tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post8481180789713605369..comments2021-01-15T10:36:20.149-08:00Comments on Dark Buzz: Black hole fuzz or fireRogerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03474078324293158376noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8148573551417578681.post-2215279752694292422013-08-26T11:23:37.527-07:002013-08-26T11:23:37.527-07:00I raised a simple few points on Peter Woit's s...I raised a simple few points on Peter Woit's site, only to see he deleted them. I raised the point that General Relativity does not allow for Superposition in highly non linear equations, which are what was used to produce a black hole within an empty unending universe containing NO matter in a asymptotically flat space, that's what happens when you set Ric=0. How are they piling up additional matter in equations which are non linear? Has someone discovered how to solve for two or more masses in Einstein's field equations? <br />I would also ask, does dividing by zero produce a 'singularity' as the metric 'blows up'? Apparently Hawkins, Penrose, and a lot of people at UCSB like to think so. I must have missed the memo when division by zero was defined or allowed.<br /><br />Stephen Crothers is not very keen on all this magical black hole proliferation either apparently. He makes the claim that 'r' is not a radius of any kind, and has been incorrectly defined in a myriad of incorrect ways by Einstein and his followers, but relates to the inverse square root of the Gaussian curvature.<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHZ5O0jTH8A<br /><br />Things do not turn from a mathematical 'limiting fiction' into actual physical reality last time I checked, no matter how complicated the math. CFTnoreply@blogger.com