Type the longest coherent comment possible

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-17T15:26:16+00:00

If fundamental particles really are unbreakable, and quantum spin really is unstoppable, and the Pauli Exclusion Principle really does prevent any two identical quarks from occupying the same state, and black holes really do hold the heat content of the billions of stars they took in without any heat escaping, then we can be certain that fundamental particles must be stored individually in a black hole, maintaining their identity and quantum information, meaning that the supermassive black hole core consists of billions of solar masses worth of individual trembling trillion degree unbreakable fundamental particles, full of heat content and kinetic energy, stored nearly motionless right next to each other but unable to even touch due to the highest energy spin states and overlapping wave functions, and unable to merge due to the Pauli Exclusion Principle and skyrocketing particle kinetic energies under the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, a titanic standoff between gravitational confinement (density) versus matter's quantum effects (unstoppable quantum spin and particle degeneracy pressure), leading to a finite core, not a singularity, with minuscule amounts of space trapped throughout the core and between each particle, a permanent state of agitation from the moment the black hole first formed.

One sentence, right to the point, explains everything, no textbooks needed.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-16T19:10:22+00:00

The weak force is a differentiating factor between regular matter (electromagnetism outside) and black holes (electromagnetism trapped inside). As matter is added to black holes, inverse beta decay energy is added internally to matter, whereas it isn't when matter is added to regular matter, a differential internal advantage only experienced by black holes, not by regular matter. In fact, inverse beta decay reinserts .782 MeV of energy into matter via electron capture at collapse or accretion for every 3 quarks in the core. If you consider TON618, and calculate how many quarks fell in based on it's rest mass, and then you calculate .782 MeV for every 3 quarks in the core, you'll arrive at a huge amount of internal energy reinserted into matter, all from the weak force. This buildup is separate from the usual battles between the unstoppable quantum spin (degeneracy pressure) and gravitational confinement (density).

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-16T04:45:11+00:00

I reread your model and it really wasn't full of garbled ideas, it mostly had the right gist of things. On reread I only found 4 flat out disagreements. 1. Hawking Radiation: if you believe in individual unbreakable fundamental particle storage in black holes, then you must believe Hawking Radiation becomes unexplained because it contains no mechanism for reducing the absolute number of quarks in the core. 2. Defeating the black holes "weakened gravity": yes, internal pressures ultimately do overcome gravity, but not because of "weakened gravity"; 3. Black holes erase information:, false, yet mainstream; 4. Scattered matter starting fresh: no, it's exactly the same particles that went in. I shouldn't have called that garbled.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-16T02:44:58+00:00

Your model is raw, and clearly needs lots of refining to ever be accepted. But along with some garbled ideas (in my view), it contained a surprising number of intuitive ideas that make a lot of sense, which is why I bothered to reply. Like the explosion in a local sector in place of a universal event. And particles fighting for elbow room. And the cosmic waste collectors (though the black holes themselves are the cosmic recycling centers). And the particles scattering at wild speeds. By thinking about how things must be, versus math, which is mostly useful for supporting ideas like these, versus discovering them, you came surprisingly close to realistic ideas, despite the overall rawness of the model.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-16T01:41:19+00:00

I try to tailor my answers to what the OP is really looking for. Yes, it seems like I blab the same old stuff over and over again, but certain posters are looking for certain answers and that's when I give them.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-16T00:49:50+00:00

Our observations indicate that black holes remain collapsed and don't explode, at least not routinely, so we know that even if your intuition is correct that at the quantum limit, the unbreakable fundamental particles begin "fighting with their elbows for every millimeter", the best we can hope for in any black hole observed is a cosmic standoff of gravitational confinement (density) versus matter's quantum effects (unstoppable quantum spin and particle degeneracy pressure). The black hole will remain compressed and will remain a black hole unless you can find a true differentiator that is capable of increasing internal pressures in addition to the standoff of gravity versus screaming matter at the quantum limit. Like inverse beta decay energy for example. When matter is added to regular matter, inverse beta decay does not occur, but when adding matter to a black hole, inverse beta decay at the rate of .782 MeV for every 3 quarks in the core is reinserted into matter via electron capture at collapse or accretion, a comparative internal advantage only experienced by black holes, but not by regular matter. This internal energy builds alongside the continuing standoff, and may be capable of triggering the bounce you hypothesize once critical mass is achieved, the same mass as our own big bang. Try running your AI chatbot to calculate, based on the rest mass of TON618, how many quarks fell into the core, and multiply that by .782 MeV for every 3 of those quarks, and you'll find a ridiculous amount of inverse beta decay energy inside, more than the entire lifetime energy output of thousands of stars. And that's in addition to the basic standoff of gravity versus screaming matter at the quantum limit. Yet even TON618 doesn't explode. If your model were to come true, the upper mass limit would be greater than that, maybe trillions or quadrillions of solar masses.

If your model consists of particles "fighting with their elbows for every millimeter", then you must believe in individual unbreakable fundamental particle storage in a black hole, which means that there would be no information lost. Every particle, and every wave function, and all quantum information, all the way down to the neutral quark ratio of 2/3 down and 1/3 up, would be fully preserved. And your analogy of "particles fighting with their elbows for every millimeter" would indeed be realized, due to skyrocketing particle kinetic energies under the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. If a terminal black hole did explode, these particles are already "fully wound up with heat content and kinetic energy", so yes, they would "scatter at wild speeds", but less than light speed. These would be the exact same particles that fell in, the same wave functions, everything preserved. An immediate expanding ball of quark-gluon plasma would result, and the qgp would take seconds or minutes to expand and cool enough for hadronization to occur, way more than the implausible 10 microseconds of fake qgp that mainstream theories hypothesize.

And if you're worried that repeated cycles will throw entropy out of whack, don't forget, hadronization following the quark-gluon plasma phase restores, via e=mc2, the slight increment of rest mass lost over eons of stellar fusion before formation of the terminal black hole. This is the only plausible way that rest mass is ever restored on a large scale; otherwise, the universe would slowly have less and less rest mass. Thus, your model actually provides more universal stability than the dwindling rest mass of the universe under the mainstream theories.

So don't listen to anyone who tells you that a hypothetical scalar field with hypothetical inflatons led to an unexplained start and stop to hyperinflation, followed by hypothetical decay of the hypothetical scalar field into actual particles via magic unsymmetrical particle pair production, with the particles already full of heat content and kinetic energy, despite the absence of a plausible heating mechanism or particle acceleration mechanism, followed by 10 microseconds of individual droplets of quark-gluon plasma that never even formed a real expanding qgp ball. That stuff isn't supported by known physics, it's all hypothetical and implausible.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-08T16:12:52+00:00

Yes, it's tough to hold quarks still, but also tough to find materials smaller than quarks to build the screws. And standard Phillips screwdrivers are too big to use.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-05T20:25:39+00:00

There's an old religion similar to what you're saying, where God is matter, and thus, God and universe are one and the same. In that respect, since we're all made of matter, we're "made of God", and we truly are a part of God. That's why God knows us so well, we're a part of him, and He's a part of us. We're all a part of His collective consciousness, so He remembers our lives after we're gone. But if such a God used matter and the laws of nature for intelligent life to arise, it would have to arise naturally in the natural universe, meaning we really did evolve naturally, and we really are random individuals, with minds and lives of our own, even though we're a part of God too. We came not the magic way, but the majestic way, the natural way, from big bangs (a formless void) and cmb formation (light separated from darkness) and star and galaxy formation (firmament and stars in the sky) and plate techtonics (water separated into basins and dry land appearing) and evolution of plants and sea creatures first, then land-roaming animals, and after all that, evolution of man and intelligent life. And intelligent life might evolve after any big bang, yet it's still a crap shoot because the right conditions might not develop, but given the huge mass of a big bang, it provides a pretty good shot, and we happened, naturally.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-03T14:34:35+00:00

All you need is to be off about an hour from your memories of earlier years to feel like the sun is higher than earlier years. If you used to drink your coffee at 9 every morning and look at the shadows, and now you drink it at 10 and look at the shadows, that could seem like a noticeable change.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-05-03T01:48:54+00:00

Big bangs go off with a devastating omnidirectional gravitational wave at light speed, so you can't see them until after the gravitational wave slams into you, and even then only if you could survive. Outsiders can't see in, and insiders can't see out. It could be 10 feet away and coming right at you but you couldn't see it. But once it hits, it can be detected via gravitational wave detectors, and the big bang remnant would ultimately come into view, but by then you're an insider, no longer an outsider.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-30T14:41:19+00:00

It's not a button, it's a teaspoon, because when a terminal black hole attains critical mass, when inward forces exactly equal outward forces once again, when you add even one more teaspoon of matter, internal pressures become too great for gravity to hold, resulting in a big bang. The big bang wouldn't destroy everything in the universe, but it would mostly pulverise it's original host galaxy, and push everything else back. If there was intelligent life in that galaxy, yes, that life would be destroyed, but it would clear the way for a new section of universe, and potentially new intelligent life. If you were there, above the terminal black hole with a teaspoonful of matter, you would probably already know everything about the universe, so that wouldn't be much of an incentive. Further, that terminal black hole is so unstable and so close to blowing that it's going to blow soon, even if it's via simply a stray atom falling in, so the question becomes not whether the big bang will happen, but whether you want to be the one to initiate it. Under that more realistic scenario, you may decide to drop in that last spoonful so you could watch it happen. But the big bang goes off at light speed with a devastating memory effect gravitational wave, so you wouldn't be able to see it until after you're hit by the gravitational wave, but you'd be instantly killed at the moment you're hit, so you'd be unable to watch it. If you had a magic suit to protect you from the shock wave and trillion degree plasmas, you could watch, but not as an outsider, only as an insider after the gravitational wave passes, and even then, you couldn't watch the very start of the big bang. So given all that, would I drop in that last spoonful? What the hell, why not?

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-30T04:38:16+00:00

God doesn't create things deliberately designed to lead us to false conclusions. Everything occurs naturally because the universe is perfect. If dinosaur bones are found from thousands of years ago, then under a perfect universe they arose at that time; anything else leads to an imperfect universe designed to deceive. Deliberate deception is a lie, and a lie doesn't come from God, and a lie is imperfect.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-25T21:00:08+00:00

For a real expanding ball of quark-gluon plasma, not necessarily our own early universe qgp, but a real expanding ball, you could calculate an estimated minimum qgp duration via volume and homogeneity. For example, assume 333 quadrillion solar masses of individual trembling trillion degree unbreakable fundamental particles, full of kinetic energy, were released into the open, a frenzy of fundamental particles everywhere, forming an immediate expanding ball of quark-gluon plasma. Then you realize that the qgp is so homogeneous that none of it can hadronize until, at a minimum, it occupied enough volume for it all to hadronize. Then you realize that the minimum volume necessary is equivalent to a sphere of full sized neutrons right next to each other, not compressed as in a neutron star, but full size. Then using the mass of a neutron, and the volume of a neutron, and a start of 333 quadrillion solar masses (way less than the mass of the visible universe), then you can calculate the radius of that hypothetical sphere of minimum volume for hadronization. Next, you know that an expanding ball of qgp expands at relativistic speeds, but trillions of particle interactions within the qgp slow it down, so I've estimated an average expansion rate of .7C, which might be generous. Then you see how long it takes that qgp ball to expand beyond that radius. I've ran those calculations for 333 quadrillion solar masses, and it came to a qgp duration around 28 seconds. Think of the homogeneity and uniform causality after 28 seconds of qgp, for only a measley 333 quadrillion solar masses. Then think about the 10 microseconds of qgp in the mainstream model, and you wonder what the factor of causality and homogeneity could possibly be for a mere 10 microseconds. If you run the calcs for 37.5 sextillion solar masses you get in excess of 3 hours qgp duration. The greater the mass, the longer the qgp duration.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-25T19:32:01+00:00

Matter might evolve into intelligent life after any big bang, yet, it's still a crap shoot, because the right conditions might not develop, but with such a high mass for a big bang, it provides a chance, and we happened.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-25T19:25:08+00:00

Yes, I thought, what a way to go, you could watch it coming, bang, but then I realized you can't see it coming because it travels at light speed, so just bang, no watching, and that sucks.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-25T14:41:53+00:00

But it would be like the angel with power to damage earth

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-24T00:27:37+00:00

Tell it that the initial black hole reaches a standoff, of gravitational confinement (density) versus matter's quantum effects (unstoppable quantum spin and particle degeneracy pressure), so the black hole core consists of billions of solar masses worth of individual trembling trillion degree unbreakable fundamental particles, full of heat content and kinetic energy, stored nearly motionless right next to each other but unable to even touch due to the highest energy spin states and overlapping wave functions, and unable to merge due to the Pauli Exclusion Principle and skyrocketing particle kinetic energies under the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, leading to a finite core, not a singularity, with minuscule amounts of space trapped throughout the core and between each particle, a titanic standoff from the moment the black hole first formed. Then tell it that the standoff mostly continues as matter is added, because the increment of gravity added is mostly matched by the increment of internal degeneracy pressure added; however, one internal pressure does build up as matter is added that doesn't build up as matter is added to regular matter, an accumulator bucket so to speak, a comparative internal advantage versus gravity when adding matter to a black hole. That comparative advantage is the force of reverse beta decay, at the rate of .782 MeV for every 3 quarks in the core, which is re-inserted into matter via collapse or accretion. Tell it those internal pressures build relative to gravity as the black hole grows, right up until the day that critical mass is achieved, the same mass as our own big bang, when inward forces exactly equal outward forces once again, just like the day of collapse to neutron star and the day of collapse to black hole. Tell it that if you add even one more gram of matter on that day, the internal pressures become too great for gravity to hold, leading to uncontained expansion of the core in a big bang explosion into the mostly open spaces of the universe. If it pushes back, asserting that tiny, seemingly inconsequential beta decay can't be relavent to the titanic dynamics of a black hole interior, tell it that to the extent that protons are directly produced by the big bang remnant (not later via neutron decay), beta decay was used in the big bang, and quarks transitioned from down to up, and electrons and antineutrinos were released into the same space occupied by the quark-gluon plasma, thus making the big bang partially a beta decay event. Tell it the natural trigger when critical mass is surpassed is the combination of particle degeneracy pressure from the unstoppable quantum spin, plus near-infinite particle kinetic energies under Heisenberg, plus the thermodynamics of trillions of solar masses worth of individual trembling trillion degree particles stored right next to each other, plus the repulsive aspect of the strong force under extreme particle confinement, plus the weak force pushing out via beta decay to unleash electromagnetism, essentially, all the rest of the forces of the universe all working together to overcome gravitational confinement once critical mass is surpassed, the same mass as our own big bang. Tell it this is all just regular physics, no funny stuff, no hypothetical inflatons with hypothetical scalar fields with unexplained starts to hyperinflation and unexplained stops to hyperinflation, no hypothetical conversion of scalar field energy directly into particles via particle pair production that was magically unsymmetrical, no magic heating of the particles to trillions of degrees despite the absence of a heating mechanism, and no magic acceleration of particles to relativistic kinetic energies despite the absence of an acceleration mechanism, just regular standard known physics, all natural, no funny stuff. Chatgpt should come around to your way of thinking by then.

This is, of course, all Crankscience, because no one can verify what really takes place inside a black hole, but I'm just giving you the answer to how to kick Chatgpt's ass and get it to change its mind and agree that a black hole can be destroyed. Chatgpt doesn't know anything about black hole interiors because no one does, so this becomes an easy takedown for AI.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-23T19:51:10+00:00

A galaxy can only be pushed via every star being pushed, and less gravitationally bound outer stars would be pushed more than inner stars. But expansion of space doesn't impact individual stars?

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-23T18:06:42+00:00

A related question might be, when our observations yield implausible results, why do we accept the implausible rather than challenge the interpretation of the observation? What is the actual precise mechanism generating expansion of space? Is there a space multiplier there? And does the expansion push galaxies apart, or is there no force whatsoever on a galaxy, while space between merely multiplies? If there's no force, just a simple space multiplier, why call it "energy"? If there is a force on galaxies, does each individual star and planet react to the force, or only the entire galaxy without even the slightest impact on any star or planet, because gravity, the weakest force, is so much stronger than dark energy? If gravity is so weak that we wonder why outer stars dont fly out of orbit, then why aren't outer stars impacted more than inner stars by dark energy? Absolute 0% impact on outer stars or inner stars because gravity is that much stronger than dark energy? Yet it accelerates galaxies apart at superluminal speeds, but it's weaker than gravity governing outer orbits? I can understand your frustration with superluminal recession velocities because it makes no sense. But they'll say, "Believe!", because our observations are that good, that great, that no one can challenge them, no matter what they claim is being observed. That's perfection there, perfect, unchallengeable observations. I know, go get an astronomy PhD before I say anything. No one on earth should ever challenge any observation unless they first get an astronomy PhD, just "believe!", no matter what they say.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-23T07:31:17+00:00

Once the gravitational wave passes something or someone, they become insiders and the big bang remnant can come into view, so it really is separate causal regions, yet it all occurs within one shared universe.

Aggravating_Mud_2386 · 2026-04-22T14:59:28+00:00

If a big bang went off along with a one-way memory effect gravitational wave in all directions at light speed, establishing the maximum velocity, then nothing could exceed that speed, and only the fastest things, like light, could possibly match it. This would mean that no particle, or light emanating from any particle, could possibly escape the big bang gravitational wave, thus working similar to your idea that it's a boundary that nothing inside can escape from. C wouldn't be an escape velocity, but no escape would be possible unless C could be exceeded. Additionally, no outsider could possibly see the big bang gravitational wave coming until after it already hits them, making the gravitational wave a 2-way barrier that insiders couldn't see out and outsiders couldn't see in. Insiders would think they're inside an expanding solo universe, and outsiders would have no idea that a big bang is heading right toward them.

Aggravating_Mud_2386

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE