Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Type of Star Can Emerge From Inside Black Holes, Say Cosmologists

Posted by Soulskill on from the cross-black-holes-off-your-list-of-good-hiding-places dept.

KentuckyFC writes "Black holes form when a large star runs out of fuel and collapses under its own weight. Since there is no known force that can stop this collapse, astrophysicists have always assumed that it forms a singularity, a region of space that is infinitely dense. Now cosmologists think quantum gravity might prevent this complete collapse after all. They say that the same force that stops an electron spiraling into a nucleus might also cause the collapsing star to 'bounce' at scales of around 10^-14cm. They're calling this new state a 'Planck star' and say its lifetime would match that of the black hole itself as it evaporates. That raises the possibility that the shrinking event horizon would eventually meet the expanding Planck star, which emerges with a sudden blast of gamma rays. That radiation would allow any information trapped in the black hole to escape, solving the infamous information paradox. If they're right, these gamma rays may already have been detected by space-based telescopes meaning that the evidence is already there for any enterprising astronomer to tease apart."

28 of 193 comments (clear)

  1. Its own weight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Black holes form when a large star runs out of fuel and collapses under its own weight

    Isn't actually it's own gravity? The weight would increase with the gravity, doesn't it?

    1. Re:Its own weight? by suutar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sort of yes. "...under the force of its own gravitational attraction" would be more precise, I think. Gravity is a force, and weight is the measure of the gravitational force on a particular item. But it's common to think of weight as the force of gravitational attraction itself, and it's shorter to type.

      And yes, as it collapses and the distance from particle A to the center of mass of the rest of the star decreases, the force of gravitational attraction (weight) increases.

    2. Re:Its own weight? by camperdave · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't get black hole evaporation. Suppose a proton/anti-proton pair gets created at the event horizon and the proton falls in. Hasn't the mass of the black hole increased by one proton? If the anti-proton falls in, it will meet another proton and annihilate it (assuming conditions within the black hole still allow this), but with no way for the energy to escape, isn't it the same as increasing by the mass of the anti-proton (which is the same as a proton)?

      I propose we try the experiment with whomever is supporting this switch to Beta.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    3. Re:Its own weight? by suutar · · Score: 4, Informative

      As I understand it, that's almost exactly it. The catch is that the universe is now 2 protons heavier than it was, and it can't keep them. "Normally" the proton and antiproton would recombine and annihilate and it would be gone, but now that they're separated that can't happen. So the black hole's mass gets debited 2 proton masses. So the final result is that the hole is down 1 proton mass and the rest of the universe is up 1 proton mass.

    4. Re:Its own weight? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Funny

      But how can the black hole's mass go down when particles are being added to it?

      Because the mass of that particle, and the particle that escaped, came from the black hole. So there is a net loss of mass. But the probability of this happening is so low that an immense number of eons are needed to evaporate a black hole, and the time required goes up with the cube of the mass. A solar mass black hole may take approx 10^66 years to evaporate. That is because its gravity sucks almost as hard as Slashdot Beta.

    5. Re:Its own weight? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't get black hole evaporation. Suppose a proton/anti-proton pair gets created at the event horizon and the proton falls in. Hasn't the mass of the black hole increased by one proton? If the anti-proton falls in, it will meet another proton and annihilate it (assuming conditions within the black hole still allow this), but with no way for the energy to escape, isn't it the same as increasing by the mass of the anti-proton (which is the same as a proton)?

      That's one interpretation of the effect. The part that you're missing is what those virtual pairs represent. Quantum mechanics allow for the violation of energy conservation laws, as long as the violation doesn't last long enough for it to measured (it doesn't matter if it's measured or not, it matters whether it happens during a time period in which it would be possible to measure it). Virtual particles pop in out of nothing, so suddenly you have extra energy in the universe. Then they annihilate and disappear again before it would be possible to measure their presence. However, in this case, one of them fell into the black hole, the other didn't, so now, from your perspective outside the black hole, you have a brand new particle and therefore extra energy and mass in the universe out of nothing. In order for that to be possible, from your perspective you'd have to witness the other particle as having negative energy. So the particle falling in to the black hole isn't a normal particle, it's a particle made up of negative energy.

      It's really hard to visualize that, so luckily there's another interpretation of the same effect that might be easier to swallow. The two virtual particles form inside the event horizon, using energy from inside the event horizon. If they're close enough to the horizon, one of them has a probability of leaving the event horizon through quantum tunneling. I always thought it was easier to visualize this interpretation.

    6. Re:Its own weight? by nanospook · · Score: 2

      However we describe it's actions, we really don't know what gravity is do we? It's not really explained.

      --
      Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
    7. Re:Its own weight? by camperdave · · Score: 2

      Because the mass of that particle, and the particle that escaped, came from the black hole.

      No. The particle and antiparticle came from a vacuum fluctuation occurring at the event horizon.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  2. In before the Fuck Beta Burst by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So decaying black holes might be another source of gamma ray bursts? Interesting hypothesis. I suppose this would permit a big old star to bounce between being a black hole and a neutron star, depending on the rate of incoming material.

    So, do I have to point out the obvious that the /. beta is horribly user-hostile to keep this from getting modded -1 insightful?

    1. Re:In before the Fuck Beta Burst by i+kan+reed · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, you do. Beta is terrible and ignoring it clearly isn't making it go away.,

  3. Twitter Bootstrap event horizon by avandesande · · Score: 2, Insightful

    .... in Slashdot Beta

    --
    love is just extroverted narcissism
  4. Re:Car analogy time by OzPeter · · Score: 2

    Car analogy time:
    I have gotten rid of vehicles that sucked less than the Slashdot beta. Seriously even that '85 Bronco II where everything was rusty, none of the body panels matched, and that had bad compression on the #5 cylinder sucked less than beta.slashdot.org.

    Bronco's never run well

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  5. Information paradox? by gstoddart · · Score: 2, Interesting

    OK, so I understand (vaguely) that this essentially means stuff goes in but doesn't come out.

    But if this Planck star bursts forth from a black hole, is any 'information' in a meaningful sense coming back out? Or is the collection of random bits which we defined as 'information' coming back out just a bunch of meaningless noise?

    It sounds more like "stuff comes back out, but will have been so mangled by the process that it isn't, strictly speaking, what we'd call 'information'".

    I've never been really clear on what is meant by "information" in this context -- it's not like you can figure out that the burst of gamma radiation corresponds to anything specific, it's just a burst of gamma radiation (and whatever else comes out).

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Information paradox? by DeadDecoy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I think information is used in it's most abstract sense. Any particle or wave signals that that approach the black hole get consumed. I.e. when we look at it, we see nothing because light is absorbed. I'm probably wrong, though, and someone who studies the topic might be more apt at providing an explanation. Personally, I wonder what this means in terms of the second law of thermodynamics. When a black hole consumes energy and releases a Planck star, do either events reduce the entropy of the system?

  6. Re:Beta Sucks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Have they been talking to the Windows 8 guys????
    Can everyone fuck up every UI???

  7. What the TFS means: by TigerPlish · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What TFS really means is that out of the suck generated by Beta, a new site will emerge, free from corporate cocksuckery.

    Beta: Only slightly better than Facetwat.

    --
    The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
  8. Re:Beta Sucks! by Ben4jammin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I usually try to stay on-topic, but this is a deserved exception.

    I logged in, perused some of my old comments just for nostalgia and will be logging out for at least the remainder of the proposed boycott period.

    I just wanted to say that it has been awesome being part of the Slashdot community. You guys are awesome. I have lost track of how much I have learned about different topics that I never would have learned were it not for participating in Slashdot discussions.

    I hope to see you on the other side...with Beta existing only as a memory of an epic fail.

  9. Beta solved the information paradox by cheese_boy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdot's Beta has proved that it is possible for information to be sucked in and never get out.

    WTF is up with article titles that only the first 3 words are visible because of the huge font used?

    Slashdot beta - the artificial blackhole created by Dice that Slashdot will be sucked into

  10. Re:I'm wondering... by dysmal · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...if a star can emerge from Slashdot Beta. That shit is a black hole of user interface hell.

    There is no gravity. BETA just sucks that hard!

  11. Cosmologists and Dice by sexconker · · Score: 2

    Neither know shit, they just throw shit at the wall and hope something sticks when someone finally gets around to testing.
    For Dice, that testing will come when they force me to use the shitty new beta version of the site. Spoiler: I won't stick around.

    Fuck beta. Fuck Dice.

  12. Beta problem is a financial one by mu51c10rd · · Score: 5, Informative

    Dice released their 4th quarter filing...and it does not cast Slashdot in a good light:


    Slashdot Media was acquired to provide content and services that are important to technology professionals in their everyday work lives and to leverage that reach into the global technology community benefiting user engagement on the Dice.com site. The expected benefits have started to be realized at Dice.com. However, advertising revenue has declined over the past year and there is no improvement expected in the future financial performance of Slashdot Media's underlying advertising business. Therefore, $7.2 million of intangible assets and $6.3 million of goodwill related to Slashdot Media were reduced to zero.

    Looks like running AdBlock on Slashdot and turning off ads may soon be the cause of their demise...

    1. Re:Beta problem is a financial one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The never-ending story.

      Popular website gets known for its high, loyal, repeat traffic count, perhaps needs funding to maintain services due to increasing demand. Investors start to take notice - MBA marketing types equate loyal, repeat traffic with high Nielsen ratings of old media, convince big holding company to invest $$$ based on business plan for "leveraging" loyal, repeat traffic to site to sell other goods/services (MBA-speak: "monetization"). Doesn't work out, popular website not meeting projected profit goals. Loyal, repeat traffic not interested in any goods/services, not interested in being "leveraged", only interested in doing what they were doing (usually having something to do with "fun") before big holding company stepped in. MBA marketing types make last ditch effort to save face by reworking popular website, particularly toward goal of increasing "leverage" toward selling other goods/services (i.e., "monetization"). Loyal, repeat traffic revolts due to lack of "fun" and contempt for other goods/services (i.e., "monetization" at the expense of "fun"). MBA marketing types hold their ground to save face, changes are made permanent. Loyal, repeat traffic drops off. Popular website shows greater and greater losses to the big holding company. MBA marketing types sense the ax falling, jump ship. New MBA's advise big holding company to cut losses (i.e., "restructure"), shut down formerly popular website, but maintain all ownership to IP rights related to formerly popular website (you know, just in case it might be worth something some day). Loyal, repeat traffic cast adrift. Formerly popular website reduced to nostalgic memory of when web was fun. World less fun.

      and repeat for each and every cool thing that ever became popular simply due to being fun, capsized by the weight of disinterested investors with uninformed, unrealistic profit expectations.

  13. Re:FUCK BETA by Bearhouse · · Score: 2

    And when they take that away, as they surely will, what will those who detest "beta" do?
    Fuck beta, and fuck stupid, cowardly cunts like you.

  14. I'm going to use my deductive reasoning here... by Guy+From+V · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And say I think that most of the community thinks Slashdot Beta sucks.

  15. Re:In memory of the old slashdot by Teun · · Score: 2
    I'm afraid you're double on topic, both for the article and the beta way of presenting it...

    I've got the two versions in adjacent tabs and they don't even have the same comments!
    As if two separate databases are being used.

    --
    "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  16. Re:Beta Sucks! by toshikodo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm posting this from Opera 12. I think that tells you what I think of /. Beta.

    --
    No volcanos here
  17. Agreed. SlashdotBeta must die. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Normal, classic, Slashdot *works*. It requires no makeover.

    Please make Beta stop.

  18. Re:I'm wondering... by egcagrac0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If there is a force that can prevent the total collapse of a star into a singularity, there is hope that we can harness such power to escape from beta...