No More Black Holes?



Eugene Sittampalam


Part 1 of 2


To:          Phil Berardelli <>


Date:       Friday 6 July 2007

Subject:   No More Black Holes?


If new calculations are correct, the universe just got even stranger. Scientists at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, have constructed mathematical formulas that conclude black holes cannot exist. The findings--if correct--could revolutionize astrophysics and resolve a paradox that has perplexed physicists for 4 decades.

No More Black Holes? Phil Berardelli, ScienceNOW Daily News, 21 June 2007


Dear Mr Berardelli,

No More Black Holes?

Pardon me, but the above question mark got replaced with an exclamation mark in the book (1) that I published in New York back in March 1999! The supporting theoretical calculations (2) and the observational facts (3, 4) should all have been high-school stuff by now. Wherein, the universe has got, not stranger, but indeed – awesomely simpler!


Briefly, here, in this fractal universe of ours, we see the atomic nucleus in the chicken egg. The basic nucleus is thus soft inside a hard shell (the hardest in nature, as the math also shows). Under increasing pressure, the nucleus simply increases in size (nucleon number), never in density (the neutron star is thus essentially a giant atomic nucleus in an extreme pressure environment), and bifurcates or fragments should this pressure become critically anisotropic. Thus, the so-called gravitational collapse of matter (to a black hole) is an absolute impossibility and a nonevent in nature.  


It is, therefore, of little wonder that observations are increasingly at loggerheads with today's standard theories and that even top academics are now beginning to openly air their discontent (if not outrage) and that too here in a highly conservative mainstream journal. (A thaw may already be in progress at Physical Review D ever since my personal presentation of my work at the APS April 2001 meeting in Washington DC, after a meeting with the two editors!)


Further, from your news item,

"How do you know they're black holes?" No one has actually seen a black hole, he says, and anything with a tremendous amount of gravity--such as the supermassive remnants of stars--could exert effects similar to those researchers have blamed on black holes. "All of our calculations suggest this is quite plausible," Krauss says.


Dead on, Prof Krauss! I have termed these "supermassive remnants of stars" as Cosmic Cores, the ultimate recycling centers in observable space (3).


Not so fast, says astronomer Kimberly Weaver… "we have never observed any events that would back this up." At the site of the supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, for example, she says astronomers routinely observe what looks like interstellar material disappearing without a trace.


You're right, too, Dr Weaver (as Topol would say!). However, this "interstellar material disappearing without a trace" is indeed the fallback of low-speed matter – following the galactic core's periodic nova-like ejections that spawn the stars. It is the stupendous backpressure from the (radially outward) galactic superwind (4) that causes this illusion of a black hole monster feeding at the center!


I wish Prof Krauss and his team well and hope they'll go even further to show that dark matter (4) and dark energy (5) are further nonentities (if not further embarrassments to the field) – with no 'strings' to boot!  


Finally, my recent short article (6 ) submitted to the Institute of Physics (UK) may now be the better – and potentially rewarding – port of entry to this final perspective on the nature of things. (The US$25,000 challenge therein – no joke; no scam; and still open, pending IOP response – should be of appeal especially to the students at CWRU Physics, with Prof Akerib or even Prof Krauss himself as the sole judge!)

Best regards,

Eugene Sittampalam







(6) (preprint; limited circulation)



"I found myself getting really angry," one cosmologist said after reading [Sittampalam's] paper.
"It must have hit some real insecurity."
Discover, April 2002, pp 66-71



– End of Letter –


Go to Part 2 of 2