clipka wrote:
> - If the equations say that inside the EH you can't do anyhing to a particle to
> prevent it from going straight towards the center, then this might be a hint
> that particles there can't *interact* in the first palce.

It doesn't. It says no particle going at or slower than c can avoid going 
towards the center. But QM doesn't restrict particles from going FTL, either.

> Fine. So? I *love* some good crazy mix of science, philosophy and wild
> speculations, nothing wrong there for me ;)

Welcome to p.o-t!  :-)   How about some Java/C++ flames now? ;-)

> it is reasonable to assume that singularities predicted by scientific theories
> actually indicate that the theory *fails* at these conditions.

Again, I think that's what's meant by the term "singularity". Isn't that why 
they name it after that word? The formulas fall down?

QM has its own singularities: if you take it all the way down to size zero, 
you get infinities in the sums. Feynman got his Nobel for proving you don't 
have to go down to zero, and regardless of where you stop approaching the 
limit of zero, you get the same answer (within tolerance of course).

So there's a singularity in QM in the same place there is in GR, in some 
sense - you can't do the QM formulas without freedom of motion, which 
doesn't happen at the singularity in a black hole.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "Ouch ouch ouch!"
   "What's wrong? Noodles too hot?"
   "No, I have Chopstick Tunnel Syndrome."

Post a reply to this message