White holes?

[neutron_star6]

Me and a couple others were talking and one of them brought up white holes. Are they just a myth or actually real? And what exactly are they?

 

[mental_avenger]

Are you sure you want the truth?<br /><br />Black holes are not only merely a theory, they are a misnomer. “Black holes”, if they exist, would be the furthest thing from a hole that can possibly exits. It therefore follows, that “white hole”, the supposed “exit” of a black hole, are also hypothetical. I prefer to refer to them as hyperdensities, a much more accurate name. In addition, Hawking radiation shows that hyperdensities can radiate energy, making it unnecessary to create imaginary “white holes” as a place for the matter and energy that enters a hyperdensity to exit. In short, “worm holes” and “white holes” may facilitate science fiction stories, but that is all.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>

 

[neutron_star6]

Yes, that is exactly what my friend said they were. Just an exit place for the matter, but the black holes would just drop off the matter in a different part of space. So, if the white holes do exist wouldnt light just as well be transferred to a different point?

 

[neutron_star6]

Well as you know we didnt know that black holes really existed and we proved that they do so are they just the opposite of just a black hole?

 

[mental_avenger]

A “black hole”, if it exists as predicted, would not a hole. It would be an extremely compact mass of matter. As such, matter that “entered” it , would simply become part of it. It is only science fiction that pretends that it is a hole that things can go through.<br /><br />OK, imagine this. Let’s say we send a rocket probe to the Sun. When it gets to the Sun, what happens to it? It is drawn in by the Sun’s gravity, and the violent forces in the Sun break it down into it’s component atoms. It becomes part of the Sun. Now, imagine that the entire Sun is the size of a baseball. At the surface, the force of gravity is so strong that not even light can escape. Anything that goes into this very small Sun is simply squashed by the Universe’s most efficient trash compactor, and it becomes part of the Sun.<br /><br />How can the “opposite” of that exist?<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>

 

[neutron_star6]

Havent they proven that the black holes do exist? Im pretty sure they have. But yes it is wrong to call them holes. They are nothing more than cushing down particle compactors. It is also right to call them holes because thats all they are. Basically its like a vaccum that sucks all particles and whirls them around while crushing them. Which brings up another question what exactly creates black holes?

 

[mooware]

I believe that this is the premise. However, a point of infinite density seems too much. It seems to me if you had INFINITE density, it would suck in everything in the universe. How about insanely incredible density?

 

[neutron_star6]

That seems to make a litle more sense than infinite density. You are right that if it did have infinite, just one could consume the entire universe.

 

[nexium]

I would like think most of the matter and energy inside the event horizon of a black hole is not at the exact center. A singularity that is a perfect point would be a difficult target for a quark which is also very small. I picture the quark missing the singularity nearly always, and the resulting sling shot manuver = gravity assist manuver carring the quark back almost to the inside of the event horizon. How often does a comet or asteriod hit our sun, and our sun is the biggest target in our solar system? What happens when two quarks collide at 0.99999 c?<br /> My guess is the accreation disc continues uninterupted inside the event horizon right down to the center. Neil

 

[robnissen]

"Let’s say we send a rocket probe to the Sun. When it gets to the Sun, what happens to it? It is drawn in by the Sun’s gravity, and the violent forces in the Sun break it down into it’s component atoms. It becomes part of the Sun. Now, imagine that the entire Sun is the size of a baseball. At the surface, the force of gravity is so strong that not even light can escape. Anything that goes into this very small Sun is simply squashed by the Universe’s most efficient trash compactor, and it becomes part of the Sun."<br /><br />Your analogy is incorrect, and in fact a black hole is closer to being a "black hole" than it is anything else. The reason your analogy is incorrect (and the reason that a black hole is an accurate name), is that the "trash compactor" never stops "compacting." Once matter crosses the event horizon of a black hole, it does not just get "squished" down and become part of the black hole (as your space ship does). Rather it continues to be squished down into a smaller and smaller volume forever. The reason why this squishing goes on forever, is that NOTHING in the universe can overcome the extreme gravitational force that is inside a black hole. For example, if the event horizon is 100 miles across, the black hole is completely empty except for the singularity at the center that is a point infinitely small, but it does not have infinite mass. Rather that infinitely small point has the entire mass of the black hole, which is 99.9999999999999999999999999999% void, which is in fact pretty much a black hole. The problem with a black hole, is that because the "squishing" never stops as the singularity gets smaller and smaller because NOTHING can overcome the gravitational forces and prevent the singularity from continuing to squish, is what happens to all that mass as the singularity approaches and becomes smaller than the volume of a quark. One speculation, but there is no science to support it, is that all that mass gets squeezed out of the part o

 

[neutron_star6]

What I think happens to the matter as it continuosly gets smaller and smaller is that it just goes on forever like you have stated. In a way it will be very unlikely that white holes do exist, but at the same time we never thought that the universe was expanding and had evidence to prove it, we also never thought that black holes existed and what our universe is mostly comprised of. I think that the matter goes down deeper into the black hole forever continuing to get smaller and smaller.

 

[Maddad]

neutron_star6<br />"<font color="yellow">Havent they proven that the black holes do exist? Im pretty sure they have.</font><br /><br />We need to be careful with the word proof. In science you do not prove ideas; you try to disprove them. The more you try to disprove them, and fail, the stronger the idea becomes. We never reach the point where we claim that we have proved the idea, but sometimes we do say that we've tested the idea so thoroughly that it's highly likely to be correct.<br /><br />Consider Sir Isaac Newton's model of gravity. It successfully withstood all attempts to disprove it for 300 years. Finally, in 1919, we got experimental evidence that his model wsa not quite complete. Although in absolute terms we've disproved Newton, for almost all practical purposes his model is good enough. NASA uses it for plotting all the orbits to the various planets even though it's not totally pervect.<br /><br />As for the black hole, we have an ever increasing set of observations that are consistent with their existence. We're not likely to hold one in our hands any time soon, so it's hard to get to the point where we're so certain of them that we consider their existence to be as sure as that of gravity, but we're not too far away from it.

 

[qzzq]

nexium,<br /><br />You posted: --<i>I picture the quark missing the singularity nearly always, and the resulting sling shot manuver = gravity assist manuver carring the quark back almost to the inside of the event horizon.</i><br /><br />Once inside the event horizon, all possible paths the quark can take lead to the singularity. So no slingshot manouvres. <br /><br />Do black holes exist? The scientific evidence is so overwhelming, it's hard to say they don't. We can view accretional disks around black holes. We can view large eruptions of X-rays when large objects plunge through the event horizon. We can see light of distant stars being bend by the black hole's gravitational force.<br /><br />This is from Universe Today: <ul type="square">Second Black Hole at the Heart of the Milky Way <br /><br />Summary - (Nov 5, 2004) A French/US team of astronomers have discovered a second black hole is lurking at the heart of our Milky Way galaxy, completely separate from the supermassive black hole that we've known about for years. This new object, IRS 13E, contains only 1,400 stellar masses, which is much less that the 4 million stellar masses of our supermassive black hole. IRS 13E probably used to be located far away from the galactic centre, where a cluster of stars could safely form. All that's left now are a few massive stars whipping around the black hole as it spirals towards the centre of our galaxy.</ul>More at the link. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>***</p> </div>

 

[tom_hobbes]

I thought radio emissions from black holes had already been imaged? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#339966"> I wish I could remember<br /> But my selective memory<br /> Won't let me</font><font size="2" color="#99cc00"> </font><font size="3" color="#339966"><font size="2">- </font></font><font size="1" color="#339966">Mark Oliver Everett</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[qzzq]

Yeah, they also cause quite a stirr when they move through gas clouds. You can also detect the emission jets at the poles of the BH.<br /><br />Here's an APOD pic taken by the Chandra X-ray Observatory of our galactic center. http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041106.html<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p>***</p> </div>

 

[nexium]

Maybe all paths a millimeter inside the event horizon lead to the sigularity, but in a very long lumpy spiral. I think that is also true one millimeter outside the event horizon, except perhaps a one in a trillion chance the partical will escape. Neil

 

[neutron_star6]

It is very hard to disprove that they exist. Considering we have done test after test on them like you said just to prove that they dont exist. You are right we usually just try to see if we can disprove the idea before we have an overwhelming evidence saying that something, like black holes, do exist. We tried to disprove that the universe is expanding for example. What we wanted to see is that it was probably shrinking, well later on we saw that it wasnt and was indeed expanding. So you are right. We just have more evidence about black holes existing than what we have saying they dont.

 

[dragon04]

I'd be inclined to believe that a white hole is a neat idea for a Sci Fi movie script but not much more than that.<br /><br />I'm a lay person but if I have this right, the mass of a black hole doesn't interact any differently with its surroundings than any other body.<br /><br />In other words, anything outside the event horizon of a 2 billion solar mass black hole will be affected only by the normal gravitational effect of an object with that mass.<br /><br />Other objects with sufficient velocity outside the event horizon won't be sucked in. Which is why supermassive black holes in the center of galaxies aren't cosmic vacuum cleaners gobbling up all matter in their respective galaxies.<br /><br />I would think the same applies to smaller black holes that are created due to the implosion of a super massive single star. <br /><br />Even after it implodes. it still follows the laws of physics and orbits the galactic center like everything else. I would think that eventually, its orbit would clear a path around it much like gas giants do during the formation of solar systems. Just on a larger scale.<br /><br />All that editorial to come to a brief lay person's point. Should a black hole perhaps rip the fabric of space time long enough to emit matter or energy into another dimension or transmit it to another point in OUR space time, it wouldn't last very long unless the singularity was fed mass constantly to sustain the event.<br /><br />That makes it seem unlikely to me that there even is such a thing.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <em>"2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!".</em> </div>

 

[mental_avenger]

<font color="yellow">It is very hard to disprove that they exist. Considering we have done test after test on them like you said just to prove that they dont exist. </font><br /><br />Since it is not certain that hyperdensities (black holes) even exist, I am curious as to what testing we have done on them, “test after test”. AFAIK, hte closest we have come to a “test” of any kind, is observing gravitational lensing near a particular area of space. It is possible that such lensing is being caused by a mass of “dark matter”, or some other object we have not yet classified. Any “emissions” that we have detected, that are attributed to hyperdensities, could have been created by other objects or events we are not yet aware of.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>

 

[neutron_star6]

Yes I know that any matter outside of the event horizon will just circulate the outside of the black hole and not be caused to be sucked in towards. I know that already. You are right that no matter what size black hole that you have the matter that is outside of it will always just circulate around because of the gravitation pull of it. Its very similar to our sun, just in that sense of course.

 

[neutron_star6]

Maybe thats what I was thinking of the time I was typing the post. I was most likely thinking of dark matter, probably getting the two confused. Dont know how I managed to do that though but it happens with the best of us. I do know that we have at least done one type of test on them though. Just seeing if something exerts any emissions but that was the only extent of a test we have done. You probably wouldnt even call it a test.

 

[diogenes]

White holes are allowed by the math of black holes, Schwarzschild geometry.<br /><br />White holes require negative entropy and exist only with a negative square root. That makes them exceptionally unlikely.<br /><br />Some more information. http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/schww.html<br /><br />

 

[alokmohan]

The universe is a white hole.It repels matter.opposite to black hole picture.

 

[neutron_star6]

How is the universe like a white hole? How does it repel the matter?

 

[mental_avenger]

One of the most profound truths of mathematics is that mathematics can create situations that cannot occur in real space. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p style="margin-top:0in;margin-left:0in;margin-right:0in" class="MsoNormal"><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" color="#ff0000"><strong>Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space.</strong></font></p> </div>