Re: My response to, "Stephen Hawking revamps black hole theory"

From: Dale Trynor (dalet_at_nbnet.nb.ca)
Date: 07/21/04 

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 19:49:49 GMT

Dan Gannon wrote:
> In response to the recent news article:
>
> Stephen Hawking revamps black hole theory
> http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/07/21/hawking.blackholes.ap/index.html
> (Text of the article included at the end of this post.)
>
> This new conclusion is in agreement with what I predicted, in my
> "Multiple Big Bangs" hypothesis about 10 years ago.

Dale Trynor wrote:
Before I get into any discussions with you on this, here is a slightly
edited post I have done to get people thinking about how the gravity
caused time dilation one must get around black holes can be shown to
expand space.

You probably know about the Shapiro delay and how it involves how light
is delayed as it passes
by a gravitational body and if you don't look it up first. its
well documented so we can ignore details and just skip by and use our
analogy of the pole-vault
and barn gedanken that
becomes rather similar to the Shapiro delay when we have a black hole
within the barn.

Trying to keep this ridiculously simple, lets put in a time dilation of
an average of 300,000,000
times and make the barn 1 meter long where it equals 1 light second long and
our rod is some reasonable percentage of light speed where even after
Lorentz contraction it will
still measured as some reasonable amount longer than the barn. We allow
both the rod as well as
a series of light pulses to enter the
barn at about the same time and because we know the rod cannot travel
faster than the light its
only logical to expect the
rod will also take at least 1 second to
exit the outlet door as this must also be the case for the light.
Note that we will still be able to show that the longer rod
will still fit nicely within the
barn from the prospective of our outside observers and given that much
time delay they will all
have agreed that both doors
were at some time, more or less simultaneously closed. You cant do this
without the time dilation
effect within the barn as you
will get different observers disagreeing on when both doors were closed
but I wont repeat this old
stuff as I know you must
know it already and its importance to simultaneity arguments.

Ok so do you now agree that we actually have a circumstance where we can
indeed argue that a
longer rod has indeed fitted nicely within the barn for almost a whole
second.

Alternatively now it gets more tricky, even with these simplified
extremes of now trying to show
that from our rods prospective it will also measure more distance within
the barn, as now we also have Lorentz contraction effects to also
account for and they become
more significant because it is in free fall. This is because of the way
one gains speed when traveling through a gravitational lens and because
objects traveling faster measure shorter as well as measuring a shorter
path from their prospective it makes this whole thing more
complicated. So try doing this where the rod is prevented from gaining
speed relative to its
prospective of the black
hole and it will become
more obvious that it will indeed measure more distance inside the barn
than it would have
estimated before it entered. Doing this you will need to remember that
we have two ends of the
rod where we can also place observers and we need to show where both
have sufficient time to
agree that they are able to observe both doors closed and or observe
more space within the barn
than they would have originally predicted from viewing the outside of
the barn before entering.

Note that this alternative theory leads to the idea that an infinite
time dilation equals an infinite space expansion, assuming anything
infinite is ever actually approachable. This leads to the idea that
black holes will have a minimal orbit that on after passing it all later
orbits become longer. It gives the most of the same predictions as given
for inflation theory if you could be inside of a black hole when it forms.

>
> I predicted that if a black hole reaches a certain critical mass,
> equal to the mass of our expanding local universe, another Big Bang
> will occur. I predicted that these occur regularly, throughout
> spacetime, with matter and energy from one big bang merging with that
> from other big bangs, forming black holes that approach that critical
> mass over time.

The above theory has some incomplete questions dealing with mass. For
example how could only a few stars worth of mass create a universe like
ours. Where would the extra mass come from or dose this mean that not
all black holes have universes like ours etc.

>
> I also predicted that what goes into a black hole doesn't get sent to
> a "parallel universe" through a "white hole."

Oddly enough this alternative theory hypothesizes that an event horizon

if it can still be called one, has a reverse side that fits the
description of a white hole for our internal observers.

I posted these ideas on
> the Internet at the time (to the sci.physics newsgroup,) and never
> received a response.

Even Hawking doesn't have it completely right. This theory has proposed
ideas for experiments as well as a lot more to it than included here.

Dale.

>
> I'm glad that Stephen Hawking has come to agree with me on at least
> some of this. :-)
>
> I postulate what causes these Big Bangs is, essentially, that the
> matter in the black hole becomes so warped by the extreme gravity,
> that the gravity emitted by the matter essentially becomes reversed
> for an instant, and that is when another Big Bang begins. It may be
> much more complex than that, but I think that's pretty close to what
> causes it.
>
> P.S., It would be nice to receive a response, someday.
>
> Dan Gannon
> Portland, Oregon, USA
> email: dgplexus1@yahoo.com
>
> ---begin text of article---
>
> CNN.com
> SCIENCE & SPACE
>
> Stephen Hawking revamps black hole theory
> Wednesday, July 21, 2004 Posted: 1:07 PM EDT (1707 GMT)
>
> "There is no baby universe branching off, as I once thought."
> -- Stephen Hawking
>
> DUBLIN, Ireland (AP) -- Famed astrophysicist Stephen Hawking says
> black holes, the mysterious massive vortexes formed from collapsed
> stars, do not destroy everything they consume but instead eventually
> fire out matter and energy "in a mangled form."
>
> Hawking's radical new thinking was presented in a paper to the 17th

[snip]

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What before big bang?
    ... do as an analogy to the polvalt in barn gedanken used to teach ... do a google if you dont remember it or the Shapiro effect. ... black hole inside the barn along with its time dilating effects note its ... Ok so now ask yourself what would happen if our relativistic rod were to ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: What before big bang?
    ... do as an analogy to the polvalt in barn gedanken used to teach ... do a google if you dont remember it or the Shapiro effect. ... black hole inside the barn along with its time dilating effects note its ... Ok so now ask yourself what would happen if our relativistic rod were to ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: My response to, "Stephen Hawking revamps black hole theory"
    ... > I predicted that if a black hole reaches a certain critical mass, ... > equal to the mass of our expanding local universe, another Big Bang ... And such a predicition ... Comparing yourself favourably to Stephen Hawking? ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: black hole information loss?
    ... I've recently reversed my position that that bright green flying ... find a black hole and run some experiments. ... could you find me a pregnant bright green flying elephant please? ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • black hole information loss?
    ... I was listening to the radio and heard that Stephen Hawking, ... paper presented at the 17th Conference on Gravity, ... reversed his position on the question of information loss in black ... some nebulous 'form' as the black hole slowly disintegrates. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading