Black holes, infinite density and the Eternal God

  • Thread starter Thread starter Layp3rs0n
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I fail to see the connection between Black holes and an Eternal God…
Black holes are a huge Materiel object… God is a Spiritual Being… there is no comparison.
there is no connection between the two in any shape or form…
they are in two completely different dimensions …
 
Anyone who says that a black hole has infinite density is being rather loose with their language. The normal definition of a black hole is something along the lines of a region of space where gravity is so strong that no matter or energy can leave the region. Such a region of space can be represented mathematically as having at its center a singularity with infinite density, but it’s just a mathematical model. Since nothing can leave, the only actual observations we have are from outside such regions, not inside.

An analogy would be to examine an old locked trunk found in an attic to determine what it contains. We can shake it to hear what sound it makes, weigh it to get an idea of what might be inside, or even xray it. If we get no results whatsoever (no sound is recorded when it’s shaken, no weight is recorded when it’s weighed, no xrays come out the other side when it’s bombarded with them, etc) then all we can do is guess. We can formulate all kinds of hypotheses about what its contents may be, but all we have to go on is what we are able to observe from the outside. Unless we have a way to observe the inside of the trunk, there’s no way to know if any hypothesis we come up with accurately represents the reality of the inside of the trunk.

Stating that a black hole has infinite density is to assume that the theory of general relativity is the same whether or not the gravitational force of a particular region is strong enough to prevent matter or energy from leaving. We simply do not know if that is the case.
I agree. It is also a very interesting question.

The truth is that we do not really know the physics of the black hole. However, the point is that the black hole is still governed by the laws of physics - it may not be the physics we have understood so far today but physics nevertheless, that we could one day stick long enough around to discover.

God on the other hand stands (or sits or whatever) outside of the laws of physics or any other science. The black hole is still part of the space-time continuum as we understand the science today. God is not.

On the other hand, one can also say that God is in the black hole in the sense that God is in everything. Black holes are still part of the universe and the universe is defined as ‘everything that is there’. (multiverse? that could be another thread) So, God is in the black hole as well.

The point is that the black hole and anything object is of a totally different nature to God. It is not like salt and water. It is more like salt and feelings. One tangible and the other intangible.
 
There are numerous web sites available for people to learn about Galaxies ,Black holes,
and anything about astronomy that you can dream of… check universities for some of those have great Resources which are freely available…
Yes, there are. I have An Introduction to Stellar Astrophysics which is available for $143 from Amazon (far from free, but it’s a good book). The e-book is only $34, but don’t touch it; it used OCR for the digital conversion and the equations in the digital book are wrong (the OCR couldn’t tell the difference between super scripts and sub-scripts). But it is because of what I read in this book that I disagree with the use of black holes as having infinite density. Black holes are often modeled as point masses. When working with celestial mechanics planets, starts, and other bodies are also often modeled as point masses. If you work out the difference in the gravitational field of a point mass and a sphere you find there’s no difference, and the point mass is easier to work with when doing the math. So for the sake of simplicity these things are modeled as point masses. But because something is modeled as a point mass doesn’t infer that it is a point mass.
 
Yes, there are. I have An Introduction to Stellar Astrophysics which is available for $143 from Amazon (far from free, but it’s a good book). The e-book is only $34, but don’t touch it; it used OCR for the digital conversion and the equations in the digital book are wrong (the OCR couldn’t tell the difference between super scripts and sub-scripts). But it is because of what I read in this book that I disagree with the use of black holes as having infinite density. Black holes are often modeled as point masses. When working with celestial mechanics planets, starts, and other bodies are also often modeled as point masses. If you work out the difference in the gravitational field of a point mass and a sphere you find there’s no difference, and the point mass is easier to work with when doing the math. So for the sake of simplicity these things are modeled as point masses. But because something is modeled as a point mass doesn’t infer that it is a point mass.
This may be a very good point [without any mass] 😛 Sometimes things don’t turn out as they have been modeled.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top