Thread: exclusion principle VS gravitational singularity

According to Pauli no two Fermion can exist in the exact same space at the same time

However common belief of blackholes and other spacial anonymities that could create a gravitational singularity all matter would be compressed into a single point in space/time

how would one explain a hypothesis for both competing theories to co-exist?

no-one with a solution?

The Pauli exclusion principle states that no two fermions can be in the same quantum state at the same time, not that they can’t be in the same place at the same time.

wouldn't the gravitational singularity compress the matter into one quantum state?

Quantum mechanics and relativity seem to be incompatible in a black hole, and that is why people look for a unification theory.

http://www.theory.caltech.edu/people...khole_bet.html

Harold that link is about the information loss. I thought hawking lost that bet when he discovered hawking radiation? correct me if im wrong?

Black hole's are certainly interesting and as Harold say's the search for a unification theory is still on. I am certainly non expert on the subject but is a black hole actually a point? (...in "space/time")

For example, if you went to the center of the earth you would be weightless. This is because the gravitational attraction between you and the outer mass would be equal and opposite, integrated over the earth's volume. Would you also be "weightless" at the center of a black hole?

If the black hole was spinning, could it eventually become "hollow"?

The difficulty is getting into a black hole I guess - the "event horizon" defines a sphere where the speed of light falls to zero, and therefore cannot escape. Information, according to Hawking, can escape and information and energy are related. In digital communications for example, we use the term "energy per bit" to describe Bit Error Rate (BER) performance of a system. Equally, if a black hole can "communicate" with the outside world, there must be an energy associated with this communication. Therefore, if so, information loss is associated with energy loss.

Once inside the event horizon, (assuming we don't get torn to bits by differential gravitation first) then our known laws of physics may not apply - Pauli exclusion being one of them. How can this be tested though? Perhaps someone has made a mini black hole in their lab (perhaps lasting a few femtoseconds) and could report their findings?

Extrapolation always carries the risk of error - the further we extrapolate the greater the risk of error. We "believe" the laws of physics to be invariant in time and space but we base this belief on local knowledge amassed over an infinitesimally small period of time compared to the age of the universe and the volume of space we occupy inside it. Perhaps this conjecture is unsubstantiated (or unsubstantionable)? The space/time of black holes may present different physical laws and we would not be in a position to experimentally verify or discredit such theories.

All in all, I think FireSale has posted an interesting question.

This link (Wikipedia) may be relevant.

Thanks for the link MagiMaster - fascinating!


"it says that the number of states of a black hole is proportional to the area of the horizon, not the volume in the interior"

So I guess intuitive thought is challenged by theoretical analysis, also

Entropy, if considered as information (see information entropy), is measured in bits. The total quantity of bits is related to the total degrees of freedom of matter/energy.

presents are superior explanation compared to my analogy to digital SNR and "energy per bit" = the entropy concept is intriguing

Wikipedia, once again, shows its excellence.

one thing i want to note on what Vaedrah said. light doesnt slow down, even in a blackhole. the speed of light is constant, gravity just will not allow it to escape, the gravity is so strong it literaly curves the light and pulls it down and will not allow it to overcome the force of gravity, but the actual speed of the light remains constant.