When can true singularity take place? Was the big bang the only chance

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter baywax
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang Singularity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of singularities, particularly in relation to black holes and the Big Bang. Participants explore the nature of singularities, their definitions, and whether black holes can be considered true singularities. The conversation includes philosophical perspectives and the implications of observing singularities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the definition of 'singularity,' suggesting it may simply denote a lack of understanding or knowledge.
  • Others propose that black holes contain singularities, which have observable effects, but the nature of these singularities remains unknown.
  • A philosophical definition of a singularity is suggested as an event that occurs without interaction with other elements, raising questions about observation and knowledge.
  • Some argue that a new understanding is required to explain singularities, similar to the challenges of reconciling classical mechanics with quantum mechanics.
  • There is a discussion about the Big Bang providing an outside view of the universe, with claims that physical laws do not apply outside this context.
  • Participants express differing views on whether the universe itself could be considered a singularity, with some emphasizing the speculative nature of such claims.
  • Disagreement exists regarding the relationship between black holes and singularities, with some asserting they are distinct while others argue they are interconnected.
  • Definitions of singularity are debated, with some participants emphasizing the importance of precise definitions in the context of black holes.
  • One participant mentions that the size of singularities within black holes is unknown, and that current understanding breaks down at these points.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of singularities or their relationship to black holes. Multiple competing views and definitions are presented, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include varying definitions of singularity, the dependence on philosophical interpretations, and unresolved questions about the nature of black holes and singularities.

  • #61


Pythagorean said:
It's a loaded challenge. Many aspects of gravitational singularity are described mathematically (even the wiki authors know that).

What aspects specifically are you referring to? I haven't read the wiki but my usual reference - Penrose's "the Road to reality" say no such thing.


"There is no math describing a gravitational singularity" may be true if you spin it the right way, but then it would be a meaningless and irrelevant statement.


No, i meant what i said. There is no math describing spacetime singularities.



So there's really no defending it.


I try to stay on the safe side, hence my statements are usually much stronger when I am perfectly aware that there is no empirical way to test the veracity of a theory that lies very very far in the future. Maybe you should explain in more detail what you meant so that i know what to reply to. I am completely in the dark as to what your above statements were supposed to mean.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #63


Maui said:
No, i meant what i said. There is no math describing spacetime singularities.

R. Geroch, Annals of Phys. v.48, p.526 (1968).
D. Christodoulou, Annals of Mathematics v.140, p.607 (1994).
etc...

Zz.
 
  • #64


We won't know for quite sometime, if someone's arguing a certain point through proposed mathematical structures, depict spacetime singularities(or something quite fictitious) without some sort of empirical verification. Kind of leans towards the absurdly complex mathematics in ST that still has no empirical verification whatsoever. But there is nothing fundamenta lly wrong in being hopeful.
 
  • #65


Maui said:
We won't know for quite sometime, if someone's arguing a certain point through proposed mathematical structures, depict spacetime singularities(or something quite fictitious) without some sort of empirical verification. Kind of leans towards the absurdly complex mathematics in ST that still has no empirical verification whatsoever. But there is nothing fundamenta lly wrong in being hopeful.

But this is beside the point. You're arguing that there is NO gravitational/spacetime singularity of any kind. That in itself has no "empirical verification" either. I merely pointed out that there are plenty of theoretical papers that would counter your assertion.

Again, this is more suited to be done in the SR/GR forum where people who are more familiar with this area hang out. This is not a philosophy topic anymore.

Zz.
 
  • #66


I agree with Zapper on this. Why speculate when there are experts in another part of Physics Forums.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K