Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Researchers may have solved information loss paradox to find black holes do not form
PhysOrg ^ | 6/20/07

Posted on 06/20/2007 4:12:14 PM PDT by LibWhacker

"Nothing there," is what Case Western Reserve University physicists concluded about black holes after spending a year working on complex formulas to calculate the formation of new black holes. In nearly 13 printed pages with a host of calculations, the research may solve the information loss paradox that has perplexed physicists for the past 40 years.

Case physicists Tanmay Vachaspati, Dejan Stojkovic and Lawrence M. Krauss report in the article, "Observation of Incipient Black Holes and the Information Loss Problem,” that has been accepted for publication by Physical Review D.

"It's complicated and very complex," noted the researchers, regarding both the general problem and their particular approach to try to solve it.

The question that the physicists set out to solve is: what happens once something collapses into a black hole" If all information about the collapsing matter is lost, it defies the laws of quantum physics. Yet, in current thinking, once the matter goes over the event horizon and forms a black hole, all information about it is lost.

"If you define the black hole as some place where you can lose objects, then there is no such thing because the black hole evaporates before anything is seen to fall in," said Vachaspati.

The masses on the edge of the incipient black hole continue to appear into infinity that they are collapsing but never fall over inside what is known as the event horizon, the region from which there is no return, according to the researchers.

By starting out with something that was nonsingular and then collapsing that matter, they were determined to see if an event horizon formed, signaling the creation of a black hole.

The mass shrinks in size, but it never gets to collapse inside an event horizon due to evidence of pre-Hawking radiation, a non-thermal radiation that allows information of the nature of what is collapsing to be recovered far from the collapsing mass.

"Non-thermal radiation can carry information in it unlike thermal radiation. This means that an outside observer watching some object collapse receives non-thermal radiation back and may be able to reconstruct all the information in the initial object and so the information never gets lost," they said.

According to the researchers, if black holes exist, information formed in the initial state would disappear in the black hole through a burst of thermal radiation that carries no information about the initial state.

Using the functional Schrodinger formalism, the researchers suggest that information about the energy from radiation is long evaporated before an event horizon forms.

"An outside observer will never lose an object down a black hole," said Stojkovic. "If you are sitting outside and throwing something into the black hole, it will never pass over but will stay outside the event horizon even if one considers the effects of quantum mechanics. In fact, since in quantum mechanics the observer plays an important role in measurement, the question of formation of an event horizon is much more subtle to consider."

The physicists are quick to assure astronomers and astrophysicists that what is observed in gravity pulling masses together still holds true, but what is controversial about the new finding is that "from an external viewer's point it takes an infinite amount of time to form an event horizon and that the clock for the objects falling into the black hole appears to slow down to zero," said Krauss, director of Case's Center for Education and Research in Cosmology.

He continued "this is one of the factors that led us to rethink this problem, and we hope our proposal at the very least will stimulate a broader reconsideration of these issues."

If black holes exist in the universe, the astrophysicists speculate they were formed only at the beginning of time.

Source: Case Western Reserve University


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: blackholes; information; loss; paradox; physics; science

1 posted on 06/20/2007 4:12:18 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

I’m afraid I’m gonna need to see those 13 pages of calculations before I can comment further on this article.


2 posted on 06/20/2007 4:15:00 PM PDT by Dysart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

I understand this stuff much better after a few beers.


3 posted on 06/20/2007 4:15:49 PM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Say it isn’t so. Now what will we use as an excuse when we lose something?


4 posted on 06/20/2007 4:16:19 PM PDT by w1andsodidwe (Jimmy Carter allowed radical Islam to get a foothold in Iran.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

The event horizon would have to be made of socks, pencils, and keys.


5 posted on 06/20/2007 4:19:49 PM PDT by xcamel ("It's Thompson Time!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Bunny... pancake...


6 posted on 06/20/2007 4:22:49 PM PDT by Luke Skyfreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

this arguement doesn’t hold. Sandy Burglar has proven that black holes exist!!


7 posted on 06/20/2007 4:25:19 PM PDT by bubman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xcamel
unmatched sock singularities, tons of them
8 posted on 06/20/2007 4:26:40 PM PDT by NonValueAdded (Brian J. Marotta, 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub, (1948-2007) Rest In Peace, our FRiend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
Doesn't it say that at the event horizon, time stops...so that any object falling into a black hole APPEARS to an outside observer to never quite cross the horizon?

One has to wonder what the perception of a person who is falling into a black hole would be...is the warp in space/time so severe that the person falling in would perceive an ever increasing acceleration and compression until unity with the core mass is achieved...but that it appears to take "forever" to an outside observer?

9 posted on 06/20/2007 4:27:18 PM PDT by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

If we have anyone interested in astronomy here, the following is a VERY interesting link.

Florida State University in Tallahassee, Florida has put up a very interesting page
on their site. It begins as a view of the Milky Way Galaxy viewed from a distance of
10 million light years and then zooms
in towards Earth in powers of ten. 10 million, to one million, to 100,000 light
years and then it finally reaches a large Oak tree. If ever there was a witness to
the glory of creation (and perspective), they have captured it for our viewing
pleasure!

Once you click on the site, the software does all the work. Sit back and try to
imagine how perfect our universe is! Amazing!

Click on the link below to view this.

http://micro.magnet.fsu.edu/primer/java/scienceopticsu/powersof10/index.html


10 posted on 06/20/2007 4:27:33 PM PDT by yorkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Uh... oh... according to the underlying research behind these findings, this appears to be ample proof that Algore not only does not currently exist, but never existed in the first place.


11 posted on 06/20/2007 4:32:24 PM PDT by C210N (Bush SPIED, Terrorists DIED!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Was there a beginning in time? What happened in the eons upon eons before then?


12 posted on 06/20/2007 4:38:25 PM PDT by kcar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

“If black holes exist in the universe, the astrophysicists speculate they were formed only at the beginning of time.”

What?

I thought a star of certain mass, particularly one with a binary companion from which to draw further mass, would form a black hole on collapse.

Are they saying that time dilation actually prevents a black hole from forming over the life of the universe, hence there can be none?


13 posted on 06/20/2007 4:58:31 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

It’s spaghettification, I tell ya! Spaghettification!


14 posted on 06/20/2007 5:04:09 PM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ("Don't touch that thing")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
"I’m afraid I’m gonna need to see those 13 pages of calculations before I can comment further on this article."

If you'll do the first 7, I'll handle the last 7.

Oops!!

15 posted on 06/20/2007 5:09:18 PM PDT by muir_redwoods (Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Here is a key phrase from the article, which reveals how much they are certain of:

"If black holes exist in the universe...."

And if I read this correctly, they are saying black holes cannot be created, but maybe some exist from the beginning of the universe. Those are big maybes and certainly raise the question what are all the black holes scientists think exist, if it turns out they aren't black holes?

16 posted on 06/20/2007 5:09:37 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

You got a deel!


17 posted on 06/20/2007 5:10:49 PM PDT by Dysart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kcar

Funny how we can imagine time having no end, but it’s difficult to imagine it never having had a beginning.


18 posted on 06/20/2007 5:14:50 PM PDT by P.O.E. (Vote Hillary in '08 - let's restore America's silverware to the White House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
Are they saying that time dilation actually prevents a black hole from forming over the life of the universe, hence there can be none?

Yep, that's what I'm getting out of it. The classic black hole with all its familiar properties, which froms a collapsing star, simply cannot exist, because everything freezes at the event horizon. Nothing "disappears" from our universe. At least from the outsider's point of view.

19 posted on 06/20/2007 5:17:45 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MacDorcha

PFL


20 posted on 06/20/2007 5:19:20 PM PDT by MacDorcha (study links agenda-driven morons and junk science...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

There’s something there. It’s just not as described in the literature. Information is not lost.


21 posted on 06/20/2007 5:20:47 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: kcar
Watched a show on the Science Channel recently about string theory/M-theory and (some) physicists are beginning to answer some of those questions... the theory involved giant rippling membranes floating around in 13-dimensional space, occasionally colliding... wherever they touch a new universe is created. Believe me, I didn't understand it, lol.

What's fun is when they start talking about creating an entire universe in the lab, one that is just as large as ours, has just as much matter in it, and one that will hyper-expand just as rapidly ours. But don't worry. It won't hurt us. It'll make its own space as it goes through its Big Bang period and not intrude into ours.

22 posted on 06/20/2007 5:32:31 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

NOT GUILTY!!

Oops... Wrong thread.

My bad.


23 posted on 06/20/2007 5:35:56 PM PDT by Redcloak (The 2nd Amendment isn't about sporting goods.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
...all its familiar properties, which froms FROM a collapsing star...
24 posted on 06/20/2007 5:36:11 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

WHICH FORMS FROM!!!

i give :-(


25 posted on 06/20/2007 5:38:03 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Actually, no observer would survive long enough to find out. Tidal forces would rip them to pieces long before they reached the event horizon.


26 posted on 06/20/2007 5:41:33 PM PDT by irv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: yorkie

Quite fascinating. Thank you for the link. We live our normal lives in a very narrow range of physical magnitudes.


27 posted on 06/20/2007 5:49:26 PM PDT by Blennos (Baton Rouge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

My brain hurts. The bit in quantum physics about observations being effected by the fact of observation gives me the willies. Going back to pondering why any Republicans would support this amnesty bill.


28 posted on 06/20/2007 5:56:40 PM PDT by kcar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Tidal effects would be lethal long before getting to the event horizon. Assuming The invention of gravity opaque paint (I think H.G. Wells originally came up with the idea) and you survived the tidal forces, you would perceive yourself falling headlong towards the black hole. If somebody 10 billion years from now could retrieve you, you would perceive them pulling you out in the nick of time.

Very similar to the speed of light. If you could constantly accelerate at one gravity, you would eventually percieve that you were traveling faster than the speed of light but outside observers would see us as slowly approaching the speed of light but never reaching it. From the perspective of a photon, it is emitted from a star and instantly appears at it’s destination but from our perspective, they can take billions of years to reach us.


29 posted on 06/20/2007 6:09:49 PM PDT by dangerdoc (dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: gcruse

They are trying to say, a point singularity cannot form. The collapsing matter will form something that from our perspective is a black hole but in reality is something different.

The object will be terribly dense but over the course of eternity will never form the classic singularity.


30 posted on 06/20/2007 6:16:21 PM PDT by dangerdoc (dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc
So if time slows to a near stop for someone inside the event horizon would outside observers be able to view this happening? Or would no light make it outside and look as if that person just vaporized?
31 posted on 06/20/2007 6:25:59 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

Another question...how do photons “travel” then do they pass through some sort of “subspace” or another dimension to get to it’s destination?


32 posted on 06/20/2007 6:29:29 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: gcruse

there is no such thing as “time” in and of itself. “time” is delta kinetic energy. Don’t think so? Demonstrate a time event that is NOT a kinetic energy event.


33 posted on 06/20/2007 6:33:27 PM PDT by timer (n/0=n=nx0)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: timer

I’d certainly never argue time with someone named timer. ;)


34 posted on 06/20/2007 7:12:47 PM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA

Ok, I have had a few beers……… If they claim that an outside observer cannot distinguish an object passing through the event horizon because “it will never pass over”, considering the effects of quantum mechanics. Where the object takes an infinite amount of time to pass over the event horizon, why would the observer be prevented from collecting any data from it assuming the observer would not be effected by the event itself? The only other question I want an answer to is, why is a duck?, and if so, why not?


35 posted on 06/20/2007 7:36:56 PM PDT by READINABLUESTATE ("life is dangerous")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

From our perspective, they would redshift to the point we could no longer measure the light.


36 posted on 06/20/2007 7:37:58 PM PDT by dangerdoc (dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: READINABLUESTATE

BECAUSE!


37 posted on 06/20/2007 7:40:03 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

From a newtonian stand point, it is a little massless cannon ball that plods along at the speed of light unless, it interacts with something.

From a quantum standpoint, it is something entirely different that can only really be described by mathmatical formulas.


38 posted on 06/20/2007 7:42:09 PM PDT by dangerdoc (dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dangerdoc

This is really fascinating stuff that makes my head spin. Do you have any links to some sites that explain quantum physics to dummies(if it can be done)? This stuff goes way beyond my college physics and math.


39 posted on 06/20/2007 7:58:00 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

BECAUSE!

The event horizon, or the duck?

I wonder how many people world wide are following a conversation about a non-event, event horizon? (another question one beer later)


40 posted on 06/20/2007 8:09:11 PM PDT by READINABLUESTATE ("life is dangerous")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase

No links, sorry.

Just alot of casual reading. There are quite a few books written for lay people.


41 posted on 06/20/2007 8:12:47 PM PDT by dangerdoc (dangerdoc (not actually dangerous any more))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

One has to wonder what the perception of a person who is falling into a black hole would be...is the warp in space/time so severe that the person falling in would perceive an ever increasing acceleration and compression until unity with the core mass is achieved...but that it appears to take “forever” to an outside observer?


It would suck. It would really, really suck.


42 posted on 06/20/2007 8:23:50 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kcar
Was there a beginning in time? What happened in the eons upon eons before then?

Think of time in the purely scientific form. You can determine the time between two events if you know their coordinates and the velocity of propagation. This statement has no meaning if you take away the coordinate system. You can't measure the time before events before the universe was created unless you strictly assume that space existed before the Big Bang into which our universe expanded. Saying 'before' attributes more characteristics to time than have been defined by science.

43 posted on 06/20/2007 8:24:58 PM PDT by burzum (None shall see me, though my battlecry may give me away -Minsc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: READINABLUESTATE; miliantnutcase

All you need to know is it’s turtles all the way down.


44 posted on 06/20/2007 8:29:51 PM PDT by Grizzled Bear ("Does not play well with others.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: burzum

To hell you say?!


45 posted on 06/20/2007 8:29:52 PM PDT by kcar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: irv

I agree on the tidal forces and the big stretch...I was speaking hypothetically.


46 posted on 06/20/2007 8:47:35 PM PDT by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: gcruse

If you knew your Quantum Mechanics, ala Professor Feynman, you’d learn a whole new chapter in physics, IF you knew your QM...


47 posted on 06/20/2007 11:47:43 PM PDT by timer (n/0=n=nx0)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: timer

Compared to the average person, I’m a professor of not only QM but quantum chromodynamics. Compared to someone who understands QM, if there is such person, I am clueless.


48 posted on 06/21/2007 7:01:37 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson