Whenever astronomers discover a new cosmic, X-ray emitting object, black holes are always mentioned, and science fictional reports about them never fail to appear in astronomy and general science magazines, as well as on television news and documentaries. The question is, how much is fact and how much is fiction in these reports?

Theoretically, black holes are objects in space whose gravity is so great that nothing can escape from it, not even light. A black hole is believed to be the result of the contraction of a star at the end of its life cycle. Such a star shrinks until it becomes a point with infinite density of matter. Around this point an invisible sphere is formed - a black hole - which reaches colossal dimensions, attracting and absorbing more and more matter, including other stars. Everything that falls into a black hole is squeezed into infinite density at the centre of the hole. Black holes can be detected because gas falling towards them becomes so hot that it emits X-rays.

The idea of black holes existing in the universe stems from Einstein’s relativity theory. However, reason, logic, and common sense tell us that a process like the formation of black holes cannot take place in the physical universe. This is because a star or anything else, for that matter, cannot shrink into a point - it will always retain finite dimensions. (Mathematically, a point is a geometrical element which has no dimensions.) Rational thinking and true scientific principles don’t admit catastrophic infinite contractions and disappearance of matter; contrary to the black hole hypothesis, a shrinking object has an internal structure, and cannot disappear from space.

Be that as it may, astronomers keep looking for black holes. Advanced space technology has made it possible to install X-ray telescopes aboard space satellites, and these telescopes have indeed detected X-ray emitting objects in space. The first to be found was the X-ray binary Cygnus X-1, comprising a 20 solar-mass BO supergiant associated with a invisible companion with a mass 10 times that of the sun. This massive black object is said to be a black hole that emits X-rays from its accretion disc. Other discoveries have been made, for example, the two X-ray binaries in the Large Magellanic Cloud, LMC X-1 and LMC X-2, where the visible star is 6 times more massive than the sun, and the unseen component is 10 solar masses. These are said to be black holes, which like giant cosmic vacuum cleaners suck in whatever flies past them. An appropriate image has also been invented - particles, before falling into the bottomless pit of this gravitational grave, send out what can be poetically described as ‘farewell greetings’.

The truth is that the existence of the so-called black holes hasn’t as yet been proved experimentally. A black hole is a mathematical concept, postulated by mathematicians when their symbols forced them to focus on what they call singularities. A singularity is said to be a mathematical point at which space and time are infinitely distorted. Here it should be understood that mathematical concepts are not always a correct description of physical reality. (It is most unfortunate that many of today’s scientists seem to be unaware of this truth!) Without going into the extremely complicated matter of the relationship between maths and reality, we can be certain that the X-ray sources detected by scientists do exist. However, they are not black holes, in which mass disappears, but certain unknown objects which have an internal structure. Earlier extensive studies on this subject, conducted by Russian scientists, suggest that even objects with a mass of a hundred million suns can shrink only to merely twice the density of water. Such hypothetical objects would have an enormous power of attraction (gravitation), and could very well be a physical reality. However, even these would obviously be too weak to function as fantastic black holes which swallow stars. Returning to Cygnus X-1, it is unlikely this object is a Schwarszchild (non-rotating) black hole, but a spinning black sphere, around which a spaceship could orbit, as long as it kept at a safe distance. If this is the case, nonsensical notions about worm holes, alternate universes, and white holes, can be permanently relegated to the already overflowing rubbish bin of pseudo-science!

Just like the black hole concept, the Big Bang theory is another mathematical outcome of Einstein’s relativity. According to this theory, 15 to 20 billion years ago, all the matter/energy of the universe was compressed into a point of zero size and zero volume, the intensity of which was infinite. Firstly, as a concept, time can be both absolute and relative; but it doesn’t exist as a physical reality. Therefore, as such, it has neither a beginning nor an end. Secondly, if at the Big Bang, the intensity of matter was infinitely dense, it would still be that way now. It is absurd to think that whatever is infinite can change into finite or viceversa. Thirdly, it is illogical, irrational and unscientific to attribute existence to an object that has zero size and zero volume. Zero plus zero is equal to zero, here and everywhere else in the universe. Rational thinking tells us that matter and energy have always existed in one form or another, otherwise nothing would exist now! Epicurus (341-270 BC), who wrote: Nothing comes from nothing, and nothing returns to nothing, knew this fact, and so did other Greek philosophers. (When taking into consideration that Epicurus, Heraclitus, Democritus, and others, lived when science was in its infancy, and technology hardly existed, their superior reasoning power and intelligence can be best appreciated.) Unfortunately, for the cause of scientific truth, many so-called physicists of the present seem to have forgotten the nature and purpose of true science, and continue to endorse the theological delusion of creation from nothing!

It is very possible, of course, that about 15 to 20 billion years ago all the matter/energy that exists now had a very great density, which is likely to have decreased under the impact of gravitational forces, until it reached the present state. This very much finite extra-high density of matter must have been the result of the Big Crunch which followed a previous Big Bang. According to the theory of the oscillating universe, the gravitational attraction of the mass within the universe will eventually slow down and prevent further expansion. The outward motions of the galaxies will then be reversed, eventually coming to a Big Crunch, where all the matter in the universe will be contracted into a small volume of high density …. Eventually, another Big Bang will follow, and so on. In other words, this theory maintains that the universe will expand and collapse through alternate explosions and implosions. This, of course, will happen only if the universe is closed, not open. According to general relativity, space can be curved, and depending on the nature of this curvature the universe may be closed or open. In a closed universe, space would curve back on itself, thus forming a finite volume with no boundaries. In this type of finite universe the gravitational attraction among galaxies would be sufficiently strong to eventually halt and reverse the expanding process, and the universe would begin to contract. In an open universe space would still be curved but would not turn back on itself; in other words, the curvature would be hyperbolical rather than spherical. In the case of an infinite universe the gravitational attraction among galaxies would be too weak to stop the expansion of the universe. (Of course, it is possible that there exist an infinite number of finite universes.) The oscillating universe theory is also just a theory, but unlike some other pseudo-scientific hypotheses (typical of the so-called new physics) it is not irrational, illogical, or downright unscientific!

Having said the above, the obvious question to ask ourselves is: ‘Does Einstein’s general theory of relativity contain some errors?’ (We already know that, speaking of his special theory of relativity, he admitted that he considered it a purely mathematical concept, which is not applicable to the physical universe as we know it.) A careful analysis of general relativity shows, for example, that the laws of conservation of energy, momentum, etc., operating in the micro and macro-worlds, are not to be found in it. Einstein himself wasn’t going to defy these laws, and thought that they were observed in his theory. Depending on the choice of a coordinate system, the mass of a body, according to Einstein’s theory, may assume even negative values. This theory also contains other paradoxes overlooked by its creator. Incidentally, Einstein evolved the general theory because he believed, rightly or wrongly, that the special theory was unsuited to gravitation (attraction). According to some modern theories, special theory applies in the case of gravitation as well. Many eccentricities in Einstein’s theory are as old as the theory itself. Perhaps the most sensational of them is the black holes it predicts. Once the well-known physicist, John A. Wheeler, said that the gravitational collapse (contraction of a star) was one of the greatest delusions of fundamental physics. Be that as it may, the great majority of physicists believe that, given time, these contradictions will find their own solution. In the meantime, having based their reputations on Einstein’s theories, they are prepared to go to any length in order to protect their interests.

According the Russian researchers, mentioned above, there exist gravitational waves which transfer energy just like electromagnetic waves, but their interaction with matter is very weak. This is why special antennae built for this purpose have, so far, eluded registration of this kind of waves. The detection of gravitational waves would indicate the existence of a qualitatively new state of matter, and could help to obtain new information about the universe.

Rational thinking and true science could be viewed as two sides of the same coin. But, unfortunately, some theories of the so-called new physics do not belong to this coin. Statements made by prominent academics, that, for example, the moon is not there when nobody looks at it, or that whenever an observation is made the whole universe splits into a number of parallel universes, are as absurd and irrational as they are alien to physical reality!

Pseudo-scientific, meta-theologico-philosophical books about vanishing moons, worm holes, white holes, alternate universes, splitting universes, infinite distortions of time and space, catastrophic infinite contractions, disappearance of matter from space, creation from nothing, etc., are known to have made some of their authors rich. (This is especially true when the word God was included in the titles.) However, these books deserve no place whatsoever in the serious endeavour of science!

***********************************