My blackhole theory-Why is it Wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rjbig2000
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Blackhole
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a personal theory proposing that two particles with mass can become trapped by each other's gravity, leading to increased mass and gravitational pull as they spin closer together. The theory suggests that this process could eventually reverse, causing the object to slow down and become visible again, ultimately resulting in an explosion. However, participants point out that basic particles do not bind together due to gravity and that gravity primarily affects larger objects. Furthermore, the concept of a scientific theory requires mathematical modeling and established assumptions, which the presented idea lacks. The thread was ultimately closed due to forum guidelines against discussing personal theories.
rjbig2000
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Ok, I am no brilliant scientist like the rest of you folks but I have had a little theory rolling around in my head for some time and I would love to hear from you smart folks why this couldn't be the case. So here is a simple explanation of my theory.

Basically the idea goes like this. Two particles (with mass) traveling in different directions get trapped by each others gravity. The two particles begin to spin faster and faster as they get closer together. As they spin faster their mass increases and thus causing their gravity to increase. As the gravity increases it begins to pull in more particles. This whole thing continues as the speed and gravity get close to light speed the object goes dark. It continues in this manner capturing more and more material until it finally captures enough material to begin to reverse the process. At this point the object is still collecting material and slowing. When it slows enough it once again becomes visible (White dwarf) and continues to slow. As the object slows it's gravitational mass is decreasing. At some point as the object slows the gravitational pull becomes to weak to hold the mass together and the object explodes.

This is basically just the opposite of what I have read that is happening. My understanding is that it is believed that White dwarfs collect mass until they become unstable then explode leaving a black hole. Very Simplified description

I would love to hear from anyone why My Theory Can't Work.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
rjbig2000 said:
Ok,
Basically the idea goes like this. Two particles (with mass) traveling in different directions get trapped by each others gravity. The two particles begin to spin faster and faster as they get closer together. As they spin faster their mass increases and thus causing their gravity to increase.
I would love to hear from anyone why My Theory Can't Work.

As I understand, basic particles move and bind together not because of gravity. So there's no chance of: '...spin faster and faster as they get closer.'.
Gravity has effect only on large scale objects.
 
Last edited:
Hi, rjbig2000, welcome to PF!

rjbig2000 said:
Ok, I am no brilliant scientist like the rest of you folks

Actually, PF users run the gamut from young students through a handful of professional scientists.

If you are a high school student, that would have been helpful information to mention here!

rjbig2000 said:
here is a simple explanation of my theory.

It can take quite a bit of book learning and experience to appreciate what the word "theory" means in physics, but what you wrote clearly doesn't qualify. One of the principle characteristics of "theories" in physics is that they include assumptions, motivations for those assumptions, deductions from those assumptions, all stated using the language of mathematics, plus mathematical models consistent with the theory which model particular scenarios, and so on.

rjbig2000 said:
My understanding is that it is believed that White dwarfs collect mass until they become unstable then explode leaving a black hole.

I don't think that's a very accurate summary. Maybe someone else can offer a better link, but try http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/blackholes.php from the Astronomy Department at Cornell.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rjbig2000,
PLease reread the site guidelines you agreed to when you registered. Dissussion of personal theories is not permitted.

Thread closed.
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
Back
Top