5 ms·
Would Hawking have got it with them?
by otalp 6y ago
Would Hawking have got it with them?
- SiempreViernes 6y agoNot sure, he's most famous for work on black hole thermodynamics, not really about formation.
- kdavis 6y agoYes. Penrose’s prize is largely for the Penrose-Hawking Theorems[1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose–Hawking_singularity_theorems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose–Hawking_singularity_th...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- codethief 6y agoWhat I don't understand is this: The Singularity Theorems already assume the existence of a trapped surface (and by implication, of a marginally outer trapped surface, i.e. an apparent horizon, i.e. a black hole) and then conclude that there must be a singularity inside. Experimentally, though, we know absolutely nothing about this and the recent black hole-related discoveries (gravitational waves, Event Horizon Telescope) can certainly not be seen as a proof of the existence of singularities, either. Now the Nobel Prize committee says that the discovery is actually > “for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity.” But this has virtually nothing to do with the most famous piece of work by Penrose, i.e. the Singularity Theorems.
- cb321 6y agoI believe your point is valid. If the universe ends in big crunch there may also be insufficient proper time to form a singularity. People often confuse event horizons for singularities, partly because of Penrose's work. :) I think Penrose has made many contributions worthy of recognition, though I am not sure Nobel committee press releases are the best place to look for them.
- PopePompus 6y agoAt most three people can win, so they would have had to bump one of the three who did win.