It's generally accepted that the gravitational singularities predicted in GR are symptoms of an incomplete theory rather than singularities existing in nature.

So the question is, what do you anons think these extremely compact, dense and dark objects are?

Intuitively, if time dilation tends towards infinity at c, it should do the same at the boundary of an event horizon, and so I personally favor the planck star concept found in loop quantum gravity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_star

>there is no direct evidence of dense, dark centers of gravity

There absolutely is, see the above gif.

>uhm ackshually those stars aren't orbiting a mass, the galactic center is empty and they orbit that center much like the eye of a hurricane or stars in a binary star system do

Balderdash, the orbits are far too extreme and acute (especially S0-16) for this to be the explanation.

>we can't know so it's useless to discuss

We are spitballing, don't be a wet blanket.

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68 |

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68 |

Black holes are just giant atoms

I'd say neutron stars are more like giant atoms anon

black holes are even bigger

I have a radical theory. That gravity is squishy.

In some cases, when a star explodes the star material is expelled outwards but the gravity in the local area becomes ensquishened. This makes the local gravity behave as if the star is still present in its regular form. Over time the gravity begins to become unsquishified, slowly returning to normal. This would be somewhat analogous to a black hole but without a singularity and with more rapid evaporation. And this would cause planets and the like to seemingly orbit nothing

No.

I cut this in twain with Newton's Flaming Razor Sword

>We are spitballing, don't be a wet blanket.

They are what happens when reality is squished onto a 2-dimensional surface. Neutron stars are already 30% of the way there. Whatever the unification of relativity and quantum mechanics might be, it at least will involve the simplification of quantum states with the increase in gravitation.

>I have a radical theory. That gravity is squishy.

Well, spacetime is because we can detect gravity waves. So with high enough forces (mass x acceleration) there will be squishing.

err, so black holes are real, they just aren't singularities? man.... semantics is a helluva drug

You guys are missing that the most important part of the black hole is the event horizon (the point beyond which nothing can escape) and not the singularity. The event horizon of a large black hole presumably does not need to be described with quantum gravity since the curvature is not large.

they’re just really massive stars with incredibly strong gravity fields.

>the gravitational singularities predicted in GR are symptoms of an incomplete theory rather than singularities existing in nature

op what does singularity mean mathematically?

It's an infinity

what happens when electromagnetic field lines spiral into a spinning black hole, if we assume that external matter mediates the forces of gravity and inertia through photon complexes?

please try to legitimately answer the question

what would happen to black holes?

An often ignored topic is that at the EH time dilation tends increases without bound, much the same as a photon experiences zero time.

This leads to the conclusion that black holes are roughly a frozen implosion/explosion as seen by non local observers, while from the perspective of an observer at the EH, the outside universe speeds up tremendously (assuming he had magic anti blueshift eyes), while the black hole itself evaporates/explodes in an apparent instant.

If time dilation approaches infinity at arbitrarily close distances to the EH, nothing should ever be able to cross that point in a finite amount of time.

The local guy sees the EH receding before him, the non local guy sees a frozen local guy at the EH, getting redshifted to black.

I don't know anon, maybe the mass of a black hole is contained in a frozen hyper thin/2D shell just outside the EH. This would still leave the question of what happens to the stellar mass that was already within the swartzchild radius as the EH formed during collapse.

Time dilation is just a coordinate effect. An observer falling through does so in finite proper time. This is a standard calculation in a GR textbook

Yes, the one falling in experiences time as flowing normally of course, but if he could somehow look out on the non local universe from the EH, it would appear to be sped up.

It only takes infinite proper time from the perspective of the non local bro, and if black holes were eternal, the local observer would indeed pass the horizon normally from his perspective.

He can "look out" of the EH. The region outside the black hole still sends information in. Whether or not the universe is "sped up" is again an artifact of the coordinate system the falling observer is using and not very interesting or physically relevant. Only proper times are relevant and everyone agrees on those (and there is no "infinite proper time" for the falling observer to cross the event horizon from anyone's perspective).

Nuh uh

gayhiterequimhonomension

Curvature is extremely high, but not infinite as in the Schwarzchild model (we already know that we avoid any singularities for the solution to the interior of a normal or even high mass star, so it's not a stretch to assume that even at higher masses, the singularity disappears in a full treatment of the stress-energy tensor).

This also solves the information problem - instead of some complex mechanism like Hawking radiation where you've got virtual particle pairs and shit like that, you just have EXTREMELY redshifted light being emitted (subradio frequency)

I was sure the models predicted infinite curvature at the EH, I guess I was the moron.

There is weak curvature at the EH in Schwarzschild for any large black hole, and it decreases to zero as the black hole gets bigger. Don't mix up the EH and singularity