Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I think that's the point. From an outside perspective the black hole will evaporate before the thing falls in. Thus a thing can never fall in. From its perspective the hole will emit more and more intense radiation and finally evaporate just before it hits the horizon.

If true, I think you can go even further and say no black hole can completely form; the collapsing matter just gets exponentially closer to being fully black until the effect of the Hawking radiation outweighs the gravitation, but it all evaporates before going fully black. No?

(This latter part assumes there's some Hawking radiation or equivalent from pre-black holes as well. And I'm not sure whether that would be unitary or not, so it may not resolve the information paradox anyway).

(Edit: I think the pre-Hawking radiation would be unitary, since the only reason Hawking radiation is not unitary is because BHs don't have information, but pre-black holes are not black holes. So doesn't that solve the info paradox? Without resorting to holographs and whatnot? Where's the error?)




Maybe, but I think if it were easy to show that black holes (for whatever definition is important here) never actually form, the physicists would have noticed.


When they are paid for research of black holes, it becomes easy to overlook their absence. They can also say they do hypothetical research, if black holes don't form by collapse maybe they form by other means, e.g. primordial black holes.


100% agree, but I'm still not seeing the flaw in the argument.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: