Wormholes: Gateways to another universe?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Z

zero_cool

Guest
The Einstein- Rosen Bridge- The relativistic description of the black hole comes from the work of Karl Schwarzschild. In 1916, barely a few months after Einstein worte down his celebrated equations. Schwarzsghild was able to solve Einsteins equations exactly and calculate the gravitational field of a massive, stationary star. <br />Schwarzschild's solution has several interesting features.<br /> First, a "point of no return" surrounds the black hole. Any object that comes closer than this radius will inevitably be sucked into the blak hole, with no possibility of its escape, (i know most people on here, know all of this, but bear with me on this, some of this is basics.) Inexorably, any person unfortunate enough to come within the Schwarzschild radius would be captured by the black hole and crushed to death. Today, this distance from the black hole is called the "Schwarzschild Radius" or the "Event Horizon"(the farthest visible point)<br /><br />Second, anyone wo fell within the the Schwarzschild radius would be aware of a "mirror universe" on the "other side" of space-time. Einstein was not worried about the existence of this bizarre mirror universe because communication iwht it was impossible. any space probe sent into the center of a BH would encounter infinate curvature; that is, the gravitational field would be infinate, any material object would be crushed. The electrons would be ripped off atoms and even protons and neutrons within the nuclei themselves would be riped apart. Also, to penetrate through to the alternative universe, the probe would have to go faster than the speed of light, which is not possible in some minds, but i think otherwise, and ill explain that in another thread so look for it, but anyways, this mirror universe is mathematically necessary to make sense of the Schwarzschild solution, it could never be observed physically. Cosequently, the celebrated 'Einstein-Rosen Bridge" connecting these two universes was considered a mathematical quirk. T
 
S

scull

Guest
For traversable wormholes, I would look into the works of Thorne and Visser...<br /><br /><br /><br />--
 
C

CalliArcale

Guest
Cool, but I'm afraid you're way over my head. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> I have a purely layperson's understanding of physics. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>
 
U

unlearningthemistakes

Guest
my opinion:<br /><br />blackholes ( in reality )does not look like the drawings you provided ---- /> it is flat dimensioned. It dont believe its effect are flat (speaking of top view) that something can be thrown in to the middle of the hole. every facet of the hole is the hole itself. either top/down, left or right you will still be sucked once you touched the event horizon ( as I see it, danger zone/radius )<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>pain is inevitable</p><p>suffering is optional </p> </div>
 
Z

zero_cool

Guest
unlearningthemistakes, i understand what you said in your last comment, but i dont really think you (or anyone for that matter) could put what you said on paper, it would look like as if space was a piece of paper, and the black hole is a circle or square on that sheet of paper..., so if i threw lets say a large rock and it hit the very edge of that square or circle on the "sheet of paper" it would immediately be compressed to the size of an atom, instead of floating around in the event horizon for a split second until it got sucked into the singularity, so what youre saying is, the WHOLE square or cirlce is the sigularity its self? if i am wrong on how i perceived what you said, please correct me
 
A

averygoodspirit

Guest
Zero_cool:<br /><br />The way I understand it, and someone correct me if I’m wrong, Kerr holes are non-rotational black holes. A black hole is formed by the collapse of a very massive, secondary stage, red giant star that has used up nearly all of its hydrogen fuel and is no longer fusing adequate amounts of hydrogen into helium. The pressure of the nuclear fusion reaction in the core of the star is no longer capable of overcoming the gravitational forces created by the mass of the star. This causes the star to collapse in upon itself forming a very dense point of singularity with an enormous gravitational field. Most stars like ours rotate. Non-rotating stars that collapse to form black holes would form a Kerr hole. <br /><br />The gravitation field created by a massive black hole is so powerful that the gravitational well in the fabric of space time is very deep. The gravity well is so deep that there is a very distinct and observable difference between what lies inside and outside of it. The black hole appears perfectly round because the point of singularity is tiny, but spherical in shape. The reason the black hole would be observable is because there would be a band of energetic molecular gas, and subatomic photon emitting particles surrounding the black hole just outside the black hole’s event horizon. The hole created in the fabric of space time is not large, it’s just deep. As long as you don’t get too close to the event horizon, you can get pretty close to the black hole. <br /><br />Here is another way to look at it. In your back yard, you dig a well that is 200 feet deep and 10 feet in diameter. You can walk right up to the hole and look down inside of it, but if you step into the hole, you are going to go for a ride straight down 200 feet. You can run around the outside of the well all you want, but no amount of centripetal force, which would be the equivalent of running around the inside wall of the well is going to stop you from hitting the bottom of the wel <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
 
N

neutron_star69

Guest
<font color="yellow">How do you know any of that is true?</font>
 
N

neutron_star69

Guest
and what is significant of a black hole consuming 2 billion times the sun's mass? what do you think will happen?
 
Z

zero_cool

Guest
well, honestly neutron, i dont think there IS a star 2 billion times bigger than our sun, but IF there is, the black hole would suck it up, but it would take a very long time, it would be like draining an olympic sized swimming pool through a drain the size of a pin hole, its gnna take awhile, and the black hole might even evaporate due to hawkings radiation before it finishes...hope i answered clear enough for ya!!
 
N

neutron_star69

Guest
he said the black hole could take in 2 millino times more than the suns mass so that would mean it wouldnt take long at all
 
R

rhinorulz

Guest
a theory: when two black holes conect the bleck holes form an time warp to the second the black holes conected.
 
R

rhinorulz

Guest
if these black holes formed between two galicies it might happen
 
Z

zero_cool

Guest
well neutron, i think what rhino is trying to say is: If a black hole were to form berween two closely seperated galaxies that if someone where flying into the black hole from the galaxy on the left (or whichever one vice versa) it would slingshot the spacecraft so fast that time would be pretty much out of the picture, so i think thats what he meant by "time warp" so yeah hope i cleared that one up
 
N

neutron_star69

Guest
so what would end up happening to the spacecraft and where would it end up?
 
Z

zero_cool

Guest
im assuming that it would slingshot around in a circular motion and end up next to the galaxy on the right, or vice versa, well if the spacecraft was strong enough nothing would happen to it, but if it wasnt, id assume that it would disinegrate from the tidal forces
 
T

trisco

Guest
now let's imagine we are inside the spacecraft. What would we see as we went through the wormhole? Would it be like in the movies; going through an acual tube? Or, what I believe, it would be like stepping through a door...sort of... instantaneous movement from one point to the next.
 
Z

zero_cool

Guest
Well theoredically you wouldnt see anything, you'd be going so fast that you wouldnt see light, because your brain couldnt process it quick enough, so im assuming all you'd see in a black "flash" and then youre there
 
B

bad_drawing

Guest
Hi Zero,<br /><br />Interesting thought excercises you have here!<br /><br />"well, honestly neutron, i dont think there IS a star 2 billion times bigger than our sun, but IF there is, the black hole would suck it up."<br /><br />I believe you're correct in your assumption that there is no star that big. However I believe what's trying to be conveyed is that the black whole can take in many many stars accross the whole spectrum of masses in addition to gas clouds and other black holes to *accumulate* a mass equal to several billion suns.<br /><br />"but it would take a very long time, it would be like draining an olympic sized swimming pool through a drain the size of a pin hole, its gnna take awhile, and the black hole might even evaporate due to hawkings radiation before it finishes...hope i answered clear enough for ya!!"<br /><br />This is just my opinion but I bet such a massive black hole could consume our hypothetical "superstar" relatively rapidly. I believe the devouring of huge amounts of mass at a time is what produces the violent xray jets visible in even the most distant galaxies. (okay... really thats thought to be from the accretion disk around the event horizon...but that stuff is one step away from being pulled in) There has to be a huge energy exchange to produce such artifacts. As for the hawking radiation atrophying the black hole before it can consume an entire object of that mass... i would lean towards no. I don't think feeble loss associated with Hawking radiation could drain the enourmous mass of such a beast for billions upon billions of years...probably considerably longer then the current age of the universe. Its my understanding (if Hawking radiation even exists) that the only black holes it would affect noticeably would be truly small ones (with the mass of, say, a mountain)<br /><br />Now I could be way off on this, so anyone feel free to correct me. It's hardly my specialty. Regardless, nice thread! The whole concept is very fascinat
 
Z

zero_cool

Guest
Bad_drawing, bravo! lol good job on correcting me, thanks, i thought he meant a very large star, but youre right it could be alot of stars grouped up over a few lightyears but even then if it grouped up to the mass of 2 billion time bigger than our sun then it would be just the same as sucking in a theoredical star that big thats just my guess, im no expert either, i just read alot on the subject
 
N

neutron_star69

Guest
<i>Well theoredically you wouldnt see anything, you'd be going so fast that you wouldnt see light, because your brain couldnt process it quick enough, so im assuming all you'd see in a black "flash" and then youre there </i><br /><br />I kind of agree with what you are saying here zero, but wouldnt it depend on how long the wormhole was?, if it were millions of lightyears long, wouldnt you eventually focus in and see what was happening?
 
Z

zero_cool

Guest
well yeah neutron_star69 i guess you would see the light thats getting emitted from light years away, but im still assuming the light thats closer you wouldnt see
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts