That’s certainly neat Ken but if we say disappeared it would be necessary to remove the mass of the “missing half” otherwise we would have to take it into account. The problem often arises in mind exercises like this it becomes more complex the more you think about it and of course its not long before we get to singularities. Having enjoyed a specualtion top arrive at a point we then add detail. Simple answers are dictated by the razor so I recon you win it.
From what I have read it seems that part of being a leading scientist is to be subject to personal attack and the reason is simple ..If you are a leader in the field and you speak the truth and your conclusions are based on solid ground you will be hard to throw in an argument about which you are a leading authority, personal attack will be all that remains for someone challenging the top gun as it were
. So if under personal attack be happy they can beat you with real facts
. Hows that for a happy view on life?
Having said that I hope I never give offence because I don’t ever intend to hurt anyone’s feelings, if I ever offend it is probably an attempt at poor humour
. I like to keep my input as simple as I can and have may be most readers under stand it
.
Thinking about the problem as to event horizon etc may not be necessary in the real world. The problem is more one of how to record the physical than to say what it may or may not be doing. The singularity grows from necessity of fitting numbers to our safe ground established by experiment and really how to record the matter.. However this creates a limit imposed really by humans not nature
..If you see my drift
. The plank limit is a limit of qualification and the fence line our imagination must sign off. So what I propose I suppose is the squares we use to get a geometric impression simply get smaller and smaller and smaller without any singularity being reached…Just because light cant pass the event horizon does that mean anything should change about the physical content of a black hole. Does not the problem really arise from placing a dot on a sheet of paper and giving up when you can see it anymore.. It is my belief that notwithstanding the theory and “boxing” of particles we think we have it all.. The barrier of singularity need not exist in the real Universe and in our attempt to fit particles in their boxes we stand at a barrier put there by ourselves
. Needless to say science can only move forward on solid ground but even Mr Hawking has this uncross able barrier before him.. It has been noted the different backgrounds here and that is very true and say I have an unsteady grasp on what I think I know but I have an ability to get overviews I suppose. Anyways think about it this way we build a singularity out of math and have established “an event horizon” where conventional math breaks down .. Can we get rid of it????? I respectfully ask? Simply for a speculation on what may be happening down there even if the math must follow? And a geometric regression may fix it all
.
alex
".
. I morosophically see it that way so it is easy to gather supporting evidence but it comes from an unhealthy interest in how does gravity work on a nuts and bolts system. AND yes its late and wild thoughts abound
. I wonder how big they would have to be to fool us would be one way of killing that one dead eh
