Captain's Log, Stardate 01 - Blackholes are not holes

Captain's Log - Stardate 01

‘Blackholes’ are not holes

Little is known about blackholes but much speculation that fits with sci-fi is circulating; it is proposed that blackholes are simply phenomena that we experience everyday on earth but on a super macro-scale.

We also see similar effects within economies

Also, not all ‘stars’ are stars!

Richard Dawkins’ illusion in his ‘God Delusion’ is clear!

_______________________

(Please Note: This website is about the pioneering of ENGINEERING into the SEBFL environments, it is about seeking truths; it is NOT about journalism, English grammar or prose, or quick-sell – it is down-to-earth engineering & pioneering requiring extensive & intensive THINKING.

SEBFL = social/economy/business/finance/legal environments.

Explaining transmission mechanisms & pre-empting catastrophic failures is NOT doom-prophecy, it is explaining probabilistic reality.)

_______________________

Scientists frequently confuse issues by making simple things complex – engineering focuses on putting complexed things into simple practice.

And when scientists choose commercial deception over the seeking of and to the extreme extent of purposefully distorting scientific truths then it makes sense to establish truths for oneself. (see also paper: ‘Infinity-Eternity, Evolution-Creation’)

In pursuit of engineering into the SEBFL environments it is necessary to continually switch thinking mode between the SEBFL world and that of engineering world so as to develop understanding of why it is that economies continually boom/crash.

Inexact scientists will have created massive confusion and, worse, mathematicians masquerading as inexact scientists (& more worse still, as engineers) have put multiple layers of mathematical nonsense on top. (see series ‘Economists’ inexact models exactly defective’)

Rethinking of two issues caused thoughts to turn briefly away from the earth to that of space and black holes, and later to evolution/creation.

The two issues were Kenya & Twin Towers.

At the start of 2008 we saw an early-genocidic eruption of violence in Kenya, watching this unfold over a number of days simply reinforced principles previously developed by CDADD that Unfair Rules & Practices that man has developed within the western world and imposed upon the underdeveloped world are causal of the massive disparity rifts, and ensuing violences. What forces actually cause fractures along non-homogenous boundaries is a similar problem to forces that man experiences in engineering

Peace and Economy Stability are mutually inclusive; it needs sound engineered, fair economy system structures & controls to achieve ongoing stability, within which peace can be maintained.

BUT, thoughts along these lines immediately brought back the issue of the criminal implosion of Twin Towers (with the perpetrators knowing people were inside) and the fact that a global financial power-network (mafia elements that masquerade as members of loving-faiths) was behind this, and that the two planes were deceptive fronts for the premeditated implosions.

The departure point for understanding the Twin Towers is to accept (or reject) that the Twin Towers fell at the rate of ‘free fall’ as a consequence of implosion not as a result of the two planes (from which the collapse would have been impossible, and if possible then impossible at free fall-rate).

Thoughts about free fall then brought about thoughts of what forces act in repulsion to the gravitational forces of a body let go in mid-air & space.

On earth we have the predominant effect of the friction generated by air; but we also have the far lesser effect of an increasing gravitational repulsion as a falling body goes faster downwards towards the earth. Because we live in a real world with an atmosphere around us we cannot readily test the theory of universal gravity between two bodies in free fall, but we can observe the effects of bodies acting upon a multiplicity of bodies in space.

One phenomena we often see is a ‘falling star’ – i.e. a body that is drawn and/or trajected toward the earth only to burn up once it encounters the atmosphere. However, occasionally, some bodies are so large that they do not fully burn up but bounce onto the earth and we have a meteorite.

We also see phenomena that we call blackholes. BUT, these are not holes.

Consider:

The area between earth & moon is space, it is not a hole. Similarly, just because we cannot see something further away in space doesn’t make it suddenly a hole and not space. Space is merely regions that have no matter in it (that we can observe that is). The fact that matter appears drawn toward a particular region and then to ‘disappear’ (into what is called a blackhole) also does not make that region a hole.

It is suggested that simple, invisible, electro-magnetic forces are at work, just as we experience on earth.

Two bodies act upon each other according to the universal gravity force effect which is approximated by the Newton’s Gravity Equation (Force = G*m1*m2/r^2).

In plain English this says that for two bodies in space that the attractive force upon them is a gravitational constant (G) multiplied by the mass of each of the bodies and divided by the square of the distance between them.

What this means is that at any moment in time with the distance between two bodies being x and that a short time later it will have diminished because they are travelling towards each other. Because the distance between them has shortened it means that the force has increased by the square of the reduction of this distance. i.e. force increases with the inverse square of the reduction in the distance as the bodies move towards each other. So, as the bodies gets closer & closer to each other they accelerate and go faster, but at a ‘natural’ rate of speed & acceleration.

This is what happens with two bodies that are freely moving towards each other, having initially started from rest. Assuming that both bodies started from rest it means that the rate of attraction cannot exceed the ‘natural’ free attraction rate - which is determined by Newton’s equation/s (which is what we experience with a free-falling body onto earth but with the proviso that the earth’s atmosphere has an additional frictional force which cause the maximum speed to be limited to ‘terminal velocity’ for free-fall).

HOWEVER, seldom, if ever, are bodies in space starting from rest when they begin moving toward each other (such that the forces between them are sufficient for meaningful interaction) and in multiplicity towards other bodies at the same time. We know that we have ‘big-bangs’, or explosions, and that matter is trajected at huge speeds into space = we effectively have a very huge ‘pin-ball machine’ of bodies swirling & spinning & bouncing in space.

Obviously this is happening in ultra-slow-mo to an observer because of massive distances in space, it taking millions/billions of light-years for events to unfold, & billions of light years for us to later observe those events, so we are seeing only a small snap-shot of events as they were long ago at this present; and all unfolding in slo-mo.

However, there is another force, a repulsive force, which is acting upon bodies that are travelling toward or away from each other at speeds greater than the free attraction/repulsion rate; and that force comes about because of induced back-emf, exactly as we see in rotating electrical machines (i.e. motors & generators; the voltage across the armature = the summed voltages across the impedance & inductance PLUS the induced & opposing back-emf voltage)

When a conductor is moved, forced, into the path of a magnetic field the movement induces a current into that conductor, it also sets up an induced rotating magnetic field around that conductor. The reverse happens if a current is put into the conductor with the conductor in a magnetic field, a force is exerted upon the conductor which repulses it out of the magnetic field.

By having a sequence of conductors entering into the magnetic field and timing (through dc commutation or ac rotating field) the insertion of a current and by putting these sequential conductors onto a shaft we cause that shaft to rotate, and we hence have an electric motor. (The opposite effect is for it to be a generator)

However a limiting force begins to exert itself as the motor turns faster and that force is known as induced back-emf, i.e. the motoring effects also produces a generating effect that opposes/offsets the motoring effect and limits the speed to which the motor may reach. The back-emf is proportional to the speed of the shaft (rotor).

NOW, apply this back-emf effect into space.

Assume two bodies are indeed starting from rest and are drawn towards each other as given by Newton’s gravitational equation. As they speed up toward each other they also begin generating a repulsive force because a back-emf is induced by the one body upon the other and vice versa. Because of this the bodies are drawn towards each other at a ‘terminal’, free-attraction, velocity and no more for any given distance & mass sizes. Obviously as they get closer to each other the speed increases because of gravitational, acceleration but not beyond the free-attraction speed for that given distance (and respective body masses)

BUT, if the two bodies are caused to travel toward each other at a rate far higher than the natural free attraction rate then we obtain a ‘generator’ mode for those two bodies.

We have mechanical input from the explosion force that caused the body to hurtle through space which induces an electro-magnetic interaction between itself & the body/ies toward which it is hurtling. A current is induced into the two bodies and magnetic fields circulate about those bodies. The faster that bodies are travelling towards each other the faster the distance is decreasing and the force is increasing inverse exponentially, and the back-emf also increases. The back-emf is what causes decelerating forces between the bodies, and toward its natural rate of acceleration.

Stop & think about this – if a body is moving through magnetic fields it must have an effect upon that body – it cannot not do anything – something must occur – and that something has to be logical & obey ‘laws of nature’, no matter how far apart the bodies are if the bodies’ sizes are in significant relation to the separation distance.

When we see something massive in space behaving in a certain way we must think on an ever more massive scale and to think of other opposing bodies elsewhere in space, and their inducing effects into the observed body – we must avoid thinking ‘inside the box’, or ‘thinking into holes’.

The greatest generating effect is observed when a small body is travelling fast towards a relatively much larger body (whether the body be singular or a collection of bodies). The generating effect upon the smaller body is increased further by the far larger mass of the bigger body.

However, the speed & direction of the smaller body relative to the larger body can cause a positive or negative generating effect depending on whether the bodies are moving toward each other or away from each other. There is simply a sign reversal (+ or -, or right hand (voltage), or left hand (current) rules) on the direction of the induced current/magnetic field directions and their effects, but the principles remain the same.

BUT, we observe what are called ‘black holes’ in space and it is not sci-fi, there are sound reasons for these effects – how is this explained in the light of the aforegoing.

Light is an electromagnetic transmission. When light travels towards a body that is experiencing ‘generator’ effects AND the light is drawn into the body and is both fully absorbed & then fully transmitted (into/from different regions of the body) THEN we have what can be termed a super-generator.

There is both full absorption & full transmission effects of light toward and then from a super-generating body.

In other words for a super-generator to become such there is a threshold distance relative to the masses of the two bodies & their relative speed at which the transition from generator to super-generator occurs.

It is contended that the total absorption of light (as seen by an observer, hence a ‘blackhole’) onto a super-generating body occurs when that observer is directly in line with the travel direction of the two bodies.

What is occurring, it is proposed, is that the magnetic field of the super-generating body (the smaller body) is totally absorbing the light particles at one end of the body, and that it is carried around the body by the magnetic field and trajected outward on the other side of the body.

This is simply an extension of the fact that light rays are bent when travelling close to a body. The magnetic field of a super-generator simply pulls the much smaller light particles round to the other side and trajects them outwards.

We also have a secondary effect because of the rotating magnetic field around the body, this has an effect that steers the body off course from the original path to the other body, and the opposite effect on the other body, so the resultant effect would be for the bodies to veer away from each other.

The effect is similar to a spinning bullet from a rifled barrel, the spinning causes the bullet to veer away from the direction in which the barrel is pointing.

It would also seem that the body itself would develop its own rotation due to the induced back-emf.

(A further thought - we also have a kind of ‘wing’ effect – much like air flowing over an aircraft’s wing. The shape of the upper wing creates a longer path for airflow thus causing it to speed up and through Bernoulli’s equation we have a reduction in pressure on the top surface, or a nett higher pressure underneath hence we obtain an upward lifting force. Or, in this case a differential dipole effect across the body because of the rotating magnetic field moving through a ‘straight’ magnetic field, the one side having an additive, the other a subtractive, effect.)

So, since an induced back-emf is producing a magnetic field and because light is in the electromagnetic spectrum and because the body is travelling at such a speed to become a super-generator (but much less than the speed of light) it causes the far, far, smaller light particles to be sucked/absorbed intoward the body at the rear (the light coming from any & all directions from behind it) - the induced back-emf rotating magnetic field draws the light particles around the body and trajects it out the front (or direction in which it is travelling). In addition the spinning effect of the magnetic field causes the light to be funnelled & trajected from the body down a narrower path than the diameter of the body.

Therefore, for an observer positioned viewing along the direction of travel, and the travel direction to be away from the observer, all the light particles are being drawn intoward the body, and fully absorbed. Hence we do not see anything, simply a blackness that is round(ish) - and black is simply the absence of reflected light, or light that is totally absorbed. And because the light out the other side is funnelled into a narrower diameter we cannot see it being trajected out because the body is obscuring it. (Scattered light over a large absorption area is amplified into a trajected narrower, funnelled, ‘beam’ of light).

Further still, because the light is being trajected out in the direction of travel it creates a secondary repulsion effect upon the two bodies and opposing the very force that is causing the super-generator effect and thus also tending to slow it down to the natural rate of attraction force. Admittedly this is likely a billion year plus process if indeed the repulsion effect more likely does not pass because of the two bodies parting, the one veering away from the other due to the dual spin effect, and possibly creating a reversed super-generator….

……. Now consider the bodies travelling away from each other; again because the smaller body is hurled by some event (a big bang, and having veered past the bigger body) and the smaller body is now travelling toward the observer and away from the far bigger body – the effects would simply be reversed. The light would be drawn intoward the body at the rear and spun round the body and trajected & funnelled out the front. What the observer would see would be a concentrated (funnelled) bright amplified beam of light. But the observer (previous to this insight) would mistake that trajected & funnelled beam of bright light for a star, which in this case it would not be.

So, not all ‘stars’ are stars.

However the observer would still not know whether it was a star or not because, it is contended, it is not possible, or is very difficult to determine, whether the light is from a star source or a super-generator effect.

Simply shine a torch into your eyes in a dark room, it is impossible to determine what is around the light region.

___________________

What we also see are that galaxies are toroidal (doughnut) in shape and this occurs because of magnetic fields that are set up.

We can see a similarity in thunder clouds. The heat & humidity causes moist air to rise, the particles moving cause a charge into the cloud which induces an opposite charge in the ground. In rising the air cools and moves outwards and back down to be warmed again and drawn back into the cloud column.

A cross-section of the clouds would show, roughly, a toroidal (doughnut) shape.

The reason we can see this is because the water vapour is visible in mist/cloud form.

Projecting this idea into space we have similar effects with magnetic fields causing toroidal shapes, although we cannot see the fields as we can see cloud vapour. But, we can see (sometimes, often) the matter that is moving inside them and from certain directions we can see light.

If matter is hurled (say from a ‘big bang’) the magnetic field will cause particles to begin spinning on their own axis, and to be drawn toward each other and to begin spinning on their collective axis. The effect of this dual spinning would create a toroidal shape, and as this collective ‘body’ of matter moves through space it would, if it’s path could be seen, project a shape similar to a tornado (a rotating funnel).

This toroidal body, as a collective body, would also interact with other similar bodies and experience generator effects. At speeds in which interaction with other bodies cause a super-generator then light particles would be absorbed and swept through the toroid and out into space. Larger, but slower, matter would likely be drawn into the toroid. Depending upon our position as an observer we would see no light being reflected (i.e. blackness, a ‘blackhole’) or a bright light, or a beam of light (similar to shining a torch in the dark; but note, when a number of torches are switched on it then becomes more difficult to see any one beam).

If we also consider an initial big-bang then it is likely that the outer regions of this big bang did not contain heat generating matter, it being centred at the core. If this was so then the space beyond that which is visible would, surely, contain that matter that was flung out first and ahead of that matter containing heat – i.e. matter not emitting light would be invisible but nonetheless generating its own magnetic fields.

Also the ambient light that is between us, the observers, and the far reaches of space (wherever that may be) would obscure much of what otherwise would be possible to be seen.

___________________

The scenario in which an observer is on the far side of the bigger body would, it appears, not be able to see anything unusual simply because the bigger body obstructs the observer from seeing the smaller body, what we would see is a far diminished (sub) super-generator effect on the bigger body.

The scenario of the observer between the two closing bodies would not allow us to see anything of the dynamics – in much the same way that being in a lit room does not allow us to see the external effects – it is the kind of stuff that Hollywood would dream about, endlessly – and, fortunately, what some directors, such as Richard Attenborough, steer away from by, for example, openly Closing the Ring.

The Transition Phases (when the smaller body is close & moving toward to the larger, and when it is aligned, and when it is close but moving away) would create a host of interesting phenomena, and with a greater host of random quirks that would be body-shape specific as well .

It is also important to recognise that the masses both bodies is in relation to the square of their respective radii, hence there is linear proportionality between the distance between the two bodies and the mass (i.e. if we double the radius on one axis of one body then we can halve the distance between the two bodies to achieve the same attraction force).

So whilst we observe HUGE universes we should not overlook that there are far greater macro-interactions between the observed universe and others interacting with it that can be much further away and possibly/probably out of sight.

(BUT, the mass of a toroid is related to the cube of its radii not the square, so as mass increases due to radii increasing the forces increases much faster than they would for a distance reduction.)

Is a big-bang a body that has accumulated so much material that it explodes or is it simply a case of a pair of bodies eventually reaching sufficient proximity in which the induced forces generated exceed the attraction forces within each, or one, of the bodies and causing another explosion, similar to a bolt of lightning being a break down of the air insulation between cloud & ground?

It seems unlikely that it is the former.

It certainly is analogous to a pinball hitting the jackpot – and space, it is contended, is more analogous to a real life pinball machine than prevailing sci-fi imagination

(Additional Notes:-

- the path of the light particles can be analogised with the current in a conductor.)

- sign conventions can alter the ‘directions’ in the arguments but, it is contended, the principles of super-generators and induced back-emf are the focal issues for departure point of argument

- would light be absorbed/trajected in line with travel direction or perpendicular to it??? Current flows perpendicular to the magnetic field.

- just because nothing is observed does not mean that an electro-magnetic field is not present. So the absence of light in a part of deep space with the presence of bodies & magnetic fields & super-generators could be analogised to a generator not on load.)

- also note that for any given distance as the mass of a body increases so the speed necessary to achieve the same induced back-emf forces reduce.

- conversely for any given speed as the mass increases the distance decreases to achieve the same induced forces.

- the light funnelled from the smaller body would likely be reflected by the larger body because it would be sub super-generator, and of opposite polarity(?)

Obviously this super-generator dynamic is happening in a kaleidoscopic multiplicity of billions/trillions of interactions, counter interactions, and so on – and we would see the multiplicity of ‘weird’ phenomenae that we do – we simply(?) need to apply the superposition theorem of separating out the individual actions to understand how any one phenomena has come about.

It is also important to recognise that we cannot, as yet, prove much of what we see in space simply because we cannot get close enough to test theories & experiment. All we can do is reason and eliminate on a balance of probability those that are least likely in light of what we already know. Sometimes we incorrectly eliminate that which later proves to be the correct option.

______________

When discussing space one is easily led to wondering how it all started and conflict issues of evolution & creation pop up. The creation issue is complex & confusing and Richard Dawkins’ ‘Gold Delusion’ confuses thinking further.

Having flicked through the book it was immediately seen that there were no ‘heads-of-argument’; the absence of a list of key points meant that one has to plough through the entire book to get an understanding of his points.

His website gives no heads-of-argument, merely Chapter 1 as an introduction but with nothing in it that states what his hypotheses are.

The promotional video snippet by his publishers (accessible at Dawkins’ website) gives deceptive statements by Dawkins with a convenient sprinkling of scientific argument. Dawkins also takes scripture out of context and without understanding of its origin & purpose – hardly a scientific approach.

Dawkins is clearly confused between religion & faith-in-God.

Faith-in-God is the vertical relationship.

Religion is the organised horizontal relationships in churches, mosques, synagogues, temples etc.

Proving discrepancies (and there will no doubt be a host of them) within the horizontal religion relationship has no direct bearing on the form & nature of the vertical faith relationship.

Scriptures are NOT the faith but a part explanation of the faith and, as it is developed by man, is full of discrepancies – but that doesn’t disprove or negate the faith, nor that the scriptures are substantially a truth.

Whilst Dawkins admits that one cannot prove that God does not exist the title of his book (God Delusion) is synonymous with the statement that ‘God does not exist’ = deception.

Believers in God cannot prove that God exists, they can ONLY examine the available evidence; and by a process of eliminating unreasonable argument they reach a point at which they take a literal ‘leap-of-faith’ and believe & trust in God.

The converse is also true; one cannot disprove that God is there.

On these two points Dawkins is correct, but his title God Delusion is a sneak method of saying, without proof, that God does not exist.

An atheist must surely accept much of the arguments rejected by believers, plus reach a conclusion about their own specific belief arguments and then take a leap-of-non-faith in non-believing & non-trusting in God.

A second skimming of his book over tea at Eason’s confirms that Dawkins relies upon arguing the limited understandings of believers (i.e. arguing horizontal relationship & understanding issues). And often Dawkins is arguing historical understandings from centuries past – so clearly those thoughts will be irrelevant because the religions were very much in the dark & with limited means of communicating ideas, and with limited numbers of educated people who could understand.

With the technology we have today it is very easy to check whether someone has distorted scriptures for personal advantage; e.g. www.e-sword.net allows for free downloads and fast & easy reference checking.

It allows one to openly challenge religious leaders who misread, misinterpret, & misapply religious texts. Historically societies were at the mercy of the religious leaders because they had no education to allow for checking.

Also many (most) of Dawkins’ arguments are non-sequiturs.

Overall, Dawkins’ illusion in his ‘God Delusion’ is clear! (But note, that does NOT prove that God exists, it is necessary to examine the facts and determine whether a leap-of-faith is warranted. See series of papers ‘A con-undrummed’ & ‘Infinity-Eternity, Evolution-Creation’).

What then is the value of Dawkins’ book?

It cannot & does not prove or disprove that God exists – so both believers & stated non-believers must take, respectively, a leap-of-faith or a leap-of-non-faith.

But, one can state categorically that Dawkins’ title is deceptive – so why read into the deception?

Instead research the facts directly and reach your own conclusion rather than be misled by unscientific & erroneous argument, and argument that is driven by commercial gain in place of the seeking of scientific truths.

Unless there is a concise list of key points (heads-of-argument) to possibly entice further reading on specific arguments then there is no point in buying the book, or even reading for free in the bookshop.

It appears that it has only monetary value to Dawkins and those associated with the business of the book & whether it sells.

What is claimed to be ‘evolutionary’ is simply that part of God’s creation that is in ‘auto-pilot’.

God after all is THE Engineer of all we see, and do not see.

(An email has been sent to Richard Dawkins requesting a list of key-points/heads-of-argument – nil response to date.)

___________________

The induction effects we observe in engineering/science also happen in the world of commerce.

As stated often before, the grossly defective economy models that are utilised by developed countries are massively destructive to themselves, it also induces catastrophically destructive forces on underdeveloped countries – which is the cause for Zimbabwe, Kenya, Rwanda, Darfur, South Africa unwinding.

Recent Papers