phys.org
>If someone were to venture into one of these relatively benign black holes, they could survive, but their past would be obliterated and they could have an infinite number of possible futures.
...and there goes another proof that we're all submerged in the gel and the reality is just our brain's projection.
>mathematician
Unrelated to the real world.
Interesting, but I'm not sure what "erasing your past" means.
Nothing happening within the event horizon can influence anything outside.
Your colleagues would still remember you. Your college yearbook and all your Facebook posts would still exist (however much you'd LIKE to see them erased.)
did you even try to read the article or the corresponding paper?
they mean that in the right circumstances you could enter a region of space where the state of various fields you encounter is decoupled from whatever was happening right before you entered
>Then
We live in God Creation
>Now
We live in a matrix
Nothing new.
Yeah, I read the paper.
That's what's confusing. The actual subject appears to have no connection with the stupid "erases your past" click-bait blurb.
who the fuck cares? You could never experience it.
Consider this. You are a macroscopic object. You take time to move. If you are headed for a black hole, feet first lets say, your feet will cross the event horizon before your torso. Since nothing can come back out of the event horizon, this includes the blood and nerve signals in your feet. Basically your feet have been severed. And as you fall deeper into the event horizon, more and more of your body is cut off, till eventually you die. It's like being forced through a cheese grater.
Why do theoretical physicists claim "discovery" when all they have are mathematical equations? The article literally says "so-and-so discovered a new type of black hole". No, you fucking didn't. Look, I respect that you're really good at mathematics and I doubt I could ever even approach that level even if I hadn't made all the wrong choices in my life and wasted my potential, but, pardon my French, you didn't discover shit. Your calculations predict something but it's not a fucking discovery. How many of these different types of black holes predicted by the "black hole experts" have even been observed? Is it zero? Can someone clue me in please?
Sounds like the obvious solution is to go in head first.
>Some black holes erase your past
literally all of them do this. the math says that you cannot escape a singularity even if you managed to reverse time. the moment you pass the event horizon you are there for good
Then your head gets cut off. And this happens atom-by-atom. It's like being pushed into the strongest belt sander ever.
If the equation exists, the object exists.
What if you bring a length of rope through the event horizon? What prevents you from just pulling yourself out? Since the rope acts as a "bridge" between the inside of the event horizon and the outside, escape velocity is rendered moot. All the mysteries of physics have been solved at last.
I hope you're joking but in case you aren't: when your equations start to give you inconsistent results, isn't it possible that the theory is incomplete? You couldn't predict the behavior of objects in space with Newtonian mechanics but they adequately predicted physics on Earth and are still used for this reason. Maybe existing physical models are not sufficient to describe what happens inside a black hole. The only way to determine what is true is through observation and experimentation. I think it's foolish to blindly believe in the math.
This. Math may be the most exact science. But it is parsecs away from being a complete science. For now verification through observation is the best way to confirm an astronomical mathematical theorem.
Simplest explanation is that, from the viewpoint of an "external observer", time stops at the event horizon.
You can climb out, but it'll take you an infinite amount of time to do so.
Nature (the magazine) will probably have ceased publication by then.
Also, on the way out, you have to pass through the trillion+ years of starlight which fell in after you did. SPF 1e20 won't be enough to avoid sunburn.
Don't be dumb. The signals from the parts of you past the event horizon still reach their destination, because they're moving up slower than you are falling down. By the time the signal gets to your head, your head is also below the event horizon.
But the "signals" include the intermolecular forces holding your cells together, and those propagate at the speed of light.
... So they should be travelling faster up than you're falling down? Think for a second what the event horizon is.
It's a barrier no info can cross. This includes even the electromagnetic forces holding molecules together, and the nuclear forces holding atoms together.
How can any structure survive having the forces holding it together turned off, however briefly?
...
Because all roads lead to Rome. Photon doesn't have a mass yet is affected by gravity and the reason why is because it has to follow the space it exists in and this space is affected by gravitational forces. Lets say you observe the trajectory of Neptune. Jupiter's mass (gravitational forces) alters the space around Neptune enough to affect the trajectory of photons that are reflected from Neptune's surface to your device. It's only a slight curve but it's present and photons travel through this curved space which portrays the position of Neptune in a different spot than it really is.
Now imagine an object that is so massive that the curve is a complete circle instead of a slight angle. This is your event horizon. Every way you take leads back to the event horizon. Imagine a space so curved you would see the back of your head as you are looking forward.
Gravity theory on quantum scale is still up for discussion right?