A questions about black holes among other things

[aljay32]

I'm not a physicist, just a mere philosophy grad, but I have some questions that may lead others to research, and I'm trying to find a place to ask them so that the information can be disseminated. They relate to the Holographic theory of the universe. Anyway, first question on this forum will have to be...

My understanding of the event horizon of a black hole (analogously of course, and limited) is that its like a line of no return, perhaps like a cell membrane or something similar. Is this a known, or is it possible that the event horizon is continuous? When I say continuous I mean from weak to strong gravitational pull (is there a pull?), and could it span the gallaxy possibly beyond. (Assuming a Gallaxy is a finite distinct object and not continuous itself.)

If so...ergo: If a black hole were continuous, might it be conceiveable that we don't live in a Holographic universe but instead that the continuousity of the event horizon is causing identifiable holographic phenomena throughout the gallaxy?

I know this is more than one question but this stuff deeply troubles me, the universe give me sleepless nights so I need to get this over and done with. Also Does anyone else think the Holographic theory of the Universe is awesome, mind expanding stuff? Anyway. Thank you.

 

[Chalnoth]

My understanding of the event horizon of a black hole (analogously of course, and limited) is that its like a line of no return, perhaps like a cell membrane or something similar.

The event horizon isn't a physical object like a cell membrane is. Instead, it's a location in space. Specifically, it's the location where the escape velocity equals the speed of light. The reason why it's called an "event horizon" is that any events that happen beyond it are completely inaccessible to us.

Is this a known, or is it possible that the event horizon is continuous?

If it wasn't, it wouldn't make any sense as an event horizon. An event horizon has to be closed, or else there would be a way for events beyond it to effect the outside world.

If so...ergo: If a black hole were continuous, might it be conceiveable that we don't live in a Holographic universe but instead that the continuousity of the event horizon is causing identifiable holographic phenomena throughout the gallaxy?

This doesn't make any sense to me. There is nothing magical about the event horizon of the black hole, and black hole's aren't especially powerful. If our Sun were replaced by a black hole of the same mass, for instance, nothing about the planets' orbits would change one iota. It'd merely get dark (and cold).

I know this is more than one question but this stuff deeply troubles me, the universe give me sleepless nights so I need to get this over and done with. Also Does anyone else think the Holographic theory of the Universe is awesome, mind expanding stuff? Anyway. Thank you.

Yes, holography is really fascinating stuff, where the behavior of a region of space can be fully-defined by the border that surrounds that region.

 

[aljay32]

Thank you for replying, its been a while since I read anything about black holes, and I really need to revisit the literature to remind myself of the current knowledge.

 

[aljay32]

What I was trying to suggest was that if as has been suggested the event horizon converts 3D objects into 2D data and doesn't destroy that data, then if the black hole were continuous with the external, the 2D data could effect the solar system or gallaxy. But you have reminded me that the horizon is a point of no return, not a kind of object or surface, so it does not make sense to think of 2D data being stored on something that is not that thing that the idea would require it to be.

 

[aljay32]

What I was trying to suggest was that if as has been suggested the event horizon converts 3D objects into 2D data and doesn't destroy that data, then if the black hole were continuous with the external, the 2D data could effect the solar system or gallaxy. But you have reminded me that the horizon is a point of no return, not a kind of object or surface, so it does not make sense to think of 2D data being stored on something that is not that thing that the idea would require it to be.

In this sense I was trying to suggest that perhaps the idea of a Holographic Universe might be too grand, and that instead, the answers to physics problems with certain particle behaviours (Behaving like waves or particles, or appearing to be in two places at once) could be due to local distortion by black hole interactions with the gallaxy surrounding it. But the answer would still be related to the idea of 3D real transformation to 2D data as represented by the holographic theory, but more as a localised distortion, rather than a whole universe. Appologies if this does not make sense. I'm still trying to find the appropriate semantic representations for some of these ideas.

 

[Chalnoth]

What I was trying to suggest was that if as has been suggested the event horizon converts 3D objects into 2D data and doesn't destroy that data, then if the black hole were continuous with the external, the 2D data could effect the solar system or gallaxy. But you have reminded me that the horizon is a point of no return, not a kind of object or surface, so it does not make sense to think of 2D data being stored on something that is not that thing that the idea would require it to be.

There is no "conversion" in holography. It's just that the three-dimensional behavior of a region is fully mathematically-equivalent to the two-dimensional behavior on the surface of that region. You can talk about the system either by talking about the three-dimensional behavior, or by talking about the behavior of the surface. If the system is holographic, there is no difference between the two: they both contain all of the information about the system.

I still don't see what you think the concept of holography has to do with black holes.

 

[Tanelorn]

I have a general question about black holes: Do they collapse to a true singularity (is there such a thing?) or do they stop at some stage similar to a neutron star does perhaps at the quark level or something smalller?

 

[Chalnoth]

I have a general question about black holes: Do they collapse to a true singularity (is there such a thing?) or do they stop at some stage like a neutron star does perhaps at the quark level or something smalller?

According to General Relativity, they must collapse into a true singularity. Most consider this to be a flaw of General Relativity, that they don't actually collapse. But the problem is that it requires a theory of quantum gravity to say what actually does happen on the interior of a black hole, and we don't have that yet, unfortunately.