**On the supermassive collapsed star alternative to a “Black Hole”**

When a star has burnt up all of its nuclear fuel, it collapses under its own gravitational field. The received wisdom is that no other force of nature is strong enough to resist the gravitational attraction, so, if the total mass of the collapsing star exceeds three solar masses, it ends up with a radius of zero, as a “black hole”. However, the property that the field itself has energy and therefore a gravitational mass (with negative sign) allows an alternative solution. Even when we* neglect all the other forces of nature*, the gravity field itself becomes repulsive, giving solutions where most of the original stellar material concentrates in a thin surface shell. The concept of the propagating field is fundamental to Einstein’s theory of gravity, particularly in the article of 1918 that deals with gravitational waves. Armed with it, I have been able to analyse in detail the trajectories of all the material points of an idealized cold star, known as a *dust ball*. No matter how big the ball, it collapses into a shell rather than a black hole. My new article *Fields tell matter how to move* reports the discovery of the limit characteristic curve, in the limit of time tending to +infinity. This curve replaces the so-called “event horizon” of black-hole theory, but for us there is no ‘other side’ of the limit characteristic, just as is there is no ‘beyond’ infinity.

### Like this:

Like Loading...

*Related*

Pingback: ‘The Big Questions’ – do physicists agree? | Crisis-in-Physics

By plotting the masses against the densities of astrophysical objects on a logarithmic scale General Relativity comes to an abrupt wall at the Schwarzschild radius (near the Chandrasekhar mass). Simply seeing the graph of this, to my mind, casts serious doubts on the whole Black Hole Enterprise, among other things. See:

http://vixra.org/abs/1507.0155