Thread: Science vs Pseudoscience

Originally Posted by holli4pirating

Sorry, but when c appears in an equation, it refers to the speed of light in vacuum, and it is therefore a constant. As such, your "argument" falls on it's face.

There are, however, equations which can determine the lifetime of a black hole (see it and some background here: Lifetime of a black hole). It is this equation that explains why small scale black holes created in the atmosphere by cosmic rays or in accelerators are not dangerous; in addition to their gravitational forces being very weak, they are very short lived.

I'd also like to throw out a reminder that the point of this thread was to distinguish science from pseudoscience. Bearing that in mind, I make the claim that there have been a lot of pseudoscientific statements made recently...

Is there a vacuum inside the Swarzchid radius of a black hole? I contend that there is.


My claims have all been backed up by solid theories.

Originally Posted by gugi

The energy can be that of a mosquito, or that of a speeding train, it depends on how close the speed of the particle is to the speed of light. So if somebody has calculated that for the particles accelerated in the LHC the energy is that of a mosquito, I can either check the claim myself, or just accept them at their word. I don't think that claiming they are wrong based on my perception of them having hidden agenda makes any sense. They are either right or wrong and their agenda is completely separate issue. Debating how dangerous is the energy of mosquito is very relevant, but very different thing. The fact that they can smash each others to bits doesn't mean that they can smash a human to bits. I can easily smash a mosquito with almost no effort between my two fingers, but I wouldn't attempt to do the same with an elephant.

Ah, ah...what happened to peer review? Are you simply going to take them at their press release word?

Here is a real example of the energy of the particles calculated energy when at full acceleration:

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is the world's largest and highest-energy particle accelerator, intended to collide opposing particle beams of either protons at an energy of 7 TeV per particle or lead nuclei at an energy of 574 TeV per nucleus.

7 Teravolts? Damn, those mosquitoes use up alot of energy. No wonder they're always hungry, the little bloodsuckers!

In summation, the statemant of energy being that of a mosquitoe in flight was most likely in reference to the protons themselves in an "inert" state, not at full acceleration, and thus stating sucha low energy example was a PR slight of hand.

Why do you contend that there is a vacuum inside the Schwarzchild radius and, more importantly, why do you contend that the speed of light is non-constant inside a vacuum?

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Ah, ah...what happened to peer review? Are you simply going to take them at their press release word?

Here is a real example of the energy of the particles calculated energy when at full acceleration:



7 Teravolts? Damn, those mosquitoes use up alot of energy. No wonder they're always hungry, the little bloodsuckers!

In summation, the statemant of energy being that of a mosquitoe in flight was most likely in reference to the protons themselves in an "inert" state, not at full acceleration, and thus stating sucha low energy example was a PR slight of hand.

TeV does not stand for Teravolts. A volt isn't even a unit of energy.

Originally Posted by joscobo

It wasn't actually theorized in any scientific sense. It was assumed. There is an important distinction between the two. Once a study was made and science employed it was shown the assumption that the Sun revolves around the Earth was false.

And currently we are assuming the theory of black holes is valid.

Originally Posted by holli4pirating

TeV does not stand for Teravolts. A volt isn't even a unit of energy.

Sorry, I forgot the conversion factor:
1 eV = 1.602176487(40)×10⁻¹⁹ joules

Oh, Seraphim, I also forgot to ask, when have you seen c used in an equation where c did not refer to the speed of light in a vacuum.

Originally Posted by Seraphim

Sorry, I forgot the conversion factor:
1 eV = 1.602176487(40)×10⁻¹⁹ joules

It's much like the difference between lightyears and years. Though there is a relation, they are not nearly the same thing.

Well, with your handy new conversion factor, now you need only calculate the energy of a mosquito in joules and make a comparison.

Originally Posted by holli4pirating

Why do you contend that there is a vacuum inside the Schwarzchild radius and, more importantly, why do you contend that the speed of light is non-constant inside a vacuum?

The speed of light can be altered, if you read the Harvard article I linked.

An entirely new state of matter, first observed four years ago, has made this possible. When atoms become packed super-closely together at super-low temperatures and super-high vacuum, they lose their identity as individual particles and act like a single super- atom with characteristics similar to a laser. Such an exotic medium can be engineered to slow a light beam 20 million-fold from 186,282 miles a second to a pokey 38 miles an hour.

Why would one expect the speed of light to not be altered within the Swarzchild radius of a black hole, if it can be altered in a lab in Cambridge, MA?

Originally Posted by Seraphim

And currently we are assuming the theory of black holes is valid.

Black holes are not assumed but calculated from equations that are part of our best models that explain how nature works. They were confirmed by observation of events that are inexplicable when only "traditional celestial bodies" are considered.

That is good enough for me until someone comes with a better model.