White holes

Do white holes exist? If not why not? If a white hole is the opposite of a black hole then it will have the following properties:- Black holes converge, localise or attract matter towards a point. white holes diverge, non-localise or repel matter. White holes should therefore be called white divergences they are not holes at all, they are the opposite of a point structure. If black holes slow down time form our perspective then a white divergence must speed up time (time contraction) and dilate distance. This effect is equivalent to a spherical reverse telescope effect whereas a black hole has an associated spherical telescope effect or magnification. If black holes are cold due to massive time dilation then a white divergence must be superhot due to time contaction. Is there a connection between the big bang and a white divergence? By definition there can only be one white hole the one we seem to be living in. It is interesting to note that a spherical reverse telescope effect will produce an increasing red shift just like the big bang!


Staff Emeritus
Gold Member
Dearly Missed
There are many differences between the big bang and the properties of a theoretical white hole. You can't really analyze all this with just the words from popular articles; you need the math. Both the big bang and black (and white) holes are solutions of Einstein's field equations for particular cases. But the cases are different.

Maybe white holes are formed from superdense pockets of dark energy.

paul_abbotts said:
White holes should therefore be called white divergences they are not holes at all, they are the opposite of a point structure. ...... Is there a connection between the big bang and a white divergence? By definition there can only be one white hole the one we seem to be living in.
I had similar (speculative) thoughts. Black holes are sometimes suggested to be 5D objects. That allows a curvature and closure on cosmological scale of 4D space-time in the 5th dimension. An observer should then see the same effect of that curvature in the far distance of the universe as he does near a black hole, i.e., objects in the far distance of the universe should show redshift, purely as a result of the space-time curvature in 5D.

Now we could speculate that the "edge" of the universe is in fact the "inside" of all black holes together, thus closing the circle in 5D. What we see is just the other side of the Schwarzschild radius. That means that whatever falls into a black hole will appear again instantly at the "edge" of the universe. It suggests that the edge of the universe is in fact a gigantic "white hole" and should therefore radiate energy (cosmic background radiation?).

In Euclidean relativity the 4-velocity of all objects is always [itex]c[/itex]. That also works in 5D if you assume a rotation of the 5-velocity vector towards the axis of [itex]x_5[/itex] when an object falls into a black hole. At the universe's "edge" where the object shows up again, this velocity begins to rotate back again. See the attached GIF file that shows the path of the 5-velocity rotation (it's actually an animated GIF but that doesn't show in this forum. You can also find it http://www.rfjvanlinden171.freeler.nl/idea/blackhole.gif).
Individual velocity components for the falling object are the coordinate velocity in 3-dimensional space:
the velocity in the time dimension [itex]x_4[/itex]:
and the velocity in [itex]x_5[/itex]:

I have never checked the remaining math of this idea completely (and don't feel very able to do so either) so don't take it too serious.


Last edited by a moderator:
I was talking to a friend a few days ago and the topic of white holes came up. I suggested that white holes were a point inspace were there was less than zero mass.
(a singularity is a point of infinite mass, thus an anti-singularity would have infinite "nullity")

Perhap's we have been looking for the white hole in the wrong place. Since a black hole, forgive this, compresses into a singularity, then is it not logical that a white hole does the opposite? Perhap's the "Big Bang" was not an event, in the normal sense, but the beginning of a white hole which exist still? In other words, the "white hole" is the known universe inwhich we exist. Simple, yet logical. Do not ask for mathmatical theorem, I have none to support it. But it would support the idea of a multiverse in that numerous black hole's would be gateway's to numerous white holes. Paradox in that "when did time start?" "What is the point of origin of gravity?" Logical to assume that one beget's the other in a loop, as a mobius strip.

My expertise lie in, heh, liberal art's. I can only base this on my career experience: a fugitive's past whereabout's being that of a black hole, the fugitive being a singularity, and his proposed future whereabout's being a white hole. Logical profiling which has worked quite well for me.
you not only need math but 3D simulations. From what i learned from my project on white holes in my astrophysics courses ...they can't be stable.
The Universe in my opinion is boolean, If you remove the space from (ALL) matter then you would have no matter at all.

Quoted from the movie, Matrix: There is no spoon!

Just my opinion though.

Gerald L. Blakley
Electron Microscope of Gold Atoms

Here is an Electron Microscope image of Gold Atoms, Notice how they look like cotton balls or Cumulous clouds.

Gerald L. Blakley :smile:


Last edited:

Physics Forums Values

We Value Quality
• Topics based on mainstream science
• Proper English grammar and spelling
We Value Civility
• Positive and compassionate attitudes
• Patience while debating
We Value Productivity
• Disciplined to remain on-topic
• Recognition of own weaknesses
• Solo and co-op problem solving