Question about white/black holes

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter EvanD
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Holes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical concepts of white holes and their potential relationship to black holes, including the idea that our universe might be a 'bubble' created by white holes. Participants explore the implications of these theories, their validity, and the lack of empirical evidence supporting white holes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that white holes could be the 'exits' of black holes, potentially creating new universes and contributing to the expansion of our universe.
  • Others argue that while white holes are theoretically possible, there is no empirical evidence for their existence, and they may be purely speculative.
  • A participant mentions that the concept of white holes is often dismissed as a figment of theorists' imagination, particularly in the context of classical physics.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between white holes and the Big Bang, with one participant suggesting that the Big Bang could be considered a white hole event.
  • Some participants challenge the idea that white holes exist infinitely in the past, suggesting that there are particle worldlines that could connect white holes and black holes within finite time.
  • There is a mention of the need for verification and falsification of theories, drawing parallels to Einstein's theory of relativity, which was initially met with skepticism.
  • Concerns are raised about the reliability of popular science media in conveying accurate information about such topics.
  • Participants discuss the theoretical nature of white holes and their implications in general relativity, with some questioning the meaningfulness of the concept without empirical support.
  • There is a brief exploration of the analogy between particle-antiparticle pairs and black holes-white holes, though some participants caution against oversimplifying these relationships.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the existence and implications of white holes, with no consensus reached. Some participants are open to the theoretical possibilities, while others remain skeptical about their validity and existence.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the speculative nature of the discussion, the lack of empirical evidence for white holes, and the dependence on theoretical frameworks that may not be universally accepted. The discussion also reflects varying interpretations of general relativity and its implications for white holes.

EvanD
Messages
1
Reaction score
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
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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?
 
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.
 
Thanks for the reply ill keep researching online and in local libraries.
 
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.
 
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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K