Black holes are flat, not round. There is virtually no actual proof that black holes are round

so just because someone professing to understand things hasnt written some scribbles and formulas to prove an assumption of a THEORY not a TRUTH, that invalidates my theory?

i have to make scribbles and write random numbers down and magically my theory becomes religion?

einstein field equations are based on an assumption, and so is mine, there is no difference except i dont have a bunch of squiggles written down to make it look more impressive

so sad how limited "mathemeticians" minds are, cant think outside the box and see the true reality is flat.

SAGE GOES IN ALL FIELDS

Black holes are roughly symmetric you plebian. Spinning black holes are oblate. Really obvious.

SUMMER
U
M
M
E
R

its time to admit what people have been afraid to say out loud for a while now: doing a BA is harder than doing a bsc doing a BA is really, really hard. Its much Harder in fact, than studying maths, For starters,we cant copy each others answers like you do in your coursework, and once you learn something uve learnt it – it’s not so easy for us. we have to chug a bottle of wine and weep over Sparknotes very basic summaries before we can even fathom choosing our essay titles, let alone writing out introductions. BS students can just Google their answers or ask matt on the boys Whatsapp what he got for question 1a We get given the choice to write our own essay title too – isit some sort of reverse psychology where our tutors want us to write an essay title to show autonomy or will they take offence if we dont pick one of theirs It’s much harder than finding out what 'x' is when it comes to coursework, ure always going to get higher than ull come back with a smarmy 90% and we can tell you think our hard earned 71% is rubbish, but it’s all relative you may have beaten us by 19% but let’s be honest: it’s not really your own work In BA we have to go and right arguments. We have to actually form ideas out of words, and do so in a coherent and convincing way. If our marker is in a bad mood because his cat’s shit on his first edition of oliver twist we wont know about it, but our grades might be lower. Your marker, on the other hand, cant begrudge you for regurgitating a mathematics equation – two plus two will always equal four Its obvious that bSc students think BA students want to be them. You ask us: “What’s the point to your degree The answer is quite honestly is that you’re intimidated by us. So don’t think we want to be you just because we skim past your inaccuracies which we get bang on point everyday – itsharder to be a BA student because people take humanitis for granted but think that being skilled at science is a gift.

This is clearly bait. Nobody is willingly this stupid.

Secondly, you didn't make a "Theory", you have a hypothesis. If you want your hypothesis to become a theory, do some experimentation, or show us a mathematical proof/model that shows us that you are correct. After peer-reveiw and you most likely receiving a Nobel Prize will your hypothesis become user's Theory of Flat Holes.

I am asking you to do that "fancy scribbling" you seem so annoyed with to shut us up. The difference between Einstein's scribbling and yours, is that his actually follows math, while you will write down a ton of incoherent symbols to try to prove a point.

Please post your proof. I await with bated breath.

> now there are flatholers like flat earthers wasn't enough

>sees bait
>calls it stupid to go for bait
>goes for bait
Mate, leave the Veeky Forums fag alone in this miserable justifying

Theres No proof of blackholes even existing

>this is all theoretical, and so my theory is just as valid

I think black holes are shaped like a pissing gnome.

What's to say it can't be, all theoretical, just as valid, etc.

This desu

Explain the x-ray emissions from Cygnus X-1 and the gravitational waves detected by LIGO.
>le faulty measurements meme

If I remember correctly it's..

R=2mg/c2

Am I right?

Please fucking tell me I'm right.

c^2*

black holes arent flat or round you incomparably retarded inbred

a black hole is an object which occupies zero space. thats the point, heavier than even degenerate forces can withstand & therefore compressed into a pointlike object

its event horizon, which is the visible manifestation of our object, is round, due to its symmetrical gravitational pull, ajd enlarges as the singularity pulls in mass

its accretion disk is usually a disk

your question is similar to my asking, why CANT the vacuum of space be the color mauve? because its not fucking there you renaissance of genetic failure, thats why, youre asking the wrong question

>why cant a pointlike singularity be a pancake you guys are so mean

eat a dick

The moon landing was real, but the moon is flat

The moon isn't real, but people landed on it.

Landing isn't real, but moon people

The moon isn't landing, but the people are real.
>they're among us

The moon isn't landing

it's crashing

>pointlike
>similar to a point but not a point

so it could in fact still be flat, even if very small?

>the moon landings were real
>and they pissed it off

People aren't real, but the land is mooning us

black hole cant be flat because they dont exist

>Black holes should squish themselves into the smallest space possible
>what's the isoperimetric inequality?

The moon people are really landing, but

The people landing are really mooning. Butt.

I chuckle thinking of the person who first wrote this. A legitimate BA would have a migraine trying to write so deliberately poorly.

so you just naturally assume all black holes .. simply face the earth with their broad side?

smarten the fuk up.

there are trillions of black holes in the universe

we can only see a handful from earth

statistically it isnt impossible that all the black holes we have seen to date arent just facing us

i mean if we zoom in with better technology, we might find they arent facing us exactly

but from the current pictures of black holes, yes they could be flat

>pic related, this one is facing right at us as can be seen by the way it looks

get a bunch of round magnets and throw them together and see what shape they form

there isnt anything to miss you idiot, what part of 'a fucking singularity' is failing to penetrate your ivory skull

the event horizon is a ball, the black hole that generates it is a point of zero size

seriously are you fifteen i remember being both this adamant & stupid for several years around that age

>zero size
>zero depth
SOUNDS FLAT TO ME

flat disk = two dimensions, three in our universe

singularity = none

manifolds

dragonfruit

see i can do it too youre an idiot

it isn't zero niggerbitch it's 'near-zero'

look, a plane is flat
but a plane is normally talked about in higher dimensional contexts, e.g. a 2d plane in 3d space

flat implies something 3d that is "practically 2d" (or less), in some sense

manifold is often used to refer to objects embedded in higher dimensional contexts, e.g. a circle is a 1d manifold because a circle can simplify be defined: x=cos(t), y=-sin(t) - with 1 variable. A circle has a dimensionality of 1 (like all lines) but is embedded in 2+ dimensions.

A 0d point in 3d space is flat

practically 2d normally means that it's got very low depth, but depending on the shape it might mean otherwise

>0d
Imbecile.

sounds like a flat black hole is possible

and anyways if black holes werent flat, why would there be jets coming out of them on exactly both sides of the black hole?

if it was round then the matter would stream everywhere

but they come out exactly on opposite sides

sounds flat to me

did you ever watch flatland? I think you should. you seem to be having trouble imagining that everything isnt as 3D as it actually is

theres nothing wrong with flat things

>ITT: one big reddit circle jerk

Veeky Forums was a mistake

the jets of matter expelled from a quasar are directed by its magnetic field. you seem to have trouble imagining how stupid you sound.

exucse me? my opinion is just as valid as anyone elses

did you forget theories is just assumptions? who are you to tell me im wrong?

you tell me to do the math, but have you done it either? no? whats that? you just repeat what youve been told and cant think for yourself?

oh ok then >_>

for one, i can spell excuse

(if youre as incredibly useless as youve led me to believe, nows when youll respond by suggesting that my suggestion that your response is invalidated by a single spelling error is invalid. dont rush, you might hurt something)

my dick is bigger than yours, too.

also, you bring up an interesting point about opinions. youre right, yours is just as valid as mine, if you believe that all people are created equal. however, we are not. you are inferior to a great many people. i am as well, but im a sight better than you.

im going to go out on a limb here & suggest that youre either a kid or a joker. the first means im guaranteed to have a much higher level of self esteem than you. the second means youre so terrible at finding ways to entertain yourself that you do it here, & i would then have an INSANELY high level of self worth compared to you.

either way, shut off the computer, go outside, & play with some sticks. santa isnt real, soda makes you fat, & black holes arent shaped like gods dinner plates.

>nows
>yours
>youre
>yours
>&
>youre
>self_esteem
>youre
>&
>insanely
>&
>isnt
>&
>arent

whose bad at spelling again? nice ad hominems and black kettles and pots but you cant insult my valid arguements away.

sorry it's just not that easy

Not him, but 'yours' and 'insanely' are both spelled correctly.

Yes it is.

Oh dear, without any proof and while working solely with our opinions, it looks as though we've got a tie. How about you go find something to break it, like, oh I don't know, a single piece of evidence or any applied mathematics whatsoever?

Tell you what. Go locate the nearest STD-riddled addict hobo that ISN'T your blood relative, & if you can manage to take a picture of them signing off on their agreement with you on this without them biting off your ear, I'll concede. No contest. All you need is someone else agreeing with you on this idiocy, & I'm out for the count. ONE other human being who doesn't think you're a blithering inbred without the slightest understanding of the world around you, & you WIN. I triple-dog-dare you.

>insanely

lots of people in this thread already agreed with me.

proof of burden more?

its not on me its on you.

No.

Blackholes cannot be a certain shape because objects with a shape occupy a certain area. Blackholes are the absence of space therefore their shape is not definitive.

>did you forget theories is just assumptions?
Not him, but that's completely wrong.
You don't belong here if you don't already understand how horribly wrong this is.
In layman's English, an theory is a vague idea that barely explains something, and is accepted by at least one person, mostly because it serves some emotional need to believe something in particular.

By contrast, a Veeky Forumsentific theory is a well-reasoned idea that's widely accepted by the scientific community because it's been thoroughly tested, AND it fits well with other scientific knowledge.

hmm, i dont think thats right

Why dont you try enveloping yourself into a blackhole and then analyzing its shape. Once you have done so then I can accept the idea of a blackhole having a definitive shape.

well just have to agree and disagree on this one and one day when its proven they are flat or have no shape we will remember back to this moment and give a private nod to the victor

i am him. just abandon thread, i remember being this stoically idiotic once. you cant win with a Dr. Pepper-addled fourteen year old who just read his first book on astronomy

you stuff it too, we're just encouraging this retard by bumping his thread

we may have different theories on the shape of a black hole but i dont remember ever insulting you because of it

in the eyes of time and space we are all equal and everything we say and do positively contributes to the advancement of humanity

Be well

dude im not insulting you im saying stop wasting your time

you fucking bitchtit muckraker fatshit

you too

[eqn] F = \frac{GMm}{R^2} [/eqn]

Gravity falls of as the inverse square of distance in all directions, i.e. as a sphere.

Black holes are therefore spherical, because the 'black hole' part is really the event horizon which is just the point at which spacetime's curvature is more than even an object travelling at the speed of light can overcome. It obviously has to be the same distance in all directions from the singularity (the actual point-like mass believed to be at the centre), so it obviously forms a sphere (spinning black holes notwithstanding, as they cause it to become a slightly oblate spheroid).

Black holes are formed when a big enough star dies. Stars are round, so black holes should also be round. Any other opinion is wrong...

Probably some alien civilization using something abnormal.