Slashdot Mirror
Black Hole Information Loss Paradox Solution Proposed
Anuborn Satirak writes to tell us that Physicists from Case Western Reserve University claim to have cracked the black hole information loss paradox that has puzzled physicists for the past 40 years. "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."
I'm sure it's not that simple, but that sure seems like what the article is saying. Black Holes would take infinitely long to form, so we'll never see one form, so no information will be lost. It sure doesn't seem to add up to me, since I thought there was pretty good evidence for black holes--and the universe hasn't existed for an infinitely long time. Still, when has quantum stuff ever made sense?
Because if the black hole was big enough to suck in the CERN campus with its gravity, the matter from which it was formed would have the same effect.
It's well-established that, if you only consider relativistic effects, a black hole will never form. What this paper does is demonstrate that if you take quantum effects into account, it's still true.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
Well, the litmus test of whether this would be funny is if you were black, and around the age of 13-16. If you are still laughing then, you're free to mod the parent up as 'Funny'.
It's got nothing to do with Slashdot. What's 'funny' is as relative as the universe... If I said some of the thing I find funny, someone may even shoot me... So much for freedom of speech, right?
'A lie if repeated often enough, becomes the truth.' - Goebbels
they haven't (proven that event horizons exist). I'll paraphrase my earlier response, maybe repetition will help you learn. We have observed objects which exhibit behavior consistent with what we would expect from observing an event horizon. I expect that the paper which is the subject of this discussion explains how their black-hole-like-object-without-an-event-horizon can also exhibit the observed behavior.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Yeah, it's so obvious that it can't even be put into a coherent explanation.
If other reasons we do lack, we swear no one will die when we attack
Your own assumptions about the universe is just a belief mind you.
You would like the universe to be like our models, of mathematics, that we created in order to understand and predict this universe. This mathematics is *within* the universe, so how this ever can be capable of holding all the parameters / the absolute truth, now *that* is irrational!
So the whole premise, although very tempting, is just impossible. The universe does not exist out of mathematics, mathematics exists because of this universe! To think any differently is perverse, and will only cloud your own judgement and mind. We must always be open to new stuff in order to advance true science, and not dogma.
Free-will or not, has nothing to do with it. The quantum-level is so low a level, that when we observe something, we irrevocably change the state. If we measure it a different way, we change the state in a different way. So wether we have free will or not, we can measure things differently, and the way we do it, will affect the result differently.
Wether we choose it by "free will", or by magic, or by rolling a dice, is just philosophy and has nothing to do with physics. You can always say this was predetermined, but the argument is that if we do it the other way, it will have different effects, that we *can* measure in experiments.
Said in a different way: Whatever we do, or dont do, we irrevocably are part of the dynamics of the universe. We would maybe like to be totally impartial observers, but when the observing itself changes the universe, how can we ever separate us from the rest of the entire universe? If you follow this logic, which yourself started, you will come to conclusions that borders on the religious, wether you like it or not. That were responsible for what we do, or dont do, even if its just observing.
So wether we have free-will or not, which is just a matter of frame of reference, where information comes from or not (we really do not know). But we have proof that we are irrevocably part of this universe and influencing everything in it, even just by observing.
So to have hope to understand such a changing system logically and reasonably, we first have to understand our self.
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/