Neither Black Nor A Hole.

Part 1.
The need for change.

The general theory of relativity has in the past been accepted as governing the large-scale structure of the universe. It is recognized generally as being a classical theory, in that it does not take account of quantum mechanics and quantum gravity: so to that extent it is common ground that it is defective, and predicts its own downfall. We can now be more specific because, as we have seen in previous articles, (see also www.tempofieldtheory.co.uk) the speed of light is a variable and not the constant 'c', a concept thought to have been written on tablets of stone. The new Tempo field theory constitutes a paradigm shift in quantum physics. The new, counter intuitive, effect is that as time dilates (slows down) the frequency of quantum energy waves increases. They do not decrease as was previously thought. Long standing quantum ideas and calculations are consequently turned on their heads.

In the late 1960s Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking showed that according to general relativity, as it was then understood, there must be a point within a black hole known as a singularity that has infinite density and space-time curvature. However, the changes brought about by the Tempo field theory now show that neither infinite density nor the warping of space-time exists. So in spite of the usefulness of black holes and singularities to science-fiction writers, they were inevitably brought into question as soon as it was shown that the explanation of gravity, given in general relativity, was defective.

Why are they called black holes? The reason is that for well over a hundred years it has been conjectured, wrongly as it turns out, that if light was made up of particles they could become captured and not merely influenced by extreme gravity. It was thought that the mass of a body could be so great its gravitational attraction would prevent everything, including its light, from escaping. The assumed effect was it looked black because no light could escape to reach an observer's eye. We now know better.

So now let us apply conventional physics, together with the new ideas set out in the Tempo Field Theory, to examine the definition of a black hole and show that our new ideas preclude their existence.

Part 2.
Black Holes Defined.

The name black hole certainly grabs the attention, but unfortunately it is totally misleading. We need to be much more precise as to what black holes are. Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking have defined a black hole as being 'the set of events from which it was not possible to escape to a large distance'. This is now the generally accepted definition, by relativists. So let us examine it.

The set of events referred to is a region of space-time where the gravitational field is so intense that it is not possible for anything to escape to reach a distant observer. Its boundary, called the event horizon, coincides with the paths of light rays that just fail to escape from the black hole. That is how scientists envisage the situation.

Black holes cannot be formed to comply with this definition. The reason for this, as set out in the Tempo field theory, is that the speed of light always increases in proportion to the time dilation of the observer. The Tempo field theory tells us that the more dense the star becomes the more intense becomes the Tempo field, (making time more dilated), causing the speed of light to become faster. If an observer was on or near to a hypothetical black hole where time is greatly dilated, the increased speed of light for him will always exceed the required escape velocity from the black hole. The increase in speed, in parallel with the increase in gravitational effect, ensures that the escape velocity is always exceeded. Consequently, an event horizon cannot be formed. The light however, would be greatly stretched or red shifted out of the visible spectrum. So if it was conceivable for a black hole to be formed, it would always be possible to see it by travelling towards it in a spaceship at a substantial proportion of the speed of light. This would have the effect of contracting, or blue shifting, the wavelength of the oncoming light. The blue shifting of the light would restore it to its former wavelength and allow us to see it in the visible spectrum.

Having shown that it is impossible for a supposed black hole to be black, we will next examine why they cannot be physically created.

Part 3.
Why black holes have no place in our Universe.

It is only in the last hundred years that physicists have imagined that states of matter could exist which were more dense than those which could be observed on Earth. Water, rock, the human body all have similar densities of merely a few grams per cubic centimeter. It was the development of quantum mechanics that enabled scientists to understand how matter came by this attribute. They found that atoms were made up of negative electrons, which were bound to a positive nucleus by forces of electrical attraction enabling them to be in a continuous orbit. This binding force of the electrons to the nucleus creates a pressure in the atom which stabilizes it and prevents it from collapsing beyond a certain limit. This force is called the Pauli exclusion force, discovered by Wolfgang Pauli in 1925.

The method of calculating the amount of this force has led to all the speculation over black holes. There are presently two methods vying for acceptance; general relativity and the Tempo field theory. Calculating the force using special and general relativity, results in notional black holes. They are caused by general relativity allowing the Pauli exclusion force to be limited. This would mean that eventually the electrons in the atom could be crushed clear of the nucleus when the gravitational force exceeds the relativistic limit. At this point gravity is assumed to be greater than the exclusion force. Matter that is hypothetically crushed in this fashion is called degenerate matter. In degenerate matter the electrons are said to approach the speed of light and become relativistic. As a result, they exert less energy for a given density of matter than they would if they were moving slower. In this way the exclusion force is supposed to gradually approach a limiting maximum.

All this speculation on the limited force that degenerate matter has, which is the cornerstone of black hole theory, is simply a misunderstanding of the effects of time dilation. The misunderstanding is about what an observer would see across a time differential from one time domain to another. In this case, the time differential lies between the time on Earth and the time of the degenerate matter, on the collapsing star. In comparative terms the Earth's time is contracted (quicker) and the star's is dilated or stretched (slower).

Previous misunderstandings now corrected by the Tempo field theory, were due to special and general relativity requiring the speed of light to be a universal constant of 300,000 kilometers a second. The frequency or energy of light was required also to reduce in dilated, that is to say, stretched or slow time. Accordingly, an observer on Earth who looks across to the collapsing star is looking across a time differential from the Earth's time to the more stretched time of the star. He would see light remain fixed at 300,000 kilometers a second and its frequency gradually reduce more and more as the time on the collapsing star dilates. In general relativity the above results are seen by all observers in all time dilations, but in the Tempo field theory these results are specific to observers on Earth. Naturally, as all our observations are taken on or near to the Earth, the misinterpretation that the speed of light does not alter has remained unchallenged until now. We have only been guessing at what is happening on the other side of the 'time differential'. The doubt was resolved when it was established that the speed of light increased with the stretching of time, with a consequential increase in the frequency or energy of a light wave, (see www.tempofieldtheory.co.uk).

To see the situation clearly it is necessary to eliminate the time differential by shifting our observation point from the Earth to the star. As soon as we do this we find that we now measure light and all quantum energy waves in the real time of the star. As the gravitational effect increases so the real time of the star will dilate and stretch. The speed of light and the speed of the electrons will consequently increase in proportion to the time dilation. The frequency or energy of the stars, photons and electrons also increase, so that a balance between the exclusion forces and gravity is always achieved, preventing degeneracy from taking place. If therefore, there is no such thing as degenerate matter then there are no such things as black holes and singularities.

We can now examine more reasons why it is not possible for the fabric of black holes or singularities to exist.

Part 4.
Why The Universe Can't Afford Black Holes.

Einsteinian relativists have another major problem to overcome when considering black holes. It has long been held that as a star at the end of its life is crushed inwards by its own gravity, it creates high internal pressure. The infinite pressure so formed being a form of energy is, according to Einstein, equal to an infinite increase in mass. Consequently, Einsteinian relativists are faced with the dilemma that the infinite increase in mass in turn has to cause an infinite increase in gravity, thereby escalating the inward collapse making inevitable the formation of a singularity.

There are a number of reasons why such a collapse cannot take place. The principal one being that it contravenes the law of the conservation of energy, because it does not merely concentrate the existing energy, it notionally increases it. For example, if pressure equals energy and energy was to equal mass and mass equals gravity, then a black hole with infinite density and pressure must have an infinitely large gravitational field that would give rise to an infinitely large event horizon embracing the universe. This nonsensical progression shows quite clearly that mass has to be a constant.

The Tempo field theory proves that mass is a constant and that an increase in energy is equal to a local increase in the dilation of time (see previous paper on E=mc²). It dilates time at the star, which increases the speed of light and allows subatomic particles to move at speeds faster than 300,000 kilometres a second, the mean speed of light on Earth. This allows the electrons to have whatever speed is necessary to prevent the formation of degenerate matter, because they can now maintain Pauli's exclusion force. This will prevent further collapse of the star and the formation of a black hole.

Consequently relativists have to invent a fictional hybrid form of matter that is passive in that it can feel its own gravity but cannot produce a gravitational field. They have to invent this fiction because if both pressure and tensile forces caused by gravity can in turn create more gravity, the conservation of energy law would be broken. It would also lead to a runaway reaction between all matter particles, causing them to increase their inertial masses infinitely. This would cause all matter particles on a collision course to smash into each other with total destructive violence.

Let us now consider what astronomers have been looking at if not black holes.

Part 5.
If Not Black Holes Then What?

Seekers after black holes have in the past theorised on the possibility of there being three different types, Stella black holes, primordial black holes and galactic black holes. Now however, we know that black holes do not exist as such, so we have to conjecture on what it is they have been observing.

It has been the practice of astronomers when seeking a stellar black hole to look for a binary pair, a black hole coupled to a visible star. This was done with a view to measuring the speed and weight of the visible star. With this information they would endeavor to calculate the approximate weight of the unseen body by the effect they have on each others orbital motion. If the mass of the unseen object was found to be more than three times that of our Sun, it was presumed to be a black hole.

However, previous practice has recently been dramatically called into question. The new Tempo field theory shows that astronomers can no longer rely on the apparent orbital speed of the visible binary star to indicate the weight of its unseen partner. Just as we saw in Part 3, with the impossibility of there being degenerate matter, the time differential as between the Earth and the star is of crucial importance. The 'apparent' orbital speed we measure is not its 'real' orbital speed, as experienced by the star. The time differential as between the Earth and star must be taken into account. In addition there are two more quantum adjustments to be applied to the observed shift in the light from the visible star. Firstly there is the apparent increase in mass due to the velocity of the stars in their orbits. Secondly there is the speeding up effect caused by the cosmic redshift that needs to be allowed for by the application of the 'adjusting fraction'. For more information on these points see my article on dark matter and my book Time, The Hidden Dimensions of the Missing Physics. Until these adjustments have been made it is not possible to derive the mass and density characteristics of the unseen star. Without these important corrections the apparent orbital speed of the visible star will be too fast as measured from Earth, giving the impression that the unseen star is more gravitationally massive than it really is, to be able to hold the visible star in orbit. It is therefore the case that unseen objects that have previously been considered too massive and too dense to be anything but a black hole, have been incorrectly weighed.

There are also many stars with very small masses whose luminosity is too faint to be seen either because the star is very distant or because it is drowned out by the brightness of its companion.

The obscure star could also be a star of any mass which has gravitationally collapsed until it is supported by the exclusion force exerted by the electrons in its atoms. Such stellar remnants include white dwarfs and neutron stars that are too distant to see or are shrouded in opaque gas.

It was thought that identifying a black hole was just a question of finding a stellar remnant with the right mass. The reason being, neutron stars and white dwarfs could not be more than two or three times greater in mass than our Sun. So anything found to be more massive was a possible black hole candidate.

Uncertainties can occur for objects of all sizes. A hot bright massive star can remain obstinately hidden because it is surrounded by dust which obscures it. A good example of this is Epsilon Aurigae which is a binary whose unseen companion has a mass equal to about 8 of our Suns. This is much greater than the allowed mass of a white dwarf or neutron star and was initially a black hole candidate. However, astronomers realized what the situation really was when they observed the visible component eclipsed every 27 years with the eclipse lasting 2 years. The supposed size for black holes would be too small to cause eclipses of such long duration. Epsilon Aurigae's unseen partner is no more than a large star concealed by opaque dust.

Even when one star in the pair can be seen clearly, there are many technical difficulties to overcome when interpreting observations. One unknown quantity to be found is the inclination of the orbital plane with respect to our line of sight. The inclination of this plane is usually indeterminable, except in certain binary systems where there are eclipses which enable astronomers to calculate the inclination within limits. Accordingly, astronomers have to make approximations when viewing the spectroscopy of the visible star in an effort to establish its spectral type. Taking account of the star's luminosity enables its size and degree of evolution to be approximated. With these approximations the astronomer tries to make a guess at the mass of the compact star. The result he obtains has a substantial degree of built-in error. What it boils down to is, in future when reviewing and interpreting data, all the benefit of the doubt that was formerly given to interpreting it in favour of black holes, must now be given in favour of the alternatives.

Primordial black holes are a theory that grew out of the big bang model for the start of the universe. They are a theoretical byproduct of the big bang theory and can be very small, down to the quantum level. Astronomers have not found anything that could remotely be taken for a primordial black hole. This is not surprising in view of the fact that the big bang and an expanding universe have been called into question.

Galactic black holes are different again. We know for a fact that there is something massive at the centre of the 'Milky Way' and other galaxies, although not black holes as such. The findings of the past 30 years of astronomy have made us realize that there are more to galaxies than just stars. Some of them shelter a source of intense 'non-thermal' radiation at their centres which is not stellar in origin. Our Milky Way has just such a nucleus, although relatively small in magnitude. The energy produced by its nucleus represents only three thousandths of the total energy emitted by the 100 billion stars in the disc and halo. On the other hand, in some galaxies the central activity is so great that the 'non-thermal' activity in a volume no bigger than would hold our Solar System is greater than that of the rest of the host galaxy. These active galactic nuclei have very powerful 'engines' at their hearts. If they are not made up of degenerate matter, then to ascertain just what they are, will take several decades more of observational research and development of our astronomical techniques.

For further reading see 'Time - The Hidden Dimensions Of The Missing Physics' by Frank Atkinson, available for review and purchase,- together with extensive free summaries on the Tempo field theory on www.tempofieldtheory.co.uk