Wait...what?
Posted on 10/01/2014 1:02:17 PM PDT by EveningStar
... Well, even 90 years isn't enough, it seems, so right now, we are entering new waters – the denial of some basic results of general relativity, our modern theory of gravity that has been around and available to everyone since 1916. So in the last week, hundreds of publications informed their readers that it's been "mathematically proven" that the big bang theory is wrong and the black holes don't exist.
These nutty claims boil down to some papers by a crackpot named Ms Laura Mersini-Houghton (no, I really, really won't accept her doctorate) who had previously claimed that she could see an opening of a wormhole leading to another Universe in some cold spots in the CMB (which aren't that cold at all, and even if they were, the interpretation was totally silly).
She wrote some totally idiotic preprints claiming that the Hawking radiation prevents a star from forming a black hole. It's just a staggeringly stupid claim. For a stellar size black hole (by the mass), it takes something like 10100 years for it to evaporate via the Hawking radiation. On the other hand, the collapse time may be comparable to seconds, a very short timescale, so be sure that almost nothing changes about the distribution of matter thanks to the Hawking radiation even if you could exactly define what you consider to be the Hawking radiation in this short, initial, out-of-equilibrium phase...
(Excerpt) Read more at motls.blogspot.com ...
I think it's a better result that no nonsensical singularities exist in our universe than that an essential part of how our universe is constructed and evolves is due to the behavior of singularities, i.e. objects that don't behave according to any law known to science.
Certainly we have theories that can be used to predict what will happen to objects that come within the vicinity of Black Holes, but they are a key reason why GR and QM have not yet been united into a single coherent theory.
The idiot who wrote the "rebuttal" is extremely rude and abusive. What is he trying to hide? Maybe he needs to find a Black Hole to crawl into.
The article is not a rebuttal. It is name calling. I, however, don’t think the targets of the name calling hold any water or quarks or anything else. The new theoroids have not had any experiments to prove or disprove them and so are not established beyond assertion.
Seems to me scientists in general have demonstrated a need for universal psychological screening of all scientists to rule out:
1) political bias resulting in crazy ideas
2) personal belief system bias resulting in delusional thinking
3) plain old stupidity
I probably should have said something like, "The article is in response to the material presented in this thread"
Sorry.
And anyone doing String "theory" is more a mathematician than a scientist.
Wait...what?
Yeah, but where does the Ford Pinto come come out all this?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.