<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt: A Supermassive Black Hole Lives in Centre of Our Galaxy</title> <atom:link href="http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/</link> <description>Space and astronomy news</description> <lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 07:14:44 +0000</lastBuildDate> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <item><title>By: R Houston</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-4/#comment-52617</link> <dc:creator>R Houston</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 22:14:46 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-52617</guid> <description>c henry, you are the babbling idiot. Black hoels are only a theory. Made up just like the absolutely ridiculius, fictional, impossible big bang THEORY. The universe is better understood by an electrical engineer than a mathemetician who has to make up theories like black holes, the big bang, nuetron stars, dark matter, etc. Things that have never been observed in reality, something that you do not live in. Like i said before snap out of your cosmic fog.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>c henry, you are the babbling idiot. Black hoels are only a theory. Made up just like the absolutely ridiculius, fictional, impossible big bang THEORY. The universe is better understood by an electrical engineer than a mathemetician who has to make up theories like black holes, the big bang, nuetron stars, dark matter, etc. Things that have never been observed in reality, something that you do not live in. Like i said before snap out of your cosmic fog.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Soto</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-4/#comment-49254</link> <dc:creator>Soto</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 17:26:09 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-49254</guid> <description>I seen it happen...When I was in Nebulon Sector 17 I saw it...</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I seen it happen&#8230;When I was in Nebulon Sector 17 I saw it&#8230;</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: c henry</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-4/#comment-48794</link> <dc:creator>c henry</dc:creator> <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 05:52:38 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-48794</guid> <description>r houston, you are a complete babbling idiot!!! the big bang is quite a fact... as a matter of fact it will happen again... smbh which reside in the center of galaxies are seeds... if only anyone or anyrhing would be around to see it happen</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>r houston, you are a complete babbling idiot!!! the big bang is quite a fact&#8230; as a matter of fact it will happen again&#8230; smbh which reside in the center of galaxies are seeds&#8230; if only anyone or anyrhing would be around to see it happen</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: R Houston</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-4/#comment-48204</link> <dc:creator>R Houston</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 2009 21:22:04 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-48204</guid> <description>Black Holes are a fantasy just like the ridiculous Big Bang theory and dust collapsing to form accretion disks which formed the planets and all the other made up excuses to try and justify the gravity only driven universe of dogmatic science. Snap out of your cosmic fog.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Black Holes are a fantasy just like the ridiculous Big Bang theory and dust collapsing to form accretion disks which formed the planets and all the other made up excuses to try and justify the gravity only driven universe of dogmatic science. Snap out of your cosmic fog.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Anirudh Kumar Satsangi</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-4/#comment-46792</link> <dc:creator>Anirudh Kumar Satsangi</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2008 07:42:50 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46792</guid> <description>Wisdom lies in giving due recognition to faith-based posts.  Faith is as old as human civilization is.  Faith is the outcome of man&#039;s internal and external experiences.  Current Science has a history of about five hundred years.  Einstein had once said :&#039; Religion without science is blind and science without religion is lame&#039;.  If both develops together it is in the interest of the humanity at large.  Thanks.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wisdom lies in giving due recognition to faith-based posts.  Faith is as old as human civilization is.  Faith is the outcome of man&#039;s internal and external experiences.  Current Science has a history of about five hundred years.  Einstein had once said :&#039; Religion without science is blind and science without religion is lame&#039;.  If both develops together it is in the interest of the humanity at large.  Thanks.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: john mendenhall</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46564</link> <dc:creator>john mendenhall</dc:creator> <pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 18:03:08 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46564</guid> <description>Ignoring the recent faith-based gibberish for few posts,&quot;john mendenhall I am sure Rey got the idea, that relative from the other side of the Universe we are moving at the rate of almost the speed of light.&quot;I recognized that point.  And from the antipodal point on the opposite side of the universe, we appear to be moving at near the speed of light in the opposite direction, and so on ad infinitum all about the edge of the visible universe.  Net motion = zero.  Aside from the &#039;O My God Particle&#039; (google it), we haven&#039;t seen anything local other than cosmic rays that is moving at a high fraction of c.  And even the OMGP was just a cosmic ray on steroids.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ignoring the recent faith-based gibberish for few posts,</p><p>&#034;john mendenhall I am sure Rey got the idea, that relative from the other side of the Universe we are moving at the rate of almost the speed of light.&#034;</p><p>I recognized that point.  And from the antipodal point on the opposite side of the universe, we appear to be moving at near the speed of light in the opposite direction, and so on ad infinitum all about the edge of the visible universe.  Net motion = zero.  Aside from the &#039;O My God Particle&#039; (google it), we haven&#039;t seen anything local other than cosmic rays that is moving at a high fraction of c.  And even the OMGP was just a cosmic ray on steroids.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: mike</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46433</link> <dc:creator>mike</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 18:39:48 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46433</guid> <description>As it turns out, sometimes a mathematical model is so precise that it tells us that a butterfly flapping it&#039;s wings can cause a tornado on the other side of the earth.  Now that the math model for this black hole has been developed, it turns out that 1/6th of a butterfly can cause a tornado on the other side of the earth.  And so we see that this is what the &quot;MATH&quot; tells us.  The answers truly come from the math.   The question is, why is the math model so very very wrong.  My kids jumping on the trampoline in the backyard just created 15 smaller black holes according to the mathematical model.  luckily they were all at the center of a galaxy far far away, so they would never be seen or measured.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As it turns out, sometimes a mathematical model is so precise that it tells us that a butterfly flapping it&#039;s wings can cause a tornado on the other side of the earth.  Now that the math model for this black hole has been developed, it turns out that 1/6th of a butterfly can cause a tornado on the other side of the earth.  And so we see that this is what the &#034;MATH&#034; tells us.  The answers truly come from the math.   The question is, why is the math model so very very wrong.  My kids jumping on the trampoline in the backyard just created 15 smaller black holes according to the mathematical model.  luckily they were all at the center of a galaxy far far away, so they would never be seen or measured.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Anirudh Kumar Satsangi</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46400</link> <dc:creator>Anirudh Kumar Satsangi</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:13:10 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46400</guid> <description>COMPREHENSIVE VIEW OF SCIENCE OF RELIGION (THEOLOGY)I have written following two papers which may lead to the realization for a higher theory of  everything:(i)	Gravitation Force is the Ultimate Creator,
(1st Int. Conf. on Revival of Traditional  Yoga, Lonavla Yoga Institute, Lonavla, January, 2006)
(ii)	In Scientific Terminology, Source of Gravitational Wave is God
(2nd World Congress on Vedic Science, BHU, Varanasi, Feb 2007)
I have presented these two papers at the two different International Conferences.   I am now submitting some views for being considered for Unified Field TheoryFrom Scriptures:
The Current which manifested in the beginning of the creation is the Current of Sabda (Sound) and of Chaitanya  (Consciousness).  From whom that Current issued forth is known as Soami (Supreme Being).  This Current, by turning back can merge again in the Holy Feet of Supreme Being.  The entire creation manifested from this current and is sustained with its energy and when the Current of the Holy Feet is withdrawn, the creation ceases to exist.This Current of the Holy Feet is the Reservoir of all energy, tastes and pleasures, knowledge, skill, shapes, forces and light etc. etc. and of the entire creation, is also the Creator of all of them.From Science:
Gravitation Force is the cause of manifestation of the creation (birth of planets, stars), its sustenance and when it is withdrawn towards centre or source the entire creation ceases to exist.  Photons have originated from gravitons.  In black holes photons merge into gravitons.  In Black Holes, Gravitational Force is so high that it does not allow even light to escape.  What does it mean then?  It simply means that the gravitational force at black-holes attracts light towards it with much greater velocity than the speed of light.  In fact, all forces including electromagnetic force, material force (strong and weak nuclear force) all merge into gravitational force in black-holes and becomes one force there and when the creational process starts again from a Black-Hole all the forces appear  (manifest) again and descends downwards to create billions of stars, planets, satellite, asteroids and various life forms.Hence it can be assumed that the Current of Chaitanya (Consciousness) and Gravitational Wave are the two names of the same Supreme Essence (Seed) which has brought forth the entire creation.All cosmological researches should be conducted keeping in view of the following philosophical facts:
It has been stated in Bible (John I-1) “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,”
Mohammedans hold that God uttered ‘Kun’ (i.e. ‘Came into being’) and the creation came into being (Holy Quran, Sur. Bakr (II.117).
In Chhandogya Upanishad it is written “Tadaikshat bahu syam prajayeyeti” (VI-2-iii) i.e. “It thought (desired) Would that I were many! Let me procreate myself!”  The Aitareya Upanishad says,”Sa ikshat ‘lokannusrija’ iti (I-1-i) i.e. “He bethought himself (desired) – ‘Let me create worlds’, etc. etc.
It is written in Chapter VII of Srimad Bhagavadgita : Sri Bhagwan said, “Arjun, now listen how with the mind attached to Me and practicing Yoga with absolute dependence on Me, you will know Me in entirety and without any shadow of doubt” (1).  I shall unfold to you in its entirety this wisdom alongwith the Knowledge of the qualified aspect of God, having known which nothing else remains yet to be known in this world (2).  Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, reason and also ego; these constitute My nature eightfold divided.  This indeed is My lower  (material) nature : the other than this, by which the whole universe is sustained, know it to be My higher nature in the form of Jiva, O Arjuna. (4-5).  Arjuna, know that all beings have evolved from this twofold Prakriti, and that I am the source of the entire creation, and into Me again it disappears.(6)
The Radhasoami Religion also tells that, the ‘Word’ mentioned above is in fact Current of Sound or Current of Consciousness or Prime Current of Spirituality which was issued forth from its Source, or Creator or God. This Current has later on produced light and other forces. The scientists are discussing these days about dark energy which constitute about 96% of the entire universe which is not known to us. Only 4% part of the universe is known to us by all scientific means. In fact this 96% invisible portion of the universe is the vast expanse of spirituality which can be designated as field of gravitational waves in scientific terms. Visible portion of the universe (4%) consists of consciousness (gravitational force), mental force (electromagnetic waves) and material force (strong and weak nuclear force).
Body = Nuclear Force (weak as well as strong)
Mind = Electromagnetic Force.
Consciousness = Gravitation Force.
According to Radhasoami Religion the whole Universe can be sub-divided into three grand divisions viz.
1.  Region of Pure Spirituality
2.  Region of Subtle Maya
3.  Region of Gross Maya
Nuclear forces dominate Region of Gross Maya (Gross Material Region), Electro-magnetic forces dominate Region of Subtle Maya (Subtle Material Region) and Gravitational Force dominates Pure Spiritual Region.
This is the only Truth which can be verified scientifically and can be termed as ‘higher theory for everything’.  This also supports the statement of Sir Sahabji Maharaj that ‘the  goal of science – Truth; the goal of philosophy – Ultimate Reality; and the goal of religion – God’ are the three names of same supreme essence.
Many things are common between Current of Consciousness and Gravitational Wave.
1. Current of consciousness can not be seen by any means and gravitational wave can also not be seen.
2. Current of consciousness is the weakest force on earth. Its strength goes on increasing on higher regions. Gravitational force is also very weak on earth and strong on Sun and even more stronger on black holes.
3 Tendency of both current of consciousness and gravitational waves are towards their source or centre.
4. Current of consciousness and gravitational force are both regarded as the creater of all the celestial and terrestrial bodies of the whole universe. They are also sustainer of these and when they turn back towards their source or centre the whole universe will collapse.
Hence it can be assumed that the source of current of consciousness and gravitational wave is the same i.e. God or ultimate creator.
This theory is based on scientific deduction. In scientific terms it can be said that the ‘gravitons’ are the elementaryparticle which was issued forth in the beginning of the creation accompanying with sound ‘Radha’
=====================================
Yoga (Application) which was based on the control of the body physically and implied that a perfect control over the body and the senses led to knowledge of the ultimate reality.  A detailed anatomical knowledge of the human body was necessary to the advancement of yoga and therefore those practising  yoga had to keep in touch with medical knowledge. (Romila Thapar, A History of India, volume one).I suggest :  Mind and brain are two distinct things.  Brain is anatomical entity whereas mind is functional entity.  Mind can be defined as the function of autonomic nervous system (ANS).  It is claimed that mind can be brought under conscious control through the practice of meditation.  But how?  ANS is largely under hypothalamic control which is situated very close to optic chiasma (sixth chakra or ajna chakra).  Protracted practice of concentration to meditate at this region brings functions of ANS say mind under one’s conscious control.ANS is further divided into parasympathetic nervous system (PSNS) and sympathetic nervous system (SNS). On the basis of these facts  I have discovered a mathematical relationship for spiritual quotient (S.Q.).  Spiritual Quotient can be expressed mathematically as the ratio of Parasympathetic dominance to Sympathetic dominance.  PSNS dominates during meditative calm and SNS dominates during stress.  In this formula we assign  numerical values to the physiological parameters activated or suppressed during autonomic mobilization and put in the formula to describe the state of mind of an individual and also infer his/her level of consciousness.Protracted practice of meditation under qualified guidance will help to manage all sort of psychological problems.Emotional Quotient can also be expressed mathematically as the product of I.Q. and Wisdom Factor.Anirudh Kumar Satsangi</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>COMPREHENSIVE VIEW OF SCIENCE OF RELIGION (THEOLOGY)</p><p> I have written following two papers which may lead to the realization for a higher theory of  everything:</p><p>(i)	Gravitation Force is the Ultimate Creator,<br
/> (1st Int. Conf. on Revival of Traditional  Yoga, Lonavla Yoga Institute, Lonavla, January, 2006)<br
/> (ii)	In Scientific Terminology, Source of Gravitational Wave is God<br
/> (2nd World Congress on Vedic Science, BHU, Varanasi, Feb 2007)<br
/> I have presented these two papers at the two different International Conferences.   I am now submitting some views for being considered for Unified Field Theory</p><p>From Scriptures:<br
/> The Current which manifested in the beginning of the creation is the Current of Sabda (Sound) and of Chaitanya  (Consciousness).  From whom that Current issued forth is known as Soami (Supreme Being).  This Current, by turning back can merge again in the Holy Feet of Supreme Being.  The entire creation manifested from this current and is sustained with its energy and when the Current of the Holy Feet is withdrawn, the creation ceases to exist.This Current of the Holy Feet is the Reservoir of all energy, tastes and pleasures, knowledge, skill, shapes, forces and light etc. etc. and of the entire creation, is also the Creator of all of them.</p><p>From Science:<br
/> Gravitation Force is the cause of manifestation of the creation (birth of planets, stars), its sustenance and when it is withdrawn towards centre or source the entire creation ceases to exist.  Photons have originated from gravitons.  In black holes photons merge into gravitons.  In Black Holes, Gravitational Force is so high that it does not allow even light to escape.  What does it mean then?  It simply means that the gravitational force at black-holes attracts light towards it with much greater velocity than the speed of light.  In fact, all forces including electromagnetic force, material force (strong and weak nuclear force) all merge into gravitational force in black-holes and becomes one force there and when the creational process starts again from a Black-Hole all the forces appear  (manifest) again and descends downwards to create billions of stars, planets, satellite, asteroids and various life forms.</p><p>Hence it can be assumed that the Current of Chaitanya (Consciousness) and Gravitational Wave are the two names of the same Supreme Essence (Seed) which has brought forth the entire creation.</p><p>All cosmological researches should be conducted keeping in view of the following philosophical facts:<br
/> It has been stated in Bible (John I-1) “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,”<br
/> Mohammedans hold that God uttered ‘Kun’ (i.e. ‘Came into being’) and the creation came into being (Holy Quran, Sur. Bakr (II.117).<br
/> In Chhandogya Upanishad it is written “Tadaikshat bahu syam prajayeyeti” (VI-2-iii) i.e. “It thought (desired) Would that I were many! Let me procreate myself!”  The Aitareya Upanishad says,”Sa ikshat ‘lokannusrija’ iti (I-1-i) i.e. “He bethought himself (desired) – ‘Let me create worlds’, etc. etc.<br
/> It is written in Chapter VII of Srimad Bhagavadgita : Sri Bhagwan said, “Arjun, now listen how with the mind attached to Me and practicing Yoga with absolute dependence on Me, you will know Me in entirety and without any shadow of doubt” (1).  I shall unfold to you in its entirety this wisdom alongwith the Knowledge of the qualified aspect of God, having known which nothing else remains yet to be known in this world (2).  Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, reason and also ego; these constitute My nature eightfold divided.  This indeed is My lower  (material) nature : the other than this, by which the whole universe is sustained, know it to be My higher nature in the form of Jiva, O Arjuna. (4-5).  Arjuna, know that all beings have evolved from this twofold Prakriti, and that I am the source of the entire creation, and into Me again it disappears.(6)<br
/> The Radhasoami Religion also tells that, the ‘Word’ mentioned above is in fact Current of Sound or Current of Consciousness or Prime Current of Spirituality which was issued forth from its Source, or Creator or God. This Current has later on produced light and other forces. The scientists are discussing these days about dark energy which constitute about 96% of the entire universe which is not known to us. Only 4% part of the universe is known to us by all scientific means. In fact this 96% invisible portion of the universe is the vast expanse of spirituality which can be designated as field of gravitational waves in scientific terms. Visible portion of the universe (4%) consists of consciousness (gravitational force), mental force (electromagnetic waves) and material force (strong and weak nuclear force).<br
/> Body = Nuclear Force (weak as well as strong)<br
/> Mind = Electromagnetic Force.<br
/> Consciousness = Gravitation Force.<br
/> According to Radhasoami Religion the whole Universe can be sub-divided into three grand divisions viz.<br
/> 1.  Region of Pure Spirituality<br
/> 2.  Region of Subtle Maya<br
/> 3.  Region of Gross Maya<br
/> Nuclear forces dominate Region of Gross Maya (Gross Material Region), Electro-magnetic forces dominate Region of Subtle Maya (Subtle Material Region) and Gravitational Force dominates Pure Spiritual Region.<br
/> This is the only Truth which can be verified scientifically and can be termed as ‘higher theory for everything’.  This also supports the statement of Sir Sahabji Maharaj that ‘the  goal of science – Truth; the goal of philosophy – Ultimate Reality; and the goal of religion – God’ are the three names of same supreme essence.<br
/> Many things are common between Current of Consciousness and Gravitational Wave.<br
/> 1. Current of consciousness can not be seen by any means and gravitational wave can also not be seen.<br
/> 2. Current of consciousness is the weakest force on earth. Its strength goes on increasing on higher regions. Gravitational force is also very weak on earth and strong on Sun and even more stronger on black holes.<br
/> 3 Tendency of both current of consciousness and gravitational waves are towards their source or centre.<br
/> 4. Current of consciousness and gravitational force are both regarded as the creater of all the celestial and terrestrial bodies of the whole universe. They are also sustainer of these and when they turn back towards their source or centre the whole universe will collapse.<br
/> Hence it can be assumed that the source of current of consciousness and gravitational wave is the same i.e. God or ultimate creator.<br
/> This theory is based on scientific deduction. In scientific terms it can be said that the ‘gravitons’ are the elementaryparticle which was issued forth in the beginning of the creation accompanying with sound ‘Radha’<br
/> =====================================<br
/> Yoga (Application) which was based on the control of the body physically and implied that a perfect control over the body and the senses led to knowledge of the ultimate reality.  A detailed anatomical knowledge of the human body was necessary to the advancement of yoga and therefore those practising  yoga had to keep in touch with medical knowledge. (Romila Thapar, A History of India, volume one).</p><p>I suggest :  Mind and brain are two distinct things.  Brain is anatomical entity whereas mind is functional entity.  Mind can be defined as the function of autonomic nervous system (ANS).  It is claimed that mind can be brought under conscious control through the practice of meditation.  But how?  ANS is largely under hypothalamic control which is situated very close to optic chiasma (sixth chakra or ajna chakra).  Protracted practice of concentration to meditate at this region brings functions of ANS say mind under one’s conscious control.</p><p>ANS is further divided into parasympathetic nervous system (PSNS) and sympathetic nervous system (SNS). On the basis of these facts  I have discovered a mathematical relationship for spiritual quotient (S.Q.).  Spiritual Quotient can be expressed mathematically as the ratio of Parasympathetic dominance to Sympathetic dominance.  PSNS dominates during meditative calm and SNS dominates during stress.  In this formula we assign  numerical values to the physiological parameters activated or suppressed during autonomic mobilization and put in the formula to describe the state of mind of an individual and also infer his/her level of consciousness.</p><p>Protracted practice of meditation under qualified guidance will help to manage all sort of psychological problems.</p><p>Emotional Quotient can also be expressed mathematically as the product of I.Q. and Wisdom Factor.</p><p>Anirudh Kumar Satsangi</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Heatherrrrr</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46365</link> <dc:creator>Heatherrrrr</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2008 00:31:12 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46365</guid> <description>Just wanted to say thanks a lot for the non-jargoned explanation. Very interesting!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just wanted to say thanks a lot for the non-jargoned explanation. Very interesting!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Steve</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46355</link> <dc:creator>Steve</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 23:08:27 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46355</guid> <description>If there was a black hole at the center of our galaxy, it must at some time eclipse our view of something.Lets say we could not see Venus, but our math told us it was there.  We would be able to verify its existence because it would block our view of what is behind it.  Over time, we could determine its exact size.This should be true of black holes as well.  I have never heard of this happening.  Since we are tracking stars at the center of the galaxy, we should be able to &#039;see&#039; the black hole too, if it were there.  It is unreasonable to believe that a black hole has no diameter (a singularity).  All the sucked in matter can not occupy no space at all.  And everything I have read says that they do in fact have diameter.In short there is a simple explanation.  Black Hole Do Not Exist!!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If there was a black hole at the center of our galaxy, it must at some time eclipse our view of something.</p><p>Lets say we could not see Venus, but our math told us it was there.  We would be able to verify its existence because it would block our view of what is behind it.  Over time, we could determine its exact size.</p><p>This should be true of black holes as well.  I have never heard of this happening.  Since we are tracking stars at the center of the galaxy, we should be able to &#039;see&#039; the black hole too, if it were there.  It is unreasonable to believe that a black hole has no diameter (a singularity).  All the sucked in matter can not occupy no space at all.  And everything I have read says that they do in fact have diameter.</p><p>In short there is a simple explanation.  Black Hole Do Not Exist!!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Steven (Not Steve) :)</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46145</link> <dc:creator>Steven (Not Steve) :)</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 15:08:57 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46145</guid> <description>Rey Says:
December 10th, 2008 at 2:47 am
&quot; we all are moving at the rate of almost the speed of light but since no one notices it &quot;#  john mendenhall Says:
December 10th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Where did you ever get such an idea?john mendenhall I am sure Rey got the idea, that relative from the other side of the Universe we are moving at the rate of almost the speed of light.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rey Says:<br
/> December 10th, 2008 at 2:47 am<br
/> &#034; we all are moving at the rate of almost the speed of light but since no one notices it &#034;</p><p>#  john mendenhall Says:<br
/> December 10th, 2008 at 10:17 am<br
/> Where did you ever get such an idea?</p><p>john mendenhall I am sure Rey got the idea, that relative from the other side of the Universe we are moving at the rate of almost the speed of light.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: tacitus</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46088</link> <dc:creator>tacitus</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:35:55 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46088</guid> <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;Anyway, supposing all this theory is real… Doesn&#039;t 4 million solar masses seem kinda wimpy?? I am sure I have read about these SMBs being billions of solar masses???I&#039;m hardly an expert or a devote believer but it makes sense that this mass should be in there (in some form) somewhere… Why is the Milky Way so wimpy??&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
It&#039;s probably a lot to do with the history of the Milky Way.  If our galaxy hasn&#039;t been involved in many collisions with other galaxies then there&#039;s probably less chance for a really humongous supermassive black hole to form.  After the Milk Way collides with Andromeda in a couple of billion years, we will have a much bigger black hole at the center of the merged galaxies!</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><i>Anyway, supposing all this theory is real… Doesn&#039;t 4 million solar masses seem kinda wimpy?? I am sure I have read about these SMBs being billions of solar masses???</p><p>I&#039;m hardly an expert or a devote believer but it makes sense that this mass should be in there (in some form) somewhere… Why is the Milky Way so wimpy??</i></p></blockquote><p>It&#039;s probably a lot to do with the history of the Milky Way.  If our galaxy hasn&#039;t been involved in many collisions with other galaxies then there&#039;s probably less chance for a really humongous supermassive black hole to form.  After the Milk Way collides with Andromeda in a couple of billion years, we will have a much bigger black hole at the center of the merged galaxies!</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: tacitus</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-46087</link> <dc:creator>tacitus</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:25:48 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-46087</guid> <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;Antti o:Our speed would accelarate endlessly until we hit the center of non-existance.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Nope, you would not accelerate at all since you are already traveling at the speed of light, which is the cosmic speed limit.  And the center is not &quot;non-existence&quot;, it is a singularity -- a point in space-time -- that has mass.&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;i&gt;So our speed would be … zero. So our energy would be … zero. E=mc2. If energy is matter, and energy is matter. No energy, no matter, no gravitational center, no black hole.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Since your assumptions are wrong, your conclusions are wrong too.  There is much we still don&#039;t know about black holes, but the contradiction you describe does not exist.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p><i>Antti o:Our speed would accelarate endlessly until we hit the center of non-existance.</i></p></blockquote><p>Nope, you would not accelerate at all since you are already traveling at the speed of light, which is the cosmic speed limit.  And the center is not &#034;non-existence&#034;, it is a singularity &#8212; a point in space-time &#8212; that has mass.</p><blockquote><p><i>So our speed would be … zero. So our energy would be … zero. E=mc2. If energy is matter, and energy is matter. No energy, no matter, no gravitational center, no black hole.</i></p></blockquote><p>Since your assumptions are wrong, your conclusions are wrong too.  There is much we still don&#039;t know about black holes, but the contradiction you describe does not exist.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Phil</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45969</link> <dc:creator>Phil</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:18:43 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45969</guid> <description>Wow!!  People get pretty worked up by Black Holes it seems.Anyway, supposing all this theory is real... Doesn&#039;t 4 million solar masses seem kinda wimpy??  I am sure I have read about these SMBs being billions of solar masses???I&#039;m hardly an expert or a devote believer but it makes sense that this mass should be in there (in some form) somewhere... Why is the Milky Way so wimpy??</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow!!  People get pretty worked up by Black Holes it seems.</p><p>Anyway, supposing all this theory is real&#8230; Doesn&#039;t 4 million solar masses seem kinda wimpy??  I am sure I have read about these SMBs being billions of solar masses???</p><p>I&#039;m hardly an expert or a devote believer but it makes sense that this mass should be in there (in some form) somewhere&#8230; Why is the Milky Way so wimpy??</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Antti o</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45968</link> <dc:creator>Antti o</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:45:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45968</guid> <description>Ok. Suppose there are black holes in the universe, how unlikely the theory is. Let&#039;s suppose that we could ride on a beam of light ( at the speed of light) and we would cross this magical line of &quot;event horizon&quot;. There a huge gravitational center waiting us. Our speed would accelarate endlessly until we hit the center of non-existance. So our speed would be ... zero. So our energy would be ... zero. E=mc2. If energy is matter, and energy is matter. No energy, no matter, no gravitational center, no black hole.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ok. Suppose there are black holes in the universe, how unlikely the theory is. Let&#039;s suppose that we could ride on a beam of light ( at the speed of light) and we would cross this magical line of &#034;event horizon&#034;. There a huge gravitational center waiting us. Our speed would accelarate endlessly until we hit the center of non-existance. So our speed would be &#8230; zero. So our energy would be &#8230; zero. E=mc2. If energy is matter, and energy is matter. No energy, no matter, no gravitational center, no black hole.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Astrofiend</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45943</link> <dc:creator>Astrofiend</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 04:58:25 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45943</guid> <description>&quot;There isn&#039;t the merest suggestion of anything beyond this in any physics experiment or observation ever made.&quot;Barring the quantum domain of course.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#034;There isn&#039;t the merest suggestion of anything beyond this in any physics experiment or observation ever made.&#034;</p><p>Barring the quantum domain of course.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Astrofiend</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45942</link> <dc:creator>Astrofiend</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 04:52:08 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45942</guid> <description>Come on Oils - look him up in wikipedia and check out some of his ideas! He was a frigging shrink, not a cosmologist!Immanuel Velikovsky was a man that took his own world view as a given (based upon mythology, religious and other dogmatic viewpoints) and then picked and chose his &#039;evidence&#039; to support it, completely ignoring anything that didn&#039;t fit. It is the opposite of  basing his world view on the evidence at hand as one has to if they are to claim to be doing science.We know there is electromagnetic phenomena in the universe - it is well understood and completely described by classical EM theory and special relativity. There isn&#039;t the merest suggestion of anything beyond this in any physics experiment or observation ever made.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come on Oils &#8211; look him up in wikipedia and check out some of his ideas! He was a frigging shrink, not a cosmologist!</p><p>Immanuel Velikovsky was a man that took his own world view as a given (based upon mythology, religious and other dogmatic viewpoints) and then picked and chose his &#039;evidence&#039; to support it, completely ignoring anything that didn&#039;t fit. It is the opposite of  basing his world view on the evidence at hand as one has to if they are to claim to be doing science.</p><p>We know there is electromagnetic phenomena in the universe &#8211; it is well understood and completely described by classical EM theory and special relativity. There isn&#039;t the merest suggestion of anything beyond this in any physics experiment or observation ever made.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: tacitus</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45937</link> <dc:creator>tacitus</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 03:29:04 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45937</guid> <description>Not sure if you&#039;re quoting Immanuel Velikovsky as some kind of authority on cosmology, but it&#039;s clear from his record that he was a crank.  A precursor to people like Richard Hoagland and Tom Van Flandren, perhaps, and just as wrong.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not sure if you&#039;re quoting Immanuel Velikovsky as some kind of authority on cosmology, but it&#039;s clear from his record that he was a crank.  A precursor to people like Richard Hoagland and Tom Van Flandren, perhaps, and just as wrong.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: OilIsMastery</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45929</link> <dc:creator>OilIsMastery</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:33:28 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45929</guid> <description>&quot;But then if there were events of this character, discharges between planets and so on, I put one of the most outrageous claims before the scientific readers, that in the solar system and in the universe generally, not just gravitation and inertia are the two forces of action but that also electricity and magnetism are participating in the mechanism, so the Lord was not just a watchmaker. The universe is not free of those forces with which the man makes his life easy already more than 100 years. They were unknown practically or little known in the time of Newton in the second half of the 17th century. But today we know that electricity and magnetism, these are not just small phenomena that we can repeat as a kind of a little trick in the lab, that they permeate every field from neurology into botony and chemistry and astronomy should not be free...and it was admitted by authorities that this was the most outrageous point in my claims. But the vengeance came early and swiftly. In 1960, already in 1955, radio noises from Jupiter were detected and this was one of the crucial tests that I offered for the truth of my theory. In 1958, the magnetosphere was discovered around the Earth, another claim. In 1960, the interplanetary magnetic field was discovered and solar plasma, so-called solar wind, moving rapidly along the magnetic lines and then it was discovered that the electromagnetic field of the Earth reaches the moon .&quot; -- Immanuel Velikovsky, cosmologist, 1966</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#034;But then if there were events of this character, discharges between planets and so on, I put one of the most outrageous claims before the scientific readers, that in the solar system and in the universe generally, not just gravitation and inertia are the two forces of action but that also electricity and magnetism are participating in the mechanism, so the Lord was not just a watchmaker. The universe is not free of those forces with which the man makes his life easy already more than 100 years. They were unknown practically or little known in the time of Newton in the second half of the 17th century. But today we know that electricity and magnetism, these are not just small phenomena that we can repeat as a kind of a little trick in the lab, that they permeate every field from neurology into botony and chemistry and astronomy should not be free&#8230;and it was admitted by authorities that this was the most outrageous point in my claims. But the vengeance came early and swiftly. In 1960, already in 1955, radio noises from Jupiter were detected and this was one of the crucial tests that I offered for the truth of my theory. In 1958, the magnetosphere was discovered around the Earth, another claim. In 1960, the interplanetary magnetic field was discovered and solar plasma, so-called solar wind, moving rapidly along the magnetic lines and then it was discovered that the electromagnetic field of the Earth reaches the moon .&#034; &#8212; Immanuel Velikovsky, cosmologist, 1966</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Excalibur</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45927</link> <dc:creator>Excalibur</dc:creator> <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:15:56 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45927</guid> <description>Steve:&gt;&gt;One day people will look back at these theories and get a good laugh.I lolled... at Steve... right now :P</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve:</p><p>&gt;&gt;One day people will look back at these theories and get a good laugh.</p><p>I lolled&#8230; at Steve&#8230; right now <img
src='http://www.universetoday.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Astrofiend</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45916</link> <dc:creator>Astrofiend</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 23:45:55 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45916</guid> <description>&quot;Our math tells us so. Is that what &#039;real&#039; science is?&quot;No, if math tells us something, then that is just math. It is in comparing our theory (with math as a core component) to observation/experiment and trying to prove these theories wrong all the time that it becomes science.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#034;Our math tells us so. Is that what &#039;real&#039; science is?&#034;</p><p>No, if math tells us something, then that is just math. It is in comparing our theory (with math as a core component) to observation/experiment and trying to prove these theories wrong all the time that it becomes science.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Geoff</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45904</link> <dc:creator>Geoff</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 22:00:39 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45904</guid> <description>Reference hiro&#039;s comment og Dec 10 @ 12:04 pm
NH = 9 years to travel ~35AU, say 4AU/year - at that rate, it would take ~140 years to reach the solar focal point (550AU) around 2146AD.
If a spacecraft were launched in say 2025AD moving 20 times faster, it could reach this region in ~7 years or 2032.
Don&#039;t hold your breath on 10x increases in speed per decade any time soon. More like launch in 2050 and be there in 2057. It would be nice, though whenever we could get there.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Reference hiro&#039;s comment og Dec 10 @ 12:04 pm<br
/> NH = 9 years to travel ~35AU, say 4AU/year &#8211; at that rate, it would take ~140 years to reach the solar focal point (550AU) around 2146AD.<br
/> If a spacecraft were launched in say 2025AD moving 20 times faster, it could reach this region in ~7 years or 2032.<br
/> Don&#039;t hold your breath on 10x increases in speed per decade any time soon. More like launch in 2050 and be there in 2057. It would be nice, though whenever we could get there.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: robbb</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45903</link> <dc:creator>robbb</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 21:50:57 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45903</guid> <description>there is an awful lot of evidence in favor of the standard model when it comes to black holes.i am always intrigued by legitimate alternative ideas to the SM, but agree with tacitus that just b/c SM can&#039;t account for everything we observe is no reason it is still not generally accepted.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>there is an awful lot of evidence in favor of the standard model when it comes to black holes.</p><p>i am always intrigued by legitimate alternative ideas to the SM, but agree with tacitus that just b/c SM can&#039;t account for everything we observe is no reason it is still not generally accepted.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: tacitus</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45893</link> <dc:creator>tacitus</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:09:33 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45893</guid> <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;How foolish of me. It is obviously better to resort to things like Black Holes, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Inflation, Neutron Stars, etc.. We can&#039;t detect any of this stuff, and it violates the laws of physics… but we &#039;know&#039; it is there. &lt;b&gt;Our math tells us so. Is that what &#039;real&#039; science is?&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;Absolutely!  That&#039;s what&#039;s so amazing about the Universe and our ability to comprehend it.  Black holes were theorized long before any evidence for them was discovered.  The mathematical theory behind them was compelling and undeniable, so it was no surprise (but still very exciting) when the observational evidence started to roll in.  Neutron stars are similarly solidly based on mathematical and physics foundations. And we have already found and observed numerous neutron stars (pulsars).Dark matter and dark energy are still more speculative, but the evidence for the real presence of dark matter is coming in faster all the time.  But even the idea of dark energy, which is the most speculative of the lot (and could be superseded by a better theory in time) is still a lot better founded than the poorly developed EU theory.EU cannot explain the presence of cosmic background radiation whereas standard cosmology not only explains it, it predicted it.  The same goes for other properties of observed space, such as the arrangement of galactic clusters.Demands by EU supporters that they should be taken seriously are based on the fallacy that if the currently established theory cannot explain everything then we should toss out the baby with the bathwater and start again with a completely new theory.  The same argument is made by creationists and ID theorists against evolution.  But you cannot just pick on the few problematic areas still to be worked out and ignore the mountains of evidence that is all explained exquisitely by standard theory.The bottom line is that if you believe EU better explains the universe, prove it.  Produce the evidence and the scientists will come around eventually.  The Big Bang theory was laughed at for years before it cosmologists had to accept that it was superior to alternative models.  Geologists poo-pooed the idea of plate tectonics for decades before the mounting evidence compelled them to accept it.  Maybe, against all the odds, EU will be proved correct, but it won&#039;t be because its proponents just sit in the wings sniping and griping at the standard theory&#039;s inability to explain absolutely everything in the Universe yet.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>How foolish of me. It is obviously better to resort to things like Black Holes, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Inflation, Neutron Stars, etc.. We can&#039;t detect any of this stuff, and it violates the laws of physics… but we &#039;know&#039; it is there. <b>Our math tells us so. Is that what &#039;real&#039; science is?</b></p></blockquote><p>Absolutely!  That&#039;s what&#039;s so amazing about the Universe and our ability to comprehend it.  Black holes were theorized long before any evidence for them was discovered.  The mathematical theory behind them was compelling and undeniable, so it was no surprise (but still very exciting) when the observational evidence started to roll in.  Neutron stars are similarly solidly based on mathematical and physics foundations. And we have already found and observed numerous neutron stars (pulsars).</p><p>Dark matter and dark energy are still more speculative, but the evidence for the real presence of dark matter is coming in faster all the time.  But even the idea of dark energy, which is the most speculative of the lot (and could be superseded by a better theory in time) is still a lot better founded than the poorly developed EU theory.</p><p>EU cannot explain the presence of cosmic background radiation whereas standard cosmology not only explains it, it predicted it.  The same goes for other properties of observed space, such as the arrangement of galactic clusters.</p><p>Demands by EU supporters that they should be taken seriously are based on the fallacy that if the currently established theory cannot explain everything then we should toss out the baby with the bathwater and start again with a completely new theory.  The same argument is made by creationists and ID theorists against evolution.  But you cannot just pick on the few problematic areas still to be worked out and ignore the mountains of evidence that is all explained exquisitely by standard theory.</p><p>The bottom line is that if you believe EU better explains the universe, prove it.  Produce the evidence and the scientists will come around eventually.  The Big Bang theory was laughed at for years before it cosmologists had to accept that it was superior to alternative models.  Geologists poo-pooed the idea of plate tectonics for decades before the mounting evidence compelled them to accept it.  Maybe, against all the odds, EU will be proved correct, but it won&#039;t be because its proponents just sit in the wings sniping and griping at the standard theory&#039;s inability to explain absolutely everything in the Universe yet.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: tacitus</title><link>http://www.universetoday.com/2008/12/10/beyond-any-reasonable-doubt-a-supermassive-black-hole-lives-in-centre-of-our-galaxy/comment-page-3/#comment-45884</link> <dc:creator>tacitus</dc:creator> <pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 19:33:53 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.universetoday.com/?p=22104#comment-45884</guid> <description>&lt;blockquote&gt;Tacitus, according to you a supermassive black hole has no more gravitational attraction than a yellow dwarf? Why is that? Because there is no such thing as gravity?Oils. That&#039;s not what I said.  In the example I gave, I suggested that if the Sun was instantaneously replaced by a black hole &lt;b&gt;of the same mass&lt;/b&gt; then the Earth&#039;s orbit would not be affected at all.  A black hole the same mass of the Sun is not a supermassive black hole.Obviously, if a supermassive black hole was to replace the Sun, Earth would probably be torn apart in seconds -- but that would be true even if a supermassive star was put there also (not that one that massive can exist).The point is that it&#039;s the mass of the object that&#039;s important when it comes to the gravitational effect it has, it doesn&#039;t matter if it&#039;s a red giant, white dwarf, or black hole.  If they all have the same mass, then any planets in orbit will move around them exactly the same way (assuming they are far enough away not to be burned up, of course!).</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>Tacitus, according to you a supermassive black hole has no more gravitational attraction than a yellow dwarf? Why is that? Because there is no such thing as gravity?</p><p>Oils. That&#039;s not what I said.  In the example I gave, I suggested that if the Sun was instantaneously replaced by a black hole <b>of the same mass</b> then the Earth&#039;s orbit would not be affected at all.  A black hole the same mass of the Sun is not a supermassive black hole.</p><p>Obviously, if a supermassive black hole was to replace the Sun, Earth would probably be torn apart in seconds &#8212; but that would be true even if a supermassive star was put there also (not that one that massive can exist).</p><p>The point is that it&#039;s the mass of the object that&#039;s important when it comes to the gravitational effect it has, it doesn&#039;t matter if it&#039;s a red giant, white dwarf, or black hole.  If they all have the same mass, then any planets in orbit will move around them exactly the same way (assuming they are far enough away not to be burned up, of course!).</p></blockquote> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- This site's performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Dramatically improve the speed and reliability of your blog!

Learn more about our WordPress Plugins: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Minified using disk
Page Caching using disk (user agent is rejected)

Served from: php5-n117.wc2.dfw1.stabletransit.com @ 2010-03-21 09:28:46 -->