We've probably all heard the statement that "nothing escapes a black hole." The gravitational pull of a black hole (not really a hole, as you know, but since light cannot escape it, it seems very dark) exceeds the escape velocity of most objects (minimum speed a body must have to escape the gravitational attraction). attraction of a particular planet or other object), then those objects are pulled into the singularity. Webster defines the singularity as a point at which a function takes on an infinite value, especially in spacetime when matter is infinitely dense, such as at the center of a black hole. I prefer the word singularity to “black hole” simply because it is a more accurate and descriptive name. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayIs information really lost in a singularity? This question arises because of the premise that the speed of light is represented as C in most science and calculus classes and its numerical value is 299,792,458 m/s (meters per second). “The event horizon of a black hole is the boundary around the mouth of the black hole, beyond which light cannot escape. Once a particle crosses the event horizon, it cannot leave. Gravity is constant across the event horizon” (Redd). If nothing can escape a singularity, not even a photon (which, at the time of writing, is the commonly known “speed limit” of the universe), especially considering the escape velocity needed at the event horizon of a singularity: C= sqrt(2Gm/R), how does the information escape? In this example, C takes on a new value which is the square root of the entire quantity represented by twice the gravitational attraction (G) multiplied by the mass of the object (M) divided by the center of the radius between the two objects (R) . To put this into perspective: gravity felt on Earth is about 9.8 m/s stellar mass singularities are typically in the range of 10 to 100 solar masses (the mass of our Sun) supermassive singularities at the centers of galaxies can be millions or billions of solar masses. The mass of our Earth is estimated to be 5,972 × 1024 kg and that of our Sun is estimated to be 2 × 1030 kg. Substituting the mass range for singularities into the mass of our star increases the mass from 10 to 100: a singularity would have a mass of approximately 2 × 10300 to 2 × 103000 kg. (That's a ten followed by 3000 zeros.) In any force calculation, the mass of the object is critical. A reduced equation useful for force measurements in physics is: where the sum of the forces is measured in Newtons, the mass is in kilograms, and the acceleration is in meters per second squared. In short, it's much faster than three hundred thousand meters per second, based only on the gravity of a singularity, because their mass is tied into the equation. If, then, it is true that nothing can escape the event horizon, how does information not get sucked into it, without any possibility of escape? He further adjusts the question by stating that there is a singularity (typically a supermassive black hole) at the center of each galaxy. The supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, Sagittarius A*, has a mass of 4.3 million solar masses. There are billions of galaxies known to us... with all these event horizons, how does the information survive? In short, we have created an impossible situation. We know that information is everywhere around us, especially in the digital age. We have established that nothing can escape a singularity and nothing can exceed the speed of light. Well, then, if it is true that information does notcan escape the gravitational pull of a singularity, how come that information around us... in general? Stephen Hawking first said it is true: “…information can be recovered in principle, but it is lost to everyone.” practical purposes” (Hawking, The Information Paradox for Black Holes), then, a few years later, revised his original statement. Using a special branch of mathematics (Virasoro algebra), he hypothesized that backward transfer of information from particle to particle when entering the event horizon is indeed possible (Hawking, Black Hole Entropy and Soft Hair). It's like a large-scale version of Tag! where each incoming particle passes information to particles that have not reached the event horizon, thus saving information. Is your head still spinning? It's a bit of a joke reading this now, but imagine if you were Mr Hawking and this conversation was happening in your head. There are some physicists who continue with the old statement that nothing can exceed the universal speed limit. As usual in the scientific world, they probably have their own hypotheses that they are actively working on, so they are not going to abandon their work and simply claim that Hawking is right. You see, in the scientific process, there are certain steps one should take to prove/disprove a hypothesis: make an observation; ask a question; search for research already conducted; form a testable hypothesis or explanation; make a prediction based on your observation. and on your understanding of the hypothesis about the outcome of the experiment; Testing the prediction; Iterating; that is, use the result to form a new hypothesis or set of predictions. So, it's no different than scientists sitting in their labs or offices for years repeating these steps. While they may be aware of Hawking's hypothesis (by looking for other research in step 3), this is not the end of the road. Of course, we must remember that it was Hawking who “discovered” black holes in 1974 (Ouellette). Understanding singularities was his life's work (Ferguson). This may create challenges for those scientists who are attempting to complete, or at least continue, Hawking's work. This was all the man did from the time he opened his eyes in the morning until he laid his head on the pillow at night. This led to him spending a lot of time on the topic, which led to his notoriety as an expert in the field. It is well known that Hawking suffered from ALS, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, a progressive neurodegenerative disease that affects nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord. It usually leaves the patient paralyzed, as in Hawking's case. To speak of his celebrity, his wheelchair was recently sold at auction for £300,000 (Rawlinson). We could, as one scientist did, hypothesize that there are some undiscovered particles capable of traveling in superlight (Gonzalez-Mestres). This isn't unheard of, but don't wait for the proof to come anytime soon. Peter Higgs hypothesized that a particle was the glue that held other larger (but still subatomic) objects together in 1964. Although firmly proven by mathematics, he had to wait until 2012 for physical proof (Arbey). The prospects in this sense are, however, promising. At CERN's LHC (Large Hadron Collider) it was revealed that some neutrinos were recorded at just over 300,000 kilometers per second. We must consider that some scientists do not believe that anything can exceed the speed of light (Harris). This is the generally accepted hypothesis, because as your speed increases to near-light speeds, your mass also increases exponentially. If I had to66.