24 Sep '14 13:34>
http://phys.org/news/2014-09-black-holes.html
News at 11 I guess.
News at 11 I guess.
Originally posted by wolfgang59yes, we already knew that. But, IF we are to believe the OP link (a very big IF! ) , then that said black hole, just like all other said black holes including the one detected in the center of our own galaxy, isn't really a black hole but rather merely a very massive object (which would then beg the obvious question of what kind of very massive object it is if not a black hole? )
Better tell these guys.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp/2014/09/18/astronomers-find-a-supermassive-black-hole-in-a-tiny-galaxy/
... She and Hawking both agree that as a star collapses under its own gravity, it produces Hawking radiation. However, in her new work, Mersini-Houghton shows that by giving off this radiation, the star also sheds mass. So much so that as it shrinks it no longer has the density to become a black hole.
Before a black hole can form, the dying star swells one last time and then explodes. A singularity never forms and neither does an event horizon. The take home message of her work is clear: there is no such thing as a black hole. ...
Originally posted by googlefudgeI had a very quick look at the paper and it looks reasonable enough. It's enough that there is a very strong gravitational field for Hawking radiation to be emitted. In Hawking's model it is produced near an event horizon, not from it - a positive energy particle is emitted and the negative energy particle falls through the horizon. In her model it just eats the stuff at the surface of the star. She did this work as a visitor at DAMTP and had people like Richard Ellis to talk to who'd have told her she was wrong if there was a problem as simple as that.
IF I were a betting man then I would be prepared to bet a considerable sum that this is junk.
[quote]... She and Hawking both agree that as a star collapses under its own gravity, [b]it produces Hawking radiation. However, in her new work, Mersini-Houghton shows that by giving off this radiation, the star also sheds mass. So much so that as it shr ...[text shortened]... o-such-things-as-black-holes/
https://briankoberlein.com/2014/09/25/yes-virginia-black-holes/[/b]
Originally posted by DeepThoughtDid you read the full paper?
I had a very quick look at the paper and it looks reasonable enough. It's enough that there is a very strong gravitational field for Hawking radiation to be emitted. In Hawking's model it is produced near an event horizon, not from it - a positive energy particle is emitted and the negative energy particle falls through the horizon. In her model it ju ...[text shortened]... The other, as the article noted, is the quantum information problem. So I wouldn't rule it out.