Astronomers May Have Solved Information Loss Paradox To Find Black Holes Do Not Form!

"Science Daily - "Nothing there," is what Case Western Reserve
University physicists concluded about black holes after spending a
year working on complex formulas to calculate the formation of new
black holes. In nearly 13 printed pages with a host of calculations,
the research may solve the information loss paradox that has perplexed
physicists for the past 40 years."


"The question that the physicists set out to solve is: what happens
once something collapses into a black hole" If all information about
the collapsing matter is lost, it defies the laws of quantum physics.
Yet, in current thinking, once the matter goes over the event horizon
and forms a black hole, all information about it is lost.

"If you define the black hole as some place where you can lose
objects, then there is no such thing because the black hole evaporates
before anything is seen to fall in," said Vachaspati.

The masses on the edge of the incipient black hole continue to appear
into infinity that they are collapsing but never fall over inside what
is known as the event horizon, the region from which there is no
return, according to the researchers.

By starting out with something that was nonsingular and then
collapsing that matter, they were determined to see if an event
horizon formed, signaling the creation of a black hole.

The mass shrinks in size, but it never gets to collapse inside an
event horizon due to evidence of pre-Hawking radiation, a non-thermal
radiation that allows information of the nature of what is collapsing
to be recovered far from the collapsing mass."


"Using the functional Schrodinger formalism, the researchers suggest
that information about the energy from radiation is long evaporated
before an event horizon forms.

"An outside observer will never lose an object down a black hole,"
said Stojkovic. "If you are sitting outside and throwing something
into the black hole, it will never pass over but will stay outside the
event horizon even if one considers the effects of quantum mechanics.
In fact, since in quantum mechanics the observer plays an important
role in measurement, the question of formation of an event horizon is
much more subtle to consider."


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0620115358.htm


As I've been saying ...

Double-A

As I've been saying ...

Double-A

There only problem here, is that you are measuring black holes by the
amount of gravity generated by them.

And if matter evaporates before it enters into a black hole, such
gravity wells, as you observe in the center of almost every galaxy,
would not exist.

Do you have empirical proof on that if you absorb and disintegrate one
of the units in an entangled particle pair, it has a negative energy
on the absorber, in order to preserve total energy?

Where is this evidence for this delusional Hawkings radiation? All is
see is quantum decoherence.

You humans are just like this: "Oh! I don't like those scary black
holes in the heavens. Let us invent some delusional theory about them
evaporating, in order to make us feel safe."

On Jun 20, 11:39 pm, wrote:
As I've been saying ...

Double-A

There only problem here, is that you are measuring black holes by the
amount of gravity generated by them.

And if matter evaporates before it enters into a black hole, such
gravity wells, as you observe in the center of almost every galaxy,
would not exist.


Sure they would. The matter will be there frozen in the process of
falling in for billions of years before it evaporates.

Double-A

Sure they would. The matter will be there frozen in the process of
falling in for billions of years before it evaporates.

Double-A

And how can billions of solar masses be concentrated in such a small
spatial area, if the mass hasn't even falled into the black hole?

On Jun 21, 12:27 am, wrote:
Sure they would. The matter will be there frozen in the process of
falling in for billions of years before it evaporates.

Double-A

And how can billions of solar masses be concentrated in such a small
spatial area, if the mass hasn't even falled into the black hole?


Well, it is easier to accept than that all the mass of those stars are
conentrated into a single point.

Double-A

How large would a black hole be spatially, if billions of solar masses
were trapped outside of the event horizon, not even disintegrated into
spatial singularity?

Have you ever observed any such large black holes in the heavens?

Well, it is easier to accept than that all the mass of those stars are
conentrated into a single point.

Is it? How come then, that all the supermassive black holes you have
observed, occupies such a small spatial area?

Is it possible for such a large amount of mass, to occupy such a small
spatial area, if it is made of normal atomic structures?

Also, if there is no sparial singularity inside of a supermassive
black hole.

Then what is all the matter falling towards in the first place? Why
would mass fall towards a place where there is nothing?