man i would never want to go into space like i mean you dont know what can happen up there of course same here but there is way more variables up there. Black hole gonna pop up in front of your face and suck you in or something
yeah mass is everywhere and space there are infinite possibilities bruh aliens gonna teleport mass in front of your face and then you get sucked in so in that case it did just appear. Lets be real here us as a race dont know shiz about space and therefore you dont know shiz about space cause the most we can do is look at it from a big af telescope in space and say well ima take a shot and guess that it works this way. similar to how isaac newton looked at an apple falling said well i guess it must work this way and was wrong.
Mass teleportation is impossible. The closest thing possible it to take the formation data of a being and make other stuff somewhere else match it. And even then, no mass is actually transported, only shaped.
lets be real here science especially when it comes to space is mostly theory. We are looking at a black hole. A ball of blackness that sucks everything in. We are also looking at is LIGHT YEARS AWAY. we cant cut a piece and take it home it is out there and we are watching it from a small section of space that we can observe. Now you see a couple of them light years away and you tell me how they work f out of here you dont know how they work and tbh we probably will never know how they work you can make all the hypothesis you want it is bull shiz to assume that we can determine how they work and what they do.
im sorry what i have no idea what they are if a black hole is coming our way we cant control it and we sure as heck cant move the planet i do not see a point of studying something that we cant do anything about.
good luck on that i mean studying the black hole itself that doesnt make sense studying rocket ships and testing them till we have one good enough to transport us somewhere better that makes sense.
Think.
If we didn't ever study blackholes, how would we know when 'too late' is? We wouldn't. We wouldn't even know what they did.
We need to study all aspects of space. Even the ones some may see no point in.
well we cant know if that info is correct anyways by just looking at them i mean its probably just out of my interest and in your interest after all so i guess this conversation is pointless.
Well, that's why we're trying to figure out a way to get up close and personal in a safe way.
And looking can do a whole lot of confirming. That's how we set the year, stars, the atmosphere of distant planets, the temperature of the sun, the existence of other galaxies, other Earth-like planets, and so very much more.
You just gotta look in different ways. One set of eyes will do no good in creating the perfect piece of art.
1) "lets be real here science especially when it comes to space is mostly theory"
Well theories are the most rigorously tested ideas in all of science. I think you mean hypotheses, and even then, you are wrong.
2) We'd feel the gravitational effects of an average sized black hole well before it got anywhere close to us. We'd literally be flung from our orbit around the Sun and freeze to death in interstellar space.
3) we've created micro-black holes on Earth. They didn't suck in the entire planet like all the conspiracy theory nuts thought they would.
theories are just ideas that have yet to be proven wrong a lot of people have the misconception of assuming theories are fact when they are just ideas that have not been proven wrong yet and seeing as black holes are far away and we dont know that much about them I highly doubt anybody can prove it wrong or find a solution that wont be proven wrong in the future. Last time i checked which i could be wrong but i just looked it up again and micro black holes are a theory not something we have done it was introduced by steven hawking 1971 but just remains a theory. Also yes with quantum mechanics anything is possible so therefore a black hole could appear anywhere for there are so many variables out there that nearly anything can happen cause we can only observe a tiny bit of space and therefore only a tiny bit of what occurs in space and could occur around us.
You bash us for applying well researched theories dating back ages, such as the theory of bloody gravity. But you're in the right for using a more modern theory with less scientific evidence behind it.
lol i had no idea it was a theory bruh i just looked up a question in yahoo answers and threw it in there my bad. at the same time though we dont know whats in space or how it all works so to say that no it could not happen to me is foolish and yeah let take the quantum physics aspect out of it. and i would not use the term bash i feel that it suggest im making fun of you i would simply advise you that bringing up that theories are hypothesis unproven does not make them fact like a lot of people seem to think.
literally the definition of a theory: A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.
not a fact though a theory like i said earlier we used to believe Isaac newtons gravity theory was fact when it was not and Einstein proved it wrong so after a long time the theory was proven wrong showing it was no more than a theory.
Newtonian gravity wasn't proven "wrong", it was added upon. Here is a better explanation:
In Physics a "theory" is a mathematical model based on various assumptions and valid for a limited range of physical conditions. Newton's laws are a mathematical model that is limited to non-relativistic speeds and low gravitational fields, and within those limits it is exceedingly accurate. There is no sense in which Newton was proved wrong by Einstein. What relativity did is expand the range of physical conditions over which the theory applied. Special relativity extended the range to include high speeds, and general relativity extended it again to include high gravitational fields. Even GR is not applicable everywhere because it fails at singularities like the centre of black holes. We expect that some future theory (string theory?) will extend GR to describe places that are singular in GR.
It was added upon but it also showed that gravity did not work the way he thought it did and theorized it did so he was wrong but yeah he did add upon it and they probably will find more issues with it and "add on" but that just shows that theories are not facts set in stone so you should not treat them as such.
you're over here saying if a scientific theory has a 99.9999999% chance of being accurate, we should still ignore it because of that .000000001% chance. No framework like a scientific theory is ever going to hit 100%, it's just not possible. At some point you just have to look at the overwhelming evidence that supports a theory and say to yourself "that's most likely right". If you really think you can poke holes in these theories, by all means, do so, have it peer-reviewed and show us. You'd win a Nobel prize for it. Otherwise, calm your tits.
im saying that when you have a theory dont pretend that it is more than a theory we can work with them and do stuff with them but that does not mean other ideas are impossible or out of the picture because a scientific theory says so. Hence my original comment on black holes emerging out of nowhere. You guys tell me this is how a black hole works and i said you dont know that for sure because there is a lot we cant observe and we could have gotten info wrong. I am simply defending my own point of view not throwing away every theory on the planet. I am simply suggesting that if there is a theory it does not make other options impossible or far fetched.
Now to simply suggest fault or other ideas i feel is hardly justifiable to the way you act which is obviously so hard headed you have to come to insults and degradation please get off you high horse and argue like a man.
My problem is you are treating a theory as if it were a hypothesis. It's not, not even close.
Your little black hole idea is a hypothesis and a pretty shitty one at that. We know exactly how much matter it takes in a small enough space for a black hole to form. It's a universal ratio. Saying a black hole could form in front of us randomly and not nearly-instantly evaporate like a micro black hole is just bad science. It is an idea that has absolutely zero evidence to support it. you're trying to say that idea is on the same ground as special relativity.
my problem is that i was originally joking about black holes popping up until you guys wanted to educate me on black holes and act as if my idea was ludicrous when we as the human race dont even know if I could be right or wrong. Theories on something as mysterious and far away as a black hole in my mind is ridiculous to assume right without any doubt, as compared to a theory on something that we can not only control but do more than observe from light years away. We hardly know anything about them and the little we "think" we know you can make a theory but dont tell me that you know how a blackhole works without a doubt and that i am completely wrong.
ok you can tell me that you know exactly how a black all consuming hole works all you want while it is light years away and I wont take you seriously I mean I guess that is why there are a mix of practical thinking people and theoretical thinking people.
you cant prove me wrong bro just admit that. Your theory could be wrong and you are so ignorant that you result to degrading the other person because you are frustrated that you cant prove me wrong with your "amazing" science.
Calling you dense wasn't degrading you. You are dense. I've proven you wrong multiple times throughout this conversation, especially when it comes to your inability to distinguish between a hypothesis and a theory. The only thing I am frustrated with is you sticking your head in the sand and ignoring me every single time I try and explain something. It's like talking to a child who keeps saying "but why". That can sometimes be useful, but most of the time it's done just to annoy.
I'm betting the green lights are either a squid spawning sesh or a bio luminescent plankton bloom. Also... I never knew the Nile was that freaking wide right before the mouth. I knew the floodplain around Cairo was huge, but I mean... that thing is THICC... must be flooded when the pic was taken.
dID SOMEBODY SAY SPACE?!
SPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACE
That's not how that works.
It is part of the universe we live in, and thus science is set up to analyze it deeply.
And if a blackhole WAS coming our way. Then it'd be better to study space MORE, so we can GTFO before it's too late.
If we didn't ever study blackholes, how would we know when 'too late' is? We wouldn't. We wouldn't even know what they did.
We need to study all aspects of space. Even the ones some may see no point in.
And looking can do a whole lot of confirming. That's how we set the year, stars, the atmosphere of distant planets, the temperature of the sun, the existence of other galaxies, other Earth-like planets, and so very much more.
You just gotta look in different ways. One set of eyes will do no good in creating the perfect piece of art.
Well theories are the most rigorously tested ideas in all of science. I think you mean hypotheses, and even then, you are wrong.
2) We'd feel the gravitational effects of an average sized black hole well before it got anywhere close to us. We'd literally be flung from our orbit around the Sun and freeze to death in interstellar space.
3) we've created micro-black holes on Earth. They didn't suck in the entire planet like all the conspiracy theory nuts thought they would.
You bash us for applying well researched theories dating back ages, such as the theory of bloody gravity. But you're in the right for using a more modern theory with less scientific evidence behind it.
In Physics a "theory" is a mathematical model based on various assumptions and valid for a limited range of physical conditions. Newton's laws are a mathematical model that is limited to non-relativistic speeds and low gravitational fields, and within those limits it is exceedingly accurate. There is no sense in which Newton was proved wrong by Einstein. What relativity did is expand the range of physical conditions over which the theory applied. Special relativity extended the range to include high speeds, and general relativity extended it again to include high gravitational fields. Even GR is not applicable everywhere because it fails at singularities like the centre of black holes. We expect that some future theory (string theory?) will extend GR to describe places that are singular in GR.
Your little black hole idea is a hypothesis and a pretty shitty one at that. We know exactly how much matter it takes in a small enough space for a black hole to form. It's a universal ratio. Saying a black hole could form in front of us randomly and not nearly-instantly evaporate like a micro black hole is just bad science. It is an idea that has absolutely zero evidence to support it. you're trying to say that idea is on the same ground as special relativity.