Hawking Solves Black Hole Mystery

AI Thread Summary
Stephen Hawking is set to present groundbreaking findings on black holes at an upcoming conference, which may challenge existing theories about event horizons. His abstract suggests that traditional views on black holes, particularly the notion of event horizons, may be fundamentally flawed. Discussions among forum members highlight skepticism regarding the mathematical rigor of Hawking's theories and whether they will hold up without experimental evidence. Some participants express admiration for Hawking's contributions, while others question his prominence in the field compared to historical figures like Einstein and Feynman. The anticipation surrounding his presentation indicates a potential shift in the understanding of black hole physics.
  • #51
A more relevant Samir Mathur paper?

I was checking out other Samir mathur papers and saw this.

"It will be interesting to address dynamical questions with the above picture. It is possible that infalling matter falls straight through the ‘fuzzball’ towards r = 0 (as if it were falling through a conventional horizon), but over the Hawking evaporation time information is transferred to the ‘light fractional modes’ and into the radiation."

No mechanism is proposed for how matter plummeting to the center of the hole should give up its information to the "giant tangle of strings" or whatever dwells in the hole.

but it is "possible" that it some how does transfer its information to the fuzzball or whatever dwelleth in the hole.

Now how might such information be transferred out thru the event horizon and percolate into the Hawking radiation witnessed by the outsider world?

"... we have argued that bound states swell upto a size of order the horizon radius; thus the interior of the horizon is not just ‘empty space with a central singularity’. This makes it possible for radiation from the hole to pick up information from the ‘hair’ and avoid the information paradox."

Again it is suggested to be possible for Hawking radiation leaving the hole to have "picked up"---perhaps the idea is "to be infected by" as one picks up a flu germ---information encoded in the tangle that dwells in the hole.
I guess the possibility is shown by proximity---because the tangle extends out to the horizon where the radiation is. But again no mechanism.

The above quotes are from the conclusions of

"Where are the states of a black hole?"
Samir D. Mathur
7 pages
http://arxiv.org/hep-th/0401115

Abstract: "We argue that bound states of branes have a size that is of the same order as the horizon radius of the corresponding black hole. Thus the interior of a black hole is not `empty space with a central singularity', and Hawking radiation can pick up information from the degrees of freedom of the hole."

My comment:
As yet no mechanism for the info to seep out thru the event horizon and be transcribed into the Hawking radiation.
Hawking radiation is usually considered on theoretical grounds to be "thermal" which means it doesn't carry information----thermal blackbody radiation is the nondescript generic glow corresponding to a given temperature.

thanks to MadIce for calling attention to Mathur's interesting work
I hope everyone checks it out and sees what it actually says.
Salutes to Mathur for ingeniously proposing some string theory getaway
routes---though as yet without means for the information to travel them.
I remain skeptical as to anyone actually having resolved the Info Paradox, at least in the way Mathur and others appear to want it resolved
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #52
sol2 said:
To your question, one just has to look at the http://www-glast.sonoma.edu/index.html Let it load and look at the ways in which we can look at the universe.

That's a nice page, and yes, I know that we can see our observable universe in LOTS of wavelengths. That was not my point, though.

The theories relating to the Big Bang are generally agreed to be consistent with observations to a remarkable degree of accuracy, BUT this has been accomplished by invoking all kinds of things that cannot be observed or measured, except by testing for self-consistency within the various flavors of cosmological theory. All our physics falls apart near the BB singularity, and we need to invoke inflation, dark matter and dark energy to explain the current state of the (presumed) accelerating expansion of the universe, etc, etc. The constant tweaking and refining necessary to hold standard BB theory together troubles me. It seems that as our grasp of the nature of the universe improves, we should be able to do away with some of these band-aids, and not have to apply more and more of them.

Observational astronomers keep discovering older and older quasars and very massive luminous galaxies (at least if they are at the cosmological distances implied by their redshifts), which leads us inescapably to the conclusion that either the very early universe was much more highly ordered than we can account for with the current standard heirarchical model OR perhaps there may be other causes for the high redshift observed in these objects, so that high redshift does not perfectly equate to distance and age. When the monster binocular telescope comes on line, I predict that astronomers will discover objects that are even more highly redshifted than the ones currently known. When that day comes, we are going to have to take a hard look at the 13.7Gy age of the universe. I hope it will prompt some fresh re-assessments and not just a new layer of band-aids.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top