This is a wrong-headed question to ask about theoretical physics. People have this idea that you can just say crazy physics things and they might be true, but that&#x27;s not even close to the case. If you want to reach the level of <i>conjecture</i>, there are some incredibly high hurdles to pass. Your conjecture has to be consistent with <i>both</i>—<i>both</i> general relativity and quantum mechanics, probably the two most experimentally accurate and successful scientific theories in the history of the human race.<p>Here&#x27;s a great lecture on this question of &quot;well don&#x27;t we need experiments? Is this all crazy physics conjecture?&quot;<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cornell.edu&#x2F;video&#x2F;nima-arkani-hamed-philosophy-of-fundamental-physics-1" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cornell.edu&#x2F;video&#x2F;nima-arkani-hamed-philosophy-of...</a><p>Black holes are the phenomena where quantum mechanics and gravity collide most intensely, and even <i>theories</i> of black hole physics compatible with both GR and QM are major achievements.<p>Edit: Although I agree the article is fairly opaque.