PDA

View Full Version : Discussion: Hawking Revises Black Hole Theory



Fraser
2004-Jul-19, 04:24 PM
SUMMARY: Stephen Hawking has reconsidered his long-held opinion that black holes destroy information that goes into them. Originally he believed that when matter was added to a black hole, all aspects of the particles are stripped away, leaving only their mass and spin. Hawking has been thinking about the problem for 30 years, and now believes that the information is maintained. He has cryptically said that black holes only appear to form, but later open up and release information about what fell inside. He's expected to explain more fully at an astrophysics conference this week.

What do you think about this story? Post your comments below.

singularity-graviton
2004-Jul-19, 04:55 PM
this should be good to see what is released next, I think is should be a great area of research we could be making some big breakthroughs now

Tinaa
2004-Jul-19, 05:02 PM
What kind of information is retained? Charge?

Duane
2004-Jul-19, 05:34 PM
As I understand it Tinaa, the information retained is related to strings. Very (very!) basically, the matter in a black hole is reduced to the primordal strings which seem to make up all matter. I assume that if the BH opens up, the strings would be released to reform the constituant matter they were before they were incorporated into the BH.

Tinaa
2004-Jul-19, 05:48 PM
So where/when/how does Hawking Radiation come in?

Duane
2004-Jul-19, 05:51 PM
Hawking radiation is the mechanism by which a black hole can shed mass. If enough mass is removed, the BH might be able to re-appear.

Guest
2004-Jul-19, 06:08 PM
More idle speculation, that proves nothing.

So-called blackholes supports contained vortex motion,in free space, not event horizons, and all the other rediculous attributes of mathematical fantasy.

Wave motion supports the moving elecromagnetic wave spectrum in free space.

Prime

Duane
2004-Jul-19, 06:30 PM
Prime, you don't make much sense, although I think it is a language thing. If you are trying to promote the concept of an electric universe, I would invite you to join the discussion at http://www.universetoday.com/forum/index.p...wtopic=1919&hl= (http://www.universetoday.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=1919&hl=).

Please do not continually promote your pet theory in these Story Comments threads, as this violates Rule 6 of this forum. From this point forward, be aware that such posts will be edited or deleted, unless they are specifically on topic.

Keely
2004-Jul-19, 08:00 PM
I wrote a thesis in my astronomy class last semester that was all about wormholes.
In that paper I challenged the ideas of Mr. Hawkings stating that...I didn't belive in the singularity. Now, this new developement...stating that information can escape will, I believe ultimately lead to re-thinking the entire idea behing the singularity and therefore bring to light that wormholes can form. I was right! i think...i hope...any comments? :D B) :P

antoniseb
2004-Jul-19, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by Keely@Jul 19 2004, 08:00 PM
I was right!
So, that would make you smarter than Stephen Hawking. Nice Going. Can you explain how this makes it possible for worm-holes to form?

StarLab
2004-Jul-19, 11:48 PM
Well, something I'd like to know is: what is the function of the singularity?

And also, Duane earlier was talking about BH's "opening up." Mind telling me, someone, how and when this might occur?

James Friesen
2004-Jul-20, 02:03 AM
I think black hole evaporation goes like this:

The Hawking radiation occurs when random pairs of virtual particles occur in space above the event horizon. If one pair falls into the black hole, and if it has a negative charge, then the remaining positive particle adds its positive charge to the rest of the universe, or something like that, creating a net gain for the universe and a net loss for the black hole.

As for how information could escape from the event horizon, Hawking could produce almost anything. Here are some speculations:

...Perhaps the black hole is somehow passively selective in the types of virtual particles it sucks up, thus leaving telltales behind in the type of opposite particle that escapes.

...Perhaps the two virtual particles are 'entangled' and information escapes when the swallowed up particle reacts with energy inside the black hole, thus instantaneously affecting the behavior of the opposite particle, and thus revealing something of the goings-on within the black hole.

...Like a wormhole, perhaps the black hole represents the fabric of space being stretched into the future or the past (i.e. the so called fourth dimension.) If it goes to the future, then perhaps we eventually catch up to it and it turns from a black hole into a white(?) hole or something, with energy pouring out of it. If it goes backwards in time, then maybe the energy is released at the beginning of our current universe. If all black holes deposited their contents in the same way, and if all matter eventually made the trip, then the universe would be a closed system replenishing itself continuosly.

That's all I can think of for now. Unless, maybe the Black Holes were designed by Microsoft and one day they will all crash. "This event horizon has performed an illegal function and will be terminated."

Guest
2004-Jul-20, 05:36 AM
Minor corrections.

Virtual particle pairs occur WITHIN the event horizon, hence why they reduce the mass of the BH. The event horizon is the furthest point light can get to before getting sucked back in, IF it were to leave from the surface of the singularity. Since the virtual pair occurs within the event horizon but further away than the surface, one particle can potentially escape.

A BH can explode violently once it loses enough mass. The more mass it loses, the more quickly it 'evaporates'. Once it reaches a certain point(maybe about the mass of the sun), it evaporates so quickly it explodes. The speed of evaporation is essentially a measurement of temperature. Black body radiation, so to speak.

The black hole at the center of our galaxy is millions of times the mass of the sun, and is gaining more mass than it's losing. So not all black holes are expected to explode. In fact, very few are expected to. None witnessed so far, to my knowledge.

Guest
2004-Jul-20, 05:49 AM
Hazzah!

http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/hawk.html

Eric Vaxxine
2004-Jul-20, 12:59 PM
(I'm no scientist) Is there a Black Hole equivalent in particle physics? Can results be extrapolated from such research?

Kevin
2004-Jul-20, 07:29 PM
I'm confused about the BH blowing up. I thought I was tuaght that they go on forever. This seemed rediculous to me becuase nothing goes on forever, IE. the big bang. Do we have any evedance of BH blowing up and what is left over afterwards? Thanks for any info. B)

Guest
2004-Jul-20, 08:36 PM
The singularity is considered quantum mechanical, as far as I know. I am no scientist either, just a curious engineer. The event horizon however is described by general relativity. If this conflict is resolved, it could be a huge step towards merging both theories. Every black hole creates a singularity. Once a star begins to collapse into a BH, there is nothing to stop it. It shrinks to a point and then some(so to speak). The actual matter in a black hole takes up no space. Try describing that with relativity. Even quantum mechanics has problems. It assumes matter is a fuzzy point. String theory is the only theory that places a limit on how small the actual matter of a BH can be.

Black hole evaporation has a few problems.

1) It takes about 2-3 solar masses to create one. But once it collapses into a singularity, it needs to lose a fair amount of mass before it explodes.

2) The chances of losing enough mass to explode are slim. VERY slim. Black holes take a very long time to evaporate. The bigger they are, the more slowly they evaporate. So you would need a very small, very remote black hole in order to witness this incredible event. I doubt any black hole will ever be seen to explode. The cosmos would probably decay before that happened.

What is important is that it is possible for matter to escape a black hole. So black holes are not completely black, and have a temperature. Although the matter coming out of a black hole paints a very fuzzy picture and tells us nothing of what is inside the BH. This escaping matter has properties related to the current size of the BH. This matter literally pops out of thin air, it is not matter that has fallen in.

Eric Vaxxine
2004-Jul-21, 12:09 PM
I always end up writing my questions late, when infact, I'm here before you guys wake up. It is really annoying always chasing the bus.

Guest_khuras
2004-Aug-10, 12:47 PM
Hi

I am not a scientist of Prof Hawkings callibre but that should not disqualify me from differing with him or any other oh callibre.

Firstly, I think the universe is readily 'open' to yield any information the we, human may demand of it, only we have to have the necessary equipment and understanding for us to get that information. So, for almost as long as 30yrs I have been sceptical about the unwillingness of the black hole to reveal what it has inside.

I yet have to read Prof Hawkings' new theory

Khuras