Education Forums
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BURT
Guest
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:10 am Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
 |
|
On Jun 25, 1:52 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
Surfer wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:55:38 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com
wrote:
The energy shift to light revealed in Pound Rebka means infinite
energy shift to light for black hole horizons. Incoming light goes
infinitely blue shifted or infinitely energetic. While outgoing light
gets infinitely red shifted to zero energy.
Both these predictions for light's energy at any event horizon are
nonsense and disproves their existence.
Why? So far as we can tell the universe extends infinitely in all
directions. Does that disprove its existence?
Are you counting the space beyond the causal horizon to be part of our
Universe, or not?
|
There was a beginning to time but No Before.
Black holes have been disproven by the reasons I have given above.
Mitch Raemsch |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Eric Gisse
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:06 am Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jun 26, 4:10 pm, BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 25, 1:52 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Surfer wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:55:38 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com
wrote:
The energy shift to light revealed in Pound Rebka means infinite
energy shift to light for black hole horizons. Incoming light goes
infinitely blue shifted or infinitely energetic. While outgoing light
gets infinitely red shifted to zero energy.
Both these predictions for light's energy at any event horizon are
nonsense and disproves their existence.
Why? So far as we can tell the universe extends infinitely in all
directions. Does that disprove its existence?
Are you counting the space beyond the causal horizon to be part of our
Universe, or not?
There was a beginning to time but No Before.
Black holes have been disproven by the reasons I have given above.
Mitch Raemsch
|
http://www.mpe.mpg.de/ir/GC/index.php |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:25 am Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jun 26, 6:06 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 26, 4:10 pm, BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jun 25, 1:52 pm, Don Stockbauer <donstockba...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Surfer wrote:
On Sat, 21 Jun 2008 20:55:38 -0700 (PDT), BURT <macromi...@yahoo.com
wrote:
The energy shift to light revealed in Pound Rebka means infinite
energy shift to light for black hole horizons. Incoming light goes
infinitely blue shifted or infinitely energetic. While outgoing light
gets infinitely red shifted to zero energy.
Both these predictions for light's energy at any event horizon are
nonsense and disproves their existence.
Why? So far as we can tell the universe extends infinitely in all
directions. Does that disprove its existence?
Are you counting the space beyond the causal horizon to be part of our
Universe, or not?
There was a beginning to time but No Before.
Black holes have been disproven by the reasons I have given above.
Mitch Raemsch
http://www.mpe.mpg.de/ir/GC/index.php- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
Black holes are just an assumption. Now they have been disproved.
Mitch Raemsch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
NoEinstein
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:01 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jun 25, 3:46 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 25, 11:43 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 25, 9:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 22, 5:25 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:25 am, Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 4:31 am, Surfer <n...@spam.net> wrote:
Why? So far as we can tell the universe extends infinitely in all
directions. Does that disprove its existence?
No it doesn't! We all know that surrounding the universe is a large
spherical wall! It is the mass of that wall which explains the ever
increasing expansion of the "known" universe after the Big Bang! But
since we really don't know what is on the other side of that wall,
that probably disproves the existence of anything beyond it! Does
this make sense?
Dear Benj: The present Universe photos suggest the Universe is potato
shaped, not spherical.
Oh, this is funny! Might want to google "geometrical acceptance".
It might be spherical if ether was a uniform
pressure, everywhere. But ether tends to stay near where most of the
masses are. Ether has near zero outward pressure against "the wall".
The latter is a magnetic meniscus that traps wandering IOTAs (the
smallest energy unit of ether). To align magnetically, IOTAs must be
in locations not easily disrupted by charged particles, or even
concentrations of light. Sunspots are magnetic storms. There is a
constant traffic jamb between the incoming IOTAs and the outgoing
charged particles and photons. The further away from those traffic
jambs, the more likely the ether meniscuses are to form. The "Swiss
Cheese" voids between galaxies probably have meniscuses, too. Those
voids are the Autobahns of the Universe—there are no speed limits on
space travel! — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Dear Folks: Who, this side of a Black Hole cares whether PD thinks
anything is funny? That couch potato has zero objectivity, and zero
reasoning ability. — NoEinstein —
This is what is known as "projecting".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
Dear Eric: Glad to hear from you! I thought you had been kidnapped
or something. Have you found a money paying career or job? Hang in
there. Long ago you predicted that PD would tear me up. But he
hasn't. He does keep coming out of nowhere and biting my pants cuff.
But I'm used to that. I wish you would argue science instead of
making those short put-downs like Jeff also observed. Find yourself a
honey, and maybe your attitude will sweeten. — NoEinstein — |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
NoEinstein
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:03 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jun 25, 4:30 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 25, 2:43 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 25, 9:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 22, 5:25 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:25 am, Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 4:31 am, Surfer <n...@spam.net> wrote:
Why? So far as we can tell the universe extends infinitely in all
directions. Does that disprove its existence?
No it doesn't! We all know that surrounding the universe is a large
spherical wall! It is the mass of that wall which explains the ever
increasing expansion of the "known" universe after the Big Bang! But
since we really don't know what is on the other side of that wall,
that probably disproves the existence of anything beyond it! Does
this make sense?
Dear Benj: The present Universe photos suggest the Universe is potato
shaped, not spherical.
Oh, this is funny! Might want to google "geometrical acceptance".
It might be spherical if ether was a uniform
pressure, everywhere. But ether tends to stay near where most of the
masses are. Ether has near zero outward pressure against "the wall".
The latter is a magnetic meniscus that traps wandering IOTAs (the
smallest energy unit of ether). To align magnetically, IOTAs must be
in locations not easily disrupted by charged particles, or even
concentrations of light. Sunspots are magnetic storms. There is a
constant traffic jamb between the incoming IOTAs and the outgoing
charged particles and photons. The further away from those traffic
jambs, the more likely the ether meniscuses are to form. The "Swiss
Cheese" voids between galaxies probably have meniscuses, too. Those
voids are the Autobahns of the Universe—there are no speed limits on
space travel! — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Dear Folks: Who, this side of a Black Hole cares whether PD thinks
anything is funny? That couch potato has zero objectivity, and zero
reasoning ability. — NoEinstein —
You know, if a clown trips over his oversized shoes and lands face-
first in a puddle of mud he's just made by peeing in the dirt, it
wouldn't matter one bit if the clown gets indignant and huffs, "Who
cares if you think that's funny?" It'd still be funny.
PD- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
Dear PD: In your case you keep putting your feet in your mouth. Are
you teething? — NoEinstein — |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
PD
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:14 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jun 27, 4:01 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 25, 3:46 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 25, 11:43 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 25, 9:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 22, 5:25 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:25 am, Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 4:31 am, Surfer <n...@spam.net> wrote:
Why? So far as we can tell the universe extends infinitely in all
directions. Does that disprove its existence?
No it doesn't! We all know that surrounding the universe is a large
spherical wall! It is the mass of that wall which explains the ever
increasing expansion of the "known" universe after the Big Bang! But
since we really don't know what is on the other side of that wall,
that probably disproves the existence of anything beyond it! Does
this make sense?
Dear Benj: The present Universe photos suggest the Universe is potato
shaped, not spherical.
Oh, this is funny! Might want to google "geometrical acceptance".
It might be spherical if ether was a uniform
pressure, everywhere. But ether tends to stay near where most of the
masses are. Ether has near zero outward pressure against "the wall".
The latter is a magnetic meniscus that traps wandering IOTAs (the
smallest energy unit of ether). To align magnetically, IOTAs must be
in locations not easily disrupted by charged particles, or even
concentrations of light. Sunspots are magnetic storms. There is a
constant traffic jamb between the incoming IOTAs and the outgoing
charged particles and photons. The further away from those traffic
jambs, the more likely the ether meniscuses are to form. The "Swiss
Cheese" voids between galaxies probably have meniscuses, too. Those
voids are the Autobahns of the Universe—there are no speed limits on
space travel! — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Dear Folks: Who, this side of a Black Hole cares whether PD thinks
anything is funny? That couch potato has zero objectivity, and zero
reasoning ability. — NoEinstein —
This is what is known as "projecting".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Dear Eric: Glad to hear from you! I thought you had been kidnapped
or something. Have you found a money paying career or job? Hang in
there. Long ago you predicted that PD would tear me up. But he
hasn't.
|
There was once a boxer whose strategy was not really to land a blow
but only to remain standing. He trained and trained on taking blows to
the head and to the body without dropping. His rationale was that, as
long as he was standing, he was not defeated. And, as his career
choice produced more and more brain damage, he eventually came to the
conclusion that as long as he was still standing, he had in fact won
the match. It didn't matter that he had no more sensation in his face,
that both eyes were swollen shut, that his nose was broken in several
places and that he was losing blood at an alarming rate, and that he
had never once landed even a glancing punch on his opponent. As long
as he was standing, he viewed himself the victor. The spectators,
however, either couldn't watch the carnage, or they were entranced by
it.
| Quote: |
He does keep coming out of nowhere and biting my pants cuff.
But I'm used to that. I wish you would argue science instead of
making those short put-downs like Jeff also observed. Find yourself a
honey, and maybe your attitude will sweeten. — NoEinstein — |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Bob Cain
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:04 am Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
PD wrote:
| Quote: |
There was once a boxer whose strategy was not really to land a blow
but only to remain standing. He trained and trained on taking blows to
the head and to the body without dropping. His rationale was that, as
long as he was standing, he was not defeated. And, as his career
choice produced more and more brain damage, he eventually came to the
conclusion that as long as he was still standing, he had in fact won
the match. It didn't matter that he had no more sensation in his face,
that both eyes were swollen shut, that his nose was broken in several
places and that he was losing blood at an alarming rate, and that he
had never once landed even a glancing punch on his opponent. As long
as he was standing, he viewed himself the victor. The spectators,
however, either couldn't watch the carnage, or they were entranced by
it.
|
LaMotta vs. Robinson (final match) - February 14, 1951 - Chicago Stadium
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."
A. Einstein |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
NoEinstein
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:08 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jun 27, 5:14 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jun 27, 4:01 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 25, 3:46 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 25, 11:43 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 25, 9:49 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jun 22, 5:25 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 9:25 am, Benj <bjac...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
On Jun 22, 4:31 am, Surfer <n...@spam.net> wrote:
Why? So far as we can tell the universe extends infinitely in all
directions. Does that disprove its existence?
No it doesn't! We all know that surrounding the universe is a large
spherical wall! It is the mass of that wall which explains the ever
increasing expansion of the "known" universe after the Big Bang! But
since we really don't know what is on the other side of that wall,
that probably disproves the existence of anything beyond it! Does
this make sense?
Dear Benj: The present Universe photos suggest the Universe is potato
shaped, not spherical.
Oh, this is funny! Might want to google "geometrical acceptance".
It might be spherical if ether was a uniform
pressure, everywhere. But ether tends to stay near where most of the
masses are. Ether has near zero outward pressure against "the wall".
The latter is a magnetic meniscus that traps wandering IOTAs (the
smallest energy unit of ether). To align magnetically, IOTAs must be
in locations not easily disrupted by charged particles, or even
concentrations of light. Sunspots are magnetic storms. There is a
constant traffic jamb between the incoming IOTAs and the outgoing
charged particles and photons. The further away from those traffic
jambs, the more likely the ether meniscuses are to form. The "Swiss
Cheese" voids between galaxies probably have meniscuses, too. Those
voids are the Autobahns of the Universe—there are no speed limits on
space travel! — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Dear Folks: Who, this side of a Black Hole cares whether PD thinks
anything is funny? That couch potato has zero objectivity, and zero
reasoning ability. — NoEinstein —
This is what is known as "projecting".- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Dear Eric: Glad to hear from you! I thought you had been kidnapped
or something. Have you found a money paying career or job? Hang in
there. Long ago you predicted that PD would tear me up. But he
hasn't.
There was once a boxer whose strategy was not really to land a blow
but only to remain standing. He trained and trained on taking blows to
the head and to the body without dropping. His rationale was that, as
long as he was standing, he was not defeated. And, as his career
choice produced more and more brain damage, he eventually came to the
conclusion that as long as he was still standing, he had in fact won
the match. It didn't matter that he had no more sensation in his face,
that both eyes were swollen shut, that his nose was broken in several
places and that he was losing blood at an alarming rate, and that he
had never once landed even a glancing punch on his opponent. As long
as he was standing, he viewed himself the victor. The spectators,
however, either couldn't watch the carnage, or they were entranced by
it.
He does keep coming out of nowhere and biting my pants cuff.
But I'm used to that. I wish you would argue science instead of
making those short put-downs like Jeff also observed. Find yourself a
honey, and maybe your attitude will sweeten. — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
Dear PD: That was an interesting analogy. Those who like to view
boxing and wrestling have unresolved issues of hate. Mohammed Ali got
Parkinson's disease from being a boxer. But he was (is) a most
interesting personality. — NoEinstein — |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
NoEinstein
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:13 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jul 8, 4:11 am, Bob Cain <arc...@arcanemethods.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
PD wrote:
There was once a boxer whose strategy was not really to land a blow
but only to remain standing. He trained and trained on taking blows to
the head and to the body without dropping. His rationale was that, as
long as he was standing, he was not defeated. And, as his career
choice produced more and more brain damage, he eventually came to the
conclusion that as long as he was still standing, he had in fact won
the match. It didn't matter that he had no more sensation in his face,
that both eyes were swollen shut, that his nose was broken in several
places and that he was losing blood at an alarming rate, and that he
had never once landed even a glancing punch on his opponent. As long
as he was standing, he viewed himself the victor. The spectators,
however, either couldn't watch the carnage, or they were entranced by
it.
LaMotta vs. Robinson (final match) - February 14, 1951 - Chicago Stadium
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."
A. Einstein
|
Dear Bob: Einstein liked to ‘play bright’ by writing and memorizing
things to be quoted. He wasn't very good at describing things,
simply. But because he implied that what he was saying WAS simple, he
elevated himself, intellectually. However, Einstein was still just an
85 IQ moron. — NoEinstein — |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Eric Gisse
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:29 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jul 10, 1:13 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jul 8, 4:11 am, Bob Cain <arc...@arcanemethods.com> wrote:
PD wrote:
There was once a boxer whose strategy was not really to land a blow
but only to remain standing. He trained and trained on taking blows to
the head and to the body without dropping. His rationale was that, as
long as he was standing, he was not defeated. And, as his career
choice produced more and more brain damage, he eventually came to the
conclusion that as long as he was still standing, he had in fact won
the match. It didn't matter that he had no more sensation in his face,
that both eyes were swollen shut, that his nose was broken in several
places and that he was losing blood at an alarming rate, and that he
had never once landed even a glancing punch on his opponent. As long
as he was standing, he viewed himself the victor. The spectators,
however, either couldn't watch the carnage, or they were entranced by
it.
LaMotta vs. Robinson (final match) - February 14, 1951 - Chicago Stadium
Bob
--
"Things should be described as simply as possible, but no simpler."
A. Einstein
Dear Bob: Einstein liked to ‘play bright’ by writing and memorizing
things to be quoted. He wasn't very good at describing things,
simply. But because he implied that what he was saying WAS simple, he
elevated himself, intellectually. However, Einstein was still just an
85 IQ moron. — NoEinstein —
|
With a Bachelors, PhD, and Nobel prize in Physics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
PD
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 12:25 am Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jul 10, 4:08 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
Dear PD: That was an interesting analogy. Those who like to view
boxing and wrestling have unresolved issues of hate. Mohammed Ali got
Parkinson's disease from being a boxer. But he was (is) a most
interesting personality. — NoEinstein —
|
I wonder if you drew the intended inference.
PD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Mitch Raemsch
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 4:25 am Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
The mathematical absurdities of black holes pointed out by people like
Stephen Hawking proves that they do not occur in nature. The extreme
of the theory is not valid in nature.
Mitch Raemsch |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
PD
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 12:03 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jul 10, 11:25 pm, Mitch Raemsch <mitch.nicolas.raem...@gmail.com>
wrote:
| Quote: |
The mathematical absurdities of black holes pointed out by people like
Stephen Hawking
|
First of all, as far as I know there is nothing absurd about black
holes, though they are a tad unusual. Moreover, outside the event
horizon, which is the limit where the rules of our universe apply,
there is nothing that could be labeled infinite or a singularity.
Anything infinite or singular is what is *presumed*, but not known, to
apply on the *other side* of the event horizon, a domain separated
from our universe. Finally, it is a mistake to say that if it is
infinite it cannot belong to our universe, because everything in our
universe is finite -- that is demonstrably not true, and insisting
that it should be is just a denial of reality.
| Quote: |
proves that they do not occur in nature. The extreme
of the theory is not valid in nature.
Mitch Raemsch |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Spaceman
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:26 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
PD wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jul 10, 11:25 pm, Mitch Raemsch <mitch.nicolas.raem...@gmail.com
wrote:
The mathematical absurdities of black holes pointed out by people
like Stephen Hawking
First of all, as far as I know there is nothing absurd about black
holes, though they are a tad unusual. Moreover, outside the event
horizon, which is the limit where the rules of our universe apply,
snipped |
ROFLOL
<rubber ruler world community meeting>
The event horizon..
All rubber ruler denizens, behind the black curtain is beyond our
current physics, we think physics may differ inside the little black box
with the vail over it!
The rules of our universe do not apply to inside the little box in our
universe!
All hail the naked king!
Hail Einstein!
</rubber ruler world community meeting>
LOL
--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
Mitch Raemsch
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 11, 2008 6:59 pm Post subject: Re: Black holes disproven Now |
|
|
On Jul 11, 4:03 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: |
On Jul 10, 11:25 pm, Mitch Raemsch <mitch.nicolas.raem...@gmail.com
wrote:
The mathematical absurdities of black holes pointed out by people like
Stephen Hawking
First of all, as far as I know there is nothing absurd about black
holes,
|
Not according to Stephen Hawking. There are mathematical infinities at
both the singularity and event horizons of a black hole.
| Quote: |
though they are a tad unusual. Moreover, outside the event
horizon, which is the limit where the rules of our universe apply,
there is nothing that could be labeled infinite or a singularity.
Anything infinite or singular is what is *presumed*, but not known, to
|
You don't know what the exreme of the theory predicts if you are
saying that.
| Quote: |
apply on the *other side* of the event horizon, a domain separated
from our universe. Finally, it is a mistake to say that if it is
infinite it cannot belong to our universe, because everything in our
universe is finite -- that is demonstrably not true, and insisting
that it should be is just a denial of reality.
proves that they do not occur in nature. The extreme
of the theory is not valid in nature.
Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
Black holes don't occur in nature. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
Ads |
Advertising
Sponsor
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
97 Attacks blocked
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
