3 ms·

Not necessarily. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox

• spriggan3 10y ago
  > Information is stored in a baby universe that separates from our own universe I like this idea, but then it means that there is no universe but multiverses, yet these multiverses need to be part of a greater structure or container, right ? do we have clues that strongly suggest the multiverse theory ?
  • x5n1 10y ago
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/black-holes-are-a-passage-to-another-universe-says-stephen-hawking-10471397.html http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/black-holes-are-a-... We have many theories but little evidence of any of the theories having to do with black holes.
  • Ruud-v-A 10y ago
    From a practical point of view, the baby universe theory is no different than the “information is lost” theory. Although it might be satisfying to think that information is not “really lost”, there is no way in which we -- in our universe -- would be able to tell the difference. The distinction is philosophical, not physical. There is a different theory not mentioned prominently on that page that in my opinion provides the most useful resolution: Black Hole Complementarity. In a sense it is not a satisfying resolution, because it basically states “the paradox is not a paradox”. It is very counter-intuitive, but that is a problem with intuition. The wave-particle duality of light, which is nowadays not really considered a paradox any more although it was ~110 years ago, is a good analogy. As always happens with questions like these, in the end the answer is “that is a nonsensical question to ask”.