I have been using black hole and singularity interchangeably and that is confusing and inconsistent. I will refer to it as a "quantum black hole" that obeys quantum mechanics:
In quantum mechanics, the black hole emits Hawking radiation<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation>, and so can come to thermal equilibrium<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_equilibrium> with a gas of radiation. Since a thermal equilibrium state is time reversal invariant, Stephen Hawking <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking> argued that the time reverse of a black hole in thermal equilibrium is again a black hole in thermal equilibrium.[2]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole#cite_note-1> This implies that black holes and white holes are the same object. The Hawking radiation from an ordinary black hole is then identified with the white hole emission. Hawking's semi-classical argument is reproduced in a quantum mechanical AdS/CFT <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AdS/CFT> treatment,[3]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole#cite_note-2> where a black hole in anti-de Sitter space<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-de_Sitter_space> is described by a thermal gas in a gauge theory, whose time reversal is the same as itself. In the Rohner video, i believe that the phenomena he describes fits the above description. I believe quantum black hole(s) from collapsed helium have built up on the inside of that one coil and are acting as a bridge that is collapsing matter (gas) and radiating energy through the coil to achieve thermodynamic equilibrium in its surroundings. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0IPWmm7GDc&feature=youtube_gdata_player Collapsed matter acts like a quantum heat pump, which is useful. Downside is that it is a bad actor. When not in equilibrium it tends to devour matter releasing radiation and creating uncertainty, which is very hard on equipment and people. On Sunday, August 19, 2012, Axil Axil wrote: > Once matter collapses it will still obey quantum mechanic and > thermodynamic laws. I am going to do some calculations and see what I > come up with. > > > > Once matter collapses, it is no longer part of this unicerse, and as such, > no longer obeys quantum mexhanics and thermodynamic laws. > > > > A *gravitational singularity* or *spacetime singularity* is a location > where the quantities that are used to measure the > gravitational<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational>field become > infinite <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity> in a way that does not > depend on the coordinate system. These quantities are the scalar invariant > curvatures<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curvature_of_Riemannian_manifolds>of > spacetime, which includes a measure of the density of matter. > > > > According to general > relativity<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity>, > the initial state of the universe <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe>, > at the beginning of the Big Bang <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang>, > was a singularity. Both general > relativity<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity>and quantum > mechanics <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mechanics> break down in > describing the Big Bang, but in general, quantum mechanics does not permit > particles to inhabit a space smaller than their wavelengths. Another type > of singularity predicted by general relativity is inside a black > hole<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole>: > any star <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star> collapsing beyond a certain > point (the Schwarzschild > radius<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwarzschild_radius>) > would form a black hole, inside which a singularity (covered by an event > horizon) would be formed, as all the matter would flow into a certain point > (or a circular line, if the black hole is rotating). This is again > according to general relativity without quantum mechanics, which forbids > wavelike particles entering a space smaller than their wavelength. These > hypothetical singularities are also known as curvature singularities. > > If a singularity would ever form on earth, that would be the end of earth > in this universe. > > > > > > Cheers: Axil > > > > > On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 12:36 AM, ChemE Stewart <cheme...@gmail.com>wrote: > > I agree. Basically I am talking about collapsed matter as the primary > trigger for all of the secoondary reactions which Abd is working on > figuring out. In quantum mechanics this is effected by the strength of > quantum scale gravity and also the hoop effect caused by a void. Once > matter collapses it will still obey quantum mechanic and thermodynamic > laws. I am going to do some calculations and see what I come up with. > > I see a similarity in what Axil is calling ultra high density inverted > rydberg matter and what I am talking about. I of course have done a top > down approach. > > The thing I am also concerned with now is does any of this stuff stay > around in the environment and not evaporate or decay completely which I > think would be very bad for the surroundings, including people. > > I just put the theory out there last week. I am going to continue > developing it. > > One last thought that I am adding to my theory regarding the big picture: > If this anomalous heat effect is basically evaporating matter under > relatively normal conditions then basically that tells us that all of the > matter in the universe will evaporate over time. And since hawking showed > that matter and anti-matter particles pop out of the vacuum and either > destroy each other or the anti-matter particle might get sucked into a > singularity to aid in its evaporation and leave a particle of matter that > escapes into space then the universe might be stuck in sort of an endless > do-loop of matter creation and evaporation to and from the quantum field. > > > On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > ** > CE, I think you need to gather your thoughts in one place, write a > comprehensive paper and flesh out many lacking details to your theory, > instead of repeating yourself ad nauseam here in Vortex, and interject your > theory at every post. > > Your theory as posted in your blog is glaringly incomplete. I read your > theory and I found it a bit lacking. I would like to see some mathematical > support to your suppositions. Mathematical computations as to energy > levels required, creation rates and evaporation rates. If you can come up > with these, it would go a long ways in providing guidance for > experimentation, which I would be willing to do if it is within my > capability. > > Also an explanation with mathematical data as to why a singularity is > formed in a void or crack as you propose instead of fusion occuring. > Saying that "quantum gravity is large, hence it creates a singularity" > ain't gonna cut it. > > I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, of course, and assuming that you > are serious about developing your theory and not just playing with your > colleages here in Vortex, seeing how many your can loop around for a spin. > > > Jojo > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > *From:* ChemE Stewart > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Sent:* Saturday, > >
