- Thank you received: 0
Comet Wild-2: first sign of repelling Black Hole
20 years 10 months ago #8270
by north
Reply from was created by north
leo vuyk
understand,alot of us don't even think blackholes exist.
understand,alot of us don't even think blackholes exist.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 years 10 months ago #8442
by Leo Vuyk
Replied by Leo Vuyk on topic Reply from
IMHO the universe is much more complex than we thought.
Thus even much more complex black hole schould exist.
Thus even much more complex black hole schould exist.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 years 10 months ago #8172
by north
Replied by north on topic Reply from
leo Vuyk
(IMHO)? what does that stand for? explain. more complex blackholes SHOULD!! exist?! it hardly follows.
(IMHO)? what does that stand for? explain. more complex blackholes SHOULD!! exist?! it hardly follows.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- rousejohnny
- Offline
- Elite Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
20 years 10 months ago #8579
by rousejohnny
Replied by rousejohnny on topic Reply from Johnny Rouse
Such vorticies should indeed exist, as to the cause of such "black holes" that is debatable. One thing is certain and in my most proper southern dialect, "it seems we don't know nothin". Everyday there seems a discovery that requires the scientific "elite" to change crucial pieces in the Big Bang mechanics. Is the grasping to keep this theory as an absolute truth, when trying to observe and analyze cosmological data, bordering on dogmatic? I do not support completely trashing the Big Bang...well not yet anyway. But what happened to the idea of trying to prove a theory wrong in order to expose its weaknesses or enforce its strengths. Most reasearch is aimed at proving BB correct, and often falls short which results in immediate First Aid to the already mummified theory. I always thought that attempting to prove a theory wrong was necessary for proper Scientific Method, I must be wrong once again.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 years 10 months ago #8271
by Leo Vuyk
Replied by Leo Vuyk on topic Reply from
IMHO : In my humble opinion.
More complex if they have a real "rigid particle filled" nucleus.
More complex if they have a real "rigid particle filled" nucleus.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
20 years 10 months ago #8322
by Leo Vuyk
Replied by Leo Vuyk on topic Reply from
Rousejonny,
I do not quite see your question, but I realize now that I foregot to mention my homepage: for more information:
home.planet.nl/~vuyk0022/
cheers.
Leo.
I do not quite see your question, but I realize now that I foregot to mention my homepage: for more information:
home.planet.nl/~vuyk0022/
cheers.
Leo.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.484 seconds