Black holes do NOT exist and the Big Bang Theory is wrong,
claims scientist - and she has the maths to prove it
A nonexistent black hole - like all portrayals, merely an artist's 'impression'
- Scientist claims she has mathematical proof black holes cannot exist
- She said it is impossible for stars to collapse and form a singularity
- Professor Laura Mersini-Houghton said she is still in 'shock' from the find
- Previously, scientists thought stars much larger than the sun collapsed under their own gravity and formed black holes when they died
- During this process they release a type of radiation called Hawking radiation
- But new research claims the star would lose too much mass and wouldn't be able to form a black hole
- If true, the theory that the universe began as a singularity, followed by the Big Bang, could also be wrong
When a huge star many
times the mass of the sun comes to the end of its life it collapses in on
itself and forms a singularity - creating a black hole where gravity is so
strong that not even light itself can escape.
At least, that’s what
we thought.
A scientist has
sensationally said that it is impossible for black holes to exist - and she
even has mathematical proof to back up her claims. If true, her research could
force physicists to scrap their theories of how the universe began.
A
scientist from University of North Carolina states she has mathematical proof
that black holes (illustrated) can't exist. She said it is impossible for stars
to collapse and form a singularity. Previously, scientists thought stars larger
than the sun collapsed under their own gravity and formed black holes as they
died
The
research was conducted by Professor Laura Mersini-Houghton from the University
of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in the College of Arts and Scientists.
She
claims that as a star dies, it releases a type of radiation known as Hawking
radiation - predicted by Professor Stephen Hawking.
However
in this process, Professor Mersini-Houghton believes the star also sheds mass,
so much so that it no longer has the density to become a black hole.
Before
the black hole can form, she said, the dying star swells and explodes.
The
singularity as predicted never forms, and neither does the event horizon - the
boundary of the black hole where not even light can escape.
‘I’m
still not over the shock,’ said Professor Mersini-Houghton.
‘We’ve
been studying this problem for a more than 50 years and this solution gives us
a lot to think about.’
Experimental
evidence may one day provide physical proof as to whether or not black holes
exist in the universe.
But
for now, Mersini-Houghton says the mathematics are conclusive.
What’s
more, the research could apparently even call into question the veracity of the
Big Bang theory.
Most
physicists think the universe originated from a singularity that began
expanding with the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago.
If
it is impossible for singularities to exist, however, as partially predicted by
Professor Mersini-Houghton, then that theory would also be brought into
question.
THIS is what a [non-existent]
black hole looks like
THE BLACK HOLE INFORMATION PARADOX
One
of the biggest unanswered questions about black holes is the so-called
information paradox.
Under
current theories for black holes it is thought that nothing can escape from the
event horizon around a black hole - not even light itself.
Inside
the black hole is thought to be a singularity where matter is crushed to
an infinitesimally small point as predicted by Einstein's theory of
gravity.
However,
a fundamental law of quantum theory states that no information from the
universe can ever disappear.
This
creates a paradox; how can a black hole make matter and information
'disappear'?
Professor
Mersini-Houghton's new theory manages to explain why this might be so - namely
because black holes as we know them cannot exist.
During
the collapse process stars release a type of radiation called Hawking radiation
(shown). But Professor Mersini-Houghton claims this process means the star
loses too much mass and can't form a black hole. And this also apparently means
the Big Bang theory, that the universe began as a singularity, may not be
correct
THERE ARE NO BLACK HOLES, ONLY GREY HOLES, CLAIMS HAWKING
Earlier
this year Professor Stephen Hawking shocked physicists by saying 'there are
no black holes'.
In
a paper published online, Professor Hawking instead argues there are 'grey
holes'
'The
absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes - in the sense of
regimes from which light can't escape to infinity,' he says in the paper,
called Information Preservation and Weather Forecasting For Black Holes.
He
says that the idea of an event horizon, from which light cannot escape, is
flawed.
He
suggests that instead light rays attempting to rush away from the black hole’s
core will be held as though stuck on a treadmill and that they can slowly
shrink by spewing out radiation.
One
of the reasons black holes are so bizarre is that they pit two fundamental
theories of the universe against each other.
Namely,
Einstein’s theory of gravity predicts the formation of black holes. But a
fundamental law of quantum theory states that no information from the universe
can ever disappear.
Efforts
to combine these two theories proved problematic, and has become known as the
black hole information paradox - how can matter permanently disappear in a
black hole as predicted?
Professor
Mersini-Houghton’s new theory does manage to mathematically combine the two
fundamental theories, but with unwanted effects for people expecting black
holes to exist.
‘Physicists
have been trying to merge these two theories - Einstein’s theory of gravity and
quantum mechanics - for decades, but this scenario brings these two theories
together, into harmony,’ said Professor Mersini-Houghton.
‘And
that’s a big deal.’
From the Daily Mail @ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2769156/Black-holes-NOT-exist-Big-Bang-Theory-wrong-claims-scientist-maths-prove-it.html
For more evidence that black holes don’t exist (more ways to disprove a double negative) see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/no%20black%20holes
For more evidence that there was NO 'Big Bang' see http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com/search/label/no%20big%20bang
- Scroll down through ‘Older Posts’ at the end of each section
Hope you like this
not for profit site -
It takes hours of work every day by
a genuinely incapacitated invalid to maintain, write, edit, research,
illustrate and publish this website from a tiny cabin in a remote forest
Like what we do? Please give anything
you can -
Contribute any amount and receive at
least one New Illuminati eBook!
(You can use a card
securely if you don’t use Paypal)
Please click below -
Videos - http://youtu.be/HC-JqZJME8w
For further enlightening information
enter a word or phrase into the random synchronistic search box @ the top left
of http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
And see
New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
New Illuminati on Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/the.new.illuminati
New Illuminati Youtube Channel - http://www.youtube.com/user/newilluminati/feed
New Illuminati on Google+ @ https://plus.google.com/115562482213600937809/posts
New Illuminati on Twitter @ www.twitter.com/new_illuminati
New Illuminations –Art(icles) by
R. Ayana @ http://newilluminations.blogspot.com
The Her(m)etic Hermit - http://hermetic.blog.com
The Prince of Centraxis - http://centraxis.blogspot.com (Be
Aware! This link leads to implicate & xplicit concepts & images!)
DISGRUNTLED SITE ADMINS PLEASE NOTE –
We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and
links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search
engines and helps spread your info further! This site is
published under Creative Commons Fair Use Copyright (unless an individual
article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright holder). Reproduction
for non-profit use is permitted & encouraged, - if you give attribution to the work &
author. Please include a (preferably active) link to the original (along with
this or a similar notice).
Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or
mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web –
but remember attribution!
If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too
small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…
Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible
worlds…
From the New Illuminati – http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com
This idea or concept which I am going to try and put into words is difficult for me to explain. So please have patience and try to visualize what I'm about to attempt to explain.The current Big Bang theory suggests an expanding universe and the further we look out, then the more of the distant past we see.They say, that the universe was more compact during earlier times of the expansion. However, and this is a very big however, the further out we look is an ever expanding sphere of a universe which should become smaller and more crowded??
ReplyDeleteSo what they're saying is, the bigger/more of the universe we see, the smaller the universe becomes.That absolutely, does not make any sense to me – a real oxymoron.
The Big Bang theory is based on red shift which the scientific community has determined that it is a Doppler shift.
Let us not forget that 100 years ago, because water was the medium of waves and water and the ether was the medium to convey light in a vacuum.
Red shift isn't a measure of universal expansion and the hubble constant isn't an echo of the nonexistent 'Big Bang'. The cosmos is infinite in space and time. We live in a multiverse of fluid fractal holograms. See Infinite Cosmos of Light and Life @ http://nexusilluminati.blogspot.com.au/2013/03/infinite-cosmos-of-light-and-life-dark.html - and note that since it was written it's been demonstrated that the so-called 'universal' background radiation isn't universal, but largely confined to the ecliptic - it's the plasma current flowing outward from the Sun, not cosmic background radiation!
Delete