Top (10/13/2024)
Einstein is false
(Fig.1) Time stopping on black hole prevents its formation.
Despite extremely long time research, black hole is still useless, because imaginary black holes are too far away from the earth to reach and confirm directly.
First, black hole cannot be formed. A clock time is said to magically slow down and stop by strong gravity at points close to black hole's surface called event horizon, as seen by outside distant observers ( this p.21 ) on the earth ( this-lower, this p.15-16 ).
The current mainstream theory claims that black holes were formed by a massive star collapsing and becoming compressed by its own gravity into black hole.
↑ But as the star becomes denser and closer to black hole, its clock time becomes significantly slower, and it would take almost infinite time to form black hole on which the time must completely stop seen from the outside observers (= hence, many researches claiming black holes were detected or photoed from the outside earth's telescopes are wrong ).
Stopping time means the collision of two black holes allegedly generating gravitational wave is also impossible, too.
Because if we suppose some long stick (or rod ) existing between two black holes which are coming closer being attracted to each other for collision, this stick must pass the event horizon at infinite speed far exceeding the light speed c contradicting Einstein relativity prohibiting any superluminal objects, because the clock time stops on the event horizon (= the stick can move some distance despite the stopping time, seen by the outside earth, which means the stick appears to move at infinite speed seen from the event horizon where the time stops. ).
The current mainstream "theory of everything" called string theory allegedly unifying Einstein relativity and quantum mechanics claims that (virtual) gravitons mediate gravitational forces.
But if so, these gravitons emitted from the black hole must pass through the event horizon where the time stops, which means gravitons also must stop at the surface (= event horizon ) of the black hole, and cannot escape into the outside of the black hole, hence, black hole cannot exert gravitational force on any outside objects. ← this means all the current researches trying to measure the strong black hole's gravity from the outside earth's telescopes are meaningless.
Some people say that gravitons may not exist, which causes another problem of No connection between black hole and gravity outside of the black hole.
Other people say the gravitons are Not real particles but just virtual particles which can unrealistically move faster than light contradicting Einstein.
↑ As a result, the black hole is self-contradictory and unreal, as Einstein himself theoretically rejected the existence of black hole.
(Fig.2) Black hole picture is fake.
Black hole, which absorbs everything, cannot be seen directly. Though the current physics claims the existence of black hole can be proved by watching the motion of stars allegedly orbiting around unseen black holes, it is untrue.
Because even stars around black holes in the galactic center cannot be seen hidden by very thick and dense clouds of dusts and gases ( this 4th paragraph ).
So the recent ( dubious ) black hole picture is fake or artificially-created, because No visible light can be detected near black hole due to very thick dusts. ← Not a real photo of unseen black hole.
This 4th-paragraph says
"These “photos” do Not, of course, directly show a black hole,.. They actually record portions of the flat pancake of hot plasma swirling around the black hole at high speeds.. its accelerating particles emit radio waves." ← Then why does this hot plasma avoid surrounding only the front of black hole's photo accidentally ? ← this is strange.
This original paper says (p.5, p.8-right-lower)
"Every imaging algorithm has a variety of free parameters
that can significantly affect the final image. We adopted a twostage imaging approach to control and evaluate biases in the
reconstructions from our choices of these parameters (= black hole photo is an artificial image based on freely-chosen parameters and algorithm for constructing artificial images )."
"it is more difficult to rule out alternatives to black holes in GR, because a shadow can be produced by any compact object with a spacetime characterized by unstable circular photon orbits. ← It means there are possibilities that other irrelevant objects just blocking the light (= so seen "black" ) were mistaken for (fictional) black hole's shadow."
To discover a black hole, we have to know both the mass and size of a black hole, which must be an extremely dense star.
For example, the radius of such a dense black hole with the same mass as the Sun or Earth must be extremely small = 3.0 km, or only 9mm.
The present astronomy relies on the ungrounded assumption that the rapid brightness fluctuation of X ray allegedly emitted from black hole may tell us how small the black hole is ( this 2~3rd-paragraphs, this 3rd paragraph, this p.1-3rd-paragraph ).
This 3rd-last paragraph claims
"To make rapidly varying X-rays, the unseen companion must be small ! The fluctuation timescale gives us the maximum possible diameter of the object. Since the speed of light is finite, it takes a given amount of time for light to travel across the object... The quicker the fluctuations are, the smaller the object (= black hole ) must be."
↑ But the rapid fluctuation of the brightness of X rays can occur due to rapid fluctuation of materials or hot gas around the black hole like the solar flares, which is completely irrelevant to the unknown black hole size. ← There is No legitimate way to know the size of a very distant unseen black hole, which means No evidence of black hole.
Sagittarius A at a galactic center of the Milky way is said to be a supermassive black hole whose mass is about 4 million times bigger than the Sun.
↑ If there is a massive star whose radius is about 160 times longer than Sun's radius, and with the same density as the Sun, this bigger star can have the mass of 4 million times the Sun (= 1603 = 4 million times the size of Sun ), and mimic the Sagittarius A's black hole, though it is not a black hole. ← It means the black hole, which can be replaced by an ordinary big star, is unnecessary.
The star allegedly closest to this black hole is called S4714 whose pericenter distance from the black hole is 12.6 AU (= 12.6 times the distance between Sun and Earth = 1.8 × 109 km ).
↑ Inside this closest star S4714 orbit (= whose orbital radius is 1.8 × 109 km ), there is a space enough for the massive star, whose radius is 160 × Sun's radius = 7 × 105 × 160 = 1.12 × 108 km (< 1.8 × 109 km of the closest star's orbital radius ), mimicking the Sagittarius A black hole with the same density as the Sun.
Astronomers try to guess the size of (unseen fictional) black hole from the dubious pictures, but it is impossible.
They insist the unseen black hole should be seen as a "black shadow" and light emitted from gas around the black hole is seen as bright "ring", which ring or shadow's sizes are said to be far bigger than a black hole or event horizon ( this-middle What will I see when.. ).
↑ The point is black hole is Not a simple two-dimensional (= Not simply a black shadow surrounded by bright ring in 2D-picture ) but a three-dimensional object whose entire surface (= including front and back sides of black holes ) is said to be surrounded and covered by bright gases, hence, bright gases surrounding the entire unseen black hole (= also its front side in the direction of earth should be covered by bright gases ) make all the area bright, and the black shadow (= alleged black hole ) should Not be observed. ← estimation of black hole size by (fake) 2D -pictures is impossible.
Furthermore, light emitted from around black hole is easily scattered and blurred by various interstellar medium and gases during the long trip to the earth ( this p.3-right, this p.1-right ), hence, estimation of any information such as size, mass and motion of (fictional unseen) black holes from the emitted light traveling over extremely long distance is impossible ( this p.3-3rd-paragraph ). ← various ad-hoc models with artificial free parameters are needed ( this p.7-table.I-note, this p.5-left-2nd-paragraph ).
(Fig.3) Black hole is too far away from the earth to confirm as real.
Basically the galactic centers are covered by very thick dusts and debris, so we cannot observe any stars' motion around the black hole, because No visible lights can penetrate these thick dusts (= so photos of unseen black holes are impossible ).
Astronomers try to "imagine" (fictitious) star's motion based on infrared rays with longer wavelength, which are emitted from everywhere not only stars (= hence, distinguishing stars orbiting around the black hole using this infrared rays is impossible ), in order to estimate the black hole's mass.
↑ Furthermore these (imaginary) stars' motions allegedly around the unseen black hole are often unnatural and unrealistically irregular, which means all these (unseen) orbits of stars around black holes are fake and unreliable.
From these doubtful unseen star's motion allegedly around the (imaginary) black hole, physicists try to estimate Einstein relativistic effects such as tiny gravitational redshift (= about 200km/s = far smaller than the classical redshift by normal Doppler effect as seen in ordinary sound wave, this last-paragraph, this 2nd-paragraph ), which dubious tiny gravitational redshift is often indistinguishable from the far-larger (= nonrelativistic ) Doppler effect's redshift influenced by star's velocity = 7650 km/s or redshifts by light's energy loss (= Compton scattering or a part of light energy is absorbed into other atomic electrons ).
The dubiously tiny redshift calculation is done by fitting various artificial parameters (= so Not agreeing with Einstein relativistic prediction, this p.3, this p.3-right-lower ), though these stars' motions with unrealistically irregular velocities are unreliable.
↑ It is impossible to confirm Einstein tiny, tiny gravitational time dilation or red-shift even around the distant (imaginary) black hole surrounded by a thick layer of dusts which block almost all lights such as visible lights ( this 7th-paragraph ).
↑ Astronomers tried to guess Einstein (imaginary) gravitational time dilation by seeing the slight wavelength change of unspecific and unreliable infrared light ( this 6th-paragraph ) or K-band such as very-low energy hydrogen Brackett-γ(= Brγ) line with 2.1661 μm wavelength (= only 0.5 eV ), which was allegedly emitted by the transition from high energy level n = 7 → n = 4 (instead of observing some strong specific atomic lines such as visible or ultraviolet lights, this p.2 observations, this p.1-right, this p.2-right-2nd-paragraph ).
↑ Knowing the original infrared light's (unspecific) wavelengths for estimating gravitational time dilation or red-shift is impossible, because many kinds of lights with various wavelengths from high-energy γ rays to low-energy infrared lights are flying everywhere around galactic centers (or black holes ), which are indistinguishable from the tiny infrared light's wavelength change.
The space around black holes are filled with very high-energy particles moving at light speed (= energy is greater than 106 eV ) causing larger classical Doppler shift's wavelength change and high-energy light at hot temperature, which can easily mask the extremely-weak hydrogen's infrared Brγ line (= only tiny 0.5 eV energy ) and make it impossible to measure the tiny relativistic redshift of the weak infrared light's slight wavelength change in the circumstances filled with a lot of lights with much higher energies.
↑ The infrared red lights they used for estimation of the dubious gravitational redshift have about 2 μm wavelength ( this 2.1 K-band ). ← Many stars such as Sun emit these infrared lights with various continuous wavelengths whose wavelength's slight change (= tiny redshift ) cannot be identified or distinguished.
In only (fictional) black holes near the earth such as Sagittarius A in our Milky way galaxy, astronomers can use the (dubious unseen) orbiting stars around the black holes to roughly estimate the masses of black holes using Kepler law, various ad-hoc models and fitting parameters ( this p.2-left-2nd-paragraph, this p.3-fig.1 ).
This method based on stars around black holes cannot be used in more distant black holes where measurement of precise motion of stars around distant black holes is impossible.
In more distant black holes, they try to rely on much more unreliable method called "reverberation mapping" where they roughly estimate the orbiting radius (= directly unmeasurable ) of unspecific clouds around a unseen black hole from the time delay or lag between the time when light is emitted from near black hole and the time when this light is reflected from the (unmeasurable) surrounding clouds called broad line region (= BLR ).
↑ But the light (= allegedly emitted from distant black holes ) is naturally reflected from many particles and gases (= Not only the cloud of broad line region ) in the dense space in the galactic centers around black holes, and this method must rely on some unknown ad-hoc freely-adjustable parameters ( this p.1-right ). Hence, the precise estimation of the alleged (unmeasurable) distant cloud's motion and radius for obtaining the distant black hole mass only from this light reflected from unknown clouds is impossible.
Almost all (dubious) black holes are so far away that we can Not even observe stars' motion around the (unseen) black holes.
Recent (doubtful) claim of discovering most distant black hole by Webb space telescope relies only on very unreliable ad-hoc interpretation where some hydrogen emission (= Hβ ) line may tell us rough masses of unseen black holes instead of seeing stars around them ( this p.14 6.1 black hole mass ), though this interpretation has No physical grounds.
↑ The rough (unreliable) estimation of the unseen, unmeasurable distant black holes' masses based only on line luminosity and width of hydrogen atomic lights = Balmer Hα (= wavelength 656 nm = 6560 Å ), Hβ (= wavelength 486 nm = 4860 Å ) lines allegedly emitted from hot gases around the unseen distant black holes is impossible due to hot gases or starts around (imaginary) black holes or galactic centers are continuously emitting many kinds of lights with many kinds of wavelengths as continuous spectral lines (= hot stars' temperature is 5000 ~ 10000 K, which emits continuum spectral lines or bright lights with wavelengths from 100 ~ 1000 nm ) which background lights easily mask the hydrogen Balmer H lines (+ lights scattered and modified by interstellar medium ), make it impossible to estimate based on light wavelength.
This research ( this p.4-5=using artificial parameters, p.6-4.2=discrepancy between theory and observation ) also depends on the ambiguous the hydrogen's Hα spectral line as a means of (baselessly) guessing the unseen distant black hole's mass using various freely-adjustable parameters, and found the discrepancy (= contradiction) between theory and observation. ← No reliable evidence of black hole
All other methods also depend on various ad-hoc models and freely-adjustable fitting parameters ( this p.12-lower ) with No direct evidence of Einstein black hole.
(Fig.4) Glavitational lens is just light bent by dusts, Not by (illusory) gravitational time dilation.
Gravitational lens is said to be one of relativistic effects where light emitted from distant light sources (= background ) such as bright galaxies, stars or quasars are bent by the strong gravity (= due to unphysical relativistic time dilation or redshift) of the foreground galaxies, unseen black holes or ad-hoc ghost-like dark matter.
They insist when the background star, the center of foreground galaxy and the earth are rarely and perfectly aligned in one line, the background star's image or light is seen as ring called Einstein ring around the foreground galactic center or black hole as phenomena of gravitational lensing.
↑ But it is too unnatural and coincidental that the distant (= background ) star and the center of some irrelevant foreground galaxy are just perfectly aligned in one line to the earth.
So it is more natural to say that the light emitted from some background star or galaxy is scattered or reflected by various gases, dusts and interstellar medium around the foreground galaxy, and this scattered light coming to the earth is observed as light ring instead of the paradoxical Einstein relativistic effect ( this p.2, p.8-right ).
Actually, part of Einstein ring is often dark, completely blocked by some dusts or interstellar medium, and centers of galaxies or areas near black holes are often filled with thick clouds of dusts and gases.
So gravitational lens is Not a proof of Einstein general relativity but just light scattering by interstellar medium or gases.
Einstein general relativity claims light is slightly bent by fantasy gravitational time dilation by massive stars or Sun. But this bent light is much more easily and naturally explained by light refraction (or light scattering ) by dusts and molecules around stars.
↑ Einstein general relativity often deliberately ignores the far more influential atmosphere or air (= gas ) medium around the earth or massive stars which can more easily modify the light speed, wavelength, frequency and atomic motions.
The refractive index of the air (= 1.0003 ) means the light speed c is significantly slower by the air medium to c/1.0003, which atmospheric influence (= 0.0003 ) is far more influential than the tiny relativistic gravitational effect or time dilation (= allegedly only 45 microseconds/per day = 24×3600 = 86400 sec/day, so relativistic effect is far smaller = 45×10-6/86400 = only 5 × 10-10 and more negligible than the air medium's influence of 0.0003 ).
Some people say light refraction is chromatic (= different wavelengths refract differently ) unlike achromatic gravitational lens, but this explanation does Not rule out the light scattering by thick dusts around galactic centers.
Actually, the observed lights from all planets such as moon are the Sun's lights reflected or scattered by them.
Some astronomers try to roughly estimate the unseen black hole's mass by using this (imaginary) gravitational lens, but it is impossible to observe the precise Einstein ring around the galactic center or black hole covered by very thick dusts and debris.
So they have to rely on some ad-hoc speculative lens models with unknown background stars' positions and artificially adjust many free parameters (= including unmeasurable dark matter parameters ) to (baselessly) deduce the masses of distant (fictional) black holes ( this Fig.2, 3.3~4.3=various models, table.6= dark matter model parameters, this p.5-left, this p.12-lower ), which artificial models are Not the proof or test of Einstein relativity.
↑ In order to explain unusual gravitational lens in the space without black holes (= this gravitational lens is caused by light scattering in the interstellar medium, Not by Einstein relativity ), they are forced to artificially create ad-hoc convenient concept of unseen dark matter, which can be explained by the real medium in space, as shown in even Einstein paradoxically trying to restore ether which he rejected before.
Pulsars or the radio waves allegedly emitted from the imaginary distant neutron stars are often used for dubious tests of negligibly weak Einstein general relativistic or gravitational time dilation effects.
The point is there is No direct evidence that these (imaginary) neutron stars really exist in the very distant space, because the neutron stars and black holes are too far away from the earth to directly observe or confirm.
The mechanism of how these imaginary neutron stars emit radio-wave pulses is still unknown despite long-time researches ( this introduction, this p.7 ).
This neutron star is very unrealistic (= I don't say it's impossible, but it's a very unnatural and unlikely object ).
For example, the pulsar PSR-B1913+16 is said to consist of very compact and dense neutron stars of 1.4 solar mass within only 20 km radius, which are allegedly spinning 17 times per second emitting radio pulses (and unseen gravitational wave ) at the distance from 21000 light years away from the Earth.
It is more natural to think that the sources of these pulsars = regular light wave such as radio waves are just the space dusts or rotating (or oscillating ) floating objects regularly reflecting or passing the lights emitted from other distant stars toward the Earth mixed with the interstellar medium's oscillation, rather than the unrealistically-spinning dense neutron stars.
In order to test the dubiously-tiny Einstein relativistic effects, physicists have to measure the precise period (= allegedly representing the neutron star's orbital period ) and the light (= pulsar ) wave's frequency shift (= representing the neutron's star's velocity change through Doppler effect ) of the detected radio wave pulses.
To know the precise masses and the unseen orbital inclination of the neutron stars and black hole's companion stars, physicists have to rely on very uncertain freely-adjustable (post-Keplerian) parameters such as the tiny,tiny general relativistic gravitational time-dilation red-shift or advance of periastron ( this p.1-2 ).
But the precise measurement of pulses or the dubiously-tiny relativistic effect based on extremely-distant (imaginary) neutron stars or black holes is impossible, so all the alleged Einstein tests are unreliable, and cannot prove the (paradoxical) Einstein relativity.
Because the weak pulses or low-energy radio waves (= telescopes on the Earth can detect only radio waves with long wavelength ) allegedly emitted from neutron stars are known to be significantly modified by various materials in the space, and hidden in many indistinguishable noises ( this p.4 ).
Radio pulses or light waves traveling a extremely long distance in the space are known to be changed, scattered, and slowed down depending on their wavelengths through the unknown interstellar mediums, which various unknown medium noise influence is strong enough to change the periods and shapes of the original pulses, which makes the precise tests of Einstein tiny relativistic effects impossible.
So astronomers have to artificially manipulate various unknown parameters called dispersion measure (= DM, this p.4, this p.1-2 ) and choose some artificial models ( this p.2-lower, this p.4, this p.3 ) allegedly representing the unknown ( changeable ) interstellar mediums, dusts ( this p.13 ) and light scattering ( this p.7 ) in each different pulsar ( this p.3-4 ) to compare their artificially-manipulable models with Einstein relativity.
The 4th paragraph of this site says
" the high precision of the timing measurements required that the researchers take into account many astrophysical contaminations. For example, free electrons in the interstellar medium cause a time-varying, dispersive effect that must be subtracted from the pulsar timing."
Contrary to the media-hype like saying "neutron stars emit radio pulses at extremely regular interval (← ? )", the actually-observed radio pulses are extremely-chaotic irregular and just randomly-oscillating meaningless noises, far from regular beautiful pulses ( this p.11 ).
Astronomer have to artificially create (fictionally) regular pulses through picking up pulses suitable for their (relativistic) models, deliberately removing a lot of unneeded noise pulses ( this p.6 ). ← It means they artificially change the original pulse shapes consisting of many chaotic meaningless noises by choosing various free parameters such as dispersion measure representing unknown interstellar mediums randomly scattering radio pulses, which manipulation is called "de-dispersion ( this 6.2, this p.6, this 3rd-paragraph )"
Furthermore, the unknown interstellar mediums are Not static but always fluctuating and changing, which are constantly influencing and changing the shape of pulses from the imaginary distant pulsars, by scattering the radio waves ( this p.2-left, this p.23-34 ), hence the precise reliable tests of Einstein's dubiously-tiny gravitational time dilation using extremely-distant imaginary objects are intrinsically impossible without artificially manipulating free parameters or ad-hoc models of unknown interstellar mediums.
These unknown interstellar mediums or dispersion measure (= DM ) elongating the light waves traveling an extremely long distance can explain the redshift or tired light ( this p.2, this p.2 ) even without relying on fantasy expanding universe.
Measurement of the slight pulse change of (imaginary) pulsars = PSR1913+16 is said to give indirect evidence of Einstein relativistic gravitational wave, but this is completely untrue.
First of all, the extremely-weak gravitational wave has nothing to do with Einstein relativistic prediction, because Einstein general relativity is unable to conserve or carry the energy as a form of (gravitational) wave, hence, the gravitational wave must be expressed as the unrealistic "pseudo-tensor ( this p.3-4, = gravitational wave pseudo-tensors magically vanish seen from different coordinates or observers ! this p.1-3rd-paragraph, this p.19-last-paragraph, this p.2, this-intro-1st-3rd-paragraphs )" contradicting Einstein original relativistic tensors.
Physicists can artificially create and choose many different forms of gravitational wave's pseudo-tensors ( this p.2-lower, this p.8 ).
↑ Choosing an artificial gravitational wave's pseudo-tensor out of infinite choices means it has No power to predict or test Einstein relativity.
And the measurement of this pulsar for the artificially-chosen gravitational wave's pseudo-tensors irrelevant to Einstein relativity also had to deliberately manipulate the unknown interstellar parameters = dispersion measure ( this p.434-right-lower ) and pick up some artificial models, which means the pseudo-gravitational waves can Not be used for verifying or testing Einstein relativity at all, contrary to the media-hype such as "Einstein relativity has passed all the tests !"
Estimation of (imaginary) neutron stars is based on fictitious effective mass instead of real masses of neutrons ( this p.2-last, this = this p.2 ).
The perihelion for Mercury is said to move only 0.012 degrees for 100 years due to doubtful Einstein relativity which effect is too tiny to believe (= there are many other factors irrelevant to Einstein relativity such as many-body complicated forces working among various shaped planets to cause such a negligibly-tiny orbital change for 100 years ), and we don't need too small Einstein relativistic effect for our daily life at all.
GPS, which is said to be the only application of Einstein relativity, does Not need Einstein, which is just useless and wrong.
Feel free to link to this site.
