singularity

Agora,

Still not sure what you are saying. We know that it requires increasing amounts of energy to speed electrons up in a particle accelerator, all I have done is remove the walls of the accelerator. Doesn't the ever increasing velocity involve energy coming from somewhere? If the mass is not increasing then the velocity must increase to balance the increase in momentum, is that what it does? Let's ignore the mass, how does the particle velocity exceed light so that it can go down the hole, or does the centripetal acceleration relation now have to be modified?

If the particle is entering the blackhole straight on it does not have to even get close to the speed of light. It is accelerated by the gravity field to some speed over some time but not to any great speed. Or do you want to make some new rule which is allowed I think.

Jeremy,

I'm saying that the very concept of "black hole" produces far too many paradoxes in our mind experiments; these paradoxes are logical in nature. If a theory outcome contradicts logic, the theory's validity has to be questioned. But relativism has long become a religion, the doubters are hence considered as marginal heretics.
I prefer to see it this way - Einstein has put physics into a grinding halt for about a century. Instead of trying to engineer FTL transports for information and matter, a lot of physicists spend their lives to prove the impossibility of the such, astrophysicists search for imaginary objects, billions are spent to discover "gravitational waves" etc, etc... Far worse consequences may be ahead if the relativists' religious beliefs push them to falsify the experimental results further, as they so comfortably did all those years.
So stuff those "black holes" and just go ahead!

The blackhole is a logical result of the process believed to power stars-so are other structures believed to exist. The underlying theory of how stars work is the problem not Einstien.

[Jim]I wonder why the orbital velocity has any effect on matter entering the event horizon. It seems to me matter can enter the blackhole directly without ever orbiting it.

What you say is true, if the matter falls in a straight line directly towards the hole there is no problem. I was questioning the more realistic case of orbiting material being accreted where one has a circular velocity. According to Kepler's law as an orbiting body drops to a lower orbit its orbital velocity must increase. In the case I described the orbital velocity must increase past that of light (at least so it appears to this layman). Since relativity does not allow FTL velocities I was simply wondering how relativists get around this.

[Agora] Read my previous post and realized I typed your name instead of Toms! Sorry to be questioning you about things out of left field! I'll get it right this time.

[Tom] Ok, the mass is not really increasing. But the velocity is, how do the relativists get around the velocity increase? Does Kepler's law change at relativistic velocities? I seem to recall reading an article once about someone claiming that the direction of centripetal acceleration reverses near a black hole, does this have something to do with it?

> [Jeremy]: Ok, the mass is not really increasing. But the velocity is, how do the relativists get around the velocity increase? Does Kepler's law change at relativistic velocities? I seem to recall reading an article once about someone claiming that the direction of centripetal acceleration reverses near a black hole, does this have something to do with it?

As relativity explains it (which is not well), momentum is the product of mass, velocity, and gamma (which also depends on velocity). As a body's speed approaches the speed of light, only the gamms factor approaches infinity. So the momentum (and inertia, or resistance to further speed increases) approach infinity, while the rest mass remains constant and the orbital speed increases slowly toward c.

Yes, Kelper's law changes because there are some gamma factors missing from it also. And there is a gravitational potential effect with a similar character.

That "reversal of direction of centripetal acceleration" is probably another consequence of the reversal of the roles of space and time inside the event horizon. Please don't forget that such concepts are playing with mathematics, and probably have no counterparts in physical reality. -|Tom|-