The paper by Mazur and Mottola appears to still be under peer review. Check out their paper at www.arxiv.org, gr-qc/0109035. These guys are not claiming that black holes do not exist, there are simply exploring other solutions to Einsteins equations (with a quantum fluid) that do not have singularities - I am surprised this was not calculated long ago - it's pretty simple.
Also, see Visser and Wiltshire's paper that goes in more detail, gr-qc/0310107.
Yes you should call him and tell him he is wasting
his time if he tells you that GR is responsible for quark gluon plasma. Quark gluon plasma does not exist on any GUT scale. Unification is expected on the Planck scale \sim 10^19 GeV,
quark gluon plasma exists around 1GeV.
For the record:
The Schodinger equation is not correct. It is not covariant (is not invariant under Lorenzt transformations). quantum field theory is fundamental and predicts the standard model and is covariant. QFT is not a patch. The paradoxes about wave particle duality are Bohr-Heisenberg problems. There really is not mystery today.
On the other hand, Supersting theory IS fundamental and definitely not a patch (although is was developed to get rid of renormalization problems). Most of the high energy physics today is not patch work, with the exception of those who tweak the standard model (like MSSM ans so on).
>1.Yes, they are a direct by-product of the >topological shape of spacetime, and that shape is >the only possible shape.
Sorry: The topology of spacetime is governed
by a dimensionfull parameter, the gravitational
coupling. topology alone will not get you anywhere.
> 2.QG itself can't, but you can derive the >creation of time from the topology of space. The >perception of time is just a side-effect of the >way our consciousness works.
I don't think you got a handle on this question.
The problem is that general relativity (The Robertson-Walker model) breaks down at the Plank scale where Quantun effects must be considered. There is no present topological model that is usable (quantum gravity has renormalization problems).
>3.Protons are "wrapped" across the entire >temporal dimension, like a loop, and thus appear >to live forever, unless you radically distort >spacetime.
Hmmm. a Little too much star trek here. I think you are trying to describe a closed string here.
Protons are not fundamental particles (made of guarks and gluons). String theory has not come close in answering this. All present GUT models fail (starting with the famous SU(5) by Glashow and Georgi.
>4.Yes, and it actually is not broken
Not broken?
If what you say is true, then supersymmetric particles exist at all energies. In that case their masses would be small (if not zero) and we would have detected them long ago.
>5.The "temporal dimension" is an illusion of >consciousness. It is really just a highly >expanded spatial dimension. Only three spatial >dimensions have expanded because n-banes only >need three dimensions of freedom to do all
>of the topologically possible transformations >they can undergo.
Again you are guessing wildly. The question is really asking why, if there are more than 3 spatial dimensions, all are compactified except for the three we can comprehend. You should read more about M theory and superstring theory.
>6.This is a direct fallout of the "shape" of the >temporal dimension.
You are really into time and topology. The cosmological constant has nothing to do with time.
It is to do with the vacuum energy density.
>8.The information does not go anywhere - it is >stored in the topology of spacetime. This >confusion comes from failing to consider time as >a dimension capable of information storage.
Topology again. This time you are closer in your guess. Some physicists like t'Hooft and Susskind propose that information is not lost in a Black hole but stored on its surface like a hologram
of its true nature,
hence the term holography and black holes.
Go to http://www-spires.slac.stanford.edu/find/hep
and type ' f t holograph# and black hole'.
>9.This is an artifact of only considering gravity >in the 3 expanded dimensions
Gravity in 5 or 100 dimensions does not help. Sorry.
>10.Yes, again it is just an artifact of the shape of spacetime.
Ouch! This one really hurts. Space time has nothing to so with quarks and gluons and QCD.
Slashdot Mirror
The paper by Mazur and Mottola appears to still be under peer review. Check out their paper at www.arxiv.org, gr-qc/0109035. These guys are not claiming that black holes do not exist, there are simply exploring other solutions to Einsteins equations (with a quantum fluid) that do not have singularities - I am surprised this was not calculated long ago - it's pretty simple.
Also, see Visser and Wiltshire's paper that goes in more detail, gr-qc/0310107.
Go to http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/html2/primer.html to get a simple intro into the quark-gluon plasma.
For the record:
The Schodinger equation is not correct. It is not covariant (is not invariant under Lorenzt transformations). quantum field theory is fundamental and predicts the standard model and is covariant. QFT is not a patch. The paradoxes about wave particle duality are Bohr-Heisenberg problems. There really is not mystery today.
On the other hand, Supersting theory IS fundamental and definitely not a patch (although is was developed to get rid of renormalization problems). Most of the high energy physics today is not patch work, with the exception of those who tweak the standard model (like MSSM ans so on).
some math proofs? Not a chance.
>1.Yes, they are a direct by-product of the >topological shape of spacetime, and that shape is >the only possible shape.
Sorry: The topology of spacetime is governed
by a dimensionfull parameter, the gravitational
coupling. topology alone will not get you anywhere.
> 2.QG itself can't, but you can derive the >creation of time from the topology of space. The >perception of time is just a side-effect of the >way our consciousness works.
I don't think you got a handle on this question.
The problem is that general relativity (The Robertson-Walker model) breaks down at the Plank scale where Quantun effects must be considered. There is no present topological model that is usable (quantum gravity has renormalization problems).
>3.Protons are "wrapped" across the entire >temporal dimension, like a loop, and thus appear >to live forever, unless you radically distort >spacetime.
Hmmm. a Little too much star trek here. I think you are trying to describe a closed string here.
Protons are not fundamental particles (made of guarks and gluons). String theory has not come close in answering this. All present GUT models fail (starting with the famous SU(5) by Glashow and Georgi.
>4.Yes, and it actually is not broken
Not broken?
If what you say is true, then supersymmetric particles exist at all energies. In that case their masses would be small (if not zero) and we would have detected them long ago.
>5.The "temporal dimension" is an illusion of >consciousness. It is really just a highly >expanded spatial dimension. Only three spatial >dimensions have expanded because n-banes only >need three dimensions of freedom to do all
>of the topologically possible transformations >they can undergo.
Again you are guessing wildly. The question is really asking why, if there are more than 3 spatial dimensions, all are compactified except for the three we can comprehend. You should read more about M theory and superstring theory.
>6.This is a direct fallout of the "shape" of the >temporal dimension.
You are really into time and topology. The cosmological constant has nothing to do with time.
It is to do with the vacuum energy density.
>8.The information does not go anywhere - it is >stored in the topology of spacetime. This >confusion comes from failing to consider time as >a dimension capable of information storage.
Topology again. This time you are closer in your guess. Some physicists like t'Hooft and Susskind propose that information is not lost in a Black hole but stored on its surface like a hologram
of its true nature,
hence the term holography and black holes.
Go to http://www-spires.slac.stanford.edu/find/hep
and type ' f t holograph# and black hole'.
>9.This is an artifact of only considering gravity >in the 3 expanded dimensions
Gravity in 5 or 100 dimensions does not help. Sorry.
>10.Yes, again it is just an artifact of the shape of spacetime.
Ouch! This one really hurts. Space time has nothing to so with quarks and gluons and QCD.