Liberate all the matter from a black hole

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the theoretical implications of dark energy's potential to liberate matter from black holes. Participants argue that while dark energy may increase over time, it cannot overcome the gravitational pull of a black hole, as the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light. The concept of using infinite repulsive energy to disrupt a black hole is dismissed as speculative and inconsistent with current physics. The conversation highlights the importance of adhering to established scientific principles when exploring such theoretical scenarios.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of black hole physics, particularly event horizons and singularities.
  • Familiarity with dark energy and its role in cosmology.
  • Knowledge of general relativity and its implications for gravity.
  • Awareness of the scientific method and the importance of peer-reviewed research.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties and theories surrounding dark energy, including its potential effects on cosmic structures.
  • Study the mechanics of black holes, focusing on escape velocity and gravitational effects near singularities.
  • Explore the implications of general relativity in theoretical physics, particularly in relation to black holes and dark energy.
  • Investigate current scientific literature on speculative theories regarding the future of the universe and dark energy's role.
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for theoretical physicists, cosmologists, and students interested in the interplay between dark energy and black holes, as well as anyone exploring speculative ideas within the framework of established scientific principles.

  • #31


salvestrom said:
Oddly enough the charley link in you signature, marcus,...

Imagination has driven absolutely everything we have ever done. Don't knock it so readily.

Where was I knocking imagination so readily? :biggrin: My only contribution to this thread so far has been the preceding two posts: #28 and #29.
Not being interested in somebody else's flight of fancy is not the same as knocking imagination. One has to be selective. So I reserve the right not to be interested in "big rip".

they've been looking for 10 years or more for signs that Lambda is not constant, e.g. increasing. So far the evidence that it is simply a constant of nature keeps piling up. Since 2005 we gradually hear less and less about "quintessence" and "big rip" in the professional literature. Imagination has to dance with the evidence. When they are really in step with each other you can't tell which is leading. I think that's right--something like that :wink:
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
  • #32


marcus said:
I don't know anything about you but it seems abstractly speaking like a reasonable question to ask. A person could learn by asking it. I'm not sure I know enough to respond adequately but I will try a little anyway.

I'm sorry, I don't see how a question asking about jacking dark energy up to an infinite level is "reasonable". Nor how messing with the cosmological constant could teach anyone much of anything. It just seem like the normal "what ifs" we usually get here on PF that we usually don't allow.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
805
  • · Replies 134 ·
5
Replies
134
Views
11K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K