MigL

I'm sure we'll all regret it when you prove us wrong. With some EVIDENCE !

The event horizon is a mathematical construct, which indicates a radius ( or radii ) after which certain effects manifest. Te rules and laws of GR continue to hold until infinities arise, close to the singularity; IOW no faster than light tavel. Te Shwazschild solution is a special case where infinities aise at the event horizon due to choice of co-ordinates. You may have misunderstood the fact that inside the event horizon, the only direction available is forward in time ( due to GR's geodesics, or geometry, terminating at the singularity, with no paths out of the EH ). A Big Bang arising from a 'white' hole connected to a Black Hole in an alternate universe is also a non-starter, as it would have observable differences to our universe, like a discernible center, or a 'rotation'.

You don't understand stellar evolution ... You don't understand 'implosion' as it relates to stellar evolution ... You don't understand stellar formation ... You don't understand reflection from a 'rough' body ... You don't understand how much power our sun actually adiates ... You have no understanding of what a Black Hole is ... Any conclusions drawn from misunderstandings are, by definition, inaccurate. I suggest you get your information from sources other than Reader's Digest.

Even the Speculations forum requires evidence to be presented in support of your 'speculation'. Hand waving arguments are not sufficient. The electromagnetic force, as we know it, did not exist until 10-35 sec after the Big Bang started. Prior to that, it was a unified electroweak field where fermions like electrons, muons, neutrinos and quarks ( and some bosons like W and Z of the weak interaction ) were massless. The Higgs mechanism allowed these particles to gain the property of mass, and the evidence of the Higgs boson, detected at CERN a few years ago, allows for a high degee of confidence in this model. I'll be waiting for you to present evidence supporting your model.

I don't know what you mean. Zero curvatue is flat space, with no gravity fields ( maybe global curvature, if any ), absent any energy-momentum that gives ise to curvature ( like a BH would )

Mass and energy are equivalent ( from E=mc2 ). As is momentum and energy ( from the same equation expanded to include massless particles )

Yes . Tidal forces are a manifestaion of the degree of curvature. Large BHs have more 'gentle' curvature, lessened tidal forces, and you can pass through the event horizon without getting 'spaghettified'. For small BHs the tidal forces are much more extreme, and you should bring along tomato sauce and meatballs.

Again I'm at a loss to understand your meaning. Do you mean 'Has anybody touched it or seen it ?' then , of course not. But science is causal, and hings can be inferred by he effects they have on other hings. Science does not simply rely on the 5 primary senses; mostly it relies on your brain to recognize causal sructures that tell us how nature behaves. IOW start living and learning beyond your fingertips

It only has to store excess electricity generated by solar panels or windmills during he day, and is meant to offload drain on he grid. Not be the sole supply. And yes, at the household level batteries would be more efficient. ( but have you ever seen a Lithium fire when the batteries swell, crack and get wet ? )

Both can be considered 'edges' of space-time, however, a Black Hole singularity ( ? ) is in the future, while the Big Bang singularity ( ? ) is in the past.

???? By 'we', do you mean you ?

What has been done is the 'creation' of hydraulic gravitational potential in the form of hydroelectric dams. My proposal would be for a hydroelectric 'battery', which stores electricity by raising water to a higher gravitational potential, and then re-extracting the electricity when the water drops back down through a turbine. It could be as simple as a rooftop tank, to store electricity generated during the day by solar panels, and to recoup at night when the panels are not active.

Have you not read any of the preceding posts ? Using the equations developed by Meghnad Saha in the 1920s, we can calculate the ionization state of a gas in thermal equilibrium from the temperature and pressure. All gases in the early universe ( mostly Hydrogen and Helium ) remained completely ionized down to a temperature of about 3000oK. In this state, the universe consisted of an opaque plasma, but once it expanded further, and dropped below this temperature, electrons were allowed to bond to nuclei to form atomic Hydrogen and Helium, rendering the universe transparent. We 'see' the glow of the opaque ionized plasma as the CMB radiation, but it is no longer at 3000oK, it is now at 2.7oK, a reduction of about 1040 times. We can then use your standard statistical thermodynamic gas laws, which relate temperature, volume and pressure, to conclude that the universe must have increased in volume by the equivalent factor of 1040 times, since the recombination era ( when atoms were able to form )

So, stop wasting your time, and posting in a topic that is boring, and doesn't interest you ...

I like my idea better ... Use 'excess' electricity, when available, to pump water to an elevated reservoir, then run the water down through turbines to generate electricity when there is demand. Although there are pumping/generating losses, the 'elevated' water can be stored indefinitely, and won't 'run out' after 13 hours.

The event horizon of a Black Hole can be viewed as an extreme curvature of space-time. A classical Black Hole will conserve mass, angular momentum and charge. And, as mass is equivalent to energy, those conserved quantities contribute to energy-momentum which produces space-time curvature ( gravity ).

Is your claim supposed o follow from he equality ? I read that as energy is equivalent to mass; and don't see 'light' in that equation at all.

While this is the Politics section, it is still a Science forum. We would be better off not dealing in hyperbole.

Clearly, JC is way over the top ... But Peterkin is not ??? The solution to most all of America's problems ( and there are quite a few ) is not to point fingers at the other ideological side, but to get your house in order. Your system of Government allows for people on both sides of the ideological debate to 'game' the system, and the polarization continues to build. United 'States' is clearly not working; they are anything but united. Thank you for the compliment and the agreement.

There are 'deliberate indifference laws in most jurisdictions, that are extended to adults as well as babies. "Deliberate indifference is the conscious or reckless disregard of the consequences of one's acts or omissions. It entails something more than negligence, but is satisfied by something less than acts or omissions for the very purpose of causing harm or with knowledge that harm will result." Deliberate Indifference Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc. Did you not see the last episode of Seinfeld ?

I was explicating as how it doesn't, can't, and hasn't any. No such thing as inherent rights. Rights are granted by a society to individuals through laws and regulations. If we as a society, deem that babies have rights, then they do. If we deem a fertilized bunch of cells not to have rights, then they don't. The importance of good, and viable laws and regulations is most important, not whether it complies with the writings of a Constitution over 2 centuries out of date.

Isn't that how this whole mess got started ? Previous administrations ( Republican ) packed the Supreme Court with politically influenced judges, who interpret ( or find ways to interpret ) laws according to political ideology, and not just the Constitution What happened here is that the SCJustices found a way to reverse the Roe vs Wade decision by claiming the Supreme Court did not have authority, and have left it up to individual states to decide. those idiots in Congress and the Senate need to pass viable laws, which stand up to Constitutional scrutiny, and are harder to overturn than simply withdrawing a previous decision by partisan SCJustices.

I would agree that gravity was present before inflation, but the inflationary period is believed to be between 10-35 sec and 10-32 sec ( electroweak unification energies ). Gravity would have been the first to split off, at times much closer to Planck time, because it is at close to Planck energies that the four fundamental 'forces' seem to have equivalent strengths. This assumes, of course, that gravity is a 'force' which can be unified with the other forces. GR, although incomplete, seems to suggest it is not

You asked for our input when you posted your idea. Some of us gave it to you, and you bitch and complain about it. Did you want o give us a lecture, or engage in discussion ? ( and I don't know what 'gaga' means; does it mean intelligent, handsome or witty person )

Geodesics determine trajectories. ( for massive and massless particles ) Unless other forces are in play.