- #1
Arch2008
- 181
- 1
Hello, I’m obviously not a scientist, but I have been wondering if anyone has considered that a Kerr ring singularity in a black hole might basically be a closed string?
-I mean it spins in one direction only and is incredibly flat and thin (one dimensional).
-Its size is on the order of Planck’s length, like a string.
-Its spinning surface is wriggling quantum foam and a string’s surface vibrates.
-A closed string vibrates to represent nuclear particles and the higher the frequency the more mass the particle has. Since they are one dimensional, if several googol strings were crushed onto each other by gravity, then they would still look like one closed string (or ring singularity). However, the frequency of the vibration would multiply from harmonics and become infinitely high, thus representing a particle of incredible mass, like a singularity.
-We already know that gravity can implode a star into neutrons (and perhaps even quarks), so why not even smaller basic structures?
Perhaps it is simply an amazing coincidence that the smallest building block in nature and the most massive natural structure are conceptually alike. If one of you gets a really good laugh at this idea, perhaps someone could give me a lesson in where I went wrong. Thanks for your time.
-I mean it spins in one direction only and is incredibly flat and thin (one dimensional).
-Its size is on the order of Planck’s length, like a string.
-Its spinning surface is wriggling quantum foam and a string’s surface vibrates.
-A closed string vibrates to represent nuclear particles and the higher the frequency the more mass the particle has. Since they are one dimensional, if several googol strings were crushed onto each other by gravity, then they would still look like one closed string (or ring singularity). However, the frequency of the vibration would multiply from harmonics and become infinitely high, thus representing a particle of incredible mass, like a singularity.
-We already know that gravity can implode a star into neutrons (and perhaps even quarks), so why not even smaller basic structures?
Perhaps it is simply an amazing coincidence that the smallest building block in nature and the most massive natural structure are conceptually alike. If one of you gets a really good laugh at this idea, perhaps someone could give me a lesson in where I went wrong. Thanks for your time.