|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Paradox unexplained
For the black hole information paradox I would expect
two seemingly conflicting results (as is necessary for a paradox by definition,) e.g. like: 1) We know that information is lost because [...] 2) But also that it is not lost because [...] Unfortunately I cannot find it clearly explained in that way. To be honest, I cannot even find the first statement clearly explained. What I mean is: by using Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates we can follow any molecule, or larger object, that enters the black hole, and there is no clear indication that it ever loses information at all! There might be tidal forces tearing it apart, but that need not in general destroy information and also that need not happen at the event horizon (in fact the Schwarzschild radius has no special local properties at all, as the K-S coordinates prove). Finally, singularities may be present somewhere inside, but we don't know the physics there, so we cannot claim anything about what happens to information at those sites. Actually, for statement 2) I also never found a really satisfying explanation, but let's leave that out, since without *two conflicting statements* there is no paradox anyway. So why do people feel there is a paradox?! -- Jos |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
THE PARADOX OF THE TWIN PARADOX | Pentcho Valev | Astronomy Misc | 3 | August 19th 15 04:16 PM |
Weird, unexplained flash in sky | Dave Typinski[_3_] | Amateur Astronomy | 5 | January 8th 09 12:06 AM |
Unexplained software "anomaly" during Cassini's closest approach toEnceladus. | Robert Clark | Astronomy Misc | 10 | April 2nd 08 11:06 PM |
Unruh radiation as the cause of unexplained spacecraft accelerations? | Robert Clark | Astronomy Misc | 3 | March 1st 08 06:00 PM |
Unexplained transient abberation in C 9-1/2 Celestron SCT | Uncle Bob | Amateur Astronomy | 9 | July 25th 06 07:04 PM |