THEORY OF BLACK HOLES

All alleged black hole solutions pertain to a universe that is spatially infinite, is eternal, contains only one mass, is not expanding, and is asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved. But the alleged big bang cosmology pertains to a universe that is spatially finite (one case) or spatially infinite (two different cases), is of finite age, contains radiation and many masses including multiple black holes (some of which are primordial), is expanding, and is not asymptotically anything. Thus the black hole and the big bang contradict one another – they are mutually exclusive. The black hole is almost universally claimed to be predicted by General Relativity. It is surprisingly easy to prove that this is not true. Similarly it is very often claimed that Newton’s theory of gravitation also predicts the black hole, but this too is very easily proven to be erroneous. Despite numerous claims for discovery of black holes in their millions, nobody has ever actually found one. In addition it is not very difficult to prove that General Relativity violates the usual conservation of energy and momentum, with only a little use of mathematics. The simple proofs also demonstrate that all ‘singularity theorems’ related to General Relativity are invalid. Fundamentally there are contradictions contained in the very physical principles of General Relativity, combined with invalid mathematics, which render the theory untenable. It is the object of this paper to provide the proofs without the complicated mathematics usually associated with the subject.

2014

– Although general relativity is mostly verified in astronomy, it leads to the black hole as a solution to Einstein’s field equations; a solution that also contradicts much of the known laws of physics. The study of black holes can be traced as attempts to reconcile them with some laws of physics, which lead to more contradictions with other laws. The inherent contradictions have led to imaginative and poetic theories, such as nature hiding a singularity behind an event horizon. Even in this day of astronomy and telescopes, there is no conclusive proof of the existence of black holes. The supermassive body at the center of our galaxy is surprisingly calm, hardly the dramatic accretion disk expected of a supermassive black hole. Thought experiments not very different from those that established general relativity, are used in this paper to identify the contradictions that arise from the black hole solution to Einstein’s field equations. The

Resumen / Los agujeros negros son objetos totalmente colapsados en su campo gravitacional. Han sido estudia-dos teóricamente durante más de cuarenta años utilizando la teoría de la relatividad general. Más recientemente, se los ha investigado en el marco de teorías alternativas de la gravitación. En este artículo repasaré las principales propiedades de los agujeros negros y discutiré en forma accesible algunas controversias teóricas recientes sobre su naturaleza. Abstract / Black holes are fully gravitational collapsed objects. They have been studied from a theoretical point of view during more than 40 years using the theory of General Relativity. Recently they have been also investigated in the context of alternative theories of gravitation. In this paper I review the main properties of black holes and I discuss, in an accesible way, some recent controversies about the nature of these objects.

2008

The modern notion of a black hole singularity is considered with reference to the Schwarzschild solution to Einstein's field equations of general relativity. A brief derivation of both the original and the modern line elements is given. The argument is put forward that the singularity occurring within the Schwarzschild line element that has been associated with the radius of the black hole event horizon is, in fact, merely a mathematical occurrence and does not exist physically. The real aim here, however, is to attempt to open up the whole problem, draw some conclusions, but finally to urge everyone to consider the points raised with no preconceived opinions and then come to their own final conclusion.

The gravitational theory is the most accredited theory for explaining black holes. In this paper we present a new interpretation based on the relativistic theory that explains black holes as a consequence of the relativistic speed of departure between the speed of celestial system and the speed of both light and quantum rays at very high energy, calculated with respect to the observer.

In this study a quick summary for the back-hole theory was presented. It was presented earlier in from of graduation project at university of Bahri, college of applied and industrial sciences department of physics, Khartoum, Sudan by the second author and under supervision of the first author Black holes were once a star shining for years, before eventually collapse on their core forming the BH. There are three cases for a star non stable end is either a white dwarf, a neutron star or a black hole which is completely depend on the mass of the previous star which are called a compact star due to their highly condensation states. In this paper a quick summary for the theory was presented.

International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research

In this paper we are introducing with black holes in our universe. How black holes are created and how they are increasing in size and mass and what are their types made by scientist on the basis of their mass and size is also introduced.

Nature Astronomy, 2019

Although black holes are objects of central importance across many fields of physics, there is no agreed upon definition for them, a fact that does not seem to be widely recognized. Physicists in different fields conceive of and reason about them in radically different, and often conflicting, ways. All those ways, however, seem sound in the relevant contexts. After examining and comparing many of the definitions used in practice, I consider the problems that the lack of a universally accepted definition leads to, and discuss whether one is in fact needed for progress in the physics of black holes. I conclude that, within reasonable bounds, the profusion of different definitions is in fact a virtue, making the investigation of black holes possible and fruitful in all the many

1997

S. Chandrasekhar wrote in the prologue to his book on black holes, "The black holes of nature are the most perfect macroscopic objects there are in the universe: the only elements in their construction are our concepts of space and time." In this contribution I briefly discuss recent developments in fundamental theory and black holes that vindicate this statement in a modern perspective. I also include some of my reminiscences of Chandra.