What is the relationship between gravity and dark energy in black holes?

[Sariaht]

If I told you there was a force in a mass, could this force increase or even function if the mass causing the force has no inner vektors?

For instance, if time is still, can EM function?
The way I see it, photons are created by particles with different charge getting closer to each other, I then find it likely that those particles allready has vektors, and that they are opposit in opposit particles. That they collide along this fourth coordinate and thereby change direction into the room in form of photons. But in a black hole, no such force can function properly, since all vectors becomes 0 and can hardly breach that value since gravity eliminates any such vector, even time passes infinitely slow. So any forces/energy emitting caused by vectors or their derivatives would be eliminated in a black whole.

--But gravity remains--

Gravity must thereby need a non-roomly vektor (since it emits energy), like for instance time, but not directly cause then gravity would disappear directly from a black hole, it must be caused by an integration or multiple integrations of such, else black holes would have no gravity.

So my question is: Since dark energy has a vektor that is non roomly, empty space G force eventually even up with the black hole G force and the black hole explode and it will all start over again?

That is my belief and I am entitled to have a such and express a such in this forum and that is also my belief

 

[cesiumfrog]

if time is still, can EM function?
[...]
That is my belief and I am entitled to have a such and express a such in this forum and that is also my belief

That latter belief is certainly misplaced, because this is not a religious forum. To express here your beliefs, as such, is contrary to any scientific legitamicy of cosmology.

Function implies movement over time, so your conjecture is nonsensical. Though I do think the phrase "non-roomly" is cute.

 

[Chronos]

Hence the concept of 'vector bosons'. Force is only measurable by its effect upon matter.

 

[Sariaht]

Ok. What I meant with belief, the word for it should be oppinion, sorry.

What I meant by non roomly* is that gravitons or carriers of such have a vektor that is not one of the room vektors, in order to attract. My oppinion is that no matter what time passing the black hole experience, it still is still from any other frame it might be attracting. And EM surely need vektors, but gravity must need an integration of a non roomly vektor, and any non roomly vektor in a black hole would fade away in comparising to empty space vektors eventually, it would just take a lot of time. Put this way: Gravity must be caused by timedistance (or non roomly distance) or higher. I would say that higher integrals would be less probable, so my guess is that it is caused by timedistance. This would require a cosmological constant (which we have) and the gravity would be caused by that more distance in less space cause more concentrated force. EM-Gravity would be impossible in a black hole, the way I see it. Atleast unless extremely weakened, which is not the case in real life

This is what I have heard, the longer out in space and further back in time we look, the faster masses moves from each other. This caused by an repelling force from a real long time ago. But since then, the cc has clearly changed sign since we now adays don't move away from each other as fast.

If gravity is caused by a vektor integration, a distance, then that distance shows an attracting value, caused by a cosmological constant that causes a force which make objects at a distance move towards each other, but at the same time that force declines in amplitude with the bending of space time hence decrease with squared radius, since the cc in space is constant, but if there is a longer distance within the masses, these should attract each other.

So clearly gravity cannot be caused by the mass itself, since a black hole has no vektors and therefor cannot emit energy hence carry a force field, but the time distance it suppases concentrate the cosmological constant. It is empty space that has the force field, hence it must have vektors, and that is why gravity is dependent of distance.

That is my oppinion, that I in my oppinion am aloud to express.

 

[Sariaht]

Provided that:
You told me "there was a force in mass".
Mass causes the "forces".
There is more than one "force" within each mass.
Vectors=Rays with specific magnitude and direction
Knowing that:
Forces always have a magnitude and direction.
We then know that:
The mass cause the magnitudes and directions, which means the mass must cause vectors. Since some of the forces are within the mass, then some of the vectors generated are inside the mass.
If the force increases, the magnitude of the vectors increase, which requires that the vectors be there.
Therefore:
The answer to: "If the mass causing the force has no inner vectors, could this force increase or even function?" :is no. The function of the force depends heavily on vectors. If no vector, then no force.



Functioning is an activity. Activity is pronounced movement. If time is still, there is no time, because time is never still. If time is still, there is no activity. "Being" and "functioning" ceases to exist without activity. Therefore, nothing functions if time is still (even EM).



That's good. This part has a good lead. EM-fields in fact consist of photons!



Yes, they have forces and therefore vectors. If they are opposite particles, then they are opposite - yes (or complementary).



Yes, if along the fourth coordinate (radius or angle - not sure which one you mean), an inelastic collision would imply the emission of radiation and a change of direction. Since the particles can be whatever size (because the size is not stated) this is on track.



If you view the vectors from an external observers perspective, then yes, this is the case. I assume that you are assuming from a external observers perspective. So your understanding is likely correct, you just haven't stated whose perspective it is.



No. It would not be "eliminated". It would be -reduced- from our frame of reference.



All vectors are "non-roomly". The do not take up any space. They are measurements and therefore abstract. The forces which result in energy emission are in correspondence to a sort of "braking" of whatever it leaves behind. Usually, gravity can be described as a product of mass and acceleration, and therefore a force. Therefore there needs to be one (actually more than one) vector. As far as I know your understanding of the physics is correct, but the words you used were not correct.



No. It would not "disappear". It would not even "vanish". By itself, the time dilation does not reduce the acceleration in terms of the perspective of the matter entering the system (i.e. the matter will still be shred apart by forces (tidal and non-tidal)). This force, from our point of view, takes a bit longer to happen. Also, the radiation time dilated as well, which we can understand given the fact that the increase of binding energy of the system -corresponds- to the energy of radiation emitted.



Of course. Gravity is a force which causes integrations.



Provided that:
"Empty space G force" = mass of the universe * Hubble constant * Speed of light = mHc
"Black hole G force" (from disk's perspective) = GMm/(2GM/c^2)^2
Hubble constant = 70 km/s/Mpc
Knowing that:
If m*Hc=m*GM/(2GM/c^2)^2, then M=c^3/(4GH), and M=4.44973219 × 10^52 kilograms
http://www.google.com/search?q=c^3/(4*G*(70+km/s/Mpc))+in+solar+masses
We then know that:
If the black hole attractive acceleration is countered by dark energy's repulsive acceleration (per frame of reference), then the size of the black hole that could be dissoluted will depend on Hubble constant (larger Hubble constant means smaller black holes that could be dissoluted, but so could more weakly bonded matter).



Thank you. Welcome to the boards!

From what I have read, the Hubble constant is caused by empty space in itself effecting mass with a force. If gravity is distance dependent and not vector dependent, that is to say, without fourth dimension vektor or any vektor at all the gravity still functions, it is thinkeable that it is the distance in roomtime that cause gravity, but that the time dimension, since we are moving along it in the speed of light, is infinitely thin in our reference system, and hence gravity increase proportional with time past, but only decrease through roomly distance, since timely distance in our comparative system is zero. So if empty space has energy, and by saying so, meaning that photons pass through our room time or that particles are created spontaneously, it is thinkeable that the empty space eventually bends roomtime equally strong as black holes, since their mass have stopped moving distance, and thereby space itself will as a whole act unbent once again. And since any force really needs a vektor, it is obvious that gravity is caused by outer vektors and not the vektors of the mass itself, else black holes would not have any gravity. So I suggest that G = k₁*sqrt(f₁f₂ct₁ct₂) = K*sqrt(f₁f₂t₁t₂) since Hubble constant causes force proportional to distance and we move a distance through space when time pass.

What I base the time distance increase on is that particles moving in the same or opposit direction along any coordinate experience that all other such particles is not moving along this coordinate since it becomes infinitely thin.

That is my oppinion and I am entitled to have a such and express a such in this forum and that is also my oppinion.

 

[Sariaht]

So this translation, how would you comment it, and how is your own idea on the subject?

Note: gravity is merely a force, but it also stopps or reduce all movement along the time or any other axis that cut our room in a BH. If the (speed) vektor along time or any other axis that cut our room becomes zero or almost zero, no reaction that release energy can be set free into any room, and since the mass of the BH is what it swallow, momentum vektors are included, it is clear that the only force that remains is the one caused by the cosmological constant according to me. That the cosmological constant will increase in absolute value*, and the distance in time, but the force only diverge into the room since the time is infinitely thin in our reference frame, but the force over the distance in time don't care about that.
That cc increase as empty space contain energy, everywere along all coordinates and that the black holes thereby will swell with constant mass until its radius is equal to the universe

*since time passes for all energy.

That is what I believe, and it is my temporary oppinion until proven otherwise.

 

[SpaceTiger]

If you have a personal theory, you should submit it to the independent research forum, not post it here.