Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

B Are Black Holes linked to our Universe & Dark Energy/Matter?

  1. Mar 18, 2017 #1
    After a quick and not fruitful Google Search I leave this question in better minds than my own.
    Q- Has there been any discussion linking the start of our Universe with a black hole?
    <Reason behind Question> I feel as if certain phenomenon seems quite similar to one another. A) star dies, implodes, becomes a black hole B) Big Bang occurs "out of nowhere" creates a Universe.

    Further, does the black hole consuming whatever matter in its wake account for the "Dark energy & Matter" that we have been able to detect? I picture; a star dies, and becomes a black hole, in turn, creating a Universe. Within the Universe, the Black hole pumps whatever matter it has consumed in to it.

    I see it being a very understandable process. Which also, to me, accounts for Inflation. The more the Black Hole consumes, the bigger it gets, which allows it to consume more and more than it previously did when it first occurred.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 18, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 19, 2017 #2

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    It sounds like you are mixing a lot of concepts together that you have heard about but only in a pop sci context.

    Black holes and cosmological spacetimes are quite different. One important difference is that the black hole spacetime is asymptotically flat, but the cosmological spacetime is not. This may seem like a small distinction, but it has some big consequences. For example, a global conserved energy can be defined in the black hole spacetime, but not in the cosmological one.
     
  4. Mar 19, 2017 #3
    To argue for that you have to argue for the existence of a meta-Universe in which the black hole must have originally formed.
    It then logically follows that this meta-Universe is itself the product of another black hole in a meta-meta-Universe, and so on ...
     
  5. Mar 19, 2017 #4
    Well, clearly, and I agree. I am ill equipped to answer a question like that, my only reasoning for asking mine was to see if there has been any study/questions posed about the prospect of it.
     
  6. Mar 19, 2017 #5
    @Dale ... I understand that point. It just seems to me that if there would ever be a time for something completely "I'll rational" <as if everything else in this universe makes complete sense, said jokingly) to happen it would be in discussion with the most unexplained phenomena that we know about. I.e. Black Holes, Big Bang, Dark Matter/Energy.
    All of the above is still in regards to posed question- Has the ever been a any study/questions posed in the past about the prospect of it. Thank you for your reply.
     
  7. Mar 19, 2017 #6
    This speculation that our Universe exists inside a black hole in another Universe has been suggested before.
    It is not a scientifically addressable idea because other Universes are by definition not part of our Universe and can't be studied.
    However as I pointed out there is a flaw in the logic because you end up with an infinite series of Universes containing other Universes without end.
     
  8. Mar 20, 2017 #7

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    I understand your desire here, but this generally is not the way that knowledge progresses. First we start to understand separate phenomena and develop models for them, and then we notice connections between them. A good example is electromagnetism, we first characterized electricity and magnetism and light, and afterwards we found the connection.

    There may be such discussions in the literature, but even from professionals it would be speculative.
     
  9. Mar 20, 2017 #8

    I am of the mind that it doesn't matter which way knowledge "generally" progresses, only that it does. As a professional athlete I wrote an outline of my Goals out on paper. There was one main goal, which was the heading. I believed it to be the correct path. I then worked backward to see which smaller goals would attribute to the success of the Header. Regardless of my success, my point remains is that there is no right or wrong way to reach a destination.

    Q- Do you find it interesting that one event "destroys"<for lack of a better term> life? (Black Hole). And another event "starts"<for lack of a better term>life?(Big Bang)
     
  10. Mar 20, 2017 #9
    There's no reason to believe that black holes create new universes. Sometimes pop sci likes to emphasize what could speculatively be possible with the basic equations, but there isn't any evidence or even a coherent theory of how this could work.
     
  11. Mar 20, 2017 #10

    Respectively, to say there is "NO reason to believe" seems a bit misguided. The adage being; "a lack of evidence isn't evidence at all".

    Also, formulas & previous theories aside KHASHISHI, do you not find it coincidental that "A Black Hole destroys life and the Big Bang creates life? This is the route of my inquiry.
     
  12. Mar 20, 2017 #11

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Personally I don't find it "coincidental", just random facts that you are REALLY stretching to try to correlate in any meaningful way
     
  13. Mar 20, 2017 #12

    PeterDonis

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    All your adage means is that if there is no evidence, you don't have a reason to believe and you don't have a reason to disbelieve. It doesn't mean that in the absence of evidence you can believe whatever you want. It means you should admit you don't know and stop there.
     
  14. Mar 20, 2017 #13

    PeterDonis

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    Basically, your argument here is: all of these phenomena are unexplained, therefore they must be the same thing. That isn't a valid argument. It isn't even much of a heuristic guess. The similarities you describe are superficial; when you dig below the surface there are many more differences.

    This isn't even a superficial similarity: the process of inflation has nothing in common, that I can see, with a black hole growing as things fall into it. Inflation doesn't "consume" anything.
     
  15. Mar 20, 2017 #14
    *believe whatever I want*... My apologies for not articulating my point as I should have. I do not believe, definitively, in anything. I only BELIEVE that these phenomena seemed very similar.

    Also, it was posed as a question, because even though I admit I don't know, I'm not going to just "stop there".

    Better question for you, Peter. Do you believe that a more informed person should belittle a less informed person who is trying to learn/converse about Physics?
    Regardless, thank you for your feedback.
     
  16. Mar 20, 2017 #15
    I'm sorry, but this is not my argument.
     
  17. Mar 20, 2017 #16
    My question to others was this, Peter....

    If***** a black hole was linked to our universe, could it be possible that the consumption of matter/lite from a black hole, then feed our Universe?
    (Again, I apologize if I am not articulating myself well enough)
    I picture a Black hole consuming matter/lite and getting bigger and bigger. And, if it does in fact feed our Universe, could the rate of inflation be linked to the expansion of a Black hole?

    This is why I posed the question. Am I correct in assuming that a black hole gains mass from the consumption of matter/lite over time?
     
  18. Mar 20, 2017 #17

    phinds

    User Avatar
    Gold Member
    2016 Award

    Do you not see how in consecutive sentences you have directly contradicted yourself.

    Look, thinking outside the box is not a bad thing, but first you have to know what's IN the box. You don't and you clearly would serve yourself better to do some studying of basic cosmology rather than asking random and disjointed questions on an internet forum.
     
  19. Mar 20, 2017 #18
    I apologize, but I do not see the contradiction. However, I am open to being shown how.

    Also, the studying of Basic Cosmology is difficult for myself. Try as I do, without proper education giving you step by step instruction, it is quite challenging for most (I assume) to become adequate enough to hold an intelligent conversation with a topic as difficult as any field of Physics.

    Lastly, I posed a question on the Internet for help, for conversation.... Had I known beforehand that I was going to offend the Forum Gods I still would've done it. Physics should be spoken of. Not for just the very few with an understanding, but everyone. It's what I believe would help our culture. What doesn't, in my opinion, is responding to someone's post, (when you didn't have to in the first place) negatively. My unsolicited thoughts anyways. Maybe you're normal and will take this to heart, and maybe, just maybe, down the way you could help nurture someone's interest. Regardless, thank you for your input. Good day.
     
  20. Mar 20, 2017 #19

    Dale

    Staff: Mentor

    Yes, I do find it interesting, but no more or less interesting than any other pair of otherwise loosely related lethal and essential things.
     
  21. Mar 20, 2017 #20

    PeterDonis

    User Avatar
    2016 Award

    Staff: Mentor

    If not stopping there means speculating, please review the PF rules. PF is focused on discussion of mainstream science. We have the Beyond the Standard Model forum where some proposed theories that are not mainstream are discussed, but even those have enough of a rigorous formulation in peer-reviewed papers that there is a basis for discussion. There are no such formulations that I'm aware of regarding the things you have mentioned here.

    Do you believe that pointing out the limitations of your knowledge is belittling? Particularly when the limitation is not even personal to you, but is shared by everyone?

    Then I'm afraid I don't understand what your argument is. If it's just pointing out that those three things are unexplained, then where do we go from there? We don't have any basis for discussion beyond "these things are unexplained, but they all look similar to me". That's not enough to get anywhere.

    Yes, that is correct.

    What do you mean by "feed our universe"? If you mean, can a black hole gaining mass cause our universe to have inflated in the past, no, there is no basis for that in our current theories, or in any proposed models of inflation.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Are Black Holes linked to our Universe & Dark Energy/Matter?
Loading...