Strange

Can your "visualization" tell you what will happen when you fall through the event horizon of a black hole? Or the how long it will take you to reach the singularity? Or the shape of the central singularity for a Kerr (rotating) black hole? If you can (to some extent) visualise any of these things that is only because you have read someone else's description. And they did the math to work out the answers. Without that, your ability to visualise is worthless. So, basically, you are taking a free ride from those who have put in the hard work, while you are too lazy to do that.

1. Darwin was not a physicist. 2. He did have a large amount of data. You don't even seem to have that.

Then you are wasting your time posting here. Come back when you have a theory (i.e. the mathematics) and can show how well it matches observation. Until then there is nothing to discuss.

Although the idea has to be based on reality (unlike some people's ...)

Why do you think people are insulted or offended? People are just bored of ignorant people spouting random nonsense and expecting to be taken seriously. Maybe you should learn how science actually works, instead of making stuff up.

It doesn't seem that anything much comes from your mind.

Yes. Because as soon as you say "god-did-it" you have no reason to look any further. And will attack others for looking for other answers because one shouldn't question "god did it". It is not a belief, just a rather obvious conclusion.

Or live in the real world.

What if those people are actually lizards from the planet Grax?

Why do some people think that random made-up nonsense is worth sharing? Only if they have some basis in reality. Writing the first bit of crap that comes into your head is not a sign of creativity or intelligence. It demonstrates lack of critical thinking and self-censorship. Grow up.

That is pretty incoherent. We can't prove they exist but we know they do from their effects on other physical things? Sounds like proof they exist to me. And they clearly arise from the activity of the brain, a physical object. There is no evidence of the paranormal, so how it works is moot. Citation needed. If you are incapable of understanding the different contexts, that is your problem. No, I don't have to do any such thing.

Science is largely factual. Your posts are mainly fiction.

Of course, the best way to destroy the poor people is to make them rich. The best way of doing that is to have democracy, freedom and education (especially for women).

No, it means there is a lot we do know. But not everything. We base our conclusions on what we do know, not on what we might know in future. I would phrase that as: 'if we can't see it, then we can't say anything about it.' When I worked as a test engineer, people would sometimes say "Will this function work?" And I would say, "We haven't tested it yet." "Yes, but what do you think? You've looked at the design. Do you think it will work?" "We haven't tested it yet." "Can we tell customers about it?" "No, because we haven't tested it yet."

BBC Radio 4 "In Business: Companies without Managers" "Who's your boss? Peter Day explores how three different companies, in three different countries, do business without managers. Who hires and fires? And how do you get a pay rise? He asks how these radical organisations emerged, and whether other companies may follow their lead." http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b066zvyh

You are trying to apply intuition and common sense to general relativity. This will nearly always give you the wrong result.

The ring singularity and the ergosphere are both the result of the same thing (the black hole's angular momentum) so I don't think it makes sense to think that one is caused by the other. (Especially as the singularity probably doesn't really exist.)

I think that may only be the Abrahamic god. The Greek Gods, for example, could be born (and maybe die - but I can't think of any examples right now). And were often as emotional and stupid as humans.

It is not a point, it is a ring. And the reason I think the radius may be measured in seconds is because isnide a black hole one of the spatial dimensions and the time dimension get swapped. I guess the only way one could understand "why" would be to be intimately familiar with the maths. Which is waay over my head. No. One of the fundamental rules of a black hole is that you cannot observe anything about the internals (that is why it is called an event horizon). It has mass, angular momentum and (possibly) charge. That's it.

Sometimes, the best person to manage those people are those actually doing the work. Anarcho-syndicalism rules!

I have no idea what the diameter of the ring is - or even if that question makes sense. It may be measured in seconds rather than metres. http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/K/Kerr_black_hole.html

Also, the Earth would not have a magnetic field if it weren't rotating.And there would not be the regular change in magnetic inclination if it were not spherical. As with every area of science, it is the accumulation of evidence that convinces us that reality is the way it is. So, there are those who wish that time and space didn't curve, that quantum effects were not weird, and that the Earth was not rotating. Those people might be able to argue away individual bits of evidence in different ingenious ways, but you can't find another model that consistently explains ALL the evidence.

And, even more, each electron is really a "cloud" as well. They exist as "orbitals" which have all sorts of wacky shapes: I would agree, yes. Certainly they are mainly comprised of electromagnetic fields. But note that the photons here are "virtual photons" so they don't exist in the same sense that the photons that make up a beam of light do. They are (or they might be) just a mathematical abstraction.

There is no such thing. How did you derive this? How is that defined? And which particle? How did you derive this? Why does it only apply to fermions (i.e. "non-bosons")?

I see a nice curved horizon, just like from every other high-altitude plane (when it is actually at its maximum altitude).