Question about white/black holes

EvanD

hey every one! according to what i've read white hole are assumed (in some theories) to be the 'exits' on the other side of a black hole. Where the matter sucked in by a black hole is expelled on the other side creating a new universes in a sort of 'bubble' if you will. Going along with this line of thinking. Could it be possible that our universe is one such 'bubble' and the reason that it is constantly expanding is be cause of a constant stream of space/time/matter being introduced by one or many white hole located somewhere in the cosmos that we have yet to find a way to discover? I would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thank you all.

phinds

White holes ARE possible according to some theories but there is ZERO evidence that they actually exist and while I mean no disrespect to you personally, the rest of your questions are the kind of meaningless drivel you see on the Science Channel.

TrinityP

meaningless drivle it might be. But be aware the even einstein's theory of reletivity was meaningless drivle until someone proved it. Right? but i think that EvanD is asking for everyone to imagine 'what if'. That's all every other theory is right? some Scientist or physisist asking the question 'What would happen if?' Of course this question i think goes hand in hand with only one of many mult-universe theories that are out there.

phinds

Wrong. Einsteins theory was serious and subject to verification/falsification

TrinityP

If so isn't the questions raised (albiet from the sci-fi channel) also subject to varification/falsification?

on a side note- where would one that doesn't have enough money to go and learn about these things in an acedemic setting find information/resources?

phinds

Not that I know of. White holes are, as far as I can tell, just a figment of theroeticians imagination.

Einstein knew right away how to verify his theory, although it took several years for a total eclipse of the sun to allow the experiment to be conducted and the verification to be performed.

First, do NOT watch History Channel / Science Channel / Discovery Channel. They produce shows with mostly good stuff but you NEVER know when they are going to dump in some just amazingly ridiculous stuff and talk about it exactly as they talk about the reasonable stuff. Don't try to get your physics from ANYTHING on television.

There are plentiful resources on the internet, and this forum is a great place to ask questions when something doesn't make sense.

TrinityP

Thanks for the reply ill keep researching online and in local libraries.

Nabeshin

I'd like to expand on this for a moment. The classical white hole object, as I understand it, is in the infinite past of the maximally extended kruskal-szerekes black hole coordinates. Such an object obviously cannot exist since by definition it exists infinitely in the past and our universe is of finite age. The fact that astrophysical black holes are born at a moment in time forbids the existence of such solutions. I've never seen an analysis of a white hole outside of this context (but honestly, I haven't looked very hard), but if none exists then the entire concept is quite meaningless. And when I say meaningless, I mean to say that it is worth even less than notions of wormholes and time machines, since at least we can conceive of solutions to Einstein's equations which could possibly exist in our universe containing these objects.

twofish-quant

Leo Smolin has come up with that idea.

The basic idea is that there was one white hole and that was the big bang.

There aren't any white holes existing now. We've looked for "anything dense that could be dark matter" (look up MACHO's) and they aren't there.

One thing about white holes is that we don't see any, and no one has shown that they can exist *but* people have tried very hard to mathematically prove that they aren't allowed by current theories of gravity, and they haven't been able to do that.

George Jones

White holes don't form during astrophysical collapse, but I don't think that it true that white holes are in the infinite past. For example, I think there exists particle worldlines (future-directed timelike geodesics: 1) that start "at" the white hole singularity; 2) that end "at" the black hole singularity; and 3) for which finite proper time elapses for the particle.

Nabeshin

I don't see how this deals with them being infinitely old. Sure, an object can pop out and meet a singularity within a finite time, but this says nothing about the age of the white hole object.

mimethic

electron-pozyton neutrino-antineutrino... Black hole- white hole... Seems quite logic

George Jones

Why not? Your comment
was not about an astrophysical white hole, it was about a white hole region of a specific solution in GR, the Kruskal-Szerekes solution. The white-whole region of Kruskal-Szerekes spacetime is not in the infinite past.

Drakkith

Antipaticles and opposites have little in common. Many properties of matter and antimatter, such as their mass and spin, are actually similar or the same and not opposites.

mimethic

Of course. But it still some way to explain existence (if exists) of white holes. Even if opposite particles have common spin or mass they would dissapear if hit each other... But we still... Know nothing about them...just think what could they be

Drakkith

We don't know about antimatter? We know a great deal about antimatter. We make it all the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter

And your post is not a way to explain the existence of white holes in any way whatsoever. I could argue that there should be "anti-nickels" worth -5 cents because everything should have opposites.

mimethic

Wow wikipedia link.. So clever. But because of missunderstanding we reach this point. "we still know nothing about them" was about black holes. Sory.