Stephen Hawking stuns physicists by declaring 'there are no black holes'

but says there are GREY ones

I have been saying this for years!

Finally Steven Hawkings catches up!!

Stephen Hawking has shocked physicists by admitting 'there are no black holes'.

In a paper published online, Professor Hawking instead argues there are 'grey holes'

'The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes - in the sense of regimes from which light can't escape to infinity,' he says in the paper, called Information Preservation and Weather Forecasting For Black Holes.

In a paper published online, Professor Hawking instead argues there are 'grey holes' and not black holes, as he first thought.
He says that the idea of an event horizon, from which light cannot escape, is flawed.

He suggests that instead light rays attempting to rush away from the black hole’s core will be held as though stuck on a treadmill and that they can slowly shrink by spewing out radiation.

Hawking told the journal Nature: 'There is no escape from a black hole in classical theory. [But quantum theory] enables energy and information to escape from a black hole'.

A full explanation of the process, Hawking admits, would require a theory that successfully merges gravity with the other fundamental forces of nature.

Source: - Stephen Hawking stuns physicists by declaring 'there are no black holes

I have not read the aforementioned paper yet.. but be assured I will..

And he is quite right the correct way to understand the phenomenon is through a theory of Quantum Gravity. I have long held that the correct theory of reality is one that encompass mass and therefore gravity as a property of space-time itself at the quantum level.

Loop Quantum Gravity (for those that want to know more about LQG please refer to this quick reference... Loop quantum gravity (LQG)) appears to be the most accurate theory we have thus far on the nature of reality.

It is fantastic to see that such a well known and respected physicist has come forward with this. It means that the scientific community will now have to stand up and listen finally to something that flies in the face of the close held standard model.

I will hunt down the paper and disseminate it here for your pleasure.

Peace,

Korg.

S&F

I guess He's gonna catch a lot of flak for this
Quantum Mechanics and relativity are a hard thing to make coexist and explain how these structures work...He should have known this as soon as he formulated Hawking radiation...

Here is the paper...

Information Preservation and Weather Forecasting for Black
Holes

The Abstract states..

It has been suggested [1] that the resolution of the information paradox for evaporating black holes is that the holes are surrounded by rewalls, bolts of outgoing radiation that would destroy any infalling observer.

Such rewalls would break the CPT invariance of quantum gravity and seem to be ruled out on other grounds. A dierent resolution of the paradox is proposed, namely that gravitational collapse produces apparent horizons but no event horizons behind which information is lost.

This proposal is supported by ADS-CFT and is the only resolution of the paradox compatible with CPT. The collapse to form a black hole will in general be chaotic and the dual CFT on the boundary of ADS will be turbulent. Thus, like weather forecasting on Earth, information will effectively be lost, although there would be no loss of unitarity.

I'm going through it now...

Peace,

Korg.

well sort of. what he said was there is no event horizon. and even then it's almost the same thing. what he has done for about the second time is affirm that information isn't destroyed by a black hole. the first time he did this it was by the mechanism of hawking radiation. subsequently a second impermeable barrier was erected by other theorists called a firewall. what he has done is show that the fire wall itself cannot prevent information from escaping. it can just make it hard to decode.

in other papers by other physicists it has been said that even a real event horizon can theoretically be breached by the right electromagnetic signals of the correct wave forms and energies. this is not the thing Dr Hawking was discussing though; just an interesting aside for you. in the extreme it means that traversable wormholes are not completely forbidden. Hawking would probably pop a vein if you said that in front of him.

SynchronousSnake
S&F

I guess He's gonna catch a lot of flak for this

Quantum Mechanics and relativity are a hard thing to make coexist and explain how these structures work...He should have known this as soon as he formulated Hawking radiation...

He will only get flak from fools and the uneducated. "Science" itself is always changing and fluid.. as you add more to your original theory with more info from tech and evidence from our space exploration with this subject in particular. Quantum theory, mechanics, astrophysics, and etc BEGS to be fluid and change when more data is compiled over time.

Advantage

SynchronousSnake
S&F

I guess He's gonna catch a lot of flak for this

Quantum Mechanics and relativity are a hard thing to make coexist and explain how these structures work...He should have known this as soon as he formulated Hawking radiation...

He will only get flak from fools and the uneducated. "Science" itself is always changing and fluid.. as you add more to your original theory with more info from tech and evidence from our space exploration with this subject in particular. Quantum theory, mechanics, astrophysics, and etc BEGS to be fluid and change when more data is compiled over time.

edit on 24-1-2014 by Advantage because: forgot an M!

The problem has been that as new information flows inward concerning new scientific discovery it always get's looked upon through the filter of the standard model.

The standard model is like a jigsaw where the peaces fit together but the overall picture is all jumbled up.... then when someone mentions this by presenting an alternative configuration of said jigsaw puzzle they get labled crack pot or fringe.

It is great news that Stephen is standing up and mixing it up like this!

A big for you Stephen!

Peace,

Korg.

Korg Trinity

Advantage

SynchronousSnake
S&F

I guess He's gonna catch a lot of flak for this

Quantum Mechanics and relativity are a hard thing to make coexist and explain how these structures work...He should have known this as soon as he formulated Hawking radiation...

He will only get flak from fools and the uneducated. "Science" itself is always changing and fluid.. as you add more to your original theory with more info from tech and evidence from our space exploration with this subject in particular. Quantum theory, mechanics, astrophysics, and etc BEGS to be fluid and change when more data is compiled over time.

edit on 24-1-2014 by Advantage because: forgot an M!

The problem has been that as new information flows inward concerning new scientific discovery it always get's looked upon through the filter of the standard model.

The standard model is like a jigsaw where the peaces fit together but the overall picture is all jumbled up.... then when someone mentions this by presenting an alternative configuration of said jigsaw puzzle they get labled crack pot or fringe.

It is great news that Stephen is standing up and mixing it up like this!

A big

for you Stephen!

Peace,

Korg.

I respectfully disagree. Its not a standard model problem IMO. Its a hubris problem Others dont like what they put out there as "truth" tinkered with, expounded upon, or taken from. They will stunt a theory out of pure hubris and blackball anyone who dares disagree with them or changes the original theory. Hawking just has the clout to do it and get away with it unlike others.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


Well I guess that would make the Big Bang theory the Big Hoax Theory .

i think he may be right but even if he is wrong check this out:

arxiv.org...



and another paper suggests all black holes are connected to each other soooo

www.extremetech.com...

the black hole transportation network is a go (maybe)

reply to post by SimonPeter


How does this information relate to the mechanics of the Big Bang?

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


The big bang theory requires the crushing of all of the stars in the heavens to a single point the size of a period on a piece of paper and then to be ridiculous that changed to nothingness . With out the power of a black hole that could not be claimed to be true .

I have a question : Being that all matter is made up of Atoms which are made up of many charged particles and electrons , just how close can you compress all of those atoms together before they short out their potential charges and are destroyed .

All you have to do is just look at the stars and you see that theory could not be possible . .

Might I remind everyone....


This is ALL just SPECULATION....

We have not ventured forth to a "black hole"....

We have NO idea what one is...

Or for that matter, what one is not......

Lol sounds like mains streams science slow u turn on black holes.

strictly speaking though matter exists below the atomic level. it is elements that exist on the atomic level and greater.

the particles that make up atoms are themselves matter. though you can get a division from the particle level to antimatter, matter, mirror matter and perhaps other exotic forms of solids. ten when you get lower than that to the quark level you can begin to argue what the nature of those things are as to whether they are (all) matter or not. i would think quarks are matter. but you are getting into photons, gluons, gravitons, higgs, and it begins to get blurry. except the poor weak force which apparently does not even merit it's own special boson. it has to make due with rigged up temporary mesons. what's up with that?

reply to post by SimonPeter

The big bang theory requires the crushing of all of the stars in the heavens to a single point

Are you sure your whole post wasn't actually related to the Big Crunch Theory. That's only one of the speculated fates of the Universe and isn't even the currently favored one.

reply to post by mOjOm


One thing I learned in life....

There is always one.

reply to post by Korg Trinity


First Pluto, now Black holes? Why you do dis science?!

reply to post by Lucid Lunacy


I really don't think that Big Bang theory was thought out fully .

reply to post by Korg Trinity


So....these "grey" holes? Anything to do with the purported grey aliens?