# Could a black hole be inverted light?

## Recommended Posts

i think that a black hole is gravity at

its highest level (of course) and it

is simply inverted light. The super star

has accumulated so much mass by

producing light that it cause the light

to slow down enough to convert it back

into mass inverting on its self, not by

running out of fuel. Which produces

a hole in the space faberic at speeds

faster than light.

the mass is infintely expanded creating

massive amount of pull.

This is base on light being mass at the

speed of light and mass attracts mass

##### Share on other sites

You'd have to explain what inverted light is, first.

##### Share on other sites

What the?!??

What's inverted light?

You don't accumulated mass by producing light!

Mass (ie. a denser gravitational field) doesn't cause light to slow down.

Light isn't converted back into mass.

And nothing is faster than light.

##### Share on other sites

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like 'inverted light' is the reverse of 'converting mass to light'. So basically the blackhole would be absorbing light and converting it into mass.

@5164

Nothing WITH MASS is faster than than light. I think theres one example (at least) where light exceeded its own speed limit. I'll try to get the exact details tomorrow (its in in article on my physics teacher's desk)

As I said, correct me if I'm wrong.

LazerFazer

##### Share on other sites

Nothing WITH MASS is faster than than light. I think theres one example (at least) where light exceeded its own speed limit. I'll try to get the exact details tomorrow (its in in article on my physics teacher's desk)

Faster than c and faster than light aren't always the same thing.

Anyway, I'll wager 400 Quatloos that the article is related to anomalous dispersion (or some other pulse-reshaping technique).

##### Share on other sites

@swansnot

Indeed, I know that 'faster than light' and 'faster than c' isn't the same thing. But the article did say something to the effect of "...broke the cosmic speed limit" or something like that, so I'm assuming they're talking about c there. And yes, if I remember correctly, it was due to some kind of pulse-reshaping technique. Although I'm a bit skeptical about it, since I THINK it appeared in an Egyptian newspaper... Not the most reliable source. But as I said, I'll check on that tomorrow when I have access to the article.

LazerFazer

##### Share on other sites

I'll take that wager and raise you 4 hundreeeed ugelbugels! If you're man enough ....

##### Share on other sites

LazerFazer, it won't be faster than c and proven... but by all means check what it was you saw.

##### Share on other sites

@swansnot

Indeed' date=' I know that 'faster than light' and 'faster than c' isn't the same thing. But the article did say something to the effect of "...broke the cosmic speed limit" or something like that, so I'm assuming they're talking about c there. And yes, if I remember correctly, it was due to some kind of pulse-reshaping technique. Although I'm a bit skeptical about it, since I THINK it appeared in an Egyptian newspaper... Not the most reliable source. But as I said, I'll check on that tomorrow when I have access to the article.

LazerFazer[/quote']

I'm sure the article is reporting a real result (whether they got the details right is another issue) - there have been several discussions of anomalous dispersion here, so if you're interested, use the search function. However, the effect doesn't violate causality and is not at odds with relativity.

##### Share on other sites

@5614

LazerFazer' date=' it won't be faster than c and proven... but by all means check what it was you saw.

[/quote']

Well, from what I remember, there were two detectors within the chamber, and the light pulse was recorded at the second detector before the first. Again, details are a bit on the short side, but tomorrow hopefully it will all come to light.

LazerFazer

##### Share on other sites

i think that a black hole is gravity at

its highest level (of course) and it

is simply inverted light. The super star

has accumulated so much mass by

producing light that it cause the light

to slow down enough to convert it back

into mass inverting on its self' date=' not by

running out of fuel. Which produces

a hole in the space faberic at speeds

faster than light.

the mass is infintely expanded creating

massive amount of pull.

This is base on light being mass at the

speed of light and mass attracts mass[/quote']

I have a different theory. Maybe a black hole is actually anti-matter also called dark matter. when anti-matter is combined with matter they would balance out to zero, so the matter would disappear and seem as if it were sucked into the hole.

##### Share on other sites

Antimatter + matter = gigantic explosion, not a black hole.

And that's just putting it simply.

##### Share on other sites

Or perhaps Black Holes are simply a mathematically valid solution of the Einstein equations and therefore as prone to "I think it is..."-interpretations as the derivative of cos(x) with respect to x.

But to say at least something the majority here will want to hear: @iamasmartgirl: I´m not sure if your post was serious, but in case it was:

- anti-matter and dark matter are not the same things - at least in principle. Anti-matter is the charge-conjugated counterparts of the particles we usually encounter every day and is well covered by current mainstream physics theories. Dark matter on the other hand is some extra matter that is needed to let cosmological theories coincide with experimental observations. It could be more or less anything. But many attempts to refer this extra matter to ordinary well known particles/phenomena have failed so far due to different reasons. Therefore, some physicist think it is a form of matter that is not part of current mainstream physics.

- Annihilation of matter and anti-matter does not result in nothingness but -due to conservation of energy which is positive for both- in some kind of radiation.

##### Share on other sites

I think the inverted light is just your fantasy !

##### Share on other sites

I have a different theory. Maybe a black hole is actually anti-matter also called dark matter. when anti-matter is combined with matter they would balance out to zero, so the matter would disappear and seem as if it were sucked into the hole.

Anti-matter is NOT dark matter.

##### Share on other sites

i think that a black hole is gravity at its highest level (of course) and it is simply inverted light. The super star has accumulated so much mass by producing light that it cause the light to slow down enough to convert it back into mass inverting on its self, not by running out of fuel. Which produces a hole in the space faberic at speeds faster than light. the mass is infintely expanded creating massive amount of pull. This is base on light being mass at the speed of light and mass attracts mass
The strange notion that we only use 10% of our brains has been thoroughly debunked on another thread. I just wonder if we weren't too hasty to generalise.
##### Share on other sites

Antimatter + matter = gigantic explosion' date=' not a black hole.

And that's just putting it simply.[/quote']

If a blackhole met an equal mass antimatter matter blackhole what would be the result?

I think it would be a blackhole of twice the size but how would it differ from a twice the size blackhole or anti-matter blackhole (I'm resisting shortening it to A-hole)?

##### Share on other sites

Following from what I know and what I've read, if a 'normal' blackhole and an anti-matter blackhole were to collide (assuming same mass exactly), I'm guessing there would be an extremely large explosion, and the two would annihilate each other.

I'm risking being wrong, but you could equate that to -3 'meeting' with a 3, what would happen? They would result in 0, ,but in this case theres also energy... vast amounts of it at that.

LazerFazer

##### Share on other sites

It does not make sense that particle matter would exist within the center of a black hole since many particles would need to occupy point space. This should be highly repulsive and should convert particle matter into energy. The paradox is that although near infinite frequency or near zero wavelength energy quantum should be created within the point center of the black holes, the black hole gives off zero frequency or infinite wavelength energy at the event horizon. Maybe this paradox implies that the created energy does excape, but its change of reference from black hole center to inertiasl converts it to such a long observed wavelength that it is not detectable with our experimental capability.

##### Share on other sites

If a blackhole met an equal mass antimatter matter blackhole what would be the result?

It would be a standard matter-antimatter annihilation. Mind, it would be massive.

0.5 grams of matter + 0.5g of antimatter = the same amount of energy as a twenty kilotons explosion (the equivalent of the atom bomb that destroyed Hiroshima).

So can you possible imagine the amount of energy a released if 2 black hole sized objects (one matter, one anti-matter) annihilated each other? Mega mega mega stuff.

##### Share on other sites

Yea so find the mass of the sun in grams, then multiply that by 20. That's how many Hiroshimas it would be equivtlent to.

mass of the sun = 1.98892 × 10^33 grams

x by 20

That's 3.97784 × 10^34 times the power of that nuke, ouch!

##### Share on other sites

lets say the black holes had the mass of our sun ($1.999 * 10^{30} \mbox{ kg }$) the resulting explosion would be the equivalent of $7.996 * 10^{34}$ kilotons. An explosion like that would probably compare to the big bang.

##### Share on other sites

isn't it always in kg's? and also since 0.5 grams of anti-matter = Hiro bomb the suns mass times 1000 (for kg's) then times 2 (because its .5) would give you the amount of hiro bomb equivalent.

##### Share on other sites

No my figure is in grams for the mass of the sun and a typical black hole is 10 times that. You need two black holes which make 20. Since 1 gram of matter makes Hiroshima (according to 5614), you just divide by 1.

So 7.95568 × 10^35 kilotonnes.

Yeh?

##### Share on other sites

If you go to the CERN site here:

http://public.web.cern.ch/Public/Content/Chapters/Spotlight/SpotlightAandD-en.html

and scroll to the part labelled Does one gram of antimatter contain the energy of a twenty kiloton nuclear bomb? then you'll find some maths.

Basically use e=mc^2 where

m is in kg

c = 300,000,000m/s

and then e would be joules

And then use: "If 4.2 TJ corresponds to a kiloton of TNT"

remember: 1TJ = 1 x 10^12 J

and that hirosh was a 20kiloton nuke.

## Create an account

Register a new account