Neutral Zone Inside of Black Hole?

The conjectures in this post to not entirely correspond with current scientific thinking on the topic, which is widely discussed across the internet.

It is very important not to think outside of mainstream scientific thinking, therefore not to threaten long held theories and endanger egos and reputations.

I am not saying they are wrong, just that they are not the end of learning.

I could be, and probably am wrong, however I prefer to think outside the box to gain perspective from a different angle.

Most times it affirms the general consensus, but I am not bound by the holy grail of ego equity, but sometimes it enlightens me in the process, which is my real objective.

We all are like the blind men describing an elephant.

We do not have the big picture.

Sometimes even a blind hog will root up an acorn.

Just call me Porky. And yes, I do have trouble pronouncing the letter "R"

Thinking "outside the box" is the only way science can make any giant gains, even though it is definitely frowned upon. I don't believe in "consensus science" and I don't believe that mathematics "as we know it" always gives us the final answer to many questions, although I expect I am now labeled as a heretic.

Exactly what I was going to post. For instance, while we picture the gravity well in 3D like a water vortex, the gravity well has no corresponding shape in 3D space. Where is the apex of the vortex? Below the black hole? Above? No, it's in the very center and it "slopes" toward the center no matter which direction you approach it from in 3D space. What we see as a downward slope in a vortex simply corresponds to an increase in the force of gravity.

Consider the center of the earth. Would you expect to find a void there? Would you expect the pressure to be near zero. I expect not.

You are correct about black holes not feeding. Some become so massive that given a large enough supply of in-falling matter, the sheer magnitude of the light and energy being emitted due to the loss of kinetic energy is so great that it creates a "wind" like the solar wind that can blow away in-falling matter and stifle the process.

In-falling matter loses electrons that are expelled along the axes of the black hole, by like charge repulsion, creating massive jets thousands of light years long and so powerful they can be seen from Earth. You might find a possible approach path along this axis in cases where it is not emitting a deadly beam of electrons.

Centrifugal force is an APPARENT force and not a real force. If it were a real force in exact opposition and identical magnitude to the real centripetal force then no acceleration occurs and the object does not change direction.

If you have equal mass in all directions,the gravity in the center of the mass would be neutral.

I am not talking about centripetal force,although that is what got me wondering.

And if my conjecture is correct,there could be a wormhole in the center of every black hole.

As we look at matter smaller and smaller, we see there is actually nothing there, it's just forces...We don't actually know the true nature of energy, we use clumsy tools to try and explain it, but in the end it's just force relative to another force and it's true nature is a phantom.....You can spend several lifetimes trying to guess what things are, but without the proper tools and language you will always be composing science fiction.....

I understand,but humor me here; a perfect sphere of any uniform mass should have a zero point in the center where the gravity cancels itself.This may not be an empty space,but it should be there.Whatever is there would be compressed by the surrounding mass.

Do we really know if there is matter at the bottom of a black"hole",or is matter converted into energy at some point and creates a white hole in another dimension or universe.

Perhaps white holes are the source of the virtual particles that pop in and out of our universe or dimension.

Sci-fi has usually preceded technology by many years.

Todays's fiction is sometimes tomorrow's reality.

AFAIK Matter and energy are the same things in these conditions.

What I do know is that you cannot hide in the middle of a black hole because you will never survive to approach a black hole event horizon, let alone visit the center.

I agree.E=MC2.

6 of one,1/2 dozen of the other.

It is not possible with our present state of knowledge and technology.

But who knows what the future may hold?

Remember the patent office worker that quit because he thought everything that could be invented had been invented and he saw no future in his job?

Einstein said that reality is an illusion,but a very convincing one;or words to that effect.

There are theories that if one approaches the event horizon at exactly the right angle and distance,one may in effect,exit this part of our universe and traverse to another place or time.

Who really knows?

".... Remember the patent office worker that quit because he thought everything that could be invented had been invented and he saw no future in his job? ...."

No. I do not. I do, however, remember a discredited myth about a US Commissioner of Patents saying something similar.

I have just finished conducting exhaustive, "water going down a drain" experiments and am here to report that your observation is flawed.

Undisturbed and in a perfectly spherical sink, water going down a drain does not exhibit an open tube in the middle.

Outside forces are at play when the open tube presents itself in your sink.

Gaspard-Gustave de Coriolis, is rolling, counterclockwise, in his grave now.

So you reject frame dragging by a rotating object (the Lense–Thirring effect), and general principle of relativity? Conservation of momentum?

Hmm...interesting.

How sure are you he was not buried in the southern hemisphere?

Don't clocks run in the same direction in the southern hemisphere?

Though the gravity effect will be zero, the pressure from surrounding material will be immense, collapsing any unpressurized void. Think of the surrounding matter with negligible compressive strength forming rings around the center and mutually attracting to generate hoop stress, but with no significant compressive resistance in the hoop. The hoops will collapse into a ball at the center at the pressure generated by all those virtual hoops of matter. Another visualization would be the compression at the center of a ball of rubber bands.

Here are some pretty cool and helpful illustrations that appear to be part of a college curriculum. Dispells a few myths.

https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/bh/schw.html

Gravity might not be a force at all, it is not well defined in science except as a WEAK FORCE.

Centrifugal force is momentum trying to continue straight but being balanced by another force making it follow a path around a fixed point.

E = MC#

E is energy

M is mass (weight)

C is speed which is a vector time/distance.

Distance is the space between two points.

WHAT IS TIME?

Hawking visualises cones of events and most people measure their personal time as linear (seconds, minutes, hours etc).

Time/space is not curved if time is expansion.

This can be expressed exactly as points on a three dimensional graph using 3D graphics and layered spread sheets (relational data base).

We can each have our straight line of existance AND cones of events if the whole universe is expanding and we call that expansion TIME.

Gravity is not a force at all but the difference in expansion between distance and weight (space and mass)

There might not be such a thing as a black hole, it might be that we do not detect anything in certain areas of the universe because our instruments do not detect any form of energy coming from these points.

I could go on but that would upset too many.

Go on then! Upsetting people means that they actually read and care about what you are saying.

You should be rather upset if you do not get a reaction.

The idea of a black hole is as abstract as anything you can throw into this community here.

Maybe all modern science is misguided because people think in tens and even this is wrong. We have eight fingers and two opposing thumbs on two hands. This is the perfect counting system as it allows us to think like a computer without the confusion of numbers that do not allow us to express the relationship between a circle and it's diameter.

Scientists have told us that there cannot be NOTHING as voids are immediately filled but if the universe is surrounded by nothing then this justifies eternal expansion as the universe tries to fill it.

Binary thinking helps us rationalise as we have an absolute base of true or false. Observing that NOTHING is an allowable state means that there is no possibility of there being less than nothing.

The center of the area we observe as a black hole cannot be nothing as the black hole itself is an illusion, it is space (distance) expanding.

When we have taken everything away there is nothing left .... zero. This makes the idea of negative values redundant in all calculations and changes everything in life.

One difficulty in visualisation is that the expanding universe is expanding from all locations and it is said that the big bang happened everywhere that existed at that time. This begs the question of 'what was there before the big bang' and the search for the Higgs Boson and the god particle. The past two years of operation of the LHC have produced no result. The claim that we have identified the presence of something we call a field is fuzzy to say the least and string theory etc seems to be clutching at straws of possibilities in a haystack of ideas.

However, if time is expansion we do not need a beginning or an end as there was nothing before time and the universe is expanding into nothing.

This can be a great comfort to each human individual who has a linear time with a beginning and an end both of which exist and cannot cease to exist within the expanding universe. We know this to be true as photographs are chemical slices of time that can be destroyed without destroying the time in which they were taken or altering it in any way. Once a person has been born they exist in 'sideways time' for ever but the downside is that if they are unpopular and nasty that also exists for ever.

This belief cannot be summarised as it is expanding with every thought.

Anybody who has read Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy knows God has 13 fingers.

"What do you get when you multiply 6 by 9?" Everyone knows the answer is 42.

Pure drivel.

The Higgs Boson was discovered in 2012. They think they may have identified multiple species, or types if you prefer, of Higgs Bosons. Part of the upgrades being performed during the two year shutdown at the LHC are to clarify this observation.

You may be confused about what a field is and means in Physics, most understand this concept just fine.

In two dimensions, a straight line is just a special type of infinitely long curves where d²y/dx²=0. (In laymen's terms, the slope is constant.)

Please view the following video about CERN LHC and the results obtained. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edvdzh9Pggg

Part of your last comment is off topic and I am not under cross examination. If you want to know stuff you have to research it like I do. In order to keep this comment on topic I will explain that I have my own laboratory to carry out experiments in electrochemistry and that includes the study of electrical energy at all levels. When it comes to particle physics and black holes there is a problem of measurement and data acquisition because the smaller you go the more the actual measurement impacts on the subject of the measurement. The information available to scientists and the rest of us about black holes is gathered by instruments of growing sophistication accompanied by growing possibility of errors. The detection of black holes depends on gravity bending light but I am saying that this might not be the case and it might be an illusion in the mind of researchers who cannot find another explanation. We can only detect energy on the move so the black holes might be locations that there is no movement to detect. This fits in with topic of this thread that is postulating that centrifugal force reaches equilibrium with gravitational pull and there could be a hole in the center of the sphere of collapsing material ... a wormhole. I gather billions of data points in my work of controlling corrosion on networks of metal pipelines and facilities globally and I analyse these using 3D graphs and calculations based on the codified laws of physics. The topic is a very interesting observation and deserves careful consideration.

"...codified laws of physics. ..."

That certainly grabbed my attention. I had no idea the laws of physics had been codified...and when I googled it, apparently almost everyone else is also unaware of this being done. 9 total returns on the search for "codified laws of physics" (quotes necessary to filter out returns on less than all the words) 4 of which were pictures and all of which seem to be about fiction.

By the way, you didn't respomd to the question about all the quantum computer companies being western versus your claim of no quantum computers in the West...does that have something to do with black holes?

Redfred's excellent evaluation of your comment is spot on.

In addition, several other portions of your comment ar noteworthy for the degree of departure from evidence and rationality:

"... We have eight fingers and two opposing thumbs on two hands. This is the perfect counting system as it allows us to think like a computer without the confusion of numbers that do not allow us to express the relationship between a circle and it's diameter...."

"Without the confusion of numbers that do not allow us to express the relationship between a circle and it's diameter"?!? Truly? How does using base 8 simplify the expression of pi exactly?

Also you'd be thinking like an outdated computer using octal.

.

"...Scientists have told us that there cannot be NOTHING as voids are immediately filled but if the universe is surrounded by nothing then this justifies eternal expansion as the universe tries to fill it...."

Which scientists have been saying this to you?

.

-"... Observing that NOTHING is an allowable state means that there is no possibility of there being less than nothing..."

Nope. A simple demonstration of this could be to consider a person who knows exactly nothing about logic. Your argument demonstrates the existence of a state if knowledge about logic lower than zero.

.

-"...When we have taken everything away there is nothing left .... zero. This makes the idea of negative values redundant in all calculations and changes everything in life...."

Again, nope. See the notes on the previous portion of your comment above.

.

-"...This begs the question of 'what was there before the Big Bang'..."

This isn't what 'begs the question' means. This might be bordering on meta-eroneous...not even right in being wrong.

.

-"... etc seems to be clutching at straws of possibilities in a haystack of ideas...."

Pot calling Kettle, come in Kettle. Over.

.

-"...However, if time is expansion we do not need a beginning or an end as there was nothing before time and the universe is expanding into nothing...."

Nope³. The expansion isn't 'into'.

.

-"...This belief cannot be summarised as it is expanding with every thought. ..."

So are you saying every thought that pops into your head, adds to the list of things you believe? If so, you aren't being very consistent as this comment is dirtied by plausibility, from which all the previous portions were squeaky clean.

The evidence about this matter is observations by scientists at places like CERN LHC. I follow a lot of the stuff that they publish as it has impact on my own speciality.

I have NOT said that base 8 solves anything I said that relational data bases are layered 3D spreadsheets that can represent exact locations accurately without the use of Pi.

Read and understand Gibbs Free Energy

Show me a negative house.

"nope" seems to be a powerful logical evidence based argument but the scientific method requires more than this.

My hypothesis stands.

"... The evidence about this matter is observations by scientists at places like CERN LHC ..."

'This matter' is (perhaps intentionally vague. If you are referring to the matter of your claim that scientists have been telling you voids are immediately filled, it would be worth noting some of the various voids that go unfilled in times exceeding the immediate.

.

"....I said that relational data bases are layered 3D spreadsheets that can represent exact locations accurately without the use of Pi...."

Oh, I did not see you say that, prior to this most recent reply. I must have missed one of your comments. Perhaps you could direct me to it, maybe it has all the info that makes all this work out sanely.

"... Read and understand Gibbs Free Energy..."

I have a decent understanding of Gibbs free energy.

.

"...Show me a negative house..."

Maybe, but you'll have you have to ask more politely. Do believe truth only is found in what you can see? Can you show yourself a positive house? If so, is there anything nonarbitrary that causes it to be positive.?

.

'Nope' is not an argument. It is a declarative statement indicating the lack of validity of the claim you made.

.

"My hypothesis stands"

And yet, just a moment ago it was lying. I suspect it has gotten up in preparation to run.

You have not responded to my suggestion that time is expansion. Stop learning and think.

One should not respond to gibberish as intelligent thought.

You have not provided a sufficiently intelligible suggestion to which I would be inclined to respond on the subject of ''time is expansion". I can think of reasons that expansion is not time, but it seems too much like tilting at windmills at this point to offer a rebuttal to what has not been seriously laid out.

Stop thinking that you know, and learn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfHjzomqbZc

Mass is the energy locked up by the gluons.

The Higgs field is the mechanism to give them mass.

All our particles would become massless without the Higgs field that is all around us.

99% of the mass comes from the energy that binds these massless particles together.

Quantum physics does not explain gravity.

Mass is not a property of matter it is a behaviour, it is something that quantum fields do.

If time is expansion and gravity is the behaviour of massless particles in the universal Higgs field we have a standard model that works 100%.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9AuqxSVHUY

architecture of the Universe - with J Richard Gott

Time = expansion = inflation

High density and low density dark matter.

Architecture is as a sponge of mass and void.

Expansion history is a measure of time.

Gravity is a condition or behaviour of a field.

"... 99% of the mass comes from the energy that binds these massless particles together. ..."

If 99% comes from energy to bind massless particles where does the other 1% arise from?

"...Mass is not a property of matter..."

If mass is something quantum fields do, why do these fields not exhibit this behavior for the particles that appear to remain massless throughout the universal quantum field?

If time is expansion how would you account for varying rates of expansion? It is bad enough to br prompted to suggest 'time is speeding up', but if time is expansion, you would lack sufficiently fundamental measures to say that expansion is occuring at an increasing rate, because instead of rate meaning per unit time, it would mean per unit increase in volume (or perhaps per unit increase in volume per unit time depending on if by 'expansion' youean rate of expansion or just the simple increase in volume....eithet way Occam's new protonic follicle shortener is way too complex to shave).

Question: If mass is something quantum fields do, why do these fields not exhibit this behavior for the particles that appear to remain massless throughout the universal quantum field?

Response: I am not a total believer in quantum because I believe in determinism.

Question: If time is expansion how would you account for varying rates of expansion?

Response: Time is different in different places.

Question:It is bad enough to br prompted to suggest 'time is speeding up', but if time is expansion, you would lack sufficiently fundamental measures to say that expansion is occuring at an increasing rate, because instead of rate meaning per unit time, it would mean per unit increase in volume (or perhaps per unit increase in volume per unit time depending on if by 'expansion' youean rate of expansion or just the simple increase in volume....eithet way Occam's new protonic follicle shortener is way too complex to shave).

Response:Expansion is different in different places and expansion can mean increase in volume if by volume you mean the amount of space occupied but you must understand that expansion occurs from every point in the universe.

Further logic: Hawking describes time as 'cones of events' but we each individually experience time as a liniar sequence of events.

'Cones of events' demands that time is expansion because it is three dimensional but liniar time does not allow for space because it is one dimensional.

Linear time is observed time the observer can only look back in time from a single location.

The sponge like structure of the universe suggests that expansion occurs differently under different conditions.

We know that the 'speed of light' varies dependent on the medium through which it passes. Speed is a vector value of time and distance.

Time is different in different places.

Gravity is the result of the different expansion rate between mass and space.

If time stopped there could be no change of the univesrsal state and therefore no gravity.

In order to understand this we must understand that the big bang happened everywhere because when it happened 'everywhere' was a single point that contained everything.

It follows that the big bang is still happening everywhere from every point and that everything is relative to everything else.

In the begining there was the idea, and nothing, no matter or space.

An idea is energy because by it's existence it changes the state of 'nothing' into 'space'.

Consider a standard computer with no software is in total equilibrium because nothing is moving.

It consists of switches that are all off and no energy can move, therefore there is nothing that is concious that the computer exists, not even the computer.

As soon as one switch is 'on' it has changed the state of equilibrium and this change is recorded as the time it took to achieve the change in the equilibrium of the whole computer.

This change is the start of expansion from every part of the computer. The whole shape (or architecture) of the computer has changed and that change is different in every part of the computer.

E = MC#

M = E/distance related to time #

There has only been change in time and time is expansion.

Gibbs Free Energy shows that free energy ocupies every void and it follows that the energy in the 'on' switch will tend to equalise with the off switches around it.

The presence of one idea has created a field that is absent of ideas and that one idea will 'infect' all the other ideas in the universe.

To model this notion we must have a three dimensional architecture to our computer. We must be able to radiate the idea in all directions but this has problems because of mathematics.

If the singularity at the begining of time was a perfect sphere and the big bang radiated out in all directions traditional digital maths cannot model this accurately because of Pi.

However, we can model this accurately using binary maths to identify each location in 3D.

It is found that this shape cannot be regular unless expansion is perfectly regular.

We know that time is different in different locations as the distance between locations varies so the expansion of different locations will be different in volume.

If the singularity was a single point this could not expand in it's original shape as this would then contain at least two or more points and these could not be spherical without creating space out of nothing between them.

This space could not be evenly distributed because the shape of the whole universe would not allow it.

Expansion from all points in the universe would then result in the observed sponge like architecture.

"... Question: If mass is something quantum fields do, why do these fields not exhibit this behavior for the particles that appear to remain massless throughout the universal quantum field?
Response: I am not a total believer in quantum because I believe in determinism....."

.

So....you have stated that you believe gravity is not a quality of particles with mass, but instead an effect of a universal field, yet when asked how you might accou t for massless particles, you state that 'you don't fully believe because you are a determinist' (paraphrasing)...

You have held up a model claiming it to be an improvement/correction, yet when asked how you deal with very basic parts, you claim not to fully believe in the hokun you are trying to pedal.