🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <948412578.954343@marvin>,
  "$toffel" <stoffel@kotnet.org> wrote:
> You seem to know something about black holes,

Actually very few people know (even less) about
black holes. Try a fellow named S. Hawking (s = superman).
Or, if you're something of a beginner, you could go to:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/htmltest/rjn_bht.html

They have some marvelous material & graphics there on it.

> could you help me with
> the
> following problem?
>
> To make it short: how can you explain that the entropy increases in
> the
> forming of a black hole? All matter is squeesed into one point so
> there
> can't be that much disorder I guess.

Take this into consideration: Since we know so little about
what goes on inside black holes, it may well be that the
particles of matter we are familiar with out here... are torn up
and chewed up inside a black hole; and that another set of
laws of physics are in effect in there--In which case it's not
really possible to speak with any degree of certainty about
exactly what is going on inside a black hole (most especially
of all one which has swallowed a goodly portion of a galaxy).
Although a black hole is, in a sense, a collapse star... it's
really gone beyond this and into another kind of object
altogether.

> Supposed that the big-bang was an exploding black hole, how can in
> this
> process entropy increase (since it also increased in the forming of
> the
> black hole wich is the opposit) ?

Don't suppose that: The Big Bang never happened, nor
will it ever happen. The present day universe of galaxies
will in future become one probably without galaxies (and
perhaps maybe even a universe where only black holes
exist).

When a star forms it forms out of present day particles.
These particles can engage in nuclear fission/fusion; but this
does not mean that the particles which preceded modern-day
particles could also engage in this same sort of nuclear
fission/fusion. The point being that one just cannot predict
what sort of "object" such prehistoric particles may be able
or not able to form... including even the infamous pre-Big
Bang singularity.

> I may have been a bit inaccurate the way I asked these questions
> because I
> really don't know to much about these things but I hope you know what
> I
> mean.
>
> Christophe

Working at explaining what one means, Christophe, is always
only half the job--The job is always completed when
somebody else completes his/her work of understanding it.

S D Rodrian
sdr@t-three.com
http://members.aol.com/prebigbang


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.