Re: Fusion in the sun

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Black Holes VII ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by sol on May 14, 2002 at 08:55:42:

In Reply to: Re: Fusion in the sun posted by BillO on May 13, 2002 at 19:40:16:

BillO,

What is a better way then to describe this expansion from your viewpoint, and that of science?

I seem to be caught in the swirling nature of transformation, in the sense of momentum carried. When something collapses into itself(?) the kinetic nature of energy accumulated, causes the rolling and geometrical consideration of metric measurements, to detail a shift in the space occuppied, and what is this space filled with?

It includes mass and everything which falls into this blackhole and is transformed, and we see the energy built up, that causes the center to ignite in the generating waves, now moved, beyond the core, to have fueled the galaxies?

In this sense the idea of a singularity can never be considered, as it is a evolving process in terms of that expansion and contraction.

The notion then, of the center of the universe as, as containing the blackhole whose energy and considering the Scharwchild radius to equal the fifteen billions years of expansion contraction, must be held in a different way?

The cyclical universe scenario allows for the continue exchange of contraction and expansion, and where is the source of this movement? So we have created the big bang to account for this? If we take a different view here and the one supplied by Steinhart, we soon learn to understanding the very nature of the blackhole, must be seen from the interaction of the a deformation of that sheet?

At the same time, the moementum understood from this change in the geometrical understanding takes place. So we see how the contraction has now move the sheet to its opposite in terms of the expansion scenario and we learn to see how the blackhole went through a rotation of its own, to have given back, and through its knot(CY comparison here?) returned back to the universe what was taken?