Differences and discrepancies between the description of the black hole according to general relativity and quantum field theory.

The description of black holes in general relativity (GR) and quantum field theory (QFT) highlights some fundamental differences and discrepancies between these two pillars of modern physics. Here's an overview:

→ General Relativity's View of Black Holes

1. \*\*Event Horizon\*\*: GR predicts the existence of an event horizon, a boundary beyond which nothing, not even light, can escape. This concept is central to the definition of a black hole in GR.

2. \*\*Singularity\*\*: At the core of a black hole, GR predicts a singularity, a point where the curvature of spacetime becomes infinite and physical laws as we know them cease to function.

3. \*\*No Hair Theorem\*\*: This theorem states that a black hole is completely described by only three externally observable classical parameters: mass, electric charge, and angular momentum. This implies that all other information about the matter that formed a black hole is lost.

4. \*\*Classical Mechanics\*\*: GR treats black holes using classical mechanics, without considering quantum effects. It describes gravity as the curvature of spacetime caused by mass and energy.

5. \*\*Deterministic\*\*: GR is fundamentally deterministic, meaning that the future of a system can be perfectly predicted given complete information about its current state.

→ Quantum Field Theory's Perspective on Black Holes

1. \*\*Hawking Radiation\*\*: QFT, when applied to the curved spacetime around black holes, predicts Hawking radiation – the emission of particle-antiparticle pairs due to quantum effects near the event horizon. This implies that black holes can evaporate over time, conflicting with the GR perspective.

2. \*\*Quantum Fluctuations and Uncertainty\*\*: At the quantum scale, the concept of a sharply defined event horizon becomes problematic due to quantum fluctuations, leading to the idea that the location of the horizon could be uncertain.

3. \*\*Information Paradox\*\*: QFT suggests that information about matter falling into a black hole should not be lost and should be encoded in the Hawking radiation, contrasting with the 'no hair theorem' of GR.

4. \*\*Quantum Mechanics\*\*: QFT treats particles and fields at the quantum level, incorporating principles like uncertainty and the wave-particle duality, which are absent in GR.

5. \*\*Probabilistic Nature\*\*: Unlike GR, QFT is inherently probabilistic, meaning that it can only predict the likelihood of an outcome, not a definite future.

→ Key Discrepancies and Challenges

- \*\*Singularity vs. Quantum Effects\*\*: The singularity predicted by GR conflicts with quantum mechanics, which avoids infinite values. QFT does not predict singularities, indicating a fundamental inconsistency in our understanding of spacetime at extreme scales.
- \*\*Information Loss\*\*: The idea that information can be lost in black holes (as per GR) contradicts the principles of quantum mechanics, leading to the famous black hole information paradox.

- \*\*Unification Challenge\*\*: One of the biggest challenges in modern theoretical physics is to develop a consistent theory that combines GR and QFT to describe phenomena like black holes. Such a theory would have to account for both the curvature of spacetime and quantum effects.

These differences underscore the ongoing quest in physics to reconcile general relativity and quantum field theory, potentially through a theory of quantum gravity.

The Universe is continuous (we know it from all the lab data; CERN, Fermilab, etc.) thus nowadays quantum gravity is wrong. My opinion is that even it's title is wrong, because the phenomena are continuous. Continuous Entropic Diffusion of Timeflow (internal clock) is a better name for a future theory of gravity.