The errors in black hole research: a summary of our findings so far

We have made a lot of progress in analyzing various errors in theoretical black hole research done since the year 1960.

Empirical research of black holes is robust

The research which rests on empirical data is robust:

1. We know that black holes do not radiate much in the electromagnetic spectrum. Matter falling in a black hole does not produce the large flash that we would expect if there would exist a surface which it would hit.

2. We know that a binary pulsar radiates away energy at the rate predicted by general relativity.

3. We know that a merger of black holes or neutron stars generates gravitational waves which match the predictions of general relativity.

4. A collapse of a supernova seems to create either a neutron star or a black hole.

Theoretical research of the event horizon and singularities is not robust

1. The metric in the Einstein field equations seems to describe the behavior of a point test mass whose mass-energy is infinitesimal. People failed to calculate the backreaction to a normal particle whose mass is not infinitesimal, and came to believe that the event horizon has an infinite force and is a one-way membrane.

2. A one-way membrane breaks thermodynamics. Stephen Hawking tried to repair the drastic problem by inventing a very unlikely hypothesis about the existence of Hawking radiation. The hypothesis led to an even worse problem of broken unitarity, and the black hole information paradox. Now it was not just thermodynamics broken, but the time symmetry of laws of physics was broken.

3. Rather than question all the dubious steps, many researchers started to believe that Hawking radiation exists.

4. Suggested models to solve the black hole information paradox are very strange. There are ideas of teleportation, wormholes, the same history happening twice, holography, and so on.

5. The notion of the "geometry of spacetime" involves many problems, which are readily visible from the Einstein-Hilbert action. We have analyzed the problems in several blog posts in the past four months. As far as we know, there has been little research on these fundamental problems in the past six decades.

6. The switch from Schwarzschild coordinates to Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates, which eliminates a claimed "coordinate singularity", is mathematically incorrect, unless one accepts that a model of physics can calculate something which happens "after" an infinite time.

7. The supposed collapse of matter into a point singularity would happen "after" the infinite time has passed. Does that make sense?

8. Extending geometries and coordinate systems to include a white hole is extremely speculative.

9. The Schwarzschild metric inside the event horizon probably requires that the event horizon is a one-way membrane. Consequently, the inner metric probably does not describe a real black hole. In the Kerr solution there are even closed timelike loops inside the inner event horizon. It is very unlikely that the inner Kerr metric would be correct for a real black hole.