What's the opposite of a blackhole?

[mdmaaz]

Blackholes suck everything inside them. I was wondering if there is anything opposite of a black hole. I've heard that there's a "white hole" theory which states white holes are the opposite of a black hole. Is it true that white holes are the opposite of black holes. And what are white holes?

 

[chrisbaird]

Strictly speaking, there is no opposite to a black hole. A black hole is an object whose gravitational attraction is strong enough compared to its radius, that its escape velocity becomes greater than the speed of light, which is unattainable, meaning nothing can escape. The opposite of a black hole would be an object whose gravitational repulsion is strong enough that the velocity needed to approach the object starting far away would become greater than the speed of light, and thus unattainable. The only problem is that gravity is never repulsive, only attractive, so there are no white holes.

The electrostatic force can be repulsive, although. So, in theory, if you could positively electrically charge a ball enough, it would form some kind of electrostatic white hole and no negatively charged particles could approach it. But this would not be a true white hole because photons are not charged and would have no problem approaching such an object.

 

[DaveC426913]

Second chrisbaird's post.

Black holes are the ultimate effect of gravity. There is no reason to suppose white holes exist because gravity is only attractive; it has no repulsive counterpart.

 

[FtlIsAwesome]

Black holes are the ultimate effect of gravity. There is no reason to suppose white holes exist because gravity is only attractive; it has no repulsive counterpart.

And even assuming you could have repulsive gravity (the speculated negative matter would do this--so far we haven't found/synthesised any), the white hole would blow itself apart. Thus you'd defeat the purpose and no more white hole.

 

[mdmaaz]

I understand that there is nothing opposite of a black hole. But I've heard a lot about "white holes", what are they?

 

[Ryan_m_b]

I understand that there is nothing opposite of a black hole. But I've heard a lot about "white holes", what are they?

Well there's no evidence that they exist, they're speculative. Wikipedia is a good place to start http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole

 

[Discord7]

Blackholes suck everything inside them. I was wondering if there is anything opposite of a black hole. I've heard that there's a "white hole" theory which states white holes are the opposite of a black hole. Is it true that white holes are the opposite of black holes. And what are white holes?

Presumably we do not draw the line against speculation on this thread, so hold on, because we must start at a beginning.

There seems good reason to suppose that stars are evidenced to contain more electrons than protons. Perhaps stellar fusion can annihilate some positively charged material without taking electrons away in the process. Since excess electrons would go to the outer surface of a star, then so would electrons from existing plasma tend to be driven outwardly. Given that, then protons within such stellar plasma would necessarily be driven downward.

Voila, naked protons ganged at the center to the exclusion of electrons should offer a static form of fusion beneath the fullest pressure to be found within a star. That alone would explain an overwhelming majority of electrons within any shining galaxy. Such static fusion might be the initial prompt for dynamic fusion with plasma occurring out beyond the central core.

Just as freed electrons would therefore migrate to the rims of galaxies, it follows that positively charged particles in space would move toward the galactic center. As protons gather around the center they would, unlike their situation for solar cores, be free to expand into some hollow shape between that of a sphere and disk. Beneath the margin formed by those protons would be a domain within which free electrons move downward. The center of gravity for an ever-growing sphere of protons would claim neutral particles from all directions to build an incidental black hole amidst the galaxy. As the margin of protons advances in size, outwardly into orbiting stars, it dismantles molecular bonds by drawing away all electrons. A predominant hollow disk formation would send those electrons to its rotational axis where they would align as a fiber-thin beam of electrons on either side of the central black hole, repelling each other outwardly under continued guidance from the very large focusing anode provided by the surrounding positive rim. A predominately spherical form would send them toward a central negative core formation around the black hole.

If a white hole were to exist, it might have been evolved under circumstances of complete reversal of electrical polarities from those of our visible galaxies: capable of bringing an accompanying beam of protons or positrons, and perhaps including larger nuclei to fashion cosmic rays . Such a galaxy might be devoid of nuclear fusion and might dispose of excess thermal intensity by some conversion of energy back into matter as we think of it: perhaps into positrons.