[Dr Amrutha (OP)]

I just watched a video where it is said that Hawking's radiation theory is a link between quantum mechanics and general relativity and that it can explain the theory of everything if it is developed further.Can someone be kind enough to tell me how that can happen?
Does Hawking's really hold the key to the lock of all unexplained theories of the universe?
 []

[stacyjones]

Does Hawking's really hold the key to the lock of all unexplained theories of the universe?
 []

No, it doesn't. Unless it is related to the dark matter continuously emitted by supermassive black holes which cause particles of matter, the gas, to be pushed far beyond the extent of their host galaxies.

'Supermassive Black Holes Transport Matter into Cosmic Voids'
...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN

“Some of the matter falling towards the holes is converted into energy. This energy is delivered to the surrounding gas, and leads to large outflows of matter, which stretch for hundreds of thousands of light years from the black holes, reaching far beyond the extent of their host galaxies,” the astronomers explained.

The energy referred to above at the scale of our Universe is dark energy. A Universal black hole is emitting dark matter which flows through our visible Universe, pushing the galaxy clusters, causing them to accelerate away from us.

Dark matter fills 'empty' space. Dark matter strongly interacts with matter. Dark matter is displaced by matter.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the strongly interacting dark matter which fills 'empty' space.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the strongly interacting dark matter.

Dark matter displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

The key to moving physics forward is to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter.

[Dr Amrutha (OP)]

How can the understanding about empty space possibly help us to find the "theory of everything"?

[stacyjones]

How can the understanding about empty space possibly help us to find the "theory of everything"?

Because the mass which fills 'empty' space relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the mass which fills 'empty' space.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the mass which fills 'empty' space.

The mass which fills 'empty' space displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

[jeffreyH]

How can the understanding about empty space possibly help us to find the "theory of everything"?

Stacyjones is promoting a pet theory and not discussing mainstream science so don't be misled.

[Colin2B]

How can the understanding about empty space possibly help us to find the "theory of everything"?

Stacyjones is promoting a pet theory and not discussing mainstream science so don't be misled.

Stacy, Jeff is right, in this section you should make it clear, in new theories you can discuss what you like.

[evan_au]

it is said that Hawking's radiation theory is a link between quantum mechanics and general relativity

The physics of black holes accreting large amounts of matter (eg dust, planets and stars) is adequately described by the general theory of relativity.

However, general relativity generates infinities in the vicinity of black holes whenever attempts have been made to combine it with the quantum effects that govern photons and subatomic particles.

...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN is a proposed quantum mechanism which would allow black holes to slowly lose mass over time. So, in a very limited sense, it does combine quantum theory and general relativity.

We don't have any nearby black holes to study (fortunately for us!), so the details are still unresolved - for example some theorists suggest that there is a "firewall" around black holes, while others  disagree.
 
That still leaves the mechanism driving the ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN emanating from black holes; mainstream physicists think they are some form of magnetohydrodynamic phenomena in the accretion disk (rather than dark matter outflows from within the black hole, which would violate general relativity).

Hawking's radiation ... can explain the theory of everything if it is developed further.

I would rather say that a theory of everything must incorporate Hawking radiation (or prove that it does not exist).
It must also resolve the debate about firewalls.
But most importantly, it must eliminate the many infinities around a black hole.

...Then we just need some way of testing it!

[stacyjones]

Stacy, Jeff is right, in this section you should make it clear, in new theories you can discuss what you like.

The question is asking about a theory of everything. A theory of everything is a new theory.

[jeffreyH]

At the event horizon of a black hole you may have Hawking radiation but also a surface relating to the entropy of any mass falling into the black hole.  So that the entropy produced by the black hole has two components. The outgoing radiation and the infalling mass. Since Hawking radiation proposes that black holes evaporate away then only the outgoing radiation persists. In which case all the mass of the black hole still contributes to an increase in the entropy of the universe. This conversion of internal entropy into external radiation at the event horizon is very likely the key to reconciling general relativity and quantum mechanics.

[jeffreyH]

One line of enquiry should be into the types of particle involved in Hawking radiation compared to the types oif particles consumed by the black hole. If fermions and photons go in but only photons and possibly neutrinos come out for instance what does that tell us about the fate of the universe and the nature of dark matter/energy?

[stacyjones]

At the event horizon of a black hole you may have Hawking radiation but also a surface relating to the entropy of any mass falling into the black hole.  So that the entropy produced by the black hole has two components. The outgoing radiation and the infalling mass. Since Hawking radiation proposes that black holes evaporate away then only the outgoing radiation persists. In which case all the mass of the black hole still contributes to an increase in the entropy of the universe. This conversion of internal entropy into external radiation at the event horizon is very likely the key to reconciling general relativity and quantum mechanics.

I think the key to reconciling GR and QM is to understand the energy referred to in the following article is dark matter continuously emitted by the supermassive black hole which pushes the gas far beyond the extent of the host galaxy.

...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN

“Some of the matter falling towards the holes is converted into energy. This energy is delivered to the surrounding gas, and leads to large outflows of matter, which stretch for hundreds of thousands of light years from the black holes, reaching far beyond the extent of their host galaxies,” the astronomers explained.

This is evidence dark matter fills 'empty' space. Once you understand dark matter fills 'empty' space you can understand particles of matter move through and displace the dark matter. This allows for the reconciliation between GR and QM.

What ripples when black holes collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the strongly interacting dark matter which fills 'empty' space.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the strongly interacting dark matter.

Dark matter displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

[stacyjones]

One line of enquiry should be into the types of particle involved in Hawking radiation compared to the types oif particles consumed by the black hole. If fermions and photons go in but only photons and possibly neutrinos come out for instance what does that tell us about the fate of the universe and the nature of dark matter/energy?

Dark matter is continuously emitted by supermassive black holes which push the gas far beyond the extent of their host galaxies.

Dark energy is this same process at the scale of the Universe. A Universal black hole continuously emits dark matter which pushes the galaxy clusters away from us.

Dark energy is dark matter continuously emitted by the Universal black hole which pushes the galaxy clusters, causing them to accelerate away from us.

[jeffreyH]

One line of enquiry should be into the types of particle involved in Hawking radiation compared to the types oif particles consumed by the black hole. If fermions and photons go in but only photons and possibly neutrinos come out for instance what does that tell us about the fate of the universe and the nature of dark matter/energy?

Dark matter is continuously emitted by supermassive black holes which push the gas far beyond the extent of their host galaxies.

Dark energy is this same process at the scale of the Universe. A Universal black hole continuously emits dark matter which pushes the galaxy clusters away from us.

Dark energy is dark matter continuously emitted by the Universal black hole which pushes the galaxy clusters, causing them to accelerate away from us.

Where is the evidence? You state things as if they are fact. Then you post statements from long dead physicists in an attempt to use past authority to make your claims sound legitimate. As far as I can see there is no evidence of a link between dark energy and black holes. If you wish to post on this then new theories is where it should go. Your concept of a "Universal black hole" has no context with which to evaluate it. This is likely because you simply invented because it sounded grand. You are simply misleading members who come here looking for legitimate answers, hoping that they fall for your deception.

[stacyjones]

Where is the evidence?

The evidence is every time a double slit experiment is performed.

In a double slit experiment the particle is always detected traveling through a single slit because it always travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the strongly interacting dark matter which passes through both.

The evidence is in the Milky Way's halo. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the strongly interacting dark matter, analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water.

[jeffreyH]

Where is the evidence?

The evidence is every time a double slit experiment is performed.

In a double slit experiment the particle is always detected traveling through a single slit because it always travels through a single slit. It is the associated wave in the strongly interacting dark matter which passes through both.

The evidence is in the Milky Way's halo. The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the strongly interacting dark matter, analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water.

Citations? Scientific peer reviewed papers? Are these surplus to requirements? If you don't have any then this is not the place for your post.

[puppypower]

My theory is the speed of light is the ground state of the universe. This can be inferred from a net conversion of matter to energy in our universe, instead of net conversion of energy to matter. The flow of potential, in our universe, is heading from matter and inertial reference toward energy and the reference of the speed of light.

GR is simply one way to get back to the C-ground state. As gravity acts upon mass, local space-time contracts in the general direction of the speed of light reference. This limit is approximated with a black hole; point-instant.

Most of the time, gravity will fall short of the C-ground state. However, gravitational pressure allows matter to change phases, to make use of other forces, as an alternate path; nuclear forces. The nuke forces help burn mass back to energy; back to the C ground state. The EM force also gives off energy as potential lowers; back to C.

Even the expansion of the universe is heading toward the ground state at C. At the speed of light reference, we would see a point-instant universe. This means the only wavelength of energy we could see, from this point-instant reference would be infinite wavelength. Wavelengths smaller than infinite will appear as fractions of a point in wavelength, in this reference, which is mathematically not possible, by definition of a point. The universal red shift moves energy in the direction of infinite wavelength. GR moves mass to C, while expansion moves energy to C.

Since the speed of light is the same in all "inertial" references and the laws of physics are the same in all "inertial" reference, all "inertial" references are heading to the same ground state. We can figure it all out, from our reference.

The current complexity of physics is an artifact of choosing the wrong ground state for the universe. Much of the complexity is scaffolding to compensate for the reference choice. For example, we define the singularity of the BB as t=0. If we assume the speed of light is the ground state, then the singularity of the BB, contains potential, since it departs from the C ground state.

Since the singularity has potential with C, the singularity is not really t=0. The real beginning is a few more steps back. Shifting the origin of the universe, answers many questions that can't be answered using an inertial reference. One question is why do we have a quantum universe? The singularity was a quanta. That choice came before the singularity.



The current model for the BB has an inflation, followed by an expansion and atomization of matter. The problem with this is, since the singularity was the first quanta, why do we skip all the quanta in the middle, and go right to the tiny quanta implicit of the substructure of matter? It is based on a big bomb that atomizes. The main disadvantage of this approach is going from the singularity to atomization, causes a huge increase in entropy, which means a lot of energy is needed for the expansion, up front. 

An alternative, that does not need as much up front energy, is the singularity will quantum divide into 2, then 4, then 8, etc. This approach allows an expansion with much less energy going into entropy, at the front end. This means we can expand the BB singularity with less energy.

In terms of a visual, this model will look like the BB singularity is quantum splitting, like cell division, with the daughter cells expanding with space-time. This model makes it much easier to explain the observed superstructures of the universe. Many of these structures don't have enough time to form from if we begin with complete atomization. With a quantum division approach, the body of the universe; superstructures, appear as it expands. This model would  explain the blackholes in the center galaxies as   seeming from the terminal cells. The original Hawking radiation was different and spewed matter, while adding giddy up to the expansion of the universe relative to galaxies.

Again, the goal is a movement back to the C-ground state, and not some arbitrary inertial reference.

[stacyjones]

Citations? Scientific peer reviewed papers? Are these surplus to requirements? If you don't have any then this is not the place for your post.

'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided'
...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN

[jeffreyH]

Citations? Scientific peer reviewed papers? Are these surplus to requirements? If you don't have any then this is not the place for your post.

'The Milky Way's dark matter halo appears to be lopsided'
...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN

I would be very interested on your interpretation of the mathematics.

[stacyjones]

I would be very interested on your interpretation of the mathematics.

The mathematics already exist. The notion of curved spacetime is a pseudo force. The geometrical representation of gravity as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the dark matter strongly interacting dark matter.

[jeffreyH]

I would be very interested on your interpretation of the mathematics.

The mathematics already exist. The notion of curved spacetime is a pseudo force. The geometrical representation of gravity as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the dark matter strongly interacting dark matter.

So in your opinion are they right to couple the Poisson equation to the equation of hydrostatic equilibrium? Does this really help with the problem of asymmetrical potential? What about the axisymmetric potential? Are they handlling that in the right way? What about their proposed sigma values? Do they match with observational data? I await your analysis with enthusiasm.

[stacyjones]

So in your opinion are they right to couple the Poisson equation to the equation of hydrostatic equilibrium? Does this really help with the problem of asymmetrical potential? What about the axisymmetric potential? Are they handlling that in the right way? What about their proposed sigma values? Do they match with observational data? I await your analysis with enthusiasm.

The equations of general relativity which apply to curved spacetime aslo apply to the state of displacement of the strongly interacting dark matter because the geometrical representation of gravity as curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of the dark matter matter.

[jeffreyH]

In other words you don't understand the document that you yourself posted in support of your argument. So you don't even know if it does support your argument or not. Not a very tenable position.

[stacyjones]

I understand curved spacetime is a pseudo force. I understand the geometrical representation of gravity of curved spacetime physically exists in nature as the state of displacement of of the strongly interacting dark matter which fills 'empty' space.

[jeffreyH]

OK so we have a central galactic black hole in our galaxy. Can we state with certainty that where S = entropy? If so then do you agree that then relates to the radius of the horizon? How then does dark matter and or dark energy relate to entropy and Hawking radiation via entanglement?

[stacyjones]

The question asks if Hawking radiation is key to a theory of everything. It is if it is related to the energy associated with supermassive black holes which cause the gas to be pushed far beyond the extent of their host galaxies. This is evidence of the strongly interacting dark matter the supermassive black holes continuously emit. This is evidence dark matter fills 'empty' space and strongly interacts with matter. From this we can relate general relativity and quantum mechanics. It is the strongly interacting dark matter which ripples when galaxy clusters collide and is what waves in terms of wave-particle duality.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the strongly interacting dark matter which fills 'empty' space.

The strongly interacting dark matter displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

[Colin2B]

Stacy, Jeff is right, in this section you should make it clear, in new theories you can discuss what you like.

The question is asking about a theory of everything. A theory of everything is a new theory.

But it would be helpful to the op to make it clear, yes

[stacyjones]

But it would be helpful to the op to make it clear, yes

I would think the OP realizes by stating "figuring out" a theory of everything that we are discussing a new theory.

In order to start figuring out a theory of everything we need to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter. We can then relate general relativity and quantum mechanics as both Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave-particle duality wave are waves in the mass that fills 'empty' space.

The first step in figuring out a theory of everything is to relate general relativity and quantum mechanics. The first step in relating general relativity and quantum mechanics is to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter.

[jeffreyH]

Not a peep about the mathematics. Mathematics is central to physics. In fact you could say mathematics IS physics. Your lack of use of such a crucial tool highlights your ignorance of the subject you are making such bold pronouncements on. That is deceitful.

[stacyjones]

Or, you could work toward answering the question which is to figure out a theory of everything.

The first step in figuring out a theory of everything is to relate general relativity and quantum mechanics. The way to relate general relativity and quantum mechanics is to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter and that both Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality are both waves in it.

Your avoidance of answering the question is deceitful.

[jeffreyH]

Does Hawking's really hold the key to the lock of all unexplained theories of the universe?
 []

No, it doesn't. Unless it is related to the dark matter continuously emitted by supermassive black holes which cause particles of matter, the gas, to be pushed far beyond the extent of their host galaxies.

'Supermassive Black Holes Transport Matter into Cosmic Voids'
...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN

Here you simply dismissed the question in order to divert the thread onto your pet theory.

“Some of the matter falling towards the holes is converted into energy. This energy is delivered to the surrounding gas, and leads to large outflows of matter, which stretch for hundreds of thousands of light years from the black holes, reaching far beyond the extent of their host galaxies,” the astronomers explained.

Below you introduce a speculative and unfounded "Universal black hole". This will in no way help the poster get a clear impression of how mainstream physics sees this. It is again an attempt at self promotion.

The energy referred to above at the scale of our Universe is dark energy. A Universal black hole is emitting dark matter which flows through our visible Universe, pushing the galaxy clusters, causing them to accelerate away from us.

Dark matter fills 'empty' space. Dark matter strongly interacts with matter. Dark matter is displaced by matter.

What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment, the strongly interacting dark matter which fills 'empty' space.

Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality, both are waves in the strongly interacting dark matter.

Dark matter displaced by matter relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

The key to moving physics forward is to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter.

The last part I expect you keep in a file on your PC for easy cut N paste it is repeated so often. This is again misleading as it fails to address the original question.

[stacyjones]

The original question is:

Does Hawking's really hold the key to the lock of all unexplained theories of the universe?

I answered it does if it has anything to do with the energy associated with supermassive black holes which cause the gas to be pushed far beyond the extent of their host galaxies. That's because supermassive black holes are emitting dark matter which pushes the gas.

The key to a theory of everything is to first relate general relativity and quantum mechanics. The key to relating general relativity and quantum mechanics is to understand dark matter fills 'empty' space, strongly interacts with matter, is displaced by matter and it also displaces the matter.

This allows for the relationship between general relativity and quantum mechanics to be understood as both Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality are waves in it.

So, you are either participating in helping determine the theory of everything or you are not. And until you are willing to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter then you are not as it is the mass which fills 'empty' space which is displaced by matter which relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

[stacyjones]

Besides Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality both being waves in the mass which fills 'empty' space, the state of displacement of the mass which fills 'empty' space is gravity. So, to have any chance at a theory of everything is to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter.

[jeffreyH]

The original question is:

Does Hawking's really hold the key to the lock of all unexplained theories of the universe?

I answered it does if it has anything to do with the energy associated with supermassive black holes which cause the gas to be pushed far beyond the extent of their host galaxies. That's because supermassive black holes are emitting dark matter which pushes the gas.

Then prove it. You posted a link which you refused to comment on directly. You posted this in support of your claims so you should at least have some understanding of the supporting evidence otherwise how can you say it indeed does support your assertions?

The key to a theory of everything is to first relate general relativity and quantum mechanics. The key to relating general relativity and quantum mechanics is to understand dark matter fills 'empty' space, strongly interacts with matter, is displaced by matter and it also displaces the matter.

Then the only honest thing to do is show the mathematics that supports this speculation. It will likely fall under the remit of quantum field theory so let us all see your equations.

This allows for the relationship between general relativity and quantum mechanics to be understood as both Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality are waves in it.

So, you are either participating in helping determine the theory of everything or you are not. And until you are willing to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter then you are not as it is the mass which fills 'empty' space which is displaced by matter which relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.

Since you know the solution show it to us. Surely you have the formula to back up such grandiose claims?

[jeffreyH]

Besides Einstein's gravitational wave and de Broglie's wave of wave-particle duality both being waves in the mass which fills 'empty' space, the state of displacement of the mass which fills 'empty' space is gravity. So, to have any chance at a theory of everything is to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter.

Poppycock and drivel.

[stacyjones]

Or, you could understand the first step in figuring out a theory of everything is to understand 'empty' space has mass which is displaced by matter.

[jeffreyH]

OK put a figure on the energy per cubic volume of this mass. Then we can compare this to the vacuum energy. What type of particles comprise this extra mass? Since you mention mass it has to be particulate matter. Can you also supply any kinetic energy terms that would apply. Once you have done this you can then rid yourself of the appearance of a charlatan.

[stacyjones]

...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGIN

Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University, had this to say about ether in contemporary theoretical physics:
The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.

[jeffreyH]

So again you can't provide an answer and simply post some link. You are likely worried that your lack of mathematics would open you to ridicule if you attempted to formulate an answer. You are in a hole so my best advice to you is to stop digging.

[stacyjones]

Your inability to even consider the possibility that a Nobel Laureate is correct means any attempt at any sort of an actual conversation is pointless.

[alancalverd]

I haven't seen Robert for several years, but if you'd care to tell me his measurements of the viscosity, density and elastic modulus of the aether, I'm prepared to believe them. If not, I must continue to assume that you haven't understood what he is talking about.

[stacyjones]

Can you explain to me how, "The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether" is interpreted to mean there is no such thing as an ether? Is the issue with the term?

Let's make up a new term in order to start fresh. I will label the mass which fills 'empty' space which is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it the 'rehtea'.

I think it's safe to say after over 30 years and more than a billion dollars and there being zero evidence of WIMPs we can move beyond that incorrect notion. If you want to continue to believe in something that billions of dollars and decades have been spent looking for with zero evidence of it then that is your choice.

I'm going to take it a step further and say that the whole notion of dark matter as a clump of stuff that travels with the matter is incorrect.

Rehtea has mass, physically occupies three dimensional space and is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.

The "missing mass" is the mass of the rehtea which is connected to and neighbors the matter which is displaced by the matter.

The Milky Way's halo is lopsided due to the matter in the Milky Way moving through and displacing the rehtea, analogous to a submarine moving through and displacing the water.

[jeffreyH]

It is so hilarious how the mask slips when you come across someone who knows one of your sources personally. You didn't expect that then did you. You just appear foolish now. I did advise you to stop digging.

[stacyjones]

How do you interpret, "The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether" to mean there is no such thing as an ether?

[LarryLee Booth]

look at my theory of gradational accumulation keep all the above in mind while you read it . It is only some of the first part i have the rest in my mind