What is the temperature inside a Black Hole?

  • 51 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline MikeS

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1044
  • The Devils Advocate
    • View Profile
Re: What is the temperature inside a Black Hole?
« Reply #50 on: 29/04/2012 09:57:49 »
Quote from: Ęthelwulf link=topic=43769.msg387100#msg387100
For locality we surely mean observer. And I'd agree, take the human observer who is aware of their surroundings. Their perception is strictly local with time and their experience of it --- but our experience of time arises because of a gene regulation inside our heads, the so-called, suprachiasmatic nucleus.

Beleiving for a moment that time exists objectively (outside the human perception) time is then part of the understanding of the manifold which requires a non-linear geometry. That would be most important, not the perception of it.

No it doesn't, that just synchronizes our body's circadian rhythms or body clock with the Earths clock.
« Last Edit: 29/04/2012 10:00:04 by MikeS »


Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 12351
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Re: What is the temperature inside a Black Hole?
« Reply #51 on: 02/05/2012 10:50:43 »
Hmm, reading this I would say that to me, to be true? Heh, we once thought the earth was flat, and had all sorts of reasons for it. We thought the universe rotated around us, with us being the crown of creation and some still do. What we can say is that if we create a logic through repeatable experiments and find it to explain new experiments we are getting closer to 'something'. The math we use is seldom thought up without reason as I've seen, although there is always some that somehow seem to create math that won't get their perfect fit until much later, as Boolean mathematics in our digital era. And there are more and better examples of that I guess than what I remember for the moment. But there is also a danger in trusting that results always are 'true' just because it fits ones current mathematics. The more one draw away from direct experimental verification mathematically, while inferring and deducting, the more susceptible that math will be to drawing conclusions that one won't be able to verify experimentally.

The very best math, to me, is the type that draws a new conclusion, and then also suggest some way to test that prediction.
« Last Edit: 02/05/2012 10:52:24 by yor_on »
"BOMB DISPOSAL EXPERT. If you see me running, try to keep up."