Besser ein Laus im Kraut als gar kein Fleisch?

Subject: Besser ein Laus im Kraut als gar kein Fleisch?
Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:04:14 +0200
From: Dimi Chakalov <dimi@chakalov.net>
To: Günther Hasinger <ghasinger@mpe.mpg.de>
CC: Stefanie Komossa <skomossa@mpe.mpg.de>,
     Kimberly Ann Weaver <kweaver@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov>,
     Alex Filippenko <alex@astro.berkeley.edu>,
     Guido De Marchi <gdemarchi@rssd.esa.int>,
     Hermann.Nicolai@aei.mpg.de, bernard.schutz@aei.mpg.de,
     Gerhard.Huisken@aei.mpg.de, Bernd.Schmidt@aei.mpg.de,
     Curt.Cutler@aei.mpg.de, kiefer@thp.uni-koeln.de,
     box@peter-ostermann.de, cxcpub@cfa.harvard.edu
BCC: [snip]

RE: Giant Black Hole Rips Apart Star
February 18, 2004, RELEASE: 04-061,
http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/04_releases/press_021804.html

Dear Professor Hasinger,

I am writing to you as the Chair of the Council of German Observatories (RDS).

I hope you are aware of the fact that the so-called black holes are fictitious objects,

http://members.aon.at/chakalov/Loinger.html

http://members.aon.at/chakalov/Thiemann.html#1

I wonder how you would explain the reference to some "super massive black hole" in your recent observations. Besser ein Laus im Kraut als gar kein Fleisch?

I will appreciate the feedback from your colleagues as well, and will keep it strictly private and confidential.

Sincerely yours,

Dimi Chakalov
http://members.aon.at/chakalov
http://members.aon.at/chakalov/white_paper.html
http://God-does-not-play-dice.net
--
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe,

http://members.aon.at/chakalov/faq.html

Pritie amzanig huh?

Note: It is widely known that the so-called event horizon might not be formed "during" the gravitational "collapse". There is no guarantee that the universe will never be killed by a naked singularity, and there is no explanation why this catastrophic event didn't happen in the last 13.7 billion years.

As of today, we can only hope and pray that Penrose's cosmic censorship conjecture and Hawking's chronology protection conjecture (cf. Matt Visser, The quantum physics of chronology protection, gr-qc/0204022) are somehow granted by Mother Nature.

If we want to do better, we have to examine this ultimate paradox. Recall that another paradox, the ultraviolet catastrophe identified by Lord (John William Strutt) Rayleigh, has led to the discovery of Max Planck, as reported on December 14, 1900.

We obviously need a complete theory of quantum gravity. Can we get the job done by 2005, celebrating Einstein's Annus Mirabilis?

D. Chakalov
February 19, 2004