BlackHole

From WikiWorld

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

BlackHoles have no hair

Whether or not black holes really exist, they represent one of the simplest information objects. Penrose declared, "Black Holes have no hair" in reference to their pure properties, mass, charge, and rotation.

Description

A stationary, neutrally charged black hole, can be described by one discrete variable (dimension), the number of quanta it contains, or it's mass.

All messages received are consumed, i.e., the number of quanta received are added to the mass.

The environment of the black hole consists of messages coming from every direction- starlight, microwave background, and [ZPE|zero point energy] at an energy density of about 175 gigaelectron volts. Although noisy, the density at each frequency from all directions varies as the inverse of the wavelength so there are many fewer hot short wave than longer low energy waves which make up the lions share of the energy.

Boy that was easy. Are we done yet?

BlackHoles have hair!

Well, Hawkings came along, on Wheeler's wing, and proved black holes have hair after all and evaporate by quantum interactions at the surface losing mass.

If we reduce the size of our hairless black hole to a small number of quanta the situation becomes clearer. Next we presume an electron-positron pair is generation by ZPE at the surface and the positron falls in. We now have an approximation of a hydrogen atom. But in our simplified model the electron will eventually fall in.

In real life only certain size objects are stable. When an electron falls into a proton it always fails to recombine with its positron partner, it becomes a neutron, which is unstable in isolation and the electron is re-emitted manifesting hydrogen. There exist, simple logical models that exhibit this behavior.

What's inside?

Nobody really thinks there is a singularity in the center of real black holes, it is clearly a limitation of the theory, not a real undefined point. To see most simple why there should be no singularity, consider cutting a black hole in half such that the two halfs are not themselves black holes and are separated in space. Now put yourself in the middle between the two halfs. Clearly you would be pulled equally by both halfs and feel zero gravity. As the halves come together you are still pulled equally in all directions. Unfortunately, when they meet you will be ripped apart because of the event horizon at the center. It should be no surprise that a second solution for an event horizon would exist there since the gravity must be zero. In charged or rotating black holes the inner horizon is not quite at the center and can be quite large. Hawking's proof that black holes radiate by quantum interaction at the outer horizon implies they should radiate similarly across the inner horizon as well. At first I thought I might have been the first to notice the inner horizon second solution but the physics profs at NJIT assured me that was established physics which I verified in subsequent research.

You understand how discrete space solves Zeno's paradox, Zero can't go 1/2 way infinitely. The same applies to a black hole singularity, in quantum leaps, matter will always miss the singularity if there was one and it could not form to begin with since there are no infinities in the discrete case.

But you don't even need to go to the quantum information case to show that a singularity at the center is unlikely. I don't know how anything but hawkings radiation could escape the inner horizon in any case, suggesting the same result. If there was a hole through the earth, and you jumped in, gravity would increase as you fell but about 2/3 way in it would start to decrease down to zero at the center. If we think of gradually increasing the mass of the earth uniformly until it was at the verge of becoming a black hole, the greatest curvature of space time will be in a spherical surface at about 1/3 the radius, distending space time there, not in the center.

But back to how discrete time and space, manifest by discrete events, manifests no singularity. Case one is a single photon with a wavelength equal to it's event horizon, ( r2mG/c^2. me/c^2 and ehf, fc/r so we have r=sqrt(2hG/c^3).) As a photon is not effected by its own mass, it cannot define a black hole alone so we presume the photon is manifest between two electrons meeting at high speed. In theory the system now has more than enough mass, with the electrons added, to become a black hole and the two electrons, in theory, are lost to this world forever. Internally the electrons will still interact. But each time the electrons interact, they manifest distance lamba between them, no singularity anywhere. No matter how many particles fall in, they will all manifest distances related to their energy of interaction and no singularity will form. (It should be noted that the interior dimension of a black hole is much larger than its external dimension.)

If you take the standard view of neuclea collapsing it a bit harder to see how no singularity forms, but it is the same, if interactions manifest internal space and time, the collapse is from our external perspective, not the internal perspective where space is distending and internal events are propagating internal space and time.

I may be the only one saying this, but that doesn't make it false. It may be possible to develop a discrete solution that has a singularity but I can't imagine how if dx/dt won't go to zero there can be no infinity. How could there be?

BlackHoles do not communicate

Error

Error.
Black holes do communicate. They communicate by their gravitational attraction. They can be said to further communicate brightly indirectly, when consuming matter which heats up and gives off energy (such as X-rays)).

If Black Holes did not communicate, they wouldn't exist, according to the statements made under InformationPhysics.

No Error

No error.
Indeed black holes have a mass, and we can deduce their presence by the effect of that mass, including the X-rays from objects accelerating inwards. But no information from the inside gets out. Quantum interactions at the surface also manifest the black hole but reveal nothing about the interior.

I would agree that hairless (ideal) black holes do not exist except in our minds.

Gravity is not communication?

You do not consider the gravitational effect from the black hole mass to be communications originating from the interior of the black hole then? You consider it an indirect communication?

Absolutely! Black holes, if they exist, are a noise sources, an abundant resource we can capitalize on. Their energy can be recycled in the ecology of information to manifest us. But the inhabitants of a black hole live independently from us. They are not part of our world.

Interesting links?

From: http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/mg18925423.600-three-cosmic-enigmas-one-audacious-answer.html Article talking about a new theory in which black holes aren't black holes. Rather, they are a quantum shell the size of a star, filled with vacuum energy. Stuff goes in, stuff (dark enery) comes out.

Added: New article about black holes, quantum entanglement, and using black holes as computers. URL: http://www.newscientistspace.com/article/dn8836.html

Check it out. --StarPilot

P.S. Feel free to move this to wherever is more appropriate.

See Also

See SyntheticModel, ExperienceModel, QuantumEventTimeSpace, InformationPhysics, InformationPhysicsVirtualClassroom

Personal tools