The Instigator
resolutionsmasher
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

Black holes are not infinite.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
resolutionsmasher
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/18/2009 Category: Science
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,797 times Debate No: 7448
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (3)

 

resolutionsmasher

Pro

I simply pose the thought that black holes are not infinite as some would say. I will allow my opponent to bring his/her case first.
Danielle

Con

By definition, a black hole is a region where matter collapses to infinite density. Whatever Black-Hole like thing that Pro proposes is not infinite, will not be a black hole. It would be something else. If no such "black holes" of INFINITE destiny exist, they would still exist in the Understanding (For those who don't know this argument, take a figure like The Easter Bunny. He exists in the sense that we have a name and understanding of him, but in reality there is no such thing). Likewise, infinite black holes (re: definition) exist - we have an Understanding of them and know what they are, and we know that they're infinite (even if that's not possible). So again, any "black hole" that is not infinite would not be a black hole; it would be something else. Affirmed: Black holes are infinite.
Debate Round No. 1
resolutionsmasher

Pro

I don't understand where my opponent is getting her definition of the space time anomaly known as the 'black hole'. The Smithsonian Scientific Journal defines it as an object in space with a gravitational field of significant size so that, to a certain distance, not even the high velocity and low mass characteristics of light can escape it. Because light does not escape the event horizon of a black hole, human perception regards no existence from that area thus we call them 'black holes'. In accordance with the above mentioned scientific journal, other high accuracy publications confirm that definition, such as the North American Astronomical Research Facility. Thus my definition stands as the more accurate of the two negating her argument.

I will further by presenting an argument of my own.
If said black holes were points of infinite mass, as speculated by some theorizers, then by the equation, Force of gravity = (gravitation constant X mass 1 (black hole) X mass 2 (any other object)) / (distance between the two objects)^2
or
F=(GMm)/(r^2)
then we find that the resulting force is also infinite.
We then look at the other object's force acceleration through this equation.
force found earlier = acceleration of other object X mass of other object
or
F = am
thus the acceleration of the affected object is infinite
Also notice that the neither the distance from the black hole, nor the mass of the other object matters because the resulting forces and accelerations are still infinite.

Thus if a black hole had infinite mass, it would pull in an infinite amount of objects, from an infinite distance, at an infinite velocity, in an infinitely small amount of time. Since this is not happening now we must concur that the objects scientifically labeled as black holes by reputable scientists are not infinite but instead of a definite mass of epically large proportions.
Danielle

Con

Danielle forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
resolutionsmasher

Pro

I also forfeight this round.
Danielle

Con

Danielle forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
resolutionsmasher

Pro

Oh for the love of GOD!!!!!
Danielle

Con

Danielle forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by Rob1Billion 6 years ago
Rob1Billion
@Koopin: OMG...

wjm, mongeese: so you guys believe black holes do not exist?
Posted by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
I wonder who voted all 7 points for Lwerd...
Posted by mongeese 6 years ago
mongeese
Of course, zero volume would also mean infinitely negative density, because x/0 is negative infinity as much as it is positive infinity. Which only adds more to the idea of dividing by zero being impossible.
Posted by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
Infinite density is impossible without zero volume. Zero volume is impossible with existence of entities of mass.
Posted by Rob1Billion 6 years ago
Rob1Billion
I wouldn't say that black holes have yet to be discovered. Their presence is dictated about as much as anything we "know" of. How else could you explain a supermassive star in orbit around nothing?
Posted by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
If you can't post right now that's ok. I'll skip the next round also to allow you make up time.
Posted by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
rangersfootballclub - I'm fully aware : ) All that we have about black holes are hypothesis for now. I'll figure out which route I'm gonna go once I feel better enough to sit down and write a round (I'm DEATHILY ILL right now)...
Posted by rangersfootballclub 7 years ago
rangersfootballclub
hey resoultion , how can you prove anything ? ever considerd that blackholes have yet tobe discovered ? thelwer you could hav used that against him at the start by a simple post of ,, oh wait not one has been proven to exsist ...
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Colucci 7 years ago
Colucci
resolutionsmasherDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Danielle 7 years ago
Danielle
resolutionsmasherDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by resolutionsmasher 7 years ago
resolutionsmasher
resolutionsmasherDanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70