UNC scientist proves mathematically that black holes do not exist

The paper was terrible, I read it and the author made some serious mistakes in the formulas they used. Basically the author over generalized and simplified their data to make the data support their theory. The author even said one of the formulas they used was "idealized." The author made some pretty predictable fallacies trying to connect two separate theories and essentially left out a lot of variables. Remember people, this person was mathematically summarizing the collapse of a star, and they did it only 7 pages. Not only does this lead me to believe the paper is suspect but they only did calculations for a "perfect" or "idealized" model anyway, one that was far too simple to take into account all the variables of a collapsing star. The article wasn't published in a peer reviewed journal anyway, so that should tell you something too.

Most of you probably didn't even bother to look at it and just saw it as a green light to bash science like peasants from the middle ages. Ignorance breeds contempt. Science is probably wrong on a lot of things, and I believe in a different model of the universe rather than mainstream science's version, but they still have done plenty of things right and have evidence to support their views. Black hole like objects are certainly out there, it's been observed and its kind of hard to refute.

Peer review approval by the same purveyors of all this bogus anti-creation-cosmology nonsense is like saying that a tree falling in the woods when no one is around doesn't make any noise.

peer reviewed a scam now....bwahahaha. the complete and utter stupidity and ignorance on this site never gets old. all of you so sure of yourselves, yet can't even pass a college entry level biology or chemistry course.

It's not a very hard concept to grasp here...if the information is legit she can send her methods out to every single university in the world to verify. If it hasn't happened by this point, rest assured

This whole discussion is possible cuz some scientists are trolling. Blackholes dont exist, and neither do mathematical calxulations to disprove the existance of black holes. You have been bamboozled by nasa and star trek and xfiles and bill nye.

...
He wanted his children to see that relativity is proportional. So he loaded the family's blue minivan with portable power supplies, monitoring equipment, and three HP 5071 cesium clocks. Three, because time is always marked relative to other clocks: More clocks mean more accurate time. With his three kids and some camping gear in tow, he drove the winding roads spiraling up Washington's Mt. Rainier and checked the family into a lodge 5,319 feet above sea level.
...

That ^^ is your "proof" ?! A bedtime story ?!

Did it occur to you that maybe the change in the oscillation frequency of the Cesium clock is caused (at the subatomic level) by the change in gravity and not as an effect of relativity ?!
twisted causality you have...

only a clock that will remain immune to gravity or high speeds could disprove this theory immediately

"Two years ago, he realized he'd acquired the capability to offer his children a demonstration of one of the effects predicted by Einstein's general theory of relativity -- a demonstration that Einstein himself couldn't have performed with the equipment of his day.

The theory says time passes slowly for someone near a massive object, as measured relative to someone farther away. On Earth, this effect is so small as to be undetectable to all but the most precise equipment, putting demonstrations beyond the reach of, say, a typical high school science fair. Consequently, "kids grow up thinking relativity is only for really fast speeds or really heavy gravity," says Van Baak.

He wanted his children to see that relativity is proportional. So he loaded the family's blue minivan with portable power supplies, monitoring equipment, and three HP 5071 cesium clocks. Three, because time is always marked relative to other clocks: More clocks mean more accurate time. With his three kids and some camping gear in tow, he drove the winding roads spiraling up Washington's Mt. Rainier and checked the family into a lodge 5,319 feet above sea level.

They hiked the trails, and the kids relaxed with board games and books, while in the imperceptibly lessened gravity, time moved a little bit faster than at home. Van Baak found himself explaining to park rangers more than once why a minivan filled with inscrutable equipment was idling in front of the national park lodge for hours on end. But the effort paid off. When the family returned to the suburbs two days later, the cesium clocks were off by the precise amount relativity predicted. He and his family had lived just a little more life than the neighbors."
[link to archive.wired.com]