Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > General Chat
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 25-09-2014, 09:57 AM
lazjen's Avatar
lazjen (Chris)
PI cult member

lazjen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Flaxton, Qld
Posts: 2,064
Physicist Claims Black Holes Mathematically Don't Exist

Story here:

http://phys.org/news/2014-09-black-holes.html

If true, that's going to change a few things.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 25-09-2014, 11:22 AM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 16,921
There is little chance the work will overturn mainstream science.
I could be wrong but I think Dr A Einstein himself rejected the notion of the existence of black holes and if so that is rather ironic considering it is his work which is relief upon to propose the existence of a black hole.
It seems the paper has not been peer reviewed so we have a problem there one would think.
That article suggests we can think of a black hole like a infinitely sense peanut which I think may be misleading. My humble layman understanding is that a black hole has no size and infinitely small and it only the size of the event horizon that we can attribute size by way of a finite diameter. I would appreciate if any members qualified to comment as to the reasonableness of that perception.
The possibility that there could not be a black hole may not exclude the prospect of a singularity prior to inflation so this news hardly posses a problem for big bang cosmology...I don't know that mainstream will see any merit in this work if there is no peer review.
Not being a scientist it is difficult for me to understand the ramifications but as a guess I don't think it will be taken seriously.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 25-09-2014, 11:32 AM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 16,921
I will now visit a mainstream science site to see if this news has surfaced there..I suspect it will not but if it has I think it will be dismissed as nonsense.
Members may care to report discussions on other forums if any..
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 25-09-2014, 12:01 PM
el_draco (Rom)
Politically incorrect.

el_draco is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Tasmania (South end)
Posts: 2,315
Thats going to be hard to reconcile with what we see at the core of our own galaxy, let alone a hell of a lot of other places.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 25-09-2014, 12:06 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 16,921
Wow it has and is being discussed with respect.
It was suggested that the publication in a non peer review journal is a method of getting informal review before another publication in a peer reviewed journal and that such an approach is somewhat common.
Anyways serious discussion is starting to take place.
Very interesting.
It appears the work applies only to certain black holes so the article may be sensationalising the work...has happened before.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 25-09-2014, 12:15 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 16,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by el_draco View Post
Thats going to be hard to reconcile with what we see at the core of our own galaxy, let alone a hell of a lot of other places.
I am reading comments that this fits certain observations better...but again it applies to certain situations and does not appear to suggest there are no black holes at all..
Might be useful to read the actual paper as even now the article seems to have misrepresented the work..
We need to clear the journalistic mist.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 25-09-2014, 02:05 PM
julianh72 (Julian)
Registered User

julianh72 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Kelvin Grove
Posts: 1,300
Mersini-Houghton sees to be intent on making a career by claiming to have "proved" all sorts of astonishing things:

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=5907
http://nautil.us/issue/6/secret-code...rsini_houghton
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog...-evidence.html

All I can say is that her burden of "proof" is rather less than mine!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 25-09-2014, 04:46 PM
lazjen's Avatar
lazjen (Chris)
PI cult member

lazjen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Flaxton, Qld
Posts: 2,064
Yeah, I dropped it into chat here for light entertainment. I'll wait for the dust to settle and see what comes of it all...
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 26-09-2014, 12:09 AM
Steffen's Avatar
Steffen
Ebotec Alpeht Sicamb

Steffen is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toongabbie, NSW
Posts: 1,965
How do they get from "stars do not collapse straight into black holes because they shed too much mass in the process" to "black holes don't exist"??


Cheers
Steffen.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 26-09-2014, 08:12 AM
ZeroID's Avatar
ZeroID (Brent)
Lost in Space ....

ZeroID is offline
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Auckland, NZ
Posts: 4,949
Hawking Radiation supposedly. Sheds the mass as the star collapses till there is nothing left to become the black hole.

(Yes, I am as confused by it all as you )
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 26-09-2014, 08:56 AM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 16,921
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steffen View Post
How do they get from "stars do not collapse straight into black holes because they shed too much mass in the process" to "black holes don't exist"??


Cheers
Steffen.
We can ask those brains that float freely somewhere in the universe .
It seems the author may seek publicity that combined with an eager journalist gives us something greater than what the research covers...I still have not read the paper but suspect it may simply propose...not all stars will collapse to form a black hole...
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 27-09-2014, 08:35 PM
Brian3. (Brian)
Registered User

Brian3. is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Mandurah Western Australia
Posts: 50
The existence of black holes is accepted as a "given."
What I find most interesting is the "state" that exists inside the event horizon.
Perhaps "no event horizon" is the more correct term? I imagine a no time state where if I superimpose points A, B & C within the black hole then to journey from A to B would take "no time," and extrapolating that sense all points are equal from all points and effectively at one point, the singularity.
Rotation of the black hole is interesting as angular velocity implies time which in my reasoning does not exist within the "boundary." This peculiarity can perhaps be overcome by the singularity state or alternatively expressed as time in the plane of rotation but not radially from the "centre."
Whatever it is the "timelessness" that creates peculiarities that spawn what superficially appear to be nonsensical mathematical results.
Hmmm...
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 30-09-2014, 01:38 PM
julianh72 (Julian)
Registered User

julianh72 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Kelvin Grove
Posts: 1,300
The latest news, as reported by the brilliant "Waterford Whispers News" website:

"Planets Top Astrophysicists ‘Just Give Up’ Studying Space"

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/201...tudying-space/
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 30-09-2014, 06:53 PM
xelasnave's Avatar
xelasnave
Gravity does not Suck

xelasnave is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tabulam
Posts: 16,921
Any publicity is good they say
The idea is to explore where math and physics,a can go..then others need to build it or destroy the theory.
I have been reading another long thread at sciforum
...providing a lot of comment ... So I have a lesser idea where it's going...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 01:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement