Posted on 08/02/2004 10:16:56 PM PDT by CarrotAndStick
Ah yes always important to protect the reputation of the "smart" guys cause their theories are always sooo right...think red shift and doppler effects on the large scale
Did you ping Physicist to this, too?
I suspect that if I read Mitra's paper (and understood it), I'd find that his claims went way beyond simply saying that black holes don't destroy all information as they evaporate, which as I understand it is all that Hawking is now saying.
I only read the first few paragraphs, but stopped. The reason being that this guy feels vindicated because none of the big boys proved him WRONG.
In science, anyone can say anything is true, but it's your job to prove you are right. It is NEVER anyone elses job to prove you wrong. I submit Hawking didn't respond to him because he didn't see anything worth wasting his time on.
I'm glad this man was vindicated...the snobbery of people "who know it all" kind of gives extra credance to Paul's remark that "thinking themselves wise they became fools instead."
This statement is like saying that light can't exist because its existence flouts the theory of electromagnetism.
...rest of article disregarded as not worth my time...
Cosmological Constant. Einstein inserted a fudge factor in an equation to make it match some observations that were later found to be incorrect. Woopsie!
It's not a fair fight! Hawking is a quadrapalegic!!!
You should see the guy in a strip club. Life of the party.
I thought this was the guy... |
But he's got a pretty cool set of wheels...
You should see when he starts working those Lowrider hydraulics.
Well, for a while Mitra felt what Halton Arp and a few others have been experiencing for decades on the subject of quasars and the Big Bang. There, dogma still reigns in astronomical academia, refusing to let observations shape theory, preferring, instead, to screen and discard observations that don't comport with theory.
Elitests have always lamented the democratization of one thing or another.
Another poorly written science article.
Hawking didn't propose the existence of black holes, the event horizon is not imaginary and yet more hair-splitting over a name.
Bring back science in the schools!
Or better still, home school!
.. and here from Chris Hillman
http://www.lns.cornell.edu/spr/2001-07/msg0034336.html
The concern of this article is the final state of spherical gravitational collapse. However, the author gives an incorrect discussion and finds a wrong result that 2M/R->1 rather than 2M/R<1 as the collapse proceeds, where M and R are the Misner-Sharp mass and circumferential radius, respectively. The author continues several discussions along this wrong line. For example, the author claims that for a physical fluid the gravitational collapse results in zero-mass black hole formation.
An article containing incorrect mathematics isn't a good challenge to Hawking's work. The referee of the original paper should have caught this and given a thumbs down to publication. (That's what peer review is for, inter alia.)
This is what happens when people turn science into a "religion" and popular scientists into "prophets."
You're right about Hawking being overrated. He doesn't believe in life after death, so I automatically know not to believe everything he says.
Don't think I did, thanks. Would be interested in such contextualization of the subject matter -- also any analysis of the behavior of these scientists that explains their "shunning" and more general determinations not to include "unorthodox" theorists in their networks of acceptance and communication.
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.