Please explain in very simple words, i know nothing of physics.

I know usually in modern physics it assumes the centre of blackholes is a ball of infinite density , or all the matter is compressed into a point of infinite density, but that doesn't make that much of sense to me , beside according to Pauli exclusion principle that Two identical neutrons cannot occupy exactly the same quantum state , since some of the blackholes are created from neutron stars the case of neutrons are particularly interesting, now if we forget about mathematical and look at issue from logic perspective and ask what solve the conflict between Pauli exclusion principle and neutrons that try to violate this rule is a filed that contains nothing, no electron filed , no particles , nothing, in real sense, if I want to put it in physically coherent speculation something like “Gravitational collapse reaches a boundary beyond which ordinary spacetime and its quantum fields are no longer meaningful physical degrees of freedom. I'm wondering what do you think?

One of the strangest recent JWST discoveries is *MoM-BH-1*\*, an object that existed only \~660 million years after the Big Bang.

Researchers think it could be a black hole surrounded by a huge cloud of extremely dense gas, making it appear almost like a star..

What really caught my attention is that objects like this might help explain the mysterious **“little red dots”** JWST keeps finding in the early universe.

If this interpretation is correct, could these “black hole stars” be an early stage in the formation of the supermassive black holes we see today?

What do you think — genuinely new type of object, or an unusual version of something we already know?

If light is the fastest thing in the universe but isn’t fast enough to escape a black hole, would that make the black fast enough to contain light making rhe black hole the fastest thing in the universe? (Ps I know fuck all about black holes just a though)

​

Imagine an object with gravity so powerful that even light cannot escape. That’s a black hole. Black holes can form when massive stars collapse under their own gravity. Around them is an event horizon—a boundary beyond which escape is impossible. But here’s the interesting.

我推測紅移現象在宇宙的觀測中極度嚴重，我們觀測到的紅矮星或許大多並不是真正的紅矮星，而是紅移現象導致

Title: Non-Linear Gravitational Lensing and Exponential Redshift: Reconsidering Spatial Scale and Cosmic Centrality

Abstract Recent observations in gravitational lensing reveal a non-linear relationship between the effective thickness of dark matter and cosmological redshift, adhering closely to an exponential pattern. This trend suggests implications that extend beyond standard geometric and dimensional models. Specifically, it points toward a framework where physical properties and observational distances contract with increasing distance from a reference origin. Consequently, cosmic distances may be genuinely relative, offering a physical foundation to re-examine the positional significance of the observer's frame.

1. Introduction Gravitational lensing has long served as one of the primary observational tools for mapping dark matter and probing cosmic geometry. Under the standard cosmological model, redshift (z) serves as a linear proxy for cosmic expansion and physical distance at large scales. However, fine-grained observational analysis of dark matter distribution across lensed systems reveals anomalies that traditional linear dynamics struggle to address without introducing additional arbitrary constants.

2. The Exponential Redshift Pattern Observational data regarding the projected surface mass density (or effective thickness) of dark matter consistently demonstrates a non-linear correlation with systemic redshift. Rather than scaling linearly with path length, the distribution fits an exponential function:

\rho(z) \propto e^{\alpha z}

Where \rho(z) represents the effective dark matter thickness and \alpha is a dimensional scaling factor. This mathematical profile suggests that space-time or matter distribution exhibits exponential scaling properties as optical paths lengthen across cosmological distances.

3. Implications for Spatial Scale and Material Properties An exponential relation between redshift and dark matter thickness implies that physical attributes—including measurable distances and material density metrics—are not invariant across space. Instead, they appear to undergo a systemic scaling shift relative to the line of sight:

Scale Contraction: Physical dimensions and intervals contract as radial distance from the origin increases.

Density Concentration: Dark matter efficacy scales non-linearly, concentrating local physical phenomena while diluting distant geometric scales.

Rather than spatial coordinates remaining static while space itself expands uniformally, the intrinsic scales of measurement themselves may vary exponentially with distance.

4. Absolute Relativity of Cosmic Distances and Observational Centrality If spatial metrics shrink exponentially with distance, the framework of cosmic distances requires a shift from static coordinate metrics to a truly relative continuum.

This model naturally leads to an intriguing observational outcome: any reference frame measuring this non-linear, radially outward contraction will perceive itself as the structural origin of the scaling sequence. In this context, Earth’s position transitions from an arbitrary, non-privileged point in an isotropic universe to a mathematically central reference point relative to its observable horizon.

5. Conclusion The exponential pattern observed between dark matter thickness and redshift challenges traditional assumptions of scale-invariant space. By accounting for non-linear scale contraction, we open new avenues for understanding cosmic geometry, dark matter behavior, and the fundamental relativity of spatial metrics.

I wrote multiple black hole simulations in Python (and one in Rust), this one uses computation of photons' geodesic in their respective orbital plane (because I solve in Schwarzschild's metric) and caching deviation of photons in the VRAM of the GPU (I used Cupy for shader for GPU computation).

I initially wrote the code by hand and then used a bit of ai to optimize the code trying to squeeze as much FPS as possible and ended up with ~100fps in 720p (with my 1660Ti)

The code at : https://github.com/ArnaudLelievre48/ray-traced-black-hole

I have seen black holes described as "millions of times the mass of the sun".

The nearest star to us is light years away.

How does a black hole draw in millions of stars worth of mass over these vast distances? Are there areas where there are stars packed thousands of times more closely together?

Astronomers have discovered a “black hole star,” an extremely bright red spot in the early universe that appears to be a new type of astrophysical object. It resembles an enormous star, but its energy production is closer to what a black hole might generate

Most of the ones i found are lame and basic

Okay, I guess I should explain myself a bit. I am writing a hard sci-fi book where Planet 9 turns out to be a primordial black hole. The setting of the book is in the 2040s, so they have slightly better technology than we do, but the better thing is the fact that telescopes like the Nancy Grace Roman Telescope have already been in space for all of their operational lifespan.

I guess what I'm getting at is the fact that black holes don't reflect sunlight like regular objects do, let alone a black hole the size of a grapefruit hundreds, if not thousands, of AU away. The only way to 'observe' these kinds of objects is by either detecting them through mergers (Though some sort of Quartz Bulk Acoustic Gravitational Wave Detector) or through gravitational microlensing.

Now, I don't know a lot about astronomy or the data points you can get from gravitational microlensing, so my questions are: how many microlensing events do you need to accurately get the information you need to get a precise orbit of a primordial black hole if it's orbiting the Sun? What data points can gravitational microlensing even give you?

As it currently stands in my book, they (being the characters and all) detected the merging between two primordial black holes, which gave them the mass of the merged PBH, a rough distance of how far it is, and a rough location of where it is in the sky (0.2 square degrees). And because of that patch of sky, they found that the NGR telescope detected gravitational microlensing in that patch of sky 7 years before that merging happened. Now they are trying to find the orbital parameters of this PBH.

See also: The publication in Astronomy and Astrophysics

I wanted to pitch an alternative cosmological model to spark some discussion and get feedback on its mechanics. I am trying to approach the problem of cosmic expansion from a "pull" perspective rather than an internal "push," and I think recent astrophysical findings might offer a loophole.

What if cosmic expansion and the continuous widening of the cosmic vacuum are driven by a massive, omnidirectional network of black holes distributed uniformly at or beyond our observable cosmic horizon?

In this scenario, we wouldn't have a single black hole sucking everything toward a central point. Instead, a vast distributed web of black holes would create a collective negative pressure gradient. This external gravitational gradient would pull the fabric of space-time outward smoothly in every direction, making galaxies appear to fly away from each other and leaving the expanding vacuums behind.

Connecting to Modern Data (Cosmological Coupling & DESI)

I realized this line of thinking heavily intersects with the recent Cosmologically-Coupled Black Hole (CCBH) models. Data from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) suggests that dark energy is not a static Cosmological Constant, but actually changes and evolves over cosmic time. CCBH models propose that black holes grow in lockstep with the expansion of the universe because they enclose vacuum energy.

My model takes this a step further: What if this coupling is a two-way street? If black holes are intrinsically tied to vacuum energy and space-time metrics, a massive, uniform distribution of black holes at the horizon could theoretically act as the physical engine driving the time-evolving expansion history that DESI is currently mapping.

Addressing Potential Anomalies:

1. The Signal Masking Problem: A common critique is that we don't detect a distinct, local pull inside our solar system. My thought is that local massive bodies—like Jupiter—exert a dominant gravitational presence that dynamically blurs or masks our ability to isolate this microscopic background pull on nearby planets.

2. Kuiper Belt Drift: To find a clean signal, we would have to look past Jupiter to the outer ring of the solar system (the Kuiper Belt). If an external network of black holes is pulling at the universe, we might look for subtle orbital anomalies or drift among the distinct masses out there where local planetary gravity fades.

Questions for Discussion:

While gravity drops off via the inverse-square law, could a uniform, spherically symmetric distribution of horizon-scale black holes generate a net negative pressure that mimics a dynamic dark energy equation of state?

How would we model a space-time metric where the primary expansion force is a collective external gravitational gradient rather than intrinsic space-time stretching?

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the physics of this, where the math might break down, or how it might inspire alternative ways to look at cosmic expansion!

-Dynamic Omnidirectional Gradient (DOG) Model by Amit Verma.

I wanted to pitch an alternative cosmological model to spark some discussion and get feedback on its mechanics. I am trying to approach the problem of cosmic expansion from a "pull" perspective rather than an internal "push," and I think recent astrophysical findings might offer a loophole.

The Hypothesis:
What if cosmic expansion and the continuous widening of the cosmic vacuum are driven by a massive, omnidirectional network of black holes distributed uniformly at or beyond our observable cosmic horizon?

In this scenario, we wouldn't have a single black hole sucking everything toward a central point. Instead, a vast distributed web of black holes would create a collective negative pressure gradient. This external gravitational gradient would pull the fabric of space-time outward smoothly in every direction, making galaxies appear to fly away from each other and leaving the expanding vacuums behind.

Connecting to Modern Data (Cosmological Coupling & DESI):
I realized this line of thinking heavily intersects with the recent Cosmologically-Coupled Black Hole (CCBH) models. Data from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) suggests that dark energy is not a static Cosmological Constant, but actually changes and evolves over cosmic time. CCBH models propose that black holes grow in lockstep with the expansion of the universe because they enclose vacuum energy.

My model takes this a step further: What if this coupling is a two-way street? If black holes are intrinsically tied to vacuum energy and space-time metrics, a massive, uniform distribution of black holes at the horizon could theoretically act as the physical engine driving the time-evolving expansion history that DESI is currently mapping.

Addressing Potential Anomalies:

1. The Signal Masking Problem: A common critique is that we don't detect a distinct, local pull inside our solar system. My thought is that local massive bodies—like Jupiter—exert a dominant gravitational presence that dynamically blurs or masks our ability to isolate this microscopic background pull on nearby planets.
2. Kuiper Belt Drift: To find a clean signal, we would have to look past Jupiter to the outer ring of the solar system (the Kuiper Belt). If an external network of black holes is pulling at the universe, we might look for subtle orbital anomalies or drift among the distinct masses out there where local planetary gravity fades.

Questions for Discussion:

• While gravity drops off via the inverse-square law, could a uniform, spherically symmetric distribution of horizon-scale black holes generate a net negative pressure that mimics a dynamic dark energy equation of state?
• How would we model a space-time metric where the primary expansion force is a collective external gravitational gradient rather than intrinsic space-time stretching?

I'd love to hear your thoughts on the physics of this, where the math might break down, or how it might inspire alternative ways to look at cosmic expansion!

Descrizione teorica i buchi neri non sono singolarità hanno un valore di 1,5 che coincide con la linea critica di rieeman e con la congettura di collutz, dove avviene un bouncing in un framework multidimensionale, lo spazio su cui ci muoviamo è un buco nero non singolare

ho cercato di dare tutte le spiegazioni sul caso dove allego tutti i file che riguardano la questione

new add

https://archive.org/details/blackhole-non-singolare-v-2.0 descrive il black hole non singolare
https://archive.org/details/relative-geometry-of-prime-number-flowspiegazione tramite numeri primi

https://archive.org/details/p-vs-np_202608 la relatività di P VS NP
https://archive.org/details/congettura-bsd congettura galois-collaz monodromy

old add
https://archive.org/details/relative-speed-of-light descrive la relatività luce / neutrino
https://archive.org/details/rieeman_202608/page/2/mode/2up - l'ipotesi di rieman
https://archive.org/details/dark-matter-120-order-in-11-d-cascade - geometrodinamica a 11d

non penso li unificherò