Are black holes giant atoms?
>>16959336Nö, but neutron stars kinda are.
>>16959336>Are black holes [gibberish]?No.
>>16959348>>16959346Why not?
>>16959353Define atom, its properties, and how it applies to black hole.
>>16959405no need to get so defensive lmaoso like if all the particles and shit from the the atoms are squished together inside the black hole wouldn't it be like they were all part of one big atom
>>16959336Spread your cheeks and look at the mirror
>>16959336We don't know what they are, hence the mystery. Like we just don't have a clear model for what happens to matter once gravity crosses that point. As >>16959346 said neutron stars kind of look like a giant ass Bohr atom since it's a clump of neutrons and protons which can even have a hazy electron cloud around it
>>16959336technically a transmutator, converting matter slowing into low state energy
>>16959405>black holes aren’t atoms>actually we don’t have a definition for atoms lol>actually we do but it just so happens not to include black holes>and no we won’t tell you what that definition is you have to provide itdumb glow nigger
>>16959336Yes. Both have identical structure:- Tiny dense core (~10-5 of total radius) - Vast gradient zone containing all the mass/energy- r_inner/r_s ≈ r_nucleus/r_atom ≈ 10-5The core of a black hole isn't a singularity.It's where density hits Planck limit — matter becomes information. Same as a nucleusholds the atom's identity.Not a metaphor. Geometry.
>>16959612Kill yourself, slopper faggot.
>>16959612cool it with the anti semitism
>>16959336Atoms don't have event horizons.
>>16959670well yeah, I was asking if black holes were atoms, not if atoms were black holes bruh
>>16959725black holes have event horizons, so they're not atoms
>>16959726wtf, is this a bot
>>16959727Black holes have an obligatory property that atoms do not.
>>16959729if they're really big atoms they'd act differently
>>16959736A singularity isn't really big, it is an infinitely dense point.
>>16959737singularities are dumb, makes zero sense
>>16959740Absolutely, but there is currently no better model for what's going on with a black hole.
>>16959746wouldn't it just be something like a neutron star insidethe infinetly dense shit makes no sense if there's a finite amount of stuff inside
>>16959405Well if you go with the greek definition, than ἄτομος (átomos) means indivisible which would include a black hole ad it is not. (While a nuclear atom acutally is)
>>16959405two things i dont understand are the same
>>16959640>HURR DURR THE JEWISH SCIENTIFIC ESTABLISHMENT IS HIDING THIS FROM USkys
>>16959336The shape of out universe is spherical anon
>>16959782a finite amount in an infinitely small point space is infinitely dense, look at the equation for density and take the limit as volume approaches zero (from the right)
>>16959336>Are black holes giant atoms?No
>>16959612try thinking for yourself instead of using an AI agent to come up with your stupid opinions
