Latest Update:  October 8, 1991

RAMBLING THOUGHTS by a cosmogonist, Number 119

I got into a discussion at a computer store with Gary Crist. Gary is a
ham operator who said his ham group had just had a conference on
astronomy. I don't exactly remember how we got onto the subject of
black holes and how they operate, but that question came up. He knew
about event horizons and that matter or energy entering the event
horizon would move to the singularity (at the center of the black
hole) and from there, if there were enough mass in a given black hole,
through the worm hole (or Einstein-Rosen bridge) to a white hole
located in another part of our Universe.

All that has been covered many times in magazines and books and even
some movies. So, when I commented that the material entering a black
hole had no way or method of moving to the singularity, I floored him.
That is, there is no way to do that which is explained in the theory
of those kinds of black holes.

The other comment of mine which floored him was that, using the theory
of the Big Bang, the Bang Bang, or the Bang Bang Bang cosmogonists,
they had a little problem, which was those Bangs couldn't have
happened.

"But Uncle Don, we know Bang happened, don't we? We're here, aren't
we?"

I am now referring you back to RT13, where we discussed the lack of
the ability of radiation pressure to cause the Ylem to go Bang. So the
Bang happened; it just didn't happen the way the standard Bang
theorists say it happened. Also, in RT11 we looked at teleportation
-- quantum jump -- as the method by which material entering a black
hole _gets_ to the central singularity.

Let's go back to that poor hunk of Planck-size matter that has just
entered the Black Hole. Time has stopped for that matter. How does it
get to the center where the singularity is located?

"You tell me, Uncle Don. I sure don't know."

Ok. I'll tell you how it works and then I'll hit you over the head
with the statement that it doesn't work that way.

[By the Way:  If any of my readers find that I've repeated myself in
any of these RTs, please leave me a message about it and I'll pull the
second mention out.] As with much of the stuff in these RTs, the
following is from Chapter 15 of my astronomy manuscript and All Rights
are Reserved. The major difference between what I'm writing here and
there is that here I'm using my niece, Audrey Sue Rosenfield as my
Socratic partner and the book I don't name my Socratic partner:

You see, the thing is, there are five theories of the structure and
operation of black holes. The first four are the Schwarzschild, the
Kerr, the Kerr-Neuman, and the Reissner-Nordstrom Black Hole Theories.

The fifth theory is the Rosenfield Black Hole Theory. I've been
calling it the Another Spinning Black Hole Theory, but putting it in
this forum requires a more definitive name.

Perhaps I should point out that I don't mean to insult any Russian who
happens to read these RTs. The Russian translation of "Black Hole" is
the same as the female sex organ. So they call these objects Frozen
Stars rather than Black Holes.

The major difference between the other black holes and the Rosenfield
is that the Rosenfield doesn't have a singularity and thus doesn't
need an Einstein-Rosen bridge. Therefore there is no need for an event
horizon located at a different place than the singularity. Without
that difference there is no problem with how the translated matter
*gets* to the singularity.

    +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
Note that the following discussion doesn't apply to the Rosenfield
Black Hole theory. 

While I haven't seen this transfer method described in any of the
books or journals I've read about black holes, it seems to me that the
translated matter and energy that pass by the event horizon move by
teleportation to the singularity.

If any of the first four of the above black hole theories are correct,
the translated material that enters the event horizon has to get to
the singularity at the center of the black hole. Reading the theories
is no help! Their authors don't say how the material *gets* to the
singularity.

So, (again, if any of those theories are right) my insight in 1986,
that the material teleported to the singularity, is necessary for them
to operate. All this is in quantum theory. The electron dance from
orbit to orbit is called a quantum jump, or facetiously, a quantum
leap.

The Rosenfield Black Hole, with no singularity and no Einstein-Rosen
bridge, needs no construction like a quantum jump; there being no
place for the matter to jump. The matter that enters the event
horizon piles up where it comes in.

"What are the other differences between the Rosenfield Black Hole and
the others?"

SCHWARZSCHILD BLACK HOLE:  Has no charge and no spin. Its
  singularity is a point. A wormhole can develop if the black hole
  gets massive enough.

REISSNER-NORDSTROM BLACK HOLE:  Has charge but no spin. Its
  singularity is a point. Unlikely to occur in nature as its charge
  would probably be neutralized.

KERR BLACK HOLE:  Has spin but no charge. Its singularity is in the
  form of a ring. It has an ergosphere located between an outer
  static limit and the event horizon.

KERR-NEWMAN BLACK HOLE:  Has spin, charge, and a ring-shaped
  singularity.

ROSENFIELD BLACK HOLE:  Has spin, has no charge, has an ergosphere and
  an outer static limit. Does not have a singularity.

"But Uncle Don! You aren't describing, for example, a Kerr Black
Hole! You're describing a Kerr-Rosenfield Black Hole, one that works
with the quantum jump. And a Schwarzschild-Rosenfield Black Hole,
and so on."

I'm glad you said that, Audrey, instead of me. But you're right. The
Kerr Black Hole theory describes no mechanism to get the material from
the event horizon to the singularity and the Kerr-Rosenfield Black
Hole does.

--by don rosenfield, asst. general sysop/cosmogonist/frozen star
                      specialist
                      All Rights Reserved