black holes

[sameer shah]

I think i can fully explain what are black holes and how they are formed i have a very different view and it's more better and accurate than compare to what currently we know about the black holes ....but unfortunately i am not scientist i am a student  i don't have platform to explain it the whole world. but can anyone of you suggest me to  share my theory like the einstein,newton or stephen hawking did.I think the world will be surprised  again because i have better explanation of black holes than our beloved and respected scientist stephen hawking .....plz i just need know how to share what i think is any place or platform for this......

[Snark]

Moving to Science & Spaceflight, since this isn't about KSP.

5 hours ago, sameer shah said:

I think i can fully explain what are black holes and how they are formed i have a very different view and it's more better and accurate than compare to what currently we know about the black holes ....but unfortunately i am not scientist i am a student  i don't have platform to explain it the whole world. but can anyone of you suggest me to  share my theory like the einstein,newton or stephen hawking did.I think the world will be surprised  again because i have better explanation of black holes than our beloved and respected scientist stephen hawking .....plz i just need know how to share what i think is any place or platform for this......

Hello, and welcome to the forums! 

Nice to hear that you have a lot of ideas.  Please understand, though, that black holes have already been pretty well explained by a large body of scientific theory and observations, and unless you're prepared to offer a rigorous scientific basis to your assertions that can stand up to the likes of Einstein and Hawking, please don't be surprised or disappointed if you receive a lot of responses pointing out difficulties with your ideas.

Please also be mindful of forum rule 2.2.h:

Quote

Content with no proof of concept or factual basis (e.g. "free energy" machines), conspiratorial and lacking evidence (e.g. flat Earth, Moon hoax), denial of historic events (e.g. Holocaust);

...nothing wrong with sharing some ideas, or asking questions about how black holes work.  But please be aware that completely unfounded "scientific" notions that are at odds with well-understood theories can easily run afoul of 2.2.h, so do please keep things reasonably grounded in reality.  If you're going to be making claims that contradict well-established science, this thread will likely be short-lived.

And to the rest of the forum:  play nice, please.  Nothing wrong with an enthusiastic person new to the forum wanting to discuss science.  It's fine to post scientific rebuttals and engage in civil debate, but we're all friendly co-KSPers here and I trust we're going to be polite and appropriately welcoming to someone who means well.  Right?

Thanks,
Snark

[Snark]

Aaaaand, sigh.  Well, that didn't take long.  Accusatory / mocking content already removed. 

I repeat, folks,

22 minutes ago, Snark said:

And to the rest of the forum:  play nice, please.  Nothing wrong with an enthusiastic person new to the forum wanting to discuss science.  It's fine to post scientific rebuttals and engage in civil debate, but we're all friendly co-KSPers here and I trust we're going to be polite and appropriately welcoming to someone who means well.  Right?

In case the above wasn't clear enough:

• If someone makes an actual claim: feel free to present discussion of it on the merits.
• If someone asks a question: feel free to answer it.
• If someone is doing something you feel is inappropriate:  you can report it.
• Ad hominem attacks on this (or any other) poster?  Not okay.

C'mon, KSP forums, you're better than this.  If you don't have anything constructive to add, or you just think the whole thread is silly, you can just stroll on by.  Nobody forcing you to read it.  No reason to jump in here just for the sake of putting people down.

Thank you for your understanding.

[Green Baron]

A good place might be a physics forum or the stackexchange subforum for physics. At least you can judge from the reaction of the people there whether your idea has something about it.

Be prepared that if you say "theory" people will want to see what data you have, what you did with it and which experiments you carried out. A "theory" is a model of a natural process that has withstood a lot of testing and experiments and is widely accepted as being appropriate. Like theory of general relativity, theory of evolution, etc. pp.

Edit: you should also discuss your idea with a physicist at your university or college, someone who is firm in that relativity stuff and astrophysics.

Edited November 14, 2017 by Green Baron

[p1t1o]

5 hours ago, sameer shah said:

I think i can fully explain what are black holes and how they are formed i have a very different view and it's more better and accurate than compare to what currently we know about the black holes ....but unfortunately i am not scientist i am a student  i don't have platform to explain it the whole world. but can anyone of you suggest me to  share my theory like the einstein,newton or stephen hawking did.I think the world will be surprised  again because i have better explanation of black holes than our beloved and respected scientist stephen hawking .....plz i just need know how to share what i think is any place or platform for this......

Hi there, welcome!

Best approach would be to assume that - bear with me here - assume that you are wrong.

Quote

This is to pay respect to the aforementioned large body of expertice that already exists (and is constantly exhaustively challenged). Every single scientist must stand on the shoulders of those that go before them, to reject that is essentially to reject scientific principles entirely.

What you can do, is clearly present your hypotheses - and this is the important part - ask why they are/would be considered wrong.

In this way you come across as inquisitive, curious and possibly with some interesting thoughts on the subject.

Then, if someone explains why your hypothesis is not as good at explaining black holes as what we currently have, you will learn an awful lot.

AND if nobody can find a robust flaw - then boom, you've got new science.

 

Current theories are very complex and supported by huge volumes of data. This is why they get to be called "theories". A "theory" is a very strong scientific statement. Its is only one...thing....below absolute proof. And as we know, absolute proof is not always even possible to obtain. Only very few things are 100% philosophical-grade proven, and many that are, are only proven within their specified logic system (like mathematical proofs).

For a new hypothesis to replace current views, it must explain everything that we already explain, to a better degree of accuracy. These are high requirements, but if you want to be the person that puts one over on Hawking + Einstein, thems the breaks!

 

We all have interesting pet hypotheses when we are students, it is one way how we explore and learn about things. But please do not be offended by having your ideas picked apart - unless of course someone is being a butt, then you can be suitably offended

 

****

I would suggest to anyone who is rolling their eyes at this thread, to remember that this is the KSP forum, right, we discuss science here, and sometimes science is momentary inspiration. Maybe his hypothesis is worthless, maybe it is not, but the least we can do is assume good faith and maybe even impart some knowledge. You never know, you might learn something. I did not 15 minutes ago over on another thread.

 

 

Edited November 14, 2017 by p1t1o
Put that bit in a quote box because it is so important and that is the most eloquent way I have ever put that.

[Rocket In My Pocket]

5 hours ago, sameer shah said:

I think i can fully explain what are black holes and how they are formed i have a very different view and it's more better and accurate than compare to what currently we know about the black holes ....but unfortunately i am not scientist i am a student  i don't have platform to explain it the whole world. but can anyone of you suggest me to  share my theory like the einstein,newton or stephen hawking did.I think the world will be surprised  again because i have better explanation of black holes than our beloved and respected scientist stephen hawking .....plz i just need know how to share what i think is any place or platform for this......

So...what is this amazing theory exactly?

You might as well tell us because no one else is going to want to hear you out about it. (No offense, just being a realist.)

I'm always open to alternative theories, even if they are out there, wildly speculative, and unsupported by science or testing. So...hit us with it guy.

[p1t1o]

I realised that I didnt actually answer your question: "... i just need know how to share what i think is any place or platform for this ..."

Well, the best place for this is here, I think. Whatever your ideas are, this is probably the best place to test them out in the open. Because I get the feeling, with all due respect, that they are not backed up with several kilograms of mathematical derivations, comparisons against current theory, supporting observations and experimental data.

 

However I think what you are asking is "How does new research make it into the wider world, how does it get accepted into theory?"

To be really brief, you submit it, just like any article, to a journal. Journals are essentially just magazines really, but they are "peer reviewed" in that before they publish anything, several volunteer scientist in a similar field will read it over and see if it makes sense. It doesnt have to automatically be "definitely new science" it just has to be good enough to be a reasonable probe into the unknown, with well documented processes and results. In theory, a completely unrelated scientist must be able to repeat your exact research just from the data and information that you present.

If it is interesting or potentially disruptive new science, if it makes a good case for "you guys should put effort and money into really checking this shiz out, its worth an experiment or two" you will find that it does get tested around the world, and articles even published on that.

Only if everything checks out and people start making better predictions using your system, will it be "generally accepted" - that highest of high statuses for scientific principles.

 

Thats the [very] short version. There are vastly more details, like not every journal is as reputable as the next. Just submitting it doesnt mean you will pass peer review. Just because it passes peer review it doesnt mean it wont be wholly rejected by the scientific community. Some journals might not accept work from a non-professional or non-qualified private person, others might.

Oh, this bit is really important - if your hypothesis offers nothing that can be tested, no experiment that shows your hypothesis to be more accurate than current theory, then it is worth very little. It still might be interesting but it will be of very poor scientific value.

 

Fact is, this happens every day, new science is constantly being generated, tested, shared, probed, reviewed, debated, and slowly, via all the various scientists working in a particular field, science that survives rigorous testing and provides enhanced prediction gradually gets absorbed into the larger body of accepted knowledge. Only VERY rarely is there one big discovery that sends ripples all through a field of science, hits the "civilian" news or papers and gets talked about in public. This is another reason why people with BIG IDEAS!! are often rejected at first sight, because there just is no way that every tom, dick and harry are having field-breaking revelations in the car on the way to work.

REAL science. REAL research. Is boring. Monotonous. Unexciting. Oh wow, you discovered a sliiiiightly better way to look at this one type of cell from one specific sub-type of a certain species of plankton. Real research scientists churn out many, many articles over their careers, its a routine, day-to-day thing, and they slowly but surely improve our understanding of the world, even without any EUREKA moments or Nobel prizes. Theres a reason they only give out a handful of those per year.

That example with the plankton up there? That really would be worth writing up and posting to a journal.

 

 

TL;DR - you write up all your data, all your findings, all your ideas, in as clear a way as possible so that people can take it away and test/repeat it, and send it to a journal who may, or may not, publish it. The scientific community takes it from there.

 

PS: for the love of god tell us what it is, Im dying! It might be subject to criticism, but anyone who is rude or unnecessarily vehement or personal in their criticism is the one being a poor scientist, not you. Honestly its a good way to learn how to keep a cool head and I dont mind admitting that I have had a few ill-advised ideas and putting them out there taught me scientific rigor better than any class or lecture.

Edited November 14, 2017 by p1t1o

[sevenperforce]

As one of the resident physics people around here...I agree with @p1t1o! Let's hear it! What's the worst that can happen -- we all learn more science?

[MiffedStarfish]

I don’t know a lot about black holes, but hopefully from everyone on this thread I’ll get to know more.

[Green Baron]

Quite a lot of things have been written in the forum, and elsewhere, of course. I am not sure if it makes sense to get exhausted before we know what's going on :-)

Have a look at the Event Horizon Telescope thread and all the info that's linked via the EHT page ...

Edit: http://eventhorizontelescope.org/

I am actually looking for news  on the page several times a day because i hope to find at least a preliminary statement. But probably it'll go like this: the announcement of an announcement, then the announcement, and afterwards the the paperstuff.

Edited November 14, 2017 by Green Baron

[YNM]

12 hours ago, sameer shah said:

.....plz i just need know how to share what i think is any place or platform for this......

You already spoken of that you have the thinking. Why not spill the beans here ? It's fine.