--- In [email protected], off_world_beings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <sparaig@> wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > And I don't think it turns black holes theory on its head. Black > holes are a consequence > > of > > > classical newtonian physics and Special Relativity, are they > not? Hawkings' conclusions > > > were combining QM with black holes. That doesn't make black > holes impossible > > according > > > to classical physics, just questions the relationship with QM > and gravity, which has > > always > > > been a sticky issue. > > > > > > > I meant to say General Relativity, not special. And GR and QM have > never gotten along > > well. That was what made Hawking's theory so important to the > Physics community, IIRC. > > > > The NON-quantum theories of black holes are considered reasonably > intact from what I've > > read. Information-escape from large-scale black holes like the > ones that are supposed to > > happen due to collapsing stars is expected to take TRILLIONS > **of** TRILLIONS of years, > > even now, after Hawkings lost his bet, so it shouldn't affect how > they behave in the "near > > term," like on the order of magnitude of the age of the universe, > or some other short span > > of time... > > > > IOW, if you approach a standard-theory black-hole-like entity, > you'll still get ripped to > > shreds by tidal effects well beore you cross the "event horizon," > and if we're living in a > > universe-sized black hole, we'll never know it unless we can show > that space is curved > > sufficiently, which does't appear to be the case. > > > > > > I taught myself elementary calculus when I was 15, and invented a > variation Gauss's > > technique to sum the numbers 1 to 100 at the same age he did (3rd > grade--in response > > to a challenge to the class by the teacher who was telling us > about Gauss). My ADHD > > prevents me from going on to higher-level math, but don't get > snitty with me, ok, Off- > > world? > > You are the one that kept saying "No" to me like some ivory tower > guru. > I take your point though, you are smarter than me. I have only been > interested in the philosophical implications of physics and > astronomy since I was 14, and decided at 16 to not pursue a career > in astronomy because I realised it was mostly sitting in a stuffy > closet number crunching decade after decade. > > > > > In case you're interested, Guass's technique was > > > > 1+100= 101 > > 2+99 = 101 > > ... > > 51+50 = 101 > > > > 51 x 101 = 5050. > > > > > > Mine was: > > > > 1+99 = 100 > > 2+ 98 = 100 > > ... > > 49 + 51 = 100 > > > > 49 x100 + 100 + 50 = 5050.>> > > I don't get it. seems hard to see why this is hard. i am sure it is.
I was 9 or 10... And no, I don't have any credentials in physics either. I just don't see why some esoteric issue involving whether or not large black holes give up information about what went into them changes their large-scale behavior in any significant way, astronomically speaking. For all mortal intents and purposes, what goes in, never comes out. The fact that it might come back out 1 trillion trillion trillion years (or more!) after it goes in doesn't really mean much to anyone save philosophers and theoretical physicists, as far as I can tell... To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
