Is Stephen Hawking's Black Hole Math Still Considered

[JMS61]

Is Stephen Hawking's Black Hole Math still considered speculative physics by the physics community?

 

[phyzguy]

Do you mean Hawking radiation? Since there are no measurements confirming that Hawking radiation exists, then I think it would have to still be considered speculative. Or perhaps "unconfirmed" is a better word.

 

[JMS61]

Do you mean Hawking radiation? Since there are no measurements confirming that Hawking radiation exists, then I think it would have to still be considered speculative. Or perhaps "unconfirmed" is a better word.

Thank you phyzguy, that is what I wanted to know. It is turning out that most of what we normal folks consider theoretical physics is actually considered speculative physics by the physics community and not true physics. I did pretty good in physics and math although I do admit that my degree is in the biological sciences. And when I was visiting Stanford U, back in the day, one of the physicist that I was talking to did explain to me that you can not talk to a physicist if you can not speak their language. So I guess as a novice of the language of physics that I seemed to have gotten the impression that theoretical physics was the best explanation that we have at any given point in time and that absolutely proven physics (predicable results every single time) was considered practical physics.

Thank you phyzguy for the word "unconfirmed", it is appreciated.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

absolutely proven physics.

Can you give me an example of absolutely proven physics?

 

[JMS61]

At what is generally considered the atmospheric pressure at sea level, distilled water freezes at 0 degrees centigrade every single time.

Predictable physics always requires a defined environmental range. If the environmental range is not properly defined, then predictability goes out the window. Which is why the language of physics can involve some very difficult math in it's attempt to define environmental range.

 

[nismaratwork]

Do you mean Hawking radiation? Since there are no measurements confirming that Hawking radiation exists, then I think it would have to still be considered speculative. Or perhaps "unconfirmed" is a better word.

The only analogue I know of was sonic... actually... there was recently a laser used for the same purpose; to create an event horizon. Still, even though the results looked good for HR... who knows if it will ever be possible to confirm or falsify anything like that.

Unless... Tell you what, in a few trillion years, let's meet here and see if those puppies are radiating?