Home » ·3galaxy » @-Mind: Black Stars

@-Mind: Black Stars

±∞ ¬∆@ST:


  1. The 3 ages of black hole theory: the 3rd age: black hole quark stars
  2. The second age: mathematical entelechies, singularity theories.
  3. The work of Hawking: breaking all the known known laws of science: baby black holes.
  4. The organic, realist model of 5D galaxies and its symmetries of scale.

Abstract. Black holes, the galatom’s proton, the galacells’ DNA…

First to state the obvious: the fractal Universe of 5D is immortal.

How then immortality is achieved in the Universe? Very simple: as scales repeat from atom to galaxy, its CORE element, the proton and the cosmological black hole are essentially immortal. Even if black hole evaporation were truth (Hawking’s never proved hypotheses, based in a simplex outdated understanding of time in lineal terms and scales is truth(, black holes would live 10ˆ100 years and protons do not decay. Immortality is thus granted because IN the two limits of quantum and cosmological gravitation there IS NO ENTROPY-dissolution for its perfect elements. All in between – us – made of thermodynamic ‘warm’ ensembles of unstable molecules are up for death. That humind egocy has of course modeled the perfect immortal universe on the imperfect limits of humans, including a knack for entropy-only theories of the Universe is just more of the same:

‘two things I consider infinite, the Universe and the egocy of man’ (Einstein)

Indeed huminds (ab. human minds) are one-dimensional, @ristotelian, self-centered in its logic, hence simple and so are their theories of reality, which go always the easy way – entropy and death, which needs little brains –  but the UNIVERSE IS NOT.

This means we must describe always for any system the 5 properties we have found for all systems of scalar cyclic space-time, product of its 5 Ðimotions:

Its organic properties due to the co-existence of 3 ±¡ scales of organization in all systems (the atomic/cellular, Individual/thermodynamic and social/gravitational scales); its topologic ternary elements, due to its existence in simultaneous space; its 3 ‘ages’ of evolution in time; its ‘mental properties’ derived of its Ðimotions of information; and the ‘NEGATION’ of them all, in the entropic processes of death of any ¬∆@st… of space-time.

When we deal with the galaxy then we observe that as a scalar organism, the ‘galacell’ is ruled by black holes; which are its ‘DNA’; that in space the ‘galaxy’ has 3 regions, akin to the membrane of the cell (the Halo), its nucleus (the central black hole) and its mitochondria or vital energy region (our star region); that in time, galaxies evolve transforming its vital energy (light stars) into dark matter, mostly black holes and ‘strange matter’, in symmetry with the 3 families of quarks, till they become ‘warped’ and dark, in its 3rd age, and then Negating entropically its existence, explode back into a quasar (20 billion years quasar cycle) confused due to the local background radiation it produces with the ‘cosmic big-bang’ in the ego-trip of creationism of astrophysicists… So finally we cannot fail to deduce that the ‘DNA-mind’ of the galaxy is the black hole and as such explain the galaxy as a system of reproduction of black holes of ‘dark matter’.

And finally we have found using 5D metric equations that in scales the symmetry between the atom and the galaxy bring us for the proton an equation equivalent to the Schwarzschild radius through the translation of electromagnetic formalisms to gravitational time vortex; so the ultimate scalar symmetry is between the atom and the galaxy the proton and the black hole, the electron and the halo, the repulsive electromagnetic force between atoms and the repulsive dark energy between galaxies, which is NOT due to the inexistent big-bang but due to the error of astrophysicists that hyperbolically extend the implosive gravitational force beyond the region in which operates – inside the galactic vortex, when outside of it they have to apply electromagnetic laws blown up in scale.

So those are the elements to study when considering black holes. To which we shall add because of the wrong praxis of the nuclear industry that is trying to do black holes on Earth, the obvious risks for mankind of such ‘endeavors’.

In the graph, the beautiful symmetry between the 3 parts of the galaxy at macrocosmic level (ultra dense black hole center, made of ultra dense top quarks (Einstein’s hypothesis), dense dark matter halo made of strangelets (Witten’s Hypothesis) and intermediate ‘light matter’, our weaker world of ud-quarks; shows an efficient, economic, simple, symmetric, REAL universe, in synthony with all the known-known laws of science, in correspondence with the work of Mr. Einstein, who rightly demanded according to the experimental method the existence of a ‘substance’ of the density of black holes to make them possible. After his death we found the top quark, whose toplet ttt++ should form under the awesome pressures of the black hole center a boson substance surrounded by bc ‘dark matter’ atoms, to form a frozen star, akin to the ‘slightly’ less dense pulsar configuration we just recently have cracked with the heaviest quark of the strange decuplet in its center, which produces in its catastrophic explosions and ejections of matter, heavy atoms, from gold to uranium… Alas, the problem with those models is that they are real and you can’t play God with its equations, nor certainly evaporate heavy quarks increasingly produced at LHC experiments, as they are the by-product of all the reactions concerning the Higgs; so to explore the Higgs is tantamount to produce copious amounts of top quarks, and bcb atoms, the likely substances of REAL frozen stars, aka black holes.

In the graph we can see the ternary symmetry between black holes as frozen heavy dark atoms stars and the 3 parts of the galaxy. The other key symmetry to black hole theory is between the strong force and the gravitational force in the limit of extreme masses; and hence between black holes as ‘factories of heavy quarks’, which destroy light quarks and convert them through weak reactions and mesons into those heavier quarks, and the parallel ‘game’ of conversion of ‘light gluons’ – the mesons inside the atomic nuclei, so to speak – that become absorbed and converted into heavier ud quarks in the ‘lower scale’ of atomic particles:

In the graph the parallelism between the nonet of gluons with its color-anticolor duplets and the nonet of mesons with its quark-antiquark duplets. the parallelism implies also a parallelism between the strong force and the gravitational force in the strong regime of black holes, and hence between the coupling constant of black holes and strong forces, both with a maximal value of 1, and the two parameters of both systems, the spin and the charge-mass, both equivalent vortices of time-space in the quantum and cosmological scales.

Black holes are the ‘protons’ of the galatom, its ‘mind-brain’, its ultimate center or particle state; its meaning; its DNA, all this from the different entangled views of black holes as the organic center of galacells, as the quantitative equivalent in 5Ð metric to the atom’s nuclei – the proton.

As such the study of black holes should be done in parallelism to the study of atomic nuclei, and the study of its gravitational forces in the ‘strong range’ with the study of the ‘strong force’ inside the nuclei of atoms.

This will be the ‘third age’ of black hole theory, after its first mathematical formulation (Einstein), and its age of ‘mathematical fiction’ (singularity). Since black holes as protons of galatoms become then ‘top quark and bcb-dark atom’ stars.

That is, in the symmetry between the 3 families of mass and the 3 parts of the galaxies, black holes are the densest stars of the heaviest quarks. While in the other extreme protons are the lightest combinations of quarks, and its gluons, further down the ladder, the equivalent to the ‘mesons’ that in weak reactions produce heavier quarks.

This astonishing symmetry between the gravitational and strong force, the heavy and light quarks, the black holes and the protons, and the two decuplets and nonets of quarks, mesons and gluons will be the ‘future of black hole theory’.

The present though is far scarier – the making of black holes at Earth, which might devour the planet, due to the constant evolution of the industry of accelerators – a black hole indeed can be compared to an accelerator that bends light to the point in which it is transformed in higher forms of mass.

As I was the main plaintiff in a series of suits against CERN denouncing the industry as a relic of the Cold War, which should be decommissioned or else can risk a genocide of the planet, it is unavoidable that in this article we bring some references to CERN.

Since most of the texts, not fully revised comes from my activist site against the Nuclear industry OF ACCELERATORS @ CERN, which might do black holes in the next years risking the life of the planet, as it truly embodies all the wrong things about the human present philosophy of ‘technological science’, with an article on the Nature of black holes.

It is not a neutral article on what is ‘wrong about physicists’ theories of an entropic dying world, as from time to time it  highlights the importance of properly understanding the laws of ‘stience’, and upgrading the humind to the new paradigm for:

A) Practical reasons – to make a better world for man.

B) Theoretical reasons – to understand better reality.

Fact is making holes on Earth is an issue which is wrong both morally and theoretically but has been highlighted as ‘the greatest achievement’ of post-World War science by the P.Ress because there is no risk due to the evaporation of black holes… a false, unproved theory based in some ‘creationist assumptions’ on the validity of any equation as long as it is written in maths.


But the point of theory is extremely fascinating since we shall develop the model of black holes as frozen ‘heavy quark’ stars, the way Einstein wanted. Since for a mathematical equation to be real it needs to be grounded in ‘real space-time’ entities. Specially if we deal with the background independent theory of relativity.

Let us then  develop the model of black holes as frozen ‘heavy quark’ stars, the way Einstein wanted, with some necessary ad ons to those papers, based in the scalar nature of the Universe, and one of the basic laws of science – hylomorphism – that is, things must be made of some ‘substance’, either a form or a motion. Since for a mathematical equation to be real it needs to be grounded in ‘real space-time’ entities. Specially if we deal with the background independent theory of relativity.

But why I affirm so firmly that black holes are quark stars? Simply, because the Universe is efficient, symmetric and scalar, and so the very essence of the galaxy and the particles found on it, which reduces to the two quark decuplets (in this LHC has been useful eliminating all the fantaphysics of supersymmetry particles, so only those quarks can form the  matter of the galaxy, as there are NOT more particles). So light quarks form our light matter, and heavy quarks, the top decuplet form dark, heavy matter.

Simple isn’t? So efficiency and Occam’s razor requires that black holes are indeed heavy stars made of the heaviest known-known matter: cbt particles. The outcome of that symmetry then in the models of the scalar Universe (5th dimension of scales) is beautiful: a galaxy modeled as a superorganism symmetric in space, time and scale, where black stars are its DNA-like informative center that catalyzes the reproduction of our stars, and the hard, lineal strangelets, its ‘halo’, a protein-like membrane that limits the galaxy – and we in-between I am afraid if nobody remedies it, the ‘ribosome-like stars and planets’ that reproduce them:

In the graph, black holes are frozen stars of the top matter decuplet by symmetry with the atoms and stars of our light galactic plane. Then by parallelism with light stars, we differentiate two species of black stars that are also found in Nature:

Those which are like our light stars made of  udd atoms, which would be made of dark bcb atoms of much larger densities, but similar properties. They would be the smaller black holes that transform the matter of a light star into bcb neutral atoms without charge. And those who are cosmic black holes, much larger, in the center of the galaxy which become the informative DNA of the galaxy (Maldacena conjecture: the surface of a cosmic BH in 5D maps out as a ‘homunculus mind does with your body’ or the ‘DNA’ with the information of the cell, the entire information of the galaxy in 4D). They are the equivalent of our neutron=strange stars, which have a core of negatively charged strangelet matter that make them turn almost at light speed and produce a hyperstrong magnetic field.

The top quark black hole then will have a ‘core of positively charged top quarks’ which will eject a huge stream jet of ‘negative mass’ neutrinos (likely tachyon strings as the weak angle of a neutrino is the size of a Planck string, 10ˆ-33 and many have been found to have negative mass, hence hyperluminal speeds – more on this latter… Those top quark huge black holes in the center of the galaxy then should  power the faster than c, z=10c motion observed as radiation and mass jets coming out of the center of many  galaxies.

We shall then make a thorough correction of the ‘creationist theory’ of black holes as infinite singularities (Oppenheimer->Wheeler->Penrose and Hawking) and go back to the basic, realist symmetric, fractal Universe of the graph. Since there are two decuplets of matter, belonging to the quantum and cosmological scale, and two type of atoms and two type of stars…

In the graph, black holes are frozen stars of the top matter decuplet by symmetry with the atoms of our Universe. We differentiate two species found in Nature, those which are like our stars made of dark bcb atoms of much larger densities. And those who are cosmic black holes, which become the mind of the galaxy (Maldacena conjecture, the surface of a cosmic BH in 5D maps out as a ‘homunculus mind does with your body’, the entire information of the galaxy in 4D), and have as neutron=strange stars have, a ‘core of top quarks’ with a hyperluminal speed jet of ‘negative mass’ neutrinos… that powers the faster than c, z=10c motion of mass outside those galaxies.

We shall then make a thorough correction of the ‘creationist theory’ of black holes as infinite singularities (Oppenheimer->Wheeler->Penrose and Hawking) and go back to the basic, realist symmetric, fractal Universe. Since there are two decuplets of matter, belonging to the quantum and cosmological scale, two type of atoms and two type of stars…

Finally we shall refute the most bizarre of all the ‘fantaphysics’ coming out of the fiction work of the gurus of singularities – the idea that black holes evaporate to the past that only shows Mr. Hawking and all physicists for that matter, stuck in the v=s/t single dimotion of locomotion have never understood. As this web is after all the most advanced model of time… there is on the humind universe, first we have to understand why…

I. 3 ages of black hole theory

To put all those theories in perspective, we can make an account of black hole theory as an evolving subject, which has clearly 3 ages, we shall treat in this blog, at ‘face value’.

  1. The age of Einstein, when general relativity equations provided the theoretical foundation to study gravitational ‘vortices’, as those described by Newton, and then by Poison with his theory of potentials, with more detail. Einstein, via Poison, made an even more detailed analysis of the vortices of spacetime that curve into masses (cosmological scale) and charges (quantum scale), and should be put in correspondence to each other – that is, gravitational vortices of mass, planets stars and ‘frozen stars’, the name he gave to black holes, should made of a substance in the smaller quantum scale, of similar density, which at the Einstein’s age was still not known (today we know quarks show all the properties needed to be the substance of both black holes and its lesser cousin, strange, neutron stars).

2. The age of Wheeler and Hawking. As we could not see within those black holes, once Einstein died, his stringent admonitions against any attempt to model black holes as ‘imaginary mathematical objects’, without substance, ‘evaporated’. So nuclear physicists, on top of the power game, notably those attached to the production of nuclear bombs, researched in accelerators (Oppenheimer, Wheeler) developed mathematical theories of black ‘frozen stars’, with no proof whatsoever in the experimental range. Wheeler came with the catchy name of black hole, which suddenly caught the subconscious collective imagination and ‘evaporated’ definitely the need for a rigorous application of the scientific method – meaning, the search for its proper substance, and its study as ‘dark matter, heavy quark stars’…

The age peaked with the work of Penrose and Hawking and all its ‘singularity theorems’, ‘thermodynamic of black holes’, and ‘cosmic censorships’, which defied every law known-known law, including those of thermodynamics (as a a black hot baby-born hole, should NOT get HOTTER and evaporate, but on the contrary, should cool down and evaporate its colder surroundings growing in mass, which is what the first and second law of thermodynamics said: ‘heat moves from the hotter source that cools down to the colder one’), those of Einstein’s gravitation (as gravitation is a cosmological not a quantum-scale theory, so it does NOT work for quantum scales); those of mathematics (as all systems that show infinities are renormalized; that is the infinity region is cut-off for calculations, precisely because both in real nature and mathematical modeling, they do not apply to infinity, so black holes need to be cut-off from infinities, so should happen with the infinities of the big-bang theory).

This age now ends as the age of Einstein ended at his death, with the death of Hawking. So we are going to move into:

3. The age of realist black holes, as ultra-heavy dark matter, quark stars. This age, you could say started 3 decades ago, with my first seminal works on the scalar fifth dimension and the symmetries between the 3 parts of the galaxy (the ultra-heavy halo and central dark hole, and the lighter star world in between) and the 3 families of quark mass (the ud-atoms of our light stars, the strangelet matter likely substance of the halo – Witten hypothesis, and the top quarks and BCB-heavy atoms of the top quark decuplet – bottom and charm quarks that should make heavy neutrons and heavy protons by symmetry with the strange matter decuplet… illustrated in the next graph.

Because of my opposition to CERN’s experiments on ethical grounds, this age was ‘cut-off’ in its first version, as I was attacked ad hominem a decade ago and soon lost my academic prestige and positions (at the time I was chair of duality in most international congresses of systems sciences, as that is the discipline where I developed my models of the scalar, organic Universe, with application to all sciences, explained on the section on 5D). But now it has immediately after Hawking’s death resurface in the work of new scholars of astrophysics, notably from the always notable Indian school of cosmologists (which from Bose, to Chandrasekar, have been instrumental on the field, with much respect for Einstein’s realist view of the subject)

And so their papers keep coming… proving all those scenarios and yet they are just buried on arxiv.org and nobody cares.

Indeed, consider the last case: black holes as top quar stars. advanced decades ago this hypothesis as a top quark star would be exactly equal in properties to a black hole. Einstein believed black holes could not be just a mathematical equation, but needed a real substance, which can only be, among the particles we know today, the top quark, with self-similar properties to a Higgs – which is produced by a top/antitop quark couple. Because then top quarks were not discovered Einstein could not explain them in detail. But he will be proved once more right. Now since the LHC will start massive production of top quarks in 2015, they might easily condensate into small black holes.

Well, recently in a stream of new papers, it has been proved that according to Einstein-Maxwell-Dirac equations ONLY  quark star, rotating black holes exist. Just for the reader who ‘read physics’:

Click to access 0306090.pdf

Click to access 9805050.pdf

The beauty of those 2 papers is that they prove that for a combination of Einstein + Dirac + Maxwell equations to work ONLY a rotating black hole made of Dirac particles of maximal mass and minimal size CAN exist. Which can only be a black hole made of BCT ultra dense quarks, as we have been saying for decades using our work on 5D Metric.

In this paper, https://arxiv.org/pdf/gr-qc/9810048.pdf they prove that there is no Schwarzschild… solution (a non rotating black hole, which is the model physicists use to establish singularities)… reason why experimentally we never found one. As THERE IS NO SINGULARITY solution (Radius > 0), compatible with the Pauli exclusion principle. And in this other paper:

arXiv:gr-qc/0306090v2 20 Jun 2003 A self consistent solution to the Einstein Maxwell Dirac Equations D. Ranganathan∗ Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi 110016 India

For those who don’t read physics,  wikipedia has an easier article on it:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Maxwell%E2%80%93Dirac_equations

This is the KEY sentence: “Einstein–Yang–Mills–Dirac Equations provide an alternative approach to the Cyclic Universe which Penrose has recently been advocating . They also imply that the massive compact objects now classified as black holes are actually quark stars, possibly with event horizons, but without singularities.”

(Incidentally Sir Penrose received my book of 2004, ‘Time Cycles’ 2 years before publishing his of the same name, with a similar theory, based on 5D and cyclical time by way of his son Eric Penrose who was for a while an activist against CERN, doing the calculus we mention on dibaryon production, and I still have to get a recognition from his side)

So Alas! what the article basically says, giving reason to Einstein is that black holes are made of a cut off substance, top quarks and BCB ‘Dark heavy atoms’. And they have NO singularities and all the fantaphysics of imaginary mathematics, as physicists just keep writing equations on never proved entities are not consistent either with experimental evidence and the 4 most important sets of physical equations.

So non rotating black holes made of no substance, with singularities and of course imaginary black holes travellng to the past as those of Mr. Hawking’s are plain fictions.

Mr. Hawking as they say ‘is history’… But the problem is we can be history soon if we do not revise with scientific realism our view of singularities.

Since if Black holes are frozen quark stars, they will be easily made at CERN, a quark factory and they won’t evaporate because  quarks don’t evaporate.

If Einstein is right they will not evaporate, regardless of its birth as tiny ‘baby holes’, because relativity means that ‘size’ doesn’t matter, it is relative and so in Einstein’s theory black holes of any size grow exponentially. As today, we have multiple proofs that Relativity theory is truth and none of black hole evaporation. So standard science proves Black holes will swallow Earth. And new articles keep coming favoring the Dirac-Einstein-Maxwell solution.

Further on, in Haifa 2 years ago, an homologous of a black hole, a Dumb Hole made of atomic condensates, 1 million time slower, that should have evaporated producing phonons instead of photons, didn’t.

Now in science because there is only a Universe, there is only a true theory for each fact. Nevertheless each property of a physical system and each scale of its structure requires a model theory. So several theories that describe several scales of the black hole can be right. This is the essential philosophy behind the scalar Universe: each scale is made of smaller parts, and for each scale there is classic theory.

So for black holes we have String theory for the smallest Planck scale – and it says strings do not evaporate. Then we have Dirac and Maxwell equations, at the particle scale and they say particles and charges do NOT evaporate. Then we have Thermodynamics at the human scale which says that hot systems cool down in cool environment. So black holes do NOT evaporate. And we have the principle of conservation of energy and information, which would also break if Black holes evaporated. And finally at the cosmic scale we have  Relativity which also denies its evaporation.

So in all scales of physics the non evaporation of black holes is proved right. And if we add Gellmann’s ‘Totalitarian’ principle – all particles that can exist will exist, Black holes and strangelets will happen at the required energies and luminosities. We seem to be lucky enough – unless strange liquid is already sipping to the center of the Earth. But now LHC is again in a 10fold upgrtading for the 2020s so we will enter another larger risky zone.

In that sense there is NO probability that a law of science is truth or false. It CANNOT be both things at the same time. So probabilities are either 0 or 100. If Thermodynamics are truth, we shall die; if string theory is truth we shall die; if the thresholds of energy for creation of black holes and strangelets (10 Tev, bag) are truth we shall die. If Relativity, DIrac’s equation, Maxwell equations are truth, we shall die.

Many people are confused by the concept of probability. Laws of science HAVE no probabilities. They are either right or wrong. But the P.R.Ess talks always of the small probability that a catastrophe happens. This is an ‘error of layman’s knowledge’ of the meaning of science which is deterministic, and probabilities (which refers to our capacity to detect or ‘guess’ the final outcome of a deterministic process.

This probability talk shows to which extent CERN exploits shamelessly saying the ignorance of people, saying that the ‘probability’ that strangelets exists and they produce them is small. This is due to a faulty understanding of quantum physics, in which there are probabilities REGARDING our capacity to observe a certain particle. But the particle IS there, if the theory that describes it and the events that create it happened. It is also due to an error in the perception of the factor that defines the occurrence, ‘when’.

‘When’ is the only ‘statistical’ fact we might argue, as collisions must met certain conditions of precision to accumulate quarks enough to create those particles that cannot be measured except by statistics – as we know we will get a double six throwing dices ALWAYS, if we keep throwing dices, but we cannot know in which throw, ‘when’ this will happen. We know it will happen because it is a fact that there are faces with 6. Point.

When you heat with fire cold water there is NOT A PROBABILITY that might or might not get hotter. It WILL ALWAYS because the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is truth. Point. ‘When’ it will boil, the time/quantity variable is the only question. So it is in the case of black holes/strangelets, when, the time/quantity variable depending on how many quarks we pack in those collisions, depending on how precise is the collision is the only variable we don’t know but it is NOT really a variable.

As with dices, if we had all the information about the throwing, we would know the bounces of the dice and the final position; if we knew all the information about the trajectory of each particle we would know how precise is the target collision. If we could see closer – without interference with our instruments – the quantum particle, we would see its position. We illustrate this common error of laymen regarding quantum physics, shamelessly exploited by CERN in our article on the famous case of the ‘Schrondiger’s cat’ paradox. If we repeat the experiment several times, the cat will certainly be dead.

So the when is what we can generously argue, which will increase with the ‘throwing of dices’, the number and energy of the collisions. This CERN knows. It knows it will create Strangelets and it gives CASTOR a 70% probability of detecting them. It knows it will create black holes and so it gives Hawking’s bizarre theory that denies the laws of Einstein’s relativity and thermodynamics a 100% chance as a ‘dogma of truth. Or as his Chief Theorist, Mr. Ellis put it in a recorded conference, to his ‘students’ and ‘workers’ all of them tied by confidentiality contracts ‘you must believe in Black Hole Evaporation’.


In the graph, philosophers of science have argued for very long that a ‘creationist’ theory, based only in language might be a nice fiction, a beautiful consistent language but they tend not to be truth, specially when they deal with ‘infinities’ – God, the absolute, the whole Universe, and infinitesimal point, etc. Since when we merely use creationist theories that isolate the language, as in the third age of any ‘linguistic science’, or person, there is an excess of form, unconnected to reality. This is the case of black hole evaporation or supersymmetry, proved wrong at CERN. Since the simple energy and geometry of reality imposes limits to the excessive ‘forms’ of pure language, by essence inflationary, as a ‘mirror of reality’ with multiple ‘reflected images’. Those errors were classified already by Kant as paralogic errors of the mind. Kant, being with Schopenhauer, a favorite of Einstein (and myself), who read them as a teenager, prompted him to say ‘I know when maths are truth=consistent but not real=describing a real physical fact.

Epistemology vs. The Egocy paradox and the plague of creationism.
Creationist mathematics as creationist religion is ultimately based in some ‘ugly’ principles – the ego paradox of both physicists and priests who want to talk in exclusive mode the supposed single language of man; and their lack of intelligence so well described by Schopenhauer’s definition of ‘stupidity’, which in the paradoxical humor of the Universe makes precisely the most ignorant to think they are the most intelligent and is the origin of ‘magic thought’, which is how we should classify both creationisms.
Regarding languages, there are infinite ‘mind-mirrors’ or ‘monads’ that gauge information from its biased perspective, which means that the relationship between languages and the order of reality is a back and forth ‘local’ process: the mind gauges information and then organizes its territorial ‘body’, mirroring its languages on reality. Maths are likely in topological, geometric form the ‘mind of atoms’, and so its laws of order are all pervading. Words are the ‘mind of humans’ and so in History the legal and ethic order trying to construct a superorganism of history, religion, nation or civilization is al, pervading.

So creationism is just a simplified, ‘one-way’ version of complex organicism and the interrelation between ‘still languages’ that mirror into a small virtual spatial form, the moving cycles of all beings. And this perhaps Aristotle and Leibniz understood better than any scientist does today: ‘Gods are unmoved points that order the energy around them’ . Whereas those unmoved ‘fractal points’ that gauge information are Leibniz’s monads: ‘every (fractal, Non-Euclidean) point holds a world within itself’. And energy the substance of the body waves they order.


ALL THIS MEANS basically, that singularity theories are pseudo-science, and that includes both, black hole evaporation and its ‘reverse’ equations of the big-bang. Because they respond to the ‘egocy’ paradox of human scientists that confuse the capacity of a language as a synoptic mirror of reality to reflect that reality and even forecast in its reduced synoptic logic, the deterministic future of the motions and ‘life-death cycles’ of a species (either with mathematics or verbal evolutionary theories), with its capacity to create reality with FICTIONS natural to all languages. So as Einstein put it ‘I know when mathematics are logic truths but not when they are real’. Reason why the ‘scientist’ should only be concerned with facts that have been proved experimentally, which do NOT include the equations of black hole evaporation and the equations of the big-bang, as we shall show now in a bit of more detail (keeping the bulk of the proof for our cosmological models on the section of 5D with its alternative, fractal, organic, immortal Universe).

But to start with we must consider what is the basic ‘epistemological error’ from where all those ‘entropic theories of lineal big-bangs and black hole evaporation’ depart – from the misunderstanding of time as a single lineal mathematical ‘cartesian graph’ arrow; when all time clocks are cyclical:

Let us then start by describing the biggest blunder mankind has committed in the realm of knowledge: to simplify the nature of cycles of time-space into lineal durations, to measure best the locomotions of cannonballs.

time cycles

Physicists uncoiled time-frequency, into lineal time, T=1/ƒ BY WRITING THE INVERSE equation…


-The information ‘stored’ in the ‘form’ and ‘frequency’ of those cycles.

-The understanding of ‘broken vital spacetimes, as each full closed cycle  reads reality into an inner and outer region, inside and outside the ‘simple knot’, or geometric definition of a cycle (Jordan’s first knot theorem). So by the mere fact of being in a universe made of infinite repetitive ‘conserved time clocks’, we obtain a broken space-time.

How does a Universe of infinite time clocks of different size and speed relates to the present Universe in which all time clocks are equalized to the mechanical, clocks of metal-information, which were invented in the Middle Ages in Italy, and became the ONLY CLOCK-TIME OF THE UNIVERSE, once elongated into a lineal ‘second-minute-hour-day-year’ system of equalized time clocks (of light waves, mechanical clocks, earth’s astronomical clocks).

Further on because time IS motion, the final substance of reality IS motions in time, and this makes REPRODUCTION, the essence of a fractal a dynamic natural CONSEQUENCE of this first ‘motion-substance’: by the mere fact of repeating a time clock-like cycle INFORMATION REPRODUCES. So there is no mystery to the process of reproduction, as reproduction occurs by MOTION. And so all those elements -repetitive patterns we call laws of science, the existence of broken vital spaces enclosed by angular momentums and moving membranes performing cyclical clocks that store and reproduce information, and the fractal structure of all of it, WHICH ARE THE ESSENTIAL WHYs of reality, became hidden by the simple concept of an absolute lineal ‘humind’ second unit of space-time.

Humanity is still in that primitive concept of a single time.

Since Einstein  just added to that XVI c. equation, V=s/T,  a ct corrector factor, but in essence he left the concept of single lineal time unchanged, despite recognizing it was a convention that must change.

What physicists mostly do then is the study of ‘open locomotions’, translations in space, through ‘lineal inertia, or scattered, entropic paths’, of objects that move; AND WHAT they care about TO QUANTIFY in terms of ‘RODS OF MEASURE’ that speed of translation in open space, is of course part of time=motion=change studies but far less important than the qualities of ‘closed time paths of frequency and form, of information’ we shall study here.

In the graph, left side,  ‘ðime’ clocks that measure the rhythms of reproduction=repetition and change=evolution of the Universe are always cyclical ‘r=evolutions’.

So while humans obviously are aware of the existence of cyclical patterns of nature, because they have abandoned the proper concept of cyclical ðime changes, and its second dimension of form, of information, they cannot fully grasp the fundamental principles of the Universe: its cycles of ðime§pace, its scales of ðime speeds as §pace size (ab. ∆±i), and the ‘mind-mirrors and languages’ of information that allow systems to measure them, and interact with other beings in ðime§pace.

The concept of cyclical ðimes is not new. On the contrary, as it is evident in the left picture that all ðime clocks are cyclical, repetitive; the true mystery is how humans are so ‘dumb’, as to deny it in the modern age. Since all Asian cultures, and all western cultures till Galileo, did believe in cyclical ðimes. The word in fact still lingers in the names of our newspapers: ‘The New York Times’, ‘The Times of London’.

Moreover science would not exist if ðimes were not cyclical as ‘scientific laws’ are merely the repetition in ðime of patterns of behavior and causality.

Each clock creates a discontinuous space-time, whose cyclical perimeter of in-form-ation encloses a piece of energetic space breaking reality into ∞ formal patterns; different time cycles with specific forms and frequencies. Thus the use of a single human clock that equalizes all of them misses 2 features of each of those time cycles:
– Its specific forms of in-form-ation in space, which gives birth to the main topological laws and Isomorphisms of the 5th Dimension (I).
– Its different speeds or frequencies. Since cyclical time is measured not by duration but by frequency, its inverse function: ƒ(t)=1/T.

All these truths unfortunately are hidden in the ðime equations of modern physics, so good for calculus so bad for interpretation, which need to be translated into cyclical ðime, measured by frequency (T=1/ƒ) and streamlined with a new jargon appropriate for a dual Universe, as opposed to the simplex jargon of classic absolute ðime§pace physics, that lingers in all sciences and drags its understanding.

In the left physical cycles, planetary orbits, which we humans use to measure ðime in all our ‘clocks’, which are also cyclical. People are hardly aware of this fact, since they tend not to use the ‘parameter’ of cyclical ðime, which is ‘frequency’, but its inverse, lineal duration: ƒ=1/t.

The formulae are simplified in this manner. Since ‘frequency ðime’ is discontinuous and so difficult to ‘integrate’. So physicists prefer to uncoil, frequencies into Lineal Time.

For example the ‘revolutions per minute of a car wheel’, multiplied by its perimeter give us the ‘distance’: λ x v = S. And besides in this manner we achieve more information, as we get the duration and form of in-form-ation of each cycle (λ) and its frequency, v.

So instead of using V=s/t, V=wave length x Frequency gives the information on the frequency and shape of the cyclic steps of the motion.

But if you just want to know the total length of along ðime period, you use Lineal Time durations and so you don’t need to sum all those cycles to get the lineal speed: V=s/t.

In the left graph, we can see that all physical systems, and all its ðime cycles return to its origin, creating a circle, but physicists uncoiled them and put all those revolutions one after another creating the concept of Lineal ðime – an artifact of measure, and further on equalized all the different clocks of the Universe, all the different cyclical actions of its species with a single mechanical ‘ðime clock’ elongated into an infinite duration.

And we shall return to it, when using cyclical time to define and upgrade physical equations, with new insights on its whys, thanks to the ‘inverse arrow of time’ cyclical frequency, ð(ƒ)=1/T-duration.

Since the enormous deformation of reality caused by the ‘belief’ that there is a single time-space continuum, a single ‘human clock’ measuring it all with a second and a single space-rod, also the human visual light spacetime measuring it all with a c-speed is obviously wrong and keeps producing conceptual errors, camouflaged by the fact the equations ‘work’ in both systems, either as ƒrequency of cycles or a lineal speed sum of the trajectories of those cycles. What we miss of course is all the inner information of the cycles.

Frequency time, broken time cycles, infinite of them, are novel concepts hidden for so long by the lineal deformation of the cartesian graph, canonized by Newton that not even the quantum revolution of ‘broken space’ and the Revolution of relativity that saw multiple time regions in the Universe, and many insights that came after on the cyclical nature of time clocks, and the SYMMETRY BETWEEN THE MOTION TO THE FUTURE (OR LIFE, informative arrow) and the motion to the past (or entropy arrow), has been ‘enough’ for mankind to understand the cyclical nature of time and all the amazing results derived from it. Since ALL MOTIONS OF TIME TOWARDS THE FUTURE OF HIGHER INFORMATION ARE FOLLOWED BY THE REVERSAL ARROW OF TIME TO THE PAST OF ENTROPIC DEATH – BUT ALL THOSE TIME CYCLES ARE LOCAL, diffeomorphic, so there is no paradox on traveling to the past, simply speaking, we talk of two inverse arrows of time, loosely understood as the arrow of life and the arrow of death, but specific of each species.

I.e. in electromagnetic waves we shall talk of the advanced collapsing wave and the retarded expansive wave; in local particles of the particle towards the future and the antiparticle or death of the particle (Feynman).

In relativity we shall talk of the ‘gravitational arrow of time that warps space’ and the ‘antigravitation’ of those likely antiparticles (still to be experimentally proved). In forces we shall talk of the ‘gauge’ spatial forces, and the ‘trans-formative, evolutionary, time interactions mediated by the weak force’. In life obviously of life and death future and past; and all of them will be soon formalized in the concept of a world cycle which is the most general understanding of all those closed time cycles that break the Universe into an internal and external world separated by a membrane, spin or angular momentum.

Lineal theories of the Universe.

Of course the best physicists are fully aware of this, but there are few of them, so Einstein said ‘I seem to be the only physicist that thinks there are infinite time clocks in the Universe’, and ‘time curves space into cyclical masses’. And when he died, as his concept of black holes as frozen stars the concept of cyclical infinite time clocks in the Universe, one for each of those cyclical masses disappeared because quantum physics and electromagnetism, are lineal equations, balanced by those cyclical masses, so as quantum physicists carried the power OVER relativists, they have ever since force-fed their theories of lineal time big-bangs and entropic black holes, and a dying Universe as dogma. When the proper way to study cosmology is precisely as I used to explain in scientific conferences when I was the chair of Duality, with the two arrows of time, lineal motions and cyclical clocks that carry the information of the Universe in the form and frequency of its cycles – masses and charges:

All what exist is a motion in time. Space forms are a Maya of the senses. So as we penetrate matter we keep finding solid matter to be just a cyclical accelerated time space clock, the meaning of gravitational forces and charges, just two vortices of two different scales of spacetime, all of them unified in the scalar metric equations of 5D physics:  In the graph, accelerated vortices of time in physical systems, in different scales of the fifth dimension: charges, masses and thermodynamic eddies become then the main clocks of time that carry with different speeds according to 5D metric (Space-size x Cyclical time-speed =K), the information of microscopic quantum charge worlds, human-size thermodynamic scales and cosmological gravitational scales. The beauty of that scalar Universe is obvious: smaller parts as the next graph shows, run faster cycles, and hence carry the information of larger systems: in physical systems quantum spins carry the information, which now is applied to mechanical systems, of ever smaller quantum computers. In biology genes carry the information of larger slower systems,. And in the galaxy fast spinning smaller black holes carry the information of its larger forms. All is entangled. All is about INFORMATION the dominant arrow of life, not lineal entropic big-bang death

In the graph, the Equivalence principle of relativity means a mass is a vortex, m=(h/c2) ƒ, whose frequency gives us its attractive power as in any vortex. So top quarks must turn very fast in its spin cycles, reason why in classic science top quarks do not interact with the strong force, which is slower in its exchange of gluons.

Yet because they turn so fast in frequency as vortices of space-time, they have much more mass: m=h/c² ƒ.

So they cannot interact with the strong force, but they can form an ultra-dense central region in the huge Kerr-Newman black rotating hole of the galactic center with a massive positive charge, producing those huge ‘superluminal’ jets akin to the superstrong magnetic force of pulsars; and they can interact with the gravitational force. And those 2 forces combined that reach the ‘electron-like’ halo of negative strangelets account for the huge force of attraction between the halo and the center of galaxies, which is the biggest mystery of physics today (dark matter missing), because electromagnetic forces are much stronger than gravitational, so the top quark positively charged magnetic-like jets bring together strongly the negative halo and positive center.

Why a sound use of Einstein’s concept of masses as accelerated vortices of spacetime, extended to charges and particles, its components matter also to big-bang theory is obvious: because the expansion of entropic lineal dark energy between galaxies is PERFECTLY balanced by the implosion and collapse of dark energy into mass when arriving to those galaxies. So this give us NOT a single lineal big-bang but a balanced ‘fractal series’ of expanding space and imploding space creating particles within the galactic vortices.

This must be clear from the beginning: in physics, due to its error of lineal time and a single arrow of time for all systems of reality, the balance of gravitational vortices has disappeared  when in fact there are infinite of such cyclical mass vortices, as they are also the basic cycles and forces of charges and particles and quantum physics.

What this means is that the ‘lineal big-bang’ is truly pseudoscience, because it MERELY eliminates 1/2 of the balanced Universe, so alas, indeed, in a Universe without mass, all is expanding entropic vacuum; as the balancing ‘cosmological constant and mass tensor of Einstein’s equations disssapear.

So even if it is written in mathematics the big-bang theory, because it does not follow the logic, espitemologic and experimental law of the scientific method is false.

In that sense, the Big Bang, has all the properties signaled as pseudoscience in ‘wikipedia’: statements, beliefs, or practices that are claimed to be both scientific and factual, but are incompatible with the scientific method, contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; relying on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; which have lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; and long after they have been experimentally discredited…continue to be hold as ‘dogma’.

While those advocating such models of pseudoscience often dispute the characterization.

Why we say this about the big-bang is obvious. Logically is absurd that all the matter of reality was in a single point, including time and space itself. This is born of an exagerated, unfalsifiable claim – that a lineal equation of spacetime expansion between galaxies, V=HoD, extends infinitely to the pas. It is truly an example of ‘creationism’ in physics, based in mathematics. And it merely ignores what physicists do in all other analysis – the need to eliminate infinities and infinitesimals through ‘renormalization’ and cut-off processes – in this case the galaxies from where the emission of spacetime light takes place, which balance the Universe with its implosive gravitation.

Yet the rule of big-bang theory is to exaggerate experimental analysis. Such is the case of the background radiation observed only in the galaxy, which is considered with zero proofs to come from all the corners of the Universe. We falsify those arguments and many more in our analysis of cosmology. The graphs below show them at true value. Perhaps the most notorious is the finding of the supposed central track of the big-bang exactly above and below the galaxy, which shows not to come from 13 billion years light away but exactly from where it comes the background radiation – the galaxy itself.

Latter on we shall explain the alternative model of the big-bang, as a simple black hole the size of the commonest object of the galaxy, a moon will radiate exactly the same temperature. So it is more logic to consider that radiation comes from the galaxy, from some form of dark matter, black holes or strangelets which will redshift to such temperature the light of the galaxy:

In the graph the true quasar big-bang, the scale at which all evidence of the cosmic big-bang points to: the age of a quasar cycle I time, the configuration of the background radiation in scale, and the organic origin of it in the ‘homeostatic equilibrium’ produced by the redshift radiation of Moon MACHOs (a primordial black hole that does not evaporate of the mass of a moon, the commonest planetoid, would have the exact form and temperature of the BG radiation. Ultimately it is completely absurd that almost every entity in the Universe has a time span much larger than the Universe itself – black holes live 10 up to 100 years, the commonest star, red dwarfs live trillions, protons live as long as black holes, etc. etc. But as the big-bang is the metaphysical pseudoscience of physicists with a single time arrow of entropy, as long as they do NOT understand the 5 dimotions of spacetime they won’t understand real cosmology.


Same goes for black hole singularities.

Now, what physicists should do is to be more honest with the scientific method and apply their renormalization and cut-off mathematical procedures to eliminate infinities, which they routinely use in charges, with masses, which are just the same type of vortices of a larger cosmological scale, as we do in 5 D physics. Then there will NOT be big-bang singularities, or black hole evaporation as the substance of those black holes will be quarks that do NOT evaporate, but are produced in mass quantities at cern and so will form as Einstein wanted dark stars, that will evaporate us, converting through weak interactions studied at cern our matter in strange quark or black hole dark atomic matter.

Einstein called black holes frozen stars for an obvious reason – he respected the scientific method unlike the creationist mathematicians of the second age of black hole theory – and said he would only believe in them when a real substance was found, which obviously are those quarks. But idealist, ego-centered mathematical physicists always like to believe their equations ‘create reality’ as religious people believes Allah creates by naming things with Arab words… That was the case of Oppenheimer who mended Einstein’s concept of frozen stars and considered black holes to be a singularity.

So he modeled them – in the heist of cynicism, with Einstein’s equations, who opposed his infinite collapse, as a ball of dust with negligible pressure, uniform density rho = (t), and at rest at t = 0 (irrotational). And alas, since there were no charge, no mass, no particles on them, they ‘so to speak’ easily shrunk into an infinitesimal point.

These assumptions which are totally unreal, as black hole are born of ultradense material stars, lead to the unique solution of the Einstein field equations, and in the co-moving co-ordinates the metric inside the black hole were given by ds² = dt²ˆ2 − R²(t) (dr² /1 − kr² + r²dθ² + r² sin²θdφ². And then he ‘decided’ that R->0 infinitely and the result where the Singularity metric… voila! Magic in the Schopenhauer’s sense: ‘A stupid is a man without reason, one that doesn’t see the causality between events so it believes in magic causes’

Since the assumption  that the black hole was of dust is magic, pure inflationary maths. It must be a real physical entity, made of particles, so you need to plug ‘above’ that spacetime frame Dirac particles.

Moreover in relativity space-time is NOT Newtonian but background independent, relational (Leibniz) meaning that all physical systems are made of spacetime, so the spacetime equations of the black hole must be made of particles, their ‘space-time’ (this is the basis of 5D – the most advanced model of background independent, relational space-time till date) AND they must also met the EFE metric. To do so, you just need to consider each region of the black hole with increasing density in EFE metrtic to be occupied by each type of Dirac’s particle, aka quark of increasing density, as light stars are also made. So both, EFE and Dirac, relativity and quantum physics meet. Simple? Isn’t? That is really the theory of quantum gravity physicists who love complicated theories seemingly to look smarter should explore. ‘Simplicity is genius’, said Leonardo.

This means that for the largest black hole in the center of the galaxy the outer layer has the density of the bcb neutral atoms of the top quark decuplet, in the graph above (and below ordered in triads of atoms).

But in the center, where there is a quasi infinite density/singularity you need top quarks, the near-infinite densest quarks (next screen). And because relativity breaks at the quantum scale, we just enter the ‘lower scale of the Universe – that of particles’, which ‘navigate’ over the background independent geometry of Einstein’s gravitational force.

THEN you meet both the reality of physical particles and the metric of black holes, whose requirement of energy conservation implies that its density: ρ(t) R³(t) remain constant in a series of parallel volumetric layers.

So as you enter the black hole, R diminishes and density increases. It just does it NOT continuously but as in all stars, in layers of increasing quark density, which means quarks of higher mass, till reaching the top quark center for the largest black holes. As higher mass means a higher frequency in the cyclical motions of masses, modeled by Einstein’s principle of equivalence between gravitation and acceleration as mass -‘vortices’ of gravitational space-time – the background independent last layers of the 5D scalar reality perceived by human beings:

In the graph, we can see what a black hole star is all about: the conversion of our ‘light matter’ into heavy atoms of the top quark decuplet. This IS the essential symmetry between the 3 scales of matter, that of bosons (gluons in the case of atoms), quarks and black holes. Another simple proof of the necessary similarity of those 3 scales is shown in the next graph – the symmetry between the ‘dying mesons’ that are destroyed by the strong force of heavier quarks in all the reactions likely to be mimicked when a heavy ‘seed’ of a cosmological strangelet or black hole appears on earth, and the exact same number of gluon particles that ‘feed’ our lighter quarks inside our smaller atoms. We might say that the gluon strong force is to the light quarks, what the light quark mesons are to the heavier quarks of cosmological matter: ‘food for thought’:

In the graph, the strong force killing smallish, lighter gluons inside the atomic nuclei,  which feed with its anti color + color dual particles our ud-quarks  is identical in a lower scale to the weak force, of quark-antiquark mesons feeding with its energy the heavier dark atoms, likely components of a black hole star in the center of the galaxies.

So we have found in 5D yet another beautiful scalar symmetry between the lighter gluons of smaller atomic nuclei, of lighter quarks, and the heavier mesons of larger black hole nuclei, whose components must be the heavier top and Bcb  quark atoms of the top quark decuplet.

It is a clear symmetry of scale:  the strong color charge and couples of gluons and antigluons that form its nonet, are parallel to the nonet of mesons, made of quarks and antiquarks that are exchanged accordingly in the reactions mediated by the weak force.

Because the atom spins faster, as a vortex of spacetime its force is stronger than the larger, slower reactions of mesons mediated by the weak force, but both mean the same: the entropic arrow of death of quark matter by ‘top (predator” heavier quarks. One is mediated by strong currents the other by weak currents of W, Z and Higgs bosons. It follows that exploring and reproducing massive amounts of Higgs will just mediate an ice-9 or ‘gas-9’ reaction converting us into mesons, from living particles into antiparticles, swallowed by the black hole or strangelet.

The parameters of black holes and its coupling constants: Black stars

Let us now introduce some basic mathematics of black hole theory to illustrate this key element – the equivalence between the meson nonet and the gluon nonet, the black hole and the proton:

Astrophysical black holes are characterized by two parameters:

Their mass and their angular momentum (or spin); which are therefore equivalent to the charge and spin of a particle (electron or proton as a black hole).

Further on, we observe the fascinating fact that the 3 ‘elements of reality’, scale (mass), space (length, or its square, area) and time (frequency or its inverse duration, which are our human constants of measure are all related in Planck’s units by simple equations:

The mass parameter M is equivalent to a characteristic length GM/ or a characteristic timescale GM/c³ in Planck’s units.

These scales, for example, give the order of magnitude of the radii and periods of near-hole orbits. So they establish the connection between the concepts of scale, either mass or charge in the ∆±1 planes, distance, the event horizon orbit of ‘cc’ around the black hole, or the minimal orbit of an electron around the proton, and so on.

It allow us then to define the concepts of charge, mass, length and time, which are the units of all physical systems in terms of 5D metric equations, as the two limits up and down the ladder of the galatom.

For Schwarzschild holes, and approximately for Kerr holes (which are the real ones, except for primordial black holes, likely to be Schwarzschild holes), the horizon is thus of a radius RH=2GM/c², in which light bends and becomes therefore the event horizon.

It must be understood that in both cases of an electron as a black hole (Carter) and a Proton as a black hole (this author), the key concept to understand the evolution of light into virtual particles is precisely the fact that light cannot escape a black hole, thus it becomes a ‘circular’ flow of energy trapped in the potential attraction of the black hole-mass or the equivalent quantum-charge in the atom.

So in both cases light collapses into ‘a particle point’ of the electronic nebulae (that is, light gives birth to particles that become stars, in the galatom mediated by the attractive power of the black hole).

And indeed, stars and photons are both useful models to study the behavior of stars nearby the black hole (physicists use photon modeling for them, as shown in the graph).

At the horizon, the tidal stresses that stretch and distort the falling observer is given by the gradient of the gravitational acceleration, as in Newtonian theory (showing once more the equivalence of both concepts, as relativity comes from Newton via Poison potential). Those force are extreme to the point that a human would become as Hawking put it, in a conference about the risks at CERN, spaghetti if one would appear on Earth and won’t evaporate. That is, a person would experience a differential gravitational field of about 10ˆ9 Earth gravities, enough to rip apart THE HEAD diving in.

Further on at the central singularity, deep inside the event horizon of the Kerr hole, the tidal stress is infinite, meaning it becomes an asymptotic motion perpendicular to the axis, converted in an electromagnetic flow in a proton, or a dark entropy flow in a black hole, which becomes therefore an electromagnetic wave that expands space between galaxies.

So the parallelisms keep coming.

What about the concept of spin in black holes? It is a bit confusing by lack of a proper Disomorphic understanding of the parallelism between scales, since what it shows is rather the value of the coupling constant for the strong gravitational interaction of the black hole which can reach a maximal of 1, as in the case of the strong force, and it is always stronger than the 1/137 fine structure constant of electromagnetism, showing indeed, that in its ‘absolute limit’ – at 1, it has the same value than the strong force. 

Let us then see this equivalence.

In addition to its mass M, the Kerr spacetime is described with a spin parameter a defined by the dimensionless expression:


Where J is the angular momentum of the hole.

It is the inverse equivalent to the fine structure constant:

α= Qe²/ch

Since angular momentum must be conserved during collapse and black hole formation, astrophysical holes are expected to have significant values of a/M, from several tenths up to and approaching unity.

It is this value of a/M as unity (an “extreme” Kerr hole), where the identity between the strong force inside the proton and the gravitational force inside the black hole reach its equivalence, and where the meson≈gluon parallel can be established as the strongest of all forces, an entropic, feeding force in which quarks feed on ±color gluons and top and heavy bcb quark atoms inside the black hole feed on ± quark/antiquark mesons.

Further on, a/m, the ‘inverse coupling constant’ in both strong and gravitational forces cannot be greater than unity.

In the mathematics of general relativity, exceeding this limit replaces the event horizon with an inner boundary on the spacetime where tidal forces become infinite. And as we know ‘infinities’ must be cut off. And they are cut off at the point in which the heavy/quark absorbs the meson/gluon

In the fantaphysics of black holes as mathematical entelechies, however because this singularity is “visible” to observers, rather than hidden behind a horizon, as in a black hole, it is called a naked singularity. Toy models and heuristic arguments suggest that as a/M approaches unity it becomes more and more difficult to add angular momentum. The conjecture that such mechanisms will always keep a/M below unity is then called in Hawking/Penrose work, cosmic censorship.

All very fancy. The knots and bolts however are rather simpler and cast also some light in the proper meaning of the fine constant of electromagnetism.

It merely means that the predator cannot eat a victim larger than his body; that the electron which is a nebulae of collapsed hc, cannot have more energy than Hc, that the whole is never larger than its parts in terms of energy; that the heavy quarks have no more volume than the lighter quarks they eat, or the ud quarks than the gluons they feed on; that a trophic pyramid has more mass in its base, that a higher whole cannot extract all motion of the lower scale, leaving some ‘entropic’ motion for the parts to maintain its canonical ensembles; and so on.

There is an entire new field of new physics to explore in depth by specialists based in this parallelism, as it is far more fruitful and easy to understand the vortices of spacetime of Newton and Einstein than the bizarre jargon of classic and quantum electromagnetism. We cannot overextend in a very specialized theme that should complete both the understanding of quantum and gravitation; as further on, Einstein’s relativity allow us to study all the ‘forces’ that come out of the original strong/black hole force, as ‘resonances’ of that original force, weakened  both in terms of the equivalent concepts of curvature=topology and motion=vortex force.

I.e. the inclusion of angular momentum (a curved motion) changes the topology of the horizon, whose area and shape becomes distorted, till reaching a value for pi = 3, at the point of maximal force; a triangular game of quarks, of Planck’s areas… which modifies the shape of the Schwarzschild radius when a/M becomes close to unity.

As usual those are details you cannot expect from Copernicus, but hopefully after my death when my activism against cern is forgotten if we are still here, others will complete to satisfaction the entire model.

Feynman’s diagrams: mesons and antiparticles die as entropic, ‘past’ arrows of time

Now Feynman’s genius had an intuitive understanding of this life-death cycle, which in the cyclical equations of 5D merely represents a world cycle of life and death: the arrow of life and information sends you to the future of more informative cyclical speed; then the arrow of death is the big-bang that dissolves your information, in any scale of reality. So in physical particles, the arrow of cyclical information is a vortex of charge or mass, which the arrow of entropy and death converts you into an antiparticle that moves you LOCALLY into your relative past – dissolving the particle into radiation, the human being into its cellular components. It is then IMMEDIATE in 5D that the SMALLER scales in which you dissolve, radiation in E=Mc2 past matter, cells and aminoacids in life death is the past, because the RELATIVE local future, whole being needs first its parts, to appear, its relative local past. Indeed, scales of more complex informative whole are always the arrow of social evolution of future of ‘love’ because they are ‘sustained’, ’emerge’, from the smaller parts, which must exist first hence being its relative past. This is the 5D logic explanation on why the arrow of death and dissolution of information is the past.

What Feynman did is marvelously to have the intuition that the antiparticle was the arrow of relative past that dissolved the particle into its radiation. As physicists use a single TIME arrow for the entire Universe, entering their paradoxes of traveling to the past to kill your father (Hawking), they always got suspicious of Feynman’s past arrow for antiparticles, but they use them anyway. Now, the conundrum is solved by the infinite cyclical time clocks of the Universe, as all those travels to the entropic past are PURELY local, so you never in a fractal organic Universe can go to the past and kill your father, as you will locally kill yourself in the trip, exploding in an entropic big-bang of death. And unless you are ‘viral’, your dying cells won’t go much further.

The strong force therefore is an entropic force, because as Feynman rightly found, in each local world cycle of particles, the antiparticle is the same particle moving backwards in time, which means dying in the entropic process that completes its world cycle (hence living much shorter as the death end of the cycle does happen in a quanta of time). And because entropic-feeding processes are the strongest, most attractive ones in any scale (food is the first cause of most Ðimotions), they carry the maximal energy:

In the graph we see the proper way to perceive the two arrows of time of physical systems, when we plot them together as a cycle-anticycle, even if an antiparticle (which must be considered the ‘3rd’ age and death of the particle) can be observed isolated.

And this leads us to the CPT symmetry, which in 5 Ð physics is absolute but quantized as time cycles are quantized for each species and its 5 Ðimotions=forces and worldcycles, and happen together not in a single plane of ‘light space-time’; but must be considered for the whole 3±I planes whereas the equations of gravitation and relativity with its c-constant speed are the limit of 5Ð for the galactic super organism but do NOT apply beyond (inside black holes and outside galaxies, where the forces are repulsive dark entropy similar to those of electromagnetism between atoms; while inside the galaxy  the forces of gravitation are similar to curved electromagnetism within the Coulomb field  between the electron and the proton, whose ‘5Ð metric’ are parallel to those of the black hole and the strangelet)…

So there is a LOT of self-similarities of scale that would allow future 5 Ð physicists once the model r=evolution is accepted and the present dogmas put in doubt to complete by self-similarity the true nature of black hole stars (which rightly Einstein told us to be frozen stars), to understand the processes of renormalization (which add scalar infinities that must be cut off, including the SINGULARITY OF THE BLACK HOLE AND THE BIG-BANG).

The solution of the antimatter-matter symmetry and the hierarchy problem.

It is then obvious that this much more realist view of black holes and big bangs solve almost every problem of present physics as we explain in the 5D section of the scalar Universe. For example, the hierarchy problem of quantum gravity is simple: because cosmological masses are much larger, with less curvature and slower time cycles, they attract far less than charges. And in fact, if we accelerate them as we reduce their size in equal proportions, by a 10ˆ40 factor the G constant becomes the q constant and gravitation becomes as powerful. We can then say that in terms of scales, the galaxy is an atom, the black hole is a proton, the quark is a gluon, and the symmetry between the 3 scales of matter, black holes, quarks and gluons is the proper way to study all those scales – a theme that runs for a century in physics, since Kaluza-Klein used it in the first models of 5D physics to unify indeed G and Q, which I obtained also by slightly similar means, as shown in the 5D section.

On the other hand, the matter-antimatter symmetry is obvious if each matter is antimatter in its big-bang entropic death, the symmetry is that between living and dying people: we see less dying people because death lasts only a quanta of time. But there is another interesting proof of the model of quark black holes and the symmetry of the 3 scales, top quarks and heavy dark atoms devouring mesons of our light Universe as our light Ud quarks devour gluons of the next, lower scale, found by the very same CERN, which is now in the news everywhere, but CErnies don’t quite understand with their faulty, creationist models of singularities – the fact that B-quarks of the heavy dark atoms that must form black holes and emit mass in quasars, prefer matter, and so in a simple theory of quasars as the origin of the mass of the Universe, it explains our matter world.

From a letter to Otto Rossler, Walter and Eric Penrose, activists against CERN, I explained this clear proof both of the asymmetry of matter-antimatter, and the Dark atoms that must form black holes and when exploding entropically in lighter atoms produce only our ud-matter:

Hi All, we missed this key discovery that proves further the dangers at CERN and the quark matter nature of black holes and quasars ejection of matter in larger amounts that antimatter:

The LHCb experiment has found hints of what could be a new piece of the jigsaw puzzle of the missing antimatter in our universe. They have found tantalising evidence of a phenomenon dubbed charge-parity (CP) violation in particles known as baryons – a family of particles whose best-known members are the protons and neutrons that make up all …
It seems Bottom quarks, the main components of BCB black atoms decay into protons 20% than in antiprotons, So if we COULD FIND a massive process of decay of Bottoms in the Universe this would explain why there is more matter – a 20% more is created, the rest annihilate with the 80% of antimatter.
The problem they have at CERN after the initial excitement is that as all matter comes from the Big Bang singularity LOL, and Black holes are not BLACK STARS with BCB atoms and tops, there is NOWHERE they can find Bottom decay in massive numbers. So the news after initial enthusiasm became short of an oddity. Because they HAVE no enough Bottoms.
But IF black holes are BLACK stars made of BCB atoms, with a central top quark singularity – that is Kerr-Newmann charged black holes in the center, with its superluminal axis, THEY ARE THE SOURCE of matter, when the galactic quasar ejects massive quantities of matter through the central axis, and its synchrotron-like magnetic fields, observed in all the jets of quasars, origin of most new irregular galaxies (baby galaxies of the Universe):
Now as I have been explaining to you and otto for a decade a black holes is a ‘black star’ of the top quark decuplet (tops, bottoms and charms), whereas a BCB is a heavy atom as an udu in our world. And the big-bang IS a local galactic big-bang (quasar, blazar), as the BG radiation is local and mimic the galaxy whose life worldcycle has been measured in 20 billion years… All this means that the creation of matter is really a series of local big-bangs (this was Fred Hoyle’s theory of multiple quasar big-bangs)…
So IF THE BIG-BANGS ARE LOCAL ejections of matter by the ‘dark atoms, bcb’ of the black hole, the 20% of higher production of protons in the decay of the black atom (BCB) what this idiots sorry ‘expert’s (: call the ∆º particle is the first sign that all the matter of the UNIVERSE comes from the ‘ejection of matter’ by quark stars aka central black holes in quasars and blazars,   (∆º is a BUD particle, as they have not yet enough energy to make a BCB but what matters it the B decaing in protons not antiprotons)
So voila, 20% of PROTONs DO NOT annihilate with antiprotons.. and we have SOLVED both the question fo matter-antimatter, proved that black holes are black stars, and proved Fred Hoyle’s quasar big-bang theroy…  slightly changed with the tools of 5D astronomy – all those symmetries of scale between atoms and galaxies, black holes as protons of the larger scales,gluons as quarks of the lower scale, the octect of gluons being the octect of mesons, etc. etc.
Now the metric of those dark stars is fairly straight and resolved, including some work by Penrose’s father, Sir Roger, and Hawking – give to caesar what belongs to caesar, with its Penrose’s engine of expulsion of matter, both from the accreting region of the black hole and the central superluminal axis of the charged rotary Kerr-newmann black hole.
And this means also the validity of Einsteins’ principle of equivalence between mass and acceleration, as the heaviest top quarks by the law of any vortex beyond the c-speed event horizon both in the black hole and as the individual elements of its center, must speed up at hyperluminal speeds, hence can eject matter escaping the black hole: 
Screen Shot 2018-03-10 at 8.36.35 AM

The axis of superluminal dark entropy, transforms a 3rd Dimensional vortex of mass into pure distance-space.

It is likely that the rotation of those top quarks is hyperluminal, as only hyperluminal rotation, if mass is a vortex that accelerates inward with lesser radius, as a skater does ( Vo Ro = K) can give them such huge mass.

This is observed in all galaxies where massive jets at 10 c come out of black holes. And it is observed even in the spin of particles that have to be hyperluminal under the vortex law generalized with the scalar 5D metric of the graph, for the magnetic field they create – something Pauii already noticed in his spin theory.

So why physicists do not accept once and for all such models, including the fact that ‘outside’ the spacetime filled with light, faster than light speeds can happen? I wonder… since nothing forbid them in physics.

There is NOT in relativity any limit of speed. Einstein only said that c is constant and hyperluminal speeds require negative mass.

So because physicists do NOT know what mass is they have the taboo because they DON’T understand negative mass, which is silly since IN TIME ‘negative’ as Gauss explained calling negative roots inverse numbers, means only an ‘inverse direction’ of motion. So for example ‘negative divergence’ means implosive motion, negative potential the same implosive motion for mass and charge.

WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE is negative space/forms (negative apples) but in TIME i repeat, negative means an inverse motion. So if Mass is an accelerated inward motion by the Principle of equivalence, the negative mass of Einstein’s equation that a faster than light rotary system has means ONLY an explosive entropic divergence, of the space-time vortex of mass. So this simple acceptance of mass as a vortex, according to Einstein’s equivalence principle also explains antiparticles’ negative time, etc.

So goes for negative energy, which means merely an entropic explosion. For example in e=mc2, the e is inverse to the m, as a negative entropic explosion of mass that becomes entropy radiation.

So entropy is the negative of mass as a vortex whose form carries the information of the Universe and that only means that at c-speed the mass explodes. Ok. Those are concepts of information theory, which is the basis of my work on 5D, but physicists should really learn some of those concepts. Yet even if you are not interested in the scalar Universe, the symmetry of black stars and light stars still holds and it is evident.

Physicists in that sense also don’t understand how time comes to zero in those equations. It means time – motion reaches a 0 position or a balance between implosive and explosive motion in the event horizon turning at c-speed, neither exploding or imploding – not that the singularity is infinite and infinitely unreachable, as proved by muon experiments, which do not stop but slow down its spin-motions, the internal clocks of its ‘life-duration. IT IS the INTERNAL TIME of the spins and mass clocks what slows down to a halt, as when YOU die off, stopping the internal clocks of the system.

SO NO PROBLEM with faster than light c-speeds, it is just A QUESTION OF UNDERSTANDING ALGEBRA in terms of the complex laws of information of the universe.

On the other hand, back to our star-planet reality, small black holes have not enough density to create top quark stars and so they are neutral bcb atoms of bottom-charm quarks equivalent to our stars. Only giant central galactic black holes resemble the strange neutron stars with a cover of ‘normal iron atoms and a core of strangelet’, in this case a cover of normal ‘bcb dark heavy atoms’ and the center of a quasi-infinite rotating speeds of ultramassive top quarks. Small consolation: we shall become a dark atom star, neutral, unnoticed, of 3 cm.

This simple model of quantum gravity, according to the known known Dirac-Maxwell and EFE equations proved together, backed besides by experimental proofs of rotary black holes and galaxies in which the halo is strongly attracted by the center all over the Universe is the work I did in 5D that now has been published in its basic assumptions at arxiv.org and will I guess have a continuation in new papers, now that Hawking cannot impose its celebrity status, not to discuss what real black holes are:

That is, Quark stars – THEORETICALLY SOUND merging THE 3 KEY EQUATIONS OF PHYSICS, EXPERIMENTALLY SOUND – A MASSIVE rotating accelerator transforming quarks in layers of heavier quarks as LHC does.

Then in the galactic version this massive positive charge creates a massive outer-galactic magnetic field trapping the outer halo of strangelets, and creating the attractive tension of the so called dark matter.

Back to the metric equation at the beginning of this paragraph, which was modeled as a fluid even then, since the fluid is assumed to be at rest at t = 0, this can only be if it is a rotational fluid, with small CYCLICAL MOTIONS INSIDE, which are precisely the mass vortices of those quarks. We have a homology on our thermodynamic scale where fluid eddies form a series of fractal little vortices inside; in black holes will be small space-time vortices which is what particles are (last graph). So the dark star model is consistent with Einstein fields equations, which in fact give for that inner region of black holes the parametric equation of a cycloid – THAT is a particle turning around the eddie of mass. as the small rotary eddies do inside a larger ‘tornado’.

So there is never a zero radius-singularity. The more so since Pauli exclusion principle implies particles cannot occupy the same position so a black hole made of quarks cannot have a singularity.

For the singularity to happen Oppenheimer thus had to made more ‘assumptions’ out of the hat: that is dust not particles, that the scale factor R(t) vanishes; that the black hole is a fluid… that it has a uniform density having the initial value rho (0) – because it is made of ‘dust’ not of matter, when precisely it is the opposite, ultradense… and also that it has zero pressure (that is, it has no particles reacting and evolving, producing radiation outwards, also stupid, specially if they have top quark positive charges in the center that will produce an immense electromagnetic pressure radiation as our stars do with negative electron pressure radiation)…

All that are completely absurd assumptions. Only then the black star collapses from rest to a point in 3-subspace of infinite curvature and zero proper volume, in a finite time t. Then he gets the final collapsed state of infinite  energy density. And of course we cannot prove this experimentally wrong just because the center of the black hole is a region we have no direct evidence off; so we need the homologic method of 5Ð scales of matter to make it symmetric to normal stars but with heavy atoms of the top quark decuplet as we did.

Dark heavy stars should be like light stars.

The reason why that homology should work is because those heavy and light quarks and fermions are identical in properties except their different mass: We cannot really distinguish between a heavy electron (muon, tau) and a light one, and the properties of quarks are similar. So we must conclude that a dark, heavy star should be similar to a light star, only much heavier. This allow us to consider the internal structure of Black Stars – not black holes.

The internal dynamics of non-idealized, real black holes are however COMPLETELY IGNORED on those ‘creationist theories’ that use only simplified mathematics.

SO by IDEALIZING that region and using only geometric= topological methods Penrose and Hawking, after Oppenheimer, just invented a number of new singularity theorems based again in the false assumption that energy is always positive (I just showed you negative energy means merely the opposite of an imploding vortex of mass, which instead of imploding is exploding). So it was a false assumption, on top of Oppenheimer’s false ones. So goes for the other two assumptions of the couple:

Ubiquity of matter which contradicts the very same model of black holes as pure geometries. And single Aristotelian causality (single time arrow, false, there are 5 type of motion=time change, locomotion, evolution, reproduction, entropy and information, form-in-action, to construct the Universe and all its systems).

Only then they can consider further theorems on the collapse to a singularity… all imaginary including, the fancy theorem of ‘cosmic censorship’, and the evaporation of black holes already mentioned.
Further on they used relativity equations for the strong field of the black hole, which is an assumption since relativity has been experimentally verified only in the limiting case of weak fields (the normal galactic plane), but does NOT work on the superstrong gravitational fields of quark-gluon matter. It has been proved that when curvatures exceed the critical value Cg = 1/Lˆ4 where Lg is length in Planck units = 1.6 × 10ˆ−33cm corresponding to the critical density g = 5 × 10ˆ93gcm¯³, the GTR is no longer valid as quantum effects AKA quark-gluon ultradense soups must apply (Zeldovich and the russian school). Thus GTR breaks down before a gravitationally collapsing object could reach the infinite density of  a singularity.

all this i repeat comes because  singularity theorems only focus on the space -time geometry and treat BH as a classical fluid, which another contradiction remains unchanged structurally even when crushed in the gravitational collapse towards infinite density. This is today absurd since. when the density of matter in a collapsing object reaches the value ∼ 10ˆ7gcm¯³, electrons and protons combine into neutrons through the reaction p + e− = n + v; with electron neutrinos v likely escaping from the object with ‘negative mass’ and slightly above c-speed, which is what stubbornly physicists have been measuring for them for 40 years and then denying they measured them (but that is irrelevant, if they are trapped so be it).

Then when the gravitational contraction density reaches the value ∼ 10ˆ14gcm‾³, the neutrons will start to become quarks, as we observe at cern. And in all those processes, Pauli’s exclusion principle prevents  the singularity…

What is lost is  common sense (: Penrose-Hawking just care for the ‘equations’  Not the  reality on them, which is the quark-gluon ‘soup’.  It is like using Galileo’s equation v=s/t with NO friction, NO matter/object moving, hence NO momentum, NO energy… you need to fill in what is moving. And we know in black holes are particles.

Now, what was important for the black hole to be an accelerator, transforming matter into heavier quarks as CERN does, is that ONLY rotating black holes MUST exist (so the rotating process does act as an accelerator for particles). If there were static black holes (schwarzschild’s first solution easy-found, never observed), the particles wouldn’t accelerate to become quarks but:

A) all black holes found are rotating as all stars found.

b) A series of detailed papers on arxiv.org show rotating dark stars are the only ones that are compatible with Dirac-Maxwell equations.

And, because in 5D the definition of mass is an accelerated vortex of space-time, (e=mc2, e=hƒ, m=(h/c2) ƒ, whereas ‘f’ the frequency of rotation is proportional as in all vortex to its attractive power which is c for the black hole. So it BECOMES a super-accelerator. 

And since the dangers of those accelerators are exactly the same, people would have easily get it: either they accelerate and collapse matter into strange quark-soups that become a strangelet, or they accelerate them into top quarks and become cosmic black holes…

THE KEY is the quark and the exclusion principle which Einstein didn’t know to put it on his  equations, but asked for a cut off substance, or else its equations, he knew, wouldn’t be real. When you do real physics EQUATIONS must ad to speed ‘something moving’, and something must collapse. V=s/t means nothing without substance tht moves.

Now if the exclusion principle rules out a singularity, it rules out both the black hole and the Big Bang, so then you need an alternative sound model and that is the 5D scalar Universe, we provide in this web

So black HOLES MUST have a substance, WHICH IS COMPATIBLE with the 3 sets of fundamental equations of physics, Maxwell (electromagnetism: Heaviside actually Maxwell did 20 complicated equations, Heaviside, reduced them to 4 after inventing the curl), Einstein (Gravitation) and Dirac (particles)

THE ONLY WAY TO PUT THEM TOGETHER INTO A BLACK HOLE is making it to have a substance, quarks, when you resolve those equations that Weyl and Einstein tried to prove WHEELER AND OPPENHEIMER wrong.

In the more complex models, you get the metric of charged central black hole emitting near infinite speed jets i the center; and the non-charged smaller balck holes of bcb neutral atoms in the galaxy. But the essence continues being the same – only with all those absurd assumptions there is singularities.

So what Hawking and Penrose did is just mathematical entelechies because languages are inflationary mirrors, all have fictions, you can believe on Quixote, Hawking’s evaporation and the Ring of the Lords MOVIE, all beautiful language inflationary mirrors, but physicists KNOW as Einstein put it that mathematics can be consistent=truth in its syntax as Quixote and ring of the lords even more beautiful than pedestrian reality, but only experimentally sound maths are real documentaries are real and journalism is real.
5D organic scales further complete the model, where each galaxy is an atom, since we have. already proved that the nanoscopic strings are equivalent to the cosmic strings, so you go in layers and the atom is equivalent to the galaxy, and the central black hole is the positive proton, i can throw you in the 5D metric that prove that easily:
Smaller systems run faster cycles but the product of both, space size and time speed of its cycles is co-invariant, WHICH IS THE MATHEMATICAL DEFINITION OF A DIMENSION BY KLEIN: a dimension exists if there is a con-invariant equation of spacetime, in this case Space size x time speed of clocks = constant, so truth that your cells run faster clocks an atoms much faster cycles, and when you shrink the equations of the galaxy to the size of the atom, alas you get exactly the speed of cycles of atoms and its size and if you go down you get alas the speed of quark cycles and its size and if you slow down your metabolic cycles alas you get the speed of cycles of cells and its size…. So that is the beauty of it all, and why you get down in scales from the human mind in the center to the microstring and above the macrostring…
TRUTH requires in 5Ð different scales all filled with reality.
And this means ALL the equations, Dirac’s articles, Maxwell electromagnetism and EFE’s Einstein, NOT only a simplified Einstein’s geometry.
Black holes are rotary always, either neutral heavy bcb dark stars or charged top quark stars.
 What kind of black star then we are talking about? There are 3 metric equations for them: fixed non-moving ones (Schwarzschild) never found and incoherent with the Maxwell-Dirac formalisms and 5Ð mass as a vortex of spacetime. So they don’t exist
This leaves us with 2 type, which should mimic the two type of light stars we find, ud-light stars like the sun, and strange stars with a heavy strange, negative charged center or pulsars. So we should find small Bcb black stars (stars collapsing into black holes) and then much larger, top quark stars in the center of galaxies, and this plug them in directly with cosmic scales where each galatom has a proton-like black hole in the center, which indeed when we apply 5D metric is what turns out to be a proton – a black holes with a Schwarzschild radius.
Let us then study those 2 models – the proton black hole formalism studied in the equation of unification of charges and masses, will not be brought here again:

In a star, the electron’s repulsive force balances the gravitational collapse.

In the GIANT central black hole the central volume of top quarks with ++ charge balances the gravitational collapse.

And the jets that move matter up to 10 C should obviously come from the accelerate neutrinos, with ‘negative mass = faster than c-speed’, the only particles that can traverse that huge ++ Pressure; so they can enter the perpendicular faster than c speed center of the Kerr-Newman black hole, which the metric show to be hyperluminal and perpendicular to the black hole plane, acting as the ‘cosmic expansive dark energy’ which we see as expansive distance between galaxies.

Again those neutrinos are all over the place, they were for decades measured by Japanese with negative mass till dogma prevented more measures, they have a weak angle of 10ˆ-33, exactly the same size that TACHYON STRINGS, so they ARE tachyon strings, the component of expansive dark energy between galaxies, and ONLY when entering the galaxy with its c-limit of spacetime, they ‘break’ to c-speed… outside the galaxy we are in a larger scale of 5D hence with larger speed-distance Max. S and slower time cycles…

It is all about modelling a black hole as a star but of heavy bcb atoms and top quarks in the center; whereas the event horizon is merely the ‘surface’ of the frozen star and gives us its diameter, the central pressure of electronic stars, the central pressure of top quarks, the layers of denser atoms of the star, the layers of denser bcb atoms which should form bcb ‘hydrogen’, ‘bcb’ carbon, ‘bcb’ iron and so on; and in those huge frozen stars on the center of galaxies, you also have the top quark ++ massive outer radiation

Or do you think the Universe has created the beautiful symmetry of light atoms and heavy atoms, light quarks and heavy quarks just NOT to give any role to heavy quarks? It is efficient and economic.

So small black stars  are BC-neutral atoms and cannot form the central jet of hyperluminal speed, so they cannot expel energy through neutrinos and must keep growing till they form the top quark curl in the center that can expel the neutrinos at superluminal speed ‘giving content’ to the metric of Kerr-Newman BH – funny thing is that the hyperluminal central jet of those BH was topologically proved by Penrose.

So black stars, we can say do exactly the opposite of Hawking’s fantaphysics: small black holes NEVER evaporate (wrong entropy arrow) but keep growing and growing till they get old as giant BH in central galaxies and then they do evaporate neutrinos, in huge numbers.

Since indeed neutrinos have variable speed and outside galaxies it has been measured to be faster than light with negative mass.

But again till physicists/mathematicians do not bet to understand what a negative symbol in a square means they won’t accept experimental evidence of faster than c-rotation. Indeed, THE SPIN OF ELECTRONS can only exist if it is faster than c or else it would not produce that magnetic dipole, something already Pauli noticed. So again:

The Universe is never one dimensional with no breath but bidimensional  (this string theory proves) so when you see a root, normally is because they have used a one-dimensional parameter, you have to square it, ‘c2’ is the constant not c. And when you see a negative in an equation with a time parameter it means a negative, inverse motion, left or right expanding or imploding.

∆+1: Galactic worldcycles.

Now because somehow physicists feel intuitively that with thermodynamics they are ‘hitting’ the right spot≈scale when studying matter, they have used the theories of thermodynamics to expand their worldview to the entire Universe, with the faulty errors due to a single time arrow, that of death, and a single scale. The result are some of the most ‘in-famous’ mishaps of science in the last century. As we have dealt in cosmology with the big-bang error of an entropy only dying Universe, we shall here only consider a specific case of that error, which on view of the present experiments with black holes and big-bang replication can have dare consequences for mankind, we talk of the erroneous, Hawking’s theory regarding…

∆+1: §ð



We study here yet another error of the conception of an entropic only Universe. In this case the misuse of the concept of thermodynamic single arrows of time (2nd laws of thermodynamics), to define out of nowhere, the thermodynamics of black holes. Indeed, we have already denied the Universal validity of the second law, balanced by gravitation at cosmic level and by cold crystals of solid order in the matter scale. It is then interesting that while physicists have expanded entropy well beyond their ‘realm’ – gaseous states, entropic processes and the ‘acceptable’ translation of similar events into ‘frequency≈temperature’ at the quantum scale (plasma, etc.), they denied the law in a local effect in which it applies: the birth of ultra-hot black holes at the ∆-1 thermodynamic level, as seeds of a gravitational species, which will finally emerge into the gravitational scale, once it cools down and feeds on the thermodynamic world.

The case is of enormous beauty and illustrates multiple laws of 5D metric, when properly interpreted. And yet we have instead a conceptual crass error by Mr. Hawking, who affirms the ultra-hot black hole keeps getting hotter, cooling down its surroundings and finally evaporates, braking locally – where it applies, the…

2nd law

Heat. ‘Heat is energy that is transferred from one body to another as the result of a difference in temperature. If two bodies at different temperatures are brought together energy is transferred – i.e. heat flows – from the hotter body to the colder. The effect of this transfer of energy is an increase in the temperature of the colder body and a decrease in the temperature of the hotter body’.

Britannica, 1st paragraph, article on ‘Heat’, Macropaedia; Volume 8, page 701

We are just a mush in the surface of a rock lost in the corner of the Universe, departing of those facts we can talk about man’ Schopenhauer, father of modern philosophy.



The hard facts of known-known science.  

The evaporation of black holes, depends on this formula:

M_H \leq \frac{\hbar c^3}{8 \pi G k_B T_u} \;(1)

As the formula is filled with Universal Constants (latter understood in more depth0, and only two variables we shall from now on write it in a simplified manner as:

±ΔMass ≤ Konstant/±ΔTemperature.

Or easier to Understand moving Temperature to the other side:

±ΔMass  x  ±ΔTemperature  = Constant.

Simple, isn’t? It is the formula that defines the changes in temperature and mass of black holes.

We know both can change but in which direction? If the black hole mass  increases, temperature must diminish for the product to remain constant. If the black hole mass diminishes, then temperature must increase for the product to remain constant.

Two choices.

If we write as Hawking does:

-Δ Mass  X +Δ Temperature = Constant…

Black holes t increase temperature, getting hotter and diminishing mass, evaporating.

If we write:

+Δ Mass  x -Δ Temperature = Constant

Hyperhot black holes will cool down, transferring heat to the surrounding star or planet, evaporating them, into a cosmic explosion, a Nova.

So wwhat chooses those symbols?

The Universe and its second thermodynamic law, which merely states that a hot object cools down and transfers heat to a surrounding colder environment. Thus it is obvious that Mr. Hawking got his sign wrong, and arbitrarily decided the second law of thermodynamics was wrong and the black hole will evaporate.

The problem is that the Universe and his fundamental laws, when they apply locally as the case of the Laws of entropy and heat imply exactly the opposite and what we observe: an ultra-active baby-born black hole, as all systems born in an ∆-1 ‘faster scale’ of the 5th dimension, have accelerated time clocks – which in this case translate into ‘faster dynamic temperature/frequency’ and so it is the black hole that evaporates the cold surroundings, transferring its matter and energy (bottom of the equation) through an intermediate state o pure entropic radiation, into the black hole, which absorbs it, and then inside, we theoretically assume, convert part into mass and part into ≥c dark energy shot through its poles.

Indeed, any ultra-hot object as a black hole, born in a cold environment as the Earth is, according to the laws of entropy cools down and transfers heat to the environment, evaporating us. And this is what we see in the Universe happening, always, when a black hole is born. It cools down and evaporates its surroundings into a big explosion, a Nova.

When you take an iron rod from the oven and put it in cold water, the water evaporates and the iron cools down, ALWAYS. And in the Universe whenever we see the birth of an ultra-hot black hole it evaporates its surrounding electromagnetic world (us) and gets colder, ALWAYS, till it reaches as a mature huge black hole a thrermodynamic balance with the cold vacuum that surrounds it.

In this principle, that heat moves from the hot source to the cold one, are based all the laws of thermodynamics, all the machines of the planet. If this principle would not exist you could made a heat machine of eternal motion, the biggest hoax of science.

Now we stress, the 2nd law applies to heat processes, entropy processes, and those processes of the quantum realm where is licit to translate temperature into frequency, as this case. It does NOT apply globally to the entire Universe, and in upper ‘colder’ scales of ‘zero temperature’, and ‘higher order’, the gravitational and dark energy scales.  So the example is a good illustration to deal also with concepts such as ‘what is truly mass’, how energy and information transfer asymmetrically between ∆-scales and so on.

Now, within the local symmetries where entropy applies there is NOT a single exception to the laws of Thermodynamics in the Universe. Everything in heat science and its frequency equivalencies in quantum scales is based in this law.

So Mr. Hawking an enfant terrible – a child of thought, to be more precise – with utter disregard of the known-known laws of the Universe, just chose to break the ‘law’ – one might imagine to shock the audience- changed wrongly the arrow of time, in one of the few cases it did apply (: and wrote the inverse symbols:

– Δ Mass  X  + Δ Temperature = Constant…

It is Hawking’s formula of evaporation of black holes…that defies all the laws of entropy, all the laws of time, all the laws of Einstein and all the laws of the 5th dimension, the expansion of Einstein’s relativity that I study.

And that is the problem.

What the equation means is easy to understand:

Hawking affirms that black holes do exactly the opposite that all other entities of the thermodynamic Universe:

They are born very hot, the hottest objects of the Universe (in this we all agree), but then instead of cooling down in our cool Universe, burning us into hell, they will ‘magically’ absorb heat from the cold environment (+Δ), getting even hotter, breaking all the laws of entropy!

It is like if you throw a flame into water and the flame would get hotter and the water would become ice!

It is like if you get a cup of hot coffee and the cup keeps getting hotter ‘evaporating’, while it freezes your hand!

This has never happened and the mere idea was for very long in science a laughing matter. Since the laws of entropy are crystal clear. When a hot system is put by the side of a cold system, temperature moves from the hot system that cools (in this case the black hole) to the cold one that heats and evaporates.

But Hawking insisted for decades with an obsessive mind and charm. When a black hole is born, hotter than the environment, instead of evaporating the environment as any hot object does, it will become hotter and evaporate!

How he figures the black hole does that? Well it can’t according to the laws of time and entropy. So alas! He figured out that the black hole travels back into the past instead of traveling to the future. And that is why it evaporates. It is like if a baby will travel back into the past and enter the womb of the mother evaporating. Easy.

Indeed, he also muses after that astounding discovery that he could enter a black hole and come into the past and kill his grand-father. Seriously.

Of course here the error is that he doesn’t understand ‘time arrows are ALWAYS LOCAL, relative past entropy, relative future ∆information and conserved relative momentum, all of them adding to a zero sum (as past entropy and future information cancel each other leaving the integral of momentum or ‘energy world cycle’ that elongates the eternal present of the Universe). Simple and beautiful:

∫p ±(Spe≈tiƒ) = Present Energy, which is a zero sum that conserves momenta and energy and cancels entropy and information.

It is worth to repeat it such a blunder of the many we will expose in simple terms using the basic laws of Ƽst here, harmonising all sciences:

-Δ Mass  x  +Δ Temperature = Constant

Defines ‘imaginary black holes’ that break the laws of entropy and will get hotter. Then for all the constants of the Universe to remain constant their mass must diminish and balance the increase of heat.

But the Universe has never done this choice.

On the contrary the Temperature of a hot mass always diminishes in a cold environment.

So mass always increases. Let us then respect the laws of the Universe, proved ad nauseam in all systems and write instead the symbols right:

+Δ Mass  x -Δ Temperature= Constant.

The hot black hole as all the systems of the Universe will decrease its temperature as it is born much hotter than our Universe, and so the heat will be transferred to our electromagnetic world and evaporate it, and the black hole will absorb it as energy in its event horizon collapsing that energy into  mass at the speed of light: M=E/c²

This is what Einstein say, what we observe in the Universe, what every black hole born in that Universe proofs:

The black hole is born very hot, evaporates the surroundings and absorbs it, exploding the world into a Nova at the speed of light.

Why then he broke the laws of thermodynamics, of Einstein’s gravitation – and the yet to be known laws of the 5th dimension and balances of the arrows of time, and consideration of momentum and energy…. running into the paradox of information, etc. etc.

Obviously it cannot be because of science and the delights of true knowledge, but for all the spurious, wrong, unscientific causes of our civilisation: fame, provocation, faked news, etc. What is far more worrisome is that science after initial derision accepted it, and now incidentally physicists are truing to do such black holes at CERN, with the obvious risks of one being born, growing fast, swallowing the Earth and killing us all.

The error of Hawking is like the tale of the emperor’s naked clothes. One day an emperor forgot to dress and went into a parade. And none would say anything till a child pointed out that the emperor was naked. His errors are so evident and absurd that nobody dares to contradict him. But the emperor walks naked and black holes will cool down and swallow the Earth if they are born at LHC.

And yet the entire situation is so absurd that nobody will shout, ‘cover the emperor’s with decent cloths’. The emperor is Mr. Hawking  invested with so much authority by the celebrity P.R.ess that only an intelligent child – that is a new born model as 5D dares to point out the error without fear of making a fool of myself.

Still with the proper arrow the formula is a beautiful one, so we can now study what it means, once we have corrected.



Science is truth when 3 elements are met: experimental evidence, correspondence with previous theories known to be truth and only then mathematical analysis with the proper dynamic evolution towards the future.

Now, we observe that the smaller the black holes are the faster they grow in a furious swallowing path. And yet the Fermi Satellite sent in orbit to find the signature of evaporating black holes has NOT found the slightest signature of black hole evaporation.

So what to make of this? Obviously, the 3 elements of science are not met:

  • Experimental evidence (none) ->Correspondence principle with previous theorems (Einstein’s hole always grow, no hair theorem gives no temperature to black holes) -> Mathematical equations (improper interpretation of the symbol of time).

So both fundamental laws of scientific truth, falsification in the negative, and experimental evidence in the positive, prove that baby black holes do not evaporate, breaking the essential laws of thermodynamics, and Nature stubbornly imposes its cosmic order.

Today the fundamental theory of the Universe, the big-bang, is based in an expansion backwards in time of a lineal equation, similar to Hawking’s:

Hubble established a cosmological velocity-distance law: velocity = Ho × distance. Whereas the variables are here instead of mass and temperature, speed and distance and the constant is Ho.

According to this Hubble law, the greater the distance of a galaxy, the faster it recedes. Modern estimates place the value of H around 22 km/s per 1 million light years. While the reciprocal of Hubble’s constant lies between 13 billion and 14 billion years, and this cosmic time scale serves as an approximate measure of the moment of birth of the universe.

Thus the same procedure of running backwards in time a black hole mass growth, pattern would give us travelling to the past, the point of birth of the black holes at the Planck scale at enormous temperature.

Does this mean Hawking’s work lacks scientific merit?

Not at all, as if we respect the laws of thermodynamics, the ratio mass-temperature of black holes, describes the birth of a small black hole, which as all systems of Nature show an enormous activity and rate of growth, in its initial stages, feeding in the energy that surrounds them – the placenta of our seminal seeds, the nest in which the parental system feeds them, the environment in which the new species becomes the dominant predator; in the case of the black hole the rich field of electromagnetic energy that surrounds it in stars where they are born by gravitation collapse and/or planets against which they collide.

It is then easy to understand the importance of the formula to interpret the genesis of black holes, the mechanisms of Nova explosions, and the way in which the energy and information of the lower scales of nature (the quantum and thermodynamic scales emerges as mass in the larger cosmological scale), since and this is the second merit of the equation of Hawking, which stirred the imagination of scientists, to the point of accepting his peculiar interpretation is the fact that it uses all the main constants of space and time of Nature, whose meaning is still no understood in theoretical physics.

And so it hinted to the solution of the fundamental ending question of physics – what is the relationship and meaning of those constants, and how can we unify mathematically the 3 fundamental scales of physical systems, the smaller quantum scale of electromagnetic charges, the human scale of thermodynamic molecules and the larger scale of cosmological masses:right euqationNow we have written the equation with the proper symbol and alas, it is a very important equation, as now IT FOLLOWS THE CORRESPONDENCE PRINCIPLE.

Why that beautiful equation is an equality?

Because the event horizon is a discontinuum, which act as an osmotic membrane, with 2 sides, which have the same ‘surface’ area, so to speak.

The event horizon has two sides as all membranes. In one side you are inside the black hole (8π GM), and there is NO temperature here (no hair theorem, black holes are defined only with 3 parameters, angular momentum, mass and charge). So the black hole DOES not evaporate because it is NOT made of temperature. It is impossible to evaporate.

On the other side of the membrane, there is though temperature, because we ARE in the Thermodynamic and quantum world, which the black hole swallows.

This duality of a membrane is perfectly understood in terms of Topological laws. The fundamental theorem of topology states that a closed circle, any n-dimensional membrane breaks the continuum into an internal world and an external Universe, with 2 different surfaces, an internal elliptic, implosive, in-formative surface and an external hyperbolic, expansive, entropic geometry,

And those are the 2 sides of the black hole: Internally the black hole creates pure information. Externally the black hole increases the entropy and disorder of our world just before it swallows it.

Consider any other ‘organic system’ absorbing energy and trans-forming it into its own substance. You eat, and first you disorder, increasing the entropy of the food you eat down to amino acids. This is what the black hole does in the side of the quantum-thermodynamic scales of the Universe. But then you stomach evolves the amino-acids back into proteins of your ‘own DNA code’. This is what the black hole does in the inside of the membrane: converts entropy into information.

But we can equal both sides, because they have the same surface, one side is gravity surface, the other side is entropy surface.

So the way to properly write that equation in terms of the duality of entropy and information and the 3 fractal scales of the physical Universe is:right euqation

This is the beauty of the equation of Hawking, when we respect the 2 ‘fundamental proofs’ of truth in science:

Experimental evidence (black holes always swallow our world in nova explosions that increase the entropy of our galaxies but absorb and grow in mass internally).
Correspondence principle (no hair theorem: black holes do not have temperature; they can be described with only 3 parameters, mass, angular momentum and in some cases charge, if they do have it; Einstein’s equations: black holes do always increase mass, do not evaporate, do not emit radiation).
Thus when we put properly the symbol, ≥, black holes grow according to the beautiful formula of Hawking, which in this manner respects the 2 fundamental proofs of truth in science – experimental Nova evidence and Correspondence principle; further clarifies the process of creation of mass, in a more detailed version of E=Mc², explains why the Universe is fractal, with discontinuous membranes between the entropic side of the Universe (electromagnetic-thermodynamic membrane) and the in-formative gravitational side that in-forms reality (mass-black hole side).

And why there are 2 ‘geometrical description’ of space-time (elliptic curved space-time of Einstein’s gravitation, made of accelerated vortex like informative mass clocks) and the hyperbolic, entropic, expansive description of quantum physics. Which ARE 2 DIFFERENT discontinuous sides of the fractal Universe that balance each other and MUST NOT be unified in simple terms because BOTH ARE NEEDED to balance the Universe.

On one hand you have what the black hole eats, our space-time world, on the other the gravitational space-time world.

There are in fact 3 scales of space-time in reality and that is what the Universe shows.

On the side of mass, we have a beautiful equation, which is identical to the tensor of Einstein’s Relativity, that describes a gravitational world, 8 πG Mass.

It must be noticed that unlike Einstein’s tensor, here there is no energy-entropy, but only the other 2 elements of Einstein’s equation: 8 π G, the curvature of the black hole and Mass, the substance of gravitational space.

On the other side, we have the same equation above for quantum space-time where h is the angular momentum of its clocks of information (so quantum systems code with h-planck quanta its informative spin and form) and c is obviously the speed-distance of space, as we see light space. Space is made of light, as impressionists painters realized and Einsteins’ relativity principle that cannot distinguish motions from distances, or the spatial expansion of intergalactic space, homologous to the red-shift elongation of light space proves.

Our human electronic mind perceives light-space, through, its time clocks, Tƒ=h-planck, is the minimal quanta perceived by an electron,  and Sp the speed of light, and H/c is so small that we have a mind that processes very little information and in terms of Lobachevski’s parameter of geometry displays a flat Euclidean World:


In the graph, you can see what i talk about. You see light and light has 3 perpendicular Euclidean dimensions. That is why your mind is flat and Euclidean. This product h c³ is thus the time-space clocks and volume of the quantum world, and its ratio Tƒ/Sp=h/c³, is the ‘ratio of information/space’ of the human mind, which in terms of Geometry is called the Gaussian/Lobachevski ratio of curvature that defines a flat mind. Beautiful isn’t. So many things hidden in an equation (-; Saper vedere.

On the other side, we have a ratio between the simplest quantum minimal, larger world and our intermediate thermodynamic scale, meaning that the black hole absorbs the quantum space-time (hc³), and first it converts it into pure entropy and temperature (KT) – hence the ratio; and then it moves it to the other side of the membrane, converted into 8 π G Mass.

Now, a brief lesson on modern cosmology. The Universe has shown to be fractal, structured in relative scales of size and with different time clocks of different speed. This we know since Einstein. We do NOT have mechanical clocks around the Universe measuring time. As obvious as this is people do not seem to understand it.

And we co-exist in several scales, with membranes and discontinuous between them, such as the Lorentz transformations that define transitions between the electromagnetic light and mass scales, the quantum equations of Planck (violet catastrophe) that define the transition regions between the thermodynamic and radiation scales.

There are 3 fundamental of such scales which we show in the next graph, the larger gravitational scale, the human thermodynamic scale and the quantum scale, with different space-quanta and time clocks:


In the graph we show them, with different space and time quanta. But all of them have a common co-invariant formula, which defines them as space-time planes of reality, with a ‘different time clock’ that measures the information of the system in the frequency and form of its cycles, and a given space quanta that measures its pieces of space.

And there are transfers of motion between them, called ‘angular momentum and ‘lineal momentum, or ‘information and ‘space’. There are many formula on physics to describe this space-time planes, and the easiest ones are those of Energy, and those that define its forces. They vary slightly (we show on the left side the formula for energy, and slight variations show formulae for momentum and forces in each scales).

This is the new stuff on physics, the formalism of the 5th dimension that this writer pioneered before this activism, as it explain the ‘whys’ of Universal constants, and the structure between scales, the reason of the exponential discontinuous equations between scales. And Hawking’s equation is a fundamental equation that relates the 3 scales together. In fact it is the only equation that relates them, as the black hole swallows it all. Swallows both the quantum and electromagnetic world and converts it into mass; it is the true devouring monster of the Universe:

∆+1(cosmological scale) : M ( 8 π G) ≥ ∆-1: hc³/ k T: ∆: Thermodynamic scale)

Now the formula has the 3 clocks of time, (G-curvature, h-angular momentum, T-emparture) and 3 space quanta of the 3 scales of the fractal Universe (c3 volume of light space, M-ass and K-entropy quanta).
So his work is essential to the fractal Universe structure and its 3 5D scales.

As such is a ‘beauty’ and it is a pity that Mr. Hawking was not happy enough finding it, and that he said ‘philosophers of science envy me, because they don’t know mathematics, and that is why they criticise the evaporation of black holes’. Of course, we do know mathematics, we invent mathematics. People like Descartes and Leibniz invented analytic geometry and calculus the two main branches of modern mathematics and they defined themselves as philosophers of science, NOT physicists. That is why we can have rigour with truths.

So to the beauty of it. First we must ask. Why there are two sides on that equality, which when properly written with the positive arrow of time is M ≥ k/T, that is the black hole mass always grows?

Because this equation is taken from the event horizon, the membrane that separates the discontinuous fractal scale of gravitation – the inside of the hole, or M (8π G) – which creates mass-information; from the outer region, the entropic, thermodynamic and quantum world, which the Hole is swallowing.

So we have an equation that shows how ∆+1 gravitational mass information is created by accretion of the lower scales of quantum light space-time (Hc3) and thermodynamic space-time (KT).

And it is precisely the simplicity and perfection of the equation, which relates the time clocks and space-quanta of the 3 scales of the Universe, what makes it so important. As it truly writes in the formalism of the fractal Universe:

∆+1 Gravitational Scale:  Space quanta: M x Tƒ(curved clock): G = ∆-1: quantum scale/∆ Thermodynamic scale:  Sp:c³ x Tƒ: h / Sp: K x Tƒ (T)

That is, the mass quanta of the gravitational space, whose frequency or curvature or attractive accelerated clock is given by G, is swallowing the Space-time of the electromagnetic, quantum Universe, whose clocks of time are here measured by the angular momentum h and its quanta of space, by the volume of 3-dimensional Euclidean space; after converting it first into thermodynamic entropy, in its process of ‘rising it up’ and transforming it upwards through the scales of information of the 5th dimension, into thermodynamic space quanta, k-constants, and its time clocks, temperature.

This is the analytical, algebraic understanding of the accretion of black holes, which absorb the space-time, c-h quanta of electromagnetic scales, convert it by this ∆-1/∆ space-time ratio first into entropic heat and then swallow it up into gravitational mass.

And the beauty of it is that we DO have here the equations in perfect form. we have in the quantum scale on top, the h-angular momentum, the minimal clock of time-information of the quantum scale, multiplied by c³, the volume of space (as we are in a light space-time membrane, with the 3 euclidean perpendicular co-ordinates of light, the electric magnetic and c-speed arrows). And we have below the thermodynamic space constant, k-entropy, as entropy is an expansive space, and the time clocks of the thermodynamic world which is temperature.

So the equation allow us to understand for the first time, properly interpreted the meaning of the 3 Universal constants of space of the Universe, in its 3 relative scales of size, Mass, Entropy and c‚ light space-time. And its 3 relative cyclical clocks of time, G-curvature,h-angular momentum and temperature:

This equation is therefore a fundamental equation, which properly understood with the 2 arrows of the future, entropy and information and the laws of the fractal Universe duality.

We can now compare it with the previous equation of radiation to further illuminate it:



A simplified analysis, shows both equations to have similar terms above hcˆ3 and hcˆ² and below Kb T, and so without doing an exhaustive analysis of the two forms, one a mere ratio the other a ratio ‘passed over an exponential decay’, they confirm our earlier model of radiation in black bodies: the thermodynamic ∆-scale ‘evaporates’ into the lower ∆-1 quantum scale of frequency radiation.

The differences beyond the mathematical scripture though are relevant:

  • In the black hole the radiation is swallowed inward into Tiƒ-mass. In the black body is emitted outwards as Energy/Entropy (B). And so we see once more the inverse relationship between inward masses and outward radiation.
  • In the black hole c is three dimensional, meaning the whole volume of ternary space-time is swallowed. In the blackbody the form is bidimensional, which we shall constantly find explained by the holographic principle: bidimensional sheets of space-time, which write c² are at the core of all formulae of light constants.
  • Finally related to 1) in the radiation what disappears are the excessive photons of the empty space, dissolved into the entropic arrow of the quantum field of non-local dark energy (Spe, ∆-4), while in the black hole disappear into the evolved ∆+4 scale of top quark masses (the true content of those black holes).


Yes, this fast turning, heavier, more attractive particle that can be the atom of black holes that gives them substance do exist, and it is called the 3rd family of heavy quarks, which are amazingly heavier than our quarks, thousands of time heavier and correspond to the exact parameters of a black atom.

Now, we shall elaborate this with the new physics of duality and the fractal paradigm to further understand why this is the most logic, symmetry, natural solution according to the laws of the scientific method (economicity, simplicity) to explain the structure of dark matter, the Halo and the galaxy.

It is all there, again. Physicists ask for a new 5th dimension to make black holes, and we find it as a relativistic motion, which is proved experimentally (the fastest clock of time of the Universe are the bottom quarks, as top quarks have not yet produced in enough numbers to measure its no doubt even faster, more attractive rotational clock). And this superstring, supermassive quark is the cut off substance of black holes.

In brief, if we define mass by the speed and frequency of its gravitational vortices, according to the equivalence principle of Einstein between gravitation and acceleration, those fast turning particles are vortices of space-time, similar to attractive tornadoes (E=mc2 +E=hv-> M=k  ƒ, so the faster the particle, black hole or mass turns as a space-time vortex the more it attracts:


In the graph, the evolution of the concept of mass in relativity, from the initial image of an abstract substance in the center of an accelerated vortex of space-time, proper of the abstract, pre–world war age, when Einstein first published his work on gravitation, to the first pictures obtained in bubble chambers in the postwar age, to the realization that each mass is a fractal space-time made of smaller cyclic motions proper of twenty-first century.

In the graph, for the pedantic observer, which rejects Newton as too simple, over seeded by Einstein, a final note on the multiple perspectives we can have of any event of space-time according to the ∆±1 or Sp, Tƒ, ST perspective we adopt, we classify the 4 standing models of gravitation as relative truths, belonging to the 4 perspectives of reality: SP< =>TO.

In the graph the 4 obvious descriptions of mathematical physics regarding gravitation: It (relativity)≈ Tƒ (Newton) <-> Sp (Poisson)≈ Es (Lagrange):

Tƒ- Newton is a moving CLOCK LIKE vortex of the same mass-motion regions)

Sp-Poisson is a potential static field of energy gradients..

Es- Hamiltonian-Lagrangian is a dynamic description of the conservative energy of the system.

It: Einstein’s simultaneous measures in relativity are a still, formal description in ‘present’ of the gravitational space-time.

And so all of them are equivalent. In fact Einstein derived his work via Poisson from Newton. Today Relativity’ informative mappings of the galaxy space-time are transformed in AMD theory into a Lagrangian-Hamiltonian ‘bidimensional model’, for computer calculations, proving once more the bidimensional structure of space-time.

All are in fact derived one from each other, as Einstein took its beginnings from Poisson, who elaborated on Newton; and the more important of them all the Hamiltonian).

All this of course can be turned with algebra into very complicated equations to describe those vortices as masses with different mathematical equations. The graph shows 4 of those ‘formalisms’, which are equivalent with more or less ‘finesse’ in the degree of detail, they have.

The 5D model.

Now the 5D model of the fractal, organic Universe, does not deny Einstein, it merely expands its views, and adds fractal organic properties to the galaxy explaining better the function of those black holes, its atomic substance and working according to the known-known facts of astrophysics, in which black holes have come to dominate most of the creative processes of the galaxy. In that regard, you can compare the galaxy to a cell in a much larger scale, with mitochondria stars, of light yd-matter which end up being devoured and becoming the energy for the creation of black holes, the informative vortices, equivalent to the DNA, that swarm in huge numbers in the centerl nuclei and control its shape and provoke the reproduction of stars, with its in-formative gravitational waves.

Einstein had asked for a cut-off substance, or ‘atom of black holes’, which he could not guess at the time as quarks had not been found, but now we hint that black holes are as he thought ‘frozen stars’ of the heaviest quark families (bct quarks), and that should be the ‘realist modeling’ of black holes. As those quarks will appear in increasing numbers in accelerators, which are crossing the dark matter barrier is very likely they will be produced on those accelerators, in any of its possible varieties of dark matter that range from strangelets (s-quarks) to toplets (TTT-quarks), through Higgs decay (H->Top and anti top).

Now, all this in mathematical physics implies a constant growth of the mass of the black hole along the previous equation: M=k/T, that is as the black hole cools down, it converts via the weak force, lighter matter into heavier quarks that increase its volume and hence its area.

The last great advances in classic black hole theory were done by Kerr, a new Zealander which defined rotary black holes with or without charge. Those would be the top quark frozen stars with positive charge and the same density at macro-scale than a black hole acting as a relative ‘proton’ acts in an atom in the center of the galaxy. While the halo should be made of strangelet quarks (negative charged), acting in this symmetry between the 3 families of mass and 3 regions of the galaxy, as a relative negative ‘electron’ cover, with the ud-stars and planets in the middle, as seen in the next graph, greatly expanded in its detailed explanation on the post of 5D astrophysics:

Screen Shot 2016-05-16 at 18.26.57

dark macrocosmos

In the graph the ‘sane’ understanding of black holes, which are born exceedingly hot and active, as all ‘seminal species’ in a lower scale of size, on the compton wavelength as a heavy quark particle, and the similar form of the halo of strange matter. this simple scheme, following Einstein’s search for cut off substances for black holes and Witten hypothesis of a halo made of strangelets, now again all the rage in astrophysics

Now, once we had the ‘solutions’ (Kerr black holes), the study of those holes was limited by the c-speed turning event horizons, which ‘absorbed’ the light of electromagnetic matter after exploding it, and ‘digested’ it via the weak force, creating heavier particles. But the maths were worked out by Christodoulou:

‘He had shown that no process whose ultimate outcome is the capture of a particle by a Kerr black hole can result in the decrease of a certain quantity which he named the irreducible mass of the black hole, M . In fact, most processes result in an increase in M, with the exception of a very special class of limiting processes, called reversible processes, which leave M unchanged.

It turns out that M, is proportional to the square root of the black hole’s area.”

So it is all clear and nice, regardless of what ‘language you prefer’, that of 4D Einstein or the added scalar meaning for a proper, scientific real understanding of 5D (as we indeed do have infinite proofs of the fractal structure and scales of size and different speeds of time clocks of physical systems from galaxies to particles). As all is obeying the laws of symmetry and Relativity of the Universe (call it Einstein’s relativity or Absolute relativity, its expansion into several 5D planes).


The PROBLEM of all black hole and Big Bang singularity… mumble

is more of the same we shall say – an absurd mathematical expansion backwards in time of something we cannot even see here. NOBODY in any other science uses those mathematical creationist views that experimental evidence breaks because we want to keep doing mathematics. I.e. consider a frequency sound coming from a source, a bat, for example, if we were to return ad infinite the frequency observed with a long wavelength at a point of the air, we would reach a singularity of infinite frequency but THERE IS ALWAYS A CAUSE, A SOURCE of that wavelength, so when we reach the BAT frequency no longer increases. It is the real source.

What all THOSE BLACK HOLE EVAPORATION ARGUMENTS LOOSE IS THE FUNDAMENTAL TRUTH of science: a cause. If there is NOT matter, not a frozen start of top quarks as Einstein wanted at the origin of the gravitational FORCE of the black hole THERE IS NO CAUSE FOR GRAVITATION. Where it comes from the awesome gravitational force of the black hole, if mass does NOT exist? if there is not as Einstein wanted a cut-off substance, which can only be the top quarks that CERN will do in increasing quantities as the decay product of Higgs, to produce it?

Mathematicians like Hawking who shun off the basis of the experimental method and the physical real nature of Nature, don’t care. For them bats do NOT exist, their sound frequency is infinite. And the source is the bat ‘hole’.

But things get worse and worse when he is cornered by reality, it becomes really painful to read, as he then takes the authority of others – specially that of Einstein, lying all the way down, but shrewdly saying what he says is ‘General Relativity’. For example, when acknowledging the whole thing of bringing effects without limit towards an infinite past to get the ‘singularity of the big bang’, which Einstein vehemently protested, he said is canonical in Einstein’s work!:

“Cosmology can not predict anything about the universe unless it makes some assumption about the initial conditions. Without such an assumption, all one can say is that things are as they are now because they were as they were at an earlier stage. Yet many people believe that science should be concerned only with the local laws which govern how the universe evolves in time. They would feel that the boundary conditions for the universe that determine how the universe began were a question for metaphysics or religion rather than science.
The situation was made worse by the theorems that Roger and I proved. These showed that according to general relativity there should be a singularity in our past. At this singularity the field equations could not be defined. Thus classical general relativity brings about its own downfall: it predicts that it can’t predict the universe. Although many people welcomed this conclusion, it has always profoundly disturbed me. If the laws of physics could break down at the beginning of the universe, why couldn’t they break down any where.”

This is false. The laws of science don’t break down in the singularity BECAUSE THERE IS NO SINGULARITY. And IT IS NOT expected in Relativity to exist SINGULARITIES:  It is ONLY because they are moving backwards equations BEYOND the very same initial conditions that are REAL – in the case of a black hole a frozen star of dense quarks that cause gravitation…  and soon we shall explain how Einstein reacted to a bunch of people, driven to deny him which on top wanted his acquiescence. At the end he just got lonely overwhelmed by all the dwarfs biting his legs and expecting him ‘to like them’. But he quipped: ‘Since mathematicians are working in relativity, I don’t understand it myself’ ).

Now; so the reader doesn’t think I am biased, fact is almost every cosmologist knows the ascientificism of the big-bang and black hole singularities – the core ‘belief’ that impulses CERN and cosmology, ever since the ‘capital sin’ of egocy (ego+idiocy) of physicists, who decided to substitute religion and what is worst, philosophy of science and epistemology of truth with his equations, even at the cost of breaking the very essence of science; we shall bring here from Quora, an interesting site which doesn’t abandon scientific rigor, but tries to explain things easy, the most upvoted=liked answer to the question, ‘Do singularities exist?’, as it pretty well resumes in very simple terms the core of it.
The place is good to check ‘common sense’ as people are free to think with the authority of reason not the reason of authority.
 Creationist ego trips of physics running high since Bohr, are the ultimate reason that we might die courtesy of CERN. This I want to stress as a serious scientist: if we do it won’t be for the sake of science but for the sake of a machine and a bunch of ‘lunatics’ that indeed, think as Bohr did – ‘the moon becomes real when I look at it’ Realism and organicism ARE the dominant trends today in science, since machines turn out in robotics to be just evolving metal-organisms, and the realist model of quantum physics the Einstein->De Broglie->Bohm model keeps gathering proofs. It couldn’t be otherwise.
 So let us put some realist common sense on those equations, courtesy of quora:

How do we know that singularities exist?

“We” (science) do not know that. A “singularity” — in the scientific sense of the term — is not some kind of object, it is only a fancy name invented in order to avoid saying “we don’t know what’s happening in such a place, or if it even exists.” More often than not, it is a euphemism for division by zero, as in two cases that are repeated ad nauseam:

(1) The “initial singularity” (before the “big bang”): Here, cosmologists are making the assumption that — because they have interpreted galactic redshift observations to be evidence for “space expansion,” the Universe volume must have been smaller in the past — as they extrapolate “back in time,” and as the energy/mass content must have stayed the same (conservation laws), the Universe density must keep rising as we approach the “bang.”

The equation is very simple: Universe density ρUU = mUU/VUU, where mUU = Universe mass (energy), and VUU = Universe volume.

When VUU = 0, the equation no longer represents valid math, but rather than admitting that science does not know/understand how such a situation can be physically allowed to happen, science flat out lies, and declares that “density becomes infinite” (as they say temperature does, BTW, and for the same reason). Why is this wrong? Because infinity is not a number.

(2) The “gravitational singularity” at the center of a “black hole”: Here, cosmologists and astrophysicists are making the assumption that it is possible (“because Einstein’s equations tell us it must be so”) for any mass to be compressed into oblivion (nothingness), if only sufficient pressure is applied.

Again extrapolating, at the point where the radius of the gravitational collapsing body has been compressed to zero — Bingo! Again we have division by zero, and again the error is hidden behind a “singularity”! (that is, “we” (science) have no clue as to what might really be happening, or how it happens). Science, at its best?

Another well known case where the error is accepted (where again a division by zero is said to result in “infinity”) is Einstein’s “velocity equation” (the “Lorentz factor”), as presented by Wikipedia (article List of Relativistic Equations):

γ = 1/(1–β22)1/21/2

where β = v/c and v is the relative velocity between two inertial frames. For two frames at rest, γ = 1, and increases with relative velocity between the two inertial frames. As the relative velocity approaches the speed of light, γ.

Presented as if it was a cold, mathematical fact … Here, the error is shrouded by hands waving symbols around, but it all boils down to a division by zero, as follows: when v = c, then v/c = 1, and 122 = 1, and 1–1 = 0, and since the square root of 0 = 0, then 1/0 = undefined mathematical operation (i.e., an error) …

So far, the ratio of “bad science” over good ditto is singular: 3/0. Here’s a cut from my answer to the Quora question Is the pre- Big Bang “singularity” a black hole or quantum phenomenon?:

Here is a side-by-side comparison of the first two “singularities” unveiled above (there are more differences, these are just the most obvious (all in theory, of course):

Only one “singularity” property is the same in both types (shaded green): The classical (i.e., non-quantum) volume in both is zero, which is what leads to the “singularity” assumed to be “residing at the core” of both (that is, any mass m/0 = “singularity” (bogus: “infinity” is not a number!)).

Ending — as well as answering the OP question — with a quote showing a little bit less scientific hubris:

A singularity often turns up in our equations when we extend them as far as they can go in the past; but a singularity of this sort is far from likely to be an aspect of nature, and instead should be interpreted as a sign of what we don’t yet understand.

Source: Professor Matthew Strassler, theoretical physicist at the Large Hadron Collider

It is indeed a good synopsis on how not to do science with Mr. Strassler at CERN telling us they know perfectly all what they do and say is bull$hit.

That is the astounding cynicism of this institution that we find once and again. When talking officially at CERN, they sign confidentiality statements and are told ‘to believe in black hole evaporation’; when writing papers or making comment off-record, they all recognize it is all bull$hit. Never mind they might kill all our sons till the 7th generation. The P.r.ess and politicos and judges let them do it, just not to have to deal with a bunch of bullies just because they don’t understand their maths – reason why we keep explaining it all very simple here, just in case one of our ‘leaders of the world’ really do what we pay them to do – to stop terrorist organizations from bombing the planet, but it seems they care just for small bombings, not big-bang ones. That is OK. As they say, if you murder a few you are a… murderer, if you commit genocide you are a (national) hero. Murder at distance, wholesale has always been very easy to do. We never blame those who throw A-bombs or carpet bomb thousands children and women from planes but become horrified by any gore terror movie with a guy killing a couple of kids with a chain-shaw.  Because if CERN kill us will be at distance, likely with strange dibaryon heavy quark matter falling and accumulating on the center of the Earth or fast growing black holes, we shall have no proof and no time to blame them. And that seems to be enough for the unethical and amoral researchers dare to go with his egocy of exploring reality with big explosions and fantaphysics for lack of a serious scientific upgrading of our present cosmological knowledge with THOUGHT experiments and solid epistemology.

Down the article we shall explain, how we should be dealing with realism and improve on Einstein’s cosmological work NOT denying it but expanding it with the correspondence principle.

To close the singularity theme – in that graph is all clearly written, as a theoretical proof of the most likely real event those big-bangs describe: quasar black holes exploding into big-bangs of matter, and matter collapsing into galaxies, balancing each other.

Indeed, notice that the black hole equations are the inverse of a big-bang, but both are if we discharge INFINITIES AND ZEROS as NON-real, happening in a local domain, called the galaxy where all our measures take place.

So at best we can talk of a ‘Quasar’ big-bang, which is the ‘death’ of a black hole, inverse to its BIRTH with maximal temperature, and evaporation of ITS SURROUNDINGS as it cools down and feeds on light matter.

So from birth to death, a quark star, aka black hole, shows its inverse equations as birth is indeed the opposite of death. And this happens at the local level of the Galaxy or the star or the planet that explodes in a ‘little Big Bang’…

All other hyperbolic, infinite deductions of cosmological explosions are just the egocy of physicists trying to substitute the egocy of previous creationist priests, who also thought the language of words they talked was not A MIRROR of reality but reality itself, creating it – so Allah and Yahveh were creating ‘naming things’ in Arab and Hebrew and quarreling about who was the higher Mind of God, still do… So it did Hawking and Penrose, ‘numbering reality’, and expecting all kind of things Happen that never did.


%d bloggers like this: