(May 11, 2009 at 7:44 am)g-mark Wrote: Oh, the area around the black hole. So where is the substance sucked into if there is no 'inside'?
It goes beyond the event horizon, where it can no longer be seen, because space time is bent in such a way that a photon at that point travelling in a straight line (in it's own frame of reference) isn't travelling in a straight line in a frame of reference that includes the black hole and considerable "flat" space around it.
Think of it as an inside if you like, I guess this is a good description in that nothing can "get out", I just think it implies that there's some huge transition at the event horizon.
(May 11, 2009 at 7:44 am)g-mark Wrote: Therefore to state a blackhole follows any laws is ridiculous. You can make assumption all day, but it makes no difference. There is a difference between 'thinking something' and 'knowing something'.
I don't think any scientist claims they know something. Only that the evidence suggests that it's true.
That doesn't mean you can say "You don't know something with absolute certainty, therfore any suggestion put forward is equally valid"
(May 11, 2009 at 7:44 am)g-mark Wrote: I will not believe anything a physicist assumes. They have been proven wrong before. So, until that point you can write to your hearts desire.
Yous seem to view science with a lot of suspicion... given your post in the nutjob atheist thread (can't remember what it was called) I'd even be tempted to call it hatred
Is there a reason?
(May 11, 2009 at 7:44 am)g-mark Wrote: If you study science, can you understand everything in the Universe?
At the moment no, if you think I was implying that, I'm sorry, I wasn't.
In the future maybe, I don't think it's fundamentally impossible.
Galileo was a man of science oppressed by the irrational and superstitious. Today, he is used by the irrational and superstitious who claim they are being oppressed by science - Mark Crislip
