Monday, December 18, 2023

Do Black Holes have Singularities?

New paper:
There is no proof that black holes contain singularities when they are generated by real physical bodies. Roger Penrose claimed sixty years ago that trapped surfaces inevitably lead to light rays of finite affine length (FALL's). Penrose and Stephen Hawking then asserted that these must end in actual singularities. When they could not prove this they decreed it to be self evident. It is shown that there are counterexamples through every point in the Kerr metric. These are asymptotic to at least one event horizon and do not end in singularities.
It is by the same Kerr who found the general relativity solution for rotating black holes.

I will have to read this. It is hard to believe that everyone exaggerated the Penrose Hawking singularity theorems.


  1. if there is no singularity within an individual particle, there appears no reason to assume a singularity within an accumulation of such particles no matter how massive - an immense density but no singularity.

  2. A singularity is an abstraction that has no volume, it's only feature it can have ascribed to it is a location. It can have no physical presence, as you cant measure a point in any way, it has no size, no physical extension, so it can not have a density either, and it would be ridiculous to say it could spin since you would have no way to tell is something of zero size is spinning. This entire industry of ascribing mass to a point and then saying it spins is as asinine as asking how much a line element weighs, or how much weight a two dimensional plane can support.

    Density is calculated as mass over volume. If your volume is zero, you are LITERALLY dividing by zero and thinking yourself clever.

    Hawking and Penrose apparently flunked basic arithmetic... and only now are physicists catching on? This is what happens when politics and ego eclipse truth.

    Science is not a religion. It's a methodology, and if you don't follow it, you aren't doing science. If you can't do basic arithmetic, you can't do science.

    Once again, dividing by zero for whatever reason is not mathematically valid no matter how famous or fat headed you are. Even if your last name is Hawking, Penrose, or Einstein, you still can't divide by zero.

  3. They didn't understand the nature of affine parameters. STEM is full of nerds and not smart people. It isn't surprising.