Inside the Black Hole: Unravelling Its Mysteries

[suraj]

What is inside the black hole? It is a tunnel for other universe or anything else.
what happen to us when we go inside the black hole?

 

[Danger]

No one knows exactly what's inside. I'm not entirely sure that you can even presume that there is an 'inside', since it's supposedly a dimensionless point.
You can't get there in any form that you'd care to experience anyway. The tidal forces would rip you to subatomic particles long before impact, and you'd most likely be dead from X-ray poisoning even sooner.

 

[vincentm]

In essence it is a point of zero size, but infinite mass - a star that is so large that when it has spent all of it's nuclear fuel it begins to implode in onitself. However as it's mass is already so large the more it implodes in on itself, the greater it's mass becomes, so that eventually you end up with a run away process where as the star collapes or shrinks it becomes more and more dense, and the more compacted it becomes, the greater the gravitational force it generates - until eventually the start becomes so compacted it collapses to a point so small it essentally has no size whatsoever - but which (as stated) still has infinite mass. For this catastrophic collapse to occur, you need a star that has a mass that is at least 3 1/4 times the size of our own sun.
However it still obays Newton's theory of Universal Gravitation (and later Einstein refinements also), which basically state that 'every object in the Universe attracts every other object with a force directed along the line of centers for the two objects that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the speration between the two objects.'
http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/history/gravity.gif

Or in other words, the further away you are from (any) body of mass in the Universe, the weaker its gravitational influence becomes. This is true also of black holes - even though at the exact point the black hole exists, gravity itself can be considered to be infinite.
It also makes no sense to say 'what would happen if you entered a black hole'. Whether string theory is correct or not (in that information might be able to escape a black hole) what is clear is that at the exact point that a black hole exits all matter is stretched so thinly so as to become exactly infinately thin. We are not just talking about spaghetti here - we are talking about the thinest spaghetti it is possible for you to imagine, indeed as I said infinately thin. Asking what would happen if I entered a black hole, is a bit like asking 'what would happen if I threw myself into a volcano?' The answer is that you would die - and anything that went in there with you would be destroyed. The only difference being that a black hole is an infinite number of times (again literally) more deadly than any volcano ever could be.
It also makes no sense to ask what happens 'inside a black hole'. There is no such thing as 'inside', you can't have an inside of a point of infinite mass and infinite density and zero size. The term 'inside' literally has no meaning. Nor does time, or motion, or or up or down, or big or small any of these things. The point at which a black hole exists (which is known as a singularity) is a point at which the known laws of physics stop working - which some might argue is Hawking mistake, because he is using known physical laws to describe an object where no such laws exist.
BTW for anyone moving towards a black hole (given that this is not advisabe) their time would not slow down to a crawl and then eventually stop as some here have described. Or at least not from their perspective. For an observer moving towards a black hole their time (to them) would continue to appear to pass normally. However they would notice everyone else in the Universe would appear to be moving progressively more slowly. However, from our perspective it is our time that would seem to move normally - while it is the person moving towards the black hole who's time would seem to pass more slowly. Time is not the fixed thing you might imagine it to be - it is as Einstein described it, 'relative.' It depends on where you are in the Universe much more than 'when' you are.
I trust this clarifies the subject discussed here.

edit: forgot the quote tags

 

[Labguy]

In essence it is a point of zero size, but infinite mass

That was used several times in your post. Black holes do not have infinite mass. If they did, we wouldn't be having threads on black holes of stellar size, 100 solar masses, supermassive in galactic cores, etc. They would all be the same, ie infinite.
I presume you are trying to describe a singularity of zero point size and infinite density.(?) I know that the math works for that description, but I think that nobody today would accept that there could be any non-rotating black holes, so maybe we could change that to a ring singularity. Also, there are many (I have read) who won't buy the idea of even infinite density, that is a ring singularity with a width dimension, but of zero thickness. I think that huge density is replacing infinite, since a singularity should be at least a minimum of Planck size. That would be very dense, but not infinite.

 

[vincentm]

That was used several times in your post. Black holes do not have infinite mass. If they did, we wouldn't be having threads on black holes of stellar size, 100 solar masses, supermassive in galactic cores, etc. They would all be the same, ie infinite.
I presume you are trying to describe a singularity of zero point size and infinite density.(?) I know that the math works for that description, but I think that nobody today would accept that there could be any non-rotating black holes, so maybe we could change that to a ring singularity. Also, there are many (I have read) who won't buy the idea of even infinite density, that is a ring singularity with a width dimension, but of zero thickness. I think that huge density is replacing infinite, since a singularity should be at least a minimum of Planck size. That would be very dense, but not infinite.

Now that makes sense, forgive me what was posted above by was not my words, i just forgot the quote tags, infinite mass (now that you point it out) doesn't sound right, because if that was the case then there wouldn't be particular sizes to any of the black holes documented so far, right?

 

[Labguy]

Now that makes sense, forgive me what was posted above by was not my words, i just forgot the quote tags, infinite mass (now that you point it out) doesn't sound right, because if that was the case then there wouldn't be particular sizes to any of the black holes documented so far, right?

That's the way I would think... A bunch of black holes, each with infinite mass, would sure solve the 'ol dark matter problem and there would be a "big crunch" in the near future...

 

[hellfire]

What is inside the black hole? It is a tunnel for other universe or anything else.
what happen to us when we go inside the black hole?

A black hole is the region within a event horizon. According to general relativity we know what happens there, altough we will not be able to observe it. For example, we know that no stable orbits exist there and that everything must decrease its radial distance falling towads the singularity. What we do not know is how to describe the singularity, which is the central, infinitely dense point of a black hole.

 

[Pippo]

edit: forgot the quote tags

I don't agree with the supposing about spaghetti, it's true for an external observator but everything is normal to whom is entering the black hole as space time is completely different, so the spaghetti are just the result of the distorted immage sent to the external observator.
What do you think about "space density"?

 

[Danger]

I'm not sure that I understand your objection to the spaghetti reference, Pippo. That's exactly the effect that tidal forces have (except that the noodles also get narrower toward the hole). It happens because of the inverse square law of gravity. The closer you get, the more the pull on the near end exceeds the pull on the far end.

 

[pattiecake]

The appearance of your body being stretched out like a piece of spaghetti isn't relative to you, an observer, or anything else. Your body is literally being pulled apart by the immense force of gravity...good times!

 

[Pippo]

I'm not sure that I understand your objection to the spaghetti reference, Pippo. That's exactly the effect that tidal forces have (except that the noodles also get narrower toward the hole). It happens because of the inverse square law of gravity. The closer you get, the more the pull on the near end exceeds the pull on the far end.

I am not referring to the effects of gravity onthe human body, perhaps I misunderstood, I was just saying that if I enter the black hole with a meter I will always measure me as 1,80 m high while for my friend on the Earth I have disappeared.
(Apologize my english is not so good)

 

[Danger]

Oh, I see; you're referring to relativistic effects due to gravity. In that case, ignoring the physical hardship, you're right. Your time, mass and length will appear normal to you.

 

[flotsam]

Now that makes sense, forgive me what was posted above by was not my words, i just forgot the quote tags, infinite mass (now that you point it out) doesn't sound right, because if that was the case then there wouldn't be particular sizes to any of the black holes documented so far, right?

Given this as true, how does this reflect on the big-bang theory? I mean, how can there be certain values for todays universe if it were born from infinite mass etc at the start? Does this mean the mass of the universe today is infinite and if not how do we get from infinity to a certain value for the mass of todays universe?

 

[hellfire]

There is nothing in the big-bang model that requires infinite mass of the universe at any time of its evolution. However, the model contains a singularity at t = 0 which is a state of infinite density.

 

[Reshma]

Wormholes!

What is inside the black hole? It is a tunnel for other universe or anything else.
what happen to us when we go inside the black hole?

The tunnel you are talking about is a wormhole. This concept is very appealing to science fiction writers: "tunnelling through the contorted space-time geometry of black holes into another universe or emerge into our own universe at some other time and space."

 

[suraj]

sorry maam you are wrong because it is not a science fiction. It going to be true but after few year.

 

[vincentm]

sorry maam you are wrong because it is not a science fiction. It going to be true but after few year.

Maybe it is just me but I am really getting a bit annoyed at your posts, which seem to be all fubar, do you even know about wormholes? Right now they only exist in mathematics, the schwartzchild wormhole violates the second law of thermodynamics, but this isn't the only wormhole to be concieved by a physicist.

The Einstein-Rosen bridge was another theory of wormhole, which again only exists in mathematics.
http://www.cakes.mcmail.com/StarTrek/worm.htm

Now some of these require an "exotic mater" that has a negative charge in order to keep the wormhole open if not it collapses on itself, leaving the would be traveler, dead. The problem is that we don't know whether this matter exists and wormholes will require vast amounts of it.

 

[Danger]

There's also, as I recall, a huge and continuously escalating amount of negative energy required. I assume that your reference to the negative matter is in regard to producing that?