- #1
Michael F. Dmitriyev
- 342
- 1
It is accepted to consider BH as an object which on a reason of the achievement of its mass before a certain critical value (?) be subjected to collapse. This situation when in small volume does concentrated enormous mass with unbelievably enormous density of the material. Having the most strong gravity and magnetic field, BH attracts all objects falling into sphere of its influence. Nothing can not overcome BH's a gravity field including the Light . As a result, for observer this object looks black.
I have much objections against such a model.
The main is that it does not work.
Is not seen the reasons why the some mass manifests different characteristics depending on volume, which it occupies. If BH was a star earlier and suddenly became the size as orange for instance, then we can not observe it. If we observe it then it has a size of the star at least. If the object after collapse has a size of star, then is not understandable than it has been before one. There was galaxy? Why BH must be formed from something? Why it can not be such age as the universe and exist before the stars was formed? It is possible to ask more and more questions, but I think it is enough.
So.
What is Black Hole?
This is an object which contains NOTHING.
No fluctuations can not exist in BH.
Consequently no material containing mass (this fluctuations also), no EM fluctuations including the light. Even the background cosmic radiation is absent .
This object has a no real size. Time is in zero.
Black Hole is an ABSOLUTE ZERO.
"Obvious paradox" is present in this case - gravity and magnetic field under full absence of the mass.
This means that mass does contains in itself a certain substance which is general with one in BH. But BH does contains nothing. Absolutely zero importances of all known and unknown power and field only.
Consequently a zero importance is perceived by us as a most is possible, but that we can measure at least aproximately, mass of the star for instance, is perceived as a vastly smaller.
At the next time it happens to note - a people prefer to stand upon a head.
What substance has a such characteristic?
The TIME only.
I have much objections against such a model.
The main is that it does not work.
Is not seen the reasons why the some mass manifests different characteristics depending on volume, which it occupies. If BH was a star earlier and suddenly became the size as orange for instance, then we can not observe it. If we observe it then it has a size of the star at least. If the object after collapse has a size of star, then is not understandable than it has been before one. There was galaxy? Why BH must be formed from something? Why it can not be such age as the universe and exist before the stars was formed? It is possible to ask more and more questions, but I think it is enough.
So.
What is Black Hole?
This is an object which contains NOTHING.
No fluctuations can not exist in BH.
Consequently no material containing mass (this fluctuations also), no EM fluctuations including the light. Even the background cosmic radiation is absent .
This object has a no real size. Time is in zero.
Black Hole is an ABSOLUTE ZERO.
"Obvious paradox" is present in this case - gravity and magnetic field under full absence of the mass.
This means that mass does contains in itself a certain substance which is general with one in BH. But BH does contains nothing. Absolutely zero importances of all known and unknown power and field only.
Consequently a zero importance is perceived by us as a most is possible, but that we can measure at least aproximately, mass of the star for instance, is perceived as a vastly smaller.
At the next time it happens to note - a people prefer to stand upon a head.
What substance has a such characteristic?
The TIME only.