What Exists at Singularity?

[nailpounder]

<p>Have astrophysicists come up with a more<font size="1"> significant definition of what exists at Singularity?Would it be a compact ball of quarks, or just pure energy, are we entering the realm of the higgs? I mean , what is the next physical state after "neutron degeneracy pressure" without saying a Black Hole? If time stops and light stops and the fabric of space is stretched infinately in a Black Hole, it just seems to reason that pure energy is left.&nbsp; ON ANOTHER NOTE, if time stops in a Black Hole, but the fabric of space distorts infinately, is this where space/time&nbsp;are separated, and why relativity breaks down in this realm? It is also interesting that light and time stop. Do they cease to exist, or is this the area of the "information lost parody" ?</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="2" color="#000080">measure twice, cut once, and if that fails, get a bigger hammer</font> </div>

 

[origin]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Have astrophysicists come up with a more significant definition of what exists at Singularity?Would it be a compact ball of quarks, or just pure energy, are we entering the realm of the higgs? I mean , what is the next physical state after "neutron degeneracy pressure" without saying a Black Hole? If time stops and light stops and the fabric of space is stretched infinately in a Black Hole, it just seems to reason that pure energy is left.&nbsp; ON ANOTHER NOTE, if time stops in a Black Hole, but the fabric of space distorts infinately, is this where space/time&nbsp;are separated, and why relativity breaks down in this realm? It is also interesting that light and time stop. Do they cease to exist, or is this the area of the "information lost parody" ?&nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by nailpounder</DIV><br /><br />There are no known physics that can describe a singularity.&nbsp; There is infinite density at a point with zero volume - so there are no quarks there is nothing except the gravity well.</p><p>There is no way to 'see' past the event horzion to see what is going on at the singularity.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[saul]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> There is infinite density at a point with zero volume </DIV></p><p>Surely zero volume cannot exist except in one's mind?&nbsp; And therefore, a singularity must tend to (but never be) zero</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[origin]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Surely zero volume cannot exist except in one's mind?&nbsp; And therefore, a singularity must tend to (but never be) zero <br />Posted by saul</DIV><br /><br />The problem is that if there is a star or mass large enough it will contract past the point of a neutron star (neutron stars stabilize due to the Pauli exclusion principle) and&nbsp;there is no known force that can prevent their continued collapse to a zero volume.&nbsp; Does this really happen - it is not known and cannot be known because no information can come out of the event horizon so we do not know what is inside.</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The problem is that if there is a star or mass large enough it will contract past the point of a neutron star (neutron stars stabilize due to the Pauli exclusion principle) and&nbsp;there is no known force that can prevent their continued collapse to a zero volume.&nbsp; Does this really happen - it is not known and cannot be known because no information can come out of the event horizon so we do not know what is inside.&nbsp; <br />Posted by origin</DIV></p><p>The prediction of a singularity is quite probably merely a sign that general relativity has broken down and that we do not fully understand the physics.</p><p>It does not seem to be true that tno information can come out of the event horizon.&nbsp; This is actually quite a deep question in physics. and has been addressed and debated by some very notable physicists, among them Hawking, 'tHooft and Suskind.&nbsp; Hawking has conceded his bet with Preskill, and is now of the opinion that information can indeed escape from a black hole in the form of Hawking radiation.&nbsp; Susskind wrote a book on his long-standing debate with Hawking on the subject -- <em>The Black Hole War.</em></p><p>Sussking makes a good case in that book, but my impression is that there may stil be some loose ends to tie up and that he makes use of some as yet unproven conjectures.&nbsp; While he is probably correct in his conclusions there would seem to be some pretty exciting theoretical physics yet to be done to make his argument mathematically rigorous. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[michaelmozina]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The problem is that if there is a star or mass large enough it will contract past the point of a neutron star (neutron stars stabilize due to the Pauli exclusion principle) and&nbsp;there is no known force that can prevent their continued collapse to a zero volume.&nbsp; Does this really happen - it is not known and cannot be known because no information can come out of the event horizon so we do not know what is inside.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by origin</DIV></p><p>There are quark stars theories however that may allow for greater density than a neutron star. </p><p>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002ApJ...572..996D<br />http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0902/0902.0653v1.pdf</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. - Kristian Birkeland </div>

 

[origin]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The prediction of a singularity is quite probably merely a sign that general relativity has broken down and that we do not fully understand the physics.It does not seem to be true that tno information can come out of the event horizon.&nbsp; This is actually quite a deep question in physics. and has been addressed and debated by some very notable physicists, among them Hawking, 'tHooft and Suskind.&nbsp; Hawking has conceded his bet with Preskill, and is now of the opinion that information can indeed escape from a black hole in the form of Hawking radiation.&nbsp; Susskind wrote a book on his long-standing debate with Hawking on the subject -- The Black Hole War.Sussking makes a good case in that book, but my impression is that there may stil be some loose ends to tie up and that he makes use of some as yet unproven conjectures.&nbsp; While he is probably correct in his conclusions there would seem to be some pretty exciting theoretical physics yet to be done to make his argument mathematically rigorous. <br />Posted by DrRocket</DIV><br /><br />Dang!&nbsp; I knew I would get called on that.&nbsp;&nbsp;How about there is no useful or undecipherable information that can come from a black hole.&nbsp; <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[michaelmozina]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Dang!&nbsp; I knew I would get called on that.&nbsp;&nbsp;How about there is no useful or undecipherable information that can come from a black hole.&nbsp; <br /> Posted by origin</DIV></p><p>Hmmm.&nbsp; If Hawking is correct about them "evaporating" over time, and we someday have the ability to discern the energy distribution patterns of that evaporation, would that still be true?</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. - Kristian Birkeland </div>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Hmmm.&nbsp; If Hawking is correct about them "evaporating" over time, and we someday have the ability to discern the energy distribution patterns of that evaporation, would that still be true? <br />Posted by michaelmozina</DIV></p><p>The information that exits in the form of Hawking radiation is preserved, in a quantum sense.&nbsp; That does not mean that it is really possible to reconstruct the information from observations.</p><p>Susskind's book <em>The Black Hole War</em> is highly recommended for a discussion of the issues involved and his approach to a resolution.&nbsp; It is a good read.&nbsp; However, I am still a abit leery of taking everything in the book at face value, since I think some of the foundations are still in the form of plausible but unproven conjectures.&nbsp; However, Hawking has conceded his bet and now believes that information is not lost when black holes evaporate through Hawking radiation. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[michaelmozina]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The information that exits in the form of Hawking radiation is preserved, in a quantum sense.&nbsp; That does not mean that it is really possible to reconstruct the information from observations.</DIV></p><p>I hear you, I was just "speculating" on the possibility of being able to locate such quantum flows somehow and therefore have some idea of where it occurs relative the spin axis for instance.&nbsp; Might that tell us anything about the inner makeup?&nbsp;&nbsp; </p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Susskind's book The Black Hole War is highly recommended for a discussion of the issues involved and his approach to a resolution.&nbsp; It is a good read.&nbsp; However, I am still a abit leery of taking everything in the book at face value, since I think some of the foundations are still in the form of plausible but unproven conjectures.&nbsp; However, Hawking has conceded his bet and now believes that information is not lost when black holes evaporate through Hawking radiation. <br /> Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p>Thank you for the book recommendation.&nbsp; It sounds very interesting. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> It seems to be a natural consequence of our points of view to assume that the whole of space is filled with electrons and flying electric ions of all kinds. - Kristian Birkeland </div>