Re: Infinities in Physics: was-> Re: OT: Universe Born in Black Hole Explosion?

"Nick M V Salmon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Replying to myself 'cause nobody else did but hey the what. ;-)
>
> [Black hole to singularity.... taking infinite time, so it never gets to
the
> point of singularity in reality.]
>
> "Nick M V Salmon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > [Black hole to singularity.]
> > Does current physical ~ collapsar theory breakdown at some point so
> > that it does happen afterall..?
> >
> > The outer mass of a collapsar accelerates inward, thus becoming more
> > massive as it's speed approaches that of light at the same time as time
> > dilation appears to slow things down to an outside observer - as time
> > dilation approaches infinity, so does mass.
as I understand it, the mass is the same, but the weight it generates,
relatively speaking, increases as you say.

>
>
> > [Passage of time at the surface of a collapsar approaches zero as the
> > mass outside the Schwarzchild radius of a collapsar approaches the
> > Schwarzchild radius itself - theory assumes it appears to never get
> > there but there would be no apparent time dilation to an observer on
> > the surface of a collapsar except everything exterior to the surface of
> > the collapsar would be redshifted to the point you would be seeing by
> > VLF R/F. Anything actually on the surface of the collapsar itself would
> > blueshift beyond measurable frequencies and you'd be smeared rather
> > thin by local gravity,
>
> That is gravity due to the rest of the collapsar apparently accelerating
> toward you, not the mass accelerating with you.
>
>
> > but would you even notice if you were built to withstand the original
> > gravitational forces & temperatures on the surface of a supergiant
> > star..? Perhaps you'd be feeling rather stretched on the rack of tidal
> > forces at the same time as you were smeared out impossibly
> > thin..? <LOL>  Or perhaps you wouldn't notice because tidal forces,
> > vertical & horizontal compression plus increasing heat & time dilation
> > all balance out, who knows until someone tries it and I'm not
> > volunteering for that one. ;-)  ]

>From what I can gather, anytime an object relatively approaches the speed of
light, the ability of any matter to stay in one piece is greatly reduced by
the fact that, what ever forces are holding it together have less time to
react to what ever it runs into.  As far as what is percieved by something
inside a black hole, my understandind is that even the best theorist working
with string theory cannot get definitive answers.  From what I heard, all
the formulas they use start to fall apart just like the matter itself.  It
is my speculation that the inside of a black-hole effectively becomes pure
energy after a point.  This is one thing that could allow one to explode
again, especially should it become peturbed by interacting with another one
at relativistic speeds.  But even short of that, it may not be inpossible
that once the mass generating material on the shell of the black-hole can no
longer generate enough force to contain the 'pure' energy at its center it
could explode and expand perhaps very rapidly by the force released by all
the spin it had previously contained.  This may be one reason their is an
initial inflation in the theories of the universes creation.  I am still
personally skeptical about the anti-gravity force theory being developed to
explain the extra expansion in the universe.  I have to believe that their
present theory is forgetting the gaseous pressure gradient within the new
universe when they go into the theory of the whole expanding equally all
over to explain why we don't percieve a 'center' and 'perimeter'.


>
>
> [From the viewpoint of an external observer.]
> > Buuuuut what is happening _inside_ the Schwarzchild radius of a
collapsar
> at
> > the same time as the outer mass is collapsing inward toward the
> Schwarzchild
> > radius..?  The outer surface of the collapsar has been subjected to far
> > greater gravitational differential than the centre, remembering that
> gravity
> > acting at the centre of a sphere is effectively zero.  Thus when it has
> > accelerated to relativistic speed in relation to the 'close by' centre
of
> > the collapsar, the surface must have increased mass relative to the
finite
> > mass interior to the Schwarzchild radius thus 'attracting' the interior
> back
> > outward toward the Schwarzchild radius - thus the mass of a collapsar
both
> > interior and exterior to the Schwarzchild radius will accelerate toward
> the
> > Schwarzchild radius for a non-finite length of time. [1]
>
> BTW: I haven't forgotten pressure at the centre of the spherical collapsar
> but that is a difficult one to visualise with the effective column the
same
> length as the diameter of the sphere thus passing through the varying
> gravitational gradient that inflects through zero at the centre of the
> sphere - does the pressure gradient follow the gravitational gradient in a
> linear fashion so that pressure at the centre of a sphere is also
> effectively zero..? It seems to me that it will but my visualisation may
> well be faulty here...
>
>
> > If the collapsar is rotating then gravitational attraction outward of
the
> > portion inside the Schwarzchild radius will be augmented by effectively
> > reduced centripetal force in the equatorial region - this would result
in
> > circulation of matter away from the poles toward the equatorial region
as
> > the equatorial region became more massive more quickly than the polar
> > regions - thus the collapsar would deform toward increasingly oblate to
> the
> > point it becomes a toroid, if revolving quickly enough initially. There
> will
> > probably also be an incredible speed differential each side of the
> > (changing) Schwarzchild radius because of the increased angular velocity
> of
> > the inward falling matter and decreased angular velocity of the outward
> > 'falling' matter. [I'd write more re polar deformation inside and
outside
> > the original Schwarzchild radius but this has grown long enough already.
> > ;-) ]
>
> It seems to me that any collapsar approaching the above form of 'surfaces
> singularity' ought to shine pretty fiercly from intense Hawking radiation
> induced by violent gravity wave 'storms' emnating from the close
approaching
> 'surface fronts' of the interior and exterior masses of the star that must
> be rotating at vastly differing speeds - in much the same way that low
> pressure frontal weather systems emnate from the wind sheer at polar
fronts
> inside our atmosphere.
>
> I wonder if we can already see so called 'black holes' approaching this
> 'surfaces singularity' by their intense Hawking radiation & how we could
> tell the difference from ordinary stars using data from recorded history
or
> observation..? Perhaps the new Laser Interferometer Gravity Wave detector
I
> read about at some link off these newsgroups will detect them if the
> operators don't suppress the relevant data as background 'white noise'..?
>
> > [1] I used non-finite instead of infinite above because, if there is a
> lower
> > bound to distance, then the two sides would, eventually, approach that
> > close - what happens then..?  Is there an implosion effect as inward and
> > outward accelerating matter 'bypass' each other via 'quantum tunneling'
> (?)
> > with the previously internal mass translating outside the Schwarzchild
> > radius thus free to 'blow off' like a Supernova shell nebula,
decelerating
> > as it expands. Does the matter that was outside that radius continue
> > accelerating inward _inside_ the previous Schwarzchild radius -
> remembering
> > that a lot of the mass of the collapsar has 'blown off' to become the
> > Supernova shell - are the known physical forces sufficient to stop this
> > collapse at some point or is the inward relativistic speed and huge
> > relativistic mass sufficient to produce the singularity that "will never
> > happen"..? ;-)
>
> Perhaps we will be able to predict Supernovae ~ Gamma Ray Bursters by the
> intensity of their gravity wave storms at some time in the future..?
>
>
> > Or; Less mass ergo smaller Schwarzchild radius ergo same thing happens
> > again, ie. cyclical implosions until the remaining mass drops well below
> > Chandrasekhar's limit and you either end up with a brown dwarf or a
> Neutron
> > star 'pulsar' surrounded by dense gas clouds rich in all sorts of
elements
> > from multiple 'implosions'..?  A 'new star nursery' perhaps..?
>
> If it is a spherical 'surface' that implodes through then there is nothing
> that I know of to stop it accelerating inward toward a singularity point,
> whatever mass remains, apart from it 's rotation & (maybe) having become a
> toroidal ring rather than a sphere.
>
> Ciao...
>
> [UK]_Nick...
> -- 
> Nick M V Salmon  Master Mariner  MN(Retd.)
> Mailto: My four [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.nmvs.btinternet.co.uk/index.htm
>
>

I have to admit you are leaving me in the dust in many places as I don't
have the Schwartchild theory under any real grasp.  I also have not read
your earlier posting.  After seeing the NOVA special on STRING theory, ideas
seen to need to get vented here also.  I have to suspect, for instance, that
there is still only three basic dimensions and time.  The 7 others are
allowed by the fact that energy is unable to interact with each other after
its spectrum is shifted too far.  This occurs as it interacts with other
energy fields at higher intensities, effectively causing time to slow down
in that arena.  If one says there are two other levels where there is enough
'time' for energy to interact sideways that gives 6 more 'dimensions' and a
final one where 'time' is so slow that it only has one direction, i.e.. its
direction of motion.  Even in this final direction energy twists around,
just not to its own perspective.

Sincerely,

Gregory D. MELLOTT
son and computer maintainer
of Kenton W. MELLOTT