Blitzfrog wrote:
First off, this is not what happens inside the blackhole, this is a description of the mathematics inside the blackhole.
Description of mathematics describes the possible reality, though physical interpretation can vary. See minute physics video on such
here. That said, because of the impossible observations of the matter at and beyond the event horizon, we need to rely on such mathematics and possible interpretations. Such interpretations can be then tested via simulations and studied to determine whether there are any effects that may imply the denial or validity of interpretation. So to say that is not what happens inside a blackhole is might be right or wrong, but we do not know, so I would avoid stating that as an absolute fact.
Blitzfrog wrote:
The infinite curvature of a blackhole just means the geodesics surrounding the blackhole all points inward, so by newton's first law, any object will "remain in the blackhole". The photons that "fall into" a blackhole doesn't get "stretched" by a blackhole. Blackhole isn't you, it doesn't stretch anything, the reason photons "stretch" is because the geodesics are distorted, therefore it takes longer for light to get to you.
That is somewhat correct, but so to speak, the wavelength gets longer.
Blitzfrog wrote:
Similarly, if you travel away from a photon coming towards you, it gets red-shiftedm and clearly you're not "stretching" a photon by moving away from it.
Yes, it's all relative. You are passing through the EM field faster or slower, causing you to move through the oscillations faster or slower, causing the photon have the effects described.
Now that we have self corrected ourselves that space redshifts the photon and the photon doesn't stretch on its own, the point of the first paragraph is to establish that the space in a black hole is ever collapsing, and therefore infinitely redshifts any photon that falls into it into the sub-infra range. However, this is not time dependent from an outside observer. It has no meaning to an outside observer other than the wave still exists in there, hense mass, just redshifted beyond proportions. To an inside stationary observer, the wave's oscillations would pass as space stretches it.
Blitzfrog wrote:
First off, what you need to search up is Unitarity. Apparently your main source of information is PBS Spacetime and I'm not sure if they cover it on there, but wikipedia probably does. (It's a good read) Basically it is quantum mechanic's version of conservation law. It is the conservation of information, and an unbreakable law like the conservation of energy. Unitarity is basically what holds the universe together, so it is close to impossible to find a theory that can disprove it. In fact, all theories need to adapt to it because it is so unbreakable. In physics we call these the "minus-1" laws, because it comes before anything else. If we were to violate that, physics would go back to square 1.
Just say that it that the sum of all quantum probabilities need to be 1.0 or else there is a problem. It ensures that the information related to the wavefunction exists somewhere in the universe and is not destroyed.
Blitzfrog wrote:
Now, the mass of the black hole is indeed "in there", but it's not disintegrated into component fields. I have no idea where you got this conclusion from, but no.
No particle is able to be preserved due to the high energies acted upon them as space gets stretched more and more faster. All of the mass will need to be converted to energy in form of waves as this happens. And just to be clear, it's not the speed at which the matter falls in that rips it in such way, but the acceleration of space stretching that does.
Blitzfrog wrote:
The idea that information is locked up and inaccessible in a black hole, like a hidden chamber with gold inside, was a view adopted by physicists before Stephen Hawking's ground breaking discovery of Hawking Radiation. (Now for those of you who don't take physics, information doesn't only refer to the matters and energies and what not, but also the properties of them. So for example, an electron has spin, that as a whole is what we mean by information, and all of these information must be conserved.) These energy that it emits is the energies contained in the black hole, therefore the blackhole gets smaller and smaller as it radiates and finally reduces to nothingness. Interesting fact: The intensity or energy of the radiation doesn't depend on the anything that was in the black hole. But this meant that the information of the things that were "sucked" into the blackhole was being lost, thus breaking a fundamental law of physics.
Ok, yes.
Soon, theoretical physicists studying string theory were looking at dualities in their equations, they found that when you take mathematical description of a system and add 1 spatial dimensions to it with a negative curvature, you get something similar to quantum fields in a three-dimensional universe without gravity. This is what made a principal called Holographic Principle, which states that: All information in 3 dimensional spaces can be "kept" and "held" on a 2 dimensional surface. Recall the event horizon of a black hole, it is 2 dimensional. It is the surface of a sphere. So basically this theory stated that the information of a black hole could actually be "stored" on the event horizon... And some of the information stored on the event horizon, gets released in the form of hawking radiation.
The particle-waves get redshifted inwards by ever accelerating stretching of space toward a direction, but it gets stretched from the event horizon and never leaves it.
Blitzfrog wrote:
Now, like you said, Hawking radiation happens because particles and anti particles pops in and out of existence. (They're NOT virtual particles)
Even Hawking described it as the result of "virtual pairs of particles". See:
https://projecteuclid.org/download/pdf_ ... 1103899181 page 202
To quote:
As the mass of the black hole decreased, the area of the event horizon would
have to go down, thus violating the law that, classically, the area cannot decrease
[7, 12]. This violation must, presumably, be caused by a flux of negative energy
across the event horizon which balances the positive energy flux emitted to
infinity. One might picture this negative energy flux in the following way. Just
outside the event horizon there will be virtual pairs of particles, one with negative
energy and one with positive energy. The negative particle is in a region which
is classically forbidden but it can tunnel through the event horizon to the region
inside the black hole where the Killing vector which represents time translations
is spacelike. In this region the particle can exist as a real particle with a timelike
momentum vector even though its energy relative to infinity as measured by the
time translation Killing vector is negative. The other particle of the pair, having
a positive energy, can escape to infinity where it constitutes a part of the thermal
emission described above. The probability of the negative energy particle tunnelling
through the horizon is governed by the surface gravity K since this quantity
measures the gradient of the magnitude of the Killing vector or, in other words,
how fast the Killing vector is becoming spacelike.
Blitzfrog wrote:
Nothing is "attracted" by anything in a blackhole. First off, how can something move or be attracted in a black hole? It has neither time, nor space. Spacetime gets distorted to the point you don't even know which is space and which is time.
Fields are still subject to spacetime inside a blackhole, but like I said the role reverses - time becomes space and space becomes time.
Blitzfrog wrote:
Nothing is "attracted" by anything in a blackhole... It's like the axis of a cartesian plane, an x-y graph, being scrunched up into a ball. How do you suppose the energies "attract" each other?
First, look up the
Penrose Diagram. It's pointless to think of space in a blackhole in terms of a Cartesian plane. Second, yea nothing is "attracted" in a blackhole. Nothing is "attracted" in everyday spaetime either. The sun doesn't attract the planets, the sun bends spacetime which planets follow. That said, there is energy inside the blackhole bending spacetime, causing it to stretch in, causing more stretching of spacetime, stretching it, and so on.
Blitzfrog wrote:
Also, it is well known in the many-body scenario that depending on the arrangements of the bodys, the centre of attraction is different. By your criteria, I can make the singularity right next to an event horizon.
But you are thinking about it as an external observer where a centre of attraction does exist. As an internal observer, the center of attraction is the future of the wave. Space and time reversed, so whatever the centre was, it is the future, and what ever the future was, it is the space the wave gets redshifted throughout.
Blitzfrog wrote:
Also, you got it the wrong way around. Relative to an observer inside the event horizon, there is a "singularity" which if he can see everything around him, that the matters surrounding him are moving towards. However, relative to an external observer, the dude never makes it pass the event horizon, he never crosses. This is why it is a deleted sequence from spacetime, because nothing makes pass it. They just stop at the event horizon, slowly turn red and vanish.
Yes that's what I am trying to say, there is a "singularity" for which everything is moving towards, but it keep moving towards that point indefinitely. Not a deleted sequence, but infinitely redshifted. Imagine the wave's frequency being 10^-100000000000 HZ but less and less as time goes on. Whatever portion we can say has such frequency is the portion just starting to cross the even horizon. It still exists, but not as anything recognizable.
Blitzfrog wrote:
If it gets redshifted, it is not getting sucked in. If it vanishes, it effectively does not cross the event horizon.
But what is making it redshifted if not the sucking effect of the warped spacetime? It crossed the event horizon because where else would that information flow to? It needs to follow the curved spacetime regardless of whether we can see what becomes of it where nothing escapes or not.
Blitzfrog wrote:
There are no parts of the wave being "stuck" on the event horizon, which means you will never observe that because that isn't true.
As we observe the particle get redshifted towards blackness and time slows to a near halt, it becomes "stuck" on the event horizon.
Blitzfrog wrote:
The wave is not being stretched from the event horizon towards the singularity either, it is just that the geodesics of spacetime around that area means that the photons follow a curved path rather than a straight path to get to you, which means increasing the distance, and therefore redshifting.
Yes. I am trying to avoid the term "stretching wave" and using the terms "stretched spacetime" and "redshifting".
Blitzfrog wrote:
Yes....Because an empty universe expands..........................................
The universe is never empty due to quantum fluctuations. When dark energy causes spacetime expansion to accelerate above a certain rate, just like near a black hole, the virtual particles would separate into matter-antimatter pairs. This would ignite the universe in a spectacular heat death akin to the big bang.