Stephen Hawking’s writings and statements are often surprising. As a world-leading physicist, not infrequently his writings and statements make a bit of a stir in the science world. If not he who says; it must be considered as a joke. But because he said that; then it is considered serious and gets more attention. For example, the writings and statements of Stephen Hawking in Nature in the early of 2014: ‘There are No black holes’. A number of physicists and astrophysicists reacted strongly against his idea.
Another post in PbsOrg:WHY HAWKING IS WRONG ABOUT BLACK HOLES.A recent paper by Stephen Hawking has created quite a stir, even leading Nature News to declare there are no black holes. As I wrote in an earlier post, that isn’t quite what Hawking claimed. But it is now clear that Hawking’s claim about black holes is wrong because the paradox he tries to address isn’t a paradox after all.
So there’s no paradox. Black holes can radiate in a way that agrees with thermodynamics, and the region near the event horizon doesn’t have a firewall, just as general relativity requires. So Hawking’s proposal is a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.What I’ve presented here is a very rough overview of the situation. I’ve glossed over some of the more subtle aspects. For a more detailed (and remarkably clear) overview check out Ethan Seigel’s post on his blog Starts With a Bang! Also check out the post on Sabine Hossenfelder’s blog, Back Reaction, where she talks about the issue herself.(www.universetoday.com)
What Hawking meant when he said ‘there are no black holes’.In a nutshell, Hawking seems to be saying this: instead of an event horizon, there is something else he calls an “apparent horizon.” In this apparent horizon, matter and energy is temporarily suspended, but then released. If this is true, it changes black holes as we know them.
“The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes — in the sense of regimes from which light can’t escape to infinity,” Hawking wrote in his paper.According to his proposal, black holes do trap information for a long time, but that information can, eventually, escape, Polchinski said. He added that Hawking’s proposal remains untested.( www.pbs.org)
Every human has limit. Stephen Hawking has limit. His writing might be right, or might be wrong. It seems he often turned his ideas, for example as it is seen in his famous book ‘A Brief History of Time’.
About test of general relativity in the year 1919 Stephen Hawking wrote ‘Their measurement had been sheer luck, or a case of knowing the result they wanted to get, not an uncommon occurrence in science’.
Hawking reports the widespread view that the errors in the data were as big as the effect they were meant to probe. Some go further, saying that Eddington deliberately excluded data that didn’t agree with Einstein’s prediction.(www.nature.com)
This is in accordance with his writing in the previous paragraph; discussing general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics Stephen Hawking wrote ‘Unfortunately, however, these two theories are known to be inconsistent with each other — they cannot both be correct’.
It shows his view on general theory of relativity. Surprisingly, he developed his idea of black holes based on general theory of relativity.
More surprising, in his book A Brief History of Time he wrote:
“General relativity predicts that heavy objects that are moving will cause the emission of gravitational waves, ripples in the curvature of space that travel at the speed of light. These are similar to light waves, which are ripples of the electromagnetic field, but they are much harder to detect.
The effect of the energy loss will be to change the orbit of the earth so that gradually it gets nearer and nearer to the sun, eventually collides with it, and settles down to a stationary state. The rate of energy loss in the case of the earth and the sun is very low — about enough to run a small electric heater. This means it will take about a thousand million million million million years for the earth to run into the sun, so there’s no immediate cause for worry! The change in the orbit of the earth is too slow to be observed, but this same effect has been observed over the past few years occurring in the system called PSR 1913 + 1 6 (PSR stands for “pulsar,” a special type of neutron star that emits regular pulses of radio waves). This system contains two neutron stars orbiting each other, and the energy they are losing by the emission of gravitational waves is causing them to spiral in toward each other. This confirmation of general relativity won J. H. Taylor and R. A. Hulse the Nobel Prize in 1993. It will take about three hundred million years for them to collide. “ (Stephen Hawking:A Brief History Of Time)
A confirmation of the general relativity won the Nobel Prize! It was said by Stephen Hawking. That was what had been expected since 1921; Einstein received a Nobel prize in 1921 for photoelectric effect, not for relativity. At that time the Nobel Committe wrote:
“without taking into account the value that will be accorded your relativity and gravitation theories after these are confirmed in the future”
What Stephen Hawking wrote above was sort of hopeful, or may be a joke. In facts, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Taylor and Hulse in 1993 for the discovery of a new type of pulsar; without taking into account the value of general relativity.
1993 Nobel Prize in Physics “for the discovery of a new type of pulsar, a discovery that has opened up new possibilities for the study of gravitation” (www.nobelprize.org)
Why do they still expect the Nobel Prize for Einstein’s gravity? It’s very obvious the theory was totally wrong. All methods of experiments in any way: i.e. VLBI, Gravity Probe B, LIGO’s Twin Detector, Event Horizon Telescope; will be found their mistakes in the experiments. General theory of relativity has been wrong since the beginning and the past can not be erasing and can not be updated.
Open Letter to the Nobel Committee for Physics 2016, W.W. Engelhardt, JET, Max-Planck-Institut für Plasmaphysik. Abstract: The Nobel Committee is informed that according to Professor Karsten Danzmann (Albert Einstein Institut) the LIGO detectors are not calibrated as expected from the statement in the discovery paper: “The detector output is calibrated in strain by measuring its response to test mass motion induced by photon pressure from a modulated calibration laser beam [63]”. The claim that gravitational waves have been detected is not substantiated experimentally, since direct calibration data, namely mirror displacement as a function of laser power moving the mirrors, are not published.(Open Letter)
“General relativity is Einstein’s law of gravity, his explanation of that fundamental force which holds us to the surface of the Earth. Gravity, Einstein asserted, is caused by a warping of space and time — or, in a language we physicists prefer, by a warping of spacetime. The Earth’s matter produces the warpage, and that warpage in turn is manifest by gravity’s inward tug, toward the Earth’s center.” (Kip Thorne: Warping spacetime)
Was the black hole down to Earth? It doesn’t matter Karl Schwarzschild discovered the solution to Einstein’s equations which describes black hole, or not. It doesn’t matter in his 1939 paper Einstein credits his renewed concern about the Schwarzschild radius to discussions with Princeton cosmologist Harold P. Robertson and with his assistant Peter G. Bergmann, or not. It doesn’t matter in 1994 Hubble Space Telescope provides best evidence to date of supermassive black holes that lurk in the center of some galaxies, or not. If astronomical data shows very clearly nothing about warping of spacetime, it mean black hole can’t happen.
In 1995 when I first read A Brief History of Time, I thought it seems that Stephen Hawking disagreed with general relativity, but he and Roger Penrose develop black holes idea based on general relativity, why did he do it? My doubts were answered 19 years later when Stephen Hawking declared: "There are NO black holes" in Nature.
In my opinion, there are two renowned physicists who deserve the Nobel Prize in physics: Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking. It is not something they find new theories or new discoveries, or not. But they both have been contributed in the development of modern physics, and they had given much motivation to the future generation of physicists.
In my opinion, there are two renowned physicists who deserve the Nobel Prize in physics: Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking. It is not something they find new theories or new discoveries, or not. But they both have been contributed in the development of modern physics, and they had given much motivation to the future generation of physicists.
This confirmation I’m waiting for: The Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose!
Read and follow the story in Medium: medium.com
