"I propose that the information is stored not in the interior of the black hole as one might expect but on its boundary, the event horizon,"
At Monday's public lecture, he explained this jumbled return of information was like burning an encyclopedia: You wouldn't technically lose any information if you kept all of the ashes in one place, but you'd have a hard time looking up the capital of Minnesota.
The translations that occur form a sort of hologram of the original particles, Hawking said -- a hologram in the sense that 3-D information is recorded on a 2-D surface. When radiation leaves the black hole, it carries some of that information preserved on the event horizon with it.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2015/08/25/stephen-hawking-believes-hes-solved-a-huge-mystery-about-black-holes/
http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.01147
The origin of the Hawking “paradox”, has to be found in a misinterpretation of a well known fact in general relativity, illustrated by the Israel theorem. Indeed, close to the horizon there is a bifurcation between any exact solution representing the external field of a perturbed sphere and the perturbed Schwarzschild spacetime (see L. Herrera, “The Israel theorem: What is nature trying to tell us?”,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D17, 557-561, (2008)for a detailed discussion on this issue).
This is due to the fact that, as stated by the Israel theorem, the only static and asymptotically-flat vacuum space-time possessing a regular horizon is the Schwarzschild solution. For all
the others Weyl exterior solutions, the physical components of the Riemann tensor exhibit singularities at the horizon.
On the other hand, we know that all physical systems are submitted to fluctuations and, of course, this also applies to self-gravitating systems.
Accordingly we have to assume that in the process of collapse (without angular momentum), the spherical symmetry, is permanently submitted to such fluctuations.
Now, if the field produced by a self-gravitating system is not particularly intense (the boundary of the source is much larger than the horizon) and fluctuations off spherical symmetry are sligth, then there is no problem in representing the corresponding deviations from spherical symmetry (both inside and outside the source) as a suitable perturbation of the spherically symmetric exact solution.
In other words, for strong gravitational fields, no matter how small the multipole moments (higher than monopole) of the source are, there is a bifurcation between the perturbed Schwarzschild metric and all the other Weyl metrics. This of course is a consequence of the Israel theorem.
From the above, a fundamental question arises: How should we describe the quasi-spherical space-time resulting from the fluctuations off Schwarzschild?
A) By means of a perturbed Schwarzschild metric,
or
B) By means of an exact solution to Einstein equations, whose (radiatable) multipole moments are arbitrarily small, though non--vanishing.
Our point of view is that the description of such deviations should be done from an exact solution of Einstein equations (of the Weyl family, if we restrict ourselves to vacuum static
axially-symmetric solutions) continuously linked to the Schwarzschild metric through one of its parameters, instead of considering a perturbation of the Schwarzschild space--time.
It could be argued that the black hole has no-hair theorem, according to which, in the process of contraction all (radiatable) multipole moments are radiated away (Price), is at variance with that point of view. However this is not so.
Indeed, the fact remains that perturbations of spherical symmetry take place all along the evolution of the object. Thus, even if it is true that close to the horizon any of these
perturbations is radiated away, it is likewise true that this is a continuous process. In other words, as soon as a “hair” is radiated away, a new perturbation appears which will be later
radiated and so on. Therefore, since “hairs” are radiated away at some, finite, time scale, then at that time scale there will be always a fluctuation acting on the system.
Based on the arguments above, we have shown (L. Herrera, “A possible way out of the Hawking paradox: Erasing the information at the horizon”,Int. J. of Mod. Phys. D 17, 2507-2514,(2008)) that information about the collapsing body is stripped away, as the body falls through the horizon, thereby resolving the information loss paradox. We have also shown that this picture is fully consistent with the Landauer's principle in the presence of a gravitational field. Indeed, the fact that the required energy to be dissipated, in order to erase one bit of information at the horizon vanishes, implies that when the object reach that point, is in a single state.
Hi
It is impossible for a star to fall into a black hole singularity!
At the end of his life when a star collapses under its own gravity and dies of a type of radiation known as "Hawking radiation" is released. Emit such radiation, leading to reduced mass, so that less pressure to create a black hole that will be left after pressing. Before you can create a black hole, the star of dying before the formation of a black hole swell and explode, so singularity and its event horizon will not be achieved.
Sounds like reverse emergence: instead of the elements in an emerging system adding up to more than their simple sum, here the loss of configuration results in the increase of effective entropy. It's hard to see how it can still be called "information" following the destruction of the factor that renders it informative = the configuration of elements in a reproducible pattern. Sometimes a problem in physics reduces to a question of semantics, and in this case it would be the definition of "information."
Another dimension: Is it information if no informed mind is available to make use of it? Nature's information lies in the jets from supermassive black holes that distribute heavy elements into space.
But that's not the level Hawking et al. are debating, they're focused on the destruction angle. Information "broken down" is a bunch of random ingredients without measurements or an algorithm; that's a crucial loss of configuration. I'll wait until we get a working definition of "information."
To an observer outside of a black hole watching stuff fall into the black hole, it would appear that the stuff is frozen at the event horizon. So it seems to me that the information carried by the stuff falling into the black hole should also be in effect recorded by the event horizon as far as the observers outside are concerned, which would mean the information is never lost to the world outside the event horizon.
Dear Dr. Arno, In 2014 a paper on the mathematical equations shown that black holes do not exist! with title: "Short distance signatures in Cosmology: Why not in Black Holes?"
The attached article,
Maurice,
A star approaching the event horizon will appear to fade away, in the end it will be invisible to the outside observer. For instance, the spectral lines in the light of the star which carried information on the composition of the star will no longer be perceptible.
From an observational point of view, I don't then understand what you mean by "the information is never lost to the world outside the event horizon". Surely it is lost.
What happens to that information inside the black hole is quite another matter. We don't know. If you can conceive of an observer inside the black hole, there the spectral lines probably still exist although shifted by the strong gravitational field.
Dear Dr. Arno. You are right!
In fact, we are dealing with what happens on the ground! Sky and black hole is not our problem!
See my paper "black holes do not exist". I'm trying to meet Stephen Hawking. Does somebody knows how to meet him ? [email protected]
The overall concept of black holes is poorly understood.
That is because the maths of tensor calculus leads to infinities at the event horizon.
However gravitational physics can be used to translate the curvature of space time into an algebraic format which avoids all the complications and paradoxes set up by infinitely dense singularities seen in current black hole physics.
The beauty of this approach is that you avoid infinite dense singularities and the sessation of time at the event horizon and get definite answer to what is going on inside a black hole, you get an explanation for the presense of dark matter
Article The formulation of Dynamic Newtonian advanced gravity, DNAg
He uploaded Talk given on 28 August 2015 at Hawking Radiation, a conference held at KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm .. and said that A full treatment of the issues presented there will appear in a future publication with
M. J. Perry and A. Strominger,
http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.01147
"Unlike the suggestion of 't Hooft, , that relies on a cut-o of high energy modes
near the horizon, the resolution of the information loss paradox I proposed here is based
on symmetries, namely supertranslation invariance of the S-matrix between the ingoing
and outgoing particles scattered o the horizon, which by construction is unitary." S.Hawking said
"Classically, a black hole is independent of its past history. I shall assume this is also
true in the quantum domain. How then can a black hole emit the information about the
particles that fell in? The answer I propose, as explained above, is that the information
is stored in a supertranslation associated with the shift of the horizon that the ingoing
particles caused.
The supertranslations form a hologram of the ingoing particles. The varying shifts
along each generator of the horizon leave an imprint on the outgoing particles in a chaotic
but deterministic manner. There is no loss of information. Note that although the
discussion in this paper focuses on the asymptotically at case, this proposal also works
for black holes on arbitrary backgrounds, e.g., in the presence of a nonzero cosmological
constant." S. Hawkind
Herein a video which explains the gravitational physics of a black hole including the information that lays inside the black hole (hidden for the rest of the Universe).
It also explains the presence of dark matter which is pretty much exactly 6.25 multiplied by the baryonic matter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDJJODXFqxo
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Theoretical Physics