Exploring the Possibility of an "Anti" Black Hole

In summary: But this doesn't seem to be the case, at least not in general.In summary, this concept has been discussed before, but there is no evidence to support the idea that there is a "formation" of an anti-black-hole.
  • #1
taylaron
Gold Member
397
1
"anti" black hole

hey,
is there evedince that leads to the idea that there is a "formation" of an anti-black-hole. i don't know how to explain it because it has no name. anyways, what if there was a star or some phenominon that insted of having "stupendious" gravity (black hole) had stupendis anti-gravity. it repells everything. including light. now, if it repells light, you might see it as a very bright light. mebe mistaking it for a star. i don't know. i may be totally wrong. that's why I am posting this. :confused:
this is described in the diagram that i drew below...
 

Attachments

  • anti black hole.jpg
    anti black hole.jpg
    18.5 KB · Views: 461
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
taylaron said:
hey,
is there evedince that leads to the idea that there is a "formation" of an anti-black-hole. i don't know how to explain it because it has no name. anyways, what if there was a star or some phenominon that insted of having "stupendious" gravity (black hole) had stupendis anti-gravity. it repells everything. including light. now, if it repells light, you might see it as a very bright light. mebe mistaking it for a star. i don't know. i may be totally wrong. that's why I am posting this. :confused:
this is described in the diagram that i drew below...

Perhaps you are talking about so-called "phantom energy"?
 
  • #3
i also heard that you can get light to travel "backwards" which apparently is faster

HUH?
 
  • #4
taylaron said:
i also heard that you can get light to travel "backwards" which apparently is faster

HUH?
What you're likely referring to has nothing to do with cosmology, and is barely interesting at all. One method uses dispersive fibre optics (doped with erbium I think). You can construct media that will amplify the first front part of an extended light pulse (same as a laser gain medium) but only scatter the rest of the pulse. Thus, the peak of the emerging signal occurs before the peak of the initial pulse would have arrived. No signal arrives any earlier than you could theoretically have detected it in the first place.
 
  • #5
Try looking for topics on "White Holes".
 
  • #7
taylaron said:
hey,
is there evedince that leads to the idea that there is a "formation" of an anti-black-hole. i don't know how to explain it because it has no name. anyways, what if there was a star or some phenominon that insted of having "stupendious" gravity (black hole) had stupendis anti-gravity. it repells everything. including light. now, if it repells light, you might see it as a very bright light. mebe mistaking it for a star. i don't know. i may be totally wrong. that's why I am posting this. :confused:
this is described in the diagram that i drew below...

There isn't any evidence that such a thing exists, but the idea (or a similar one) has been talked about before in physics literature, for instance Hermann Bondi, "Negative Mass in General Relativity", Reviews of Modern Physics 29, 423 (1957).

One can replace the mass M in the Schwarzschild metric with a negative number, and find that an object with negative mass gravitationally repels nearby objects, and that objects nearer the negative-mass black hole age faster rather than slower.

It's worth noting that such an object doesn't have an event horizon, so it's not really a black hole.

The Bondi article may be hard to get a hold of (I don't have a copy myself) - there is a reasonably good popular discussion in http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw14.html however.
 
  • #8
pervect said:
It's worth noting that such an object doesn't have an event horizon, so it's not really a black hole.
Yes but instead it has a barrier, nothing can enter it from the outside, not even light. :smile:
 
  • #9
MeJennifer said:
Yes but instead it has a barrier, nothing can enter it from the outside, not even light. :smile:

If one posutlates a point negative gravitational mass, an effective potential analysis (such as the one at http://www.fourmilab.ch/gravitation/orbits/)
shows that it would require infinite energy to reach r=0. One could come as close to the central point mass as desired, but never reach it with a finite "energy at infinity".

But if one postualtes a distributed, rather than a point, mass, this issue goes away. A distributed negative gravitational mass would have a metric that was well-behavied everywhere, and one could reach the center of it without any special problems.

So there wouldn't be any event horizon, nor would there be any singularity, or any difficulty reaching r=0, with a finite negative mass of nonzero volume.

Negative mass has a lot of other problems though. Thermodynamically, for instance, it's a real mess. One would expect particles with negative mass to gain negative energy from their surroundings, for instance, heating up the surroundings while the negative mass particles gain "negative energy".
 
  • #10


taylaron said:
hey,
is there evedince that leads to the idea that there is a "formation" of an anti-black-hole. i don't know how to explain it because it has no name. anyways, what if there was a star or some phenominon that insted of having "stupendious" gravity (black hole) had stupendis anti-gravity. it repells everything. including light. now, if it repells light, you might see it as a very bright light. mebe mistaking it for a star. i don't know. i may be totally wrong. that's why I am posting this. :confused:
this is described in the diagram that i drew below...

Here's a thought:
For a 'white hole' to display 'anti-gravity' properties to emit/disperse 'stuff', it has to have received 'stuff' from somewhere.

I came up with 3 possibilities:

1. A 'black hole' changes to 'white hole' after reaching it's 'threshold of attraction/gravity' (whereby nothing can escape it's gravitational pull).

2. An existence of a 'parallel universe' in which exists a corresponding 'black hole' which supplies the 'white hole' with 'stuff'.

3. A 'white hole' attracts 'anti-matter' and repels 'matter' (converts anti-matter to matter). (Opposite to a 'black hole' attracting 'matter').


Cheers,
 
  • #11


ronnie2177 said:
Here's a thought:
For a 'white hole' to display 'anti-gravity' properties to emit/disperse 'stuff', it has to have received 'stuff' from somewhere.
White holes wouldn't have anti-gravity, you'd fall towards them just like black holes, it's just that nothing could ever reach the horizon from the outside. White holes are just the time-reverse of black holes, so just as anything falling through the event horizon of a black hole must hit the singularity at the center, anything that comes out of the event horizon of a white hole must have been emitted by the white hole singularity.

Incidentally, it's better to start a new thread rather than revive one that no one's posted on for years!
 

1. What is an "Anti" Black Hole?

An "Anti" Black Hole, also known as a white hole, is a hypothetical celestial object that is the opposite of a black hole. While a black hole has a gravitational pull that is so strong that nothing, including light, can escape, an anti black hole has a repulsive force that pushes matter and energy away from it.

2. How are "Anti" Black Holes formed?

The formation of an "Anti" Black Hole is still a topic of debate among scientists. Some theories suggest that they could be formed by the collapse of a white dwarf star, while others propose that they could be the result of a black hole that has reached its maximum mass and is now "spitting out" matter and energy.

3. Can we observe "Anti" Black Holes?

As of now, there is no concrete evidence of the existence of "Anti" Black Holes. However, some scientists suggest that they could potentially be detected indirectly through their effects on surrounding matter and energy. More research and advanced technology are needed to confirm their existence.

4. What is the significance of studying "Anti" Black Holes?

Studying "Anti" Black Holes could provide a better understanding of the fundamental laws of physics and the nature of the universe. It could also help us gain insights into the formation and evolution of celestial objects. Furthermore, the study of "Anti" Black Holes could potentially lead to new technologies and advancements in space exploration.

5. Are there any potential dangers associated with "Anti" Black Holes?

Since the existence of "Anti" Black Holes has not been confirmed, there are currently no known dangers associated with them. However, if they do exist, their repulsive force could potentially have an impact on nearby celestial objects and their gravitational pull could affect the movement of matter and energy in the universe. Further research is needed to fully understand any potential dangers.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
686
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
37
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
566
Back
Top