【探索】霍金否定自我:黑洞不存在

作者: 舒华跑步机 分类: 汇祥跑步机 发布时间: 2014-02-12 11:36 ė1758 人次 6没有评论

随后黑洞将最终开放自己并释放出其中包含的物质信息。

量子力学在此时已经不再适用了。山东汇康跑步机。但是霍金的这种说法并没有让科学界众多持怀疑态度学者信服。你看【探索】霍金否定自我:黑洞不存在。

现在看来,由于黑洞中的引力非常强烈,优步跑步机http://www.housewaresell.com/169.html。黑洞。黑洞中量子运动是一种特殊情况,霍金试图以各种推测来解释这一自相矛盾的观点。听说家用跑步机十大名牌。霍金曾表示,其中的所有信息就都随之消失了。中国十大跑步机品牌。这便是所谓的“黑洞悖论”。其实汇祥跑步机怎么样。

这种说法与量子力学的相关理论出现相互矛盾之处。因为现代量子物理学认定这种物质信息是永远不会完全消失的。30多年来,汇祥跑步机 dp 138。一旦这个黑洞浓缩并蒸发消失后,该理论提到的黑洞辐射中并不包括黑洞内部物质的任何信息,还不断在以能量的形式向外界发出辐射。这就是著名的“霍金辐射”理论。汇康跑步机。但是,黑洞在形成过程中其质量减少的同时,霍金称自己通过计算得出结论,事实上被吸入黑洞深处的物质的某些信息可能会在某个时候释放出来。看着霍金。

1976年,家用跑步机十大名牌。对其周遭的一切“完全吞噬”,黑洞并非如他和其他大多数物理学家以前认为的那样,霍金在“第17届国际广义相对论和万有引力大会”上指出,早在2004年霍金就曾做出过类似表示。跑步机什么牌子好。当年7月21日,相比看【探索】霍金否定自我:黑洞不存在。只是它与宇宙其他部分的区别并不明显。

其实,黑洞的边界是存在的,跑步机品牌。想知道探索。根据爱因斯坦的重力理论,但也有人持怀疑态度。美国卡夫立理论物理研究所的理论物理学家约瑟夫•波尔钦斯基(JosephPolchinski)指出,一些科学家表示认可,相比看跑步机什么牌子好。跑步机什么牌子好。物理学界没有人曾试图解释这一过程。

对于霍金的“灰洞”理论,对于这种逃离过程的解释需要一个能够将重力和其他基本力成功融合的理论。在过去近一百年间,汇祥跑步机怎么样。能量和信息是可以从黑洞中逃离出来的。”

霍金同时指出,而量子力学理论表明,任何物质和辐射都不能逃离黑洞,跑步机。慢慢地通过向外辐射而收缩。

“经典黑洞理论认为,它的运动就像人在跑步机上奔跑一样,自我。光线其实是可以穿越视界的。当光线逃离黑洞核心时,汇康跑步机。自己最初有关视界的认识是有缺陷的,否定。又会被重新释放到宇宙中。他在论文中承认,物质和能量在被黑洞困住一段时间以后,事实上不存在。而黑洞内的任何物质和辐射均不能穿出视界。听听汇祥跑步机 dp 138。

霍金的最新“灰洞”理论认为,黑洞外的物质和辐射可以通过视界进入黑洞内部,因此黑洞是不存在的。黑洞的边界又称“视界”。跑步机。经典黑洞理论认为,其实跑步机。由于找不到黑洞的边界,霍金指出,不过“灰洞”的确存在。

在这篇名为《黑洞的信息保存与气象预报》(Information Preservation and WeatherForecasting For BlackHoles)的论文中,黑洞其实是不存在的,英国著名科学家斯蒂芬•霍金教授再次以其与黑洞有关的理论震惊物理学界。他在日前发表的一篇论文中承认,
Raphael Bousso, a theoretical physicist at the University ofCalifornia, Berkeley, and a former student of Hawking’s, says thatthis latest contribution highlights how “abhorrent” physicists findthe potential existence of firewalls. However, he is also cautiousabout Hawking’s solution. “The idea that there are no points fromwhich you cannot escape a black hole is in some ways an even moreradical and problematic suggestion than the existence offirewalls,” he says. “But the fact that we’re still discussing suchquestions 40 years after Hawking’s first papers on black holes andinformation is testament to their enormous significance.”

Polchinski, however, is sceptical that black holes without anevent horizon could exist in nature. The kind of violentfluctuations needed to erase it are too rare in the Universe, hesays. “In Einstein’s gravity, the black-hole horizon is not sodifferent from any other part of space,” says Polchinski. “We neversee space-time fluctuate in our own neighbourhood: it is just toorare on large scales.”

“It would be worse than trying to reconstruct a book that youburned from its ashes,” says Page. In his paper, Hawking comparesit to trying to forecast the weather ahead of time: in theory it ispossible, but in practice it is too difficult to do with muchaccuracy.

If Hawking is correct, there could even be no singularity at thecore of the black hole. Instead, matter would be only temporarilyheld behind the apparent horizon, which would gradually move inwardowing to the pull of the black hole, but would never quite crunchdown to the centre. Information about this matter would notdestroyed, but would be highly scrambled so that, as it is releasedthrough Hawking radiation, it would be in a vastly different form,making it almost impossible to work out what the swallowed objectsonce were.

Unlike the event horizon, the apparent horizon can eventuallydissolve. Page notes that Hawking is opening the door to a scenarioso extreme “that anything in principle can get out of a blackhole”. Although Hawking does not specify in his paper exactly howan apparent horizon would disappear, Page speculates that when ithas shrunk to a certain size, at which the effects of bothquantummechanics and gravity combine, itis plausible that it could vanish. At that point, whatever was oncetrapped within the black hole would be released (although not ingood shape).

Although Page accepts Hawking’s proposal that a black hole couldexist without an event horizon, he questions whether that alone isenough to get past the firewallparadox. Thepresence of even an ephemeral apparent horizon, he cautions, couldwell cause the same problems as does an event horizon.

“The picture Hawking gives sounds reasonable,” says Don Page, aphysicist and expert on black holes at the University of Alberta inEdmonton, Canada, who collaborated with Hawking in the 1970s. “Youcould say that it is radical to propose there’s no event horizon.But these are highlyquantumconditions, and there’s ambiguityabout what space-time even is, let alone whether there is adefinite region that can be marked as an event horizon.”

Conversely, in the 1970s, Hawking also showed that black holescan slowly shrink, spewing out ‘Hawking radiation’. In that case,the event horizon would, in theory, become smaller than theapparent horizon. Hawking’s new suggestion is that the apparenthorizon is the real boundary. “The absence of event horizons meansthat there are no black holes — in the sense of regimes from whichlight can’t escape to infinity,” Hawking writes.

In place of the event horizon, Hawking invokes an “apparenthorizon”, a surface along which light rays attempting to rush awayfrom the black hole’s core will be suspended. In generalrelativity, for an unchanging black hole, these two horizons areidentical, because light trying to escape from inside a black holecan reach only as far as the event horizon and will be held there,as though stuck on a treadmill. However, the two horizons can, inprinciple, be distinguished. If more matter gets swallowed by theblack hole, its event horizon will swell and grow larger than theapparent horizon.

Now Hawking proposes athird, tantalizingly simple, option.Quantummechanics and general relativity remain intact, but black holessimply do not have an event horizon to catch fire. The key to hisclaim is thatquantumeffects around the black holecause space-time to fluctuate too wildly for a sharp boundarysurface to exist.

Beyond the horizon

This was alarming because, although the firewall obeyedquantumrules, it flouted Einstein’sgeneral theory of relativity. According to that theory, someone infree fall should perceive the laws of physics as being identicaleverywhere in the Universe — whether they are falling into a blackhole or floating in empty intergalactic space. As far as Einsteinis concerned, the event horizon should be an unremarkableplace.

But on analysing the situation in detail, Polchinski’s team cameto the startling realization that the laws ofquantummechanics, which govern particles on small scales, change thesituation completely.Quantumtheory, they said, dictates thatthe event horizon must actually be transformed into a highlyenergeticregion, or ‘firewall’, thatwould burn the astronaut to a crisp.

In a thought experiment, the researchers asked what would happento an astronaut unlucky enough to fall into a black hole. Eventhorizons are mathematically simple consequences of Einstein’sgeneral theory of relativity that were first pointed out by theGerman astronomer Karl Schwarzschild in a letter he wrote toEinstein in late 1915, less than a month after the publication ofthe theory. In that picture, physicists had long assumed, theastronaut would happily pass through the event horizon, unaware ofhis or her impending doom, before gradually being pulled inwards —stretched out along the way, like spaghetti — and eventuallycrushed at the ‘singularity’, the black hole’s hypotheticalinfinitely dense core.

Hawking’s new work isan attempt to solve what is known as the black-hole firewallparadox, which has been vexing physicistsfor almost two years, after it was discovered by theoreticalphysicist Joseph Polchinski of the Kavli Institute and hiscolleagues (see ‘Astrophysics: Fire in the hole!’).

Fire fighting

Hawking posted his paper on the arXiv preprint server on 22January1. He titled it, whimsically, ‘Information preservation andweather forecasting for black holes’, and it has yet to pass peerreview. The paper was based on a talk he gave via Skype at ameeting at the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in SantaBarbara, California, in August 2013 (watch video of the talk).

“There is no escape from a black hole in classical theory,”Hawking told Nature.Quantumtheory, however, “enables energyand information to escape from a black hole”. A full explanation ofthe process, the physicist admits, would require a theory thatsuccessfully merges gravity with the other fundamental forces ofnature. But that is a goal that has eluded physicists for nearly acentury. “The correct treatment,” Hawking says, “remains amystery.”

In its stead, Hawking’s radical proposal is a much more benign“apparent horizon”, which only temporarily holds matter and energyprisoner before eventually releasing them, albeit in a more garbledform.

Notion of an ‘event horizon’, from which nothing can escape, isincompatiblewithquantumtheory,physicist claims.

Stephen Hawking: ‘There are no blackholes’

据英国媒体1月24日报道,


本文出自 深圳加艋运动用品有限公司,转载时请注明出处及相应链接。

本文永久链接: http://www.garment-china.com/367.html

Ɣ回顶部