Back to Home

Blackholes2 Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes II | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
But Space Isn't 'sucked'- Is It?

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Joe Antognini on March 7, 2002 02:58:32 UTC

I thought that space was simply distorted. If we will charmingly use Einstein's happy model:
We have a rubber mat. We then place a marble on it- the rubber mat sinks down and space is distorted. If you draw lines one the rubber mat, you will find that no space is being 'sucked' in. The lines remain at the same positions. As you leave heavier and heavier objects, you will find that no space is being 'sucked'. It is merely being distorted. No, even that isn't really the right word. It is, more or less, being stretched. Eventually, you get to a black hole. You drop that in, and you find that it has ripped right through your poor rubber mat and has taken your feet. When it's eaten half of your calves, you realize that the black hole, being infinitly heavy, was too much for your mat (space) and has not 'sucked' up any space at all- just ripped it. If you find this wrong (besides the eating of the calves, etc. please tell me)
p.s. I'm sorry I've been gone so long. I've missed all the fun, haven't I?

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins