• qooqie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Don’t mean to be too technical but would the Big Bang be indirectly responsible for the formation of regular holes?

  • palordrolap@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    8 months ago

    If “Indirectly” is an allowed answer, as demonstrated by the answers after “Precious Metals”, then the answer to “Are regular holes created by the Big Bang?” is not “No.”

  • Spzi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Falling in is only “definitely fatal” if it’s too big. For all we know, black holes can be tiny and light. We can debate if you can still “fall in” one of those. Maybe the process is more like passing by, or some mote of dust sticking to your clothes.

  • jbk@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    did hawking really argue that all infomation in black holes is lost forever? what about the hawking radiation? idk im not really into physics

    • jorge
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      For a long time, it was believed that Hawking radiation is thermal and doesn’t carry information, except for the mass/radius/temperature of the black hole.

      In 2004, Hawking conceded that, due to the holographic principle, information wasn’t lost. The basic idea is that the infalling matter can gravitationally deform the horizon and thus modify the distribution of Hawking radiation from the pure thermal emission. And the interesting point is that the entropy of the black hole is proportional to its area and not its volume (holography), so the deformation of the horizon is sufficient to recover all the “missing” information.