"Black" holes and "White" holes

  • I
  • Thread starter petrushkagoogol
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Holes
In summary: No. Black holes are finite, while white holes are theoretical. White holes are a possibility according to the law of conservation of energy, but they are not a reality.
  • #1
petrushkagoogol
28
4
What makes black holes "black" and white holes "white" ? :cool:
 
  • Like
Likes SARKARSUMAN and Irfan Nafi
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Black holes absorb all radiation and matter that falls within the event horizon, and hence they are "black" (non-emitters). White holes emit radiation and matter from within, and thus are "white".
 
  • #3
With a black hole, space is curved so much inwards that there is no path that leads anywhere but deeper into the hole. With a while hole, space is curved so much outwards that there is no path that leads anywhere but further away from it. White holes would require a negative energy density, and hence are thought to be physically impossible, just a mathematical curiosity.
 
  • Like
Likes petrushkagoogol
  • #4
We cannot be certain either entity actually exists, but, we have solid evidence for black holes and virtually zero evidence favoring white holes.
 
  • Like
Likes Fervent Freyja
  • #5
Hello
"Black holes" so called because the light that goes through it has a lower speed than the gravitational force of black holes that's why light can't get out of it, and we can't see it, so these holes called "black."
About the "white hole", as I know, the scientists they have not yet found, but according to the law of conservation of energy, this energy that enters a black hole should get out of the white hole, and if the light is in a black hole can not escape, the white hole It acts with a repulsive force, and we see a bright light that's why "white holes" so called.
I hope I could help you.
 
  • Like
Likes praveena
  • #6
Mary Space said:
Hello
"Black holes" so called because the light that goes through it has a lower speed than the gravitational force of black holes that's why light can't get out of it, and we can't see it, so these holes called "black."
About the "white hole", as I know, the scientists they have not yet found, but according to the law of conservation of energy, this energy that enters a black hole should get out of the white hole, and if the light is in a black hole can not escape, the white hole It acts with a repulsive force, and we see a bright light that's why "white holes" so called.
I hope I could help you.
Not quite, it means that light speed is slower than the escape velocity caused by gravity. Gravity is also radiating at the speed of light.

Black holes and white holes are not related. Energy going into a black hole simply gets stuck there and then radiated away as Hawking radiation. Black holes are not wormholes to white holes, they are simply inescapable gravity pits.
 
  • Like
Likes Hoophy, praveena and davenn
  • #7
Per GR gravity propogates at a speed of exactly c - the same as light. While we do not know what goes on inside the EH of a black hole, a wormhole appears unlikely. If light, or anything else, had a wormhole escape route, the black hole would lose mass equivalent to the escape rate. A white hole powered by a black hole would suck the black hole dry in short order. There is no evidence suggesting this happens.
 
  • Like
Likes Monsterboy
  • #8
Poster has been reminded that wikipedia is not a valid scientific reference for making assertions
newjerseyrunner said:
Not quite, it means that light speed is slower than the escape velocity caused by gravity. Gravity is also radiating at the speed of light

Yes, I had that in mind but incorrectly expressed

newjerseyrunner said:
Black holes and white holes are not related. Energy going into a black hole simply gets stuck there and then radiated away as Hawking radiation. Black holes are not wormholes to white holes, they are simply inescapable gravity pits.

Some footnotes from Wikipedia
"Theoretically, it is assumed that white holes can be formed at the exit from the horizon of the black hole event substance which is in the opposite direction of the thermodynamic arrow of time. It should be understood that the full space-time map contains both black and white holes, and a separate entity only "pure" black or only "pure" white hole to complete the map of the space-time can not be in principle."
 
  • #9
Not unheard of for wiki to spout unsupported bs such as this.
 
  • Like
Likes Fervent Freyja
  • #10
Chronos said:
Not unheard of for wiki to spout unsupported bs such as this

I just translated this quote from russian on english.
If you want I can give you a link on original's language and if you understand russian you can read this.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Белая_дыра
 
  • #11
"Theoretically" probably means "mathematically theoretically." Sure, you can have a white hole if you can have negative energy density. We've seen no indication that such a thing is physically possible.
 
  • Like
Likes praveena
  • #12
yes white hole is the theory as well as Hawking radiation, think you will agree that in the universe are lot of theories and few facts, so it remains to wait for confirmation from scientists
 
  • #13
If a black hole draws in everything within it's event horizon, and keeps drawing it deeper, does that mean the black hole is infinite? And what about white holes? Since they emit matter, could they be the other side of a black hole (assuming there is one)? I'm curious as to what kind of studies have been done on this subject.
 
  • #14
No white hole has ever been observed. unsurprising since this would involve exotic matter having negative gravity.
Black holes, or at least the gravitational and other effects of black holes (eg quasars) have been observed.
It is indeed a conundrum that this implies infinities (a singularity) at the centre of a black hole.
We don't actually know what happens there, but the fact that the math leads to infinities is most likely an indication that whatever is going on is physics of which we currently have no idea.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Is there any evidence [what would such evidence even look like] that the creation of a black hole is the 'big bang' of an new universe or is that just a pretty science fiction idea?
 
  • #16
Garett Kutcher said:
Is there any evidence [what would such evidence even look like] that the creation of a black hole is the 'big bang' of an new universe or is that just a pretty science fiction idea?
The idea has been suggested before but as far as I know it's pure speculation.
 
  • Like
Likes Mary Space
  • #17
Sue Rich said:
If a black hole draws in everything within it's event horizon, and keeps drawing it deeper, does that mean the black hole is infinite?
What makes you think it "keeps" drawing it deeper? It draws it to the center and that's it. Black holes are finite.
 
  • #18
phinds said:
What makes you think it "keeps" drawing it deeper? It draws it to the center and that's it. Black holes are finite.

How you are saying that black hole is finite?Is that singularity is the end??
 
  • #19
The singularity is simply where the math breaks down and produces nonsense results.
It is NOT a description of a physical object.
We DON'T KNOW what physically is going on at the center of a back hole.
We do know that the infalling stuff is by this time no longer in the form of atoms, because atoms disintegrate before that point.
Neutron stars, (very massive objects which are not quite massive enough to be black holes), are known to exist by observation, and what we observe IS consistent with GR math.
The star has become mainly a soup of neutrons with other subatomic fragments mixed in.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
rootone said:
The singularity is simply where the math breaks down and produces nonsense results.
It is NOT a description of a physical object.
We DON'T KNOW what physically is going on at the center of a back hole.
We do know that the infalling stuff is by this time no longer in the form of atoms, because atoms disintegrate before that point.
Neutron stars, (very massive objects which are not quite massive enough to be black holes), are known to exist by observation, and what we observe IS consistent with GR math.
The star has become mainly a soup of neutrons with other subatomic fragments mixed in.
I know that.I am asking that without knowing the end how we can conclude black hole is finite?
 
  • #21
praveena said:
... without knowing the end how we can conclude black hole is finite?
Well strictly speaking we can't make any conclusions at all since we can't observe anything, we can't reproduce the conditions, and the best theory we so far have; GR, doesn't make sensible predictions.
We do know that stuff (like us) exists externally to the black hole though, so in that sense it can't be infinite.
 
  • Like
Likes praveena
  • #22
rootone said:
We do know that stuff (like us) exists externally to the black hole though, so in that sense it can't be infinite.
This is an illogical statement. Complete and infinite do not mean the same thing. For example: a set of all positive integers is an infinite set, but does not contain all numbers.
 
  • #23
We know the mass of black holes is finite. It has been measured with great accuracy in cases such as Sag A. All you need for a black hole is to compress mass into a volume less than its Swarzschild radius - which is also finite. You can't enclose anything infinite inside a finite volume.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn and praveena
  • #24
i have a couple of question about the theory of white holes if no one mine me sounding a little slow but what is the explachen rate of a wight hole and would it be fast enough to affect gr and sr
 
  • #25
praveena said:
How you are saying that black hole is finite?Is that singularity is the end??

That's mostly the theories I've read about, Praveena. I wonder why no one has ever tried to send a camera of some sort inside a black hole to actually see what happens before (or if) it's destroyed? Until we actually know what's inside, everything we say is nothing more than conjecture or speculation at this point.
 
  • #26
A white hole is one possible solution to the Einstein field equations, as is a black hole. Mathematical possibilities, however, are not always realized in nature. We already have reason to believe GR is an incomplete description of gravity, and will remain so until we have a valid theory of quantum gravity - which is a possibility in the not so distant future. Once we unify quantum physics with GR many puzzles with things like black holes and white holes should be resolved. In the mean time we must rely on observational evidence to realize the distinction between reality and mathematical artifacts. The observational evidence favoring black holes as a valid solution to EFE is overwhelming. The evidence favoring white holes is virtually nonexistent. The prime directive in physics is a theory is nothing more than a hypothesis until until predictions made by that theory are confirmed by observational evidence.
 
  • Like
Likes Fervent Freyja
  • #27
ok i know white holes are only theory so far but i was wondering if time could work in a different in the way than black holes has shown to be... like only lasting for a nano sec spewing out energy and matter then somehow shut off or run out of energy and matter for the nano sec?? or are they predicted to hang around as long as the cosmic vacuum cleaners do?

:bugeye:
 
  • #28
Sue Rich said:
\ I wonder why no one has ever tried to send a camera of some sort inside a black hole to actually see what happens before (or if) it's destroyed?.

The nearest black holes are thousands of light years away...
 
  • Like
Likes Drakkith
  • #29
Yet we observe phenomena in various parts of the universe that cannot be accounted for by any known physics aside from black holes. The same cannot be said for white holes.
 
  • Like
Likes hsdrop
  • #30
Sue Rich said:
That's mostly the theories I've read about, Praveena. I wonder why no one has ever tried to send a camera of some sort inside a black hole to actually see what happens before (or if) it's destroyed? Until we actually know what's inside, everything we say is nothing more than conjecture or speculation at this point.
What good would sending a camera in do? It can't come out again, nor can any information from it so what would be the point?

Also, the nearest known BH is tens of thousands of light years away so would take us hundreds thousands of thousands of years to get there.

There are other problems.

I don't think your camera idea works out too well.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
  • #31
  • #32
Chronos said:
Yet we observe phenomena in various parts of the universe that cannot be accounted for by any known physics aside from black holes. The same cannot be said for white holes.

I was reading this https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/new-einstein-equation-wormholes-quantum-gravity and was wondering what the difference between white holes and worm holes would be? Maybe we do see evidence for white holes, but don't realize it- of course, I am most likely wrong.
 
  • #33
The short answer is nothing exits a black hole and nothing enters a white hole.
 
  • Like
Likes hsdrop
  • #34
Chronos said:
You can't enclose anything infinite inside a finite volume.

Well, the 'depth' of a point is infinite.

Fervent Freyja said:
The nearest black holes are thousands of light years away...

phinds said:
What good would sending a camera in do? It can't come out again, nor can any information from it so what would be the point?

Also, the nearest known BH is tens of thousands of light years away so would take us hundreds thousands of thousands of years to get there.

There are other problems.

I don't think your camera idea works out too well.

Party poopers with no sense of humor.

Chronos said:
The short answer is nothing exits a black hole and nothing enters a white hole.

That depends. Are we talking about spacetime holes or humanoid holes?

I never heard of a 'white hole' beyond the biological realm before.
 
  • #35
rollete said:
Party poopers with no sense of humor.
No, party poopers who poop on crackpot science
I never heard of a 'white hole' beyond the biological realm before.
I take it you know little about cosmology. It's an extraordinarily common term (in cosmology). Just for grins, I just Googled it. ALL of the two pages were referring to cosmological white holes and I'd be surprised if the next 10 were not as well. I think your sense that it is a biological term is a significantly minority view.
 
Last edited:
<h2>1. What is a black hole?</h2><p>A black hole is a region in space where the gravitational pull is so strong that nothing, including light, can escape from it. It is formed when a massive star dies and its core collapses, creating a singularity with infinite density and zero volume.</p><h2>2. How are black holes detected?</h2><p>Black holes cannot be directly observed, but their presence can be inferred through their effects on surrounding matter. Astronomers can detect the X-rays and radio waves emitted by matter as it is pulled into a black hole, or by observing the gravitational lensing caused by a black hole's immense gravity.</p><h2>3. Can anything escape from a black hole?</h2><p>Once an object crosses the event horizon of a black hole, it is impossible for it to escape. This is because the gravity of the black hole is so strong that the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light. However, some theoretical models suggest that particles can escape from the black hole through Hawking radiation.</p><h2>4. What is a white hole?</h2><p>A white hole is a hypothetical region in space where matter and energy are constantly being ejected outwards. It is essentially the opposite of a black hole, where matter is being pulled inwards. White holes are not yet proven to exist, but they are predicted by some theories of general relativity.</p><h2>5. Can a black hole turn into a white hole?</h2><p>There is no evidence to suggest that a black hole can turn into a white hole. In fact, the laws of physics suggest that a black hole will continue to exist and grow in size as it consumes more matter. However, some theories propose that a black hole could potentially transform into a white hole in the distant future, but this is still a highly debated topic among scientists.</p>

1. What is a black hole?

A black hole is a region in space where the gravitational pull is so strong that nothing, including light, can escape from it. It is formed when a massive star dies and its core collapses, creating a singularity with infinite density and zero volume.

2. How are black holes detected?

Black holes cannot be directly observed, but their presence can be inferred through their effects on surrounding matter. Astronomers can detect the X-rays and radio waves emitted by matter as it is pulled into a black hole, or by observing the gravitational lensing caused by a black hole's immense gravity.

3. Can anything escape from a black hole?

Once an object crosses the event horizon of a black hole, it is impossible for it to escape. This is because the gravity of the black hole is so strong that the escape velocity exceeds the speed of light. However, some theoretical models suggest that particles can escape from the black hole through Hawking radiation.

4. What is a white hole?

A white hole is a hypothetical region in space where matter and energy are constantly being ejected outwards. It is essentially the opposite of a black hole, where matter is being pulled inwards. White holes are not yet proven to exist, but they are predicted by some theories of general relativity.

5. Can a black hole turn into a white hole?

There is no evidence to suggest that a black hole can turn into a white hole. In fact, the laws of physics suggest that a black hole will continue to exist and grow in size as it consumes more matter. However, some theories propose that a black hole could potentially transform into a white hole in the distant future, but this is still a highly debated topic among scientists.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
972
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
942
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
14
Views
2K
Back
Top