Hi Emmanouil,

Thanks for the great post.

I think that a Kerr-Newman black hole can be interpreted as a magnet with N-S poles and the justification behind it lies in Maxwell equations. Curl of the electric field of the Kerr-Newman black hole produces a magnetic field with poles oriented along the trajectory of the extra-galactic jets. Thus if I throw a small magnet towards the black hole, there is a possibility that the magnet will be repelled depending on the size and thus the gravitational field of the black hole.

I would love to hear your views on this idea of mine.

Hi Avishek,

At that level of magnetism and gravity, both are becoming indistinguishable. Opposite to general believe the natural tendency of dipole magnetism acting on free objects is to attract and not to repel. Meaning that any ferromagnetic, paramagnetic, permanent magnet and even diamagnetic material in the case of the Black hole (we have seen frogs to magnetically interact, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1vyB-O5i6E) when not forced to (i.e. hold by hand) and left free, will experience attraction towards a strong magnet and not repulsion meaning it re orients itself in space so that the two nearest opposite poles attract.

So most probably in the case of the Black hole whatever you throw towards the Black hole will be attracted, I believe.

Stephen Hawking considered magnetic black holes in his debate with Roger Penrose. Galactic sized black holes are possible but probably not the norm.

Positron jets have been observed coming from areas thought to be the magnetic poles of a super massive black hole, possibly caused by protons becoming neutrons in the gravity squeeze moderated by magnetic field.

It can be interpreted in some theories as evidence the magnetic pole weakens local gravity.

It is quite possible at blackhole which is a quantum singularity quantum decoherence may occur that will help to create symmetry of energy matter. In the act of that, multiple states with dipoles - monopole vortex magnetic fields may coexist, enhancing energy density. Such highly energy density levels later on give symmetry breaking energy, such as Hawking's radiation & eventually energy-matter intergalactically supernovae explosions. My analysis with zero point & the microblackhole referring working papers that I've in RESEARCHGATE forum, tells similar story about quantum aspects.

My correlation theoretically with Emmanouil's experimental observations, that appears with more aspects answering his article in this research general forum "The one question science can not answer: What is the magnetic field made up of?" may highlight close connections to dipole magnets with the blackholes, where there's high probability of coexistences transient monopole states. Per J.D. above " Positron jets have been observed coming from areas thought to be the magnetic poles of a super massive black hole, possibly caused by protons becoming neutrons in the gravity squeeze moderated by magnetic field", that may shed light about creative power of monopole magnetic states having high energy densities equivalently with massiveness!!!!! & as was discussed earlier in the related topics generate mechanism of sources/sinks having monopole with cw & ccw vortices. Essentially that Emmanouil noted about self-similarity of the ferrolens system observations & blackholes "striking resemblance of this galactic gravitational phenomena extravaganza with the quantum magnetic field (QFM) shown by a ferrolens", our QFM/EM model that is getting developed might prove the micro macro connectivity clearly!!!!!

A simulation of the powerful jets generated by supermassive black holes at the centers of the largest galaxies explains why some burst forth as bright beacons visible across the universe, while others fall apart and never pierce the halo of the galaxy.

About 10 percent of all galaxies with active nuclei - all presumed to have supermassive black holes within the central bulge - are observed to have jets of gas spurting in opposite directions from the core. The hot ionized gas is propelled by the twisting magnetic fields of the rotating black hole, which can be as large as several billion suns

May be this may help: https://books.google.co.in/books?id=B1NX5KuRLb0C&pg=PA48&lpg=PA48&dq=galactic+giant+sized+magnetic+dipoles+black+hole&source=bl&ots=MsIAV3hlkQ&sig=C9Ks0tOz26-26avr3hH13FYcCXI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjt1e3PusDfAhUHaBoKHTg7DeAQ6AEwCnoECAEQAQ#v=onepage&q=galactic%20giant%20sized%20magnetic%20dipoles%20black%20hole&f=false

Quantum Field of Magnetism (QFM) Theory - Difference between gravity and magnetism

Dear All,

Simulation of two black holes merging. Although it appears it has all the characteristics of a magnetic dipole, it does not. The two vortices have not a fixed common axis of spin and are circling each other until they merge.  https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/BBH_gravitational_lensing_of_gw150914.webm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_relativity According to QFM, a magnetic dipole don't exhibits this kind of behavior, has a fixed common axis and they two vortices although joint, keep a distance separation all the time and never merge. Moreover, in a magnetic dipole the vortices do not have a common equatorial plane but separate ones and  are spinning in unison (i.e. synchronous) through their common vertical axis. Therefore the above simulation shows actually a gravitational dipole until they two gravitational monopole sources merge in one single large vortex. Essentially we witness the creation of gravity itself!  QFM theory suggests that magnetic monopole elementary charge particles are merging through the same process shown above, coming spherically and concentrically converging all  to a singular point (center of gravity) from all xyz directions 360 degrees around in Euclidean space and merging thus forming a single monopole gravitational field we call gravity. 

Gravity IS the accumulation through merging of magnetic monopoles charge.

Detection naturally of magnetic monopole charge particles is impossible since as soon they appear they either merge (gravity) or join (EM and nuclear) in multipole configurations. An isolated magnetic monopole elementary charge particle or vortex can not therefore occur in the cosmos. With that said, they are ways to artificially generate, isolate  or trap an amount of  magnetic monopole charge (not necessarily elementary particle) BUT in its isolated form, unless it will be brought close to an other magnetic source, will exhibit only gravitational properties.

Kind Regards,

Emmanouil Markoulakis

copyright©Emmannouil Markoulakis Technological Educational Institute of Crete 2018-2019

References

Article The Quantum Field Of A Magnet Shown By A Nanomagnetic Ferrolens

Arxiv: https://tinyurl.com/yb9bu7jk

Preprint Quantum Field of Magnetism Theory (QFM) And Experimental Evi...

wiki: https://en.everybodywiki.com/Ferrolens

Theory says the black hole itself cannot have a magnetic field but the accretion disc is rotating plasma so probably would.

Neutron stars are found by magnetic fields and characteristic gamma rays from particles interacting with magnetic fields. Black holes are not found by magnetic fields, although they are found from x-rays of particles interacting in the gravity field.

I am pretty sure that a neutron star gravity would be quite capable to interact with EM as well apart it's magnetic field interaction.

Absolutely not.

Some of the curved spacetime should be also contributed not only due magnetic interraction of the Neutron star about 10^13 Gauss but also its gravitational influence.

We see normal stars bending ligh why not a Neutron star?

I think there may have been some confusion in the recent comments due to their wording, neutron stars would certainly bend light much more than the Sun but it is entirely due to the gravitational influence, their magnetic field does not cause any bending of light.

10^13 Gauss does.

No, none at all.

Not sure about that:

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/306/2/333/1000494

It shows here that strong magnetic field of Neutron star can actually bend light!

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-magnet-bend-light

The premise here is that for very strong magnetic fields like 10E13 Gauss spacetime is actually bend as it would with strong gravitational fields with only difference the additional polarization that exists in a magnet.

These are simulations of what is expected to show up as a black hole accretion disk and event horizon from the MIT project to deliver the first actual photos of a black hole later this year: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fFL9oLNJOI The funny thing is that the state in their note here:

https://eventhorizontelescope.org/simulations-gallery

" Left side of the image is brighter than the right side due to the Doppler beaming effect: light emitted from a substance moving toward an observer is brighter than that of moving away from the observer."

That's actually the light house effect in the domain wall ... we notice here in the QFM image, Fig.1 of a dipole magnet and I have previously pointed out that this could be the static imprint of the whole dipole field physically spinning ccw in synch with the domain wall (accretion disk) of the field of the magnet !!... (see fig.1) In fig 1 left side appears generally more illuminated than right. Also notice the dip in the right hand side of the above dipole magnetic accretion disk as if it would appear when rotating away from the observer. Coincidence?

Fig.2 Black Hole simulation (essentially a vortex) ...nature has habit to use the same trick over and over again?

References

Article The Quantum Field Of A Magnet Shown By A Nanomagnetic Ferrolens

ScienceDirect: https://tinyurl.com/y7juoqnw

Arxiv: https://tinyurl.com/yb9bu7jk

https://academic.oup.com/mnras/article/306/2/333/1000494

That's an interesting article, thanks.

EM: It shows here that strong magnetic field of Neutron star can actually bend light!

It also says the effect is "trivial" below 5.7x1016G, see the second sentence in section 6 and in section 7. Note also this is not "bending of spacetime" but a modification of the refractive index of the vacuum.

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-magnet-bend-light

EM: The premise here is that for very strong magnetic fields like 10E13 Gauss spacetime is actually bend ..

Yes, that article is different, it is noting that the energy in the magnetic field contributes to the source stress-energy tensor thus is adds to the effective mass of the star as m=E/c2 and then contributes a small amount to the gravitational bending. Again though the effect is tiny in comparison to the mass of the star.

I agree. Bending spacetime by manipulating the refraction index does not count, since this would imply that the vacuum is not perfect and there is still matter in there, which is true around a neutron star. So the effect of magnetic bending of spacetime in an neutron star is not real in a pure theoretical sense, only gravity can do this. Nevertheless the apparent effect for an observer is the same I guess.

Also the article implies that for Ultra Neutron Stars > 5.7x1016 Gauss, the effect is non-trivial. I guess this limit is also depending and can vary accordingly with the amount of matter hovering around a neutron star.

What are your comments however on the proof of the second link I provided? This guy claims that it can theoretically be proven that magnetism can bend spacetime?

https://www.quora.com/Can-a-magnet-bend-light

Dear Emmanuil,

the Magnetic field energy is just field energy. If the density of that energy is quite high, then there is an appreciable influence on the stress energy tensor as exerted by any equivalent mass-energy.

Thank you for your input.

Actually, this phenomenon is the subject of my next project "Artificial Black Holes of Electromagnetic Fields". Superparamagnetic 10 nm nano-magnetite might be the right material, when surfacted with the 2 nm long anionic tails of a carbon-based solution. Their individual resonant peaks would be around 700 PHz, in the X-ray region @ 1KeV. This Ferrocell image says it all.

**Dear All,**

Black holes appear Black not because their immense gravity that not "even light can escape"!! That is just a science fiction description... and frankly due to the latest observations highly inaccurate!!

The exact physical explanation why astronomical black holes appear black, is because they are vortices of energy and there is nothing there to depict at the center, it's a void as in any vortex.

The matter is whirling on the perimeter around the black hole leaving a void at the center. Light can not follow into the center of the black hole , there is no reflection or any scattering, therefore total blackness.

For an exact presentation of how light interacts with vortices watch the following video segment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pnbJEg9r1o8&t=186s

BTW this is amazingly also presented the same by the polar field of ferromagnets shown in real time by a quantum ferrolens namely the Ferrocell of Timm as he previously mentioned:

Preprint Artificial Black Holes of Electromagnetic Poles

Actually I can replicate with my ferrocell a realistic black hole image using magnetism in my lab, see figure above.

Black holes are the answer to our missing link between EM and gravity.

Kind Regards,

Emmanouil Markoulakis

Technological Educational Institute of Crete

copyright©Emm Markoulakis TEI of Crete 2019

Dear Dr. Markoulakis,

I think we can claim now that it is the case that in our interdisciplinary learning field of heart-mind turnpike spacextime integrability theory of the low dimension "string matching field" (Mallick (2018), Mallick, Hamburger & Mallick (2016, 2017, 2018), Mallick, Raychaudhury, Mallick and others (2018, 2019)) the DBranes of the convergent geodesic group homologous spacetime gives an energy-information tensor of quantum mechanics which matches the setting sun in low dimensional low horizon visually, hence matching our group homology of the "Higgs-Mallick mechanics" with "DBranes Vector Diffeotopy of Embedding with jump quantum conductance" AGGNN Network embedded cybernetic type field theory which we have derived from a systems classification and systems integration (Mallick (2012, 2014, 2015)) of emerging electronic stock market, Juno Probe, ISRO Mangalyan, Higgs-Boson CERN, and LIGO experiments using Shroedinger potential quantum general relativistic (*) mechanical stock and flow quantum field theory integration experiment on the www. (Mallick et. al.). Thank you Dr. Markoulakis for this piece of evidence.If we use the redshift from the black hole to measure the Fine Structure Constant by using our Pvs.NP invertibility mechanics argument by string perturbations on distributed computer networks adapted to the light lumen we will get the RHMHMINFSC by the GA String Matching Field VDE of 4*10^3/C.

Soumitra K. Mallick (CA),

for Soumitra K. Mallick, Somak Raychaudhury, Sandipan Mallick and others,

of The RHMHM School,

USA, Japan, India

Dear Professor Soumitra K Mallick,

Thank you for your acknowledgements and I am happy I could offer inspiration to you. We will release later this year a publication on this first mentioned here observation.

Since no one yet has directly observed a Black hole and we are expecting the first images later this year by Event Horizon Telescope and MIT group let me to make a final note on our observations.

Because the enormous distances involved our perspective is always perpendicular 2D to an observed black hole therefore assuming we see a lighted up accretion disk perimeter of black hole, the light diffraction lens effect we demonstrated by the Black hole will always produce at the observer's location a total black filled center image as the example of fig.1 of water whirl looked from above.

However, assuming we could travel to the location of the Black hole and observe safely from a distance and a different not perpendicular viewing angle, more shallow, then I believe we would actually observe not the center of the Black hole being black but more like a twisted semi transparent blurred image lens effect of the stars behind the Black hole. This is because in reality mater is whirling from all directions into the singularity (collapsed neutron star?) filling the empty space and only at a very narrow band location where the singularity object is located there is a true void created, see fig.2.

Kind Regards,

Emmanouil Markoulakis

Technological Educational Institute of Crete

Greece

copyright©Emm Markoulakis TEI of Crete 2019

References

Preprint Do Black Holes appear black because not even light can escap...

The picture distinctly shows filament like AGGNNNetworks which are clearly quantum mechanically Dbranes String differentiable in spacetime (spacextime) because of the spherical curvature (vector diffeotopy of embedding Dbranes field) by our discovered Higgs-Mallick mechanics DBVDEJQC which in terms of physical quantum behaviour identifies the conductance of permittivity by the transitivity of information-energy thus describing the Rikki-Tensor in this modified relativity field application. (Mallick, Raychaudhury, Mallick and others et.al.). Hence, implicitly electromechanics describes the electromagnetism of the Higgs-Mallick mechanics String Matching Field theoretically.Notice that due to differentiability by our RHMHMFACalculus in Strings you can define transversality by the network string function as we have found (Mallick(2014, 2015)) in string perturbation and string condensation of categories (spectrum of spacetime dynamics with gravity location).

Soumitra K. Mallick, Somak Raychaudhury, Sandipan Mallick and others,

RHMHM School,

USA, Japan, India

Do Black Holes appear black because not even light can escape their gravitational pull?

Preprint Do Black Holes appear black because not even light can escap...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHGT0DgvhNM

What are Black Holes? Science or Science Fiction?

Dear Thierry De Mees ,

Light is not bending because some enormous force sucks the live out of it and electron (the light emitters) are crashed and destroyed in the BH although eventually they are, but this is not the real reason.

The actual reason is just Snell refraction of light on the BH formed vortex dimple cone creating a shadow optical effect at the center of the BH and a bright scattering of light on the perimeter of BH vortex. It is an optical effect when a BH is viewed from Earth at these vast distances and therefore always in perpendicular perspective to us.

In other words, we see the BH as black (thus we don't see it at all directly observing) because it is a vortex and at the center of any vortex there is no matter whirling, it's a void and light has nothing to reflect or scatter into therefore not visible.

We can see light only when it reflects, refracts or scatters on matter.

It is simple like that. It is an optical diffraction effect of light from the center to the perimeter of the BH and not due light matter being destroyed in the BH.

Preprint Do Black Holes appear black because not even light can escap...

Emmanouil

Oh yes of course. Self illumination if the object generates it own light.

However I am not totally convinced that we can see even then the generated light for example from our sun with our naked eyes, when we are in space without reflecting first in the atmospheric screen of our planet. The atmosphere also gives the image of the sun reflection enlarged from as it would appear when viewed from space and so for the moon. From pictures from the ISS for example moon appears very small compared when viewed from inside our atmosphere.

Also the first astronauts Appolo missions which the spacecraft windows had not any reflecting coating, reported that they could not see any stars from the spacecraft and the same when they were on the surface of the moon.

Also consider that you can not see directly the light from a laser diode unless it is reflected on a surface and you can see the laser line only when you create smoke around it although the Laser diode emits on the optical range?

So as an analogy a laser pointer generates its own visible light but why we can not see the light path of the laser to us? and only a red spot when it hits its target?

Also there are reports of people getting their eye burned or damaged when laser strike them directly on their eye without previously reflecting somewhere else and they newer saw a light? This tells me that by means of reflection of light on matter by means of the eye itself, this is not enough to be perceived by humans...

So yes I really have my doubts if you can see the stars outside our atmosphere and planet without a glass window or helmet with reflecting coating...

...but maybe I'm wrong on this one :)

I don't know, this guy sounds pretty convincing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSuVJm4TI5c&t

or here ... very confusing...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmcwW-8CC6E

Can Stars BEND LIGHT? General Relativity and Gravity with Dr. Edward Dowdye!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_ixkOI4k8c

I start to get tired with all these old standard dogmatic theories and ill translated or inadequate experiments proven wrong by today's data, experiments and science development, and however these not being declared as false and continuing to exist and considered as a standard and worst of all these used to turn down any new potential promising and valid new theory and development and thus hindering science real progress.

Should be easy to verify his claims, with modern image analysis, high resolution.

If the diffraction rate is varying with distance from the corona of the star with inverse cube instead inverse square then Einstein rings should be dismissed due gravity and the phenomenon is due diffraction of light into matter (plasma) which is clearly a magnetic lensing effect.

Black holes can not be gravitational in nature if we don't even know the phase of matter of our own sun:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_A7VFVwAA5U

Hi

i am Interested to make grou research in power electronic field and macine drive

many thanks

Scientists simulate a black hole in a water tank

https://m.phys.org/news/2019-02-scientists-simulate-black-hole-tank.html

pdf: Article Black Hole Quasibound States from a Draining Bathtub Vortex Flow

Historic: The first Photograph of a Black Hole Release today 11th of April 2019 by the Event Horizon Telescope

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omz77qrDjsU (Theatrical Version)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RxitCeuokI (short version Nature)

... A Vortex Ring

Event Horizon Telescope Historic First Photograph of a Black Hole - A Gigantic Gravitational Monopole. Read Why?

Preprint Do Black Holes appear black because not even light can escap...

This is my take (preprint above) on the initial interpretation of the historic photo.

Project Update: https://www.researchgate.net/project/A-Synthetic-Magnetic-Unipolar-Array-Not-a-Dirac-Monopole/update/5cafb98ecfe4a7df4ae7def7

Disturbing News on the EHT Photo of the Black Hole

The BH shadow is approximately 25% off, of being a perfect circle.

This is too much difference from the predicted Einstein model, perfect circle within 10% model.

Something is not right here.

In the press conference release he says that the "shape of the shadow in a BH is decided by gravity alone", therefore an almost perfect circle, but what we see instead is far from being a circle and not only that but it is not even an ellipse but actually egg shaped, which is an asymmetric shape.

Press conference release: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlrfBiuMzfE&t=2660s (no it is not a perfect circle with 10% as announced)

The shape of the BH shadow is very important since it can reveal the geometry of BH and tell us by which mechanism they are created and what they are.

A not circular shadow BH is disturbing news since it contradicts our current understanding of BHs being created by massive dead suns.

Read below of what a non circular BH shadow can possible infer to:

https://www.researchgate.net/project/A-Synthetic-Magnetic-Unipolar-Array-Not-a-Dirac-Monopole/update/5cafb98ecfe4a7df4ae7def7

Emmanouil

I don't known, seems this algorithm they used to extrapolate the final photo a bit subjective...

Here is what algorithm they used to puzzle out the final image of the BH:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIvezCVcsYs

?...

And their published paper EHT:

https://www.researchgate.net/deref/https%3A%2F%2Fiopscience.iop.org%2Farticle%2F10.3847%2F2041-8213%2Fab0ec7%2Fmeta

Also they didn't announce any σ confidence level for their results.

Also I don't see any merits and frankly get a bit frustrated when very expensive experiments after many years announce that theyhave confirmed Einsteins predictions and theory.

They never announce any unexpected results or anomalies. What are really the merits for science from such endeavors? How new

theories can be developed if not new things are discovered and we only confirm what we already know, or expect?

Always Expect the Unexpected, if this is not valid then it is not science.

Also in their paper they refer in more into the magnetic properties of the BH (they are 28 instances of the word magnetism in different variations and 20 instances of the word gravity) than the gravitational in an astrophysical entity which is supposed to have gravity as the dominant phenomenon.

When I initially asked this question thread here about BH being in reality immense magnets pulling everything into, since all matter is more or less magnetic in essence and its gravitational pull being actually only apparent, I was told that I was wrong.

However, seems to me for a regarded tremendous mass object like that, they should be really only the gravity dominant with all other forces nuclear to EM being collapsed. Nevertheless, more than 60% of all the effects taking place in a BH can be explained only by magnetism!

Seems to me that a astronomical BH being less a gravitational anomaly and more likely to be a giant magnetic monopole vortex field. They actually also infer to this since their simulations are based in magnetohydrodynamics models (GRMHD).

Also frankly speaking, in an immense BH of that magnitude M87 galaxy the BH shadow according to Einstein should whatever other forces in play, be a perfect circle. Period.

Either their photo is flawed or BHs are not quite what we are previously thought.

... there is the real excitement and progress in science and not by rushing to announce observations matching Einstein... so what?

Emmanouil Markoulakis

TEI of Crete

p.s. By the way, I have an even better :) thing than magnetohydrodynamic BH computer simulations in my lab, namely a magnetohydrodynamic BH real time emulator, the Ferrolens.

Preprint Do Black Holes appear black because not even light can escap...

Data Ferrolens Real Time Magnetically Controlled Minkowski Space ...

Article The Quantum Field Of A Magnet Shown By A Nanomagnetic Ferrolens

Article Real Time Visualization of Dynamic Magnetic Fields with a Na...

Article Real time observation of a stationary magneton

Newest Article Published "Real time observation of a stationary magneton", Results in Physics, 2019. Probing the, Quantum Magnet, field (QFM) of ferromagnets with the quantum magnetic optic Ferrolens with minimum Quantum Decoherence and macroscopically projecting the field and flux geometry of a stationary magneton. Decoherence mechanism explained responsible for transforming the Quantum Magnet to its Classical macroscopic magnetic dipole field imprint. Magneton observed as a confined dipole energy vortex.

"It is a well - known facet of quantum field theory that everything can be described in quantum mechanical terms . The complex interactions between a physical system and its surroundings ( environment ) , disrupt the quantum mechanical nature of a system and render it classical under ordinary observation . This process is known as decoherence."

Enrich Joos from Erich Joos and H. D. Zeh version of quantum decoherence (QDE) theory, states that "decoherence can not explain the measurement problem".

The premise of the research here presented is by probing the Quantum Magnet field of a macroscopic ferromanget where electrons have minimum linear relativistic motion

and by circumventing the problem of decoherence (QDE), by using an observation quantum device with minimum QDE but which can display non-decohered quantum information at the macroscale, thus the ferrolens, we can obtain and observe a non-relativistic model for the stationary magneton.

With other words, the Ferrolens preserves and shows the Quantum Magnet field image of a macroscopic magnet which resembles the intrinsic magnetic dipole field of the electron thus a stationary magneton.