A Physics forum. Physics Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Physics Banter forum » Physics Newsgroups » Physics - General Discussion
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Black Holes As Initial Rather than Terminal Objects 2: Control



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 13th 05 posted to sci.physics
OsherD
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,831
Default Black Holes As Initial Rather than Terminal Objects 2: Control

From Osher Doctorow

If singularities, including black holes, are really in an initial state
of non-control or uncontrol which begins an increasing control scenario
at least when viewed in one way, then control of diverse forces (forces
in different directions and with different magnitudes) rather than
magnitude and direction of one force arguably is a deeper fundamental
process than that involving Newton's laws.

Optimal control and Kalman filter/predictors involve the Riccati
Differential equations and Riccati Algebraic equations (the latter with
derivative set equal to 0), and so this scenario brings us back to
Expansion-Contraction via PI. But now it is control of
Expansion-Contraction in multiple directions that is emphasized, but
control in terms of simplicity of coordination.

Spherical homogeneous isotropic expansion is especially simple since it
involves control of multiple (in fact, infinitely) directional motion
via control of one radius and "iteration" of this in different
directions.

At the other extreme is chaotic and fractal processes and at least the
singularity/black hole scenarios of the Einstein Field Equations for
example.

Quantum "non-causality" isn't anywhere in this picture except at the
chaotic-fractal-singularity end if there.

As for Stephen Hawking's finite evaporating black hole, it isn't in the
picture. Replace "finite evaporating" by "universe-generating" or
"large part of the universe generating," and things seem to get more
accurate.

Osher Doctorow

Ads
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Black Holes As Initial Rather than Terminal Objects OsherD Physics - General Discussion 1 September 12th 05 09:27 AM
Black Holes Do Not Exist! Nightbat Black Comet Explained Same LongAgo nightbat Physics - General Discussion 0 May 20th 05 10:08 PM
Black Holes nightbat Physics - General Discussion 1 April 29th 05 03:17 PM
Black Hole Bouncing vs Evaporation vs Control OsherD Physics - General Discussion 36 March 18th 05 08:35 AM
DM and black holes John Sefton Physics - General Discussion 7 March 2nd 05 06:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2008 Physics Banter, part of the NewsgroupBanter project.
The comments are property of their posters.
Advertising - Myspace Proxy - Ringtone - Proxy - Loans