‘Quantum hair’ could resolve Hawking’s black hole paradox, say scientists
New mathematical formulation means huge paradigm shift in physics would not be necessary



Stephen Hawking’s black hole information paradox has bedevilled scientists for half a century and led some to question the fundamental laws of physics. Now scientists say they may have resolved the infamous problem by showing that black holes have a property known as “quantum hair”.

If correct, this would mark a momentous advance in theoretical physics.

Prof Xavier Calmet, of the University of Sussex, who led the work, said that after working on the mathematics behind the problem for a decade, his team made a rapid advance last year that gave them confidence that they had finally cracked it....

...Hawking’s paradox boils down to the following: the rules of quantum physics state that information is conserved. Black holes pose a challenge to this law because once an object enters a black hole, it is essentially gone for good – along with any information encoded in it. Hawking identified this paradox and for decades it has continued to confound scientists...

...The name is a nod to the view, based on classical physics, that black holes can be viewed as surprisingly simple objects, defined only by their mass and speed of rotation. The prediction of bald, featureless black holes has been nicknamed the “no-hair theorem” since the 1970s.

Calmet and his collaborators think the black hole is more complex – or hairy. As matter collapses into a black hole, they suggest, it leaves a faint imprint in its gravitational field. This imprint is referred to as “quantum hair” and, the authors say, would provide the mechanism by which information is preserved during the collapse of a black hole. Under this theory, two black holes with identical masses and radii, but with different internal composition, would have very subtle differences in their gravitational fields.

Full: https://www.theguardian.com/science/202 ... scientists

down_time wrote: ↑Fri Mar 18, 2022 3:29 pm ‘Quantum hair’ could resolve Hawking’s black hole paradox, say scientists
New mathematical formulation means huge paradigm shift in physics would not be necessary





...Hawking’s paradox boils down to the following: the rules of quantum physics state that information is conserved. Black holes pose a challenge to this law because once an object enters a black hole, it is essentially gone for good – along with any information encoded in it. Hawking identified this paradox and for decades it has continued to confound scientists...

It's quite refreshing to see this sort of article posted here.

It's not really my field of expertise, to say the least, but I there seems to be a hole in the paradox itself.

It states that "once an object enters a black hole, it is essentially gone for good – along with any information encoded in it". However, it seems that they would only be true from the point of view of the observer, whereas at the quantum the information would still be available somewhere in the form of energy, which can neither be created nor destroyed.

It seems in quantum mechanics though, there's no division between observer and observed, so perhaps this makes it a valid assumption.

Where did the big bang come from, could these guy's just be sucking it all back up again in an ever expanding universe
Gravity is losing it's cool
I have thought about this often
And my conclusion was that these professor types need to get out more!

sigmoid wrote: ↑Fri Mar 18, 2022 4:39 pm It seems in quantum mechanics though, there's no division between observer and observed, so perhaps this makes it a valid assumption.

Like you I am a complete amateur in these things but it does hold a fascination. I believe you have answered your own question here.

Well, check this one out then:

https://bigthink.com/hard-science/new-h ... existence/

A new hypothesis says the universe self-simulates itself in a "strange loop". A paper from the Quantum Gravity Research institute proposes there is an underlying panconsciousness. The work looks to unify insight from quantum mechanics with a non-materialistic perspective.

"Panconsciousness" may sound a bit religious/non-scientific but keep in mind that everything is just energy, including consciousness.

Here's also Bostrom's paper:

The Simulation Argument: Why the Probability That You
Are Living in a Matrix is Quite High

https://wmpeople.wm.edu/asset/index/cvance/simulation

sigmoid wrote: ↑Sat Mar 19, 2022 10:21 pm Well, check this one out then:

https://bigthink.com/hard-science/new-h ... existence/

A new hypothesis says the universe self-simulates itself in a "strange loop". A paper from the Quantum Gravity Research institute proposes there is an underlying panconsciousness. The work looks to unify insight from quantum mechanics with a non-materialistic perspective.

"Panconsciousness" may sound a bit religious/non-scientific but keep in mind that everything is just energy, including consciousness.

Here's also Bostrom's paper:

The Simulation Argument: Why the Probability That You
Are Living in a Matrix is Quite High

https://wmpeople.wm.edu/asset/index/cvance/simulation

Ignoring all the catchy buzzwords, this is basically an idea that is starting to look increasingly attractive to some in the physics community. The basic concept is that quantum field theory is the most accurate description of the universe we have ever created, and so if we are going to look beyond it, it will need to be done in such a way that it becomes merely another special case of something much more fundamental.

Enter the idea of flipping the script on consciousness. Nobody has ever been able to explain what consciousness is, so Instead of the rational, materialist model of matter and the brain giving rise to consciousness, we allow consciousness to be fundamental, and allow that force to be the thing which sets the boundary conditions to wave equations that describe our physical universe. Dr. Dean Radin has conducted many experiments to prove the reality of clairvoyance, and shown that not only is our consciousness somehow spread out in time (with parts of it in the future), there also appears to be a component to believing in something that can affect future physical outcomes.

These results can seemingly be explained with our existing theories if we simply place some kind of external consciousness as the force setting boundary conditions to the wave equations that describe the structure and energy of spacetime. Since the invention of quantum mechanics 100 years ago, we have assumed the most boring set of boundary conditions possible when solving the equations. But these are merely assumptions. They are not now, nor have ever been, physical laws. And all the same realities hold true if you assume a more dynamic set of conditions than the most boring when constraining possible solutions. The last 100 years merely become a special case where the effects of consciousness have been ignored. Which likely isn't a bad approximation in experiments where scientists are actively trying to maintain an unbiased approach.

Whether that makes this universe a "simulation" in the classical sense is open for debate. But consensus does seems to be building towards the idea that there is more to our existence than what we have studied so far.