| Author |
Message |
    
Thalion
storyteller
Username: Thalion
Post Number: 990
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 8:43 am: |     |
A discussion about this started in the SF forum.
I'll copy the posts here as well, since more people may want to contribute.
Kerensa posted:
Disappointment for Science-Fiction-Fans
The famous physicist Stephen Hawking said at the 17. International Conference for Relativity and Gravitation in Dublin that there are no parallel universes
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/weltraum/
--------------------------------------------------
Annie replied:
But maybe there is a parallel universe where he didn't say that... 
--------------------------------------------------
Thalion replied:
Kerensa, I read that, too, and was very disappointed...
But he didn't say that there aren't parallel universes, he only said that (oh my, this is difficult for me to paraphrase, me being such a physics idiot...) -
he takes back his theory of parallel universes swallowing the matter that seems to vanish in black holes. Instead it has been proven, I think, that the matter is remaining there for a very long time in a very compressed state and ejected again, into our universe, when the black holes finally disintegrate.
So his theory was wrong. There still may be parallel universes, but I don't know if there are any other theories with sufficient scientific backup about them, apart from the black hole thing.
Does that mean that ST Voyager is then still in the 4th quadrant?
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they pass by - Douglas Adams |
Kerensa
gatherer
Username: Kerensa
Post Number: 208
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 8:58 am: | |
Thalion, it is me again!!!
You forgot the last bit of the link. Here it is.
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/weltraum/0,1518 ,309746,00.html |
Thalion
storyteller
Username: Thalion
Post Number: 992
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 9:02 am: | |
That last bit didn't open for me over on the SF forum, thus I linked the main page only.
Here's another post from the SF forum, I'm gonna link to here so we can continue this part of the discussion here.
-----------------------------------------------
Don posted:
I preface this by saying that I know only what I read in the popular press, with all the misunderstandings that can generate!
I thought it was all to do with information.
Hawking orginally said, I thought, that once a black hole swallowed matter, all information about it was lost.
Now he seems to be saying that (over a period of billions of years) that a black hole may gradually "evaporate", and that some of the information about what went in may be recovered.
There was a bet that Hawking lost, and he has to provide an encyclopaedia of the other bettors choice, from which, of course, information may be freely abstracted at will!
Don
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they pass by - Douglas Adams |
Pine
storyteller
Username: Pine
Post Number: 531
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 1:58 pm: | |
Here is a link in English: Hawking changes his mind about black holes
"Mommy, you are not always wrong!" - my daughter, almost 6. |
Thalion
storyteller
Username: Thalion
Post Number: 1005
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Monday, July 26, 2004 - 2:35 pm: | |
Thanks Pine, I knew there had to be something more scientific out there somewhere... not that I understand much, though. 
How about this parallel universe theory with that quantum interference thing? That isn't affected by the toppling of Hawking's black hole theory, is it?
(Holy SCOTT, I feel like such an idiot, I don't understand half (if at all) on those sites, whine...)
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they pass by - Douglas Adams |
Scott
storyteller
Username: Scott
Post Number: 406
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 27, 2004 - 2:02 am: | |
Hawking *knew* that not all information was lost. He was the guy that came up with the ideas that black holes evaporated. Yes, black holes emit "Hawking Radiation".
But he did not think that anything could survive crossing the Schwartzchild boundary, including information. He was wrong. Just as he is wrong about the idea that parallel universes don't exist IMO.
I sitll intend to go see Ponter et al - anyone wanna come along?
Scott
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ces gens, Jondalar, ils sourient. Ils me sourient. - Ayla |
Cavebear
flint knapper
Username: Cavebear
Post Number: 1156
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, July 30, 2004 - 12:25 am: | |
I'm probably misunderstanding this due to a definition of "information", but I thought that the atoms (at least, in not the particles) of any organized matter were separated from each other in a black hole. I understand from Hawking's statement that those atoms (or whatever level of particles) can be returned to the universe when the black hole disintegrates, but how would any of that be considered "information".
If I fall into a black hole, I'm certainly not going to be ejected whole again in a billion years. I wasn't even "whole" when I crossed the event horizon.
As a further question, I wonder what we would observe at the moment a black hole disintegrated to the point where it released matter back to the universe. A supernova? A super-supernova? A simple new star? It seems like it would be a "significant physical event".
I thought I was wrong once, but it turned out I was mistaken about that. |
t. Marton (Unregistered Guest)
visitor
| | Posted on Thursday, September 06, 2007 - 6:48 pm: | |
And what of information or memory? Do they continue? As is? Does Sheldrake have something with his morphic resonance? Where does that fit in to getting lost in a black hole? |
Don
hunter
Username: Don
Post Number: 494
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 06, 2007 - 8:53 pm: | |
You really are into Sheldrake, aren't you?
For those mystified by this reference, scroll down at the jade link:
http://www.auelfans.ca/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?3/3645
take what you want and pay for it |
Scott
flint knapper
Username: Scott
Post Number: 2090
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, September 09, 2007 - 10:46 pm: | |
Could you explain "morphic resonance" with respect to space-time and/or black holes?
Scott
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ces gens, Jondalar, ils sourient. Ils me sourient. - Ayla |
|
Science Lab