Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!

Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory! - Physics Forum

Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory! - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-16-2004, 12:04 AM
Double-A
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!



Hawking RECANTS on Black Hole Theory!

Stephen Hawking now says that what goes in to a black hole CAN come
out!

Hawking now says that physical singularities DO NOT EXIST after all!

Hawking admits he was WRONG when he theorized that information going
into a black hole was lost forever. He has further agreed to PAY OFF
on a longstanding bet with a colleague on this matter!

This seems to have been a triumph of the ideas of Quantum Gravity.

See the article:

[Only registered users see links. ]

(No, this isn't the April 1st edition of Nature.)

See also:

[Only registered users see links. ]

And for a slightly more sympathetic take:

[Only registered users see links. ]

Simply amazing!

Double-A
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-16-2004, 05:15 AM
MorituriMax
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!

Double-A wrote:

Really? Strange I seem to recall scientists change their minds on all kinds of
things once they determine they may have been in error.

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-16-2004, 10:43 AM
nightbat
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!

nightbat wrote

Double-A wrote:

nightbat

Amazing to you perhaps Double-A but not to some of us Mavericks
that have been pointing the way for so many years. If only Scott in alt.
astronomy could see your post, I'm sure he would find it very
interesting. The science newsgroup Kings of the Mavericks take little
consolation in Mr. Hawking's flip flop since it has been amply pointed
out by the more humble and enlightened of energy's indestructibility and
therefore of its information alternate mutual transference in any
gravitational field, strong or weak. It takes a big man to admit he's
wrong, and a greater one to get it right. The black hole theoretical
resolution was long ago presented via nightbat's singularity of the
profound " Black Comet " that even the Darla and company aliens took
notice of. Illusory Shastry may think singularity is point total
consciousness, but if he only was really conscious, perhaps he would of
understood its simple resolution and nightbat theorem. Not only Hawking
but the rest of the theoretical astro science boys need to catch up to
the logical Maverick beautiful theoretical mind likes of Uncle Al,
Varney, oc for Wolter, Painius, OG, Ralph, Old Man, Mr. Green, nightbat,
and select others, to try to get a viable bigger cosmic physics picture.
Poor posting friend to all Bert, this Hawking turn around will be
devastating news to him for he so depends on the main streams prolific
writing and books to get his " what if " thoughts from. Now that Darla
has blown net fan kisses at nightbat it has gotten Bert in a fit for he
thought he could win Darla's attention with sweet pies, and sci fi not
logic. Darla goes both ways, nightbat goes only one way, to solution, is
there any other way?

Thanks for the links Double-A, here is another for you, and if
responding to me, hint, just drop Followup-To for fun.

See:
[Only registered users see links. ]


ponder on,
the nightbat

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-16-2004, 12:58 PM
brian
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!


"MorituriMax" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:hwJJc.48363$[Only registered users see links. ].com...
kinds of
In recent months I had been wondering how much energy escaped from the
Blackhole in the form of radiation, there no published figures on the
subject, I tended to dismiss it thinking that amount of radiation would
sterilise the whole universe, so the amount of energy I had decided was
small., there must be another form of outlet, or this newish theory is
wrong.
And then I am back in the room behind the Blackhole where all matter is
stored until it bursts at the seams, and gives birth to another big bang, or
small one whatever you may wish to think, theory is just that strong idea's
usually, but all we have, and lets face it all we are likely to have or
obtain until that ultimate understanding of the universe comes along and
bites us on the bum.


Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-16-2004, 01:03 PM
colin
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!


"MorituriMax" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:hwJJc.48363$[Only registered users see links. ].com...
kinds of

any good engineer worth his salt knows that singularities wich apear in many
usefull equations dont realy exist IRL and knows how to avoid using the
equation in that region.

Colin =^.^=


Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-16-2004, 01:54 PM
Laurent
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!


"nightbat" <[Only registered users see links. ].com> wrote in message
news:[Only registered users see links. ].com...
come
all!
going
PAY OFF
Gravity.
[Only registered users see links. ]
Mavericks
in alt.
little
pointed
indestructibility and
he's
theoretical
the
took
would of
Hawking
up to
nightbat,
picture.
prolific
Darla
for he
not
solution, is

I read some of what Hawking said, and it seems to me that he was
talking about information ABOUT the black hole coming out, nothing
about information going in being preserved and them coming back out
in the form radiation.

--
Laurent


Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-16-2004, 02:14 PM
Lobsang Norbu
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!

Thanks for the link. It was a very interesting article. MorituriMax was
right though, generally when physicists are wrong about something they
change their minds. It doesn't seem at all strange that he changed his mind.
Even the most intelligent people can be wrong about things. Really not that
amazing, but certainly still interesting and worthy of reading.

"Double-A" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message
news:79094630.0407151604.1e7542ea@posting.google.c om...


Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-16-2004, 03:07 PM
Eric Gisse
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!

[Only registered users see links. ] (Double-A) wrote in message news:<79094630.0407151604.1e7542ea@posting.google. com>...


[snip]

Interesting, if light on the details that aren't hand-wavy.

Right now would be a very good time to take a trip to Ireland, *sigh*.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-16-2004, 03:57 PM
alistair
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!

A black hole is under no obligation to release information in Hawking
radiation.Provided it obeys the second law of thermodynamics , that is
all it needs to do.There may be no singularity in a black hole and
microstates may exist in the hole, but they do not necessarily have to
appear in radiation, not if there are particles other than Hawking
radiation that can escape from the hole.A point in case is gravitons -
if they exist - they must escape from the balck hole to have an effect
on other masses.I would suspect that if Hawking is right, then he will
have had to remove the singularity from both the black hole and from
the beginning of the universe as a whole.
And there's also the question of energy conservation in general
relativity -
energy is not usually conserved in general relativity.This is at odds
with every other branch of physics.GR needs to have energy
conservation built into it so that it can be combined with quantum
mechanics - in which there is energy conservation - to give quantum
gravity and a clear picture of what goes on in black holes.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-17-2004, 02:05 AM
MorituriMax
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Hawking Recants on Black Hole Theory!

Laurent wrote:


No it was about things that go INTO the black hole, and how you have to have the
information stored in some form within, so that the information can come back
OUT at some point in the future.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
black , hawking , hole , recants , theory


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moving Dimensions Theory Book Due Out in Fall 05--Very Rough Draft: 4th Dimensions Expanding Relative to 3 Spatial Dimensions jollyrogership@yahoo.com Physics Forum 64 03-31-2012 10:24 AM
Simply put, MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY is THE NEW MODEL: http://physicsmathforums.com drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 0 08-29-2006 06:32 AM
Moving Dimensions Theory!! Rock On!! drelliot@gmail.com Physics Forum 1 07-06-2006 05:19 PM
Superstrings... Do Wah Ditty Physics Forum 0 11-11-2003 08:01 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.21324 seconds with 16 queries