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
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
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?”