>Look Donald! A star's goin' out!
>WAOW IT JUST VANISHED! HOLY SCIENCE DOCTOR FAUCI IM POSTING THIS ON REDDI-There was dust on the lense.
>>17009927>lense
>>17009927Is settled science, chud. Everyone knows not being able to see a star proves black hole are verified 100 sigma real result research conclusion
>>17010125so where did it go?
>>17009927reddit derangement syndrome
>>17010126The circuit has changed and has been interrupted
>>17009920
>>17009920I thought a star collapsing into a black hole also resulted in a huge explosion akin to a supernova. Or am I mistaken?
>>17010339Basedatists found stars that just disappear. So now they believe it's possible that they just turn into black holes (black holes don't exist). Even though before they found these data points they said that it's not possible. They're completely unwilling of entertaining the idea that all their assumptions are wrong.
>>17010363>black holes don't exist????????
>>17010303Looks like the theory of that guy you will banned here if you link his papers.
>>17010339Most of the time yes, but it's complicated. What actually happens at the end of a massive star's life depends on the final mass. To produce a black hole you need a fairly massive star ~20 solar masses. It's thought that for somewhat more massive stars the supernova collapses earlier into a black hole, and so the supernova is less energetic. But if you take an even higher mass there are points where you get no compact remnant at all. Note that very massive stars are super rare, a lot of this is theory.
>>17010377Why thatAnd why are there magnetic fields *between* galaxies
>>17010566because there are currents in space connecting different objectsThis is what is at the center of galaxieshttps://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/106378-highest-electrical-current-in-the-universe
>>17010174>Reddi-ACK!
>>17010568>This is what is at the center of galaxiesIf it's so simple then why don't you calculate the orbits of all the stars in the center of the Milky Way? Which just happen to be in orbits described by gravity, and a compact object in the core. The black hole model is perfectly testable, it predicts future orbits. And has been tested against new observations, like gravitational redshift and advance of periastron. Why are your type so disinterested in the actual data? >>17010566>And why are there magnetic fields *between* galaxiesThey haven't been detected yet. Only upper limits. If they exist, they are weak. There is evidence of magnetic fields near galaxies, but that can be explained by weakly magnetised outflows from galaxies.
>>17010363>Even though before they found these data points they said that it's not possible.Nope. People have been looking for these things for more than a decade.:>>17010510>>17010491>>17010303There are no serious papers, just half baked word vomit. There is no serious research program. Proponents don't even agree with each other on the most basic shit (what causes redshift, whether the Sun is positive or negatively charged, whether gravity is just electromagnetism (very dumb)). There is no theory, just a loose collection of ideas.They also ignore all the incredible gaps. Like the fact that none of the spacecraft orbiting the Sun have bumped into one of these giant invisible currents, even Ulysses which went over the poles. Or of why the number of neutrinos emitted by the Sun just happened to match to the value predicted by fusion, meaning you don't actually need any more power from the invisible power cable.
>>17009920Ancient starlight
>>17009928>basedlense
>>17010566so blackholes are wyrm holes, ok, but how will that help me cum in a hot girl?>oh, hey girl, did you know that blackholes all spin in the same direction, spewing out radio jetsi dont think that's going to work.
