Celestia Forums

In a nutshell, nothing ever passes though the event horizon; hence the information is never destroyed, only converted. This comes from the stand point that it takes an infinite amount of time for anything to fall into a black hole, but based upon Hawking radiation, the black hole will burn out in a finite amount of time.

You can read more about it here.

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20 ... radox.html

Anyone have any thoughts on this? Would this mean that at the center of a black hole there is absolutely nothing because nothing ever passed the event horizon?

I am sure that the original mass of the core of the progenitor star will be in the singularity.

I honestly don't really believe it. Don't black holes merge? (Possibly forming supermassive black holes that are centred in most galaxies?)

You bring up a valid point, and accepted theory of how a black hole forms is that pressure for all the weight of the star squeeze the core until the gravity is so great, it surpasses the Schwarzschild limit and, wham a back hole is formed.

But what if it?€™s slightly different? We know that atoms are > 99.9% empty space so what if the initial reaction forms in the empty space and not on the electron, proton, or neutron, of a give atom. The atom would be split, and again because of relativity, would be frozen in time trapped falling into the black hole. This would also mean that all the accumulated mass would not be in the center of the black hole, but in the surrounding shell of the event horizon. This shell would be less then the thickness of an atom, probably reduced to the level of a quark, which also might explain why the back hole admits no light; a photo would be too large to survive on the shell.

The more I think about it the more this theory seems to make sense at least to me anyway.