Question about white/black holes

  • Thread starter EvanD
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Holes
In summary: I don't know about white holes forming during astrophysical collapse, but according to some theories they are possible. However, there is currently no evidence that they actually exist. The rest of the conversation raises questions about the validity of white holes and the information available on the subject, but it is important to keep in mind that theories and speculations should always be subject to verification and falsification. White holes, like many other theories, may also just be a figment of imagination without any actual proof.
  • #1
EvanD
1
0
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.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
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.
 
  • #3
meaningless drivle it might be. But be aware the even einstein's theory of relativity 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.
 
  • #4
TrinityP said:
But be aware the even einstein's theory of relativity was meaningless drivle until someone proved it. Right?

Wrong. Einsteins theory was serious and subject to verification/falsification
 
  • #5
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?
 
  • #6
TrinityP said:
If so isn't the questions raised (albiet from the sci-fi channel) also subject to varification/falsification?
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.

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?

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.
 
  • #7
Thanks for the reply ill keep researching online and in local libraries.
 
  • #8
phinds said:
Not that I know of. White holes are, as far as I can tell, just a figment of theroeticians imagination.

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.
 
  • #9
EvanD said:
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.

Leo Smolin has come up with that idea.

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?

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.
 
  • #10
Nabeshin said:
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.

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.
 
  • #11
George Jones said:
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.

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.
 
  • #12
electron-pozyton neutrino-antineutrino... Black hole- white hole... Seems quite logic
 
  • #13
Nabeshin said:
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.

Why not? Your comment
Nabeshin said:
The classical white hole object, as I understand it, is in the infinite past of the maximally extended kruskal-szerekes black hole coordinates.

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.
 
  • #14
mimethic said:
electron-pozyton neutrino-antineutrino... Black hole- white hole... Seems quite logic

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.
 
  • #15
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 disappear if hit each other... But we still... Know nothing about them...just think what could they be
 
  • #16
mimethic said:
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 disappear if hit each other... But we still... Know nothing about them...just think what could they be

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.
 
  • #17
Wow wikipedia link.. So clever. But because of missunderstanding we reach this point. "we still know nothing about them" was about black holes. Sory.
 

1. What is a white hole and how does it differ from a black hole?

A white hole is a hypothetical celestial object that is the opposite of a black hole. While a black hole is known for its incredibly strong gravitational pull, a white hole is thought to have an incredibly strong repulsive force, pushing matter and energy away from it. Essentially, while a black hole sucks everything in, a white hole would push everything out.

2. Can we observe white holes in space?

At this time, white holes are purely theoretical and have not been observed in space. There is currently no evidence to suggest that they exist in our universe. However, some scientists believe that white holes could potentially exist in other universes or dimensions beyond our own.

3. How are white holes formed?

There are several theories about how white holes could be formed. One theory suggests that they could be created when a black hole reaches the end of its lifespan and "explodes" into a white hole. Another theory suggests that white holes could be created during the Big Bang, as the opposite of a black hole's singularity.

4. Do white holes violate the laws of physics?

Currently, white holes are purely theoretical and have not been proven to exist. Therefore, it is not possible to say whether or not they violate the laws of physics. However, some theories about white holes do challenge our understanding of gravity and the laws of thermodynamics.

5. What is the significance of white holes in our understanding of the universe?

If white holes were to exist, they could potentially help explain some of the mysteries of the universe, such as the origins of the Big Bang and the possibility of multiple universes. They could also provide insight into the behavior of gravity and the laws of physics in extreme conditions. However, until we have concrete evidence of their existence, their significance remains purely speculative.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
836
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top