https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/black-holes-bab...

Black Holes Caught in the Act of Cosmic Creation
Astronomers have glimpsed the telltale signs of newly formed stars inside the powerful winds of a supermassive black hole.
MARINA KOREN MAR 27, 2017

I don't know anything about the science here, but am wondering if focusing in on creation of stars linked to black holes will change any of the dialogue between some theists and some atheists.  That is, if some of the usual running around in circles involves theists insisting that atheists must be able to explain the "creation" of the universe and of the Earth and of life, and if we were to start to see more clear indication that creation goes on all the time within the universe as we know it, then perhaps it would influence at least one small part of the discussion.  I don't mean to make too much of this, but it ties in a little bit to a discussion we were having in the forums.

Views: 271

Replies to This Discussion

This might involve a noble discussion of some sort, but I too know very little about it. Black holes may do some creating or they might just clean up the debris when some stars collapse. Muslims call them the "vacuum cleaners" of space and they want to prove this in the Quran, but I'm quite sure that way of thinking wasn't popular until mankind invented the vacuum cleaner.

As for theists insisting that atheists be able to explain the "creation" of the universe, Earth, life, etc. I find that idea absurd because all that believers do is make things up. It's the same for the Christian or the Muslim. Equally odd is the theistic claim that you would have to live the different religions separately in order to know which one was the "true religion" and there is just not enough time for any person to do this. It's insanity! All a person needs is common sense and logic to see that none of them are correct. Gods are imaginary.

Back to black holes and what they do, it's easy to see the universe as ever expanding. Science claims as much and we have never been able to put boundaries to the universe. As for it slowing down, perhaps the vast distance alone would be enough to make it appear that way. Theists aside, there is no way that our universe can be explained by god belief or holy books.

Actually, it is possible to put boundaries to the universe. By studying the frequencies in the Microwave Background it is possible to determine the size of this physical universe in the same way that one can deduce the size of a piano from the frequencies that get "clipped". Apparently it is large enough that we can never see all of it, and it is the shape of a soccer ball, approximately. (A curved dodecahedron.)

Hi Sean. If you go back and read a few prior discussions about the nature of the universe , the big bang and other hypotheses of the universe's nature posted on the Atheist Nexus you will find there is a psuedoscience based agenda bordering on a religious  jihad behind a lot of them.It has resurfaced again and again and there is a tendency to simply reject any real scientific evidence and logical deductions in favor of unfounded and previously debunked pseudoscience concepts.  You are unlikely to make any headway in trying to present any arguments based in the real science that might be relevant to any such discussion. I have no intention of wasting more time entering into that ridiculous debate again, but I do think you deserve a heads up since you seem to be speaking from a valid scientific point of view. Go back and read the "do you require the universe to have a beginning" discussion string and make up your own mind about what is really behind many of these comments ? John

jlaz, don't accept an article on www . theatlantic . com as evidence for the existence of black holes. In the almost fifty years since their postulation, no evidence has been found.

Hi Tom, I think it's clear that it's not that relevant here to remark on the journalistic layman's type source.  Plenty of others carried the story and the Atlantic traces back to a reputable science journal.  

None of this is that relevant to my main point, but that's my response on your side-point.

jlaz, think evidence.

Physicists test their hypotheses about the world with laboratory experiments.

Mathematicians don't.

Bangers may have degrees in physics but they do mathematics.

A few of my thoughts on the matter of a "big bang." The term is used to explain the universe getting here suddenly from nothing. It was a sudden expansion when everything came into being but space is a vacuum so there would have been no sound. Suddenly everything simply "is" and some say the expansion is still going on.
Theists never accept this but it is no different than their explanations of their personal god, and their god always existed. Since we cannot go back in time to see a singularity it may be possible that we are talking about a universe that has always existed.
This may be hard to grasp but I am not sure any of us will ever have the answers. Only a theist has all the answers.

Well said, Michael; only a theist has all the answers.

The rest of us require evidence.

Einstein wanted to believe in a static universe that always existed despite his equations showing the contrary. He even modified his equations to show a static universe. Later Edwin Hubble, through telescope observation, proved that it is expanding. He observed distant galaxies accelerating from us. Einstein called his equation modification the biggest blunder of his career.

Of course there was no Big Bang sound in the vacuum of space. It is just a name. Bangs can also produce immense energy.

Please check out Black Holes Exist

Having checked it out....

So many claims of evidence, so little evidence.

Are you kidding ? There is a plethora of scientific data on the existence of black holes by the most renowned physicists and astronomers. How do you explain the orbit of giant stars around a powerful gravitational mass, Sagittarius A, in the center of the Milky Way. NASA, and every space agency, accepts the existence of black holes. You know that scientists don't speak in terms of absolutes but the evidence is overwhelming. Tom Sarbeck is as adamantly anti-cosmology as he is atheistic.

RSS

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

Latest Activity

Patricia posted songs
1 hour ago
Plinius commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
1 hour ago
Patricia commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
1 hour ago
Joan Denoo commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
1 hour ago
Chris commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
1 hour ago
Patricia commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
2 hours ago
Chris commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
2 hours ago
Patricia commented on Ruth Anthony-Gardner's group Hang With Friends
2 hours ago

© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service