[ExI] First Picture of a Black Hole!

John Clark johnkclark at gmail.com
Wed Apr 17 17:20:41 UTC 2019

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:43 PM Stuart LaForge <avant at sollegro.com> wrote:

 >>A electromagnetic wave with a  frequency that low would contain such a
>> absurdly small amount of mass/energy it's not worth  considering.

*> I never claimed dark energy was electromagnetic in nature.*

With any sort of wave the longer the wavelength the less energy it
contains, and you're talking about a wave almost as large as the observable

* > Dark Energy doesn't cancel out because it is in resonance with the
> big bang. That would be my guess. *

It would be easy to understand if Dark Energy didn't cancel out and only a
little harder to understand if it didn't, but trying to figure out why
everything cancels out EXCEPT for one part in 10^120 is ridiculously hard.

> >*I never claimed dark energy was electromagnetic in nature.*

The mystery is not that Dark Energy exists but that it's so weak. It's been
known for many years that electromagnetism should cause Dark Energy but the
calculated strength is so huge the universe would accelerate so fast that a
trillionth of a second after the Big Bang no proton would be closer than a
billion light years from another proton. Needless to say that's not the
universe we live in, it's been called the worse disagreement between theory
and observation in the entire history of science.

> * > a maximum  frequency cutoff can exist even if space-time is
> continuous. Consider  this: The shorter the wavelength of a wave, the
> higher the frequency.  The higher the frequency of a wave, the higher the
> energy of the wave.  The higher the energy of a wave, the more it bends its
> surrounding  space-time. If the frequency exceeds 5.23*10^42 Hertz, then
> the  wavelength is shorter than the Schwarzschild radius of the wave which
> means that you get a tiny black hole and the wave can't propagate  *

*anywhere because it is stuck. This is called either a kugelblitz *

If spacetime is continuous then there there is always a discernible
different between 2 points regardless of how close together they are, but
if a kugelblitz always forms when you pack enough energy into a small
enough volume then there can't be a detectable difference between the 2
points and it would be meaningless to say spacetime is continuous. And a
kugelblitz can't form unless both Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity
always work the way current textbooks say they do, and everybody agrees
that at the center of a Black Hole at least one of those theories and
probably both breaks down.

>>> *>>>one final assumption which is that no two quantum
>>> harmonic  oscillators in our causal cell can vibrate with the exact
>>> same  frequency or have the same value of "n".*
>> >> That's true for Fermions like electrons protons and neutrons but not
>>  for Bosons like photons of light; any number of photons can be in
>>  the same quantum state.
> *>*
> *Well if dark energy were made of photons of light, then it probably
> wouldn't be so mysterious. *

If you assume spacetime is continuous then Dark Energy should be infinitely
strong. If we assume nothing can be smaller than the Planck Time or the
Planck Length things are a little better but not much, then Dark Energy is
not infinite but it would still cause the universe to accelerate 10^120
faster than what we observe.  So something is obviously very very wrong but
nobody knows what.

> *> Perhaps this is evidence that gravitons are fermions.*

Nobody has ever detected a graviton it's a purely theoretical construct but
if it exists it must have a spin of 2, and by definition bosons are
particles with integer spin and thus the graviton must be a Boson just like
all the other force carrying particles and be unaffected by the Pauli
Exclusion Principle so an infinite number of them can be in the same
quantum state.

John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20190417/576728fc/attachment.htm>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list