PDA

View Full Version : More fuel for the black hole debate.



Bill S.
2002-Apr-25, 02:52 AM
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/gravastars_020423.html

I fully admit I'm not an astrophysicist, nor am I really that up on quantum mechanics, but this seems a little off to me. The few observations about stellar mechanics I've noted is that mother nature likes to keep things simple.

This hypermassive "bubble" theory they propose seems just too damn complicated. Not too complicated as in "I don't understand it" but too complicated in that general entropy won't tolerate it. It's like suggesting that if you throw clock parts into a heap in the middle of the room, somehow you'll end up with a working clock and not a heap of clock parts.

I just don't see how nature would tolerate such a "structure" (if you will) for more than a millenia or two, if it was allowed to form at all. If it's a sort of "accretion sphere" expanding away from the 'hole, then it should dissipate. If it's close enough to a hypermassive body, it should collapse completely back in on itself; but to exist in this "shell state" flies in the face of the basic mechanics of the universe;
you'd have an easier time convincing me that a planet can form in the shape of a perfect cube.

No, I as an amature don't buy for a minute this gravitic bubble concept.

Thoughts?