What is the White Hole Model of the Universe?

In summary, the authors of this paper have found that the high-z type Ia supernovae data supports a model of the universe with the Galaxy at the center in a spherically symmetric isotropic gravitational field. This model does not require the inclusion of dark matter, but suggests a finite bounded white hole as the only possible solution consistent with the observed data. The matter density of the universe is estimated to be $\Omega_{m} \approx 0.0304$, with a significant contribution from vacuum energy. The authors also estimate the effective radius of the universe and the Hubble constant in the limit of zero gravity. However, there are criticisms of this model, such as the lack of an explanation for the CMB and the absurd
  • #1
wolram
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
4,446
558
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0508367

Authors: John G. Hartnett
Comments: 7 pages, 6 figures

The distance modulus and supernova redshift data, determined by the high-z type Ia supernovae teams, is found to describe a model of the universe that places the Galaxy at the center in a spherically symmetric isotropic gravitational field. The result describes particles moving in both a central potential and an accelerating universe without the need for the inclusion of dark matter. However the sign for the only possible solution, consistent with the observed data, implies a finite bounded white hole. A comparison with the model that ignores the central potential indicates that this model is much more robust and the averaged matter density of the universe $\Omega_{m}$ derived from the analysis is highly significant. From two measured data sets it is determined that the matter density $\Omega_{m} \approx 0.0304$ and the vacuum energy contribution to gravity $\Omega_{\Lambda} \approx 0.9688$, with a total $\Omega_{\Lambda}+ \Omega_{m} \approx 1$ at the present epoch. From the model also an estimate of the effective radius of the universe $R_{*} = 0.67 c\tau$ is derived as well as the Hubble constant in the limit of zero gravity $h = 72.88 \pm 1.30$ km/s/Mpc.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Aside from the absurdity of putting us at the center of the universe, this paper hasn't even found a solution for their universe's evolution with time. Perhaps I'm missing it, but I also don't see an explanation for the CMB within their model.
 
  • #3
SpaceTiger said:
Aside from the absurdity of putting us at the center of the universe, this paper hasn't even found a solution for their universe's evolution with time. Perhaps I'm missing it, but I also don't see an explanation for the CMB within their model.
I do not defend the paper in any way, but would a white hole require a CMB?
 
  • #4
This is sort of a sidenote:

"White hole" solutions for cosmology exist, but are of little practical interest because they are not isotropic. You can construct a model that has a standard FRW cosmology "inside" some radius, glued to an external Schwarzschild solution. See for instance

Is the universe a black hole?

A white hole model which fitted cosmological observation would have to be the time reversal of a star collapsing to form a black hole. To a good approximation we could ignore pressure and treat it like a spherical cloud of dust with no internal forces other than gravity. Stellar collapse has been intensively studied since the seminal work of Snyder and Oppenheimer in 1939 and this simple case is well understood. It is possible to construct an exact model of stellar collapse in the absence of pressure by gluing together any FRW solution inside the spherical star and a Schwarzschild solution outside. Space-time within the star remains homogeneous and isotropic during the collapse.

It follows that the time reversal of this model for a collapsing sphere of dust is indistinguishable from the FRW models if the dust sphere is larger than the observable universe. In other words, we cannot rule out the possibility that the universe is a very large white hole. Only by waiting many billions of years until the edge of the sphere comes into view could we know.
 
  • #5
wolram said:
I do not defend the paper in any way, but would a white hole require a CMB?

The CMB is observed. The question is whether a white hole will produce a CMB, no whether it requires it.
 
  • #6
HINT: black holes are by definition VERY large natural quantum computers operating at the Bekenstein Bound- and they perform more Flops than the observable universe has since the big bang

the universe can be a white hole yet isotropic and centerless/boundless yet flat and finite if it's metric is 'VIRTUAL'-

the universe is not a play with objects dancing in a Cartesian Theatre background- Reality emerges from relationships and systems of interactions [ie software]
 
Last edited:
  • #7
I doubt the patient will survive the dosage required for this dark matter cure.
 

1. What is a white hole?

A white hole is a hypothetical object in the universe that is the reverse of a black hole. While a black hole pulls matter and energy inward, a white hole would push matter and energy outward at an extremely high rate.

2. What evidence is there for the idea of the universe being a white hole?

There is currently no direct evidence for the universe being a white hole. However, some theories suggest that the Big Bang, which is the prevailing model for the creation of the universe, could potentially be the result of a white hole. Additionally, the cosmic microwave background radiation, a remnant of the Big Bang, has a uniform temperature and distribution that is consistent with the idea of a white hole.

3. How does the concept of a white hole differ from a black hole?

While both black holes and white holes are governed by the same equations of general relativity, they have opposite effects on the matter and energy around them. A black hole pulls matter and energy inward, while a white hole pushes it outward. Additionally, while a black hole has an event horizon where nothing can escape, a white hole has an event horizon where nothing can enter.

4. Could a white hole be responsible for the expansion of the universe?

There is no scientific evidence to support the idea that a white hole is responsible for the expansion of the universe. The expansion of the universe is currently thought to be driven by dark energy, which is a mysterious force that counteracts the pull of gravity. However, some scientists suggest that a white hole could potentially play a role in the expansion of the universe if it exists at the center of our universe and is continuously pushing matter and energy outward.

5. Is there a connection between white holes and wormholes?

There is currently no scientific evidence to suggest a connection between white holes and wormholes. While both are hypothetical objects in the universe, they differ in their effects on matter and energy. A wormhole is a hypothetical tunnel that connects two distant points in space, while a white hole is a hypothetical object that pushes matter and energy outward at an extremely high rate. Some theories suggest that wormholes may be connected to black holes, but there is no evidence to suggest a connection to white holes.

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
858
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • Cosmology
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Back
Top