The Instigator
Prof.Asteroid
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Uzume
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Do black holes exist?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/5/2015 Category: Science
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 812 times Debate No: 71160
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (11)
Votes (0)

 

Prof.Asteroid

Pro

My arguement is over black holes and that they do in fact exist.
Uzume

Con

I accept this challenge with a friendly heart and for a good time. :)

Contention 1: No hard-lying evidence

This is a situation similar to the purple unicorn, relying on different people's words and only by data itself. You can not even see the black hole for yourself which seems similar to the argument against the existence of God.

Contention 2: The paradox

The black hole's existence has been predicted by Einstein's theory of gravity, but a law (which is in fact greater than a theory) of quantum theory states "no information from the universe can ever disappear." If you put the two together, they do not make sense. In fact, there is a name for this situation called the information loss paradox.

Contention 3: A new situation

A scientist named Mersini-Houghton thought of a new scenario that could rethink the whole idea of space-time. She and Stephen Hawkings both agree that a star emits Hawking radiation when a star collapses under its gravity, but Mersini-Houghton discovered that the star also sheds mass. It sheds so much mass that it no longer can become a black hole simply due to the lack of density. As we all know, a dying star swells and then explodes. With Mersini-Houghton's discoveries, a singularity and an event horizon never forms.

I look forward to your response!

Debate Round No. 1
Prof.Asteroid

Pro

Prof.Asteroid forfeited this round.
Uzume

Con

Pro forfeited? That's not good.
Debate Round No. 2
Prof.Asteroid

Pro

Sorry about that, my computer broke down, but back to the subject at hand.

(1) Most astronomers have agreed on the existence of black holes.
(2) There realy isn't any better explanations for the high speed clouds of matter circling areas in space.
(3) There's not realy any hard fact evidence denying black holes.
(4) The star's information dosnt't disapear, it leaves behind a giant black holes.
(5) Just because you can't see something, dosn't mean it's not there.

I wait for your response.
Uzume

Con

Uzume forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Prof.Asteroid

Pro

Prof.Asteroid forfeited this round.
Uzume

Con

Uzume forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Uzume 1 year ago
Uzume
I'll get back to everyone's comment after the debate is over. I don't want to give away my counter ideas. :P
Posted by Mathgeekjoe 1 year ago
Mathgeekjoe
There is a theory that galaxies' is determined by wormholes. While this theory mostly goes against the theory of dark matter, it is possible to stretch it to saying black holes do not exist and everything we think is a black hole is really a wormhole.
Posted by Yottabit 1 year ago
Yottabit
Occam's Razor states that; when presented with multiple theories, the one that involves the least assumptions is generally correct. We could say that there is a large, unknown, massive object in the center of every galaxy, but that involves more assumptions, and has less proof and calculation behind it than saying that there is just a black hole. We could say that these cosmic winds come from some other megalithic energy-creating giant, but we have less mathematical proof for that than we do for black holes. There are several theories that explain this "information loss paradox." However, I will not list them for sake of not helping the instigator. Black holes still involve a lot of theory, and cannot be proven unless we find all the answers. But, they currently have more science behind them than any other theory that explains these cosmic phenomena.
Posted by Uzume 1 year ago
Uzume
Again, this is a 1 on 1 debate... no helping the other side pls :P
Posted by Uzume 1 year ago
Uzume
first comment I cannot answer. It's simply a hypothesis... nobody knows for sure.
The ideas of singularities in the middle of the black hole suggests that everything disappears because of infinite gravity and density. Maybe the cosmic winds come from a different location than the center of the milky way? You said it intercepted winds coming from the center area... there's no evidence it spawned right there.
Posted by Yottabit 1 year ago
Yottabit
*force of gravity
Posted by Yottabit 1 year ago
Yottabit
First of all, if black holes don't exist, then what force if gravity at the center of a galaxy is causing billions of stars to orbit around a single point in space? Second of all, we have no proof that all matter going into a black hole just disappears. We don't know where it goes, or what happens to it, but it is a general scientific consensus that it is not just erased from existence. Finally, NASA's Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array has intercepted cosmic winds coming from the black hole in the center of the Milky Way. These winds carry more energy in a minute than any star will produce in its entire lifetime. Only an object that absorbs an exponential amount of energy can shed off these winds.
Posted by Uzume 1 year ago
Uzume
You guys are a little too fast in saying that it's a fact. :P
Posted by jenkinsm 1 year ago
jenkinsm
How do you debate con for this? It is a fact that black holes exist there is one forming right now!
Posted by Yottabit 1 year ago
Yottabit
For a moment there, I though you said that they didn't, it would have been embarrassing to accept that.
No votes have been placed for this debate.