Black Holes vs Wormholes: What's the Difference?

In summary, black holes and worm holes are both theoretical concepts in astrophysics. A black hole sucks things in and converts them to subatomic particles, pulling them towards a singularity. A worm hole is thought to do the same, but then spews everything out into an alternate or "baby" universe. While black holes have been observed indirectly, worm holes are still considered science fiction. To an outside observer, black holes and worm holes appear the same, but any differences would be contained within the event horizon. White holes and worm holes are still fictional concepts, while black holes have been observed in the center of our own galaxy and others. There is also ongoing research to estimate the mass of black holes, with some estimates reaching billions of
  • #1
jontyjashan
68
0
what is the difference between black hole and worm hole
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
Black hole sucks things in, converts everything to it's subatomic particles, and pulls it closer and closer towards a singularity while doing so.

Worm hole sucks things in, converts everything to it's subatomic particles, pulls it closer to a singularity and then spews everything out into an alternate/baby universe.

Realistically, we know BHs exist. Wormholes are still Sci Fi
 
  • #3
I agree with protonchain. Worm holes may actually exist, but the real reason that we can't be sure is nothing has ever gone into a black hole and then been ..'recovered' afterwards. because of the fact that different solar systems are essentially neighbors in a galactic sense, it is feasible to think that when a star implodes and becomes a black hole, it may serve as a 'rip' in the lining of a singular galaxy that may allow matter to seep into another adjacent universe, which is one of the theories on how our universe received the planets that we have today. worm holes are defiantly sci fi how they are currently presented however, as being portals to another dimension. they may merely be a name for a black hole which allows matter to slingshot into a nearby galaxy.
 
  • #4
protonchain said:
Black hole sucks things in, converts everything to it's subatomic particles, and pulls it closer and closer towards a singularity while doing so.

Worm hole sucks things in, converts everything to it's subatomic particles, pulls it closer to a singularity and then spews everything out into an alternate/baby universe.

One important thing to note from protonchain's description is that to an outside observer, the black hole and worm hole appear exactly the same. Any differences are contained within the event horizon (point of no return), so the question of what the difference between them is almost loses all meaning. To all of us who are not trapped within the event horizon, there is no difference.
 
  • #5
how can we prove that black holes exist?
 
  • #6
Nabeshin said:
One important thing to note from protonchain's description is that to an outside observer, the black hole and worm hole appear exactly the same. Any differences are contained within the event horizon (point of no return), so the question of what the difference between them is almost loses all meaning. To all of us who are not trapped within the event horizon, there is no difference.

Are you sure? From an extreme n00b point of view, it would seem like space would be warped slightly differently depending on whether it is a singularity or a wormhole. The picture I have in my mind is the difference between a cone and a hyperboloid of one sheet.
 
  • #7
maze said:
Are you sure? From an extreme n00b point of view, it would seem like space would be warped slightly differently depending on whether it is a singularity or a wormhole. The picture I have in my mind is the difference between a cone and a hyperboloid of one sheet.

I know the wormhole is formed from a combination of a black hole and a white hole. The white hole is some distance away. The black hole connects to the white hole to form a very unstable wormhole (it will last something along the lines of the Planck time before the bond breaks). Meanwhile, from the observer's reference frame, nothing happens.

There are other means in which negative mass is proposed to hold the wormhole open. This would form a more 'tunnel' like gape in space-time, and would be held open by what is called the 'throat'. This would also, however, be unstable as intense radiation would immediately be emitted. I believe that as one holds the hole open, one essentially gets rid of the singularities, causing radiation to shoot out both ends. I think we would see a bright burst of radiation. If I'm wrong, please correct me.
 
  • #8
jontyjashan said:
how can we prove that black holes exist?

Of course. We observe them indirectly all the time. It's obvious you have a black hole when surrounding stars appear to bend into almost unrecognizable shapes. However, that is extreme. We usually see either stars in places they shouldn't be (the light has bent to make them appear in different positions) or we see the jets that they shoot off. The latter is far less likely to observe.
 
  • #9
maze said:
Are you sure? From an extreme n00b point of view, it would seem like space would be warped slightly differently depending on whether it is a singularity or a wormhole. The picture I have in my mind is the difference between a cone and a hyperboloid of one sheet.

I share your concern that there might be a slight difference and the equality of geometries may only be an approximation. However, I think that for a distant observer a BH and star curve spacetime exactly the same, which leads me to the conclusion that a BH and wormhole would as well. Someone better versed in GR could perhaps provide insight into whether this is true or merely an approximation, though.
 
  • #10
"how can we prove that black holes exist?"

When astronomers see a star orbiting around something they can't see, chances are, it's orbiting a black hole. The first black hole, Cygnus X-1, was discovered this way.
 
  • #11
are white holes the worm holes that were mentioned in the topic?
 
  • #12
The most compelling evidence for black holes resides in the center of our milky way. It is a whopper. We have discovered even more gigantic black holes in the center of other galaxies - some with masses of many billions of stars. White holes and worm holes are still science fiction.
 
  • #13
Chronos said:
We have discovered even more gigantic black holes in the center of other galaxies - some with masses of many billions of stars.

Check out the new estimate for the mass of M87.
 
  • #14
has a photo of a black hole ever been clicked or has anyone seen a black hole{i know that is impossible)
 
  • #15
all the things u r talking about is hypothetical
 
  • #16
jontyjashan said:
all the things u r talking about is hypothetical

Black holes are not hypothetical. We know they are there.
 
  • #17
There is compelling evidence black holes power quasars, and exist at the centers of most galaxies. There is no compelling evidence [in fact no evidence] supporting the existence of white holes. You obviously can't photograph a black hole, but you can photograph matter being ripped apart as it is 'eaten' by a black hole.
 
  • #18
jontyjashan said:
has a photo of a black hole ever been clicked or has anyone seen a black hole{i know that is impossible)
While true, the actual centre of the BH is not visible, this is no show-stopper to detection. BHs are actually very bright X-ray objects due to the disk of infalling gas and dust.

Cygus X-1 is probably the most well-known but there are many others.
 
  • #19
is it true that not every BH has a singularity?
 
  • #20
ta_minh_trang said:
is it true that not every BH has a singularity?

The singularity theorems of Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking use classical general relativity to prove that all black holes contain singularities. Many physicists, however, think that quantum gravity is relevant for such extreme situations, but currently there is no quantum theory of gravity that can be used to make reliable, accepted, useful calculations.
 

What are black holes and wormholes?

Black holes are regions in space with an incredibly strong gravitational pull that prevents anything, including light, from escaping. Wormholes are hypothetical tunnels or shortcuts in space-time that connect two distant points.

What is the main difference between black holes and wormholes?

The main difference is that black holes are formed from the collapse of a massive star, while wormholes are only theoretical and have not been observed in nature.

Can anything escape from a black hole or a wormhole?

No, nothing can escape from a black hole once it crosses the event horizon. However, some theories suggest that objects could potentially enter and exit a wormhole, but it is highly speculative and has not been proven.

What are the potential uses of black holes and wormholes?

Black holes could potentially be used as a source of energy, while wormholes could potentially be used as a means of faster-than-light travel. However, both concepts are still in the realm of theory and require more research and understanding.

How are black holes and wormholes studied and observed?

Black holes are studied through their effects on surrounding matter and light, while wormholes can only be studied through mathematical models and simulations. Observing both directly is currently beyond our technological capabilities.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
942
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
972
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
6
Views
1K
Back
Top