Stellar Splitting and pairing NEW Black holes foun

Hi Jim, it's only on this board that we talk about the speed of gravity. Though there are a few who talk about, what amounts to heresy, when they refer to a supposed hyper-inflation of the universe during the big bang. I suppose we have to add to that, those working on slow light.

I think gravity is a force, I dont like the idea of the universe being simply geometry. Geometry is real but it doesn't exist.

Fields are okay as well but they belong to things. A gravitational field falls off to infinity, yet if we say that changes in the energy levels of the field can only propagate at light speed, then we end up in a bit of a mares nest.

Sloat, The field is a giver of force not energy-therein lies the rub to quote a great writer. It seems force is not energy. If the sacred model could be displaced and that alter left vacant maybe new ways of looking a things could evolve. Maybe Planck was right when he suggested new ideas only rise when the old ideas die out. About your observations of geometry-I still can't figure why anyone would believe blackholes exist outside of models. Its like Mickey Mouse; real in the movies for sure.

Hi Jim and Stoat. It's been an education reading your posts, though I wish I knew the tune of the ballad. I suspect it's been heard in a pub or two.

It has been some months since I posted the idea that the speed of gravity was on the order of the square of the speed of light, about 9x10 to the 12th km/sec. The speed that g equals mc cubed produces is about right in order to scale the galaxy to a life form that we can relate to. It could monitor itself in the same time frame that we do with nerve impulses, covering the whole body in tenths of seconds.

However, the accelerating square kilometer is a force equation that I can't realy speak to; but that is why I've enjoyed Jim's comments so much about the existence of what cannot be seen. Science operates by creating the hypothetical and then looking for it, calling success the finding, or at least the funding.

My point is that we are cube-landers here and we are not using the necessary equipment to understand the next dimension up by expecting the math of the lower one to do the job. In three dimensions a line moves to make a plane which moves again to make a solid, but a hyper-cube moves through itself, seeming to be in two places from our limited point of view. Like yours, Stoat, I have only been to that dimension in my dreams.

I have a siamese cat that likes to drink out of the faucet. He watches me turn the handle and stares at the drain; he seem so close to figuring it all out. His methods are correct, he just doesn't have enough of them.

I don't despair, however. What we know we get from our sense detectors and I'm sure we have more than five. With a little more time and funding we may start building the right machines. Maybe a longer LIGO or maybe stacked gravity probes used for tsunami or earthquake detectors. There must be some tiny but detectible time lag in planetary gravitational effects we could find.

Meanwhile, curious people like yourselves will always be pushing what is entertaining toward innovation. Keep up the good work.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Jim</i>
<br />Sloat, The field is a giver of force not energy-therein lies the rub to quote a great writer. It seems force is not energy. If the sacred model could be displaced and that alter left vacant maybe new ways of looking a things could evolve. Maybe Planck was right when he suggested new ideas only rise when the old ideas die out. About your observations of geometry-I still can't figure why anyone would believe blackholes exist outside of models. Its like Mickey Mouse; real in the movies for sure.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Hi Jim, Black holes are not singularities that is for sure. What they are is the turnstyle of reverse polarity whereby gravitons flip at the end of their journey causing antimatter core induction. We really have very primitive notions regarding how galactic motion is governed as if some remote dark matter at a distance is causing all of this motion which is total non-sense. What is taking place operates way above the speed of light, a 4D motion of gravitons that began their lives on the other side of our dipolar time sphere in a mirror antiverse. John

Hi John, It seems to me the structure and motion could be better understood if some reasonable gravity rule was used in a study. It is quite clear the mass of a galatic disk is spread out all over the disk and not focused on any point within the structure and yet when ever the structure is studied everyone assumes the mass is focused on the geometric center of the disk. Thats a mistake that leads to more error about the structure. The way it should be studied is to put the mass in its proper place within the disk which is all over the structure and not at the center. I suppose it is a lo more work when the mass is not neatly placed at a point but thats the way the structure is developed.

Hi Greg, Have you read the new book called:"Flat Earth"? Its about the flat earth theory-how it came about and how much money it has attracted over time much like the funding triumphs you alude to. A good read.