Does the Singularity Really Exist Beyond the Standard Model?

[wolram]

People keep saying that it is an artefact of the mass and the singularity does not exist, yet other theorists suggest they lead to worm holes, Do they exist or are they or are they (beyond the standard model)?

 

[PAllen]

A wormhole is a conceivable alternative to a singularity.

 

[phinds]

People keep saying that it is an artefact of the maths and the singularity does not exist, yet other theorists suggest they lead to worm holes, Do they exist or are they or are they (beyond the standard model)?

The word "singularity" is just shorthand so that physicists don't have to keep saying "the place where the math models break down and we don't know WHAT is/was going on". It does not imply that there is or is not something physical going on, it implies (states directly actually) that we don't KNOW what's going on.

 

[DrStupid]

The word "singularity" is just shorthand so that physicists don't have to keep saying "the place where the math models break down and we don't know WHAT is/was going on".

It doesn't even come from physics. The term "singularity" is used in mathematics for conditions where an object is not defined. But if this object has been used in physics and the singularity is not removable this means indeed that the corresponding mathematical model breaks down.

 

[fumbar]

As far as I understand, Relativity, as a classical theory, is known to be woefully incomplete on the scale of the singularity. Quantum mechanics will have something to say about confining huge amounts of mass to small volumes and yet it does not inform the model of the classical singularity. So my perspective is that the singularity, as we currently envision it, is not a "real" object or state, but instead a classical analog of some more weirder quantum mechanical state.

 

[stefan r]

As far as I understand, Relativity, as a classical theory, is known to be woefully incomplete on the scale of the singularity...

The singularity is similar to dividing by 0. It does not make algebra or calculus "woefully incomplete". The theory could approach infinite accuracy and still have a singularity.

It doesn't even come from physics. The term "singularity" is used in mathematics for conditions where an object is not defined. But if this object has been used in physics and the singularity is not removable this means indeed that the corresponding mathematical model breaks down.

There are cases where an object is defined but still has a "singularity". For example a step function like y = x[round down]. The number 2 is defined but the limit as f(x) approaches 2 from the left is 1 but as f(x) approaches 2 from the right it is 2.

I would not say that a step function is a "broken model" it just is not continuous. A lot of real world work has this feature. Items or boxes are discrete units. Customers are upset if they get a fraction of an item delivered. Getting a package to the door after the truck leaves is a fail. Derivatives or rates are still very useful. A model will just be slightly off because the units are not really continuous but that is easy to anticipate.

 

[DrStupid]

There are cases where an object is defined but still has a "singularity". For example a step function like y = x[round down]. The number 2 is defined but the limit as f(x) approaches 2 from the left is 1 but as f(x) approaches 2 from the right it is 2.

I would say that f'(x) has a singularity at x=2, but not f(x).