/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11687798]

An engineering student on /pol/ says he just disproved black holes, what are your thoughts on this? Is there any truth to his theory?
>>>/pol/257974923

[Anonymous No.11687799]

>>11687798
>an engineering student is a fucking idiot
Expected

[Anonymous No.11687802]

>>11687798
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11687804]

>>11687798
>on /pol/ says he just disproved
Kek

[Anonymous No.11687828]

>>11687798
Typical brainlet.

[Anonymous No.11687833]

>>11687798
>black holes are technically not real because they exist on a 2Dplane in a 3D world
there’s so much wrong with this that you’d almost have to start from scratch to correct it. relearning english would be a first step

[Anonymous No.11687838]

I cant believe there is more arguments on /pol/ than on /sci/.
This place is full of ad hominem and other fallacies.
/pol/ might be shit and full of /x/tier retards, but at least people try and argue.

Learn to argue /sci/

>>11687799
>>11687802
>>11687804
>>11687828
Not an argument

[Anonymous No.11687845]

>1/0 * 0/x = 1/x or any number between 1/∞ ,1/1, -1/∞ or all real numbers
>where x is any real number
"no"
>if you drew all of the slopes of 1/x you would have a 2d plane or all numbers between 1 and infinity.
what does that even mean? all the slopes? you mean if you drew the derivative? you dont get a plane
>By the same logic using a black hole in our 3D universe is undefined (1mass/0volume), then that means it doesn't have a Z axis or otherwise it doesn't have depth, meaning that it is a 2D object in 3D universe. Passing the event horizon or going into the black hole is transmitting into the second dimension.
There is no logic presented anywhere. The absolute state of engi students.
>>11687838
go back

[Anonymous No.11687847]

>>11687838
>
If you want to stretch your brain go look up "maximally extended diagram of a kerr spacetime". If you want the blue pill, just bullshit your way through more things in life. Comparing a person like you to a person like me, or many of the physicists on here is like comparing you to a sub-saharan african. Its comical. Just go be a good bot and pay taxes. Leave the big brain stuff to us. It will hurt less.

yes, the hight of academic rigor, /pol/

[Anonymous No.11687849]

>>11687798
>>11687838
schizos post their theories here all the time, it's usually best to just ignore them

[Anonymous No.11688259]

>>11687798
>disproved
It was never proven.

[Anonymous No.11688321]

>>11687798
>Engineering student
This guy must have taken nothing but electives so far

[Anonymous No.11688332]

>>11688259
Nothing is ever proven, except in pure math. What we do have is incredible evidence in the form of a visible-light picture. In physics, seeing is believing. “Disproving” the existence of black holes might be possible, but we are so overwhelmingly certain they exist that working against the theory can only be a serious waste of brainpower.

Try again when we run into a property of spacetime that can’t be explained with general relativity.

[Anonymous No.11688333]

>>11687838
places like /pol/ are unironically the last places where real science gets done. This place is full of stuck up retards with academic aspirations and academia is pure bullshit, it does no science today. They are possibly also diversity hires who will die to protect their cozy undeserved positions.

[Anonymous No.11688364]

>>11688332
Never been proven.

[Anonymous No.11688516]

Stop with this silly schizo "black hole" garbage. And yes the belief in "black holes" is truly schizo.

"Black holes" violate Einstein's Relativity theories (let's just pretend they're correct), yet in the institutionalized "settled science" dogma, they simultaneously believe in Relativity. And "black holes" (as defined by the "black hole" believers themselves) can't exist in a Big Bang Universe, yet they simultaneously believe in the Big Bang. And by the official "black hole" """science""" there can't be /multiple/ "black holes" in the same universe simultaneously, yet they believe there are. It's 100% schizo and idiotic.

Institutionalized "settled science" followers are basically religious - they ignore any science and facts which contradicts their belief system.

To everyone who wish to learn and educate themselves, here's an excellent scientific paper describing the problems and contradictions with "black holes" and Relativity: https://files.catbox.moe/b3aur6.pdf

And here are great educational videos for those who don't want to read (all the following is based on /real science/ and observations of reality, as opposed to the "settled science" dogma):

https://youtu.be/kI14fpM3ouU

https://youtu.be/Iz8RRN8rY00

https://youtu.be/yc9PB_4F-OU

https://youtu.be/J4NffTr_GMk

https://youtu.be/Dk2-lH9ewuA

https://youtu.be/ev10ywLFq6E

https://youtu.be/I8y3VrrVEpI

https://youtu.be/Dz2A4qXJQjc

https://youtu.be/-FdWTH08u30

https://youtu.be/Q185InpONK4

https://youtu.be/CHZ5O0jTH8A

https://youtu.be/nLC4MA6_Oq0

https://youtu.be/GfyNOEMjzI4

https://youtu.be/lmROfjgViLE

https://youtu.be/TiKYvUtpJXA

https://youtu.be/MvNCWMD6so4

https://youtu.be/TdYrgJrBFr0

https://youtu.be/-03lh_tHMJ0

https://youtu.be/FIgmsQOKnmk

https://youtu.be/ot-9R2GZxp8

https://youtu.be/p8lKQMEYYLw

https://youtu.be/_c9M33FLH40

https://youtu.be/SeIHTCdOGWs

https://youtu.be/4IdMz8PkGZM

https://youtu.be/kz-Bwi5xTTs

https://youtu.be/xUC_a-IMmGs

https://youtu.be/hC_KkLvG22A

[Anonymous No.11688757]

>>11688333
Waste of good trips.

[Anonymous No.11688816]

>>11688516
Eventually someone will put the effort in to bother countering that retarded anti GR thing that keeps getting posted

Personally I'd point out that the fact that the Schwarzschild metric being a solution to GR doesn't necessarily mean that that metric must physically occur. In fact, we expect bodies to have some rotation so the Kerr metric would be better. Still, the crucial point is that we don't expect the spacetime around bodies to be exactly the same as the analytical solutions like Schwarzschild's, they'll only be approximately correct and finding a 'real' solution will require some numerical methods. The fact that Schwarzschild's metric cannot possibly exist in our universe isn't any different from how any exact solution you get in EM won't actually exist because of other charges around the universe altering your exact result. Usually we can make a good argument to ignore them and pretend like our analytic solution is reality. Same goes for the solutions to GR.

Whoever made that post clearly understands some of the maths but his Proof 3 really gives away that he has no idea what the fuck he's talking about. Pointing out that superposition doesn't apply to GR solutions doesn't show anything new, and pointing out the nonexistence of analytical solutions to GR for multiple masses doesn't mean that solutions don't exist, it means you can only find them numerically. What a waste of time

[Anonymous No.11688904]

>>11688816
>Whoever made that post clearly understands some of the maths
0 times infinity/infinity = all numbers? Does that sound like something a mathematician would say?

[Anonymous No.11688915]

>>11688516
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11688937]

>>11688816
>Schwarzschild meme

[Anonymous No.11688942]

>Engineer
>Discovering
Wrong

[Anonymous No.11688947]

>>11688516
>>11688816
>>11688937
Related.

[Anonymous No.11688975]

>>11688333
>real science
Phd in google specialising in racial esotericism sounds very impressive

[Anonymous No.11688982]

>>11688937
>>11688947
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.11688986]

>>11687798
There's a reason he posted it on /pol/ and not here

[Anonymous No.11688996]

>>11688937
>>11688947
Doesn’t GPS have to take account of relativistic effects as defined by Einstein to work properly? How can it be wrong if it leads to the expects results?
Also, why would GR going against Newton be relevant to its validity?

[Anonymous No.11689016]

Have always preferred the fuzzball theory anyways.