Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

“Black holes do not exist”


That was the shocking headline in 2005 in prestigious scientific journal Nature:

Black holes are staples of science fiction and many think astronomers have observed them indirectly. But according to a physicist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, these awesome breaches in space-time do not and indeed cannot exist.

Black holes are one of the most celebrated predictions of Einstein’s general theory of relativity, which explains gravity as the warping of space-time caused by massive objects. The theory suggests that a sufficiently massive star, when it dies, will collapse under its own gravity to a single point.

George Chapline thinks that the collapse of the massive stars, which was long believed to generate black holes, actually leads to the formation of stars that contain dark energy. “It’s a near certainty that black holes don’t exist,” he claims.

But Einstein didn’t believe in black holes, Chapline argues. “Unfortunately”, he adds, “he couldn’t articulate why.” At the root of the problem is the other revolutionary theory of twentieth-century physics, which Einstein also helped to formulate: quantum mechanics.

In general relativity, there is no such thing as a ‘universal time’ that makes clocks tick at the same rate everywhere. Instead, gravity makes clocks run at different rates in different places. But quantum mechanics, which describes physical phenomena at infinitesimally small scales, is meaningful only if time is universal; if not, its equations make no sense.


Is Chapline alone in his views? Turns out Nobel Prize Winner Robert Laughlin co-authored papers with Chapline on the topic:

Emergent Relativity and the Physics of Black Hole Horizons.

I have no opinion, except to say, “Black holes have to be real, they told me so in school.”

1. The paper lists Laughlin at the Los Alamos National Laboratories
Creationist John Baumgardner also works at the Los Alamos National Laboratories.

2. even though the headline is old, I wasn’t aware of it until it came up in the discussion on distant starlight
Distant Starlight the thorn in the side of YEC

3. HT: UD commenter butifnot for linking to the scandalous website that got me thinking of these things a little more:
Comment on Distant Starlight

4. This has relevance to cosmology, which has some relevance to ID and a lot of relevance to creationist cosmology.

Back in 1977, Stephen Hawking of Cambridge University recently advanced his new theory regarding “black holes,” a term usually applied to remnants of stars that have collapsed after all their nuclear fuel has burned up. According to Hawking, the universe is virtually filled with “little black holes” no bigger than atomic particles. He holds that these “black holes” were formed of the primeval material of the universe. D. P. Doyle, director of education policy studies at Washington’s American Enterprise Institute, made an interesting point when writing an article for the Los Angeles Times: “Indeed . . . science everywhere reigns supreme. Our material abundance, our war machines, our computer toys, the air waves trembling with phantom TV images, the poisoned atmosphere and polluted water all bear mute testimony to the role and place of science.” Yet when it comes to scientific support of evolution, Doyle asked: “In what way is scientific evidence overwhelming?” His answer: “Of course, science simply beats creationism all hollow when it comes to describing dinosaurs, meteorites, fossils and big bangs. But at the center of the scientific enterprise is a nagging doubt, a sort of spiritual black hole.” This “spiritual black hole” exists because “any thoughtful person must, in the face of physical reality, wonder if there is any larger purpose to life,” explained the researcher. Though “science can explain how the world works,” Doyle warned: “At issue is the more important question about man’s role in the universe, man’s sense of purpose, his vision of a moral order—or, more important, the possibility of a moral order. The scientific evolutionists, who rail against creationism with the enthusiasm and finesse of Goliath, are in mortal danger of missing this critical point.” Barb
Anyone interested in following up on this post might be interested in heading here: www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com. I'm subscribed to Mr Crother's newsletters and I must say he makes a good argument. humbled
Only slightly related... but very interesting paradigm-shifting research on the cosmos' preferential relationship with Earth.
Is there a violation of the Copernican principle in radio sky? Singal 2013 Cornell University Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) observations from the WMAP satellite have shown some unexpected anisotropies, which surprisingly seem to be aligned with the ecliptic.... ...What is intriguing even further is why such anisotropies should lie about a great circle decided purely by the orientation of earth's rotation axis and/or the axis of its revolution around the sun? It looks as if these axes have a preferential placement in the larger scheme of things, implying an apparent breakdown of the Copernican principle or its more generalization, cosmological principle, upon which all modern cosmological theories are based upon.
http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.4134 From what I gather, there have been a couple more follow-up papers on this that reconfirm the observations. lifepsy
What evidence do we have for the existence of black holes? Astronomers have found convincing evidence for a supermassive black hole in the center of our own Milky Way galaxy, the galaxy NGC 4258, the giant elliptical galaxy M87, and several others. Scientists verified the existence of the black holes by studying the speed of the clouds of gas orbiting those regions. In 1994, Hubble Space Telescope data measured the mass of an unseen object at the center of M87. Based on the motion of the material whirling about the center, the object is estimated to be about 3 billion times the mass of our Sun and appears to be concentrated into a space smaller than our solar system. For many years, X-ray emissions from the double-star system Cygnus X-1 convinced many astronomers that the system contains a black hole. With more precise measurements available recently, the evidence for a black hole in Cygnus X-1 -- and about a dozen other systems -- is very strong. http://hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=64&cat=exotic 'Death Spiral' Around a Black Hole Yields Tantalizing Evidence of an Event Horizon January 11, 2001: The Hubble telescope may have, for the first time, provided direct evidence for the existence of black holes by observing how matter disappears when it falls beyond the "event horizon," the boundary between a black hole and the outside universe. Astronomers found their evidence by watching the fading and disappearance of pulses of ultraviolet light from clumps of hot gas swirling around a massive, compact object called Cygnus XR-1. This activity suggests that the hot gas fell into a black hole. http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2001/03 bornagain77
I never! This was taught to me as a fact! Just like macro-evolution! Andre
I love this stuff but I need a translation from the greek it's written in. lpadron
http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/archives/guests08/061108_sjcrothers.htm JGuy
http://www.thunderbolts.info/wp/2012/10/16/black-hole-surprise/ JGuy
http://www.thunderbolts.info/thunderblogs/archives/subject.htm#blackholes JGuy
How Are Black Holes Detected? - video http://www.space.com/10257-black-holes-detected.html bornagain77

Leave a Reply