The no-hair conjecture states that a black hole is completely characterized by its mass, electric charge, and angular momentum. Most physicists take it as given. My question is, why?
- It implies the black hole information paradox, which violates time reversibility and quantum mechanics in a way that is some what difficult to reconcile.
- Analogous theorems, such as the four-dimensional equivalent, is outright false, which doesn't lend to the theorem being true.
- We have no evidence for the no-hair conjecture being true as far as I can tell. It would be difficult to find direct evidence until we could observe a black hole closer.
The only thing in favor of the no-hair conjecture that I can see is Steven Hawking proved that some hard to justify assumptions would imply it. Oh, and a lot of people mistake it for a theorem (which it isn't), which could confuse people into thinking it must be true?
Why is the no-hair conjecture taken as given?
Note: The question "Black hole "no hair" theorem" only addresses why a black hole must have mass and magnetic hair. It doesn't address why there isn't other types of hair.
