Alternative to black holes proposed

[Nowhere]

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18925423.600&feedId=online-news_rss20

"Started" by lack of agreement between black holes and quantum theory, and also by some experiment.
Explains dark matter and dark energy.
Very interesting stuff (well, for me...)

BTW, I seem to remember I've heard similar hypothesis long time ago, about exotic kind of stars (in place of black holes) composed of "shell", and that the Universe can be the insides of such star. Didn't seem so "documented" back then (perhaps it was different thing)

[Jammrock]

Chapline suggested that the objects that till now have been thought of as black holes could in fact be dead stars that form as a result of an obscure quantum phenomenon.

But aren't black holes just supposed to be ... dead collapsed stars in the first place? Plus, I thought the basic notion about black holes causing space-time "singularities" was recently recended by Hawkings.

*shrug*

Interesting theory none-the-less.

Jammrock

[Nowhere]

Sure, they're too "dead collapsed stars", but their model/idea behind them doesn't take into account quantum effects.
About Hawkins - you're talking about this bet of his and destroying information by black hole? There still second problem with "freezing" of time apparently. And if it explains dark energy, the better.

[Jammrock]

Okay, so they still think it's the same basic thing as a black hole (the dead collapsed start part), but they want to change the entire model of what happens around a "dead collapsed star," changing it from the traditional view of a Hawking's style black hole into a more quantum correct one.

[cjolley]

Neeto!!!
Thanks for the post.
This will be very interesting to follow for the next few years.

[Nowhere]

Jamm, not really what happens "arround", that's mostly the same, the same/similar effects (plus obviously effects of dark energy, but I can imagine those beeing insignificant locally; in the same manner that while on extremelly smal distances electromagnetism wins over gravity, at long ones the former force doesn't matter). They have a new idea what happens in/to a star while it collapses, and what comes out of it.

[Dr Mordrid]

To me the most interesting implication comes in the following quote;

The most intriguing fallout from this idea has to do with the strength of the vacuum energy inside the dark energy star. This energy is related to the star's size, and for a star as big as our universe the calculated vacuum energy inside its shell matches the value of dark energy seen in the universe today. "It's like we are living inside a giant dark energy star," Chapline says. There is, of course, no explanation yet for how a universe-sized star could come into being.

Bottom line:

if you ever wondered what it's like inside a black hole just go outside on a dark, moonless night and have a look around

Dr. Mordrid

[Gurm]

Of course this is all pure foolishness.

Every good Christian knows that the Sun orbits around the Earth, and not vice versa. If God had intended for there to be "dark matter" when He created the heavens and the earth, He would have explicitly mentioned it in The Holy Bible.

[Dr Mordrid]

Give up the anti-Christian bulls*** Gurm. The church has recognized the heliocentric solar system for hundreds of years. The Roman Catholics even have their own observatory in New Mexico. The only outdated part of this conversation are your prejudices.

Dr. Mordrid

[dZeus]

Give up the anti-Christian bulls*** Gurm. The church has recognized the heliocentric solar system for hundreds of years. The Roman Catholics even have their own observatory in New Mexico. The only outdated part of this conversation are your prejudices.

Dr. Mordrid

I agree, Jason. Your post is specifically not funny because these days organised religion definitely doesn't try to push stuff like Intelligent Design.

[KvHagedorn]

Of course this is all pure foolishness.

Every good Christian knows that the Sun orbits around the Earth, and not vice versa. If God had intended for there to be "dark matter" when He created the heavens and the earth, He would have explicitly mentioned it in The Holy Bible.

Isn't Genesis part of the Torah? So Judaisim says the exact same thing.

[Umfriend]

I agree, Jason. Your post is specifically not funny because these days organised religion definitely doesn't try to push stuff like Intelligent Design.

ROFLMAO! That one was mean. Still, I can understand Doc's sentiment, I mean, it's not like any statement was made in this thread that warranted such a response IMO.

[Wombat]

Isn't Genesis part of the Torah? So Judaisim says the exact same thing.

...and it smart enough to accept it as metaphor, without a rising "literalist" faction.

[KvHagedorn]

...and it smart enough to accept it as metaphor, without a rising "literalist" faction.

And aren't you smart enough to see that I was saying this exact same thing to Gurm in a roundabout way?

[Gurm]

Hey, I'm just pointing out the "slippery slope" phenomenon.

Don't get too stuck on current cosmology. It's entirely possible - even likely - that everything we know about the universe is completely wrong.

Which is, after all, my point... albeit made in my "blatantly anti-christian" way.

But hey, I have good reason to be anti-christian.