Space

1951 readers

118 users here now

A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens

Rules

Be respectful and inclusive. This means no harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
Engage in constructive discussions by discussing in good faith.
Foster a continuous learning environment.

Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics

Please keep politics to a minimum. When science is the focus, intersection with politics may be tolerated as long as the discussion is constructive and science remains the focus. As a general rule, political content posted directly to the instance’s local communities is discouraged and may be removed. You can of course engage in political discussions in non-local communities.

Related Communities

🔭 Science

🚀 Engineering

🌌 Art and Photography

Other Cool Links

Astronomy Picture of the Day Archive
Live Space Dashboard

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Black holes may be hiding something that changes everything (aeon.co)

submitted 1 day ago by cm0002@suppo.fi to c/space@mander.xyz

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (6 children)

The article doesn't even suggest what they might be hiding.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Huh? This bit answers that imo

But I suspect that nature could very well have played a different trick altogether, and made black holes a gateway to something far more unusual – a region where the rules of spacetime themselves transform into something we’ve never seen before. Many objects we think of as black holes may, in fact, be imposters: identical on the outside but harbouring entirely different physics within. Finding out whether that’s true will require peeling back the shell of reality itself. And humankind is getting closer to doing exactly that.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

It's already known by the definition of a Black Hole that physics has no explanation for the laws governing the singularity.

So restating the definition of a word as a conclusion of a long essay is silly.

If the title of the essay was "An introduction to Black Holes", it would be acceptable. But the title was click bait which poisons the reading when no payoff (new research or information) occurs.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world -1 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

It's already known by the definition of a Black Hole that physics has no explanation for the laws governing the singularity.

Yeah. But that doesn't imply that each could be uniquely fucked up in terms of what's beyond the event horizon. THAT'S the point they're making.

Not that singularities are unknown to us and we'd face something unexpected, that's obvious. What isn't is that we might face a completely new set of physics in each different black hole.

Edit perhaps the quote was a bit on the longer side so:

Many objects we think of as black holes may, in fact, be imposters: identical on the outside but harbouring entirely different physics within.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

But that doesn't imply that each could be uniquely fucked up in terms of what's beyond the event horizon. THAT'S the point they're making.

It's beyond the event horizon. It's unknown by definition. They restated the definition.

Many objects we think of as black holes may, in fact, be imposters: identical on the outside but harbouring entirely different physics within.

And maybe a black hole is filled with pudding. Again this is restating the definition: Maybe there's something unknown inside an object that's defined to be something that is unknown.

Using two paragraphs to say there's unknown inside of an object defined as being unknown inside is ridiculous.

Again if this was an essay titled, "A beginners guide to Black Holes.", it would have been perfectly fine.

load more comments (4 replies)