Has Stephen Hawking Solved the Black Hole Information Paradox?

[Mentat]

Forgive me, but I don't know the source of this. Has anyone heard anything about...

“A black hole only appears to form but later opens up and releases information about what fell inside. So we can be sure of the past and predict the future,” he added.

The findings, which Dr. Hawking is due to present at the 17th International Conference on General Relativity and Gravitation in Dublin on July 21, could help solve the “black hole information paradox,” which is a crucial puzzle of modern physics.

Exactly what happens in a black hole — a region in space where matter is compressed to such an extent that not even light can escape from the immense gravitational pull — has long puzzled scientists.

They initially posited theories that the holes were like a cosmic vacuum cleaner, sucking up everything in their path.

Dr. Hawking revolutionized the study of the holes when he demonstrated in 1976 that, under the strange rules of quantum physics, black holes are capable of radiating energy.

He calculated once black holes form they effectively start to “evaporate” away, radiating energy and losing mass in the process.

But by conjuring up the so-called “Hawking radiation,” the Cambridge mathematician, who is crippled by motor-neuron disease, also created one of the biggest conundrums in physics.

That conundrum about the fate of what enters a black hole became known as the “information paradox.”

Current theory holds that Hawking radiation contains no information about the matter inside a black hole and once the black hole has evaporated, all the information within it is lost.

However this conflicts with a central tenet of quantum physics, which says such information can never be completely wiped out.

Dr. Hawking said recapturing the information has important philosophical and practical consequences.

“We can never be sure of the past or predict the future precisely,” he said.

“A lot of people wanted to believe that information escaped from black holes but they didn't know how it could get out.”

Dr. Hawking did not elaborate on the BBC program how the information could be extracted from the black hole.

Curt Cutler, from the Albert Einstein Institute in Golm, Germany, which is chairing the meeting in Dublin, told New Scientist magazine Dr. Hawking asked at the last minute for permission to address the conference.

“He sent a note saying: ‘I have solved the black hole information paradox and I want to talk about it,”' Dr. Cutler said.

If Dr. Hawking succeeds in making his case, he will lose a bet that he and theoretical physicist Kip Thorne, of the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) made with John Preskill, also of Caltech.

The terms of the bet were that “information swallowed by a black hole is forever hidden and can never be revealed.” Dr. Preskill bet against that theory.

The forfeit is an encyclopedia, from which Dr. Preskill can recover information at will.

?

 

[Jeebus]

Everyone has been talking about this for weeks now, Mentat. Where have you been?

Oh and the source is from here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/16/tech/main630203.shtml

 

[russ_watters]

There are at least two active threads on this in General Astronomy...

Bottom line though, he hasn't made his speach yet.

 

[mc2ise]

I asked this on "general astronomy" and got no answer. Anyone?

"When Hawking presents his paper with the explanations for what I read here, when and how do we (the public) get to see what he said and read the explanations?

Thanks."

 

[Jeebus]

Latest News!

Check it all out here: http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040721.gthawk0721/BNStory/Technology/

 

[Perspectives]

Hawking announcement and supporting information

I am perplexed that the announcement has not been followed by the supporting documentation.

 

[marcus]

I am perplexed that the announcement has not been followed by the supporting documentation.

The transcript of Hawking's talk at the conference Wednesday has been
circulating. I posted a link to it here at PF the same day

http://pancake.uchicago.edu/~carroll/hawkingdublin.txt

have fun

there's been a fair amount of discussion at various blog sites and at sci.physics.research

you might like to look at the comments to Peter Woit's blog about Hawking at the "Not Even Wrong" site

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/blog/

or the comments at Sean Carroll's blog at "Preposterous Universe"

http://preposterousuniverse.blogspot.com/

More documentation (perhaps a more detailed paper from Hawking, which might have more satisfactory explanation in it, or might not) is likely to appear with time. But I wouldn't say that there is, even now, a complete absence of documentation. whether one finds it persuasive or not is another matter

 

[Tom D]

I wonder if Professor Hawking is confusing mathematical models with reality?
I think that maybe perhaps he is.
Also, what happened to 'knowing the mind of God' , as promised in Brief History of Time ?
Will Professor Hawking announce next year that we can't really know the mind of God after all ?

 

[Perspectives]

Thanks to Marcus, I have retreated the summation of Professor Hawking’s argument regarding his recent announcement. I will be a long time trying to understand his proof for his position and the summation will not be enough for my review. What I find much more intriguing are the possibilities that his conclusion brings.

Where might we find his entire proof?