Most of astrophysics/cosmology. There are too many unjustified assumptions and fudge factors, I would say because their model is fundamentally flawed and falsified. Dark matter, black holes, dark energy are all non-sense. They anticipate, based on their model, a particular rotation rate of galaxies, and galaxies rotate at a different rate than they predicted, instead of re-evaluating their model, they assert 'dark matter'. In essence, pixie dust that has mass but barely interacts with other mass and is invisible to detection.
anything that has to do with infinity, as a practical "number" or concept. just bothers the shit out of me. no thing is infinite, everything had a beginning, everything will have an end, even time itself. if the universe, itself, were infinite... way i see it, everything in it would also be infinite, and everything, like you and i and the atoms that make us up and the planet we live on... all obviously finite. edit; and yeah, infinity is required to do advanced mathematics (i think??? i dont even know man i never made it past algebra 2...,) sure... but like, it as a thing, EXISTING or being? nah, not buying it. it does seem like singularities may have infinite density but i don't even know if that really like counts as infinity in the same way as like a numerical value on objects, distance or time... and they might just be gravastars anyway...
I agree! This is the problem with trying to fit idealistic concepts to reality. This is why Zenos paradox isn't an issue in reality, reality is quantized thus there is a minimum number of finite distances that cannot be constantly divided in half. Singularities are another mathematical construct which has no relation to reality.
can only make the folds for a paper crane so many times before the paper rips! singularities are certainly interesting though. infinity always irked me but until the idea of gravastars, which seems to make a whole lot of common sense if nothing else, i just couldn't explain that one away with my exceedingly limited understanding of physics. fun to try though, right? If infinity does exist in some way, I do think think this may be the gateway to it; seems like we just need a wee bit more time to get the math right, but it looks kinda finite to me
Yeah it is all a load of rubbish. That isn't a black hole, there is no such thing, the math contradicts itself and reality doesn't comport with it. Furthermore, these objects do not even fit any supposed black hole hypothesis. Physics is in crisis. A singularity is a mathematical concept only, just like a perfect circle, neither actually exist in reality.
well it certainly seems to be that a black hole does exist, if you merely define a black hole as a place where a star once was, circa sagan. the supermassive ones, obviously, can not be defined so simply, but in some capacity and size, what we generally call a black hole does exist (or is at least like hypothetically viable) from the quantum world on up to galaxies and such... might just be an issue of semantics. still, yeah, we can call them whatever we like; it would be nice if the math and equations caught up to observations, like the region of space in that image, i suppose. one does have to admire the ingenuity it took to create, afterall.
There is much more evidence for these things than you realize. Your objections have been well known for a long time. In spite of those objections, dark matter, black holes, and dark energy are accepted by cosmologists. You are forgetting that scientists are the most skeptical people alive. They have thought of your every objection, and many, many more. A scientific theory is the best explanation of a phenomenon based on existing evidence. If/when the evidence changes, the best explanation can also change. Science is always a work in progress, not absolute truth. Whoever figures out dark matter and dark energy will become a nobel prize winning celebrity. The same is true for anyone who can debunk these ideas. A scientific career can be made by debunking accepted truths.
They aren't the inescapable gravity well that was conjectured by Relativity, I don't see any good reason to start calling objects "black holes" when they aren't just that. You know what I mean? It seems like predicting a perfect circle and settling for an octagon but still calling it a perfect circle. They are fundamentally different hahaha.
No their isn't, there is a lot of hand waving though. There is reality conflicting with their model and the holes in their model have a name, that doesn't mean they exist. I don't care how many scientists cling to their delusions. If I said I my car can go 300mph and you clock it topped out at 100mph, would you accept dark resistence as an answer and spend billions looking for dark resistence? Now they have the lovely problem, even after their fudge factor of dark matter, some galaxies are still wildly violating their fudge equations to where they say less than 1% of the mass is dark matter. Instead of re-ealuating the model, they will conjure up various fantasies to explain why some galaxies are 1% pixie dust and some are 90% pixie dust. Then you get various flavors of pixie dust like cold dark matter, warm, luke warm, hot, WIMPs etc. Scientists are not superhuman and somehow immune to confirmation bias, and all the other forms of self-deception. It is part of human nature, I am not blaming them but rather hoping someone will step back and put forth a new model. It is very hard to fundamentally overhaul an established dogma.
Pi should be 4 Surface speed x 4 ÷ dia works That bs Arcamedies came up with does not. No matter how many segments you break it down to, it is still a linear measurement. Leap days, seriously we can't make a calender that actually works right without them? Wtf?
Have you read Miles Mathis white paper on pi=4? The whole issue with the calendar is fascinating. The number of Earths rotations from solstice to solstice isn't a perfect division, so if we don't make these ad hoc adjustments, the seasons would cycle through the calendar. I guess for humans it is easier to try to tack them down and make goofy adhustments haha.
Not to mention that the length of the day is slowly changing. A perfect calendar devised today will fail in a few thousand years. Tidal friction caused by the moon and sun act like "brake shoes" on the earth that slow down its rotation, and lengthen the day. If days were twice as long, it would only take half as many of the longer days to go around the sun, so the calendar would have only 15 days per month. (The earth's orbital time is independent of its spin time) One billion years ago, the day was a bit less than 19 hours long.
Would we have 15days per month or roughly 60 day months and half as many months? Since the moon is tidally locked to the Earths rotation wouldn't the moon cycle take twice as long?
I am not buying that all things have a beginning nor end as we understand it. The big bang is an example. It does no physics just to say we just exploded into existence. Even if we did something would have had to exists to make it so. I often wondered not we are not the product of the inside of a black hole. I am big fan of scientists though. Look at the the theories that got us to the moon and back.
It's much like what an ice skater does to come out of a spin. There is a direct relationship between the skaters rotation speed, and how close to the axis of rotation the skater's mass is. When the skater's rotation speed slows, some skater mass (arms and leg) must have moved outward. Same for the earth-moon system. The earth's slower rotation must be accompanied by some mass moving outward, the moon. Eventually the day and month will be equal, somewhere between a month and a day. Eventually the smaller effect of the sun on the tides will have a similar, but smaller effect on the time to orbit the sun. Tidal effects on a planet depend on how much closer one side of the planet is to the tide producing body than the other side of the planet is. Our moon is about 240,000 miles away from the 8,000 mile diameter earth, so one side of the earth is 8/240 = 3% closer to the moon, which is enough to produce noticeable tidal effects. The sun is 93 million miles away, so one side of the earth is only 8/93,000 = 0.009% closer to the sun than the other side, so the sun's tidal effects on the earth are much smaller. Interestingly, the sun's tidal effects have locked the planet mercury into the stable configuration of 2 orbits around the sun for every 3 spins, making its year equal to 1.5 days.