for them, it's not a problem. Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
________________________________ From: PEN-L list on behalf of Gassler Robert Sent: Fri 7/16/2004 12:03 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Hawking black hole If I sent a note to the American Economic Association and said 'I have solved the neoclassical autism problem and I want to talk about it' do you think they'd buy it, and just go on my reputation? Guess not. >NewScientist.com > >Hawking cracks black hole paradox >19:00 14 July 04 >Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition. > > >After nearly 30 years of arguing that a black hole destroys >everything that falls into it, Stephen Hawking is saying he was >wrong. It seems that black holes may after all allow information >within them to escape. Hawking will present his latest finding at a >conference in Ireland next week. > >The about-turn might cost Hawking, a physicist at the University of >Cambridge, an encyclopaedia because of a bet he made in 1997. More >importantly, it might solve one of the long-standing puzzles in >modern physics, known as the black hole information paradox. > >It was Hawking's own work that created the paradox. In 1976, he >calculated that once a black hole forms, it starts losing mass by >radiating energy. This "Hawking radiation" contains no information >about the matter inside the black hole and once the black hole >evaporates, all information is lost. > >But this conflicts with the laws of quantum physics, which say that >such information can never be completely wiped out. Hawking's >argument was that the intense gravitational fields of black holes >somehow unravel the laws of quantum physics. > >Other physicists have tried to chip away at this paradox. Earlier in >2004, Samir Mathur of Ohio State University in Columbus and his >colleagues showed that if a black hole is modelled according to >string theory - in which the universe is made of tiny, vibrating >strings rather than point-like particles - then the black hole >becomes a giant tangle of strings. And the Hawking radiation emitted >by this "fuzzball" does contain information about the insides of a >black hole (New Scientist print edition, 13 March). > > >Big reputation > >Now, it seems that Hawking too has an answer to the conundrum and the >physics community is abuzz with the news. Hawking requested at the >last minute that he be allowed to present his findings at the 17th >International Conference on General Relativity and Gravitation in >Dublin, Ireland. > >"He sent a note saying 'I have solved the black hole information >paradox and I want to talk about it'," says Curt Cutler, a physicist >at the Albert Einstein Institute in Golm, Germany, who is chairing >the conference's scientific committee. "I haven't seen a preprint [of >the paper]. To be quite honest, I went on Hawking's reputation." > >Though Hawking has not yet revealed the detailed maths behind his >finding, sketchy details have emerged from a seminar Hawking gave at >Cambridge. According to Cambridge colleague Gary Gibbons, an expert >on the physics of black holes who was at the seminar, Hawking's black >holes, unlike classic black holes, do not have a well-defined event >horizon that hides everything within them from the outside world. > >In essence, his new black holes now never quite become the kind that >gobble up everything. Instead, they keep emitting radiation for a >long time, and eventually open up to reveal the information within. >"It's possible that what he presented in the seminar is a solution," >says Gibbons. "But I think you have to say the jury is still out." > > >Forever hidden > >At the conference, Hawking will have an hour on 21 July to make his >case. If he succeeds, then, ironically, he will lose a bet that he >and theoretical physicist Kip Thorne of the California Institute of >Technology (Caltech) in Pasadena made with John Preskill, also of >Caltech. > >They argued that "information swallowed by a black hole is forever >hidden, and can never be revealed". > >"Since Stephen has changed his view and now believes that black holes >do not destroy information, I expect him [and Kip] to concede the >bet," Preskill told New Scientist. The duo are expected to present >Preskill with an encyclopaedia of his choice "from which information >can be recovered at will". > > >Jenny Hogan >
