Naked Singularities - strange siblings that violate known laws

Scientific Aerican ^ | Feb 2009 | Prof Tung en Cheex

[Young Werther]

Modern science has introduced the world to plenty of strange ideas.

[Young Werther]

Black Holes Indeed! After many years of reading Scientific American I was astounded to see such a pronographic presentation! We must investigate the Smithsonian and all the other shenangians that occurred on the Mall!

[PghBaldy]

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=naked-singularities

[Young Werther]

NAKED!

There you go again!

[cripplecreek]

Guess I just have problems believing that the intense gravity of the singularity would have no effect outside itself.

[Our man in washington]

I saw the headline and was expecting an article on Bill and Roger Clinton.

[Fred Hayek]

Last page of the article is some major malware.

[Centurion2000]

Sounds like a load of horsecrap. Read the article and the event horizon is a side effect of the singularity. Besides, how exactly are they going to measure something like this when light cannot escape the singularity in the first place? And if light can escape then you don't have infinite gravity and density; you have something closer to a stange matter star (quark matter) or neutronium.

Stange Matter article if anyone is interested.

[cripplecreek]

Some kind of strange inward gravity that can’t make sense in this physical realm.

[Tolkien]

The more I read the article the more fuzzy it became.

Although I'm a genius (don't laugh), it sounded like a bunch of mumbo jumbo to me.

Gas is far more powerful than gravity and the shape of the star that's collapsing seems totally irrelevant to the type of black hole forming. If the gravity is as powerful as to not let light escape, there has to be an event horizon.

But hey, what do I know?

[Young Werther]

We've come along way from E=MC2. Astrophysics is a new frontier of science that we have studied and still are learning of and formulating new hypothesis about!

I remember when the big bang was first postulated. I began to have doubts about the existence of God! A friend who was charting his course thru high school to the seminary to priethood and I were discussing the big bang. I asked him if this new scientific understanding meant that there was no God and that he didn't create the Heaven and Earth.

His answer was "Big Bang! Big Deal! For God that was just the snap of a finger!"

We've come along way and have a long way to go! Ad Astra!

[starlifter]

Are these related to naked shorts?

[Tolkien]

The "Big Bang" never bothered me. The scriptures say God flung the heavens into being.

The astronomers had to come up with a term that excised God from the process but it didn't really.

God is on His throne and as much as "science" undergoes changes, I wouldn't chance my eternal soul on their theories.

[Philo-Junius]

The astronomer who did the math raising the prospect of the Big Bang was a Roman Catholic priest, Msgr. Georges LeMaitre.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dp27bi.html

His Catholicism coupled with the theological implications of his findings led the scientific establishment to resist his findings for decades, until the supporting observations were pretty much inescapable.

There’s a reason everyone knows about the Big Bang, but no one knows LeMaitre’s name.

[spunkets]

"The astronomer who did the math raising the prospect of the Big Bang was a Roman Catholic priest, Msgr. Georges LeMaitre."

from your link... "Another scientist, Soviet Aleksandr Friedmann, had come to the same conclusion independently, a few years earlier."

A few years was 5. Friedman published his work in 1922. link

[Philo-Junius]

Fine. Another fabulous Soviet inwention. But it was LeMaitre's Catholicism that scared the scientific rank and file away from the theory.

[Tolkien]

That doesn't surprise me at all.

But there are Christians that are well known for their scientific discoveries.

Kepler

Farraday

Newton

Pasteur

and the list goes on.

It's just that no one knows they were Christians.

[spunkets]

"...it was LeMaitre's Catholicism that scared the scientific rank and file away from the theory. "

No.

[Philo-Junius]

Ah; so substantive.

[Philo-Junius]

Einstein himself said that he didn’t like LeMaitre’s theory because “that suggests too much the creation.”

“Big Bang” was originally a derogatory epithet bestowed by those who wanted to ridicule the very notion of a primaeval singularity.

[Philo-Junius]

Additionally, Friedmann’s 1922 work indicated that space was indeed expanding, but left open the possiblity that the curvature of space was a periodic function, avoiding the necessity of a Time Zero.