Written by Stephen J. Crothers

Whenever you hear cosmologists talk of a black hole they never tell you what type of black hole they allege in what type of big bang universe they allege. It is always reported something like this: there is a black hole here or there and the Universe is expanding. More often than not the black hole is mentioned without any reference to a big bang expanding universe, which is simply assumed as a canvas onto which their black holes are painted. The vagueness of all this is amplified when you learn that there are actually four alleged types of black hole universes and that there are three alleged types of big bang universes.

What are the alleged types of black hole universes you ask? Let’s list them.

(1) Non-rotating, charge neutral

(2) Non-rotating and charged

(3) Rotating, charge neutral

(4) Rotating and charged.

What are the alleged types of big bang universes you ask? They depend on the type of constant spacetime curvature they have, usually denoted by the letter k; the k-curvature. Let’s list them too.

(1) Spatially infinite (k = -1, negatively curved spacetime)

(2) Spatially infinite (k = 0, flat spacetime)

(3) Spatially finite (k = 1, positively curved spacetime).

Each type of black hole universe is no less a universe than each type of big bang universe because each and every black hole alleged is a solution to a completely different set of Einstein’s gravitational field equations. As such black hole universes and big bang universes are all independent of one another. To see why this is so we need only examine the generic defining characteristics of black hole universes and big bang universes and then compare them to one another.

All alleged black hole universes:

(1) Are spatially infinite

(2) Are eternal

(3) Contain only one mass

(4) Are not expanding

(5) And are either asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved.

All alleged big bang universes:

(1) Are either spatially finite (k = 1) or spatially infinite (k = 0 and k = -1)

(2) Are of finite age (~13.8 billion years)

(3) Contain radiation and many masses

(4) Are expanding

(5) And are not asymptotically anything.

Note also that none of the alleged black hole universes possesses any big bang k-curvature.

It is immediately apparent that none of the foregoing defining characteristics of black hole universes are compatible with those of the big bang universes. Consequently black holes and big bangs are mutually exclusive. Nonetheless cosmologists thoughtlessly blend them to obtain billions upon billions of black holes in some unspecified big bang universe that is of finite age.

That a black hole universe is a universe is clear from the fact that it is either asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved. There is no bound on asymptotic, for otherwise it would not be asymptotic, and so there is no bound on the extent of the spacetime of any black hole. Thus the black hole universe is spatially infinite. Let’s consider just two alleged black holes. Each black hole disturbs the asymptotic character of the spacetime of the other black hole by its presence, no matter how far away they might be supposed from one another, and thereby violates this defining feature of a black hole. Moreover, all alleged black holes are said to have an infinite spacetime curvature at their so-called ‘singularity’. Consequently each of the two black holes under consideration encounters an infinite spacetime curvature at the singularity of the other, and that is a far cry from being asymptotically anything. It’s clear that a black hole universe can’t coexist with any other black hole universe or even with a duplicate of itself. Nor can it exist inside some big bang universe. Similarly no big bang universe can coexist with any black hole universe, with any other big bang universe, or with itself. Now consider the 2.5 million black holes that NASA scientists [1] have allegedly found with their WISE survey! Each of these alleged black holes encounters 2, 499, 999 ‘infinite’ curvatures around it, and that’s a long way from being asymptotically anything. What about the cosmologists’ claim that ‘almost’ every galaxy harbours a supermassive black hole at its centre? How many galaxies are there?

Now try placing any of the black hole universes, which are all eternal, inside any of the big bang universes, all of which are allegedly ~13.8 billion years old. They don’t fit! What about sticking in any of the black hole universes, all of which are spatially infinite, inside the spatially finite type of big bang universe? They don’t fit either. You can try fitting any of the other defining properties of black hole universes with the defining properties of the big bang universes. You will find that none of them fit, as the comparative list above succinctly reveals.

Every black hole is, on the one hand, alleged to have an escape velocity and this escape velocity is greater than or equal to the speed of light in vacuum, usually denoted by the letter c. For instance,

            “black hole A region of spacetime from which the escape velocity exceeds the velocity of light.” [2]

            “According to the theory of relativity, nothing can travel faster than light. Thus, if light cannot escape, neither can anything else. Everything is dragged back by the gravitational field. So one has a set of events, a region of space-time from which it is not possible to escape to reach a distant observer. Its boundary is called the event horizon. It coincides with the paths of the light rays that just fail to escape from the black hole.” [3]

The escape velocity of a body is the velocity that another body must initially have in order to escape from the gravitational interaction force produced by them upon one another. A rocket, for instance, must attain the escape velocity of Earth to escape from Earth. Note that escape velocity does not imply that things can’t leave, only that things can’t escape unless propelled at or greater than the escape velocity. If you throw a ball into the air, did it leave the surface of the Earth? Certainly! Did it escape from the Earth? No; it falls back to ground. 

Now, on the other hand, it is also claimed that nothing can even leave the event horizon of a black hole, let alone escape. Things can only go into a black hole but nothing can even leave or emerge, not even light. This property is often referred to by cosmologists as a ‘one-way membrane’ at the event horizon.

            “I had already discussed with Roger Penrose the idea of defining a black hole as a set of events from which it is not possible to escape to a large distance. It means that the boundary of the black hole, the event horizon, is formed by rays of light that just fail to get away from the black hole. Instead, they stay forever hovering on the edge of the black hole.”  [4]

Thus, Hawking [4] tells us that nothing can even leave the event horizon, because even light hovers at the event horizon, “forever”.

Professor Bland-Hawthorn [5] of the University of Sydney alleges a particularly curious escape velocity.

            “A black hole is, ah, a massive object, and it’s something which is so massive that light can’t even escape. … some objects are so massive that the escape speed is basically the speed of light and therefore not even light escapes. … so black holes themselves are, are basically inert, massive and nothing escapes.” [5]

Light travels at the speed of light, and according to Bland-Hawthorn the escape speed is the speed of light, from which he concludes that light can’t escape. Well, if the escape speed is the speed of light and light travels at the speed of light, then light not only leaves, it also certainly escapes.

Since all black holes are alleged to have an escape velocity and since nothing can even leave black holes, the cosmologists thoughtlessly claim that their black holes have and do no have an escape velocity simultaneously; which is quite impossible.

The Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is claimed by cosmologists to be the afterglow of some big bang, the type of which they never say. Various atmospheric balloons and rockets, and several satellites, have allegedly measured the temperature of this afterglow, the so-called mean temperature of the Universe or the monopole signal, and tiny variations therein called anisotropies. Yet the monopole signal has never been detected outside the influence of Earth. The Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) satellite was only orbiting Earth at an altitude of about 950 km. The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) and the Planck spacecraft were located at the Second Lagrange point, L2, which is some 1.5 million km from Earth, on Earth’s far side from the Sun. sun earth

COBE carried two instruments: (a) the Far Infrared Absolute Spectrophotometer (FIRAS), and (2) the Differential Microwave Radiometers (DMR). FIRAS allegedly measured the monopole signal of the CMB and DMR the so-called anisotropies in the CMB. WMAP was a differential instrument and so was incapable of detecting a monopole signal – it could only address anisotropies. The Planck spacecraft carried two instruments: (1) the Low Frequency Instrument (LFI), and (2) the High Frequency Instrument (HFI). Also aboard Planck were two 4 Kelvin blackbody loads for the LFI to compare to. Although the Planck LFI was able to make both absolute and differential measurements, the Planck team has never reported detection of a monopole signal at L2. Thus, no monopole signal has ever been found beyond the influence of Earth.

Did any of these instruments actually detect microwaves from the Cosmos? If you put a glass of water in a microwave oven and turn it on, does the water reflect or absorb the microwaves? A microwave oven emits microwaves – that’s why it’s called a microwave oven. The water placed inside it gets hot, and if left there long enough, vaporises. The same happens to a block of ice. Submariners also know that water absorbs microwaves. Radio communications by microwaves can’t be used for submarines when under water because the oceans and seas completely absorb them rapidly over a very short distance. Now it is well known from experiments that anything that absorbs also emits in the same frequencies, and so that which absorbs microwaves also emits microwaves. Thus water also emits microwaves in all its phases (solid, liquid, gas). About 70% of the surface of the Earth is covered by water, and there is water in the atmosphere. The atmosphere scatters radiation and microwaves are radiation. COBE-FIRAS carried a radiation shield, but this shield could not block microwaves from Earth because it was not designed for microwaves. All detections of the monopole signal have been from water on Earth, not from the Cosmos. All the alleged anisotropies are nothing but data-processing artefacts due to attempts to remove the microwave radiation from the foreground of the Milky Way, present in the microwave images. The alleged anisotropies are some 1 million times weaker than the monopole signal and some 1000 times weaker than the microwave noise due to the Milky Way. It is simply impossible for the spacecraft detectors to recover such a weak signal from such a strong enveloping noise level, even on the assumption that the anisotropies are present. However, they are not there, since there is no CMB. The so-called CMB does not come from the Cosmos [6, 7, 8].

There are a great many additional demonstrations that black holes, big bangs, and the Cosmic Microwave Background are figments of irrational imagination [9, 10, 11, 12, 13] but I will not detail them here. I was invited to present a talk about these and related matters at the Electric Universe conference held in Albuquerque, USA, in March 2014. My presentation, of which this article has been an overview, was recorded and is now freely accessible online:

Crothers, S. J., ‘The Parallax Effect on Short Hair’,




[2] Dictionary of Geophysics, Astrophysics, and Astronomy, Matzner, R. A., Ed., CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, LA, 2001.\%20of\%20Geophysics,\%20Astrophysics\%20and\%20Astronomy.pdf

[3] Hawking, S. W., The Theory of Everything, The Origin and Fate of the Universe, New Millennium Press, Beverly Hills, CA, 2002.

[4] Hawking, S. W., The Theory of Everything, The Origin and Fate of the Universe, New Millennium Press, Beverly Hills, CA, 2002.

[5] Bland-Hawthorn, J., ABC News, station ABC1, Australia, 24 Sept 2013.

[6] Robitaille P.-M., WMAP: A Radiological Analysis, Progress in Physics, v.1, pp. 3-18, 2007,

[7] Robitaille P.-M., COBE: A Radiological Analysis, Progress in Physics, v.4, pp. 17-42, 2009,

[8] Robitaille P.-M., The Planck Satellite LFI and the Microwave Background: Importance of the 4K Reference Targets,  Progress in Physics, v.3, pp. 11-18, 2010,

[9] Crothers, S. J., Flaws in Black Hole Theory and General Relativity, for the Proceedings of the XXIXth International Workshop on High Energy Physics, Protvino, Russia, 26-28 June 2013,

[10] Crothers, S. J., Black Hole and Big Bang:  A Simplified Refutation,

[11] Crothers, S. J., On The ‘Stupid’ Paper by Fromholz, Poisson and Will,

[12] Robitaille, P.-M., On the validity of Kirchhoff’s Law,

[13] Robitaille, P.-M., The Cosmic Microwave Background,


Comments (7)

  • Avatar

    rRichard P. Bauman


    You are generally right about current theories in physics. It wouild help if you also had a theory to replace them. Please contack me if you are interested in a rather simple and inclusive one.

  • Avatar



    Fantastic demonstration of reason and philosophy. Just about anyone with a brain could see the big bang universe postulate and the existence of black holes postulate would not even come close to passing simple philosophical test. Indeed, so many things in so many branches of what is assumed to be science cannot pass simple philosophical test and thereby render themselves invalid. What passes for science today approaches being a joke. Big bang and black holes are two of these preposterous jokes of the feeble mind. There are so many more today a reasonable count would be impossible.

  • Avatar

    david ursiny


    The problem is their group think world, and the belief in a mechanical improbability, the singularity in the broth of the universe and transferring that concept to a black hole, add that to their lack of knowledge of the mechanical workings and parts layout of the internal mechanics in the star, which even leads them to a false measure of the mechanics of nova , space is perpetual its an environment of sub atomic particles, that protons are manufactured from thru their super conductive properties, that are formed into protons by magnetic field waves and induction of those particles they capture an electron in that induction process to be born into a self sustaining hydrogen atom, to build a universe. You need an unlimited supply of those.and the parts and process to manufacture them, for stars to be possible to make the other elements atoms on the element chart, the hydrogen atom is the only atom not made in a star,,then their conception of the structure of a black hole is ridiculous, made from a collapsing star its just a compression of the sub atomic core containment walls of the stars fission chamber your not crushing sub atomic parts into a tiny point of a singularity, and when that core is crush the volume of that empty chamber has to escape to crush it that’s would be two holes a upper and lower one at the pole positions so the newly formed black hole structure is a mass core of sub atomic particles with two gate openings with two event horizons upper and lower it has one job now to strip the electromagnetic bonds off of atoms and collect neutral sub atomic parts for the future its a container of mass that has a structural limit just like stars have on their structural expansion , with the end results of collecting the atoms of a trillion stars over it life of 200 billion years in which it meets its structural limit, and the over populated inner galactic core is full of fuel by then and a neutron star that orbits it eventually using velocity,mass matter density, and kinetic energy penetrates the perimeter radius of it to enter in the wrong way which is the cause of a black hole inner galactic core explosion big bang that throws the outer galactic rings of stars and mini black holes out expanding away into space followed by all the galactic electrons and the contents of the black holes sub atomic particles to reseed an environment to make a new universe with the parts and processes already in existence from the old universe the perpetual universe,

  • Avatar



    The ‘father of big bang’ presented his red shift data in 1928 and Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington seized on it claiming the ‘expanding Universe’ hypothesis, quickly nicknamed the big bang. This hypothesis was based on measurements made by the 100 inch Hooker telescope at Mount Wilson and showed light, estimated at 3.8 billion light-years distance, moving at an astronomical 25,000 miles per second. In a Dec 14, 1936 interview, “Shift on Shift” with Time magazine, this “Dr X” stated this was farcical and that with the new 200″ Mount Palomar telescope with four times the light gathering power the Universe would be 13 billion years old with that ‘edge’ moving at 100,000 miles per second.

    See “Mysterious ‘Dr X’ says Universe is NOT Expanding” at the FauxScienceSlayer site.

  • Avatar

    Pat Obar


    What a wonderful article, demonstrating how far current “science” has drifted from anything “physical”.

    The “physical” is but a small subset of the “real” which must include all fantasy, deceit, conjecture, and the deliberate fraud such as “greenhouse effect” or “catastrophic anthropogenic global warming” with not even one of those six words defined sufficiently, so others may discern easily “what may be part of, and what is not part of”.
    The physical can repeatably be measured by different earthlings, because the physical persists, not transient. Even if those earthlings have little or no knowledge of “what it is that was measured”. (the most common case, even after thousands of aw shits.)
    If the measurement is repeatable, only than we can try to figure out “what was measured”.
    In every case, each aw shit is more pristine, (never to be amalgamated), than any understanding. That single (aw shit) is the only chance of measuring some part of the “physical” at that interval of time. Every physical measurement is an outlier, never to be discarded.
    Why do your arrogant academics claim they know, via statistics? Statistics are fine for actuaries, never for the tricky physical. Are your academics writing insurance policies?

  • Avatar

    phil francis


    An excellent and simple to comprehend explanation of the ridiculous nature of traditional thinking, nice one Stephen.

  • Avatar



    I have long thought the black holes idea to be full of holes.

    They are still thinking there is one at the center of the Milky Way galaxy,despite never making a credible case for one.

    They should get back to working on gathering actual evidence before they make any kind of case for something that maybe is going on in the universe.

Comments are closed