Let's go!I wonder if there's not a paradox regarding the infinite density of a singularity. If one BH, say of mass 20 suns, has a singularity of infinite density, and another BH, say of 40 suns, also has infinite density, which infinite density is larger than the other infinite density? Wouldn't their EH's not also have infinite radii?
It's no surprise to hear that the equations of modern physics fails at singularities. The expression I like best is that "the wheels go flying off" the wagon.
You got me in the first part, then you lose your point: this is without doubt something strange, infinity in not possible to describe, but if you want to put it in this way, that's ok. Math teaches us: no matter how infinity is, if you want to subtract infinity to infinity you can have zero as well as infinity (the result won't be clear...). For this reason you can't compare Black Holes with an infinite density.
Certainly, why not? This is only a theory after all...Science, IMO, should only loosely be understood to be about reality. I prefer to think of science as a conversation with nature and not that science is objective-based, where hard facts take precedence. There are zero hard facts about disappearing matter, especially when EHs are stable due to the very likely presence of matter.
"they can't have any dimension" one hundred per cent. I have an idea about it, given that they are the strangest things in the Universe and someways resemble the Big Bang, they don't have neither space dimensions, nor time dimensions (this is something I believe). They have mass though. According to math, all the numbers divided by zero give infinity. We remember that density is given by the ratio between mass (in this case a random nunmber) and volume. (zero), this is possible.A quark is three-dimensional, and geometrically speaking, if blackholes are "points", they can't have any dimension. A point does not have a dimension, mass or width.
Of course, you're right. Maybe is better if I finish to say things I can't explain.Right, it is an idea. A friend once told me of a great idea I thought I had, "of all your ideas, that's one of them!" Without objective evidence even in principle, there is no science, only psuedoscience or metaphysics. This is the subjective world of supposition for even conjectures should include some objective evidence. Yet, I can't imagine any science not beginning where you are. Ideas and reason are what connect the dots of objective evidence.