Physicists Demonstrate How Information Can Escape From Black Holes

>Once you consider quantum gravity...

There is no accepted theory of quantum gravity.

> According to Ashtekar, space-time is not a continuum as physicists once believed.

Which experiment can confirm it?

Both quantum gravity and whether space-time is discreet or continuous are much bigger, older and more importent unsolved puzzles of physics.

@superhuman: This guy is making assumptions about parts of reality which we will not be able to resolve through experimentation for many years to come. Quantum Gravity? Discontinuity of space? This is not how science is done. You cannot make assumptions about that which you cannot prove, either empirically or experimentally, and then base a conclusion on those assumptions. While it is not a logical fallacy, I would say that a conclusion is only as stable as the foundation upon which it is built. And, unprovable assumptions are, to me, very weak.

In my opinion, however, I do not see how information can be perfectly preserved because information is also dependent upon context. If the information emitted by black holes is not emitted in a manner that preserves context, then conservation of information is still violated.

There is no law of conservation of information. Disorder grows bigger all the time.

By AWT such conclusion is simple consequence of model, the Universe is composed by system of dense blobs of blobs of blobs... recursivelly. And we are sitting inside of one of these blobs right now.

If we travell into some large black hole ( considering our particles woldn't dissolve in the dense vacuum around it like lumps of wet sand thrown into watter), we'll observe an interesting phenomena: the event horizon would surround us opening a new free space for us until our universe would remain behind our back, so it would appear like black hole, simmilar to those, into which we have passed right now. Our original universe would remain undistingushable from other black holes and we would reveal some new black holes inside the original black holes, so we could travel from one black holes to another seamlessly like during travelling through giant foam composed of nested bubbles.

In reality such travell would remain disallowed for us, because our particles would decompose and recover again during every pass through event horizon, like during passing through Big Bang event.

There is no law of conservation of information.

Here's no law of increasing of disorder as well. Order and disorder are just switching their positions mutually.

Try to imagine an infinitelly fractal foam composed of nested bubbles, where the smaller bubbles are expanding and these larger ones are shrinking, until they will switch their position. Now you can imagine, such scale switching occurs spontaneously on many levels of nested foam hiearchy and you'll get the complexity of enthropy transforms inside of our Universe.

We can observe such enthropy fluctuations during boiling or stellar matter development, because we can see, the large objects are evaporating to even smaller ones by radiation of energy/matter, while the small ones are aggregating and condensing into larger objects at the same time, so at the sufficiently global scale no apparent enthropy arrow prevails. It's a sort of slow boiling, during which the small bubbles are both evaporating both condensing into larger ones at the same moment.

By AWT our generation of Universe does exactly the same, just at the much larger level.

..space-time is not a continuum as physicists once believed..

By AWT the space is formed by infinitelly tiny particles, so it appears like continuum. But it's never completelly homogeneous, which effectivelly means, inside of every sufficiently large density fluctuation the density gradient will become so large gradually, it will affect the energy spreading by total reflection phenomena, which means, it would behave like less or more "black hole".

For example the water droplets are rather transparent for light waves, but they're behaving like tiny reflecting singularities with respect of sound wave spreading. By analogous way, the black holes are behaving like singularities with respect of light waves, but they're should remain quite transparent for gravitational waves, and so on.

So that only observational perspective can define, what can be considered a singularity or not.

..no one, until now, has been able to provide a plausible mechanism for how information might escape from a black hole..

The only true is, everybody's believing, his explanation is more plausible, then the explanation of others. But the robust theories of "white holes" are many already, for example the Yilmaz and Heim theory, gravastar theory, etc. You can find the AWT explanation for example here: http://tinyurl.com/6rpud3

@Neil: Then why must black holes emit radiation? This was a major reason why Hawking Radiation is accepted by many scientists.

Or maybe I am wrong?

"Once we realized that the notion of space-time as a continuum is only an approximation of reality, it became clear to us that singularities are merely artifacts of our insistence that space-time should be described as a continuum."

Is it just me, or is this brutally obvious?

(assuming quantum gravity works)

"There is no law of conservation of information. Disorder grows bigger all the time." - Neil Farbstein

That is actually an increase in information, as more data is required to model the state of the universe at each moment. Equivalent to thermodynamics.

If my blackhole disappears, would you still know about my farts?

information could be stored in other dimensions, as in string theory. Quantum mechanics does not say that information cannot be lost.

The formation of singularity belongs the realm of relativity theory, because from Schwarzschild solution of GR follows, every object of supercritical mass should collapse into singularity undeniably. The QM doesn't violate this theorem conceptually, being in similar position when claiming, a certain level of uncertainty is immanent to quantum reality and it cannot be avoided, as follows from EPR and Bell theorem - so that certain portion of information remains always hidden for us.

But here's still apparent caveat, because the singularity solution of GR is steady state solution and as such it doesn't care, when this situation will occur. As we know, the BH is formed by collapse of dense matter and the speed of energy spreading is the more slow, the more dense such matter is. From this follows, the infinitely dense matter (i.e. the singularity) should form just in infinite time. Which is apparently unrealistic assumption, if we consider the finite age of Universe.

From this insight follows, only sufficiently small BH can form the singular solution, the heavier ones cannot form a singularity, if they were formed just after Universe formation. Note, that such conclusion is consistent with the AWT explanation of information paradox, linked above ( http://tinyurl.com/6rpud3 )

Yes information can escape, no spacetime is not so simple. These black holes do not evaporate away, they emit information because they contain discrete fractional spacetime ; but even that is not enough to describe them fully. Continuous as such is a very weak definition as it only discerns one level of continuity, thus being unable to even contemplate what may go on beneath seemingly continuous spacetime.

Quantum Gravity? Discontinuity of space? This is not how science is done. You cannot make assumptions about that which you cannot prove, either empirically or experimentally, and then base a conclusion on those assumptions.

In my opinion, you are right and wrong. This research still has value. If they can work out a model where a discrete space-time and quantum gravity are required to explain macroscopic phenomenas (e.g.: black holes), they will be building a stronger case for those hypothesis.

"In my opinion, you are right and wrong. This research still has value."

By the same token, research into why faeries do not exist, is also an excellent waste of taxpayer dollars.

It seems to me that the more fundamental our questions get regarding the structure of the universe, the more difficult it is to test them directly. It is often easier and less costly to come up with a model or hypothesis, work it out to its logical conclusion, and test the prediction. This is the case with string theory, for example. The benefits of pure research are not always immediately practical or even obvious -- but unusual approaches yield useful information often enough to be worthwhile.