STEPHEN HAWKING HASN'T SOLVED THE BLACK HOLE PARADOX JUST YET - The mystery of black holes and information loss is too thorny for a quick resolution By Clara Moskowitz | August 27, 2015 |

1.  “Over time a black hole can theoretically emit so much radiation that it completely evaporates. That outcome, however, presents a problem because it seems to suggest that black holes destroy information…”

2nd OPINION: We are confused, think what is radiation?, What is light? They all are the form Dark Energy. Better to say packet or quantum of Dark energy. We have to rethink all the definition on the perspective of UNIVERSAL SCIENCE [based on 4% + 96%]

Reference: It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & formation of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15] 

The information is never lost.

Reference: POINT No. – 12  [dated 24th, Jan’2015]

http://swarajgroups.blogspot.in/search?updated-min=2015-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2015-02-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=3

2.  “A black hole may arise, for example, from the death of a large star that has run out of fuel for nuclear fusion and collapsed under its own gravity.”

2nd OPINION: I want to contradict that black holes are formed from the death of large star. Black hole may formed during the collision of the stars. But spin of the stars play an important role. The reason of collisions are also different.

Reference: My comments dated 13th & 20th, June’ 2013

http://www.universetoday.com/102780/a-rare-oppurtunity-to-watch-a-blue-straggler-forming/

3.  “They have only three properties: mass, charge and angular momentum; …”

2nd OPINION: What if the mass of a black hole is ZERO?

4. “I propose that the information is stored not in the interior of the black hole as one might expect but on its boundary, the event horizon,” he said.

2nd OPINION: Information carried by the incoming particles, better to says ‘white atom just destructed near the outer surface of the black hole [from halo side] & created at other side of black hole [disc side]. We can’t ignore the role of Dark atom & Dark energy here.

Reference: POINT No. – 12  [dated 24th, Jan’2015]

5.  Hossenfelder adds, “but it is somewhat unclear right now how this happens and how efficiently it happens. Also, the mechanism they have to store information actually allows them to store too much information!”

2nd OPINION: This happen very efficiently by the “UNLOADING & RELOADING” mechanism. There is no need of storing much information. It is so simple “take what you give”.

6.  “Black holes are perplexing objects in part because they invoke two different theories of nature—quantum mechanics, which governs the subatomic world, and general relativity, which describes gravity and reigns on large cosmic scales. Yet the two theories are fundamentally incompatible. What physicists need is a way to describe gravity according to quantum rules. By invoking both quantum mechanics and relativity, the information-loss paradox “gives us a chance to focus what we know and what we don’t know and to try to work out the implications of different hypotheses about quantum gravity,” says physicist Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Ontario.”

2nd OPINION: Gravitation is a PUSHING FORCE – arising due to the unification of the dark energy. This will be the single explanation for  GR & Quantum level.

Reference:  Since 2013 I have been writing

http://swarajgroups.blogspot.in/2015/03/planck-puts-einstein-to-test.html

http://phys.org/news/2015-03-planck-einstein.html

The physics world is abuzz this week with news that Stephen Hawking has solved the famous black hole information paradox—and that he has even discovered “a way to escape from a black hole.” The giddy announcements are somewhat premature, however—this paradox looks like it has staying power.

Hawking, a physicist at the University of Cambridge, first uncovered the conundrum in the 1970s when he predicted that black holes—supposedly inescapable gravitational pits—actually leak light, called Hawking radiation. Over time a black hole can theoretically emit so much radiation that it completely evaporates. That outcome, however, presents a problem because it seems to suggest that black holes destroy information—a definite nonstarter according to the theory of quantum mechanics.

A paradox

Black holes, like everything else, should preserve a quantum mechanical record of their formation. A black hole may arise, for example, from the death of a large star that has run out of fuel for nuclear fusion and collapsed under its own gravity. According to quantum mechanics, the black hole should store the information about the star that gave birth to it as well as any matter that has fallen in since. But if the black hole someday evaporates, it would seem that information would be destroyed.

Physicists have tried to find a way for the information to escape the black hole’s demise via the Hawking radiation. The problem with this scenario, however, is that black holes appear to have no way to impart information to this radiation. Black holes, in fact, are very simple objects according to the theory of general relativity, which first predicted their existence. They have only three properties: mass, charge and angular momentum; other than those quantities, they have no characteristics, no other details—in physicists’ vernacular, they have “no hair.”

Hawking unveiled a potential “answer” to the information-loss paradox—a way to give black holes hair—during a presentation given at the KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm on August 25: “I propose that the information is stored not in the interior of the black hole as one might expect but on its boundary, the event horizon,” he said. The event horizon is the theoretical border of a black hole, a spherical “point of no return” for incoming matter. Hawking further suggested that the information resides in so-called “supertranslations” on the event horizon, which are imprints that would cause a shift in the position or the timing of the particles that are emitted via Hawking radiation. These supertranslations would be formed by the particles of the dead star and any other matter that fell into the black hole when they first crossed the event horizon. Hawking admitted that the information would not be readily retrievable but maintained that it at least would not be destroyed, thereby resolving the paradox. “The information about the ingoing particles is returned but in a chaotically useless form,” he said. “For all practical purposes the information is lost.”

A “greater state of confusion”

Most physicists say it is too early to know whether Hawking’s idea is a real step forward. His presentation was brief; he and two collaborators—Cambridge physicist Malcolm Perry and Andrew Strominger of Harvard University—plan to publish a paper in coming months detailing their idea further. “I think [the idea] has promise,” says Sabine Hossenfelder, a physicist at the Nordic Institute for Theoretical Physics who attended the talk. “But so far it is not a full solution.”

Hawking described the basics behind his idea that supertranslations can encode information. “That may be,” Hossenfelder adds, “but it is somewhat unclear right now how this happens and how efficiently it happens. Also, the mechanism they have to store information actually allows them to store too much information!”

And supertranslations are hardly the only solution on the table. In recent years physicists have come up with a host of ideas to solve—or further complicate—the information-loss paradox. “To be completely honest I must say that [the paradox] is in an even bigger confusion now than it has ever been before,” observes physicist Ulf Danielsson of Sweden’s Uppsala University, who was in attendance for the presentation. “With Hawking saying that he has solved the information paradox, to me that means now there’s another ingredient that is coming in, and the question is: Will this actually resolve anything or just leave us in an even greater state of confusion? I’m not really sure.”

Larger mysteries

Whatever happens to Hawking’s scenario, the topic will continue to be a hot-button issue in physics. The question is not just an arcane consideration about black holes—it is deeply tied to larger mysteries about the nature and origin of the universe. And to answer the question physicists will probably need not just a better understanding of black holes but a full theory of quantum gravity—a theory that has so far been missing.

Black holes are perplexing objects in part because they invoke two different theories of nature—quantum mechanics, which governs the subatomic world, and general relativity, which describes gravity and reigns on large cosmic scales. Yet the two theories are fundamentally incompatible. What physicists need is a way to describe gravity according to quantum rules. By invoking both quantum mechanics and relativity, the information-loss paradox “gives us a chance to focus what we know and what we don’t know and to try to work out the implications of different hypotheses about quantum gravity,” says physicist Lee Smolin of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Ontario.

Smolin and Hossenfelder recently collaborated on a review paper that summarized all the various possible solutions to the information-loss puzzle and concluded that they mostly fall into six categories, each taking a different tack to resolve the apparent paradox. One possibility is that information really is destroyed—perhaps that prohibition of quantum mechanics is wrong. Another is that inside a black hole a new region of spacetime forms a sort of baby universe, in which information is preserved. Other solutions involve theoretical objects called “white holes”—the opposite of black holes, in which the flow of time is reversed and nothing can fall in, only out (information included). Then there is the chance that black holes never quite evaporate—they only shrink down to incredibly small sizes, thereby preserving the information. Or perhaps information is somehow copied from inside a black hole to outside, so that when the black hole is destroyed the outside copy remains. And finally there are proposals in which information is encoded on a black hole’s horizon in various ways—Hawking’s idea falls into this category. “I think the real situation is unfortunately that we have a puzzle and we have several ways out and we just don’t know enough,” Smolin says. “It might even be that in nature there are different kinds of black holes and some resolve the puzzle in one way and others resolve it in another.”

However the solution turns out, it may affect not just black holes but also a theoretically related event—the big bang. The small, dense state of black holes is very similar to the presumed situation of our universe at its birth, and many of the same physical considerations apply. In both cases the mathematics currently predict a “singularity”—a point of spacetime that is infinitely dense and infinitely small. Some physicists say these infinities are proof that the equations are wrong whereas others maintain that the singularity is a physical reality. If the resolution of the information-loss paradox comes from a quantum theory of gravity that eliminates the singularity, it could imply a different origin for our universe. “Is there still a first moment of time,” Smolin asks, “or does the singularity get eliminated and turn into a bounce so that there was an era of the universe before the big bang?”

“Tiny fountain of atoms sparks big insights into dark energy” – By Adrian Cho 20 August 2015 2:15 pm

“For more than a decade, physicists have been puzzling over dark energy, the mysterious stuff that’s blowing space apart and has been detected only by studying the universe on the largest scales”

2nd OPINION: Dark energy is the universal thing. Everything is made up of it. Since it is thermophobic, universe is expending. Unification of Dark energy create the 5th force.

It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & formation of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15]

“The discovery of dark energy rocked physics and cosmology”

2nd OPINION: Dark energy, Dark atom & white atom starts UNIVERSAL SCIENCE

“two teams of cosmologists showed that in fact the expansion is accelerating by studying stellar explosions called supernovae”. 

2nd OPINION: Dark energy formed where fusion reaction takes place. During supernova blast fusion is accelerated tremendously [heavy elements are formed in outer surface. For HOW?  Refer my oral presentation in Vietnam

It is the part of my oral presentation on “Regeneration of Star & formation of a Solar system – a Potter man's concept” in International Science conference [“Planetary System – a synergistic view”] at Vietnam [19th-25th , July’15]

“But what is dark energy? ”

2nd OPINION: Ref. my oral presentation in Vietnam

“…quantum field would affect things like the orbits of the planets in the solar system—but dark energy doesn’t seem to”.

2nd OPINION: I contradict, the orbit of planets in the solar system is controlled by Dark energy. For how? Pl. refer my oral presentation in Vietnam.

It's a study in contrasts. For more than a decade, physicists have been puzzling over dark energy, the mysterious stuff that’s blowing space apart and has been detected only by studying the universe on the largest scales. Now, researchers have probed its properties using about the smallest tools available—atoms falling freely in a vacuum chamber. The experiment, reported today in Science, doesn't  reveal what dark energy is, but it helps nail down what it isn't. In particular, it narrows the prospects for one popular idea: that dark energy resides in hypothesized "chameleon particles" hiding in plain sight.

"I find it exciting to be able to use laboratory-scale experiments to test such ideas," says Amol Upadhye, a theoretical physicist at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, who was not involved in the work. The test doesn’t entirely rule out chameleons, he says, but future improvements might put the idea to the ultimate test.

The discovery of dark energy rocked physics and cosmology. Scientists thought the expansion of the universe was slowing, as the galaxies tugged on one another with their gravity and counteracted the expansion that began with the big bang. However, in 1998, two teams of cosmologists showed that in fact the expansion is accelerating by studying stellar explosions called supernovae. The result has been bolstered by analyses of galaxy clusters, the afterglow of the big bang (the cosmic microwave background), and other cosmological phenomena. Physicists attribute the acceleration to some sort of space-stretching dark energy.

But what is dark energy? There are two possibilities. It could be energy hidden in the vacuum of empty space itself—a cosmological constant, as Albert Einstein hypothesized in 1917. Or it could be a quantum field that fills space and blows it up like a balloon. Both alternatives have problems. Given the standard model of particle physics, theorists can calculate what the cosmological constant should be, and they get a value vastly too big to explain the relatively modest acceleration—suggesting some unknown physics just zeroes it out. On the other hand, the presence of a quantum field would affect things like the orbits of the planets in the solar system—but dark energy doesn’t seem to.

That's where chameleon particles come in. The hypothetical particles would make up just such a quantum field, but they would interact with matter in a way that would make the field vanish wherever the density of matter was high. Thus the field would exert no noticeable effect on things like planets. "The chameleon, like many other theoretical ideas, has a small probability of being there," says Justin Khoury, a theoretical cosmologist at the University of Pennsylvania and co-inventor of the concept. "Nonetheless we should test it if we can."

That's just what Khoury, Holger Müller, an atomic physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, and colleagues have done. To search for a chameleon field, they studied the interactions between an aluminum sphere 9.5 millimeters in diameter and a puff of 10 million ultracold cesium atoms within a vacuum chamber. If there were a chameleon field within the vacuum, then the sphere would squash it. And like a bowling ball on a trampoline, the sphere would bend the field just outside its surface, causing the field’s strength to taper to zero. The cloud of atoms would slide down the sloping field, experiencing a short-range force toward the sphere. Crucially, the cloud itself was not dense enough to suppress the field and spoil the effect. "In the simplest terms, we're looking for a funny force between the sphere and the atoms," Müller says.

That force would come in addition to the pull of Earth's gravity. So, the researchers repeated the experiment in two different configurations. In one, they dropped the atoms from 8.8 millimeters above the sphere, close enough for the sloping chameleon field to exert a force. They used an exquisitely sensitive technique called atom interferometry to measure the cesium atoms’ acceleration as they fell for about 20 milliseconds (see figure). In the other configuration, they dropped the atoms well to the side of the sphere, where the chameleon field should have been uniform and produced no force. So, if there were a chameleon field, the atoms would accelerate downward faster when dropped above the sphere. In fact, in both configurations, the atoms accelerated at the same rate to within a precision of 1 part in 1 million.

Curiously, neither Müller nor Khoury thought up the experiment. Instead, it was proposed by Clare Burrage and Edmund Copeland of the University of Nottingham in the United Kingdom and Edward Hinds of Imperial College London, in a paper they posted to the arXiv preprint server a year ago. "Of course I was disappointed that they did it before us," Hinds says, "but they already had a suitable apparatus, while we have had to build an experiment specifically for the purpose."

At its current precision, the experiment rules out only chameleons whose interaction with matter—the thing that makes the field go away where the matter density is high—is much stronger than gravity, Khoury says. Those that interact with matter more weakly are still viable, he says. Müller says that his team aims to improve the precision of their experiment to 1 part in 1 billion, which should put the chameleon to the ultimate test. Hinds is trying to beat Müller to that goal. And even if the chameleon concept dies, there are other ways to hide a quantum field that would produce dark energy.

Posted in Physics

Tweet

Science| DOI: 10.1126/science.aad1653