Mapping Interiors of Black Holes with Many Sensors

Physical Review Letters @PhysRevLett

Microscopic Origin of the Entropy of Astrophysical Black Holes:
A theoretical proposal presents a framework for microscopic explanation of the entropy of astrophysical black holes
Replying to @PhysRevLett

How many astrophysicists does it take to create a 3D volumetric model of the interior of a black hole region? 13. Four to chant continuously to Hawking and Wheeler. Four to mumble prayers on beads labelled Feynman, Hilbert, Minkowski, Schartzschild. Four to run in circles as fast as they can to ward off evil spirits by shaking rattles filled with beads labeled with every author names or acronym they can remember. And 1 to tattoo Beckenstein all over his body to be a human sacrifice by suggesting that the microstates are random and can be constructed arbitrarily as long as they are observable, probably in the range suggested by the observed temperature, mass, magnetic field, and interactions with nearby observable matter.

You left the door open by saying “thin shells of dust particles”, “shell”, “black hole interior”, “electric and magnetic charges”, “dust shells in the black hole interior”, “some angular momentum”, “perfect fluid”, and language that time does matter and there ought to be resonances for the whole. You left things so vague all I can guess is you want to allow for a spectrum of nearly singular vacuum fluctuations (highest energy density events). And, that is why you keep repeating “random phases”, “statistics”, “erratic phases” – which suggest someone ought to check the region closely for phase noise with a range of detectors across all frequencies and wavelengths (you have to do both).
You can count microstates by any exterior observable ( do not forget gravitational sensors at MHz GHz THz) if you store the data in lossless global open formats, be consistent and share your entire microscopic model so the actual calculations linking observables to interior assumption is clear to everyone.
I am not sure about overlaps or what practical number of orthogonal states are required. Just measure EVERYTHING and keep both amplitudes and phase spectra and correlate like crazy. No one has ever mapped the interior of a black hole region. Passive correlation imaging should work, at least for radial solution, which fits your shell model.
Your idea of analytic continuation is not wrong but hard to tie to real data. From the outside, since you cannot easily see the whole interior, unless it has rotation and or turbulent magnetic fields, you can get a radial solution with phase noise correlations. I suggest trying detectors that focus on “quantum noise”. I keep forgetting to ask the Chinese and others to losslessly record their “quantum noise” which should be better tracked in some of the components of quantum computers now. Or in calibration and testing of components.
The ones on earth are going to pick up earth and solar system noise too, and mostly local gravitational potential fluctuations from many geophysical and human events and sources. It is NOT impossible, just tedious. I am not sure the best way to go, but those many arrays of radio telescope are capable of recording noise, if someone was not told “get rid of all that noise” when they decided the frequencies where the “good stuff” was supposed to be.
You have a good start, just by saying you can arbitrarily choose the way you model your microstates. The only big black holes are those galactic ones and they are almost guaranteed to have un-consolidated interiors. There is just not time for mixing by the required close interactions of nodes that were previously separate. I am fairly certain the interior cores will have macroscopic gluon “stuff” that can be any size depending on initial states you can randomly generate and model. So use your idle exa-scale computers. The neutron interior groups can just make theirs dense enough to trap light. All the (quark and) gluon stars can be black too. Do not forget that proton and gluon microstates will often bind with 1/r^3 magnetic potentials. (I think the big bang was a gluon condensation nova, maybe some can check one day).  And do not forget to look for black hole and neutron star “quakes”. That is why you need Hz KHz MHz GHz THz gravitational sensor arrays.

I really feel sorry for the human sacrifice, but just remember Galileo and Joe Weber. Joe was angry but resigned, and he got the last laugh with Robert Forward.

I posted this in my notes under “Mapping Interiors of Black Holes with Many Sensors”, but it could be “What black hole and neutron star interior models are not inconsistent with the exterior measurements?”

Best wishes,
Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation
Richard K Collins

About: Richard K Collins

Director, The Internet Foundation Studying formation and optimized collaboration of global communities. Applying the Internet to solve global problems and build sustainable communities. Internet policies, standards and best practices.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *