Eric and Robin---

Everything gets squeezed to the other side through a worm hole, the same way 
some energy leaks from the other side (the vacuum) to reality in the known 
universe—its simple as that.

The black hole is like a strong rubber balloon that deflates as more energy 
enters inside its membrane.  The positive curvature of space increases around 
the concentration of energy.  And at a critical point of curvature releases 
some of  the energy to anti- di Sitter space (the other side) with its negative 

The  black hole poles are a little tricky since they produce an intense 
magnetic field depending upon the angular momentum that was accumulated inside 
their event horizon before the collapse happened.  IMHO the magnetic polar 
field couples to the “other side” and allows the transport of spin energy back 
and forth eith related angular momentum.

As Robin suggests, our existing reality sees the historic accumulation of mass 
(energy) and the extreme curvature of normal di Sitter space.

Bob Cook

From: Eric Walker<>
Sent: Friday, February 2, 2018 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest

On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:02 PM, 
<<>> wrote:

It's worse than that - nothing ever even gets to cross the event horizon from
our point of view (because time slows to the point where the universe comes to
an end before anything actually gets to the event horizon.)
(Which BTW is what originally led me to the notion that there is nothing in a
black hole.)

You might be right about there being drama at the event horizon, but there are 
other possibilities [1]:

The paradox [of an inconsistency mentioned earlier in the article] itself 
arises due to Hawking radiation, which demonstrates that matter can be emitted 
from a black hole, but initially it appeared that no information about the 
matter that once fell into the black hole is carried away. In 2012, a group of 
physicists studying this paradox found that three basic assumptions involved in 
this paradox cannot all be consistent.

Namely, principles of unitarity and local quantum field theory contradicted the 
assumption of "no-drama"—meaning that nothing unusual should happen when an 
object falls through the event horizon. Instead, they proposed that the most 
conservative solution to this contradiction is that there would indeed be 
"drama" at the surface of the black hole in the form of a "firewall" that would 
destroy an infalling object. This seems rather surprising, because the 
curvature is negligibly small at the event horizon of a sufficiently large 
black hole, where general relativity should hold and one would expect nothing 
special when crossing the horizon.

The conservative proposal mentioned by these theorists that there might be 
drama at the surface (event horizon?) of the black hole is in contradistinction 
to a "no drama" view in which objects merely cross over the point of no return, 
but otherwise nothing particularly interesting happens.  I.e., it is not 
certain that there is drama at the event horizon.  But even if there is a 
firewall that destroys everything approaching it, it might need to lie beyond 
event horizon in order not to have observable effects:

"If a firewall exists, not only would an infalling object be destroyed by it, 
but the destruction could be visible, even from the outside," says Misao 
Sasaki, a contributor from Kyoto University.

So your counterargument against the possibility of the electron and positron 
annihilating on the other side of the event horizon is merely suggestive but 
not conclusive.



Reply via email to