Slashdot Mirror
Math Shows Some Black Holes Erase Your Past and Give You Unlimited Futures (vice.com)
dmoberhaus writes: An international team of mathematicians has found that there are theoretical black holes that would allow an observer to survive passage through the event horizon. This would result in the breakdown of determinism, a fundamental feature of the universe that allows physics to have predictive power, and result in the destruction of the observer's past and present them with an infinite number of futures. The findings were detailed in a report published last week in Physical Review Letters.
Before!
Now!
And will again!
Murph!!
This seems risky, even if it were possible to approach a black hole. In this case, I'll choose to not believe what my teacher tells me.
In other words, the afterlife?
"Math isn't going to bring you back from the dead"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
requires that you to pass thru an even horizon...
This may not apply to us humans. We are what our past made us. On the other hand we are what we are now so our past vanishes...
Its all rubbish to me :P
But he'd probably just fuck that up infinitely also.
Summary implies conflation of mathematical artefacts with physical reality. Real paper is probably quite dry and abstract.
This looks like a division by zero.. but instead of understanding the logical error that put them in that impossible situation and fixing it, they just keep on doing more math over it....
When mass hits the speed of light, it does not travel back in time... It just louses all mass properties and turns into light.
1/(x*x) will never be negative with a real input!!!
Physicists should not be mathematicians, they should be primarily physicists. Not everything is real what math allows. If that were the case, the SU(5)
model (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgi%E2%80%93Glashow_model) would have worked.
Mathematics can describe reality, but reality is not mathematics.
Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
Math does not apply to reality. It always only applies to an abstraction of reality and that loses accuracy, sometimes catastrophically as almost certainly happened in this case.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.10502
A human surviving forever in one piece? Or a single particle stuck in time? Or?
Easy now. Just a joke.
People tend to believe that physics is applied math. It's not. The universe doesn't care about your math. General Relativity is a set of mathematical equations that were picked because they could model the observed experimental data. Yes, it proved to be a very accurate theory by predicting future experimental results decades after it was published. That doesn't mean that every single prediction will be true. So until an experiment can confirm these results, nothing has been "shown", as the headline implies. This doesn't mean these findings aren't relevant. On the contrary, finding these edge cases is what allows theories to be tested and be eventually replaced by a better model.
Only difference between black holes and neutron stars is black holes overcome pauli and everything collapses into a shared state. Big whoop. Assertions of "infinite density" are nonsense. There is no evidence single massive shared states have exactly zero extent or that length is not quantized and energy sure as heck is not infinite so jumping to "infinite density" conclusions is premature at best. Neither is there anything special about escape velocities approaching C. Of course there are effectively incalculable (yet not unlimited) futures embedded in the ginormous quantum state making up the black hole.
Infinite density is a scam.
Determinism is a scam.
(Ir)reversibility as constructed is essentially a tautology.
Doesn't this imply a solution to the grandfather paradox in time travel?
Those experiencing it claim the past really did change and it's not their faulty memory. It's name comes from them remembering Nelson Mandela dying in prison in the 80's.
Where do we get all these universes from otherwise.
Or maybe just the hypothesis being espoused is. It seems like an indeterministic universe where effect no longer follows cause would be completely antithetical to life. Our existence utterly relies on cause and effect, without it, the first problem would be creating matter at all, let alone organizing into elements, then minerals, amino acids, cells, cell groups, and so on.
So... you don't have infinite futures if you were to cross the event horizon. You still have none.
All those parking tickets: gone!
Table-ized A.I.
Every time there's one of these multiverse/we're living in a simulation/you can enter a black hole without being spaghettified to hell articles, I'm reminded of why religion is so persistent: people just love making shit up and trying to convince others to believe it.
On that note, did you know Bitcoin was invented by aliens? This crazy math formula I saw in my dream proves it!
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
... determinism, a fundamental feature of the universe ...
While we may wish for determinism, it has been shown long before that it does not exist.Since it was shown that we can not accurately know both the position of a particle and its speed, it has been proven that predicting the future is impossible because it is impossible to know the present, let alone calculate the future by using the present as a starting condition. So determinism is absolutely not a feature of the universe.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
and getting a infinitive number of new girlfriends
Math just manipulates numbers. Add, Subtract, Multiply, Divide, etc... that's MATH.
Humans assign MEANING to numbers.
5/10=0.5 is MATH.
5/10 where a human says this is L/D means the Lift over drag ratio is 0.5 to an aero person.
5/10 where a human says this is I=V/R means that 0.5 Amps results from 5 Volts and 10 Ohms to an EE.
MATH shows nothing on its own. Now, let's see what evidence these authors have for the idea that their equations have ANYTHING to do with what they are arguing.
They could, to borrow from above (for simplicity) say that S=M1/M2 where S=a coefficent for how fast time flows in a black hole, where M1=mass of object crossing event horizon and M2 = mass of black hole..... then plug in 5 for M1 and 10 for M2 and get 0.5 for the coefficient the MATH would be "good" but there's nothing saying that the human meaning assighed to that math has ANY applicability or validity and thus the MATH says nothing more than that 5/10 = 0.5
People need to become a LOT more skeptical in this era of more people with science degrees than the marketplace demands, and gazillions of science papers, many with subjects that SOUND "sciencey" but which will never be ACTUALLY TESTABLE in anybody's lifetime.
Not quite, e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdeterminism
I bet that a quantum gravity theory would disallow breakdown of determinism, and this paper is only evidence that classic general relativity is flawed and needs to be adjusted for quantum mechanics.
The future is ours!
string theory
Except for the part about how the paper says no such thing.
I will hop in the black hole roller coaster right after you.
To cover this ( if valid they no doubt will) already have a collection of blackhole episodes
https://m.youtube.com/results?q=space%20time%20black%20hole%20&sm=1
If one discards Einstein's postulate that gravity causes time-dilation, then the idea that a gravity singularity causes a non-deterministic space-time (all time exists simultaneously), should also be discarded.
So in other words, they supposedly discovered: The History Eraser Button. The JOLLY CANDY LIKE BUTTON. Sometimes when I read this drivel I wish someone did actually find the history eraser button to erase human stupidity.
We'll make great pets
While we may wish for determinism, it has been shown long before that it does not exist.Since it was shown that we can not accurately know both the position of a particle and its speed
This is just pure common sense sprinkled with a slight bit of meta physics. We know this is true for now because all methods of taking these measurements you describe involves "bumping" the particles in question thus changing their state. In order to truly know the state at some fixed time, we would need to plug into the back-end of the system from outside of it and to our knowledge this is impossible. From a software developer's perspective, this is akin to being able to write something directly from the system to the console log. It would require there to be a "command" to issue to the universe like: getPositionOfEntity(e) and part of the subroutine is writing the answer to some medium that humans can parse.
We'll make great pets
I hereby demonstrate my complete lack of understanding slashdot readers by linking to the full article on arxiv It's kind of an interesting mathematical exercise in the physics of charged black holes under various conditions but obviously does not reflect reality. For example, you would need a large positive cosmological constant, and an extreme ratio of charge to mass for this to be relevant. Further the clickbait headline implies some kind of retroactive erasure of the onserver when in reality it just means you can't reconstruct the past from future observations due to a breakdown in how the math works. This may not even be true at all because we know that general relativity does not fully describe spacetime at the extremes found at the surface horizons of black holes anyway.
It would be a great help to the ECB's balance
With my past destroyed, the one where I *didn't* enter a future-granting black hole and lived a mundane human life didn't happen.
Infinite futures means that in one of my futures, benevolent aliens gave me two cloned Jessica Alba sexbots.
WOO!
Do I get to tell people I had a threesome with Jessica Alba now?
On a fundemental level, eliminating large class of hidden variable, you have an unpredictible system. But while unpredictible it still follow a distributioon of probability, which when you go to the macro level end up eliminating it partially enough that our own macro world looks deterministic enough to be qualified as such. Think about it as newton physic versus GR, for a moving car newton is enough, for shooting a ball or cascading domino determinism is good enough. I would argue that as such the universe is deterministic enough for the most common human understanding of it.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Determinism means potentially more than one thing. Something might be determined but that doesn't mean we can determine it. In a sense, just because you can't work out the guarantee doesn't mean there isn't one. I personally believe the universe has a duality to it. On a certain scale it's definitely deterministic in a sense. If you look out there all away across the universe for vast distances you see huge numbers of galaxies, stars, etc. Essentially the same thing over and over. When you also break those down it's because of an unimaginable number of particles behaving in the same way whether they're here or opposite each other on the furthest sides of the observable universe.
It's not about knowledge. Determinism doesn't claim that we would have to know both the position of a particle and its speed. Determinism asserts that motion of every particle is governed by some set of physical rules. Our ability to "predict" anything is not relevant to the question of determinism.
and result in the destruction of the observer's past and present them with an infinite number of futures.
Nooooo!!!
That's just what they want you to think!
Don't get on the carousel!!!
against spreading of pseudo-scientific highly abstract disconnected from reality unverifiable utter bullshit, like the laws against spreading of porn.
Berenstein Bears and the black hole!
are so much more accessible
This makes one huge assumption: That black holes are infinitely dense. That is physically impossible. If it were true then a single black hole would absorb the whole universe instantly.
The fact is, we just don't know very much about black holes.
...interested in are from horny babes like Jada Fire.
All of the other posts are in the erased past.
Hawking Radiation, a slow and lumbering destructive process from outside of the black hole, is a nearly instantaneous event from a reference frame inside the event horizon. Due to time dilation a Hawking Nova destroys the black hole before the collapse can complete and form a singularity.
There would be a breakdown all right, but there wouldn't be much of a future (your remains would be scattered throughout a cold dead universe where the last stars burned out trillions of years ago).
The most interesting math results are:
The space and matter have the same nature, so basically there is no difference between space and matter.
The time and matter have the same nature, so basically there is no difference between time and matter.
Time is quantitative, it can be emitted and absorbed like an energy. We can travel in space with zero energy cost in no time spent inside of machine.
Now a little bit of crazy ideas coming out of math: :-)
All events in the past, present and future happen simultaneously
This completely kills society we have built and foster.
I can share link to the space/matter part of math work, but everything else being said is not part of any publication, it is just fun.
Just to put a damper on discussions...
1) "theoretical black holes", meaning they may not exist naturally. If they do, they could be rare. At any rate travelling to any of them in the near future is impossible.
2) If one were to say artificially construct one of these things, in order for it to be big enough to fit a human though, it would have to be at least a certain size. A casual search indicates that a 5m event horizon black hole will have the approximate mass of Jupiter. So if it is constructed anywhere near Earth it will probably destroy it. If done in the solar system, could potentially mess with orbits catastrophically if not very careful.
The inherent assumption of the entire paper of a deterministic universe is on dubious scientific ground. I wonder what conclusions could be drawn from the mathematics of this assumption were abandoned.
It is a copy.
Math doesn't do anything, it's inert. It's people that make speculations. At this point you'd think Silly Valley has a crystal ball or magic mirror, and their predictions are about as useful.
Or for the more sophisticated among us, Command-Z.
If these are the same kind of maths people as the ones that say the infinite sum of all positive integers is -1/12 then I will be putting them in the Dunce box too.
Chris Nolan is amazing!
an exploit.
Please tell me you people don't actually believe any of this.
They are just trying to tease us to jump into black holes. Luckily I am not that stupid! I see what you did there Russia!
oops, sorry about that.
Go, travel to a black hole, go through the event horizon and have the eternal life you always wanted and deserve.
Wish you all the happiness you deserve!
DT arrives at the pearly gate to enter heaven. Trumpets sound, the gates open and he is guided by two huge angles on his side to the throne with the almighty god.
God addressed DT and asks: "Do you have anything to say to me?".
DT: Ah, you are the guy sitting in my seat, get out!
Sounds to me like they are describing movement to a different bubble universe, where you did not exist before. The math is incomplete, though, so it is not includng the bounds of the previous universe. Your history probably still would exist there.
I wonder if their math encountered the square root of minus one? That usually indicates that there are other dimensions/degrees of freedom that were not taken into account.
oops
very same thing last week.
Determinism means potentially more than one thing. Something might be determined but that doesn't mean we can determine it.
Repeat after me three times: "There are no hidden variables". The universe is non-deterministic, as elegantly put by aepervius above.
Just to nitpick: thr fact that we can not measure the present does not mean that the future is not deterministic.
The particle you measure will go where it goes, unless you measure it. Then it is going where your measurement is deflecting it to.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Helpfully, Laplace's deamon wikipedia page has a good section on debunking determinism.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.105...
Woohoo, the true random generator everyone has been looking for!
And I am not the anonymous coward. I'm the true blue that doesn't have time to log on for frivolous comments. Stick that up your anti humor machine.
That getting to the event horizon takes an infinite amount of time. So it will never occur. Hawking radiation will make the event horizon recede before you can get there anyway, and probably kill you in the process.
(T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
Don't panic.
It's bitztream the autism-hating, custom EpiPen-hating, Musk-hating, Qualcomm-hating, Firefox tabs-hating, Slashdot editors-hating Slashdot troll!
(...)/Superdeterminism
...which is also a human construct; an metaphysical attempt to get a way around the hard truth of non-determinism.
Just to nitpick: thr fact that we can not measure the present does not mean that the future is not deterministic.
The particle you measure will go where it goes, unless you measure it. Then it is going where your measurement is deflecting it to.
That is one way of thinking about how the universe *might* work.
Another way to think about it is a particle exists in a superposition state of many positions (each with their own probability), and it will effectively go everywhere, until you measure it and then all the things that it has interacted with in the past and transferred momentum to (even if they are now far away) are adjusted to be consistent with your current measurement.
Although you might think the second way of thinking of how the universe might work as being too complex and dismiss it via the principle of Occam's razor, you should remember, that Occam's razor is only used to say that complex explanations should not be introduced unless *necessary*. Given the current amount of empirical evidence about the function of quantum mechanics, the simpler way of thinking doesn't seem to have sufficient explanatory power, so...
As an aside, there is acutally QM way to do so-called interaction-free measurement as well. It may defy intuition, but there is evidence for these effects as well...
For those who are not shocked when they first come across quantum theory cannot possibly have understood it. -- Neils Bohr
The "paradox" is only a conflict between reality and your feeling of what reality "ought to be." -- Richard Feynman
...goes through a black hole, survives it, and all of the slit squeezes it endured over the years are undone.
It also has unlimited futures.
In the year 3,000AD
Someone will stumble upon this article and laugh their guts out at how ridiculous and medieval all of this is.
Hey, things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trepanning were once considered completely valid too.
Well, I read TFA right up to "the Universe is deterministic". I already know enough ignorant morons, i.e. journalists.
So I am already in a blackhole, cool. Guess this proves that theory that has been going around for a while.