Whoever said this seems to think that there is not enough direct evidence for black holes. However, I understand there is enough evidence to believe that black holes actually exist - including the observation of many, many objects that can only be black holes.
Our modern understanding of black holes is based on the General Theory of Relativity.
stellar black holes, no none at allhawking black holes, no none at allsuper massive black holes at galactic centers, no none at alluniversal black holes, yes we are an example, if the entire universe is indeed inside an ultra massive black hole as would be suggested by the combination of big bang theory and black hole theory
There are no "black stars" in space. There are black holes, but they don't really "mean" anything, they're just a thing that theory predicts can happen and observation suggests does seem to actually exist.
1916, Albert Einstein came up with the theory about Black Hole.
There have been a few prominent Indian cosmologists who have worked on black holes but you are probably thinking of Jayant Narlkiar.
The existence of black holes is an outgrowth or prediction of General Relativity, which was Einstein's theory of gravitation. The dominant force forming black holes is the force of gravity, a universal attraction between mass.
Because according to the theory of black holes and white holes their are several different universes.
a theory on how black holes exert radiation
A black hole? well scientist are not sure. Black holes is a theory, not proving to be true. But there could be.
Because according to the theory of black holes and white holes their are several different universes.
His major contribution to the theory of black holes is that they will gradually evaporate, due to certain quantum effects close to the event horizon.
This will help the world by helping us more understand about black holes for when we are able to travel farther into the universe.