Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

Stephen Hawking: 'There are no black holes'

black holes stephen hawking

  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#1    Still Waters

Still Waters

    Deeply Mysterious

  • 36,880 posts
  • Joined:01 Jun 2008
  • Gender:Female

  • Que Sera, Sera - Whatever will be, will be..

Posted 25 January 2014 - 01:34 PM

Stephen Hawking has produced a "mind-bending" new theory that argues black holes do not actually exist - at least not in the way we currently perceive them.

Instead, in his paper, Information Preservation and Weather Forecasting for Black Holes, Hawking proposes that black holes can exist without 'event horizons', the invisible cover believed to shroud every black hole.

http://www.independe...es-9085016.html

Posted Image

#2    Hazzard

Hazzard

    Stellar Black Hole

  • Member
  • 11,757 posts
  • Joined:25 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside Voyager 1.

  • Being skeptical of the paranormal is a good thing.

Posted 25 January 2014 - 02:13 PM

Hazzard has produced another mind-bending theory : "There is no Stephen Hawking".

I still await the compelling Exhibit A.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

#3    Ryu

Ryu

    Born to fail.

  • Member
  • 3,328 posts
  • Joined:17 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Where you'll never find me

  • Just because I do not agree doesn't mean I don't understand.

Posted 25 January 2014 - 02:15 PM

Though I am obviously no scientist I often wondered about science's common claim about black holes that endlessly suck up everything.

As I understand it, there is only so much matter that can be collected and compressed before some sort of limit is reached. I mean, something has to give, right? Regardless of what it is transmuted into, it has to go somewhere and if the "hole" is feeding off of the matter it collects then the entity would have to get bigger or emanate something.

As for light, (though it strays a bit from the subject) maybe light itself (at least visible light) is something other than just a particle or wave. Maybe both, maybe neither or perhaps something in between but I would think that even light would have to be transmuted into something else as it passes into and perhaps out of the black "hole".

It just seems odd to me to have a entity that just vacuums up matter and have nothing to show for it; even batteries (for example) have their limits and either burst or simply quit absorbing electricity and might even start releasing stray bursts. I don't know.
Still it is great to see scientists challenging popular theories.

Edited by Ryu, 25 January 2014 - 02:29 PM.


#4    Talion78

Talion78

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 9 posts
  • Joined:20 Jan 2014
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 25 January 2014 - 02:16 PM

I can't wait for Disney to release a new version of the 80's classic
"metastable bound states of the gravitational field" I loved that film.


#5    Ryu

Ryu

    Born to fail.

  • Member
  • 3,328 posts
  • Joined:17 Dec 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Where you'll never find me

  • Just because I do not agree doesn't mean I don't understand.

Posted 25 January 2014 - 02:20 PM

View PostTalion78, on 25 January 2014 - 02:16 PM, said:

I can't wait for Disney to release a new version of the 80's classic
"metastable bound states of the gravitational field" I loved that film.

Hehehe....what?


#6    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 January 2014 - 03:09 PM

View PostRyu, on 25 January 2014 - 02:15 PM, said:

Though I am obviously no scientist I often wondered about science's common claim about black holes that endlessly suck up everything.

As I understand it, there is only so much matter that can be collected and compressed before some sort of limit is reached. I mean, something has to give, right? Regardless of what it is transmuted into, it has to go somewhere and if the "hole" is feeding off of the matter it collects then the entity would have to get bigger or emanate something.

As for light, (though it strays a bit from the subject) maybe light itself (at least visible light) is something other than just a particle or wave. Maybe both, maybe neither or perhaps something in between but I would think that even light would have to be transmuted into something else as it passes into and perhaps out of the black "hole".

It just seems odd to me to have a entity that just vacuums up matter and have nothing to show for it; even batteries (for example) have their limits and either burst or simply quit absorbing electricity and might even start releasing stray bursts. I don't know.
Still it is great to see scientists challenging popular theories.
I don't think Dr. Hawking is saying there are no black holes that endlessly suck everything just that we must rethink our ideas about the event horizon

Edited by spacecowboy342, 25 January 2014 - 03:10 PM.


#7    Hawkin

Hawkin

    LiverEatenJohnson

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,334 posts
  • Joined:21 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • Some say he is dead.
    Some say he will never be.

Posted 25 January 2014 - 03:54 PM

No Aliens, No Bigfoot, No Black Holes. Yep, science has got it all figured out.


#8    Rolci

Rolci

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 563 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 25 January 2014 - 03:56 PM

So what he's saying is, everything here: http://www.physics.u...6b/lectures.pdf is wrong. Just think of all the wasted work that went into all of it. And it's only an introduction.


#9    stevewinn

stevewinn

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 8,193 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, England

  • Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival

Posted 25 January 2014 - 04:22 PM

View PostStill Waters, on 25 January 2014 - 01:34 PM, said:

Stephen Hawking has produced a "mind-bending" new theory that argues black holes do not actually exist - at least not in the way we currently perceive them.

Instead, in his paper, Information Preservation and Weather Forecasting for Black Holes, Hawking proposes that black holes can exist without 'event horizons', the invisible cover believed to shroud every black hole.

http://www.independe...es-9085016.html

its marvellous how scientist come up with these theories, In his paper, Hawking writes: "The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes - in the sense of regimes from which light can't escape to infinity." He told Nature journal: “There is no escape from a black hole in classical theory, but quantum theory, however, “enables energy and information to escape from a black hole.” Don Page, a physicist and expert on black holes at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada told Nature that "the picture Hawking gives sounds pretty reasonable". “You could say that it is radical to propose there’s no event horizon", he said. "But these are highly quantum conditions, and there’s ambiguity about what space-time even is, let alone whether there is a definite region that can be marked as an event horizon.”

Posted Image

British by Birth - English by the Grace of God

#10    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 January 2014 - 04:36 PM

View PostRolci, on 25 January 2014 - 03:56 PM, said:

So what he's saying is, everything here: http://www.physics.u...6b/lectures.pdf is wrong. Just think of all the wasted work that went into all of it. And it's only an introduction.
I don't think he is saying that all that is wrong at all. And even if it turns out to be wrong it wasn't wasted work, as it lead to greater understanding


#11    Bean85

Bean85

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 36 posts
  • Joined:20 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 25 January 2014 - 04:52 PM

Yes there is some form of black holes but i think it works diffrently then scientist say


#12    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 16,065 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 25 January 2014 - 05:28 PM

It seems to me that Hawking is suggesting that the event horizon is a seperate entity from the actual collapsed mass beneath. That after the star collapses it forms a gravitational zone above it which is what is called the event horizon. Which is actually where the light and matter gets captured.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#13    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 January 2014 - 05:51 PM

I think he is saying that the event horizon is not a boundary where nothing can escape, because some information can escape under certain circumstances


#14    DieChecker

DieChecker

    I'm a Rogue Scholar

  • Member
  • 16,065 posts
  • Joined:21 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon, USA

  • Hey, I'm not wrong. I'm just not completely right.

Posted 25 January 2014 - 06:10 PM

I thought it was Hawking himself who speculated Hawking Radiation decades ago? Which is expected to allow energy to escape a black hole.

http://en.wikipedia....wking_radiation

How could he ever think it impossible to escape if he believed energy could leave the system?

Edited by DieChecker, 25 January 2014 - 06:11 PM.

Here at Intel we make processors on 12 inch wafers. And, the individual processors on the wafers are called die. And, I am employed to check these die. That is why I am the DieChecker.

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not cease to be insipid. - Friedrich Nietzsche

Qualifications? This is cryptozoology, dammit! All that is required is the spirit of adventure. - Night Walker

#15    spacecowboy342

spacecowboy342

    Traveler of both time and space

  • Member
  • 4,027 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I shall now proceed to entangle the entire area

Posted 25 January 2014 - 06:41 PM

View PostDieChecker, on 25 January 2014 - 06:10 PM, said:

I thought it was Hawking himself who speculated Hawking Radiation decades ago? Which is expected to allow energy to escape a black hole.

http://en.wikipedia....wking_radiation

How could he ever think it impossible to escape if he believed energy could leave the system?
In Hawking radiation nothing actually was thought to escape as black holes were thought to be diminished from sucking in negative energy.(I think) Here information is escaping due to entanglement when one of a pair is drawn in and the other escapes and becomes entangled with every particle ever drawn into the hole, I think because all the information from everything that has ever entered the hole is smeared across the surface of the event horizon. My apologies to any physicists if I've mangled this but it seems the gist of what I got from reading the article. Also this idea isn't proved yet





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users