Black Hole holograms and...

Originally posted by Stunspot
Now, Quantum Mechanics says that black holes will slowly return their mass as completely unorganized Hawking radiation

edit on 19-10-2012 by Stunspot because: (no reason given)

Firstly, thanks for the science. Its like a breath of fresh air!

Agree with most of what you said, just wanted to add Hawking used Quantum field theory and relativistic ideas to come up with the bhole temperature equation which lead to the ideas of hawking radiation. Unless I am mistaken there are still many other interpretations or predictions of what happens at a bhole horizon that arise from quantum mechanics. Because as you pointed out, we don't have a complete understanding of gravity at the planck scale so its impossible to say with certainty what happens as an object crosses an event horizon

reply to post by ubeenhad


I agree mostly, but "not understanding much about how they fit together" is not at all the same as "not understanding ANYTHING about how they fit together".

Hawking radiation is really a pretty natural and straightforward affair, once you understand how virtual particles work.

I guess what I'm saying is that it's hardly hand-wavey or suspect.

Originally posted by Stunspot
reply to post by ubeenhad

 

I guess what I'm saying is that it's hardly hand-wavey or suspect.

I think it would be important to emphasize this as the truth.

If my understanding of quantum potentiality is correct then we would still have to wait until the entire black hole scenario is actually observed right? I mean, couldn't all the math go out the window if somebody observes it and it behaves differently? As I typed that I sort of realized how silly it is to talk about the observer collapsing potentiality in reference to a black hole...

And great job explaining this stuff, guys. Well done on all parts.

Originally posted by Stunspot

When you look at what happens to time around black holes, you get the result that at the event horizon, for an infalling body, time will STOP as measured by a distant observer, Zero time. End of line. No change, no radiation emission (don't talk to me about Hawking radiation -- whole other deal), complete End Of Line. Things would look a lot different to the body itself, but that doesn't matter because it can never ever ever EVER communicate those sights to anyone outside the event horizon. They are completely informationally segregated from the universe and can have absolutely no causal relation to any event in the universe.

Another way to think about it is that in a black hole, all the information about a system is copied before it is ejected from the universe irretrievably.

Thanks much for the informative and detailed response!

Have we not "witnessed" stars orbiting closely around our supermassive black hole and then becoming victim?
your saying if we never stopped observing, a ghost of the star would be projected at the horizon forever?

all the information is copied by what? and stored where?

Originally posted by Stunspot
No, that's exactly, precisely the right place to start. Most people hearing the lecture will have heard the word 'entropy' before and virtually none of them will have a complete understanding of it.

I'm certain you are correct that virtually none of them would have a complete understanding of it.

What I was asking is: Don't most people think entropy in the context of physics rather than in the context of society has to do with energy not available to do work?

So, wouldn't a physicist address entropy by talking about that definition first, then proceed to talk about information or confusion?

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Published on Nov 4, 2011 by tvochannel

Leonard Susskind of the Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics discusses the indestructability of information and the nature of black holes in a lecture entitled The World As Hologram.

The YouTuber is TVO, which is a Canadian public educational media organization, according to the Channel page.

I'm curious to know why the description of the video doesn't give us any information about the date of the lecture or under whose auspices the lecture was presented. Stanford Institute for Theoretical Physics? Or TVO? Something else?

Why isn’t the video on Stanford University’s YouTube channel rather than TVO’s? Or is it on both? Anyone know?

Is the lecture a summer lecture for laymen?

I see this lecture by Susskind is on the Stanford channel:

Uploaded by StanfordUniversity on Feb 14, 2008

Lecture 1 of Leonard Susskind's Modern Physics course concentrating on Quantum Mechanics. Recorded January 14, 2008 at Stanford University.

This Stanford Continuing Studies course is the second of a six-quarter sequence of classes exploring the essential theoretical foundations of modern physics. The topics covered in this course focus on quantum mechanics. Leonard Susskind is the Felix Bloch Professor of Physics at Stanford University.

Complete playlist for the course:
youtube.com...

Stanford Continuing Studies: continuingstudies.stanford.edu...

About Leonard Susskind: www.stanford.edu...

Stanford University channel on YouTube:
www.youtube.com...

That description is more what I would expect to see.

I used google advanced search trying to locate Susskind's lecture on the world as a hologram on Stanford's YouTube channel but it didn't work.

Is Susskind still a professor there?

Is the world as a hologram a controversial subject at Stanford?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Is the world as a hologram a controversial subject at Stanford?

The holographic principle is not very controversial because it pretty much the pinnacle of our achievements to date. Its corroborated by some of the most respected physicists in a variety of disciplines.

Susskind also helped discover string theory.
Call Standford and ask.

reply to post by ubeenhad


Do you have a clue about why that video is posted by TVO instead of Stanford?