Almost a month after being published, Stephen Hawking's (an his colleagues) paper about black holes, divides physicists. Some support the preprint’s claim — that it provides a promising way to tackle a conundrum known as the black hole information paradox, which Hawking identified more than 40 years ago. Others are not so sure that the approach can solve the paradox, although some say that the work illuminates various problems in physics. In the mid-1970s, Hawking discovered that black holes are not truly black, and in fact emit some radiation2. According to quantum physics, pairs of particles must appear out of quantum fluctuations just outside the event horizon — the black hole’s point of no return. Some of these particles escape the pull of the black hole but take a portion of its mass with them, causing the black hole to slowly shrink and eventually disappear. http://www.nature.com/news/hawking-s-latest-black-hole-paper-splits-physicists-1.19236
Nay on black holes disappearing. They have inflowing matter and energy that would most likely greatly exceed the loss of mass due to particle formation in the chaotic and intense energy density environment surround a black hole.
Yes, but the point is more complicated. - An isolated black hole vaporizes - this was a genuinely new idea that Hawking brought up, even that there are no isolated black holes in reality. - The information loss paradox - the vapor is completly random, the particles which fell into the black hole carried information. So black holes seemed to be information drains. Both very interesting points.
You are right, it is a complicated theoretical issue, and the scientific community is divided. My layman level science enthusiast speculations are that information emerges and expands spherically, and so though some enters a black hole, identical information expands away from the black hole. My apologies for mentioning such speculations, but the whole topic is deeply theoretical, if not speculative.
I don't suppose there's any chance that the emitted Hawking radiation could be quantum entangled with its partner inside the black hole, and carry information out that way? Or does that just not make sense?
Hawking seems concerned with "quantum hair transplants" for black holes in his latest paper, in order to address the "black hole information paradox". But it seems that this remains an open question, and only a sketch of the necessary tools are provided in the paper, according to his concluding remarks. It's hard to get excited over a pronouncement such as this from someone who reportedly already lost a bet to a colleague on the subject. So, I guess that would be a "nay".
The nuclear fusion or fission process converts mass into energy, is the information preserved here ?? What is the significance of information as kept by energy, even the shrodinger equation does not help here......so this black hole information paradox is business, useless for science to perpetuate the BH reserach one way or the other.
BH research will logically be perpetuated both classically and quantum nature, until we understand more about them......Well worthwhile research that recent discoveries of BH confirmation and Gravitational radiation has further added to. My heartiest congratulations to all the Thorne's and Hawking's out there, and many other lesser known names perpetuating and gaining further data and knowledge for mankind. Great stuff!
