Black hole paradox and entanglement are fantasy ?

Top page (correct Bohr model including helium )
Big Bang theory is wrong.
Theory of Everything failed.
Gravitational wave is real ? (13/10/22)

Black hole is an illusion.

[ Black hole contradicts special relativity. ]

(Fig.1) You cannot escape from black hole !   Time stops !

As shown in this page, if we solve Einstein equation on the assumption that a spherical star exits, we can get Schwartzschild radius (= rg ) of black hole.
The surface of this radius is called "Event Horizon".
Strange to say, on this horizon, the time stops.
And once you enter the black hole across this horizon, you can NEVER escape out of the black hole !

Because, as shown in Fig.1, metric tensor of time and space become opposite.
As shown in this page, the metric tensor of the unchangeable sign is the heart of the relativity.
And braking time-like relation of this black hole clearly contradicts relativity.
So Einstein never believed this unrealistic black hole.

[ Fatal paradoxes of special and general relativity show black hole doesn't exist. ]

(Fig.2) Fatal paradox of relativity → black hole is wrong.

For example, in GPS time clock, they insist those times need to be corrected using both general and special relativity.
But basically, these time concepts of relativity includes fatal ( twin ) paradox. as shown in this page.
Because, from the viewpoint of one GPS (= A ), the time of another GPS (= B ) is delayed, because B is moving.
But from another GPS (= B ), the time of GPS (= A ) moving faster is always delayed.

And as shown in this page, special relativity includes fatal paradoxes (= Trouton-Noble, right-angle lever ).
As most people feel, they (= textbooks and top journals ) are hiding these true paradoxes.
( So we rarely see these true paradoxes in various bulletin board, books and websites. )

[ Stringent tests of general relativity is very doubtful. ]

(Fig.3) Bending light and Mercury's precession really proves general relativity ?

Bending light by the gravity of the sun proved the general relativity, they insist.
But this explanation contradicts the gravitational lens of dark matter.
They insist lights are bent by the unknown dark matter.
Dark matter was introduced to explain the discrepancy between experimental results and general relativity.
So which is the cause of bending light, general relativity or dark matter ?? This is strange.

And they insist the precession of Mercury's orbit can be explained by general relativity.
But this discrepancy is ONLY 43/3600 degrees per 100 years !
Different from the usual laboratory experiments, these stringent tests of general relativity cannot be stringent due to various unknown effects such as dark matters and many-body effects.

[ Light is just bent by the gravity "g" like other objects. ]

(Fig.3') Equivalence principle → Light's acceleration is "g", too.

When an observer is free falling to the earth obeying the gravity, the light he sees acts as that of ( special relativity's ) inertial frame ( left of Fig.3' ), according to general relativity.
This means when the observer is at rest with respect to the earth, the light is bent by 1/2 gt2 to the earth, like other objects.

The same acceleration of "g" means light is also influenced by the common earth aether.
If you assume "earth aether" dragged by the earth, you don't need to artificially introduce other dark matters.

(Fig.4) Maximum speed in "aether" can explain Sommerfeld's fine structure.

Story about precession of Mercury reminds me of Bohr-Sommerfeld model's fine structure.
As shown this page, classical orbit precesses a little, when we suppose some maximum speed (= c ) in the aether.

It is natural that we think some maximum speed exists even in the usual classical mechanics.
For example, when some object is falling, its final velocity becomes constant due to the resistance of the air.
This final maximum speed of the classical mechanics can explain heavier relativistic mass naturally.

(Fig.5) One typical example of "doubtful" stringent test of general relativity.

Here is a typical example, which shows stringent tests of general relativity is very doubtful.

In some top journal ( Science, 2013. ), we see the results that dwarf star, which is 7000-light-year far away, emits illusory gravitational waves, loses energy, and changes its orbital period slightly (= only 8 microsecond per year ! ).
As you feel, it is impossible that we exclude all other effects such as unknown dark matter, gravitational forces of many other stars.

Even on the earth, we cannot know the detailed history 7000 years ago.
How can you distinguish various infinite noises, unknown dark matter's effects on 7000-light-year signal path ?
It is impossible.
This recent experiment clearly proved researchers ( and top journal ) have "preconceived" notion that general relativty is absolutely right.

[ There are almost NO grounds for the black hole. ]

(Fig.6) There are almost no grounds for the black hole.

They observed that very strong light ( x-rays ) were emitted from the small area (= center of the galaxy ).
So they insist there is only black hole, that can explain this phenomina.
This is the ONLY experimental reason why they believe black hole, as shown in this site
( True mechanism of these jets remains unknown ! )

The distance between the earth and black hole candidate is so long that we cannot know even the precise orbital informations and masses such as companion stars. These are only speculations. Only emitted lights are everything.

Furthermore, they easily jump to a conclusion that rapid change of X ray luminosity means very small area emitting strong X lays, as shown in this site.
But, for example, even on the earth, there are different kinds of light sources emitting different lights.
So we cannot say it is small area ONLY from this fact.

(Fig.6')   Time dilation on event horizon → Time stops !   NO black hole is formed.

One of comments inside the article " Stephen Hawking: There are NO black holes " says,
due to time dilation, such an large dense mass would take an indefinite amount of time to become a black hole, which means black hole doesn't exist.

According to the current theory, as we come closer to black hole, time is more dilated due to the strong gravity.
Strange to say, on the event horizon (= Schwartzchild radius ), the time stops ! ( from our viewpoint. ), as shown in this site.
If so, all dusts falling into black hole, becomes indefinitely slower, and cannot reach black hole, which means black hole cannot be formed. Furthermore, slower speed of dusts means NO powers to emit strong X rays.
This is clearly self-contradiction.

[ Dark matter means failure of general relativity. ]

(Fig.7) Rejecting "aether" started fantasied cosmology.

The recent experiments showed that plasma gas of high temperature exist inside galaxy, and their total amounts exceeded the total mass of the galaxy.
These experiments clearly proved that many galaxies are floating inside plasma gas.

And, general relativity can NOT explain rotations of galaxy (= flat rotation curve problem ).
Rotation speed of statrs near edge of galaxy is much faster than that of general relativity (such as black hole ).
Adjusting their stories to fit these facts, unkown dark matter needed to be "artificially" created .

But as you feel, if we admit "ether", we can explain naturally all about dark matter, black hole (= ether friction at the center ), plasma gas, dark matter halo and microwave background.

[ Rejecting "aether" started "fantasied" cosmology. ]

(Fig.8) Black hole paradox and faster-than-light inflation.

As shown this page, rejecting aether started fantasied consmology such as faster-than-light inflation and expanding universe.
Though they denied aether in the vacuum, they created many fictional matters such as dark energy, matter, and virtual particles (= quantum fluctuation ) filling all space, instead of aether.

This is clearly self-contradiction.
And as seen in black hole information ( firewall ) paradoxes in the latter section, the recent arguments about the black hole paradoxes ( and entanglement ) are all very unrealistic.
I want ordinary people to know the sad fact that even top physicists are working at these imaginary concepts even in 21th century.

[ Black hole has an eating disorder ? → Black hole doesn't exist from the beginning. ]

(Fig.8') Black hole cannot swallow anything. ← illusion !

A long-standing mystery has been why most super massive black holes (SMBH) at the center of galaxies have such a low accretion rate.
(= they swallow very little of the cosmic gases and act as if they are on a severe diet. )

This explanation is very strange, because if they cannot swallow anything, it contradicts the definition of black holes !
The present theories insist that the winds of gases around black hole is too strong and too hot for the black hole to swallow ( Science, 2013 ).

But I think these reasons are very artificial and ad-hoc.
These results clearly indicate that black hole is an illusion, and just some "aether friction" at the galaxy center.
( See also this section. )

Black hole information paradox is so important ?

[ Black hole entropy and area of event horizon.]

(Fig.9) Black hole abosorbs something → its entropy increases.

If black hole swallows some things and all the informations about those things vanish, it clearly contradicts the law of thermodynamics.
According to thermodynamics, entropy always increases.
To explain this contradiction, they introduced black hole entropy, which is proportional to the area of event horizon.

As shown this page, string theories have infinite kinds of particles, so it cannot predict anything.
They cleverly used these infinite kinds of strings to explain increased entropy of black hole ( holographic principle ).
Of course, these theories ( including LQG ) are only speculation.

[ Hawking radiation and virtual particles. ]

(Fig.10) Virtual particles can explain black hole radiation ?

If the black hole satisfies thermodynamics, it needs to have some temperature.
So high temperature black hole gradually loses energies.
But the things absorbed into black hole can NEVER escape from black hole.
To explain this discrepancy, they used virtual particles.

Virtual particles disobey relativity, they can suddenly appear from the vacuum !
To satisfy energy conservation, one virtual particle has negative energy, and another has positive energy.
And only particle having negative energy is absorbed into black hole, so the black hole loses energy, and vanishes in the end (= evaporation ).

Another particle having positive energy go outwards (= Hawking radiation ).
But this explanation cannot be understood.
Even antiparticles have positive mass (energy), so why their energies change into negative ?
Considering equilibrium, it is unnatural and too good to be true that only negative energies are absorbed.

[ Information paradox. ]

(Fig.10) Original informations (= A ) of black hole vanish. = Paradox.

If black hole vanishes, all original informations (= A) of black hole vanish, too.
As you see in Fig.10, the informations (= B ) of emitted virtual particles are different from original informations A.
So this contradicts quantum mechanical unitary laws. (= information paradox. )
Because the original informations (= states A ) spontaneously vanish, and change into other things (= B ).

[ Entanglements are very "convenient" tools. ]

(Fig.11) Entanglements are really happening inside black hole ?

To avoid vanishing informations, they use, what we call, entanglement. ( = very convenient tool ! )
If informations A and B are entangled and related to each other , their original informations A can be conserved ( in B ).
But as shown this page, this nonlocal entanglement is just an illusion caused by "imaginary" photons.

And it is inconsistent to link relativistic concept of black hole to faster-than-light entanglement.
As most people feel, at this moment, these theories have already lost touch with reality.

(Fig.12) Quantum mechanics dislikes " multi-entanglements " ??

If the vacuum is divided into two virtual particles, these two virtual particles (= informations A and C ) must be entangled with each other.
If so, informations B are entangled with both A and C (= multi-entanglements ).
According to their theories, quantum mechanics adopt "monogamy of entanglement", in which B can be entangled only with A or C.
( So B cannot be entangled with both A and C. )

[ Firewall paradox. ]

(Fig.13) Breaking B-C entanglement by firewalls → Violating equivalence principle

To keep monogamy of entanglement, they introduced very strange idea of firewalls.
They insist that the event horizon is a ring of fire that burns anything falling through.
If C is burned, and entanglement between B and C is broken, the single entanglement between A and B is conserved.
( So the original information A is conserved in B. )

But C is just free falling into black hole.
According to the equivalence principle of general relativity, free-falling things don't feel gravity, and are the same as things floating in empty space.
If firewall theory is correct, these firewalls spontaneously appear and burn only free-falling things.

This is called "firewall paradox", and there is controversy on this paradox even now.
I imagined that most ordinary people would be surprised that even top physicists in 21th century continue discussing these fictional and endless subjects even now.

[ Extradimension and black hole can be really created in accelerator ? ]

(Fig.13') Proof of black hole and extradimensions ?

The problem is that they try to detect fictional extradimensions and black hole in the accelerator even now !
To detect black hole, they try to detect Hawking radiation, in which various light and particles are emitted spherically.

And they insist only gravitons can enter extradimensions.
So if they can detect the violation of some evergy conservation, it means the proof of extradimentions !
Because gravitons might carry some energy into extradimensions. ( Why they so easily believe unreality ? )
( Or they try to detect Kaluza-Klein particle, which means extradimension, they insist. )

Unfortunately, the present unifying theory failed, and all they can do is to rely on imaginary extradimensions.
But in the present state (= string theory is the ONLY final theory ), they might find these fictional particles inside inifinite noises, which can be artificially sorted by computers, I'm afraid.

Entanglement is just an illusion.

[ If classical photons with the opposite polarizations bump into each filter .. ]

(Fig.14) Two classical photon's case.

Here we explain about the reason why entanglement is just a illusion.
Two classical photons with the opposite polarizations are flying in the opposite directions.
They bump into each filter, and photon A passes through filter A.
In this case of Fig.14, photon B passes through or reflected by filter B.

Because, the angle between the filter and photon B polarization is arbitrary α.
( When this α is not zero, B is reflected at the probability of sin2α )
But the experimental results are different from Fig.14.

(Fig.15) Two entangled photon's case ( they insisting ).

The experimental results showed that when photon A passes through filter A, the photon B always passes filter B.
So the combination of A -- B2 (= A pass, B reflect ) of Fig. 14 is NOT seen.
( Only A pass- B pass or A reflect- B reflect are seen ).

So they easily conclude that the instant photon A passes its filter A, some faster-than-light signal is transmitted to photon B, and photon B automatically changes its polarization to the same one as A, which passed the filter A.
( So due to this spooky link, the angle α of Fig.14 becomes automatically zero like Fig.15 before filter B ! )

If the arbitrary angle α becomes zero just before its filter B, photon B always passes the filter B.

(Fig.16) Both waves are split almost equally = not detected.

Of course, the entanglement of Fig.15 is unrealistic and imaginary.
Because these filters have very unnatural powers to change the polarization of another photon, which is very far away.

Trick is that they always use the word of "photon", NOT "electromagnetic wave".
If the photon is just a classical electromagnetic wave, photon can be divided at filter, and detected at detector, when its intensity is above some threshold.
( If light intensity is zero, it cannot be detected, so there are some lower limit of light intensity, which can be detected at detector. )

When light polarization turns in the oblique direction of blue shaded parts of Fig.16, this light is divided equally in each filter.
So, their light intensities at both pass and reflect sides become too weak to be detected.
( A and B have the opposite polarizations, these results becomes the same. )

(Fig.17) Both waves pass their filters ( ++ ) enough to be detected.

When the polarization axis of the photons A ( this axis is the same as the photon B, because they are parallel ) points toward ( ++ ) of Fig.17, both photons (= lights ) A and B pass each filter, and are detected as "photon particles".

Because these light can pass these filters enough to be detected (= reflected light is very weak, instead ).
The pass light intensity is I cos2α ( or I cos2β ). When the light polarization points to (++), this angle α (or β ) is near 0 degrees, so the pass intensity is strong enough.

(Fig.18) Both waves reflect ( - - ) enough to be detected.

And when the polarization axis of the photon points toward the ( -- ) of Fig.18, both photons A and B are reflected by the filters enough to be detected as "photon particles" (= passing light is very weak, instead ).
For example, the reflect light intensity is I sin2α.

When this angle α is near 90 degrees (= (--) part of Fig.18 ), reflected light intensity becomes strong enough.

In Fig.16-18, the results of the photon (= light ) A and B always become the same ! (= experimental results. )
It means that faster-than-light entanglement is just an illusion caused by the assumption that imaginary photon particle exists

[ Light "frequency" = oscillation inside "point" particle of photon ?? ]

(Fig.19) Frequency is wave's property NOT particle !

You often see the explanation that the photoelectric effect is related to photon's frequency, so it proved particle nature of photon.
But this explanation is completely inconsistent.
Because the frequency (= c/wavelength ) is just wave's nature !

How can you distinguish various different oscillating patterns inside point particle of photon.
( Though their velocities are always the same "c", and their masses are zero. )
Point particle means it has NO size, so we cannot know the frequency difference inside point particle photon.

(Fig.20) Point particle can collide with each other in photoelectric effect ??

In the actual experiments, the electron or proton always emit some polarized light ( left, right or linear ).
Again how point particle photon can be polarized. It is impossible !

And it is very unnatural that point particles of photon and electron can collide with each other so easily.
Even if you rely on string theory, this string is very tiny.
And classical electromagnetic wave is much more natural than 10-dimensional string theory.

[ All entanglements including atoms and photons are illusions. ]

(Fig.21) Faster-than-light entanglement ? Really ??

Basically, we must use some polarized light to manipulate or detect ion (atom)'s states.
So the entanglements dealing with atoms and ions can be explained by usual classical mechanical lights ( of course, "local" ).
This means that entanglements in atoms and ions are also illusions, and just local phenomena.

(Fig.22) Faster-than-light entanglement ? Really ?? - part II.

Also in case of electron hole entanglement, they use microwave or phase of superconductor.
When they detect these phases, they use some amplifier, which can detect only signals above some threshold.

And these entanglement using superconductors and ions have locality loophole, so we don't know they are really nonlocal (= faster-than-light ) phenomena.
See also this page and this page.

[ Why they "like" superpositions and many-worlds so much ? ]

(Fig.23) Right and left moving currents in Josephson junctions = many-worlds ??.

These kinds of physicists always want to link just classical mechanically mixed states to mysterious superpositions.
For example, when right and left directional currents are mixed in one circuit, they easily conclude that these mixed states are fantasied many-worlds !

As most people feel, these states (= mixed currents, two energy states, interference of two lights ) are just classical mechanically mixed states.

I think, they should use these highly developed ( superconductive ) technologies for more useful things ( NOT fantasied and unuseful entanglement ! )

Fantasied gravity theories → black hole is wrong.

[ Unruh effect is real ? → black hole entropy is real ? ]

(Fig.24) Accelerating thing radiates energy ? = Unruh effect ?

Hawking radiation is based on Unruh effect.
Though special relativity denied aether in the vacuum, the present cosmology needs many kinds of virtual particles in the vacuum.
( As I said many times, this is clearly self-contradiction. )

According to Unruh effect, from the accelerating observer (= ex. person free falling to black hole ), the vacuum around the black hole spontaneously causes virtual particles !
But if this theory is correct, it means non-accelerating charge radiates energy depending on the observer's movement ?
This is strange.

[ Why "imaginary" virtual particles are generated from the vacuum ?? ]

(Fig.25) Rindler coodinate = accelerating frame.

The point is that they introduced Rindler coordinate, which describes ( uniformly ) accelerating frame.
Fig.25 shows transformation from usual Minkowski (= inertial ) frame (= x, t ) to Rindler coordinate (= ξ τ ).
( "a" = acceleration. )

(Fig.26) Virtual particles = "mathematical" operators.

As shown in this page, the present quantum field theory adopt very abstract concept of creation and annihilation operators to express various particles.
These mathematical equations are so vague that they can interpret them too broadly.

Original Dirac ( or scalar ) particles were introduced to express real particles in the 4D Minkowski inertial frame.
But the present cosmology often uses this theory to express imaginary virtual particles in the vacuum ( ex. quantum fluctuation ).
So thse are very convenient tools !

(Fig.27) Quantum field theory in Rindler coordinate ??

The problem is that they applied the quantum field theory of Minkowski spacetime (= Fig.26 ) to accelerating Rindler coordinate in the same form.

As shown in Fig,27, bk is particle operator in the Rindler version.
But it is very strange that this form of Rindler version is the same as usual Minkowski frame, though "accelerating" is completely different from uniform velocity.

(Fig.28) Same commutation relation in Rindler coordinate ?

And they defined the common (anti)commutation relations of quantum field theory even in accelerating frame.
Of course, these definitions are only artificial definitions by our human beings , which does not mean the reality.

(Fig.29) Virtual particles created only in Rindler coordinate ?

Fig.29 upper shows the vacuum contains nothing, because the vacuum becomes zero when some annihilation operator acts on it.
But if we use the relations and transformation from Fig.25 to Fig.28, we can show new vacuum including created virtual particles is just equal to to usual Minkowski vacuum.

So they insist, in the accelerating frame, various virtual particles are spontaneously generated from the vacuum, which is the origin of Hawking radiation and temperature.
This strange phenomenon is caused by applying the common form even to the accelerating frame, as shown in Fig.27, 28.

(Fig.30) Particle at rest also radiates energy ?

A particle at rest is accelerating from the viewpoint of the accelerating observer.
So accoding to their theory, even if this particle at rest is not radiating, it radiates energy from the different observer !
This is clearly self-contradiction.

But they try to detect this Unruh effect even now in 21th century.
As I said, in the present condition (= string theory is the ONLY final theory ), they might find this imaginary thing from infinite noises, I'm afraid.

[ Equivalence principle → strings spontaneously disappear ?? ]

(Fig.31) Free falling observer can erase strings ?

According to the equivalence principle of general relativity, gravity acting on some object is erased by the free-falling observer.
This means gravity (= graviton, closed string of string theory ) can be erased by free-falling observer ?
This concept of string = gravity is very unreasonable and cannot be accepted.

[ Ads/CFT correspondence needs many artificial and imaginary definitions. ]

(Fig.32) Present theory about black hole "lost" tough with reality.

To avoid singularity, they insist a group of 5-dimensional D branes + 1-D strings inside 10-dimensional world means black hole entropy.
Of course, these definitions are only speculation and has nothing to do with reality.

Mathematically ( Not physically ), they found the relation between 5-dimensional D-brane and 4-dimensional conformal field theory (= Ads/ CFT correspondence ).
Projecting 5-dimensions to 4-dimensions are like "holography", they insist.

[ Present "fantasied" gravity theories show black hole is fantasy, too. ]

(Fig.33) Another world from black hole ? Big bounce ? Fantasy ?

In some theories, they insist black hole is linked to another world.
If so, black hole information paradox can be solved, they insist.

And according to loop quantum gravity ( LQG ), the loop is discrete and can avoid singularity.
Strange to say, according to LQG, the universe contracted before big bang, and then it expanded again (= Big bounce ).
As most ordinary people feel, these present gravity theories and cosmology are completely fantasied fields and full of ungrounded speculations.

As I said above, black hole and relativity themselves are wrong.
Of course, if black hole doesn't exist, strange singularity doesn't appear from the beginning.

Experimental facts for black hole are very doubtful.

[ It's dangerous for ordinary people to blindly believe "imaginary" black hole, influenced by various journals. ]

(Fig.34)   Three conditions must be satisfied to believe black hole.

The important point is that black hole can NEVER be observed directly, because black hole absorbs everything, they insist.
The only experimental fact of black hole is strong X rays and jets (= gas ) emitted from something ( ← black hole ?? ).
To believe black hole only from indirect and vague observations, it must pass three important examinations.

Of course, if ( special ) relativity includes fatal paradox, black hole based on relativity is wrong, too.
So black hole is an illusion, as I said many times. But as they hide these true paradoxes from textbooks, imaginary black hole appears in top journals even now.

Second, we must believe unrealistic "gravitational collapse", in which strong gravity reduces stars into a singularity.
If weak gravity is some macro effect combined with various forces, this unrealistic collapse wouldn't occur.
Third, if dark matter is some ether, we don't need black hole as x-ray source.
( Some "ether" frictions at centers of galaxies = strong x ray emission. )

[ Wrong interpretation of electromagnetic wave pulse causes illusory black hole. ]

(Fig.35)   Their desire changed true interpretations of electromagnetic pulse.

We cannot go and confirm whether black hole really exists.
So there are only some electromagnetic pulse and x rays as grounds for black hole.
First, they easily concluded that regular electromagnetic pulse means very dense neutron star, as shown in this page.
If unstable neutron star really exists, black hole can be generated when star's mass is heavier than that.

In case of quasar, they concluded very energetic quasar's size is unrealistically small, only from the fact that the changes in light luminosity are rapid.
( They insist when light luminosity changes rapidly, it means that star's volume is very small, less than that short periods. )
Small volume star emits very strong lights, so it means black hole, they concluded by force.

If gravitational collapse is unreal, and gravity has no power to shrink massive star to some singularity, the interpretation about neutrons star and black hole would be drastically changed.
And even if that quasar is very large, it can emit rapidly changing lights, due to some different activities at different spots inside quasar.
So clearly, their strong desire for black hole changed these experimental facts into wrong and imaginary directions.

[ We don't know clear mechanism of jets, accetion disk, and x ray emission in black hole. They are only "imaginary" things. ]

(Fig.36)   Black hole absorbs → Why "jet" blows in the opposite direction ??

The important point is that we do NOT know clear mechanisms of "jet" and x ray emissions in black hole, even now.
Though there are little things we know about black hole, they made a rash judgement.

The mass of black hole and companion star are estimated only from some light bending, though they are very far away from the earth ( more than ten thousand light years ).
Of course, if the lights are influenced by some space matters, while they travel for extremely long time, the interpretations about these masses need to be changed.
And jets (= gas or something ) are blowing in the opposite direction from black hole at almost light speed , though black hole has extremely strong absorbing power. ( This is clearly self-contradiction. )

There are many kinds of ad-hoc hypotheses about this unkown jet emission mechanism.
Some people say this is due to energetic photon emission, and some people say this is due to strong magnetic fields.
So we know almost nothing about this mysterious black hole ( and things around it ) , even now.
Various journals, web news and textbooks should NOT introduce this imaginary black hole, as if it's a real object.


2013/8/19 updated. Feel free to link to this site.