# How sure are we that black hole is not a product of a massive gravity implosion that rips a hole into the fabric of 3D/4D dimensional space in which light and everything else got sucks out to another side?

My imagination runs wild like a horse in the wild today, and so today it’s all about black hole and infinity and Calculus. To tell the truth, I’m not at all great in math, and so Calculus is so out there for me. Furthermore, I have not been back to school for ages, and so I might be a thousand miles away from the right answer when I’m trying to do a complicated math problem such as a hard Algebraic problem and so forth. Still, I’m a carefree person sometimes, and today is that day when I don’t care if I’m right or wrong.

According to the YouTube video right after the break, a black hole is formed because of the massive gravitational collapse of a dead star. Personally, I like to say a massive gravitational implosion because it sounds cooler! Anyway, the video right after the break explains how black hole forms in detail.

Today, I imagine that because of massive collapse or implosion of dense gravitational strength which, in my opinion, allows the core of a dead star not really was squashed into nothingness but was pushed so hard that it stretched and ripped a hole of our 3D/4D spatial space — thus pushing and ejecting the core of the dead star through another spatial dimension. This way, as if you can imagine that a hypersonic plane got punctured with a massive hole and thus anything got closer to the hole would get eject and suck out of the plane. The hypersonic plane is the container or the fabric of our 3D/4D spatial dimension and the outside is a bigger dimension that imprisons our 3D/4D spatial dimension.

Why black hole is always round like a circle and not a square? You know, if you push a ball through a massive piece of easy to be ripped tissue, you could probably create a square or a weird shape of the hole in the tissue right? Here comes the part of infinity and Calculus — hence circle.

Since Calculus was probably started by the ancient mathematics geniuses who were hypnotized by trying to work with a circle or whatever was more meaningful than a circle that led to their wonderment of infinity. Since a circle isn’t a straight line, in Calculus, I guess we could imagine a circle is a composite of infinitely small straight lines that form a circle in an orderly connected directional position. Hence infinity’s involvement since we don’t really know curve that well and have to use our imagination of using a straight line with infinity to form a circle. I guess, through infinity, a constant of the unknown, we find changes in infinitely small intervals. (My interval meaning isn’t a mathematical one but merely a point!) — So I guess Calculus is about finding the meaning of the change!

What has Calculus got to do with a black hole? In my opinion, a ball rips through a massive tissue isn’t the same as a massive collapse or implosion of gravity. According to the book “Infinite Powers: How Calculus Reveals the Secrets of Universe” by Steven Strogatz, and here I quote:

Mathematically, circles embody change without change. A point moving around the circumference of a circle changes direction without ever changing its distance from a center. It’s a minimal form of change, a way to change and curve in the slightest way possible. And, of course, circles are symmetrical. If you rotate a circle about its center, it looks unchanged. That rotational symmetry may be why circles are so ubiquitous. Whenever some aspect of nature doesn’t care about direction, circles are bound to appear. Consider what happens when a raindrop hits a puddle: tiny ripples expand outward from the point of impact. Because they spread equally fast in all directions and because they started at a single point, the ripples have to be circles. Symmetry demands it.

Thus my thinking is that since symmetry demands it, whenever something in nature which doesn’t care about the direction like the implosion of gravity — in our case the black hole — a circle must be formed in space that is so black as a black hole! As I mentioned above, the core of the dead star was collapsed and imploded so hard by gravity thus I think it probably got ejected through the ripped 3D/4D spatial dimension. Like a hypersonic plane that got a massive hole, anything near the hole would get ejected out to the other side. Whatever on the other side must be so exotic and our super special black hole makes things so impossible that even light cannot escape the grasp of the black hole.

# Imagine Time As A Tide Medium To Record Bookmarks Of Time For A Universe, But What About The Sum Of Infinite Natural Numbers Equal To -1/12 or -1/8?

What is even more nifty is that I found another video on YouTube which relies on the video above to refute the -1/12 answer to the sum of positive things, and the video would argue that -1/8 is the real answer to this scenario.  Well, by now I’m totally confused by both videos for sure.  So, is it -1/12 is the answer to 1+2+3+4+n… (to the infinity) or the answer would be -1/8?  Check out the next video right after the break.

Anyway, it’s quite amusing, and I’m not sure if I’m ever going to be able to understand this proof.  Anyhow, maybe someday my mind will be a little brighter than now and I’ll definitely see how -1/12 would be the answer of the sum of infinite positive numbers.  Or is it that only the sum of all positive number series would equate to -1/12 or -1/8, but adding non-series numbers in total to the infinity would not equate to such answer?  But, all numbers like natural numbers can always be counted to the positive, thus does it really matter that non-series numbers in total to the infinity would turn out to be any differently than -1/12 or -1/8?

Honesty:

To be honest, I was wondering about how time and space can be infinite or not, and a similar question on Quora (Can time be infinite and space be finite?) got an answer which directs me to the first YouTube video which I had posted near the very top of this blog post.  Yep, that’s how I found out about these videos.

Personal thought:

Right now, I imagine time as in a single tide travels to an imaginative beach in which this beach got no sand barrier to block the tide, and this tide would ride on into the infinity and would never be able to hit against the sand barrier of the beach.  I imagine that each tide is a time.  Thus with this imagination I can conclude that each tide is an origin which represents a time medium.  Nonetheless, this time tide medium isn’t a regular tide, and so it would have history of time, like bookmarks of time.  Anything which rides upon the time tide medium would move forward with time, but leave history in bookmarks of time tide medium.  This imagination would allow me to go further by concluding that I can travel in time by revisiting the bookmarks of time tide medium, or perhaps I can jump to another time tide medium to visit the bookmarks of time of not my own altogether.  If this is possible, does it mean jumping to another time tide medium would mean escaping the current universe?  After all, I assume that different universe should allow a different behavior of time tide medium, because each time tide medium could behave differently altogether.  Anyway, this whole crazy mess I just ranted on is my imagination, and it has no proof of anything — meaning it’s nothing in reality and just an imagination (i.e., a fairy tale).

# Try To Imagine A Picture Of A World With Infinite Dimensions

Certain theories map out how many dimensions we’re having.  For an example, a Superstring theory requires 10 dimensions to make sense, and if this is the case then the roadmap to 10 dimensions has been mapped out.  Don’t ask me why Superstring theory requires 10 dimensions, because I don’t know the details.  Nonetheless, they, the experts in whatever field that comes up with this theory suggest and theorize that it takes 10 dimensions to make sense of their theory.  For all I know I could be wrong in how I generalize their point of view about what make their theory makes sense in the first place.  Regardless, I want to focus not on anything else but the idea of infinite number of dimensions.  Basically, why should anything be limited when there is infinite, right?

Unlimited dimensions or infinite number of dimensions could mean my mind is about to be exploded.  Something complex as 10 dimensional theory such as Superstring theory is already too hard to grasp, but who would dare to take on the challenge of mathematically calculating the possibility of infinite number of dimensions?  Just imagining the idea of living in a world where infinite dimensions is the norm would be a task in which only the Gods can take on.  For us humans, 3 dimensional speaking is something we are accustomed to, because we can measure our positions in our space relatively intuitive.  For Einstein though, he added a fourth dimension which is time to accurately explain his special theory of relativity.  Thus traveling at the speed of light time may bend.

But why stop at 3, 4, or even 10 dimensional universe, because an imagination does not limit the idea of an infinite dimensional universe.  Thus, the idea of unlimited dimensional theory is definitely mind blowing.  I wonder, perhaps we and everything that has ever existed within all dimensions are being encompassed by the infinite dimensional spatial.  Only through this conjecture that my brain can wrap around the idea of other dimensional spatial does exist.  Basically, I don’t think it’s sensible to think a limited dimensional universe could exist by itself, because it had to be created and caressed by something else.  For the most basic instinct, we could theorize that baby comes from the parents (without being too technical such as eggs and sperms).  Should the basic instinct be correct about everything is being encompassed by the infinite dimensional spatial?

# After Cantor, Infinity Comes In Different Sizes… Perhaps Not?

From Netflix’s “The Story of Maths” series, Georg Cantor was introduced to me, and from Google’s search I landed on Numberphile’s “Infinity is bigger than you think” YouTube video.  I totally understand the logic in which Georg Cantor wanted the world to know that infinity does have different sizes, but the logic within me just steers me away from Cantor’s infinities altogether.

If you watch the YouTube video I’d mentioned (don’t worry… I’ll post it at the bottom of this post), you should understand why Cantor’s diagonal argument depicts that infinity does come in different sizes.  Basically, the idea of infinity with different sizes is very well explained in the YouTube video that I’d mentioned of.  Nonetheless, what is bothering me is that numbers exist only in our mind, and they have nothing to do with infinity.  Furthermore, infinity is a concept in which could both be true and imaginary.

Whenever a whole number infinity size is being measured to so called larger decimal infinity size, within me would logically beg the differ for I see that each decimal number is just a representation of each whole number.  Thus, in Cantor’s diagonal argument, I imagine that there is only one infinity in which you can draw however different sizes of infinity within one true infinity.  In a way, I don’t see Cantor is being wrong, but I’m seeing that there must always be that one more infinity which can hold all other infinities within.  In a sense, these so called different infinities should be one of the same, because they’re all connected (interconnected) together.

Anyhow, check out the YouTube video I’d mentioned earlier right after this break.  Enjoy!

# Pi Is Awesome, You Should Have Some

I’m far from good at math, but Pi has always been something I hold dear to my heart.  Knowing Pi as the DNA of a circle, I know any circle’s circumference divides by its diameter would result in 3.14.  This means the code for a circle is Pi, because without having a pie you would not get a circle.  Thus, eating up your pie, yeah?  Anyhow, Pi is also mysterious in a way that it would go on forever.  This means, if you have a Pi, you would never be able to finish it.

To be accurate, Pi is not only 3.14, but it’s also 3.14159, 3.1415926535, 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971, and it would go on forever.  Don’t ask me why it is like this, because I’m not a mathematician.  Thankfully, we got mathematicians to tell us that Pi is an irrational number, thus it would string on forever without a known permanent pattern.  By without a known permanent pattern, it means that you don’t have a pattern of a Pi yet unless you can finish eating it.  Nonetheless, as of now, nobody knows how Pi would be completely eaten.  Thus, it’s irrational!

Since I’m not a mathematician, I like to think of Pi in a philosophical manner.  Not even sure what this means, but here is my philosophical dictation of Pi.  Imagine you take a pen or a pencil, and then you just draw one circle over and over again, into the infinity.  I call this Pi.  Furthermore, you can also draw another circle within a circle into the infinity, and I also call this Pi.  Perhaps, religiously, Pi is the meaning of reincarnation.  If someone said there is no such thing as reincarnation, maybe you could have a pie!

I also like to think Pi as a code or one of the codes of the God universe!  I imagine a universe we live in does have a border.  This universe’s border is similar to earth’s border, because there would be another universe right outside of this universe’s border.  Nonetheless, the God universe does not have a border, because it would encompass all universes within it.  The God universe would go on forever just like Pi.  So, at least whenever you eat a pie, you can imagine that you eat the God universe.  Can you finish it?

When looking at Pi this way, I wonder how much smaller an atom can be divided?  Scientists have a name for matters that are smaller than the smallest subatomic particles.  What are subatomic particles?  Think these subatomic particles as the particles that you had learned in high school, and these are proton, neutron, and so on.  Nonetheless, scientists call known smallest matters that are the building block for known subatomic particles as elementary particles.  An example of known elementary particles is Quark.  Since scientists like to call these elementary particles as the building block particles that cannot be divided further, it makes me wonder what elementary particles that would make up as the building block for the known elementary particles such as Quark.  Have a pie?

Pi/pie is awesome!  Not the kind of pie that you could ever finish in a meal, but the kind of Pi that you would never be able to eat it all.

# Pi Isn’t Special?

Vihart (YouTube user and channel owner) thinks Pi is not that special, but obviously she is against so many people who think otherwise.  Check out her rant on why she thinks Pi isn’t special in the video right after the break.

Just in case you haven’t seen my own cool math video, you can watch “The Secret of Number 9” video right after this break.

I’m no math whiz, but I like cool math videos and tricks.  If you know any, feel free to mention them in the comment section.  Thanks…