Rethinking the origins of the universe

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the origins of the universe, specifically the existence of black holes and the implications of a new mathematical proof proposed by Laura Mersini-Houghton that suggests black holes cannot exist. Participants explore the tension between theoretical predictions and observational evidence regarding black holes.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants highlight Mersini-Houghton's mathematical proof that claims black holes can never come into being, suggesting a need to rethink the fabric of space-time and the origins of the universe.
  • Others argue that the article discussing Mersini-Houghton's work lacks clarity and recommend focusing on the original papers available on arXiv instead.
  • One participant emphasizes the importance of observational evidence over mathematical proofs, stating that the substantial evidence supporting the existence of black holes raises doubts about Mersini-Houghton's claims.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity of Mersini-Houghton's proof and the existence of black holes, with some supporting her claims while others defend the established observational evidence for black holes.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the tension between theoretical predictions and observational data, highlighting the unresolved nature of the discussion regarding the existence of black holes and the implications of Mersini-Houghton's work.

Shadowmaru
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Black holes have long captured the public imagination and been the subject of popular culture, from Star Trek to Hollywood. They are the ultimate unknown – the blackest and most dense objects in the universe that do not even let light escape.
And as if they weren’t bizarre enough to begin with, now add this to the mix: they don’t exist.
By merging two seemingly conflicting theories, Laura Mersini-Houghton, a physics professor at UNC-Chapel Hill in the College of Arts and Sciences, has proven, mathematically, that black holes can never come into being in the first place. The work not only forces scientists to reimagine the fabric of space-time, but also rethink the origins of the universe.
“I’m still not over the shock,” said Mersini-Houghton. “We’ve been studying this problem for a more than 50 years and this solution gives us a lot to think about.”
For decades, black holes were thought to form when a massive star collapses under its own gravity to a single point in space – imagine the Earth being squished into a ball the size of a peanut – called a singularity. So the story went, an invisible membrane known as the event horizon surrounds the singularity and crossing this horizon means that you could never cross back. It’s the point where a black hole’s gravitational pull is so strong that nothing can escape it.
The reason black holes are so bizarre is that it pits two fundamental theories of the universe against each other. Einstein’s theory of gravity predicts the formation of black holes but a fundamental law of quantum theory states that no information from the universe can ever disappear. Efforts to combine these two theories lead to mathematical nonsense, and became known as the information loss paradox.

http://unc.edu/spotlight/rethinking-the-origins-of-the-universe/
Papers at link.

So, what do we think, on to something ?
 
Space news on Phys.org
The papers are what matter.
 
A time honored tradition in science is observation trumps math. No amount of mathematical proof is sufficient to refute observational evidence. The choice is clear - either Mersini-Houghton's 'proof', or the mountain of evidence supporting the existence of black holes is suspect.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 134 ·
5
Replies
134
Views
12K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K