Jump to content

Quantum Gravity and the elusive "Event Horizon Gate"

FTL Machine

Recommended Posts

I use the term Gate as it sounds like the gates in Sci Fi novels where you can look at and travel the universe by stepping through gates with no data loss or fully intact. These gates can be located anywhere.


Taken fron the article: The elephant and the event horizon



On Quantum Gravity:



The implications are unsettling, to say the least. Sure, quantum mechanics tells us that an object's location can't always be pinpointed. But that applies to things like electrons, not elephants, and it usually spans tiny distances, not light years. It is the large scale that makes this so surprising, Susskind says. In principle, if the black hole is big enough, the two versions of the same elephant could be separated by billions of light years. "People always thought quantum ambiguity was a small-scale phenomenon," he adds. "We're learning that the more quantum gravity becomes important, the more huge-scale ambiguity comes into play."


All this amounts to the fact that an object's location in space-time is no longer indisputable. Susskind calls this "a new form of relativity". Einstein took factors that were thought to be invariable - an object's length and the passage of time - and showed that they were relative to the motion of an observer. The location of an object in space or in time could only be defined with respect to an observer, but its location in space-time was certain. Now that notion has been shattered, says Susskind, and an object's location in space-time depends on an observer's state of motion with respect to a horizon.



That's not all. The fact that space-time itself is accelerating - that is, the expansion of the universe is speeding up - also creates a horizon. Just as we could learn that an elephant lurked inside a black hole by decoding the Hawking radiation, perhaps we might learn what's beyond our cosmic horizon by decoding its emissions. How? According to Susskind, the cosmic microwave background that surrounds us might be even more important than we think. Cosmologists study this radiation because its variations tell us about the infant moments of time, but Susskind speculates that it could be a kind of Hawking radiation coming from our universe's edge. If that's the case, it might tell us something about the elephants on the other side of the universe.


So basically because things are unpredictable or faster then light, like in a Black Hole (there are large comparisons to FTL black holes in the article), we can best predict things with an 'event horizon.' This Event Horizon can be located anywhere it states, even on earth; but how do I get a black Hole event horizon near me on earth and how do I even know what a Black Hole is or where it is and how far it reaches since Black Hole predictions are only based off of indirect evidence from Hawking radiation?

One comparison I could make would be to our imagination or I could fling myself into a black whole to find out.. maybe not.

I would then be at two places at once. I wonder how real that transfer could be. How do I step out of the event horizon and would I end up at another end of the universe or could I choose my location based on event horizon type.


So if I don't know where a black hole leads and there is no information loss could I theoretically step though a black hole and be taken to another part of the universe very far away intact if I can escape the black hole, that is.


The article says that we could be anywhere instantly but only located within the Black Hole or past the event horizon. Just sounds like they are trying to avoid measuring Faster then Light particles by creating another quantum field.:) Could be good for indirect research though

I like the Quantum field because I do believe our small minds can never exactly measure the universe all at once. Not even AI as it would then be too unreachable for realistic science. Maybe on the whole though.


Anyway this is all so fun and I am really having fun with the recent planet hunting that's been going on using gravity techniques

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hello FTLmachine,


I don't have time to analyze this article. It is not related to the newer (post-string) research in approaches to QG that I follow----a lot seems to be string theory----there is stuff in the article that is simply not recognizable or making sense to me. Maybe someone else will help you with it.


As a general recommendation, be cautious about what you read in popular science media like the New Scientist

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.