Yes, Stephen Hawking Lied To Us All About How Black Holes Decay

Oops, Stephen Hawking lied to us about black holes. He led an entire generation astray, both the common people as well as experts. This is just an FYI. But, he knew exactly what was going on. He just didn't trust us to comprehend it.

Yes, Stephen Hawking Lied To Us All About How Black Holes Decay
https://www.forbes.com/sites/starts...all-about-how-black-holes-decay/#457bb6014e63

 

I find pitching that as "Hawking lied" to be about the lowest form of science journalism possible.

Also, Forbes is not a science journal. Though usually respectable, one would think they would do better than allow their product to present advances in physics as a hit piece.

 

Science moves forward at the pace of tombstones?

 

That's an old saw that does have some merit, though it is tounge in cheek.

When theoretical physics centered on string theory, the result was that a whole generation of theoretical physicists ended up teaching string theory. Those became the people who led and monitored the progress of research done by phd candidates, more than likely favoring string theory.

As string theory is found to be less than successful, other areas struggled to find smart brains ready to develop alternativs - simply because the smart brains had been taught a different view and the change of direction would require education in a different direction. The switching cost for an individual to move in a different direction is high, so while that happened it did take time.

The Hawiking hit piece does not suffer from that in any way. In fact, it references work Hawking did 30 years ago and is well respected throughout physics today. It should be no surprise that various advances were made over the last 30 years. Physicists aren't sitting one their asses.

And perhaps more importantly, his work was most DEFINITELY not a lie.

I really am disgusted at that magazine for allowing such a hit piece.

 

Does Siegel really believe that he understands the Hawking radiation better than Hawking did?
https://motls.blogspot.com/2020/07/ethan-siegel-not-stephen-hawking-lies.html?m=1

 

I still believe Hawking's theory is flawed. Both versions.

In addition to, and separate from that, there is also a little something called baryon conservation. Which means a proton can't just suddenly appear or disappear (unless it does so with its anti-particle, or if an anti-neutrino is involved, a little bit more complicated than on face value, and yes it can also turn into a neutron). It can lose mass inside a gravitational well, but it can't disappear entirely. (well, maybe unless the entire universe collapsed, but that is a very different topic)
The basic point is that matter can't just disappear entirely into energy without the corresponding anti-matter being involved.

So, Hawking's theory would need to come up with an explanation for that, which it can't. This is one more big hurdle to overcome.

 

As I understand it, everything will eventually fall into a black hole and then the black holes will evaporate leaving the universe with nothing.

This is why I prefer to believe in m theory.

 

Yes, Stephen Hawking Lied To Us All About How Black Holes Decay

We are now so intolerant that we turn being mistaken into a lie?

 

Actually, he wasn't mistaken. In his scientific papers, he said one thing, but in his famous book (A Brief History Of Time) he said something else. Stephen Hawking mislead a lot of people. So, it's okay to be mad at him.

From the OP link:

 

The equivalece of matter and energy isn't a Hawking thing and it isn't a black hole thing.

Einstein famously defined this equivalence with his e= mc^2.

And, yes. Physicists observe matter popping into existence even in a vacuum due to the presence of energy. And, matter can be witnessed moving in the opposite directin as well.

 

This is TOTAL horseshit.

It's like saying we can hate Newton, or Einstein, or Galileo or every other scientist on the planet because they didn't have the full answer, yet they said something - which we know today to be less than perfect.

Science is about extending human understanding of how our universe works. It is a process.

And in everything he did, Hawking pushed our human understanding forward.

As for the lie part, projecting the best most honest truth one knows is absolutely NOT a lie even if it turns out that the statment is wrong in some way. Being wrong and lying are NOT the same thing AT ALL.

Having some idiot from Forbes suggest Hawking is a liar shows NOTHING other than that the idiot from Forbes doesn't know what a lie is and also doesn't know what science is.

 

I think you don't understand then. There does not exist a widely accepted law of physics that would allow mass to entirely decay to energy (which does not involve the corresponding anti-matter).
so the whole e= mc^2 thing you bring up is sort of besides the point.

If a little black hole really could evaporate to nothing, it would be an example of something termed baryon conservation violation.
Unless the Hawking radiation consisted of matter, but that would be very difficult for it to escape then.

 

Or would the black holes eventually come together into one and compress until (???? happens) and another big bang?

 

That’s a very good possibility.
I think the Big Bangs are eternal.

 

You should cite something from physics on this.

That would make your comments a little clearer.

But, thats not the main point here. The claim was that Hawking LIED.

And, there is no evidence of that.

I see this as significant, as there is a BIG BIG difference between lying and being incorrect.

 

By that note kindly refrain from calling it nonsense and possibly triggering another response by someone in this forum.

 

I will leave this matter to the mods!

 

Nut jobs will use the Forbes article to claim that if Hawking lied, then other scientists are lying about viruses, vaccinations and global warming.

 

Cosmology is not science. It's 99% conjecture and 0.99% circular logic mathematics

 

The universe is very mostly a series of black holes. Best to study them as they are our ultimate future.

 

Rubbish; cosmology is a branch of astronomy. Like any field of science, cosmology involves the formation of theories or hypotheses about the universe which make specific predictions for phenomena that can be tested with observations.

 

I was trained in chemistry so theoretical physics is not my forte.

Hawking seems to come up a lot though as equivalent to even Newton and Einstein.

Exactly what groundbreaking work has he done to be placed among these giants?

 

Black Holes Matter.

 

It continues to be amazing to me that the most common event in the universe is the least fully understood.

These guys were merely theoretical not so awfully long ago.

 

He is great by bringing in a way to study black holes. And, that's important because it deals with gravity. Gravity is the last thing that is not understood by quantum physics. And lack of knowledge is holding us back from understanding a Unified Field Theory (UTF). And that's a big thing because it would allow us to do things with nature that would almost seem magical. It's a huge deal.