This conversation is closed.

Black holes are not due to exploding stars, but rather due to spin.

Black holes spin into existence and position!

Black holes are not due to exploding stars.

From what science claims, black holes are created by massive stars exploding or imploding. i see it as the spinning motion of our galaxy at approx 600,000 mph and the spin of each celestial body that spins and rotates around each other inside the galaxy, setting up the spinning vortex we call black holes, at least that's how I see it. Science has claimed black holes are due to massive stars exploding or imploding and these largest of stars all just happen to be in te exact middle of each galaxy? How funny.

  • Mar 23 2013: This doesn’t seem like a discussion? It all seems kinda one sided here?
    • Mar 23 2013: If other people rebutt what I've said, it will be called a debate,--discussion or they might agree, with addition, right? I offer a hypothesis and other people add or refute what's said.
      Discussion don't just appear from nowhere.
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: Ok well this is one of your hypothesis

        "Our galaxy spins at about 600,000 mph. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. I say that spinning creates friction on all the celestial bodies in each galaxy and that's what creates the spinning vortex, known as a black hole. If not, what is the opposing reaction of our galaxies 600,000 mph spin?"

        And my answer is that it would create gravity/dark matter and you have yet tell me how it wouldn't
        • Mar 23 2013: I’m not sure I agree with that Casey I think the spinning is more from the gravity of objects near each other the energy release is one object moving faster one moving slower?

          “friction” is energy released as heat or electric energy like lightning from water and air molecules rubbing
      • Mar 23 2013: But every time someone says something you just say there cut and pasting? Im still not clear on your views? I get the topic but your also implying your a creationist theory person and if you are there is no debate because everything is how he wanted it
        • Mar 24 2013: I don't believe in religion, so what are you going to blame it on now?
        • thumb
          Mar 24 2013: Your ignorance, as a person that's what I am going to blame it on.... Prove me wrong Jim show me you can have a debate without name calling
        • Mar 24 2013: Gotta love people that think mediocracy is a good thing. They talk about what everyone else talks about. Mediocrity it seems is a perfect fit for most websites. They get plenty of hits, that drives the money train and who doesn't love that. As to anyone different, don't worry, we'll send in the hounds to chase them away or as so many sites, there are those that have nothing of their own, so they take it upon themselves to chase off any that don't fit. We can't have any that make others feel as if their schools did a bad job of teaching.

          The flat earth society is working hard, just as childish cliques in schools.

          Mediocrity is the flat earth society.
        • thumb
          Mar 24 2013: Jim I think you smoke to much crack

          Once again please engage me in a debate of knowledge

          It is you who are acting like a child while me and Daniel are actually having a conversation
        • thumb
          Mar 24 2013: Schools do a horrible job at educating are youth.
          What they teach is regurgitation not an education

          But what the heck does that have to do with this conversation?
        • thumb
          Mar 24 2013: Right which is also how we measure gravity. Law of Universal Gravitation to calculate the mass of the Earth.

          But if you took up the equivalent of the mass of earth up in to outer space, say to build a death star, the death star would be "weightless" in outer space? Right? And then if it did have mass it would depend on the closest star or planet to it not its weight that it had here on earth so it would not be a "constant"
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: Daniel, that's was part of the longer conversation that I was having with Jim to quote myself this is what I said

        Just like the spinning of the earth creates gravity here on earth, the spin of the galaxy as well as the celestial body's it is made up of create dark matter(edited gravity/dark matter)

        See below
        • Mar 24 2013: but its not the spinning that creates the gravity? its the mass of all the atoms from the surface of where your standing to the core but the spinning is canceling some of that out or you would weigh more than you do that is the centrifuge force
      • thumb
        Mar 24 2013: Right but mass is a tricking thing because when you go into outer space where are planets are we have no mass. Does that mean the planets don't have mass either?
        • Mar 24 2013: there mass is calculated by the pull they have on there closest star
    • thumb
      Mar 23 2013: That's because it seems to me that Jim wants to use some sort of old science, which I am not sure what that means.

      Maybe we should stop teaching the kids the world is "round"-ish and go back to that is flat. Although based on perception and view point one could argue that the world it both round and flat ....dualism at its finest
      • Mar 24 2013: A stalker like yourself is someone that has nothing of his own, so he tries to make anyone he can't keep up with, the object of your stalking.

        • thumb
          Mar 24 2013: What are you talking about, It is that you like to think you are a know it all, but in reality you try to bully people into your veiw's. Why don't you try actually debating me instead you want to do some childish name calling.

          But see you can call me all the names you want I am a big boy. Specially since you certainly can't prove that you are smarter then me. So you can attack me all you want but what would be really cool it if you actually debate me.

          So I challenge you to prove you are smarter then me
    • Mar 20 2013: By what you write or offer, shall you be known, just as all of us. What you leave tells all of how you were taught and what you were taught. So far, you offer cut and paste. What does your mind have to offer, I want to speak to you, not to some nameless, faceless, web site. The least you could do is condense down what you believe you can DEFEND, please.

      I write science according to logic. I love strong debate and respect.
      If you can refute what I write, I'd appreciate it.

      Have a wonderful day Gale
  • Mar 26 2013: I've researched everything I speak of a lot, but thanks for your input Toine.
  • Mar 26 2013: Sorry for the new comment couldn't reply anymore on yours.

    But I am not coming with the existence of dark matter but the theory. They have already simulated all the right conditions for a galaxy (including rotation speed and the guessed gravitational force of the black hole) and the galaxy fell apart.

    But by adding some sort of new element into the field they describe as dark matter.
    The galaxy did not fell apart so this already concludes that rotation speed does not hold it together (to current simulations) if the current simulations are wrong and they conclude rotation speed is the birth of blacl holes then so be it but the theory of it being dark matter in this case will last for some time until they prove otherwise.

    (Dark matter is not the same as dark energy)
  • Mar 26 2013: How interesting your theory seems but how would the first black hole have gotten into existence or let's say the very first ?? According to the big bang theory nearly what's it now 300.000 years after the first galaxies started to form. Its a chaos but a perfect chaos to sustain galaxies and so forth.

    To think they spin into existence then what happens to just 1 mile outside of a galaxy there should be some force or something too according to your theory.

    So I find spinning into existence highly unlikely. This would mean that the spinning force let's space and time collapse....

    The power of an exploding star with a gigantic burst of pure energy is capable according to theories

    Spinning creates something magnetic... But since there is little or no friction in space this is unlikely
    • Mar 26 2013: I don't ascribe to the Big Bang theory. I can't tell you how the first anything came about. According to all we see, the planets and suns could not have come together as they are. Each planet and suns atmosphere extend far out into space, but as long as our earth spins, we will have an atmosphere. However unlikely, spinning gravity is all that's holding our galaxy together.
      • Mar 26 2013: I quote from you ''however unlikely, spinning gravity is all that's holding our galaxy together''

        Now there is already proof that your spinning gravity isn't holding together galaxies but its dark matter.

        And how does spinning works in sphere like galaxies? Those aren't discs focused specificly on 1 line by spinning.

        So this concludes already that dark matter is the thing that holds galaxies together who would otherwise even with spinning gravity fall apart (calculated with supercomputers)
        • Mar 26 2013: Show proof of dark matter and then proof of how it holds the galaxy together.
  • Mar 24 2013: ???? and if you don't understand that there is more of this !!!!!!!!!!! ok im done with this topic
    • Mar 24 2013: Oh my doodness, I'm all a twitter, don't keep us in suspense and don't be bitter.
  • Mar 24 2013: I see part of the problem in your thinking at least about your original topic the black “holes” aren’t created from the “explosion” or “implosion” but from the core of the sun that is left after the super nova and the gravitational forces from that core is so strong it even pulls in the photons of “ light” from other stars which gives the impression of a black hole
    • Mar 24 2013: Yo moma

      Black holes spin into existence and position!

      Black holes are not due to exploding stars.

      From what science claims, black holes are created by massive stars exploding or imploding. i see it as the spinning motion of our galaxy at approx 600,000 mph and the spin of each celestial body that spins and rotates around each other inside the galaxy, setting up the spinning vortex we call black holes, at least that's how I see it. Science has claimed black holes are due to massive stars exploding or imploding and these largest of stars all just happen to be in te exact middle of each galaxy? How funny.
      • Mar 24 2013: can you show me any article where is says that they spin "into" existence I have done a lot of reading and never heard of them coming to be in that context?

        question? in your theory is the vortex spinning inward or outward?

        and if its spinning inward where is the matter that is going inward going?
        • Mar 24 2013: Go play hide the weenie so to speak, with someone else, just like yourself.
  • thumb
    Mar 23 2013: Well as far as I know most things are dualistic in nature, so most likely the cause is the bang, the effect is the spin

    Also there is nothing exact in science, that actual the basic axiom of science
    • Mar 23 2013: Does science portray gravity as dualistic?
      So you're saying that 1+1 is not exact. Is math not a science and a part of many other sciences?
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: Yes we call it dark matter now

        and your 1+1 easily be x+x or arbitrary + arbitrary

        Math is science I guess but your talking to the wrong person about number, I/we already got rid of them in nature

        And then brought them back in
        • Mar 23 2013: 1+1 cannot be changed as you and science claim, nor is it dualistic . We weren't discussing x+x et al. If you want to change the subject, make a different post, unless you have a very short attention span.

          You and from what you claim, science, claim there is nothing exact in science. 1+1 is exact. That means science is teaching stupidity to children.

          You nor science can prove dark matter exists and you didn't answer if gravity was dualistic.

          Gosh, all you did was change the meaning of all that I replied to.

          I'm not interested in such.
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: Also 1+1 takes on the assumption of a "whole" or complete, yet science say's in any whole object there is more that is not there then there is that is there
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: Please show me 2 of the same thing, you simple can't everything is an individual representation of what is that one thing.

        Do you know about Quantum Physics?
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: Ok you know you are spinning on a rock in space right? please show me were and how that is rational, I think you might have a few thing confused, also you brought up the 1+1 not me.

        And I will tell you how gravity and dark matter create a dualism.

        You seem to change topics alot

        I thought we were talking about black hole want to go back to that topic not gravity or 1+1
        • Mar 23 2013: Show how gravity is dualistic.
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: I am assuming that you are talking about how gravity and dark matter are one in the same, and yet separate?

        Just like the spinning of the earth creates gravity here on earth, the spin of the galaxy as well as the celestial body's it is made up of create dark matter.

        edited: dark matter/space gravity
        • Mar 23 2013: Noooo, I simply asked you to explain how gravity is dualistic.
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: It with in it self as dualism?
        • Mar 23 2013: Sure, whatever your delusion of the moment is.
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: My delusion of the moment is currently trying to figure out how it makes rational sense that we are on a flying rock in space, and everyone seems to be ok with that.

        As far as Gravity as dualism my assertions were at least in the conversation that it gravity and dark matter were and are one in the same. And I think I showed that just how the spinning of the earth creates gravity, so to would the spinning of the galaxy.

        Oh and just for the record you are making a strawman fallacy, but don't worry I am big boy
        • Mar 23 2013: Keep telling yourself whatever. I'm not interested in anything you have to say, go bother someone else.
      • thumb
        Mar 23 2013: Ok strawman
  • Mar 23 2013: I read a great deal that science offers, but I see so many dichotomies, like red shift ---blue shift, that make no sense. I challenge to find at the least, more accuracy, if not better explanations. Radicals come about because of so much in attention to detail and outright ignorant claims. Red shift ---blue shift is sooo stupid and yet, evolutionists in the name of science, destroy children's thinking by such.
  • Mar 23 2013: If you are more than cut and paste, tell us what you find as remarkable on the following web page.
    This is why science fails people--especially children and people fail science.
  • Mar 23 2013: The reply button doesn't show up a lot of times.
    • thumb
      Mar 23 2013: Go to the the closest reply in the down stream line conversation

      Whoever those comments are for will never get them
  • Mar 23 2013: The spinning and gravity are the cause and effect? Please explain spinning and gravity?
    That is why the air is in the air? Please explain.

    Just tell us about those 2 first.
  • Mar 23 2013: If you think about it a “black” hole”” is just a matter of perspective? Because we just dont know what is causing it. The term “black hole” is an archaic term for black area of space. From what your thinking that the spinning is like a vortex then you have to explain where is the matter “going”? If its not going then that means it is building up in the middle of the vortex and if it is than what is there that is big enough to start the vortex and there is only 1 thing with that much gravitational pull the core of a sun. but what they are talking about with the super size “black holes” is many cores that have joined into 1 bigger there is a good and insightful show to watch from the discovery channel called How The universe Works dont know if any of this helps but thought I would post something
    • Mar 23 2013: You write what I defend and that is,-------- waaaay to much of today's so called science, is supposition. It's sooo irresponsible to teach this trash to children, while the troglodytes leading science, demand that children copy and paste all this crap, becoming forever confused, conflicted and ignorant, as to the true nature of science.

      There are people on other science websites that work together as a clique of bullies, attacking any that dare show the weaknesses in all the crap supposition, science has been drilling into children's heads for years now. They are all as deceitful as the day is long, as the twist, turn attach and defend as a childish clique, with the most viscous of name calling and worse.

      Where do you think these people learned to act like this, if not in our schools?
      This site is sooo much nicer

      Maybe I should tell you how I really feel. :-)
  • Mar 21 2013: Addendum to my topic starter.

    Science claims that a super massive star exploded at the center of every galaxy. Wow, talk about coincidence!

    If we consider a whirlpool in water, we could think of a whirlpool of air, created by each galaxy that according to science, is spinning at great speeds.
    Our galaxy is spinning at about 594,000 miles per hour. Then we have every celestial body inside the galaxy, spinning and rotating around each other.

    The spinning galaxy must create a swirling vortex of air that would naturally focus at the center of the galaxy, as the spinning creates friction across all the celestial bodies in that galaxy, which would become a black hole, unless someone can convince me otherwise.

    Thank you
    • thumb
      Mar 22 2013: Hi Jim

      I don't know if it is intentional, but you deliver centuries of astronomic observations in a rather sarcastic manner.

      Due to the gravitational pull and the laws of motion it is natural for galaxies to form around massive stars. When they die, they collapse to form black holes. It is not a coincidence.

      If there was air in the galaxy and this was caused because of friction, the galaxy would look very different. The earth wouldn't exist if it was moving through air, as the friction would cause a lot of damage in the same way that meteors burn when they enter our atmosphere.

      Apart from that, if black holes spin into existence, what is it exactly that spins? And what causes that angular momentum? And how would that in any way cause an attractive force?

      I suggest you read about Newton's theory of gravity and Einstein's general theory of relativity as they explain the motion and forces of celestial bodies very precise. These theories have been tested and are consistent with our observations.
      • Mar 22 2013: I am sarcastic because because evolution makes so many claims, that I see as dumbing down children and confusing them. Red shift, blue shift, the many changing faces of the big bang, speed of light theory, gravity and on and on.

        How far out does earths atmosphere go and since our planet is spinning at 1,000 mph, do you really think that spinning creates no reaction?

        Our galaxy spins at about 600,000 mph. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. I say that spinning creates friction on all the celestial bodies in each galaxy and that's what creates the spinning vortex, known as a black hole. If not, what is the opposing reaction of our galaxies 600,000 mph spin?

        You believe whatever your told, while I challenge. Answer the question above, that science doesn't bother with. Spin is in every living thing, in every celestial body and tell us, what does science explain as the reaction of spin in everyone and thing?
        • Mar 23 2013: The spinning and gravity is the cause and effect. That is why the air is in the “air” the gravity of our core has less pull on those molecules and the spinning of the core is what caused the elements to separate into layers from the core outwards. And as far as what you refer to as our planet is spinning at 1000mph is more a matter of perspective.meaning distance traveled or RPM and even when you think about the rpm that is factored by surface tension of all the particles from the core to the outer most particles of our atmosphere
        • thumb
          Mar 23 2013: Hi Jim

          First of all, what does evolution have to do with any of this?

          You seem to have completely misunderstood basic science, the scientific method and how scientific discoveries come about.

          Science has made many discoveries and we have many models to describe how the world works. Just because you find them confusing, complex or counter intuitive doesn't change the fact that they have been tested and are in compliance with observations.

          Before you reject the work of people that have dedicated their lives to understanding the world we live in, at least have the common decency to understand what it is.

          Quote: "You believe whatever your told, while I challenge."
          You are not in a position to make a statement about what I believe; and you haven't challenged a thing. All your arguments are based on your limited experience on this earth. There is air on earth, therefore you think it is everywhere in the universe.

          By the way how do you know how fast the earth and the galaxy is spinning? You only know this because that's what you've been told.

          I could refute most of your ideas only using logic, but it would probably be a waste of my time, as I imagine debating with you would be like debating with a stubborn 6 year old, who thinks he knows everything.
        • thumb
          Mar 23 2013: Actually every speed calculation is based on the assumption that we are traveling in a circle instead of an ellipse.

          Since we are traveling in a ellipse it is impossible to calculate as a constant because it is always changing
        • thumb
          Mar 23 2013: Also since we are talking about evolution please tell me how the birth of a child is not evolution

      • Mar 23 2013: You like most all evolutionists resort to childish insinuations, instead of refuting what has been said. Move on Faisal.
      • Mar 23 2013: Many call me know it all. Jealousy becomes you Faisal.
        You can't logically refute what I write, so you resort to childish insinuations. You like so many were taught very poorly. Science does a horrible job of teaching. You're not to blame Faisal, you are just a product of such a poor education.
      • Mar 23 2013: 5 minutes ago: If you are more than cut and paste, tell us what you find as remarkable on the following web page.
        This is why science fails people--especially children and people fail science.
      • Mar 23 2013: Then show us where science bases its calculations on circles instead of ellipses. Science claims we are moving around the sun in an elliptical orbit. It seems you've been reading different science books or articles.
        • thumb
          Mar 26 2013: Mate, you are way out of line.

          I would gladly debate, if there was anything to debate and if you had some grasp of the concept of logic and rational thought. Putting an exclamation mark after a claim is not an argument.

          I understand that you've had some poor teachers in the past, but that is no excuse for being ignorant, arrogant and delusional.

          However, there is a forum for people who believe the earth is flat. I think you'll find like minded people there.

      • Mar 26 2013: When you can refute what's written, let me know. So far all ya got is childish innuendo.
  • Mar 20 2013: How do I get myself into stuff like this?
    I am NOT a scientist but I am a student of all things scientific, including biology & astronomy.
    I have read a lot of articles on black holes and their locations, sizes and possible origins. It has even been suspected that the edge of a tiny black hole once brushed against a section of Russia many yrs. ago. It flatten a huge section of forest which has yet to regrow.
    I really can not get into a debate with you about this subject for I am just a lay person.
    • Mar 20 2013: Hi Gale, glad you wrote back. I too am a student of all things that interest me. I've been reading, researching and writing about science for about 5 years now, but on a different site. In a way the site was horrible, in that it brought out the worst in me, but in another way, it made me want to push back against a group that acted like a childish clique. I was always reading and researching, trying to stay a couple of steps ahead of them.

      At first, I joined in, just because they were bullies and I have always fought back against bullies, partly from being bullied at a young age and partly on behalf of others that were too afraid to fight back. Maybe they were just smart for not fighting back. Lol

      Somehow in all that mess I got really interested in science and here I am. I did quite a lot of research on black holes. Keep reading and writing Gale. One thing Gale, MOST every time before I write something or as I'm writing something new, I do my homework first and while I read carefully, I also consider very hard, what is NOT being said. Most times, what's not being said is far more important and no detail should go unchallenged, for it is in the smallest of detail, that we find the largest rewards.

      Have fun Gale

      • Mar 21 2013: I'll bet you are a far younger student then I. I happen to be 68 yrs. old & seen & studied on a lot of subjects including on how to get along in life with others. You don't need to stay several steps ahead of folks Jim, you just need to see what they see through their eyes. It may not be the same view you have but their view is just as important to them as yours is to you.
        As for Black Holes: Most is theory but darn good theory at that.
        Depending on how you challenge someone, can bring great rewards or disaster.
        You speak of small details & their rewards- so see & hear those same details in others too.
        Ever hear of K.I.S.S.? Keep it simple stupid! I am NOT calling you or anyone stupid, it's just a way to do things and interact with others.
        • Mar 21 2013: I'm sure you're right.
  • Mar 20 2013: Not all black holes are in the center of galaxies, most are located in various areas throughout any given galaxy.
    • Mar 20 2013: Please bring evidence of your claim, because I've only heard they were at the center of each galaxy.

      Thank you
      • Mar 20 2013: It is suspected that a massive one is at the heart of each galaxy but there are also many million of them throughout that same galaxy.
        • Mar 20 2013: Gale, are you saying there is more than one black hole in a galaxy? If so, what evidence do you have to support this?
    • Mar 20 2013: There is always an exception to every rule.

      Supermassive black hole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...It is now widely accepted that the center of nearly every galaxy contains a supermassive black hole.