Back to Home

God & Science 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 | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: Scripture-consistent Cosmology

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by yanniru/">yanniru on April 14, 1999 14:48:21 UTC

: Richard: You must be a real theorist to claim that black holes result from an Equation of State. I think they result from the death of sufficiently large stars. Likewise, I think that singularities only exist in mathematics, not in nature. The black hole central singularity is a product of classical physics, not of nature. The components of the construction of universes I described is discussed in Briane Greene's book, THE ELEGANT UNIVERSE. Brian made some of the original contributions to those ideas. Each new universe generated by a black hole is a separate Big-Bang with a new beginning for time. White holes would generate a sub-universe that would have to fit into the old universe, a much more messy endeavor in which the laws of physics were already established; whereas in black hole creation of completely separate universes, new laws of physics have the opportunity to evolve, an opportunity denied by white hole creation. I think I got you with your own argument there. However, I agree with you on one issue. The black hole singularity is not beyond our theoretical conception. Superstring theorists are now in the throes of trying to understand it. So I looked at the latest on-line published papers to get a better understanding of what I call the central membrane of the black hole. The site is The most recent appropriate paper is JHEP 12(1998)002, "Tachyons and black hole horizons in gauge theory" by Kabat & Lifschytz from Princeton, home of the foremost string theorists. To my amazement, I must confess, they agree with you. The black hole membrane is at the Schwarzchild radius. I had conceived of the membrane as occupying the volume we normally associate with the classical singularity, perhaps on the order of a Planck volume, not the whole black hole. I won't really believe it until I see a few more papers saying the same thing. Of course, their result may be restricted since it was derived under conditions where the entire black hole was roughly the size of a Planck volume. On another level, we seem to be arguing over a Vishnu Cosmology vs. a Krishna Cosmology. It's ironic that in Hindu thought, these are presumably different names for the ONE god. What fascinates me is that physics is in a position to decide between two different religious views. From another angle, perhaps god wanted to cover all bases so that whatever science finally decides, there is a ready scriptural cosmology to agree with it.

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