Philosophy Of The Cosmos - Black Hole Questions
Hey everyone,
I was reading the stuff in the reader about black holes by novikov, and i have few questions i was hoping you could help me answer/discuss.
The basic concept that i am a little uneasy about is the whole creating matter business. It has come up a several times in the last few weeks, and i dont really understand when matter is allowed to be 'created'. In the case of black holes, it says they create matter when a particle antiparticle pair appears at the event horizon, with one either side so that one falls in and the other 'radiates'. By this process my guess would be that particles and antiparticles would be created by the black hole in equal amounts- is this right? YES. Jason I am also wondering if adding an antiparticle is equivalent to subtracting a particle… SADLY, NO. IT WOULD BE SIMPLER IF IT WAS. BUT CREATING BOTH A PARTICLE AND AN ANTI-PARTICLE CREATES NET ENERGY, WHEREAS CREATING A PARTICLE AND SUBTRACTING ONE WOULD NOT ADD ENERGY. IT'S THE NET ENERGY THAT'S CREATED THAT'S SUBTRACTED FROM THE BLACK HOLE'S REMAINING ENERGY (SOMEHOW — DETAILS ARE COMPLICATED QUANTUM MECHANICS). Jason if it isn't i dont quite understand how the black hole is shrinking. I BET YOU DO UNDERSTAND NOW: THE BLACK HOLE'S ENERGY DECREASES SO ITS RADIUS AUTOMATICALLY DECREASES TOO. Jason On that note, it says that the Black hole is "shrinking in space and time"— what does it mean for it to be shrinking in time? Is it because the infinitely dilated time is somehow becoming finite? IT'S JUST A (MAYBE SILLY) POETIC WAY OF SAYING THAT IT WILL EVENTUALLY STOP EXISTING, AS ITS ENERGY WILL EVENTUALLY BECOME ZERO. Jason
I also wanted to make sure that this isn't the only way in which matter is 'created'. GOOD QUESTION, BUT THE ANSWER IS WE DON'T KNOW. IT MIGHT BE. Jason
Hope someone can help tidy (some of) the mess in my head! Thanks in advance :)
~Sharmila (u 4848798)

This one has been doing my head in too. And I doubt I can tidy it up! As I understand it: current theories imply, and empirical evidence confirms, that matter (or particles, or virtual particles if you like) is spontaneously created out of nothing, everywhere, all the time. Most of the time it disappears just as quickly, an exception being on the periphery of a collapsar (black hole). EXACTLY RIGHT. Jason Nonetheless, the notion that things appear out of thin air (in fact out of nothing) is very, very, disturbing to my psychic equilibrium. Almost as much as the thought of dying.
What follows is even more speculative-
What this suggests to me, is that space, even the utterly empty vacuum of deep space, isn't really 'nothing' after all. After all, something can't appear out of nothing, can it? :-) And we already know space has other properties, like gravity (if you think of matter as densely crunched up space). Perhaps it _is_ something, but not something we can detect. So, in a way, maybe space is more like the 19th century idea of 'ether' than we thought. Maybe the universe is like an expanding goldfish bowl filled with ether, in which everything hangs in suspension. I wonder if there are currents? GREAT IDEA. YES, THERE COULD BE CURRENTS. FOR MATHEMATICAL REASONS WE'D EXPECT SUCH CURRENTS TO BE WAVE-LIKE, AND THEN THEY'D BE _GRAVITY WAVES_. SEARCHING FOR SUCH THINGS IS AN AREA OF CURRENT RESEARCH. (YOU CAN PROB FIND A LOT ABOUT IT ON THE WEB. I HAVEN'T GOT TIME TO CHECK RIGHT NOW.) PEOPLE OFTEN CONFUSE _GRAVITY WAVES_ WITH THE PROPAGATION OF THE FORCE OF GRAVITY, BUT THEY'RE NOT THE SAME THING, AND I THINK YOUR WAY OF LOOKING AT IT IS A REALLY GOOD WAY OF SEEING WHY THEY'RE NOT THE SAME. GOODONYA! Jason
Martin Bolanca
u 4324392