Support NeoGAF

[Joe]

http://phys.org/news/2014-09-black-holes.html

"I'm still not over the shock," said Mersini-Houghton.

In 1974, Stephen Hawking used quantum mechanics to show that black holes emit radiation. Since then, scientists have detected fingerprints in the cosmos that are consistent with this radiation, identifying an ever-increasing list of the universe's black holes.

But now Mersini-Houghton describes an entirely new scenario. She and Hawking both agree that as a star collapses under its own gravity, it produces Hawking radiation. However, in her new work, Mersini-Houghton shows that by giving off this radiation, the star also sheds mass. So much so that as it shrinks it no longer has the density to become a black hole.

Before a black hole can form, the dying star swells one last time and then explodes. A singularity never forms and neither does an event horizon. The take home message of her work is clear: there is no such thing as a black hole.

The paper, which was recently submitted to ArXiv, an online repository of physics papers that is not peer-reviewed, offers exact numerical solutions to this problem and was done in collaboration with Harald Peiffer, an expert on numerical relativity at the University of Toronto.

Experimental evidence may one day provide physical proof as to whether or not black holes exist in the universe. But for now, Mersini-Houghton says the mathematics are conclusive.

 

[FantasticMrFoxdie]

Whoa

 

[Newt]

Don't believe it at all.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

You lost me when it says it was submitted to a repo without peer review and quoted her at the shock over her own research.

 

[Ghost_Messiah]

Wow. Black holes don't exist? How accurate and reliable are this researcher's claims? It just sounds so shocking and unexpected that I'm doubting the authenticity here.

 

[Baconmonk]

Crazy, link is broken for me though.

This seems to work http://phys.org/news/2014-09-black-holes.html

 

[SolarPowered]

This is worse than feathered dinosaurs.

 

[SummitAve]

You lost me when it says it was submitted to a repo without peer review and quoted her at the shock over her own research.

This.

 

[Veitsev]

The paper, which was recently submitted to ArXiv, an online repository of physics papers that is not peer-reviewed, offers exact numerical solutions to this problem and was done in collaboration with Harald Peiffer, an expert on numerical relativity at the University of Toronto.

...aaaand we are done here.

 

[Sho_Nuff82]

The paper, which was recently submitted to ArXiv, an online repository of physics papers that is not peer-reviewed

Cmonson.jpg

 

[Pinko Marx]

Nope. #teamblackholes. You're not ruining my sci-fi movies.

 

[ChuyMasta]

The math is conclusive?
It would suck so bad if her calculations had a stupid mistake. Such as a sign error.

 

[Couleurs]

Who needs peer review, just say whatever you feel like

 

[WesternHeretic]

This is worse than feathered dinosaurs.

Agree. This is a travesty along with feathered dinosaurs.

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

lol no peer review

 

[Ahasverus]

Yeah no. I'm already expecting the christian fanatics macros on facebook tho "If science fed these lies to our children all these years, why is evolution teaching allowed?"

 

[Salmonax]

Wow - only the minor step of peer review remaining! Sounds conclusive.

 

[Fireblend]

Studies that haven't been peer-reviewed are about as worthy of attention as my cousin's writings.

He's 6 years old.

 

[BobLoblaw]

As far as theories go, this is really out there. Too much evidence the other way saying that they exist.

 

[NekoFever]

The paper, which was recently submitted to ArXiv, an online repository of physics papers that is not peer-reviewed

 

[ronito]

"Not peer reviewed"

OK then. I'll wait.

 

[Kettch]

I'm not reading anything that suggests black holes don't exist, seems to say that their understood method of creation doesn't happen.

 

[x-Lundz-x]

I'll stick with Hawking on this one.

 

[CapitalismSucks DonkeyBalls]

LOL at sending it to a non peer-review publication. Give me a fucking break with this bullshit.

 

[Mammoth Jones]

Science has to be willing to look at new evidence and adjust itself accordingly.

So let's see if this holds up to scrutiny.

 

[Lucky Forward]

Who needs peer review, just say whatever you feel like

It worked for cold fusion!

 

[Gentleman Jack]

So what's the explanation for what is happening to HDE 226868 if black holes don't exist?

 

[Freedom = $1.05]

that's EXACTLY what the black holes want you to think

 

[DiipuSurotu]

 

[Nokagi]

Well what the fuck is Morgan Freeman going to talk about now? This is bullshit man.

 

[TUSR]

let me know when its peer reviewed

 

[DonasaurusRex]

even the legitimacy of peer reviewing has been called into question as of late so not only is this not peer reviewed but it better be done by a trustworthy journal. If the work is available for all to see then maybe some people will do some work on it and we can go from there.

 

[dark_chris]

Not peer reviewed.
Not important... Yet

 

[SliceSabre]

I opened my mouth and looked in a mirror and saw a black hole.

Checkmate scientists.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

I'm not reading anything that suggests black holes don't exist, seems to say that their understood method of creation doesn't happen.

Oh, this is another one of those SMBC Science Reporting moments isn't it?

"A collapsing star sheds too much mass during its collapse to on its own provide the required criticality for a singularity to form"

Headline: BLACK HOLES DON'T EXIST.

 

[Gr1mLock]

Well that settles it.

 

[CornBurrito]

Come on people. Are any of you seriously taking a single non peer reviewed paper to heart?

 

[DarkFlow]

I'll stick with Hawking on this one.

Yeahhhh I'm thinking the same. One of the greatest minds to ever live vs some random person.

 

[Earthstrike]

The worst part was, even if her hypothesis was right, that a lone star could never become a black hole, it does not lead to the conclusion black holes don't exist since these new end states of stars could always gravitationally interact with one another.

 

[Ghost_Messiah]

that's EXACTLY what the black holes want you to think

lmao! Yeah and reading this thread once more and you guys clearly pointing out that her work wasn't peer reviewed makes me doubt the correctness of her claims. Almost everyone's been to University these days and it's there you learn of the importance of the peer review and how it essentially makes or breaks a paper.

Kind of feels like the gaming side. Waiting on the reviews.

 

[televator]

Well let's see where the majority of scientists come out on this before tossing the big bang out with the bath water.

 

[plasmawave]

Did she even see Star Trek?

 

[dr3upmushroom]

This sounds like one of those dudes that wants to disprove accepted theories for some sort of recognition.

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

Confirmed by research that is actually not research.

 

[explodet]

This is worse than feathered dinosaurs.

Agree. This is a travesty along with feathered dinosaurs.

 

[theechrisfox]

 

[CornBurrito]

Yeahhhh I'm thinking the same. One of the greatest minds to ever live vs some random person.

This is a logical fallacy. You shouldn't ever take Hawking's word for something just because he said it. Science is about peer review and nobody should get a pass. This is the sort of bullshit that leads to people going "hurr Einstein believed in god so obviously god is real."

 

[Ichi_]

The paper, which was recently submitted to ArXiv, an online repository of physics papers that is not peer-reviewed

 

[Gruco]

Relevant (audio link - This American Life)

 

[finowns]

This would be cool if true. We have to wait to see if this holds up.