Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

White hole / black hole theory

  1. Jun 24, 2003 #1
    white hole black hole theory:

    so a black hole sucks in matter and energy and crushes it to an infinitly small dense point. ok but then what happens?

    and what are white holes? do they exist? what do they do?

    can anyone explain to me about black and white holes and what if any link is there between them.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jun 24, 2003 #2

    MathematicalPhysicist

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    white holes- the equivelant to black hole. a white hole is an area where matter and energy goes out of it from a singularity to space.
    no one knows if they do exist.

    the link between them might be with a wormhole (matter goes in black hole and after that it exit through the white hole), but this is also just an assumption.
     
  4. Jun 24, 2003 #3
    ok but does anyone know what happens to the matter that goes into a black hole, or is this still a mystery. i know it gets crushed really small but then what
    [?]
     
  5. Jun 24, 2003 #4

    Phobos

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    It's a mystery. Modern physics cannot accurately describe what goes on at the singularity where both huge gravitational effects and quantum-scale events become significant. (Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have yet to be linked....e.g., through some theory of Quantum Gravity)

    The mass/energy may simply stay there or it may explode into a new universe. Who knows?

    A white hole is another mathematical solution to (I think) General Relativity...however, there is no evidence for their existence. It is the opposite of a black hole (point at which nothing can enter?). There is some speculation (mostly in Sci Fi it seems) that there is a wormhole/tunnel between black holes and white holes. But there's no evidence that wormholes exist either.
     
  6. Jun 24, 2003 #5
    so black holes crush matter and do god knows what with it, white holes may exist and if they do we dont really know what it is they are.humm perplexing
     
  7. Jun 24, 2003 #6
    There might or might not be a singularity inside a black hole (if I'm not mistaken). If there is one, matter is indeed 'crushed' to a point (all dimensions are zero). The safest bet is to say that the matter just exists then, nothing happens to it. There are some complicated explanations, but I'm afraid most are just speculations.

    Most scientists agree that white holes are highly unlikey to exist. Mathemathically, they might, but they probably don't. A comparison I've always liked is that let's say that a man 2 m long weights 100 kg, and a man 1 m long weights 50 kg, and that it's a general law. This allows a man of 20 m and 1000 kg exist, but I haven't heard of any...

    By the way, I'm not sure, but I think that in the case of wormholes there might be black holes at both ends, not just one...
     
  8. Jun 24, 2003 #7
    White Holes do not exist. They do not follow the second law of thmerodyanmics.
     
  9. Jun 25, 2003 #8
    The same set of Equations give rise to White holes and Blacholes, both are relative, and both are evolutions of Relativy Theory.

    There is a perception principle, where a White hole emerges from a Blackhole(both are one end of a single(singularity)set of Einsteins Equations. The emerging of a White hole from around a Blackhole is equivilent to that of every Galaxy is deemed to have a blackhole core at its centre, and looking from outside these equations(looking at another Galaxy in space) a Galaxy is the whitehole surrounding a blackhole!

    All the problems occur when one tries to percieve a blackhole and/or a whitehole from within a Galaxy, we do this because we are part of a whitehole, being we are inside a whitehole that is surrounding a Blackhole that is at our Galactice Core within our Milky Way.

    The theory of Einsteins Relativity has always thrown up perceptional problems for observers/mathematicians, who try and comprhend a Reality, on oneside you have the Quantum holes(BLACK/unseen) and on the otherside you have Special Relativity, and the Cosmologists who look and see the Cosmos through telescopes, they see a load of Whiteholes..STARS..filling the dark night sky as..GALAXIES!

    It is most interesting that the Equations give rise to a Star(whitehole) can create a blackhole during a supernova collapse, but this is also one of the most misguided perceptional problems today, more realistic that a Star emerges from a Blackhole,Blackholes creates Whitehole(Stars in Galaxies) who as ever heard of a Star that create a whitehole?..its a perceptional thing that we humans find most difficult balenced, by our Time related Equations, shows that Stars are themselves Whiteholes.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2003
  10. Jun 25, 2003 #9
    ok this is all getting really confusing now, im giving up and going away from this thread.

    (mutters under breath) wish i'd never started the topic.
     
  11. Jun 25, 2003 #10
    Um stars aren't white holes. I don't think you know what you're talking about. They're balls of gas that are fusing due to the gravity of all that mass. If every star was white hole, we'd see a hell of a lot more black hole evidence don't you think? I'd read up on cosmology a little more.
     
  12. Jun 25, 2003 #11
    oooohh bit**y

    ok so to summarize no one really knows what goes on in blackholes and white holes may or may not exist.

    ok im outta here till we get some definite answers
     
  13. Jun 25, 2003 #12
    Stars are not white holes, and white holes are highly hypothetical. They probably don't exist.

    Black holes, on the other hand, do exist. It's fairly safe to say that nothing happens to the matter that falls into it (except it gets compressed). It just goes on existing.
     
  14. Jun 25, 2003 #13

    Phobos

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2017
  15. Jun 25, 2003 #14

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Has anyone been able to predict the size or age of a Black Hole? Since we are now discussing super-massive Black Holes, it would seem that the stuff [stuff inside of the Black Holes] stays around in this universe. But, then it occurs to me that gravity does escape from black holes. By this, we have information about what's in there - how much mass. However, even if a star fell into a Black Hole a million years ago, and even if it goes into another universe after falling in, wouldn't we see the effects of the mass in this universe virtually forever due to time dilation inside of the even horizon?

    Edit: Doesn't our theoretical ability to measure the increase in mass of a Black Hole [as something falls in] void the statement that no information can traverse the event horizon?
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2003
  16. Jun 25, 2003 #15
    you are familiar with Hawking radiation, are you not? information can and does leave a black hole.
     
  17. Jun 25, 2003 #16

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Well, maybe I was thinking of something else. But what about the time dilation for things falling in? EDIT: It would seem that even if things falling in eventually would leave this universe, by the effects of time dilation, they are forever stuck falling, inside of the event horizon, and frozen in time for an eternity. By this the paradox seems to be resolved.
     
    Last edited: Jun 25, 2003
  18. Jun 25, 2003 #17

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Does this actually tell us anything about what's inside of the Black Hole?
     
  19. Jun 25, 2003 #18
    if a black hole has a singularity, than yes, time would end. but i don't know if falling in a singularity is the same thing as "falling out of the universe".
    p.s.: like the new avatar. very creepy. are those actual government photos?
     
  20. Jun 25, 2003 #19
    no, but you're missing the point. there is nothing inside a black hole but gravity.
     
  21. Jun 25, 2003 #20

    Labguy

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Yes, but what causes the gravity? There must be matter = mass, which is finite and measureable.
    That would also seem to rule out the conjecture that the matter / mass flows out somewhere as a "White Hole". If it did, the BH would have no way to increase in mass, as many do. Someone else mentioned that a "singularity" may, or does not need, to exist. For all we know, the event horizon may be the "surface" of the matter of a star that has collapsed to a state more compressed than a neutron star. Neutron stars have a definable surface. Hawking dumped the singularity idea years ago.
     
  22. Jun 25, 2003 #21
    To clarify some things: White holes cannot exist. Not only do they violate thermodynamics, but also if there existed any white hole, we'd see it. It would pour out so much radiation that it would be extremely detectable.

    Gravity does not escape from a black hole. Remember, gravity is not only a field, but the curvature of spacetime. This curvature of spacetime does not escape from a black hole.

    As for Hawking radiation, yes it is information, but it is not yet clear if it is useful information.
     
  23. Jun 25, 2003 #22
    i'm not saying that white holes exist, they don't. exactly because of what you just said. but that arguement doesn't rule out the possibility that they might exist in a more mature universe. before stars, were there beings that wondered if a star could ever be possible?
     
  24. Jun 25, 2003 #23
    I wasn't really saying anyone was specifically, just to point out finally why they can't. And chances are, if there were beings before stars...they'd have to be non-corporeal. Since before stars, there were no heavy elements, and the laws of physics would still prohibit white holes then anyways.
     
  25. Jun 26, 2003 #24

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Hehe. Thanks. This picture really creeped me out...it looks a little too good. The full sized image is fairly impressive. But no, in spite of the claims otherwise, I have no reason to believe this is a genuine photo.

    pss...maximus...it is really a picture of me but don't tell anyone.
     
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2003
  26. Jun 26, 2003 #25

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Doesn't this depend on how we define our closed system; is it one universe or two?

    Egad that was a terrible choice of words. I stand corrected.

    What struck me as interesting was that we can say something about what happens to a mass after it passes the event horizon. Since if a singularity does exist, from our point of view time would stop for any object beyond the EH, then why did the whole debate about black holes being gateways to other universes ever exist? [I don't mean just here but for the last 30 years]. The whole line of reasoning appears to be inconsistent. What good is a gateway through which nothing can really ever pass in the lifetime of the universe?
     
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook