Is there a maximum mass for a black hole?

[Drakkith]

If you study the article in the link in #83 then this is what happens. Also mass is increased as if out of nowhere which is what I had found and didn't believe. This research ties cold dark matter to black holes.

This has nothing to do with gravity itself, but only on our way of calculating its effects in the domain of very high gravitational force. The apparent increase is based against Newtonian gravity which is already known to be incorrect, but since it is MUCH easier to use than General Relativity it is the choice for most calculations. As the paper shows it ceases to be accurate in regions of very high mass. Interestingly they say that their equation accurately predicts gravity using a constant factor.

 

[hubble_bubble]

I am now in the position where time could flow either forwards or backwards with a swap of the functions of space and time into what could be termed timespace. Going backwards would increase the mass of the universe and have the same energy and mass existing twice which I really don't believe. Moving forward would make more sense. Lorentz transforms of spacetime into timespace would have to modify beta, t and x at least. Whether this would even be possible I don't know. Even worse this is using the standard configuration. There would also need to be movement of the singularity through a stretched timespace as mass increases. This would need to be proportional to the Schwarzschild radius somehow although who knows how you compute this.

The forward moving mass would only be partially present at any spacetime point in the external universe and mass would seem less than expected. Yet at some future time this mass will resolve itself and again become "available" I think.

 

[hubble_bubble]

If I am right and the article in the link below is interesting in this regard, then supermassive black holes are killing the universe.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100126104844.htm

 

[hubble_bubble]

The relationship of the frame dragging should be described by the relationship 2lp/tp where tp = Planck time and lp = Planck length. If anyone disagrees or thinks I am too off the wall please let me know.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Closed pending moderation.