One aspect of the black hole hypothesis that the Cheshire could never wrap his whiskers around is the claim that information is flowing strictly in one direction over its event horizon.
His reasoning is:
1. Gravitation is a two body causal interaction
2. Any causal interaction may be expressed in terms of mutual exchange of information.
3. Black hole and the surrounding galaxy are exerting a gravitational pull on each other.
4. Therefore information is very well flowing in both directions across the so-called event horizon.
5. That clearly demonstrates that the concept of an event horizon is a contradiction in terms of a rather scarce meaning.
Thoughts and objections to the feline?
(Serge Kim)
Jake Archer
Black holes are holy objects…Don’t think many would questions them here..That would be heresy!
C Stephen Gomez-Nichols
i loved alice in wonderland, so i agree. I think
Joegen Baclor
// 1. Gravitation is a two body causal interaction //
Gravity is mass affecting curvature of space. There is no need for two to tango. You are confusing gravity with magnetism.
// 2. Any causal interaction may be expressed in terms of mutual exchange of information. //
Interaction and mutual is redundant.
// 3. Black hole and the surrounding galaxy are exerting a gravitational pull on each other. //
Wrong. Gravity has a sphere of influence. The only thing that can match the pull of a black hole is another black hole in near proximity.
// 4. Therefore information is very well flowing in both directions across the so-called event horizon. //
Premise 3 is wrong, therefore derivative is wrong.
// 5. That clearly demonstrates that the concept of an event horizon is a contradiction in terms of a rather scarce meaning. //
Predimse 3 and 4 is wrong, therefore 5 is wrong
// Thoughts and objections to the feline? //
remain a feline.
Jake Archer
“Gravity is mass affecting curvature of space”…Yes affecting what? Why two bodies of course One a black hole with (cough) “infinite mass”(splutter)…And a Sun- for instance.. Are you saying that a SUN winking out of existence (screaming x-rays) if it gets too close to a black hole… Isn’t information to those who detect it from Earth..?
Serge Kim
Sorry, Joegen, space is a relation but even assuming that space can curve in a hypothetical situation around a black hole devoid of the surrounding galaxy, and then space is an object interacting with the hole. The relation still stands. The massive hole massively curves the space-object and the curved space-object affects the hole in its turn. Note the real situation is different. The space-object may only be a medium to transmit the pull from the hole to the galaxy and back either literally or metaphorically. The galaxy is no less massive and therefore is equally bending space inside the framework of the space curving hypothesis. Nothing is changed by your inane objection as the relation just becomes a three body interaction. The gravitating hole, the gravitating galaxy and the space-object mediating the gravitation between the two forms an interacting trio, says the feline.
Joegen Baclor
I just want to let it known that this clown here “Jake Archer” serves this very purpose of asking questions followed by?? Or!! As if he makes sense and post links to their religious articles about pseudo sciences in their groups. I chose to ignore him already in one of the groups I belong to and I urge you also do likewise.
In fairness to Serge. I know this guy for a while and we have been playing this sarcasm with him in the past so we both know somehow where we stand with or without a public audience.
Jake Archer
I just want to let it BE known, that this clown Joegen Baclor, has no argument so is left with the option of being an ass!
Which he performs the duty of being…Like a pro…
Joegen Baclor
// space is a relation but even assuming that space can curve in a hypothetical situation around a black hole devoid of the surrounding galaxy, then space is an object interacting with the hole. //
It is all about mass Serge. Space is the container of mass. We yet have to determine what’s the primary composition of space but what is evident right now is that it has no mass and therefore cannot play a role in gravitation. It is the ingredient to the gravitational recipe.
Jake Archer
“Space is the container of mass.”…But what contains…Space..? LOL
Serge Kim
It’s not a question of whether that bendable entity is massive or not and what it might be composed of, it’s a question of whether it is a causal agent or not. Remember that Wheeler formulated it thus: “matter tells space-time how to curve; space-time tells matter where to move”. Telling or instructing to move is a causal action whether performed by a massive body or incorporeal angel. It informs the matter about the precise trajectory to describe and therefore is passing of information in spades.
Kel Van Der Meel
Space is it’s own reciprocal. ~
Serge Kim
How does it work, Kel? Bent space reciprocates the advances of its plane variety?
Kel Van Der Meel
It was meant as a joke Serge, even if it might be an interesting idea, I was referring to space being its own reciprocal in the sense that the processes within it, also justify its existence, as does the universe with existing, justifies it’s inner process.