Take the 2-minute tour ×
Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I recently came across a paper Black Hole - Never Forms, or Never Evaporates. It is claimed that under general evaporation conditions, before particles come into the Black Hole, the Black Hole itself will completely evaporate. In other words, Black Hole cannot form from gravitational collapse.

If this paper was correct, (I haven't went through all the details, but did not find a technical error yet. And I would like to know your opinions about this paper, though i am not sure if it will be an opinion-based question), do we still need to study many paradoxes of Black Holes?

share|improve this question
    
We have enough circumstantial evidence for the existence of black holes from astronomical observations now that to claim otherwise is highly suspect. –  kleingordon Feb 21 at 22:45
3  
@kleingordon: black holes are observationally indistinguishable from dark gray ones –  Christoph Feb 21 at 23:01
    
@Christoph Ah, okay, I understand the question better now. Thanks. –  kleingordon Feb 21 at 23:20
    
What exactly do you count as a paradox? Are you referring to the information paradox? (My understanding is that is not so trivially solved, as the amount of information on/near the horizon does not scale the same as the amount of Hawking particles yet to be emitted.) Or something like "what happens when I cross inside the ring singularity in a Kerr BH?" Or something else? –  Chris White Feb 22 at 3:19
    
Information lost, for example. If the blackhole never forms, why do I need to care about the information lost? –  Rodriguez Feb 22 at 7:02

1 Answer 1

The point of the paper is the information lost and singularity problems will be avoided, if black holes do evaporate. Hawking's mechanism of black hole evaporation will solve the information lost problem raised by himself, together with the singularity problem in classical GR. This result suggests that QFT and GR are not only consistent, they requires each other, there are no sharp conflicts between them.

Here is the Mathematica code for verifying the universal spherical solution in the paper: http://zhblog.engic.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/BH-Code.zip

PS: As @Christoph said: "black holes are observationally indistinguishable from dark gray ones". So there is no conflict with known astronomical evidences.

--the author of the paper.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.