We may misunderstand black holes. Physicists have long believed that black holes are just such things. A huge gravitational object, an enormous amount of matter, and space-time collapsing into a kind of prison with no escape. But the more we study, the more black holes refuse to cooperate with this picture that has emerged from Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity, a large-scale model that explains how gravity works on a cosmic scale. To go. What happens at the center and edges of black holes is not fully understood. Black holes can emit small amounts of radiation, so they may not be completely black. And perhaps most worryingly, as these ideas become increasingly understood and defined, they don’t fit well with our understanding of how energy and matter work at small quantum scales. . That’s why some new research is going in a different direction. What if we understood black holes not as gravitational bodies, but as quantum objects, as one bold paper claims? Perhaps they are, in fact, the world’s largest quantum objects, so they are not our traditional It probably refuses to follow the gravitational model. Of particular interest is what happens at the center of a black hole. These are the places where our classical understanding of gravity and relativity breaks down, which is why physicists have used messy quantum calculations to figure out what’s going on there. In their paper, physicists Nikko John Leo Lobos and Reggie Pantig of the Polytechnic University of the Philippines and the Mapua Institute of Technology in the Philippines argue that rather than attempting quantum, black holes are seen as macroscopic consequences of the quantum world. I am conducting a thought experiment. Mechanics that explains gravity from the general theory of relativity.
Quantum objects are objects rife with uncertainty, and in order to make scientific predictions, physicists rely on the “fuzzy” rules of quantum mechanics (the electron is here (can also exist there). of classical macroscopic physics. One of these vague rules is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, which imposes severe limits on the accuracy of measurements of particle coordinates and momentum. This principle applies only to very small (quantum) scales. But if there is one uncertainty factor that changes momentum on very small scales, there is probably another uncertainty factor in nature that changes position on very large scales, scales comparable to black holes. will exist. Like other theoretical physicists, “nature loves symmetry and dualism,” Lobos and Pantig write. Lobos and Pantig explore the implications of this idea, examining how natural uncertainty in position manifests itself in the event horizon of a black hole. Their impressive work shows that it is possible to develop a practical understanding of so-called black holes, starting from quantum rather than gravitational fundamentals. In general relativity, a black hole is simply a mass of matter compressed into an infinitesimal point, and the event horizon, or “surface” of a black hole from which there is no escape, is the natural mass of this dense mass of matter. This is the result.
But in the language of quantum mechanics, black holes are considered a special type of Bose-Einstein condensate, named after Einstein and the early 20th century Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose. These condensates are special structures of matter in which all particles have the same quantum state and synchronize their quantum motions, allowing them to behave like giant particles in a solid. The particles that make up the Bose-Einstein condensate of a black hole are gravitons, the hypothetical quantum carriers of gravity. When a black hole forms, gravitons come together, synchronize with each other, and strengthen each other’s gravitational influence. But the particles in a Bose-Einstein condensate are in the same quantum state, so they can occupy the same position in space. This means that the black hole seen through this lens has no physical reason to be macroscopic. That is, it is not larger than any other subatomic particle. This is where the ambiguity arises. The new quantum rules used by Lobos and Pantig corrupt the black hole and cause it to occupy real physical space. What we call the event horizon is just the outer limit of this smear effect. Therefore, in this image, the black hole becomes a collection of expanded quantum particles that can be seen and accessed on the macroscopic and even cosmic scale. This is a completely different way of building black hole physics, based on quantum rather than gravitational fundamentals. The researchers suggest how future experimental tests, including more detailed images from the Event Horizon telescope and its successors, might resolve this quantum-classical debate. The properties of quantum black holes are slightly different from those predicted by general relativity. Although the differences are small (as they should be, otherwise the old model of black holes would have been scrapped long ago), they are potentially significant. Most importantly, the “shadow” of these quantum black holes may be larger than the “shadow” of a black hole in the traditional sense. A shadow refers to a “hole” cut out in the backlight. Also, getting too close can cause large deviations in the object’s trajectory. More careful measurements of stars near the Milky Way’s massive black hole, Sagittarius A*, and subsequent missions with the Event Horizon telescope could be precise enough to detect these differences. .
These researchers are not the only ones who suspect that black holes function, at least in part, as giant quantum objects. Another group of physicists in Australia and Canada focused on the quantum concept of superposition, where particles bond together regardless of the distance between them. It turns out that by applying this concept to the macroscopic world, we can reproduce the known properties of black holes. And black holes may not be the only giant quantum objects in our universe. In one proposal, a group of Indian physicists suggests that the cosmological event horizon – the limit of the visible universe – may also be a quantum artifact. Their research follows the same logic as Lobos and Pantig, but only on a (much) larger scale. Fundamental uncertainties in quantum interactions are reflected in the macroscopic world and can explain what is traditionally the realm of pure gravity. But a group of Iranian physicists say there is no need to go to such extremes to find connections between the quantum and classical worlds. They also provide a way to apply advanced quantum thinking to the study of extremely hot gases, common objects in the universe spread across the vast cosmic web.
Many physicists would say that there is no reason for quantum uncertainty to exist on such large scales. Experiments and physical theory do not encourage us to extend Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle as some theorists do. And everything we’ve observed so far about black holes is consistent with our understanding of general relativity. There is no need to complicate the situation until experiments prove otherwise. But just because the work is amazing and done outside a dense crowd in the heart of an upscale industrial park doesn’t mean it’s wrong or wasted. Science is also about wild ideas. It’s about exploration and courage. It’s about diving into the darkness and finding the freedom to marvel at the world around you.