In the futhering of this debate it would seem appropriate to investigate the recognised criteria by which the presence of an AmiBroker Black Hole could be established. The pre-eminent problem in actual identification arises from observational difficulties, in that `Einstein's General Theory of Relativity' predicted that as gravity could bend space, then the actual existence of an object with the undoubted gravitas/gravity of an AmiBroker black hole, could be established by observing the said object from the perspestive of a viewer, such as Yuki, as its light was brought into focus by being bent around another object in its direct path, such as TJ.
There is some evidence to suggest that the view so achieved is determined by a "Wobbling" motion on the part of one of the bodies, but far be it from me to state categorically that either Yuki or TJ are "Wobbly" persons. Still it must be acknowledged that we do indeed now have a blurry, yet undetermined, possible dark orifice of some kind in view. We now need to establish the existence of that mass of spiralling matter the accretion disk, the actuality of which would confirm a Black Hole's existence. Its size would of course confirm well how big it is. In conclusion may I state on behalf of the majority of Amibroker users that while we `Without Hesitation' accept TJ's assertion of Supports "Output", even this could possibly be considered further evidence that an AmiBroker Black Hole exits. Black holes can also eject, from their centre, relatively small amounts of material at high speeds to form jets the unkind amongst us, not me of course, not in a million years, would propose that TJ and Marcins efforts could be regarded as such. My fervent hope is that I have added some small clarity to the debate Yours in AB Gerard --- In [email protected], Yuki Taga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I anyone getting replies from [EMAIL PROTECTED] I seem to be sending to a black hole. Yuki
