Comments on: Lies My Teacher Told Me

By: Nicholas Mascari

Nicholas Mascari — Tue, 08 Jan 2019 22:38:52 +0000

black holes are supposed to make no sense they warp space and time and have you heard of Steven Hawking you are fighting against him about black holes Hawking studied black holes

By: Abraham

Abraham — Fri, 06 Oct 2017 22:52:33 +0000

You teach someone how to fish. My interest in maths started when my dad showed me an easy way to calculate multiples of 9. Tell them what kind of mathematics is involved. Tell them about the thought experiments that the scientists themselves have used.

By: Brian Koberlein

Brian Koberlein — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:23:32 +0000

The term "black hole" is actually not a great name for what black holes really are. They aren't really a hole in space, but simply a region of intense gravity due to some super-dense matter. Here's a bunch of posts on black holes I've written.

By: Kristianna Thomas

Kristianna Thomas — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 14:57:35 +0000

Is a Black Hole the same as a donuts with a hole in the center, and the event horizon at the circumference; except with the revolving mass of the universe squirreling around it. We have never witnessed the birth of a galaxy, and the formation of its galactic core. Every wheel has a central hub; co every galaxy and universe has to have a central axis point for all matter to rotate around. A hurricane has an eye that it rotates around; so there seems to be a lot of similarities between hurricanes and galaxies and universes. It has been recently shown that light can be slowed down below the relative speed of light, and it has also been shown that light can be bent by electromagnetic forces. If the EM forces of a rapidly spinning Star produces enough gravitational force, could it pull light back on itself; trapping light within a Black pulsating Star? Does time stand still or become nullified at the event horizon? If one could stand on the edge of the event horizon; would they age; although, the galaxies have not always existed for infinity; they will one day come to an end. It seems everything come to an end; except space and time.

By: Stella Heart

Stella Heart — Sat, 24 Jan 2015 14:35:20 +0000

Hi Brian, I love your words!

By: Alan Mindbender

Alan Mindbender — Fri, 23 Jan 2015 03:25:08 +0000

Well, do keep in mind that this discussion stemming from another discussion about dumbing down, is still dumbing it down for we without the layman knowledge that comes from the years of study leading to his particular field. For instance, when squaring up an area for flooring, I show my apprentice how it’s run, after I’ve done all the math and referenced all walls for square, and that they run true to one another. With enough experience those details will be relevant to him, but until such a time, I don’t inundate him with details that would only bore and confuse him.

By: Tony Annechino

Tony Annechino — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 21:44:22 +0000

While i’m a smart guy, I don’t think the real explanations would have been all that difficult for people to grasp. Offering illogical explanations as a means of simplifying them disrespects the individual trying to understand, and does a disservice to science, if people are ever to put more trust in the words of scientists. And in order to quash the flames of ignorance, don’t give the fomenters of such any real fuel.

By: Dawn Rocks

Dawn Rocks — Wed, 21 Jan 2015 22:17:45 +0000

I think it is the smashups between pre-relativistic and post-relativistic terms are confusing. The word Gravity should only be used pre-relativistic, and this should always be stated that way. Gravity is in classical physics no more then a conservative force. Meaning. When you ,standing on a star, could hold one of its planet still, you will notice that the planet only tries to move towards the star (you stopped it orbiting). The force and the direction you need to apply to keep the planet in place, that is gravity. Thats all.

It should not be used post-relativistic. Except when classical physics is used to mathematical solve something.

Post-relativistic we know that mass curves the spacetime geometry around it. If we agree that energy can be defined as: the scalar quantity that is conserved as a result of the spacetime-translational invariance of the laws of physics, then we also should agree that we should use ‘energy’ as main concept. Especially after Einstein showed that energy and mass are the same thing. We should use something like the Hamiltonian and completely drop gravity when speaking in post-relativistic terms.

Again sorry for my bad English.

By: Tino Koschinski

Tino Koschinski — Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:25:50 +0000

Years back at school I learned about the Bohr atom model. I found it incredible easy to understand and I felt that it gives me a good understanding of how an atom “works”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bohr_model

Then I learned here that the electrons “jump” from one level to another emitting a photon in the process but also that the electron moves from one energy level to another without crossing the “space in between”. Having Bohr’s atom model in mind – I found that really hard to wrap my head around. Then I learned that electrons can’t really travel around atom nuclei because they would loose energy which would make atoms unstable. Again, Bohr’s atom model seemed rather to hold me back in my understanding then letting me move forward.

So I think that is just another example of what you were describing here. While Bohr’s atom model was a good start to understand the atom – if you give into the details then it rather leads to misunderstandings.

By: Bob King

Bob King — Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:04:29 +0000

Great read!

By: Bernardo

Bernardo — Wed, 21 Jan 2015 19:13:40 +0000

It’s a great challenge being didactic and rigorous at the same time. It’s the difference between a good science divulgator, good teacher or good professor, and a mediocre one.

By: Mathias

Mathias — Wed, 21 Jan 2015 17:22:23 +0000

Yes. Black holes most probably don’t really exist in our earthly frame of rest. But maybe some black hole is already forming somewhere in our ‘vicinity’ and falling towards us. If so, we are doomed. Its event horizon can cross us before we can see anything ‘special’.