Life inside black hole
I know that here it is supposedly not welcome, but I am doing a cross-post from here at the direct request of the author - Nikolai Nikolayevich Gorky. There is some chance that their idea will turn over modern science. And it is better to read about it in the original than in the retelling of ren-tv or tapes.ru.
For those who did not follow the topic. Consider two black holes rotating around each other, for example, masses of 15 and 20 units (masses of the Sun). Sooner or later they will merge into one black hole, but its mass will not be 35 units, but, say, only 30. The remaining 5 will fly away in the form of gravitational waves. It is this energy that the LIGO gravitational telescope catches.
')
The essence of the idea of ​​Gorky and Vasilkov is as follows. Suppose you are an observer, sit in your chair and feel the attraction of 35 mass units divided by the square of the distance. And then bang - literally in a second their weight decreases to 30 units. For you, by virtue of the principle of relativity, it will be indistinguishable from a situation where you are rejected in the opposite direction with a force of 5 units divided by the square of the distance. That is, indistinguishable from antigravity.
UPD : because not everyone understood the previous paragraph, consider a mental experiment by analogy proposed in the comment 0serg . So, you are an observer, sitting in a tank that rotates in a very high circular orbit around the center of mass of this BH pair. As Grandfather Einstein used to say, without looking out of a tank, you can’t tell the movement in orbit from just hovering somewhere in the intergalactic space. Now, suppose that the BH merge has occurred, and part of their mass has flown away. In this regard, you will have to move to a higher orbit around the same center of mass, but already united BH. Andyou will feel this transition to another orbit in your tank (thanks ofmetal ) external observers at infinity will be regarded as a kick that pushed you in the direction from the center of mass. / UPD
Then there is a lot of calculations with terrible TOTAL tensors. These calculations after thorough verification are published in two articles in MNRAS - one of the most authoritative journals on astrophysics in the world. Links to articles: 2016 , 2018 (preprint with the author's introduction).
And the conclusions there are: there was no big bang, but there was (and is) a big black hole. Which us all zohavaet.
In this article, the author (Nikolai Nikolayevich) tries to present all this more or less popular. Under the cut the author's text is reprinted word for word.
After the release of two main articles with mathematical solutions, the agenda included the task of writing a more popular and broader article, as well as the promotion of a revived cosmic cosmology. And it turned out that surprisingly, the Europeans managed to respond to the second article, who had already invited me to give a plenary report for 25 minutes on the acceleration of the universe with a variable mass in June. I see this as a good sign: the specialists are tired of the “cosmological darkness” and are looking for an alternative.
Also journalist Ruslan Safin sent questions in connection with the release of the second article. A somewhat abbreviated version of the answers was published today in the “South Ural Panorama” under such a title from the editorial staff “Inside the Black Hole. Astronomer Nikolai Gorkavy found the center of the universe. ”
First of all, for the sake of truth, I should note that it was Alexander Vasilkov who began to actively ask the "naive" question: Does the Universe have a center? - and this initiated all our further cosmological work. So we searched and found this center together. Secondly, the newspaper requested our joint photo, but did not wait, so I bring it here along with the full text of the read by Sasha and the interview supplemented by his comments. Here we are: Alexander Pavlovich Vasilkov on the left, and I on the right:
1. After the release of your first article with Vasilkov, you assumed that the observed accelerated expansion of the Universe is due to the predominance of repulsive forces over attractive forces at large distances. In the new article you come to another conclusion - on the relative accelerated expansion: it seems to us that something is accelerating because we ourselves are slowing down. What led you to this thought?
In an article in 2016, published in the journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, Alexander Vasilkov and I showed that if the gravitational mass of an object changes, then besides the usual Newtonian acceleration, additional force arises around it. It falls inversely with the distance from the object, that is, slower than the Newtonian force, depending on the square of the distance. Therefore, the new force should dominate at large distances. With a decrease in the mass of the object, the new force gave a repulsion or antigravity, with an increase - there was an additional attraction, hypergravity. It was a rigorous mathematical result that modified the well-known Schwarzschild solution and was obtained in the framework of Einstein's theory of gravity. The conclusion is applicable for a mass of any size and is made for a fixed observer.
But when discussing these results, we verbally expressed additional hypotheses - rather, hopes that the found anti-gravity is responsible for both the expansion of the Universe and the acceleration of its expansion in the eyes of accompanying observers, that is, you and me. While working on the second article, which was published in February of this year in the same journal, and was already directly devoted to cosmology, we found that reality is more complicated than our hopes. Yes, the found anti-gravity is responsible for the Big Bang and the obvious expansion of the Universe - here we were right in our assumptions. But the barely noticeable acceleration of cosmological expansion, discovered by observers in 1998, turned out to be associated not with antigravity, but with hypergravity from our 2016 work. The resulting rigorous mathematical solution unequivocally indicates that this acceleration will have an observable sign only when some part of the mass of the Universe grows, and does not decrease. In our qualitative reasoning, we did not take into account that the dynamics of the cosmological expansion looks very different from the point of view of a fixed observer and for related observers sitting in scattering galaxies.
Mathematics, which is smarter than us, leads to the following picture of the evolution of the Universe: due to the merging of black holes and the transfer of their mass into gravitational waves, the mass of the collapsing Universe of the past cycle has decreased dramatically - and there was a strong anti-gravity that caused the Big Bang, that is the modern expansion of the Universe. This antigravity then decreased and was replaced by hypergravity due to the growth of a huge black hole that appeared in the center of the Universe. It increases due to the absorption of background gravitational waves, which play an important role in the dynamics of space. It is this growth of the Big Black Hole that caused the stretching of the part of the Universe observed around us. This effect was interpreted by observers as an acceleration of expansion, but, in fact, it is an uneven drag of the spread. After all, if in the column of cars the rear car is lagging behind the front, then this can mean both the acceleration of the first car and the braking of the rear. From a mathematical point of view, the influence of the growing Big Black Hole causes the appearance of the so-called “cosmological constant” in the Friedman equations, which is responsible for the observed acceleration of the scattering of galaxies. The calculations of quantum theorists differed from observations by 120 orders, but we calculated it within the framework of the classical theory of gravity - and it well coincided with the data from the Planck satellite. And the conclusion that the mass of the Universe is growing now provides an excellent opportunity to build a cyclic model of the Universe, which several generations of cosmologists dreamed of, but it was not given in any way. The Universe is a huge pendulum in which black holes turn into gravitational waves, and then the reverse process takes place. Here, the key role is played by Einstein's conclusion that gravitational waves do not have a gravitational mass, which allows the Universe to change its mass and avoid irreversible collapse.
2. How did the growing Big Black Hole appear, which is responsible for the relative accelerated expansion of the Universe?
The nature of dark matter, which, for example, caused the accelerated rotation of galaxies, almost a century was a mystery. The latest results of the observatory of LIGO, which caught several gravitational waves from merging massive black holes, opened the veil of secrecy. A number of researchers have put forward a model in which dark matter consists of black holes, and many believe that they came to us from the past cycle of the universe. Indeed, a black hole is the only macroscopic object that cannot be destroyed even by the compression of the Universe. If black holes make up the bulk of the baryon mass of the cosmos, then when the Universe is compressed to a size of several light years, these black holes will actively merge with each other, dropping a significant portion of their mass into gravitational waves. As a result, the total mass of the universe will fall sharply, and at the confluence of the cloud of small holes will remain a huge black hole about the size of a light year and with a mass of trillions of solar masses. It is an indispensable result of the collapse of the Universe and the merging of black holes, and after the Big Bang it begins to grow, absorbing gravitational radiation and any matter around. That such a superhole would arise at the stage of the collapse of the Universe was understood by many authors, including Penrose, but no one knew how important this Big Black Hole plays an important role in the dynamics of the subsequent expansion of the Universe.
3. How far from us and where exactly (in which part of the sky) is it located? What are its parameters?
We believe that at a distance of about fifty billion light years. A whole series of independent research talks about the anisotropy of various cosmological phenomena — and many of them point to the sky region near the dim constellation Sextant. In cosmology, the term "devil axis" has even appeared. According to the current value of the accelerated expansion of the Universe, one can estimate the size of the Big Black Hole in a billion light-years, which gives it a mass of 6 * 10 ^ 54 grams or billions trillions of solar masses - that is, it has grown a billion times since its inception! But we received this information about the mass of the Big Black Hole with a delay of billions of years. In reality, the Big Black Hole is already much larger, but how difficult it is to say, additional research is needed.
4. Is it possible, from the distance at which this LBH is located, with the help of existing tools to see if not itself, then at least indirect signs indicating its presence in this part of the Universe? Under what conditions will it be available for direct study?
Having studied the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe, and how it depends on time, we will determine the evolution of the parameters of the Big Black Hole. The anisotropy of cosmological effects is manifested in the distribution of the background radiation fluctuations across the sky, in the orientation of the axes of galaxies and a number of other phenomena. These are also ways of exploring the Big Black Hole in the distance. We will also study it directly, but later.
5. What would we see if we could fly to this LBH? Is it possible to dive without risk to life? What do we find under its surface?
As for the internal space of black holes, even in textbooks there is a lot of conflicting information. Many people think that, at the border of black holes, we will certainly be torn apart by tidal forces into small ribbons - even the word “spaghettizing” has arisen. In fact, tidal forces at the edge of a very large black hole are completely invisible, and according to strict solutions of Einstein's equations, for a falling observer, the process of crossing the border of a black hole is not remarkable. I believe that under the surface of the Big Black Hole we will see almost the same Universe - those galaxies that dived into it early. The main difference will be the change of the scattering of galaxies for their rapprochement: all researchers agree that everything inside the black hole falls to the center.
6. If this black hole grows, then one day it will suck in all the rest of the matter. What happens then?
The border of the Big Black Hole will go to the border of the observable Universe, and its fate will stop worrying us. And the Universe inside the hole will enter the second phase of its cycle - when the expansion is replaced by compression. There is nothing tragic about this, because the compression will take about the same many billions of years that it took to expand. Reasonable creatures of this cycle of the Universe will feel problems in tens of billions of years, when the temperature of the CMB will rise so much that the planets will overheat due to the warm night sky. Maybe for some aliens, from whom the sun will go out, this will become, on the contrary, salvation, even if temporary, for a hundred million years. When the present Universe shrinks to a size of several light years, it will again lose its mass, causing the Big Bang. A new cycle of expansion will begin, and the Big Black Hole will appear fresh in the center of the universe.
7. When this event (dumping of the Universe in LBH), in your opinion, should happen? Is this time interval unchanged for all expansion / compression cycles or can it change?
I think that cosmological cycles with a good accuracy follow a certain period related to the total mass and energy of the Universe. It is difficult to say exactly what stage of our cycle we are at - for this we need to build specific cosmological models with a given number of baryons, black holes, gravitational waves and other types of radiation. When will the border of the growing Big Black Hole reach us? Calculations show that it will certainly reach the superluminal expansion mode — this does not violate the theory of relativity, because the border of a black hole is not a material object. But this superluminal speed means that our encounter with this border of the Big Black Hole can occur at any moment - we cannot detect its approach according to some observations that are limited by the speed of light. In order to avoid panic, I repeat: I do not see anything tragic in this, but cosmologists will begin to notice how the redshift of distant galaxies will change to blue. But for this, the light from them must have time to reach us.
8. What observational and theoretical data speak in favor of the cosmological model proposed by you or, maybe, make it even mandatory?
The classical Friedmann equations are based on the principle of isotropy and homogeneity. Thus, conventional cosmology could not, in principle, consider the effects of anisotropy, which many observers are talking about. The modified Friedman equations obtained in our paper with Vasil'kov in 2018 include anisotropic effects — the Big Black Hole is located in a certain direction. This opens up possibilities for studying these effects, which will confirm the theory itself. We did not build a new cosmology, we simply insert the missing dynamic springs into a well-developed classical cosmology, which originated in the middle of the 20th century, starting with the works of Gamow and his group. We are reviving this classical cosmology, making it part of ordinary physics. Now it does not contain any assumptions about quantum gravity, about extra spatial dimensions and about dark entities like “inflation”, “vacuum phase transitions”, “dark energy” and “dark matter”. It works only within the framework of Einstein’s classical and well-proven gravity theory, using only known components of the cosmos, such as black holes and gravitational waves. Since it explains well the observed phenomena, it makes it absolutely obligatory - according to the principles of science. There are many cosmological models, but one reality. The revived classical cosmology is strikingly elegant and simple, so I suppose that we learned the true way of existence of the Universe.
UPD2 : Gorkavogo comment on your comments:
My comments on the comment on the comments:
- About the spring wrote another author
- Stern's comment is this:
For those who did not follow the topic. Consider two black holes rotating around each other, for example, masses of 15 and 20 units (masses of the Sun). Sooner or later they will merge into one black hole, but its mass will not be 35 units, but, say, only 30. The remaining 5 will fly away in the form of gravitational waves. It is this energy that the LIGO gravitational telescope catches.
')
The essence of the idea of ​​Gorky and Vasilkov is as follows. Suppose you are an observer, sit in your chair and feel the attraction of 35 mass units divided by the square of the distance. And then bang - literally in a second their weight decreases to 30 units. For you, by virtue of the principle of relativity, it will be indistinguishable from a situation where you are rejected in the opposite direction with a force of 5 units divided by the square of the distance. That is, indistinguishable from antigravity.
UPD : because not everyone understood the previous paragraph, consider a mental experiment by analogy proposed in the comment 0serg . So, you are an observer, sitting in a tank that rotates in a very high circular orbit around the center of mass of this BH pair. As Grandfather Einstein used to say, without looking out of a tank, you can’t tell the movement in orbit from just hovering somewhere in the intergalactic space. Now, suppose that the BH merge has occurred, and part of their mass has flown away. In this regard, you will have to move to a higher orbit around the same center of mass, but already united BH. And
Then there is a lot of calculations with terrible TOTAL tensors. These calculations after thorough verification are published in two articles in MNRAS - one of the most authoritative journals on astrophysics in the world. Links to articles: 2016 , 2018 (preprint with the author's introduction).
And the conclusions there are: there was no big bang, but there was (and is) a big black hole. Which us all zohavaet.
In this article, the author (Nikolai Nikolayevich) tries to present all this more or less popular. Under the cut the author's text is reprinted word for word.
After the release of two main articles with mathematical solutions, the agenda included the task of writing a more popular and broader article, as well as the promotion of a revived cosmic cosmology. And it turned out that surprisingly, the Europeans managed to respond to the second article, who had already invited me to give a plenary report for 25 minutes on the acceleration of the universe with a variable mass in June. I see this as a good sign: the specialists are tired of the “cosmological darkness” and are looking for an alternative.
Also journalist Ruslan Safin sent questions in connection with the release of the second article. A somewhat abbreviated version of the answers was published today in the “South Ural Panorama” under such a title from the editorial staff “Inside the Black Hole. Astronomer Nikolai Gorkavy found the center of the universe. ”
First of all, for the sake of truth, I should note that it was Alexander Vasilkov who began to actively ask the "naive" question: Does the Universe have a center? - and this initiated all our further cosmological work. So we searched and found this center together. Secondly, the newspaper requested our joint photo, but did not wait, so I bring it here along with the full text of the read by Sasha and the interview supplemented by his comments. Here we are: Alexander Pavlovich Vasilkov on the left, and I on the right:
1. After the release of your first article with Vasilkov, you assumed that the observed accelerated expansion of the Universe is due to the predominance of repulsive forces over attractive forces at large distances. In the new article you come to another conclusion - on the relative accelerated expansion: it seems to us that something is accelerating because we ourselves are slowing down. What led you to this thought?
In an article in 2016, published in the journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, Alexander Vasilkov and I showed that if the gravitational mass of an object changes, then besides the usual Newtonian acceleration, additional force arises around it. It falls inversely with the distance from the object, that is, slower than the Newtonian force, depending on the square of the distance. Therefore, the new force should dominate at large distances. With a decrease in the mass of the object, the new force gave a repulsion or antigravity, with an increase - there was an additional attraction, hypergravity. It was a rigorous mathematical result that modified the well-known Schwarzschild solution and was obtained in the framework of Einstein's theory of gravity. The conclusion is applicable for a mass of any size and is made for a fixed observer.
But when discussing these results, we verbally expressed additional hypotheses - rather, hopes that the found anti-gravity is responsible for both the expansion of the Universe and the acceleration of its expansion in the eyes of accompanying observers, that is, you and me. While working on the second article, which was published in February of this year in the same journal, and was already directly devoted to cosmology, we found that reality is more complicated than our hopes. Yes, the found anti-gravity is responsible for the Big Bang and the obvious expansion of the Universe - here we were right in our assumptions. But the barely noticeable acceleration of cosmological expansion, discovered by observers in 1998, turned out to be associated not with antigravity, but with hypergravity from our 2016 work. The resulting rigorous mathematical solution unequivocally indicates that this acceleration will have an observable sign only when some part of the mass of the Universe grows, and does not decrease. In our qualitative reasoning, we did not take into account that the dynamics of the cosmological expansion looks very different from the point of view of a fixed observer and for related observers sitting in scattering galaxies.
Mathematics, which is smarter than us, leads to the following picture of the evolution of the Universe: due to the merging of black holes and the transfer of their mass into gravitational waves, the mass of the collapsing Universe of the past cycle has decreased dramatically - and there was a strong anti-gravity that caused the Big Bang, that is the modern expansion of the Universe. This antigravity then decreased and was replaced by hypergravity due to the growth of a huge black hole that appeared in the center of the Universe. It increases due to the absorption of background gravitational waves, which play an important role in the dynamics of space. It is this growth of the Big Black Hole that caused the stretching of the part of the Universe observed around us. This effect was interpreted by observers as an acceleration of expansion, but, in fact, it is an uneven drag of the spread. After all, if in the column of cars the rear car is lagging behind the front, then this can mean both the acceleration of the first car and the braking of the rear. From a mathematical point of view, the influence of the growing Big Black Hole causes the appearance of the so-called “cosmological constant” in the Friedman equations, which is responsible for the observed acceleration of the scattering of galaxies. The calculations of quantum theorists differed from observations by 120 orders, but we calculated it within the framework of the classical theory of gravity - and it well coincided with the data from the Planck satellite. And the conclusion that the mass of the Universe is growing now provides an excellent opportunity to build a cyclic model of the Universe, which several generations of cosmologists dreamed of, but it was not given in any way. The Universe is a huge pendulum in which black holes turn into gravitational waves, and then the reverse process takes place. Here, the key role is played by Einstein's conclusion that gravitational waves do not have a gravitational mass, which allows the Universe to change its mass and avoid irreversible collapse.
2. How did the growing Big Black Hole appear, which is responsible for the relative accelerated expansion of the Universe?
The nature of dark matter, which, for example, caused the accelerated rotation of galaxies, almost a century was a mystery. The latest results of the observatory of LIGO, which caught several gravitational waves from merging massive black holes, opened the veil of secrecy. A number of researchers have put forward a model in which dark matter consists of black holes, and many believe that they came to us from the past cycle of the universe. Indeed, a black hole is the only macroscopic object that cannot be destroyed even by the compression of the Universe. If black holes make up the bulk of the baryon mass of the cosmos, then when the Universe is compressed to a size of several light years, these black holes will actively merge with each other, dropping a significant portion of their mass into gravitational waves. As a result, the total mass of the universe will fall sharply, and at the confluence of the cloud of small holes will remain a huge black hole about the size of a light year and with a mass of trillions of solar masses. It is an indispensable result of the collapse of the Universe and the merging of black holes, and after the Big Bang it begins to grow, absorbing gravitational radiation and any matter around. That such a superhole would arise at the stage of the collapse of the Universe was understood by many authors, including Penrose, but no one knew how important this Big Black Hole plays an important role in the dynamics of the subsequent expansion of the Universe.
3. How far from us and where exactly (in which part of the sky) is it located? What are its parameters?
We believe that at a distance of about fifty billion light years. A whole series of independent research talks about the anisotropy of various cosmological phenomena — and many of them point to the sky region near the dim constellation Sextant. In cosmology, the term "devil axis" has even appeared. According to the current value of the accelerated expansion of the Universe, one can estimate the size of the Big Black Hole in a billion light-years, which gives it a mass of 6 * 10 ^ 54 grams or billions trillions of solar masses - that is, it has grown a billion times since its inception! But we received this information about the mass of the Big Black Hole with a delay of billions of years. In reality, the Big Black Hole is already much larger, but how difficult it is to say, additional research is needed.
4. Is it possible, from the distance at which this LBH is located, with the help of existing tools to see if not itself, then at least indirect signs indicating its presence in this part of the Universe? Under what conditions will it be available for direct study?
Having studied the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe, and how it depends on time, we will determine the evolution of the parameters of the Big Black Hole. The anisotropy of cosmological effects is manifested in the distribution of the background radiation fluctuations across the sky, in the orientation of the axes of galaxies and a number of other phenomena. These are also ways of exploring the Big Black Hole in the distance. We will also study it directly, but later.
5. What would we see if we could fly to this LBH? Is it possible to dive without risk to life? What do we find under its surface?
As for the internal space of black holes, even in textbooks there is a lot of conflicting information. Many people think that, at the border of black holes, we will certainly be torn apart by tidal forces into small ribbons - even the word “spaghettizing” has arisen. In fact, tidal forces at the edge of a very large black hole are completely invisible, and according to strict solutions of Einstein's equations, for a falling observer, the process of crossing the border of a black hole is not remarkable. I believe that under the surface of the Big Black Hole we will see almost the same Universe - those galaxies that dived into it early. The main difference will be the change of the scattering of galaxies for their rapprochement: all researchers agree that everything inside the black hole falls to the center.
6. If this black hole grows, then one day it will suck in all the rest of the matter. What happens then?
The border of the Big Black Hole will go to the border of the observable Universe, and its fate will stop worrying us. And the Universe inside the hole will enter the second phase of its cycle - when the expansion is replaced by compression. There is nothing tragic about this, because the compression will take about the same many billions of years that it took to expand. Reasonable creatures of this cycle of the Universe will feel problems in tens of billions of years, when the temperature of the CMB will rise so much that the planets will overheat due to the warm night sky. Maybe for some aliens, from whom the sun will go out, this will become, on the contrary, salvation, even if temporary, for a hundred million years. When the present Universe shrinks to a size of several light years, it will again lose its mass, causing the Big Bang. A new cycle of expansion will begin, and the Big Black Hole will appear fresh in the center of the universe.
7. When this event (dumping of the Universe in LBH), in your opinion, should happen? Is this time interval unchanged for all expansion / compression cycles or can it change?
I think that cosmological cycles with a good accuracy follow a certain period related to the total mass and energy of the Universe. It is difficult to say exactly what stage of our cycle we are at - for this we need to build specific cosmological models with a given number of baryons, black holes, gravitational waves and other types of radiation. When will the border of the growing Big Black Hole reach us? Calculations show that it will certainly reach the superluminal expansion mode — this does not violate the theory of relativity, because the border of a black hole is not a material object. But this superluminal speed means that our encounter with this border of the Big Black Hole can occur at any moment - we cannot detect its approach according to some observations that are limited by the speed of light. In order to avoid panic, I repeat: I do not see anything tragic in this, but cosmologists will begin to notice how the redshift of distant galaxies will change to blue. But for this, the light from them must have time to reach us.
8. What observational and theoretical data speak in favor of the cosmological model proposed by you or, maybe, make it even mandatory?
The classical Friedmann equations are based on the principle of isotropy and homogeneity. Thus, conventional cosmology could not, in principle, consider the effects of anisotropy, which many observers are talking about. The modified Friedman equations obtained in our paper with Vasil'kov in 2018 include anisotropic effects — the Big Black Hole is located in a certain direction. This opens up possibilities for studying these effects, which will confirm the theory itself. We did not build a new cosmology, we simply insert the missing dynamic springs into a well-developed classical cosmology, which originated in the middle of the 20th century, starting with the works of Gamow and his group. We are reviving this classical cosmology, making it part of ordinary physics. Now it does not contain any assumptions about quantum gravity, about extra spatial dimensions and about dark entities like “inflation”, “vacuum phase transitions”, “dark energy” and “dark matter”. It works only within the framework of Einstein’s classical and well-proven gravity theory, using only known components of the cosmos, such as black holes and gravitational waves. Since it explains well the observed phenomena, it makes it absolutely obligatory - according to the principles of science. There are many cosmological models, but one reality. The revived classical cosmology is strikingly elegant and simple, so I suppose that we learned the true way of existence of the Universe.
UPD2 : Gorkavogo comment on your comments:
No, I will not go there. There they have already written a complaint against me, either at the UN, or at Sportloto. Moreover, a man wrote who thinks that an astronaut at the orbital station can measure the centrifugal orbital force with the help of a spring. Here we still have to figure out who the obscurantists.
Well, of course, a lot of laughter in the comments. "Witnesses of Maldasena" - just great. Popov and Stern also flashed. Well, Popov - I just do not know where he is an expert, I saw his article, where he reassured everyone a year before the Chelyabinsk race car, that there was no space danger and only asteroids 10 km were dangerous. I do not think that he is able to read our article, but Stern clearly looked into it and spoke. Well, okay, but I would be surprised if an Englishman, a reviewer of our article, with whom we have long and carefully discussed spherical symmetries, uniformity and heterogeneity in our decision, that he does not distinguish one from the other ... I just admire these guys and those for who they authority.
My comments on the comment on the comments:
- About the spring wrote another author
- Stern's comment is this:
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/371363/
All Articles