OUT OF THE BALLPARK

Typing these numbers is useful, g’mornin !! The chosen Schwarzschild radius of E4 meters can be divided by ‘c’ to get light-seconds, so R = 0.3 E-4.
In a year there are about 3 E7 seconds, so in these units, we seem small, with
R = E-11 lightyears.
THE BIG PICTURE::: If there are E12 galaxies, and each one hosts E9 black holes, that’s E21. My calcs say integrated all the way out, each one adds more than 20 radial units…
E-11 x 20 x E21 is 2 E10 . Oh shit… I AM SO RATTLED I UNDERFIGURED THIS.
= 2 E11 lyr.  Seems the Swiss cheese has more holes, than cheese…. This is a first, pretty dumb estimate. I need galaxy spacing.

On this next day, I see I missed a factor of 10 in the Schwarz. radius, and this lowers it, whew !!!   Haaaaaaaa, it is still a major development. The added size is roughly equal to all that already is.
Advertisements

17 thoughts on “OUT OF THE BALLPARK

  1. Is this a simple multiplication of universe radius increase when black hole effects are added volumetrically? In other words, how does extra space created by a stellar black hole in the Milky Way get perceived to an observer in Andromeda whan a black hole forms there?

    Like

    • Perhaps putting both the question and the answer into words can be tricky, yet a good verbal description may be helpful for a paper. Are we proposing something new in saying the black hole creates extra space (seen from far away) and does this mean that other particular papers are incorrect? If a single black hole can add radius ‘dr’ to the universe, then the additional volume added is the surface area of the universe times ‘dr’. This seems like a lot of clout for a single black hole?

      Like

    • On the other hand we’ve seen the other references stating what the proper distance is and how the circumference is measured. Are we being consistent with this or do we have a different result?

      Like

  2. LOOK at the equation. In the far, we can write S = r + 1/2 log r . Near-field, and far, are defined wrt Schwarz. radius. Careful, this is the calculus form in base ‘e’ !!!

    Like

    • r S S-r
      0.3162E+01 0.3738E+01 0.58
      0.1000E+02 0.1115E+02 1.15
      0.3162E+02 0.3335E+02 1.73
      0.1000E+03 0.1023E+03 2.30
      0.3162E+03 0.3191E+03 2.88
      0.1000E+04 0.1003E+04 3.45
      0.3162E+04 0.3166E+04 4.03
      0.1000E+05 0.1000E+05 4.61
      0.3162E+05 0.3163E+05 5.18
      0.1000E+06 0.1000E+06 5.76
      0.3162E+06 0.3162E+06 6.33
      0.1000E+07 0.1000E+07 6.91
      0.3162E+07 0.3162E+07 7.48
      0.1000E+08 0.1000E+08 8.06
      0.3162E+08 0.3162E+08 8.63
      0.1000E+09 0.1000E+09 9.21
      0.3162E+09 0.3162E+09 9.79
      0.1000E+10 0.1000E+10 10.36
      0.3162E+10 0.3162E+10 10.94
      0.1000E+11 0.1000E+11 11.51

      Like

    • This is one way to look at the equation. This would be a key step, just in case we’d want to make a graphical plot for the paper.

      If I’m not understanding something conceptually that I should be, then I’d invite you to add some thoughts as this type of back and forth is a way to help flesh out the paper.

      There shouldn’t be any reason to get frustrated. It simply takes some time and effort to put this all together.
      >>It is frustrating for me. From you, I need really only two numbers, yah? The “equation” is simple.

      Like

  3. The log of 10, in base ‘e’, is 2.3 . I love my log-log sliderule. Distance to Andromeda measured in our Schwarz. units, is 2.5 million lyr, times E11, the inverse of our unit. We calc for r=2.5E17 , yah?

    Like

  4. RADIUS IS RADIUS. Clout, yes !!! CHECK IT OUT, I don’t quite have words yet, but for each BH source, we add the log terms, but not the original statement of ‘r’.

    Like

  5. Are we able to demonstrate that the circumference of the Earth’s orbit changes if the Sun collapses into a BH? Is this change on the order of r(s)? What is the functional relationship as a function of solar radius during a collapse? This might make an interesting graph.

    Like

  6. If we can write an equation for this (or other things) with all terms defined it would be possible to tabulate a functional relationship with a short computer program.

    Like

  7. I was thinking this helps build contextual understanding and a logical case for the main hypothesis. This applies at least in my mind, though it’s true I’m unsure whether this would be germane for readers of the paper.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s