Black Holes Behaving Badly | Space News

Black Holes Behaving Badly | Space News


Welcome to Space News from
the Electric Universe, brought to you by The
Thunderbolts Project™ at Thunderbolts.info What lies at the
center of our galaxy? For many decades, astrophysicists have
told us that at the core of the Milky Way and 98% of all galaxies is
a supermassive black hole, a hypothetical “region of space-time” whose
gravitational effects are so colossal that nothing, not even
light can escape. Scientists believe that supermassive
black holes explain the stupendous energies and mass measured
at galactic cores and many fantastic
electromagnetic phenomena including powerful galactic
jets and X-ray emissions are attributed to black
holes’ influences. In fact, for many years scientific
and educational literature have presented the existence of black
holes as a matter of settled science and science media routinely
report truly amazing claims about black holes
with no skepticism. Of course, a recent example in
2016, was the media firestorm resulting from the pronounced
detection of gravitational waves which was supposedly produced by two
colliding black holes a billion years ago. Subsequent, such claims have been met
with an equal absence of media scrutiny. However, we note that a recent
scientific paper entitled “On the Signal Processing
Operations in LIGO signals” should raise serious questions about the
validity of the gravitational waves claims. The abstract of the paper authored
by UC Berkeley’s Akhila Raman states that the first five reported
gravitational waves events are, “…very weak signals whose amplitude
does not rise significantly during the gravitational
waves event, and they are indistinguishable from
non-stationary detector noise.” A link to the article may be found in
the description box of this video. Unfortunately, this paper has not received
a fraction of the media attention that the claimed gravitational
waves discoveries have garnered. Paradoxically, these same media
also routinely report discoveries that would challenge the very
existence of black holes, if astronomers and astrophysicists were
willing to entertain such a possibility. But rather than forcing any
reassessment of foundational theory, the discoveries are simply presented as
exciting puzzles for working scientists. A good example is found in a recent paper on
scientists’ observation of star formation that is occurring impossibly close to the
Milky Way’s hypothetical black hole. A phys.org report introduces
the conundrum as follows, “At the center of our galaxy, in the immediate
vicinity of its supermassive black hole, is a region wracked by
powerful tidal forces and bathed in intense ultraviolet
light and X-ray radiation. These harsh conditions, astronomers
surmise, do not favor star formation, especially low-mass
stars like our Sun. Surprisingly, new observations…
suggest otherwise.” Scientists using the ALMA telescope discovered
evidence of a total of 11 low-mass stars forming within just three light years
to the hypothetical black hole. As the phys.org report notes, “At this distance, tidal forces driven
by the supermassive black hole should be energetic enough to rip apart clouds of
dust and gas before they can form stars.” The lead author of
the new paper says, “Despite all odds, we see the best evidence
yet that low-mass stars are forming startlingly close to the supermassive black
hole at the center of the Milky Way. This is a genuinely surprising result and
one that demonstrates just how robust star formation can be, even in
the most unlikely of places.” But of course, this is not the first time
that our galaxy’s hypothetical black hole has mystified astronomers
with its behavior. For several years, scientists
around the world eagerly awaited the approach of the gas cloud
G2 to the supposed black hole. The standard expectation was that
the cloud would undoubtedly be, “devoured” as it entered
the black hole’s domain. Apparently, the black hole
was not feeling hungry as the gas cloud was left intact to the
amazement of astronomers around the world. Hopelessly problematic
black hole behavior has been observed at all
scales throughout the cosmos. In 2012, we reported on scientists’
observations of two bright radio spots in the globular cluster M22, which they
interpret as two small black holes. But Standard Theory dictates that
only one black hole at most, can exist in the cluster
of tightly packed stars. The National Radio Astronomy
Observatory reported of the findings, “Simulations have indicated
that these black holes would fall toward the
center of the cluster, then begin a violent gravitational
dance with each other, in which all of them or
perhaps all but a single one would be thrown completely
out of the cluster.” The author of a paper
on the findings stated, “We didn’t find what we were looking for,
but instead found something very surprising — two smaller black holes.
That’s surprising because most theorists said there should
be at most one black hole in the cluster.” At a much vaster scale at the farthest
reaches of the observable universe, we see in ever greater detail,
stupendous electromagnetic phenomena that are not predicted nor
explained by black hole theory. As we’ve reported
several times, in 2016 a Royal Astronomical Society press
release reported the discovery that, “…supermassive black holes in a
region of the distant universe are all spinning out radio
jets in the same direction…” A lead investigator, professor
Romeel Dave said of the findings, “This is not obviously expected based on
our current understanding of cosmology. It’s a bizarre finding.” As noted by Professor
Andrew Russ Taylor, “…these black holes don’t know about
each other, or have any way of exchanging information or influencing each other
directly over such vast scales…” In the Electric Universe,
such cosmic alignments, completely unexpected by standard
cosmology, are both predicted and required if the dominant organizational
force is electromagnetism. The Electric Universe theory proposes
that space across cosmic distances has a substructure of
twisted-pair current filaments with stars and galaxies forming
along them like pearls on a string, and having their spin axes
aligned along their filaments. Space discovery continues
to confirm this prediction including the Herschel Space
Observatory’s imaging of vast networks of
star-forming filaments. In fact, the phenomenon of
spectacular cosmic jets, sometimes hundreds of thousands
of light years long, dramatically reveals the tunnel
vision of gravito-centric cosmology. Radio astronomers who have measured the
electric current in an extra galactic jet, have proposed that the black hole
creates a powerful magnetic field which then produces the
jet’s electric current. But mysterious magnetism will never explain
the tremendous electromagnetic emissions that are now routinely detected
throughout the cosmos. As we’ve outlined in dozens of episodes,
the concepts of Plasma Cosmology and the Electric Universe offer very
different predictions and explanations for the phenomena astronomers
attribute to black holes. At the center of galaxies
is not a black hole but an ultra-high density energy
storage phenomenon called a plasmoid, a kind of load in the
galactic electrical circuit. In a galactic circuit, electrical power
flows inward along the spiral arms lighting the stars as it goes and is
concentrated and stored in the central plasmoid. When the plasmoid reaches
a threshold density it discharges, usually along
the galaxy’s spin axis. The Electric Universe proposes this is in fact
the source of the stupendous cosmic jets. Indeed, a recent scientific paper
reveals that nature is confounding all of cosmologists’ predictions about
black holes’ magnetic properties. A phys.org report on
the finding states, “Black holes are famous
for their muscle: an intense gravitational pull
known to gobble up entire stars and launch streams of matter into
space at almost the speed of light. It turns out the reality may
not live up to the hype… University of Florida scientists have discovered
these tears in the fabric of the universe have significantly weaker magnetic
fields than previously thought.” The unsolved mystery that
the report acknowledges is, “…how ‘jets’ of particles traveling
at nearly the speed of light shoot out of black
holes’ magnetic field.” The study co-author states, “The question is,
how do you do that? Our surprisingly low measurements will force
new constraints on theoretical models that previously focused
on strong magnetic fields accelerating and
directing the jet flows. We weren’t expecting this, so it changes
much of what we thought we knew.” As noted in a public comment by
Thunderbolts colleague Chris Reeve, “The picture which is emerging is of
the black hole as non-falsifiable. It really does not seem to matter
how many null results accumulate; since theorists need
them to be there, they will continue to insist
that they ARE there.” In fact, we have noted a fundamental
challenge to the very question of whether Einstein’s mathematics
predict black holes. As explained by
physicist Wal Thornhill in his Space News interview
on gravitational waves, “It’s a self-serving myth that Einstein’s
mathematics predicts black holes. The originators of black hole
theory in 1965, including Thorne, chose not to mention that Einstein’s
October 1939 paper which they refer to, concludes with, “The ‘Schwarzschild singularity'”, the term black hole had
not been introduced then, “does not appear for the reason that
matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily and this is due to the
fact that otherwise the constituting particles would
reach the velocity of light.” Einstein showed mathematically that
black holes cannot form gravitationally for the same reason that
stars and planets cannot. Because the infalling matter begins
to circle the center of mass until the centrifugal force
balances the gravitational force. The observational evidence now
shows that stars and planets are formed by the powerful
electromagnetic force produced in electromagnetic pinches
along cosmic lightning filaments in molecular clouds. Gravitational collapse theory is now
discredited by direct observation. For continuous updates on Space
News from the Electric Universe, stay tuned to Thunderbolts.info

100 Replies to “Black Holes Behaving Badly | Space News

  1. I hate it when logic dictates the universe, we all need fuzzy, snake oil and magic. The scientific community debunk snake oil and magic all the time, but they preach religious phallic worship of the party line, the faithful shall survive the onslaught of demonic logic, for they believe in that which does not exist, so can change it, at will to avoid the bullets of truth .. ha ha .. I think I should be an astroboy ..

  2. If you gather ALL the "we did not expect that" "we don't know why that happened", and similar comments from the cosmology world, you would realize they don't know ANYTHING.
    It's like Jeff Session's "I don't recall". They are simply way too many, which causes you to ask "Then what do you know?". Yes dear cosmologists, exactly what do you know? Or are sure about?

  3. "The "Schwarzschild singularity" does not appear for the reason that matter cannot be concentrated arbitrarily."

    That's what Einstein wrote in regard to the Swarzschild singularity existing in reality!

    Amazing how the man is deified yet, that is selectively ignored.

    His Oct 1939 paper is easy to find online. Shhhhheck it out.

  4. Modern Scientists:
    "It's incredible how we are observing all this phenomena that our model does not predict!! We can't explain it!"
    "Maybe your model is wrong?"
    "Nahhh pretty sure it's correct"

  5. How does this channel only have 94,000 subscribers? To me, that's the greater mystery… It should have ten times that, just based on the content and production values alone. It's shocking, really.

  6. You must be kidding.

    Morgan Freeman told me some years ago that scientists were about to figure out everything about the multiverse.

    He was speaking through a wormhole or something like that so i could have misundestood him but anyway I am pretty sure he was right.

  7. None of this is supposed to be accepted as science because the end result would be zero-point energy. This much is clear. The question then becomes, who would not want this? These people are why this TRUE science will never be taken seriously by "Academics". Only people driven by truth, and not grant money, can see the clarity in the Thunderbolts perspective.

  8. Cosmologists, physicists, and mathematicians will have to reconsider the EU theory in order to reconcile what they are actually observing. It appears that predicted results of galactic and universal behavior never goes their way. Birklande currents rock!!

  9. I'm thinking the black holes are condensed metallic hydrogen. Very high density with differing densities layering outwards from it. These form streams or arms as we have seen. The matter is statically attracted to the hydrogen in all densities.
    All this hydrogen based plasma must be contained or divided and matter does just that. Matter is the plasmoid and hydrogen seems to be the divider of the medium of plasma that forms between the matter. Remember the silicon vibrating table experiment. You can create a drop of silicon on a vibrating surface of silicon and it will maintain itself and not rejoin the vibrating silicon. So plasma is the medium and plasmoids are the medium bound by statically attracted matter flakes. The plasmoid is concentrated into a ball with two polar tendrils out the poles. Matter flakes are attracted to the plasmoid in certain sizes or even composition resonantly. The plasma in our region of space or galaxy is held inside of the core of our gallatic bubble, bound by metallic hydrogen. Stars are nothing more then metallic hydrogen and layers of oxygen. You got it.. The stuff of life, Good old H2O, when it condenses….

  10. The theoretical physicists are going to start assassinating the members of the telescope manufacturers' R&D departments…since their pronouncements about black holes are now more and more often being proven idiotic by the superior technology of modern astronomical detection devices.

  11. given phenomena in electromagnetic plasma physics are so scalable to immense magnitudes, from tiny to galactic, one cannot help but suspect if electromagnetic forces dominate our universe (not mere gravity, ever: no "black hole" exists, as it is only a mathematical "fudge-factor" to "fix bad gravitational-based origins-physics) … then, when looking at both planetary scale (including asteroids, comets, and other lopsided chunks), solar/stellar scale, and all the way to massive nebular or geometrically well-defined galactic scale, there SHOULD EXIST many REPEAT ELECTRICALLY-based SYSTEMS-within-SYSTEMS of similar distributions of MARKLUND CONVECTION sorting of elements "EVERYWHERE"

    that means even within high intensity cores of galactic "plasmoids" are likewise similar high mass high density distribution of the most stable elements starting with IRON, then NICKEL, etc onwards towards lighter elements

    and EVERY LUMINOUS STAR, without exception, has similar marklund convection distribution of elements
    alll the way to every planet, even so called "gas giants", not just rocky encrusted planets like Earth (mercury, venus, mars, moon, etc)

    and ultimately EVERY planet, is "potentially" luminous electromagnetically

    every heavy cored celestial object, acts as a super-capacitor, which can be luminous (starry or cometary) in proportion to its heavy core mass as well as outer rocky crust when it moves in space relative to all others at such high velocities

    all celestial objects are moving within a wider larger super magnetic field of the galaxy, but MORE SO, relative to the immense "zero-point" energy that surrounds everything in space of our universe

    no object can be said to be "electrically neutral" (it's impossible) given the whole universe is in constant high velocity motion "everywhere"

    whilst i have no particular leanings to ancient "alien" skies, which may exaggerate visual phenomena, or it may not be an exaggeration at all, or something different altogether, such as exaggerated attribution to honor some respected hero-vip-dignitary of historical significance (as a memorial to that individual(s))

    i do, however, take ancient biblical scripture more seriously than pagan-self-serving fantasy-accounts (basis for mythologies)

    what if what one draws from expression from both old/new testament, that the SUN will go DARK (an observable hard core) … even while still shining (its corona expanding out from solar surface) and still keeping us on Earth warm?

    it will look strange, and even mercury and venus may light up again, and the moon will turn red, as the sun's corona expands towards mercury, venus, and beyond

    our sun's ion output may exceed electron influx coming in from outside our solar system as our solar system experiences a massive motion "lull" (moving slower relative to before) means the ion-electron interactions will go out further from the sun than before, as the sun "discharges" at a lower warmer color (more yellow than white beyond its surface, as it darkens to "relative black")

    this unveils what our sun (and ALL stars) may REALLY LOOK LIKE, underneath … not a big ball of "light gaseous elements packed densely", but a much more non-fusion, non-gravity driven, harder denser heavier IRON METALLIC CORE (much cooler than expected)

    so … this major paradigm shift … that all celestial bodies, are electrically formed, electrically active, luminous (more or less; depending on its capacitance makeup) rocky objects with iron metallic cores, with or without remnant gases still "hanging on" (only when such bodies are electrically SCOURED of its rocky and gaseous components from its surface, does it become "bare heavy iron" (less luminous))

  12. Scientist don't like to admit being wrong, just like everyone else. But scientist especially don't like it. I'm not saying they are wrong with most theories but, ones were the evidence stacks up not in favor of there ideas, they take a LONG time admitting they were won't correct in there thinking.

  13. sometime i watch "scientists" eyes when they speak about the cosmos and the big bang and all the rest of it and i get the feeling these guys are "on" something. It's like they are lying so broadly and taking great delight in our gullibility. They preach their religion of science and they dare us to not accept it. closed minds do not a good scientist make. science that rebuffs questions about its validity is not science but religious dogma.

  14. so basically everywhere they look. they have no fucking idea. and are refusing to re asses their repeatedly failed gravity models.

  15. Astrophysics and astronomy as we know it today (in fact most of science as we know it) are belief systems similar to religions where no one questions the theories that scientist thought a hundred or more years ago. It seems that those theories are sacred and cannot be questioned. I am so happy that videos like yours exist so that science can be revisited and possibly be revised according to new data.

  16. I like their honesty. We have a black hole in our theory. For anyone else, its only making the decision to use a different theory, for a while, till it makes sense, the evidence stacks up, then the decision is sciences. NASA are left behind. Waving><><><><><><

  17. The 'centre of gravity' is that point of a body at which the mass of a body acts, right? Now think of the centre of gravity for Earth – more or less at the centre of the Earth. All the stuff that gives it gravity is spread around it in all directions.
    Since there is zero gravity there, it could well be a space – with the Earth spinning there will still be a force pushing outwards – a flying saucer shaped black hole under the equator, filled with gas or molten something. (Or are the walls of the hole hot enough to produce light, so perhaps not black?)
    So what's the gravity at the centre of the Sun – also zero, and the centre of our galaxy – also zero, with the mass of some the bodies in the galaxy spinning each other, but all. in turn, around the galaxy's centre of gravity – where there's a dark black hole with zero gravity, not a massive collapsing mass. Its a mass of – nothing – just emptiness and, if there was once something there, it would have, long ago, slipped into orbit around the centre.

  18. I think it valid to say that currently the word Gravity is as useful as the word shiny in the understanding of the universe.

  19. great work. Sentence itself is crazy: "supermassive holes" . What's a hole? empty space?? Can a hole to have anything? A hole with something feeling it is even a hole? can an empty space be massive?? or super massive?? which matter is into those holes?? then is a hole or what??

  20. anyone in science would laugh at this but at 6:45 the image referenced I saw when looking at the sky on mescaline at night. I could see what appeared to be streams of light that the stars were connected to like a huge web. it looked very similarly to this. My eyes were super sensitive to all the artificial light in the room so I went outside and was amazed when starring at the sky to see what appeared to be such beautiful connections.

  21. Some great work. Thank you
    Has anyone formulated the mathematical basis to support the EU theory. This is a must if you want to take down a paradigm as big as the Gravitational Centric Theory of the Universe

  22. Thank you guys! I can now be really excited and learn real observational science and not current religious science dogma that is verifiably incorrect.

  23. Now that I know about birkland filiments black holes are just nonsence. Ty for showing me something that makes observable sence.

  24. Thank you Thunderbolts Project.
    Could it be that these "black holes" are just "galactic central plasmoids" that have a different way of channeling and sending on the plasma for their respective places on their "pearly string"? :)~ Maybe these "untra-dark, central plasmoids" (black holes) just don't want to shine their light? …or are they just acting as capacitors for the entire Electric Universal chain in which they sit? TIA

  25. How it is matter falls into a black hole at all? It seems like the closer matter gets to a black hole the more energy it would need to slow down enough to fall out of orbit, that at some point it would need an infinite amount of energy to slow down any further….

  26. So, the "theorists" say black holes have gravity from which nothing can escape, except for all the stuff radiating out in all directions? Man, I need one of those jobs!

  27. I wouldn't quote phys.org, some of their writings are invalid. I would look at their sources and quote their sources, instead.

  28. The fact that establishment scientists will go right up to the edge of Electric Universe theory and tested, observational fact but will not take the plunge despite ALL of the evidence, says to me that corporate sponsorship of university research has totally corrupted the process, as it does with everything. They can't be that stupid!

    Acknowledging the TRUTH of the Electric Universe leads one right to the door of free energy! And that is forbidden by the corporate elite.

  29. I wish you would’ve gone into, WHY scientists and media dismisses these findings and prefers black hole theory, what’s in it for them?

  30. ,.. the low mass stars located in such a close proximity to the theorized 'black hole' highly suggests, (well using the above mentioned data & going by the main-stream science academia approach 'they' would "confirm"), ..but it seems that it highly suggests that the anomaly at the galaxy's center could be the source of, or the primary mechanism that allows, the star formation to occur & even possibly the source of the majority of the objects residing within the emanating z-pinch plasma columns that we optically see spiraling outward from the center of most galaxies.

    …baby plasmoids birthing from the womb of the mother-of-mothers-super-plasmoid-z-pinch.
    .

  31. This is how suns work @ThunderboltsProject
    : Our sun gets redshifted light from all over universe. Sun lights out shorter wavelenght light to us, they go inbetween redshifted light. The redshifted light dont nessesary come from shorter wavelenghted light that originally came from the sun and bounced back, but if it do it gives extra energy for our sun to grow maybe. The redshifted light charges up our sun, so that it dont need a neuclear fusion in its core. Rest you can all figure out. LOL @Wal Thornhill et al.

  32. It seems to me that the "Black holes theory " is dead as well it should be. The evidence coming in from our space telescopes tells us this over and over and yet mainstream keeps parroting out of antiquated books that belong to the Victorian age. Thanks thunderbolts/electric universe team for all the work you folks do.

  33. if a black hole is possible then logically we can assume that every black hole gives birth to new space vacuum , multiverse . so every black hole in a parrent universe is a white hole in a baby universe , not observed

  34. There are events taking place, in the universe, and for now they have been coined black holes. What ever it is, it's there and it may not be a black hole, the way a black hole has been defined.

    I have loved following cosmology since I was a kid. I am a home builder, I use geometry everyday. It makes sense to me that the term plumb points to the center of gravity.

    I have serious objections to the idea of the black hole and the big bang. It doesn't mean I am not reading and denying the idea that people who are attempting to build a unified theory of everything, are wrong. I love the fact those people have sparked my interest, and have built a world way more beautiful than what the religions have claimed.

    Keep up the great idea thunderbolts, I am and will forever be intrigued.

  35. Mainstream science is so accustomed to "believing the blackboard" they put the blackboard numbers into computer models and let the models speak – but models only reflect the bias of the modeler. The more complex the model, the more the modeler has to tweak it to comply – with what the modeler expects to see.

    The models of black holes and other phenom are no different than the models promulgated for "climate science". Why do we constantly hear of falsified climate data. Who would need to falsify data if it's so easily attainable and pervasive? It's because the data has to be shoe-horned to fit the model

    And this same effect is with these many models of the cosmos The computer model delivers what they expect to see, and the "theater of the mind" somehow actually see it, and it becomes fact. Along come observations and the scientists are "stunned" "surprised" "bewildered" etc.

  36. Mainstream science claims that the EU is pseudoscience, yet it explains and predicts most, if not all, of the "anomalies" of the consensus gravitational model observed by the latest advanced instrumentation that leave scientists "baffled and surprised". The model that fits the observations best is closer to reality.

  37. I have a different idea of what black holes are and what they should look like. It won't be long before I find out whether I am right or not. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315381462_The_Mandelbrot_Set_as_a_Quasi-Black_Hole

  38. I just finished watching a PBS Nova special: black Hole Apocalypse. They just lauded the discovery of gravitational waves. No skepticism.

  39. It's painful to try and watch the recent PBS Nova show on black holes. Not a mention of any of the issues brought up in this Space News.

  40. > Now, we also have conventional SM lab evidence that the Z Machine and the hyper-bright super-laser both prove that we can not observe ultra-high-E astrophysical events "as is" and especially NOT when they are subject to impacts of ultra-bright collimated (coherent LASER) energy beams — like when in the trajectory of hyper-powerful axial ultra-energetic galactic jets.

  41. N L Holt Softsound does not appear does not appear on results when I google it. Could you, ThunderboltsProject's team, show me how to get the song?

  42. People we dont know how actually black hole functioning, we to travel near black hole and put our instruments into blackhole, for me those scientist are locked up in their knowledge, they are not scientist in my opinion.

  43. Not that im an alien conspiracy theorist trying to forward a ridiculous sounding theory, but what if there was a super advanced alien race living in our galaxy? I would imagine that they would situate themselves right next to the plasmoid in the center of the galaxy because of the massive amount of energy it provides that they could harvest from. But what would they do with all that energy? Probably manufacture more stars and planets for their massive population to live on.

    Someone should write a book. I'd read it. 🙂

  44. Something is very wrong with settled science being settled. Scientists continuously reiterate that no science is ever settled, but the current world view seems to persist with an enormous amount of fudging to substantiate it.

  45. just a theory, but maybe the other end after you come out of a white hole, there's another universe, or a different reality. I read recently online of a finding of a universe devoid of darkmatter, I'm thinking the reason for that is that at the center of that galaxy is a white hole. I'm thinking that it's like that in other universes.

  46. Could you please, applying EU principles, discuss the portion of the video in the link from 2:51 to 2:53? There seems to be nothing around witch the stars are orbiting at tremendous velocities, but there also seems to be periodic flashes where the nothing seems to be. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=if2opecmev8 The studies seem to ignore these flashes, I suppose it is ascribed to signal interference or something like that.

  47. The secular theory claims black holes spin but effectively have time frozen at the event horizon. That is a blunt contradiction. So the physics fails entirely.

    Spiral galaxies have twin supermassive bodies that emit pre-solar gasses from their equators due to excessive spin. This reconciles Newtonian gravity with the rotation curve problem (aka Rubin's problem) almost completely.

    The algorithm that predicts this is not formally part of the EU, but is compatible with it.

    See here:
    http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/summary%20of%20rotation%20curves%20of%20galaxies.htm

  48. "However, we note that a recent scientific paper entitled 'On the Signal Processing Operations in LIGO signals', should raise serious questions about the validity of the gravitational waves claims…and they are indistinguishable from non-stationary detector noise…"

  49. Are we going to see a reply to the recent announcement of visual evidence of a "black hole?" I would like to see how a plasmoid can appear the way they are displaying a black hole.

  50. So supposedly they released a photo of a black hole today lmao just bcuz they observe something doesn't mean they know what it is. Infact what mostly all of them do is project their imaginings onto all that is.

  51. Has there been any statement since the recent “black hole” discovery photos on phys.org? I haven’t checked Facebook yet, but I was hoping I could share something from YouTube.

  52. The only proven black holes are the ones $cienti$t are part of that can’t accept new theories that tie in with observations of galaxies actions and formations. The taxpayers money disappears into their black hole.

  53. "Black Holes"-is the most Natural thing for these SuperMassive Stars,to become,when they"DIE"-Doing the Opposite of what they did(giving US-the Planets-ENERGY..!!..),but since you know that"Energy" cant be destroyed,you should rather think of it as a "PLASMOID"going backwards-Pulling,instead of break as Fushion strings-from in side the sun…Pulling(EATS..:-)..)matter,and shooting the Highly Precious Gases-in "Jet Streams"-to form "NEW"Cosmic Birkeland(Go Norway,Go-YEAH)Currents,as they Natural go,into the"Electro(N)Magnetic Fields"-making New spheres(STARS!)-does anyone have a problem seeing that..?..That Nature does thing in the single,simplest way-as always..?..I canseeing ith think of anything..!!..-That "LIVES"-that are NOT,just acting as EnergyConverters-as the "Isotopic Osmolic Blend",that COSMOS shows,and have showed "US"-right under Our NoseTips,since the dawn of"TIME"-without ManKind seeing it,but just AstroSophies about it-making them into Stupid "MathMatishions",derby only concerning themselves-with thing they can "Count"-and,Not taking into acount ALL The Electricity Playing around-Making (Electro(n))Magnetic Fields..!!..It doesn't GET any Simpler than that..).."THE ONLY CONSTANT,IS CHANGE"…)…You Go and have a Nice day now,You hear…;:=-D)…

  54. hahahahahahahahha you right!!! Scientists and Astrophysicists are all wrong! The Mythologists are right!!! hahahahahahahahah 12 and half minutes lost!!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *