Slashdot Mirror
Black Holes No More -- Introducing the Gravastar
Mark Eymer observes: "From the Space.com article: 'Emil Mottola of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and Pawel Mazur of the University of South Carolina suggest that instead of a star collapsing into a pinpoint of space with virtually infinite gravity, its matter is transformed into a spherical void surrounded by "an extremely durable form of matter never before experienced on Earth."' While these objects may abound in the universe, they also say that our entire universe may reside within a giant gravastar." This new theory attempts to fill holes in the currently accepted concept of the "black hole".
the /dev/null of the universe!
An article about Grevestars showed up in Scientific American a few months back I remember...
It was an interesting article, but they seemed to be a ways off from anything solid...so to speak.
FWIW, NASA ADS returns 22 abstracts.
"Dude... what if, like... our whole universe... is just one tiny atom... in the toenail of some giant dude?"
"Woah, dude."
Man, you should write scripts for the Matrix!
You can't take the sky from me...
Now Disney is going to have to refilm "The Black Hole"! For some reason I think that "The Spherical Void" just will not be as much of a hit with the little ones.
I never did research to investigate the black hole theories, nor will I do research on this. I'll leave that to others. But new ideas tend to be a positive thing, even if they may seem outlandish at first. And what's with this "self-professed scientists" title? It's not as if "credible leaders" in a field haven't been wrong before. I look forward to others looking into this. When Slashdot posts about an article that hasn't been peer-reviewed because it's new, someone complains because it's too new? geesh. I'm sure we have some knowledge members among the Slashdot audience that can tell us more. Maybe Slashdot posting the article brings it to their attention and peer-review will occur sooner. Maybe it's not worth reviewing. We'll see.
In times like these, it is helpful to remember that there have always been times like these. - Paul Harvey
Actually, anyone can upload papers to the archive (the main site is now at www.arXiv.org). There's no peer review involved -- that's why it's called a _preprint_ archive -- and no respectability is conferred by simply uploading a paper to it. The fact is that there's a lot of crap on arXiv (though not as much as you might expect), and there are also a lot of people who don't use arXiv.
But apart from that, your comment is irrelevant anyway since these two do have plenty of articles on the server, as seen in a previous reply to your post.
The author of this post asserts his moral rights.
For those of you with short memories, Slashdot covered the gravastar theory when it was announced last year.
See these articles:
Black Holes Disputed, 1/19/2002
Doubting the Existence of Black Holes, 3/26/2002
There must be black holes. That's how articles in the editors' database mysteriously disappear so they can be duped later.
Let me just say that every 4 months or so somebody writes a paper that tries to explain black holes as something other than black holes. Some of these papers are good, and some are not, but the fact remains that there are people out there who just don't like the idea of black holes and try to come up with other explainations.
Usually these explanations are far more complex physically than a black hole, so until I see a compelling, scientifically verifiably alternative to the theory of black holes I'll apply the principal of Occams Razor. I.e. The simplest answer is most likely the correct one. Theories that are 30 times more complex than black holes but are not measurably different I'll continue to ignore.
Memory fading, but I'll be close...
The title comes from the retelling of a story in Carl Sagan's Broca's Brain where a 17th century philosopher/physicist (which one I can't remember) is giving a lecture on how the Earth moves in the Solar System, floating in space. A woman stands and claims the theory is ridiculous. She states everyone knows that the Earth rests on the back of a giant turtle. To which the scientist asks, "Well then, what is the turtle resting on?"
Her reply? "Very clever young man, but it's turtles all the way down!"
It's a great book.
Sig: I'm sorry but your opinion seems to be wrong.
I'm sorry, but your opinion seems to be wrong.
The last thing that gets sucked into the gravastar is the gravastar itself, which results in the formation of what scientists call a kleinstar, a four-dimensional construct where the inside is the outside (and vice versa). This neatly avoids any issues arising from the concept of having the universe contained within something that is itself within the universe, by moving the whole discussion into the realm of mathematical topology -- which nobody understands, but which we're all too embarassed to admit.
Remember to stock up on Klein bottles now, so you'll have something to drink out of once the kleinstar forms. ;-)
A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
First: Some following posts show the author didn't even do a rudimentary search of the archive let alone anything else. A place to start for example, "Where are all these zillions of states hiding in a black hole?" Mottola said in a recent article in New Scientist magazine. "It is quite literally incomprehensible." or The "unique and remarkable properties" of a gravastar "could explain several high-energy astrophysical phenomena that now are puzzling," says Marek Abramowicz, a black hole expert at Gothenburg University. Oh, and Mottola was a researcher at Los Alamos' Theoretical Division. RTFA, dude.
... yes, it was released by a very presitigious research lab.
Second: Anyone involved with the scientific community in the least, should know that peer review is actually quite a contentious issue and by no means considered as accounting for "all fault-finding".
Third: The theory itself resolves some troubling issues with black hole theory. The latter has become so fashionable that even lay men speak of them without seeming to question some of the root concepts that stretch all but a seasoned physicist's imagination. A quote from a related article: Physicists have struggled for years to account for the huge entropy of black holes, and largely have failed. Unlike their black hole counterparts, Gravastars would have a very low entropy.
Finally: This linkis to the Los Alamos release
"Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.