A Copenhagen solution of the black hole singularity problem

In summary: Is that an acceptable solution of the black hole singularity problem from a "Copenhagen" point of view?
  • #1
Demystifier
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
14,174
6,652
Due to strong gravitational tidal forces, any living observer will die and any macroscopic measuring apparatus will be destroyed before it reaches the black hole singularity at the center of a macroscopic black hole. Hence the black hole singularity cannot be observed, so from an experimental point of view it doesn't exist.

Is that an acceptable solution of the black hole singularity problem from a "Copenhagen" point of view?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
By that argument, we could say matter outside the observable universe doesn't exist? Or matter inside but far away stopped existing since we are not in its future light cone any more? I don't share that view. It also doesn't answer how the end of the evaporation process looks like.
 
  • #3
Its characteristics are not defined.
 
  • #4
There is not black hole singularity problem.

Also, the tidal forces don't matter. The singularity is in the future of any falling observer and space-like, so it cannot be observe.
 
  • #5
If the black hole is large enough, I have read that the tidal forces are manageable.
 
  • #6
akvadrako said:
If the black hole is large enough, I have read that the tidal forces are manageable.
Not at the singularity, by definition. At the event horizon, tidal forces are indeed lower for a larger hole, but this is not what Demystifier is talking about. Somewhere between horizon and singularity the tidal forces get sufficiently high to rip you apart (assuming GR holds).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes akvadrako and Demystifier
  • #7
In the CI it is not generally assumed that the tidal waves have definite properties before observation. It's silent on the matter and we must assume that they have those properties(though this is common and probably wrong).
 
  • #8
Demystifier said:
Hence the black hole singularity cannot be observed, so from an experimental point of view it doesn't exist.

Is that an acceptable solution of the black hole singularity problem from a "Copenhagen" point of view?
I don't think these views are comparable at all. According to the CI physical properties are not defined before measurement whereas General Relativity requires that physical quantities become infinite at the singularity which is unobservable per se .
 
  • #9
Demystifier said:
Due to strong gravitational tidal forces, any living observer will die and any macroscopic measuring apparatus will be destroyed before it reaches the black hole singularity at the center of a macroscopic black hole. Hence the black hole singularity cannot be observed, so from an experimental point of view it doesn't exist.

Is that an acceptable solution of the black hole singularity problem from a "Copenhagen" point of view?

In section 7.3 of "Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime and Black Hole Thermodynamics", Wald discusses issues of quantum coherence that are especially (but not exclusively) prominent in the process of black hole evaporation. Specifically, it is hard to correlate states defined on spacetime surfaces in different regions in the presence of black hole evaporation. I don't think your proposal would solve this issue.

On the other hand, in the same book, Wald also discusses measurement theory formulated with an algebraic approach (i.e. where states are no longer defined on spacetime surfaces) that would presumably let us recover a Copenhagen interpretation. So maybe there's no problem in the first place.
 

1. What is the "Copenhagen solution" of the black hole singularity problem?

The Copenhagen solution is a theoretical proposal that suggests that the singularity at the center of a black hole does not actually exist. Instead, it is argued that the singularity is a result of our current understanding of gravity breaking down at extreme conditions, and that a new theory, such as quantum gravity, is needed to fully explain the behavior of black holes.

2. How does the Copenhagen solution differ from other proposed solutions to the black hole singularity problem?

The Copenhagen solution is unique in that it does not attempt to explain the singularity itself, but rather suggests that it is a sign of our incomplete understanding of gravity. Other proposed solutions, such as the firewall or fuzzball theories, attempt to describe the singularity as a physical object with specific properties.

3. What evidence supports the Copenhagen solution?

Currently, there is no direct evidence for the Copenhagen solution, as it is a theoretical proposal. However, it is consistent with our current understanding of physics and has been used to make predictions about the behavior of black holes that have not yet been disproven.

4. Are there any potential issues with the Copenhagen solution?

One potential issue with the Copenhagen solution is that it relies on a theory, such as quantum gravity, that has not yet been fully developed or tested. It is also possible that future observations or experiments could disprove the predictions made by this solution.

5. How does the Copenhagen solution impact our understanding of black holes?

If the Copenhagen solution is proven to be correct, it would significantly change our understanding of black holes and the behavior of extreme gravitational fields. It would also require a new understanding of gravity and potentially lead to new discoveries and advancements in physics.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
12
Views
374
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
57
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
833
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
706
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
844
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
62
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
305
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
3
Views
967
Back
Top