Hossenfelder: Today I comment on the recent claim that the black hole information loss problem is “near its end” and explain why this is nonsense.
Ethan Siegel looks at the limitations: But we’re still a long way away from determining exactly where that information goes, and how it gets out of a black hole. Theorists disagree over the validity and soundness of many of the methods that are currently being employed to do these calculations, and no one has even a theoretical prediction for how this information should be encoded by an evaporating black hole, much less how to measure it.
Sheldon: Black Holes are a theoretical and empirical disaster. Given two possible assumptions to Schwarzschild’s solution of Einstein’s gravity equation, nearly everyone has taken the discontinuous, unphysical, “event-horizon” assumption leading to “Black Holes”. One of the many predictions of BH, is that they cannot have magnetic fields, and they destroy anything that falls into them, converting all that matter into “Hawking radiation”. What about all that data showing high density objects at the center of our galaxy and neighboring galaxies?
It all sounds so much like religion, actually, but maybe that’s the direction in which High Science is heading.
Can’t help but make one wonder how much else in popular science literature is wrong but sells books.
Dvorsky: Astronomers are puzzling over observations that show a black hole smashing into a mystery object of unusual size.
At Quanta: In the latest surprise, that link turns out to exemplify a general fact about nature. In a paper published in March in Physical Review Letters, Goon and Riccardo Penco broadened the lessons of the earlier work by proving a simple, universal formula relating energy and entropy. The newfound formula applies to a system such as a gas as well as a black hole.
Your experiment to get to the bottom of gravity collapses into a black hole? Well, that’s just gravity’s way of declining an interview. Suck it up. 😉
Why not?: “The group found that for both types of black holes they examined, there is indeed a central singularity, and it is always spacelike. “
Researcher: “We cannot understand the data unless we include the theories of relativity.” …
Her view: Most physicists believe that the solution is that the Hawking radiation somehow must contain information after all.
Regis Nicoll: Stephen Hawking had for many years considered the idea that “black holes are birthing centers for Star Trek phenomena like wormholes, time tunnels and multiple universes.” Then, in 2004, he turned on the idea.
Not really being able to integrate information with matter and energy surely means it is hard to say whether information could really be destroyed.
The black hole has always occupied a sort of space in the middle, between science and philosophy. It’s good to see that acknowledged. From ScienceDaily: Erik Curiel studied Philosophy as well as Theoretical Physics at Harvard University and the University of Chicago, and the primary aim of his current DFG-funded research project is to develop Read More…
According to a new paper, white holes, the theoretical opposite of black holes, may account for dark matter, and may even predate the universe. They may even, according to Carlo Rovelli, explain the direction of time: A black hole is one prediction of Einstein’s theory of general relativity. Another is known as a white hole, Read More…