Skip to main content
Physics

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

4
  • $\begingroup$-1: This answer is incorrect. I am sorry to downvote, but a singularity is not a "point of infinity", but a point of infinite curvature, and even then, it is not so terrible by itself. The singularity is not the issue with this stuff, it is all exterior things that are the issue.$\endgroup$
    – Ron Maimon
    CommentedApr 6, 2012 at 5:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$Sorry for downvoting, but I can't agree with the answer. In classical theories point particles also generate singular potentials, but all the conservation laws hold. In GR, if you have an asymptotically flat space (with a black hole) you can still comfortably enough introduce conservation laws. The real problem with information comes from the fact, that the objects can only enter, but not leave the event horizon.$\endgroup$
    – Alexey Bobrick
    CommentedApr 6, 2012 at 12:06
  • $\begingroup$Oh, ok so if the data is permenantly stuck inside the event horizon, the it's considered "destroyed"? And "information" cannot be created or destroyed, right? Is that the idea?$\endgroup$
    – John
    CommentedApr 6, 2012 at 16:06
  • $\begingroup$Yes, somewhat. If the bodies fall under the horizon, the information about them perturbs the horizon itself, and though outside observers cannot reach the bodies which have fallen under the horizon, they can still measure the properties of the perturbed horizon.$\endgroup$
    – Alexey Bobrick
    CommentedApr 6, 2012 at 16:36

close