OT: No black holes? One scientist thinks so...

[Saber Cherry]

Starhawk said:
Again where does this "time freezes" crap come from, no one knows because no one ever has ever even seen a blackhole muchless measuerd time in there LOL face it scientists LOVE making theories that can never be disproven in their lifetimes

Hmmm... no. This is an obvious extrapolation of tested phenomenae. Time slows in certain situations, particularly at high (relative) speed and at high (relative) gravity. Synchronized clocks have demonstrate these. Extrapolation is very useful in science - for example, absolute zero has never been reached (nor can it be), but its temperature was discovered a long time ago by extrapolating from the behaviour of thermal expansion in gasses. Do you not believe in absolute zero?

Are you saying that the experiments were in error, or that they should not be used to extrapolate? I don't really understand your claim. It seems to be "Anything is crap unless it was specifically tested, such that dropping a 10 colored balls and watching them accelerate toward the floor gives no indication of what might happen if you drop an 11th ball of an untested color." But such a claim renders all useful knowledge invalid, and science useless, when it has been shown to be very useful... and thus the claim is false.

But that's just my guess of your claim. Could you clarify it?

[Starhawk]

Saber Cherry said:
But that's just my guess of your claim. Could you clarify it?

Yeah your way off considering there i a big difference between bouncing a ball and making a blackhole, we've never EVER made a black hole or anything remotely like what we "think" one would be, we can't even make a large enough ammount of gravity or speed to test the theory properly.
Considering the fact that they were using clocks some people may just argue that the clock's mechanisms suffered from the gravity/speed not actual time it's self.
Unless you stick something that ages or spoils rapidly and place it in a high grav/ high speed environment and see if it spoils at a slower rate you'll always have arguments that you can't "prove" time slows down at all.

My point is, theories are just that theories as in "totally unproven" if it was proven in any way or shape it would no longer be a theory but instead be a scientific fact.

And yes temperature wise absolute zero can be reached in deep space from what I've heard but again I don't think we know for sure so aw well heh....

No I don't think it's "crap" unless it's totally proven I just think we shouldn't take it as "a fact" until it is "a fact" considering how rapidly scientific theories are proven wrong, then right, then wrong again a few months afterward.

Edit:
Repaired Mangled Quote Tags.

[AngleWyrm]

Bumblebees can fly, whether we classify them as "aerodynamically sound" or not. You've probably seen them do it. An arrow shot from a bow does in fact strike something, even though it must first cross half the distance, then half that, and so on.

If the explanation does not agree with observations, then the explanation fails it's primary purpose--to explain.

I've never seen an alien space ship. I can say this is because all alien space ships have cloaking technology, and are therefore undetectable. If I preach this loud and long, sooner or later someone's going to take me into custody.