gamma Ray Bursts -- The REAL CAUSE | REM460 | Astronomy Misc | 4 | April 15th 04 03:42 PM |