Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> Warp wrote:
> >>>   Matter degenerates under that much gravity. They are not "particles"
> >>> anymore.
> > 
> >> Err, what are they, then?
> > 
> >   How should I know? I'm not an astrophysicist.

> Why do you think they aren't particles, then?

  Because you can't have a huge bunch of particles in a space of zero
volume. Hence if all the mass is in a singularity, it cannot be in the
form of particles, but something else completely (basically something
that cannot be described with current knowledge of physics).

  (Of course I'm assuming here that singularities do exist. It's possible
that reality is different and they don't.)

> > and if the gravity is larger than the critical limit, the
> > matter just collapses and there's nothing to stop it. (AFAIK according to
> > the relativistic equations you would need literally an infinitely strong
> > force to keep matter inside the event horizon from falling into the
> > singularity. Thus no kind of non-zero-sized shape can be maintained in
> > there.)

> Yeah. I'm not arguing that any one thing happens or doesn't. I'm just trying 
> to figure out why people seem to be asserting that we know what happens in 
> the middle of a singularity (where the math doesn't apply or conflicts with 
> other theories that have just as much or more evidence in their favor).

  People don't claim to know what happens in the singularity. They claim that
the equations say something about what happens *outside* the singularity
(and that "something" is, basically, "there can't be anything inside the
event horizon and outside the singularity, hence the only possible place
where everything must be is in the singularity, because that's where all
the space-time geodesics are pointing to").

> >> Or something like the 
> >> quantumness of spacetime. Can you actually fit multiple particles into one 
> >> plank-length of space?
> > 
> >   Since there is currently no unifying quantum theory of gravity, nothing
> > definitive can be said about that, I think.

> Right. So applying relativity where we already know it doesn't apply doesn't 
> seem to be supportable, scientifically speaking.

  Relativity cannot be applied to the singularity itself, but it can be
applied to the space between the event horizon and the singularity. (It's
all really weird there, and greatly complicated by things like rotation
and electric charge, but calculable.)

> It's also the case that when you get down to zero size, if you mash 
> everything into a single point, then you start violating the duality 
> principle (if I understand correctly) as well as a whole bunch of symmetry 
> laws, which is why there's now all kinds of talk about holographic 
> information on the surface of black holes and such.

  If GR breaks at the singularity, who is to say that QM doesn't?

  Maybe information *is* destroyed at the singularity? After all, it's
pretty weird in there (being of zero size and all).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message