Monday, November 25, 2019

Blackholes, quasars, and galactic blackholes

In the sequel I summarize the dramatic progress which has taken place in the understanding of blackhole like entities (BHEs) in TGD framework. This picture allows to see also stars as BHEs. A more detailed representation can be found in the article Cosmic string model for the formation of galaxies and stars.

I have discussed a model of quasars earlier (see this) . The model is inspired by the notion of MECO and proposes that quasar has a core region analogous to black hole in the sense that the radius is apart from numerical factor near unit rS=2GM. This comes from mere dimensional analysis.

1. Blackholes in TGD framework

In TGD the metric of blackhole exterior makes sense and also part of interior is embeddable but there is not much point to consider TGD counterpart of blackhole interior, which represents failure of GRT as a theory of gravitation: the applicability of GRT ends at rS. The following picture is an attempt to combine ideas about hierarchy of Planck constant and from the model of solar interior (see this) deriving from the 10 year old nuclear physics anomaly.

  1. The TGD counterpart of blackhole would be maximally dense spaghetti formed from monopole flux tube. Stars would not be so dense spaghettis. A still open challenge is to formulate precise conditions giving the condition rS= 2GM. The fact that condition is "stringy" with T= 1/2G taking formally the role of string tension encourages the spaghetti idea with length of cosmic string/flux tube proportional to rS.

  2. The maximal string tension allowed by TGD is determined by CP2 radius and estimate for Kähler coupling strength as 1/αK ≈ 1/137 and is roughly Tmax∼ 10-7.5/G suggesting that in blackhole about 107.5 parallel flux tubes with maximal string tension and with length of about rS give rise to blackhole like entity. Kind of dipole core consisting of monopole flux tubes formed by these flux tubes comes in mind. The flux tubes could close to short flux tubes or flux tubes could continue like flux lines of dipole magnetic field and thicken so that the energy density would be reduced.

  3. This picture conforms with the proposal that the integer n appearing in effective Planck constant heff=n× h0 can be decomposed to a product n=m× r associated to space-time surface which is m-fold covering of CP2 and r-fold covering of M4. For r=1 m-fold covering property could be interpreted as a coherent structure consisting of m almost similar regions projecting to M4: one could say that one has field theory in CP2 with m-valued fields represented by M4 coordinates. For r=1 each region would correspond to r-valued field in CP2.

    This suggests that Newton's constant corresponds apart from numerical factors 1/G= mℏ/R2, where R is CP2 radius (the radius of geodesic circle). This gives m∼ 107.5 for gravitational flux tubes. The deviations of m from this value would have interpretation in term of observed deviations of gravitational constant from its nominal value. In the fountain effect of super-fluidity the deviation could be quite large (see this) .

    Smaller values of heff are assigned in the applications of TGD with the flux tubes mediating other than gravitational interactions, which are screened and should have shorter scale of quantum coherence. Could one identify corresponding Planck constant in terms of the factor r of m: heff = rhbar0? TGD leads also to the notion of gravitational Planck constant hbargr= GMm/v0 assigned to the flux tubes mediating gravitational interactions - presumably these flux tubes do not carry monopole flux.

  4. Length scale dependent cosmological constant should characterize also blackholes and the natural first guess is that the radius of the blackhole corresponds to the scaled defined by the value of cosmological constant. This allows to estimate the thickness of the flux tube by a scaling argument. The cosmological constant of Universe corresponds to length scale L=1/Λ1/2∼ 1026 m and the density ρ of dark energy corresponds to length scale r= ρ-1/4 ∼ 10-4 m. One has r= (8π r)1/4LlP1/2 giving the scaling law (r/r1)= (L/L1)1/2. By taking L1=rs(Sun)=3 km one obtains r1= .7× 10-15 m rather near to proton Compton length 1.3× 10-15 m and even nearer to proton charge radius .87× × 10-15 m. This suggests that the nuclei arrange into flux tubes with thickness of order proton size, kind of giant nucleus. Neutron star would be already analogous structure but the flux tubes tangled would not be so dense.

    Denoting the number of protons by N, the length of flux tube would be L1≈ Nlp== xrS (lp denotes proton Compton length) and the mass would be Nmp. This would give x as x= (lp/lPl)2 ∼ 1038. Note that the ratio of the volume filled by the flux tube to the M4 volume VS defined by rS is

    Vtube/VS = (3/8) (lP/lPl)2 × (lp/rS)2∼ 10 (rS(Sun)/rS)2 .

    The condition Vtube/VS<1 gives a lower bound to the Schwartschild radius of the object and therefore also to its mass: rS>101/2rS(Sun) and M>101/2M(Sun). The lower bound means that the flux tube fills the entire M4 volume of blackhole. Blackhole would be a volume filling flux tube with maximal mass density of protons (or rather, neutrons -) per length unit and therefore a natural endpoint of stellar evolution. The known lower limit for the mass of stellar blackhole is few stellar masses (see this) so that the estimate makes sense.

  5. An objection against this picture are very low mass stars with masses below .5M(Sun) (see this) not allowed for k≥ 107. They are formed in the burning of hydrogen and the time to reach white dwarf state is longer than the age of the universe. Could one give up the condition that flux tube volume is not larger than the volume of the star. Could one have dark matter in the sense of n2-sheeted covering over M4 increasing the flux tube volume by factor n2.

  6. This picture does not exclude star like structure realized in terms of analogs of protons for scaled up variants of hadron physics M89 hadron physics would have mass scale scaled up by a factor 512 with respect to standard hadron physcs characterized by Mersenne prime M107. The mass scale would correspond to LHC energy scale and there is evidence for a handful of bumps having interpretation as M89 mesons. It is of course quite possible that M89 baryons are unstable against transforming to M107 baryons.

  7. The model for star (see this) inspired by the 10 year old nuclear physics anomaly led to the picture that protons form at least in the core dark proton sequences associated with the flux tube and that the scaled up Compton length of proton is rather near to the Compton length of electron: there would be zooming up of proton by a factor about 211∼ mp/me. The formation of blackhole would mean reduction of heff by factor about 2-11 making dark protons and neutrons ordinary.

Can one see also stars as blackhole like entities?

The assignment of blackholes to almost any physical objects is very fashionable, and the universality of the flux tube structures encourages to ask whether the stellar evolution to blackhole as flux tube tangle could involve discrete steps involving blackhole like entities but with larger Planck constant and with larger radius of flux tube.

  1. Could one regard stellar objects as blackholes labelled by various values of Planck constant heff? Note that heff is determined essentially as the dimension n of the extension of rationals (see this and this). The possible p-adic length scales would correspond to the ramified primes of the extension. p-Adic length scale hypothesis selects preferred length scales as p≈ 2k, with prime values of k preferred. Mersennes and Gaussian Mersennes would be in favoured nearest to powers of 2.

    The most general hypothesis is that all values of k in the range [127,107] are allowed: this would give half-octaves spectrum for p-adc length scales. If only odd values of k are allowed, one obtains octave spectrum.

  2. The counterpart of Schwartchild radius would be rS(k)= (L(k)/L(107))2rS corresponding to the scaling of maximal string tension proportional to 1/G by L(107)/L(k)2, where k is consistent with p-adic length scale hypothesis.

    The flux tube area would be scaled up to L(k)2= 2k-107L(107)2, and the constant x== x(107) would scale to x(k)=2k-107x. Scaling guarantees that condition V(tube)/VS does not change at all so that the same lower bound to mass is obtained. Note that the argument do not give upper bound on the mass of star and this conforms with the surprisingly large masses participating in the fusion of blackholes producing gravitational radiation detected at LIGO.

  3. The favoured p-adic length scales between p-adic length scale L107 assignable to black hole and L(127) corresponding to electron Compton length assignable to solar interior are the p-adic length scale L(113)= 8L(127) assignable to nuclei, and the length scale L(109), which corresponds to p near prime power of two.

    1. For k=109 (assignable to deuteron) the value of the mass would be scaled by factor 4 to a lower about 12 km to be compared with the typical radius of neutron star about 10 km. The masses of neutron stars around about 1.4 solar masses, which is rather near to the lower bound derived for blackholes. Neutron star could be seen the last phase transition in the sequence of p-adic phase transition leading to the formation of blackhole.

    2. Could k=113 phase precede neutron stars and perhaps appear as an intermediate step in supernova? Assuming that the flux tubes consist of nucleons (rather than nuclei), one would have rS(113)= 64 rS giving in the case of Sun rS(113)=192 km.

    3. For k=127 the p-adic scaling from k=107 would give Schwartschild radius rS(127) ∼ 220rS. For Sun this would give rS(127)=3× 109 m is roughly by factor 4 larger than the radius of the solar photosphere radius 7× 108 meters. k=125 gives a correct result. This suggests that k=127 corresponds to the minimal value of temperature for ordinary fusion and corresponds to the value of dark nuclear binding energy at magnetic flux tubes.

      The evolution of stars increases the fraction of heavier elements created by hot fusion and also temperatures are higher for stars of later generations. This would suggest that the value of k is gradually reduced in stellar evolution and temperature increases as T∝ 2(127-k)/2. Sun would be in the second or third step as far the evolution of temperature is considered. Note that the lower bound on radius of star allows also larger radii so that the allowance of smaller values of k does not lead to problems.

2. What about blackhole thermodynamics?

Blackhole thermodynamics is part of the standard blackhole paradigm? What is the fate of this part of theoretical physics in light of the proposed model?

2.1. TGD view about blackholes

Consider first the natural picture implied the vision about blackhole as space-filling flux tube tangle.

  1. The flux tubes are deformations of cosmic strings characterized by cosmological constant which increases in the sequence of increasing the temperature of stellar core. The vibrational degrees of freedom are excited and characterized by a temperature. The large number of these degrees of freedom suggests the existence of maximal temperature known as Hagedorn temperature at which heat capacity approaches to infinity value so that the pumping of energy does not increase temperature anymore.

    The straightforward dimensionally motivated guess for the Hagedorn temperature is suggested by p-adic length scale hypothesis as T= xhbar/L(k) , where x is a numerical factor. For blackholes as k=107 objects this would give temperature of order 224 MeV for x=1. Hadron physics giving experimentally evidence for Hagedorn temperature about T=140 MeV near to pion mass and near to the scale determined by ΛQCD, which would be naturally relate to the hadronic value of the cosmological constant Λ.

    The actual temperature could of course be lower than Hagedorn temperature and it is natural to imagine that blackhole cools down. The Hagedorn temperature and also actual temperature would increase in the phase transition k→ k-1 increasing the value of Λ(k) by a factor of 2.

  2. The overall view about the situation would be that the thermal excitations of cosmic string die out by emissions assignable perhaps to black hole jets and also going to the cosmic string until a state function reduction decreasing the value of k occurs and the process repeats itself.

    The naive idea is that this process eventually leads to ideal cosmic string having Hagedorn temperature T= hbar/R and possible existing at very low temperature: this would conform with the idea that the process is the time reversal of the evolution leading from cosmic strings to astrophysical objects as tangles of flux tube. This would at least require a phase transition replacing M107 hadron physics with M89 hadron physics and this with subsequent hadron physics. One must of course consider also all values of k as possible options as in the case of the evolution of star. The hadron physics assignable to Mersenne primes and their Gaussian counterparts could only be especially stable against a phase transition increasing Λ (k).

2.2. What happens to blackhole thermodynamics in TGD?

Blackhole thermodynamics (see this) has produced admirable amounts of literature during years. What is the fate of the blackhole thermodynamics in this framework? It turns out that the the dark counterpart of of Hawking radiation makes sense if one accepts the notion of gravitational Planck constant assigned to gravitational flux tube and depending on masses assignable to the flux tube. The condition that dark Hawking radiation and flux tubes at Hagedorn temperature are in thermal radiation implying TB,dark= TH. The emerging prediction TH is consistent with the value of the hadronic Hagedorn temperature.

  1. In standard blackhole thermodynamics the blackhole temperature TB identifiable identifiable as the temperature of Hawking radiation (see this) is essentially the surface gravity at horizon and equal to TB= κ/2π= hbar/4π rS is analogous to Hagedorn temperature as far as dimensional analysis is considered. One could think of assigning TB to the radial pulsations of blackhole like object but it is very difficult to understand how the thermal isolation between stringy degrees of freedom and radial oscillation degrees of freedom could be possible.

  2. The ratio TB/TH ∼ Lp/4π rS would be extremely small for ordinary value of Planck constant. Situation however changes if one has

    TB= hbareff/4π rS ,

    with hbareff= nhbar0=hbargr, where hbargr is gravitational Planck constant.

    The gravitational Planck constant hbargr was originally introduced by Nottale (see this and this) assignable to gravitational flux tube (presumably non-monopole flux tube) connecting dark mass MD and mass m (M and m touch the flux tubes but do not define its ends as assumed originally) is given by

    hbargr= GMDm/v0 ,

    where v0<c is velocity parameter. For the Bohr orbit model of inner planets Nottale assumes MD= M(Sun) and β0=v0/c≈ 2-11. For blackholes one expects that one has β0<1 is not too far from β0=1.

    The identification of MD is not quite clear. I have considered the problem how v0 and MD are determined in (see this and this). For the inner planets of Sun one would have β0∼ 2-11 ∼ me/mp. Note that the size of dark proton would be that of electron, and one could perhaps interpret 1/β0 as the heff/hbar assignable to dark protons in Sun. This would solve the long standing problem about identification of β0.

  3. One would obtain for the Hawking temperature TB,D of dark Hawking radiation with heff=hgr

    TB,D= (ℏgr/ℏ) TB= (1/8π β0)× (MD/M) × m .

    For k=107 blackhole one obtains

    TB,D/TH = ( ℏgr/ℏ)× TB× (L(107)/xℏ)= (1/8π β0(107))× (MD/M) × (L(107)m/xℏ) .

    For m=mp this gives

    TB,D/TH = ℏgr/ℏ) TB× (L(107)/xℏ)= (1/8π x β0(107))× (MD/M) × (mp/224 MeV) .

    The order of magnitude of thermal energy is determined by mp. The thermal energy of dark Hawking photon would depend on m only and would be gigantic as compared to that of ordinary Hawking photon.

  4. Thermal equilibrium between flux tubes and dark Hawking radiation looks very natural physically. This would give


    giving the constraint

    (ℏgr/ℏ) TB ×( L(107)/xℏ)= (1/8π x β0)× (MD/M) (mp/224 MeV)=1 .

    on the parameters. For M/MD=1 this would give xβ0≈ 1/6.0 conforming with the expectation that β0 is not far from its upper limit.

  5. If ordinary stars are regarded as blackholes in the proposed sense, one can assign dark Hawking radiation also with them. The temperature is scaled down by L(107)/L(k) and for Sun this would give factor of L(107)/L(125)=2-9 if one requires that rS(k) corresponds to solar radius. This would give

    TB(dark,k)→ (ℏgr/ℏ)× (L(107)/L(k)) TB= (2(k-107)/2/8π β0)× (MD/M) × m .

    For k=125 and MD= M this would give TB(dark,125)= m/2π.

    The condition TB,D= TH for k=125 would require scaling of β0(107) to β(125)= 2-9β0(107) ≈ 2-11. This would give β0(107)≈ 1/4 in turn giving x ≈ .66 implying TH≈ 149 MeV. The replacement of mp=1 GeV with correct value .94 GeV improves the value. This value is consistent with the value of hadronic Hagedorn temperature so that there is remarkable internal consistency involved although a detailed understanding is lacking.

  6. The flux of ordinary Hawking thermal radiation is T4B/ℏ3. The flux of dark Hawking photons would be T4B,dark/ℏgr3 = (ℏgr/ℏ) TB4 and therefore extremely low also now also. In principle however the huge energies of the dark Hawking quanta might make them detectable. I have already earlier proposed that TB(hgr) could be assigned with gravitational flux tubes so that thermal radiation from blackhole would make sense as dark thermal radiation having much higher energies.

    One can however imagine a radical re-interpretation. BHE is not the thermal object emitting thermal radiation but BHE plus gravitational flux tubes are the object carrying thermal radiation at temperature TH= TB. For this option dark Hawking radiation could play fundamental role in quantum biology as will be found.

  7. What about the analog of blackhole entropy given by

    SB= A/4G= π lPl2TB2 ,

    where A= 4π rS2 is blackhole surface area. This corresponds intuitively to the holography inspired idea that horizon decomposes to bits with area of order lP2?

    The flux tube picture does not support this view. One however ask whether the volume filling property of flux tube could effectively freeze the vibrational degrees of flux tubes. Or whether these degrees of freedom are thermally frozen for ideal blackhole. If so, only the ends of he flux tubes at the surface or their turning points (in case that they are turn back) can oscillate radially. This would give an entropy proportional to the area of the surface but using flux tube transversal area as a unit. This would give apart from numerical constant

    SB= A/4L(k)2 .

2.3. Constraint from ℏgr/ℏ>1

Under what conditions mass m can interact quantum gravitationally and are thus allowed in hgr for given MD?

  1. The notion of hgr makes sense only for hgr>h. If one has hgr<h assume hgr=h. An alternative would be hgr=→ h0=h/6 for hgr<h0. This would given GMDm/v0>hbarmin (hbarmin=hbar or hbar/6) leading

    m>( β0ℏ/2rS(MD)) × (ℏmin/ℏ) .

    This condition is satisfied in the case of stellar blackholes for all elementary particles.

  2. One can strengthen this condition so that it would satisfied also for gravitational interactions of two particles with the same mass (MD=m). This would give

    m/mPl01/2 .

    For β0=1 this would give m=mPl, which corresponds to a mass scale of a large neuron and to size scale 10-4 m. β0(125)=2-11 gives mass scale of cell and size scale about 10-5 meters. β0(127)≈ 2-12 corresponding to minimum temperature making hot fusion possible gives length scale about 10-6 m of cell nucleus. A possible interpretation is that the structure in cellular length scale have quantum gravitational interaction via gravitational flux tubes. Biological length scales would be raised in special position from the point of view of quantum gravitation.

  3. Also interactions of structures smaller than the size of cell nucleus with structures with size larger the size of cell nucleus are possible. By writing the above condition as (m/mPl)(MD/mpl)>β0, one sees that from a given solution to the condition one obtains solutions by scaling m→ xm and MD→ MD/x. For β0(127)≈ 2-11 corresponding to the scale of cell nucleus the atomic length scale 10-10 m and length scale 10-4 m of large neuron would correspond to each other as "mirror" length scales. There would be no quantum gravitational interactions between structures smaller than cell nucleus. There would be master-slave relationship: the smaller the scale of slave, the larger the scale of the master.

2.4. Quantum biology and dark Hawking radiation

The scaling formula β0(k)∝ 1/L(k) with flux tube thickness scale given by L(k) allows to estimate β0(k). In this manner one obtains also biologically interesting length scales. An interesting question is whether the scales for the velocities of Ca waves (see this) and nerve pulse conduction velocity could relate to v0.

  1. The tube thickness about 10-4 m, which corresponds to ordinary cosmological constant being in this sense maximal corresponds to the p-adic length scale k=171. The scaling of β0∝ 1/L(k) gives v0(171)∼ 4.7 μm/s. In eggs the velocity of Ca waves varies in the range 5-14 μm/s, which roughly corresponds to range k∈ {171,170,169,168}.

    In other cells Ca wave velocity varies in the range 15-40 μm/s. k=165 corresponds to 37.7 μm/s near the upper bound 40 μm/s. The lower bound corresponds to k=168. k=167, which corresponds to the larges Gaussian Mersenne in the series assignable to k∈{151,157,163,167} the velocity is 75 μm/s.

  2. For k=127 gives v0∼ 75 m/s. k=131 corresponds to v0= 18 m/s. These velocities could correspond to conduction velocities for nerve pulses in accordance with the view that the smaller the slave, the larger the master.

I have already earlier considered that dark Hawking radiation could have important role in living matter. The Hawking/Hagedorn temperature assuming x=1/6.0 k=L(171) has peak energy 38 meV to be compared with the membrane potential varying in the range 40-80 meV. Room temperature corresponds to 34 meV. For k=163 defining Gaussian Mersenne one would have peak energy about .6 eV: the nominal value of metabolic energy quantum is .5 eV. k=167 corresponds to .15 eV and 8.6 μm - cell size. Even dark photons proposed to give bio-photons when transforming to ordinary photons could be seen as dark Hawking radiation: Gaussian Mersenne k=157 corresponds to 4.8 eV in UV. Could CMB having peak energy of .66 meV and peak wavelength of 1 mm correspond to Hawking radiation associated with k= 183? Interestingly, cortex contains 1 mm size structures.

To sum up, these considerations suggest that biological length scales defined by flux tube thickness and cosmological length scales defined by cosmological constant are related.

See the article Cosmic string model for the formation of galaxies and stars or the chapter of "Physics in many-sheeted space-time" with the same title.

For a summary of earlier postings see Latest progress in TGD.

Articles and other material related to TGD.

No comments: