Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>>   According to GR you would need an infinite amount of energy to maintain
>>> a shape with non-zero volume. Obviously there isn't an infinite amount of
>>> energy inside a black hole.
> 
>> Interestingly, according to QM, you need an infinite amount of energy if two 
>> particles can be zero distance from each other.  And that is *exactly* the 
>> problem.
> 
>   I suppose the apparent contradiction won't be solved until a unified
> theory is discovered.

Or until we figure out how to make a black hole we can actually observe the 
behavior of, etc. :-)  I think QM is more "holy" than GR because it's very 
difficult to observe the actual behavior of GR in the extreme. We have only 
theories of what goes on inside a black hole's even horizon, whereas QM has 
been expermentally validated to a much greater extent with actual 
observations, perhaps?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message