Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 (edited) This topic is about the gravitational effects of the singularity. Get ready for shocking news ! "I dont understand why we the theory of quantum gravity would apply at a singularity of a black hole . Quantum gravity would describe the gravitational interactions between subatomic particles . On the other hand the mass of the black is too big for any quantum effects . But on the other hand we have a singularity which is dimensionless so it can be considered a quantum system . I think all the confusion begins from there : if we need to study the singularity as a quantum system or without quantum effects . " What does this mean? Spoiler This means that we have an empty quantum system since there are no quantum effects . So we apply General Relativity as usual and we dont need any quantum thing involved! Tricky huh? Edited August 3, 2019 by Amazing Random
Strange Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Amazing Random said: This means that we have an empty quantum system since there are no quantum effects . So we apply General Relativity as usual and we dont need any quantum thing involved! The problem with that is applying just GR to a black hole leads to singularities and infinities. Which means that the theory is no longer working - it is not producing realistic results. The assumption is that a quantum theory of gravity would explain what happens in the extreme conditions inside a black hole, near the event horizon and in the early universe. Just saying "we don't need one" doesn't address any of the problems.
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 14 minutes ago, Strange said: The problem with that is applying just GR to a black hole leads to singularities and infinities. Which means that the theory is no longer working - it is not producing realistic results. The assumption is that a quantum theory of gravity would explain what happens in the extreme conditions inside a black hole, near the event horizon and in the early universe. Just saying "we don't need one" doesn't address any of the problems. We dont need quantum things . The deBroglie wavelength of the singularity is very small so I said no quantum effects take place . It is an empty quantum system . We can calculate by approximation. 18 minutes ago, Strange said: The problem with that is applying just GR to a black hole leads to singularities and infinities. Which means that the theory is no longer working - it is not producing realistic results. The assumption is that a quantum theory of gravity would explain what happens in the extreme conditions inside a black hole, near the event horizon and in the early universe. Just saying "we don't need one" doesn't address any of the problems. And math can stop working but physics doesnt stop working. 22 minutes ago, Strange said: The problem with that is applying just GR to a black hole leads to singularities and infinities. Which means that the theory is no longer working - it is not producing realistic results. The assumption is that a quantum theory of gravity would explain what happens in the extreme conditions inside a black hole, near the event horizon and in the early universe. Just saying "we don't need one" doesn't address any of the problems. No quantum effects take place .
Strange Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 25 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: We dont need quantum things . The deBroglie wavelength of the singularity is very small so I said no quantum effects take place . It is an empty quantum system . We can calculate by approximation. The "approximation" without quantum effects doesn't work: it leads to singularities. 25 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: And math can stop working but physics doesnt stop working. But we want out math to usefully describe that physics. 26 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: No quantum effects take place . Making assertions with no evidence is not helpful.
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Strange said: The "approximation" without quantum effects doesn't work: it leads to singularities. But we want out math to usefully describe that physics. Making assertions with no evidence is not helpful. We may not be able to calculate everything . Ask de Broglie why quantum effects dont take place at the singularity or look at my explanation
Strange Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Amazing Random said: We may not be able to calculate everything . So you just want to give up because it looks complex?
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Strange said: So you just want to give up because it looks complex? No it is not complex we may just cant calculate everything precisely.... 7 minutes ago, Strange said: So you just want to give up because it looks complex? We shouldnt modify physics when we meet infinities . Maybe infinities are part of the universe. 6 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: No it is not complex we may just cant calculate everything precisely.... We shouldnt modify physics when we meet infinities . Maybe infinities are part of the universe. Math is the language of physics it is not physics itself 9 minutes ago, Strange said: So you just want to give up because it looks complex? And we also dont need to believe the world is perfect. Nothing is perfect in nature . Maybe this works for the whole universe. 11 minutes ago, Strange said: So you just want to give up because it looks complex? And i dont want to give up but based on the physics we have discovered there isnt anything else to search for besides this.
swansont Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 49 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: We dont need quantum things . The deBroglie wavelength of the singularity is very small so I said no quantum effects take place . It is an empty quantum system . We can calculate by approximation. Really? How small is it?
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 (edited) 4 minutes ago, swansont said: Really? How small is it? λ = h/mu 2 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: λ = h/mu the core of the dying star will have big mass dont you think? Edited August 3, 2019 by Amazing Random
swansont Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 Just now, Amazing Random said: λ = h/mu And what is mu? (Usually we use p). I mean, the value. It’s pretty big, right? But not infinite, so the wavelength is bigger than the singularity GR predicts. We ignore quantum effects when the wavelength is a lot smaller than the scale of interest. IOW, we’re on a scale where QM applies.
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, swansont said: And what is mu? (Usually we use p). I mean, the value. It’s pretty big, right? But not infinite, so the wavelength is bigger than the singularity GR predicts. We ignore quantum effects when the wavelength is a lot smaller than the scale of interest. IOW, we’re on a scale where QM applies. ??? The wavelength is so small we ignore quantum effects.
Strange Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 Just now, Amazing Random said: The wavelength is so small we ignore quantum effects. What is the wavelength. The appropriate answer would be a number
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 Just now, Strange said: What is the wavelength. The appropriate answer would be a number I dont know the mass of the core of a dying star.... 1 minute ago, Strange said: What is the wavelength. The appropriate answer would be a number How could I know? 2 minutes ago, Strange said: What is the wavelength. The appropriate answer would be a number But its pretty big . So big we ignore quantum effects.... -1
Strange Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 Just now, Amazing Random said: I dont know the mass of the core of a dying star.... So what are you basing "The wavelength is so small we ignore quantum effects" on? You can look up the mass of various types of black hole if that is relevant. You can read up on supernovas and what the necessary mass is to produce a black hole. In other words, you could do some research to back up your claims, instead of just making assertions.
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 1 minute ago, Strange said: So what are you basing "The wavelength is so small we ignore quantum effects" on? You can look up the mass of various types of black hole if that is relevant. You can read up on supernovas and what the necessary mass is to produce a black hole. In other words, you could do some research to back up your claims, instead of just making assertions. We ignore quantum effects even at the mass of a football ball . And a black hole is much heavier than a football ball.
Strange Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: I dont know the mass of the core of a dying star.... How could I know? But its pretty big . So big we ignore quantum effects.... If you don't know, why did you say: "The wavelength is so small we ignore quantum effects"? And why are you now saying the opposite? Could it be that you don't know what you are talking about and are just posting the first thing that pops into your head?
swansont Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 9 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: ??? The wavelength is so small we ignore quantum effects. As I just explained, that’s not valid. You’re on the wrong side of the inequality. The singularity has size zero. You can ignore QM for something smaller. Obviously, there’s a problem here
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Strange said: If you don't know, why did you say: "The wavelength is so small we ignore quantum effects"? And why are you now saying the opposite? Could it be that you don't know what you are talking about and are just posting the first thing that pops into your head? Big is the mass of the core of the dying star 1 minute ago, swansont said: As I just explained, that’s not valid. You’re on the wrong side of the inequality. The wavelength of an object predicts if we have to take into account quantum effects. 4 minutes ago, swansont said: As I just explained, that’s not valid. You’re on the wrong side of the inequality. What are you talking about? 4 minutes ago, swansont said: As I just explained, that’s not valid. You’re on the wrong side of the inequality. Better go ask de Broglie or one of his grand -grand children to tell you
swansont Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 5 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: The wavelength of an object predicts if we have to take into account quantum effects. What are you talking about? Better go ask de Broglie or one of his grand -grand children to tell you Which is bigger: the wavelength or the singularity?
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 3 minutes ago, swansont said: Which is bigger: the wavelength or the singularity? The wavelength 3 minutes ago, swansont said: Which is bigger: the wavelength or the singularity? But the quantum system is infinitely small so no quantum effects.
swansont Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 2 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: The wavelength But the quantum system is infinitely small so no quantum effects. When the wavelength is bigger, QM applies.
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 Just now, swansont said: When the wavelength is bigger, QM applies. The quantum system is infinitely small There is no propability. 4 minutes ago, swansont said: When the wavelength is bigger, QM applies. There is not enough space-time for propabilities to be created. 5 minutes ago, swansont said: When the wavelength is bigger, QM applies. Sorry there are no quantum effects at all . -4
swansont Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 16 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: The quantum system is infinitely small There is no propability. There is not enough space-time for propabilities to be created. Sorry there are no quantum effects at all . Fine. Provide evidence and your model to support your assertion.
Amazing Random Posted August 3, 2019 Author Posted August 3, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, swansont said: Fine. Provide evidence and your model to support your assertion. The wavelength of the core of the dying star doesnt fit to the singularity so we know the position of the mass. 19 minutes ago, Amazing Random said: The wavelength of the core of the dying star doesnt fit to the singularity so we know the position of the mass. Since there is only one point where the mass could be there is no uncertainty though no quantum effects. Edited August 3, 2019 by Amazing Random
Mordred Posted August 3, 2019 Posted August 3, 2019 3 hours ago, Amazing Random said: We dont need quantum things . The deBroglie wavelength of the singularity is very small If there is a DeBroglie wavelength it would not be in a singularity condition.
Recommended Posts