I tried to keep it as simple as I can and it is reasonable if a black hole has a radius, it cannot be a singularity; but to continue:
In such a black hole consisting only of pure or radiant energy its time dimension is zero because all the quanta particles move at the velocity of light. In other words, it exists in the fifth dimension or frame reference. There are no other dimensions within it because it contains no massive objects that move with a speed lesser than the speed of light.
A black hole has a temperature and density depending on the amount of quanta energy, and its temperature and density will decrease as its energy or virtual mass increases. The decrease of temperature and density is due to the increase of the energy or virtual mass because density is measured by the mass divided by its volume which depends on its radius:
D = M / V
where D stands for density; M for the mass or quanta particles; and V for the volume. The volume of a sphere increases by the cube root of its increase of the radius:
V = (4 pi R^3) /3
and the radius of a black hole increases directly by the increase of its mass:
R = (2 G M) / c^2
and thus the volume of a black hole sphere increases by the cube of its increase of mass, and its density decreases by the square of its mass. The fact that the density of a black hole decreases much faster than its increase of its mass or energy is an important phenomenon that will be shown later when discussing quantum fluctuation and the formation of mass particles.
Since a black hole consisting of pure energy, exists in the fifth dimension or frame reference, the Newtonian laws of movement apply because all the quanta particles move at the same speed relative to one another and the time dimension does not apply because they all move at the speed of light.
Another very important phenomenon of a black hole consisting of pure energy is that there is no place for a singularity. This is so because all the quanta particles or virtual mass have momentum, kinetic and gravitational energies that can not be distroyed, but are conserved due to the law of conservation of mass and energy.
The quanta particles within a pure energy black hole are not drawn to its centre because here there exists an equilibrium of its gravitational-kinetic force. As it was shown earlier in this work, quanta particles have two equal and opposite forces, kinetic and gravitational. But it could be argued that the gravitational potential force within a black hole is most active at its boundary within its event horizon because it prevents the quanta particles from escaping.
This is not a strange phenomenon because even in our ordinary experience of a massive object, its centre of gravity may lie within or without the object. It is at the centre of gravity that all the forces of gravity of the object pull equally in all direction so that there is an equilibrium at its centre and the object is at rest or has equilibrium. In a black hole the greatest pull of gravity is not at its centre but at its boundary while at its centre there is an equilibrium. The quanta particles cannot be collected at its centre because they cannot loose any energy and momentum which are conserved. There exists an equilibrium within a pure black hole because the gravitational forces are equally opposed by the kinetic forces. Both these forces are potential and conserved in the kinetic and gravitational energies of the quanta particles.
If a singularity cannot exist at the centre of a pure energy black hole, than no singularity can exist in the universe. This is so because matter reduced to its most basic form is pure energy and this is according to Einstein’s relativity theory which holds that mass can be reduced to pure energy and energy can be transformed into mass.
A singularity is not possible because it does not account for the momentum of quanta particles which exists according to Einstein’s photoelectron effect. Both the gravity and momentum of quanta particles cannot be lost because quanta particles cannot loose any energy; they are the most basic quantity of energy according to Planck’s theory. The theory of the singularity only deals with gravity and does not account for the momentum of quanta particles.
While a black hole cannot lose any energy, it can, however, gain energy from the outside. Let us presume that a pure energy black hole only gains pure energy. As it gains energy, it will gain virtual mass and consequently its radius will increase and its density will decrease. However, it will retain its equilibrium at its centre while the strength of its gravitational force and thus its pressure and temperature remains the same at its event horizon, preventing any escape of quanta particles.
It could be speculated that in nature there exists no greater force of gravity, pressure and temperature than at the event horizon of a black hole because nothing can move faster than the velocity of light or quanta particles. If this speculation is correct that the greatest region of density and temperature is at the event horizon of a black hole, it could also be speculated that it is the optimum place for the occurrence of quantum fluctuation as Stephen Hawking has proposed.
It could be speculated that in nature there exists no greater force of gravity, pressure and temperature than at the event horizon of a black hole because nothing can move faster than the velocity of light or quanta particles.
This speculation is incorrect. It is perfectly possible to cross the event horizon of a black hole without feeling a thing. It just means that, whatever you do, you cannot move your spaceship in a way such that you could escape from the inevitable fate of falling into the black hole. It is only when you get closer to the centre of the black hole that you start feeling the immense gravitational tidal forces of the black hole. See here for more information.
__________________ ~neutralino
If you haven't found something strange during the day, it hasn't been much of a day - John A. Wheeler.
I agree with you that my ideas are just speculation, but I hope they are based on some evidences that are found in reality. We can not see insight a black hole and so any thing we say about the interior of a black is speculation. So when you say: "It is only when you get closer to the centre of the black hole that you start feeling the immense gravitational tidal forces of the black hole."; it is also a speculation.
I just wonder if that speculation is right because scientists can detect black holes from the X-rays that are emitted from matter falling into a black hole. The X-ray certainly could not have come from the inside or the centre of the black hole because nothing can escape the black hole. Thus the X-rays come from outside the event horizon of a black hole. Thus the immense gravitational tidal forces of a black hole is experience by matter before they fall beyond the event horizon and not necessarily when they reach the centre of a black hole.
This is how my speculation differs from the present understanding of the basic forces of nature. The basic force of a quanum particle is not just gravitational, but it consists of two equal but opposite kinetical and gravitational forces. These two forces balance each other in a quantum particle. However, they are also the basic kinetical and gravitational forces in nature because all matter is basically constituted from quanta particles.
Since the quanta particles are conserved, they are the basic form of energy and energy can not be created or distroyed, the basic kinetical and gravitational forces in the universe are conserved. Thus also the basic gravitational kinetical forces of a black hole are conserved. The quanta particles even in a black hole, can not fall into a singularity, they are constantly moving at the speed of light. If a quantum particle, or a Planck particle which is the smallest quantity of energy and it constant, conserved and it has a Planck length, how can it loose its dimensions even in a singularity if it is conserved and constant?
I think both Newton and Einstein realised the basic equalibrium of the kinetic and gravitational forces in nature but they lived before it could be explained. Newton discovered gravity but he also discovered the three laws of motions and the third law is: "For any action there is an equal and opposite reaction"; this is the basic form of the kinetic gravitational forces in a quantum particle. Einstein came very close to explain the two basic kinetical and gravitational forces in nature and he even speculated of a "universal constant", a force to oppose and equalise the force of gravity in nature. Unfortunately, he did not fully appreciated the basic form of the quantum particle which he himself discovered.
"The X-ray certainly could not have come from the inside or the centre of the black hole because nothing can escape the black hole."
I think we could further speculate that the inverted force of gravity increases proportionate to the force of gravity, and the inverted force carrier at the singularity would exceed the escape velocity of the less dense field surrounding the singularity.
This way, the proposed black holes at the center of galaxies can be said to be responsible for the creation of the galaxies based on the energy and angular momentum of the radiation that escapes them.
So when you say: "It is only when you get closer to the centre of the black hole that you start feeling the immense gravitational tidal forces of the black hole."; it is also a speculation.
Well, it's a calculation based on our current theory of gravity, which has stood up to many observational tests. If you call this speculation, then fair enough.
Quote:
I just wonder if that speculation is right because scientists can detect black holes from the X-rays that are emitted from matter falling into a black hole.
Note that the X-rays are not necessarily produced by matter falling into the black hole (or past the even horizon) but are produced by the black hole accreting matter; this matter then heats up as it accelerates round the accretion disk and gets closer to the event horizon.
Another thing to consider is the blue x-ray radiation, like Cherenkov Radiation, implying that that gamma bursts within black holes could create electrons/positrons that exceed the speed of light through the medium of the black hole.
C is only allegedly constant in a vacuum, but in denser media is said to propagate slower than other forms of radiation can be accelerated.
I have no problem with our present understanding of gravity and I try to get a clearer understanding of it in regards to the quantum particle, the basic component of all matter. The quantum particle has mass although virtual, and also kinetic and gravitational forces and energies which are equal, opposite and conserved. If this is true than there is no need to speculate about an "inverted force of gravity", or blue x-ray or gamma bursts that create electron/positrons that exceed the speed of light. Nor is there need to speculate about a singularity from which burst forth galaxies or the universe itself. If this were true then the great question would be: "where did all this new energy to create new galaxies or the universe itself, come from? - certainly not out of nothing!
Neutrolino, I have no problem when you say: "that the x-rays ... are produced by the black hole accreting matter; this matter then heats up as it accelerates round the accretion disk and gets closer to the event horizon." But if this is so than these x-rays must have been formed by the immense gravitational tidal forces of the black hole. This means that the immense tidal forces of the black hole can also exist outside the black hole and not necessarily at its centre.
Nothing begets nothing, so certainly not out of nothing. Just certainly not literal.
Cherenkov radiation is proposed as being blue, and black-hole spacetime as being liquid-like. Using a bit of imagination, then, x-rays can be the result of electrons and positrons forming from the high-energy collisions whereby the observable electrons exceed the speed of light in such a medium.
It is based on following the implications of what empirical and theoretical sciences offer, Cosvis, according to the variable interpretations of those implied facts.
There is no problem with the Cherenko effect and granting you are right : "that the observable elctrons exceed the speed of light in such a medium", of the black-hole. But since in a medium the speed of light is slower than the speed of light in a vacuum, it could be true that the speed of the lectrons is faster than the speed of light moving through the medium. This does not however, mean, that the electrons move master than the speed of light in a vacuum. The electrons and X-rays cannot move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, otherwise Einsteins theory of relativity is incorrect. If the electrons and X-rays produced inside a black-hole, cannot move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, than they will not be able to escape the black-hole, otherwise there is no black-hole.
I like the idea that "the black-hole spacetime as being liquid-like." In my theory, every black-hole has a liquid like medium and it is basically a quantum, Planck, or energy medium, a light medium, an electro-magnetic radiation medium. This medium consists of virtual mass and it has both kinetical and gravitational forces and energies that makes it stable unless of cause, it would gain external matter or energy.
To me, if modern physics and Einstein's relativity theories are correct than the X-rays coming from distant black-holes must have been produced outside the event horizon and could not have come from within. I think my theory is in accord with modern physics and the relativity and quantum thoeries; it combines them and give a reasonable explanation of physical reality. According to my theory there is no need to postulate matter moving faster than the speed of light in a vacuum, or a singularity, or worm-holes through space and other brilliant ideas that demand a new physics.
Re: The eternal evolving universe. 
Linear Mode
