Why do scientists believe white holes are impossible?

  • Thread starter Ultrastar 1
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Holes
In summary, white holes are hypothetical objects that are the opposite of black holes, spitting out matter and light rather than sucking them in. However, there are multiple reasons why white holes do not exist. First, they violate the second law of thermodynamics. Second, the gravitational force of a black hole would make it impossible for a wormhole to form and transport matter to a white hole. Third, the amount of energy needed to create a wormhole is much greater than the energy produced by a black hole. Additionally, the material that is sucked into a black hole does not go anywhere else, it is compressed and destroyed within the core of the black hole. The existence of white holes is still a subject of debate and more research is
  • #1
Ultrastar 1
60
0
I have multiple reasons why white holes do not exist. But first let’s go over what a white hole is. It is: the same as a black hole, but in reverse. Instead of sucking up matter and light, it spits it out. This spit out matter and light are said to have been from a black hole, transported to the white hole by a wormhole or inter-space bridge. This is not true because: first, it violates thermodynamic law number 2. Second, the wormhole cannot be produced by a black hole because the gravitational sheer that a black hole produces would be too great for a formation of a wormhole, meaning it would be impossible for it to form because of all the gravity produced by the black hole. Third: we know that it takes a significant amount of gravitational energy or force in order to reshape the fabric of space and form wormholes, but is that amount equal or less than the amount generated by black holes? Not even close. As we know, black holes are sort of shaped like funnels. They suck up matter and light and channel it into the core of their singulaty, where it is pretty much destroyed. Well, because a black hole channels all of its energy forward instead of backward or any other direction, no energy is going past the core to make a wormhole, therefore, not transmitting their matter and light to a white hole, thus rendering white holes nonexistent.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #2
then where does all the material go once it is in the black hole? it has to go somewhere.

also have scientists actually observed material being sucked into a black hole?
 
  • #3
jamesabc said:
then where does all the material go once it is in the black hole? it has to go somewhere.
Where did all the material the black hole consists of come from? It have to come from somewhere?
 
  • #4
It comes from the space around the black hole, of course. That part has been observed. I don't see your point.
 
  • #5
HallsofIvy said:
It comes from the space around the black hole, of course. That part has been observed. I don't see your point.
My points was that his question was as dumb as the question I asked him.

The mass is inside the black hole, in what form or shaper we don't know, but it is in there.
 
  • #6
Klockan3 said:
My points was that his question was as dumb as the question I asked him.

The mass is inside the black hole, in what form or shaper we don't know, but it is in there.

Who did you ask the question to?
 
  • #7
jamesabc said:
then where does all the material go once it is in the black hole? it has to go somewhere.

also have scientists actually observed material being sucked into a black hole?

Ok, here is how it works: Some people (and I am one of them) believe that the matter that is scuked up goes into the core of the black black hole, and is then compressed again and again until there is nothing left. This is because the force that compresses the matter is circulating around the core of the black hole (the core is originally the core of a collapsed neutron star.) This circulation causes the above stated compression cylce.
 
  • #8
Ultrastar 1 said:
They suck up matter and light and channel it into the core of their singulaty, where it is pretty much destroyed.

I like how you used the violation of thermo 2 as evidence that white holes can't exist, but your model of a black hole violates the most basic of all of the laws of physics.
 
  • #9
Archosaur said:
I like how you used the violation of thermo 2 as evidence that white holes can't exist, but your model of a black hole violates the most basic of all of the laws of physics.

Can you expain the last post a little bit more?
 
  • #10
Archosaur said:
I like how you used the violation of thermo 2 as evidence that white holes can't exist, but your model of a black hole violates the most basic of all of the laws of physics.

Thanks. Can you expain the last post a little bit more?
 
  • #11
Ultrastar 1 said:
matter... is compressed again and again until there is nothing left.

Ultrastar 1 said:
matter and light... is pretty much destroyed.

google "Conservation of Matter"
 
Last edited:
  • #12
Archosaur said:
google "Conservation of Matter"

oh ok. Thanks. I'm still not convinced that they exist though, you can't ignore my theory... (:
 
  • #13
Ultrastar 1 said:
oh ok. Thanks. I'm still not convinced that they exist though, you can't ignore my theory... (:

Whoa now. Don't get me wrong. I was only trying to suggest a little rethinking of your model of a black hole. I wasn't trying to defend white holes. Heck no. I'm not convinced either.
 
  • #14
Archosaur said:
Whoa now. Don't get me wrong. I was only trying to suggest a little rethinking of your model of a black hole. I wasn't trying to defend white holes. Heck no. I'm not convinced either.

Oh ok. I understood you wrong. Thanks, ill try to rethink the theory.
 
  • #15
Can anyone describe the entropy increase or decrease for black and white holes?
 
  • #16
menergyam said:
Can anyone describe the entropy increase or decrease for black and white holes?

Im still working on that. Entropy is not a subject that I can understand that good. I am close to an answer, but I am still donig research. I will let you know when I have something.
 
  • #18
What do you think about ring (Kerr) singularities>
 
  • #19
P.S. From wiki, I don't understand this part:

If black holes carried no entropy, it would be possible to violate the second law of thermodynamics by throwing mass into the black hole. The only way to satisfy the second law is to admit that the black holes have entropy whose increase more than compensates for the decrease of the entropy carried by the object that was swallowed.

I see that point, you can not get rid of entropy by throwing objects in a black hole.

However, the second law is defined for the isolated SYSTEM and implicitly uses the absolute simultanity of the state of that system which is not consistent with SR/GR and for the Black Hole is not applicable 'as is', at least, without giving additional clarifications.
 
  • #21
Klockan3 said:
Where did all the material the black hole consists of come from? It have to come from somewhere?

It came from the material left over from a large star collapsing unto itself.
 
  • #22
Ultrastar 1 said:
I have multiple reasons why white holes do not exist. But first let’s go over what a white hole is. It is: the same as a black hole, but in reverse.
You are offering a solution for which there is no problem. White holes don't exist for the same reason unicorns don't exist.


But as long as you're looking for reasons, here's the big one: gravity is a one-way force. There is no counterpart to it.
 
  • #23
DaveC426913 said:
You are offering a solution for which there is no problem. White holes don't exist for the same reason unicorns don't exist.


But as long as you're looking for reasons, here's the big one: gravity is a one-way force. There is no counterpart to it.

What about dark matter?
 
  • #24
No no no no no no no no
 
  • #25
Mr. Paradox said:
What about dark matter?
What about it?
 
  • #26
It would bo cool to see if they do exist. you are right theoreticaly they do not. but where do the black holes go? maybe a new universe. maybe that is what we call the big bang. new material from another universe.
 
  • #27
mikeasabsa said:
It would bo cool to see if they do exist. you are right theoreticaly they do not. but where do the black holes go? maybe a new universe. maybe that is what we call the big bang. new material from another universe.
(Careful. Overly-speculative.)

One of things that suggests the matter does not go anywhere is that its gravitational effects are still felt just as if it's clumped up in the centre of the BH. Whatever happens to the matter down there, it doesn't seem to have any detrimental effects on the matter's gravity.
 
  • #28
The main argument that white holes exist seems to come from the Time part of CPT symmetry. This could be a flawed arguement. Additionally, There is plenty of observational evidence that leads to the conclusion that black holes exist. If white holes did exist they would be much easier to detect than black holes, yet we have no observational evidence for their existence whatsoever.
 
  • #29
The lack of obserational evidence for white holes is fairly compelling to me. One could argue for gamma bursters as evidence, but, i find that argument weak.
 
  • #30
If I read Hawking's original papers, 30 years ago, he wrote there that for all purpose white holes would be indistinguishable from black holes, at least for an outside observer. The rate of matter "evaporation" from a white all is identical to the rate of radiation from a black hole. I stress again, in the original papers of Hawking 30 years ago, I don't know about now. So from this point of view, there is no more or no less observational evidence for white or black holes !
 
  • #31
DaveC426913 said:
But as long as you're looking for reasons, here's the big one: gravity is a one-way force. There is no counterpart to it.

But you've got it wrong. Gravitional force is time-evolution symmetric. As much as theory admits black holes, it admits white holes. It really does become a question of entropy, where we should ask, how should the observed entropy of the universe find correlation with white holes/blackholes?
 
  • #32
Schwarzschild is just an idealization for the eternal flat spacetime around an object.
Realistic solution depends on the consmological model (open, closed universes).
So white holes are not compatible with Big Bang consmology.
 
  • #33
Dmitry67 said:
Schwarzschild is just an idealization for the eternal flat spacetime around an object.
Realistic solution depends on the consmological model (open, closed universes).
So white holes are not compatible with Big Bang consmology.

Then neither are black holes. Replace t with -t in the schwarzschild solution, and you have replaced a black hole with a white hole.
 
Last edited:
  • #34
The difference is (in the open universe) that we have only 13 billion years of the time BEFORE today but the eternity AFTER. So our position in time is very assymetric. So you can't just change the sign of t
 
  • #35
humanino said:
If I read Hawking's original papers, 30 years ago, he wrote there that for all purpose white holes would be indistinguishable from black holes, at least for an outside observer. The rate of matter "evaporation" from a white all is identical to the rate of radiation from a black hole. I stress again, in the original papers of Hawking 30 years ago, I don't know about now. So from this point of view, there is no more or no less observational evidence for white or black holes !

Hypothetically, an over-extremal rotating 'black' hole would behave like a white hole based on-

[tex]\kappa_\pm=\frac{r_+-r_-}{2(r_\pm^2+a^2)}[/tex]

where [itex]\kappa_\pm[/itex] is the Killing surface gravity at the outer (r+) and inner (r-) event horizon where-

[tex]r_\pm=M\pm\sqrt{M^2-a^2}[/tex]

where M=Gm/c2 and a=J/mc

The inner and outer event horizons would disappear (the coordinate radii would technically swap places) and [itex]\kappa_\pm[/itex] would become negative if a>M. While there is a mechanism in place for the formation of black holes (where a<M), there isn't one for the over-extremal solution. Either they would have had to have always existed or there is a mechanism as yet unknown (the notion of http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=naked-singularities" seems to have made a recent reappearance). Also, it would be interesting to see how temperature and entropy would fit into such a solution.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
<h2>1. Why do scientists believe white holes are impossible?</h2><p>There are several reasons why scientists believe white holes are impossible. Firstly, the concept of a white hole contradicts the laws of thermodynamics, which state that energy cannot be created or destroyed. A white hole would need to constantly create energy in order to continuously push matter away, which goes against this fundamental law. Additionally, there is no observational evidence or theoretical framework to support the existence of white holes. </p><h2>2. Can white holes be explained by black hole evaporation?</h2><p>No, white holes cannot be explained by black hole evaporation. While black holes are theorized to eventually evaporate and release energy, this process would not result in a white hole. The energy released by black hole evaporation would not be enough to counteract the intense gravitational pull of the black hole and create a white hole.</p><h2>3. Are there any observed phenomena that could be attributed to white holes?</h2><p>No, there are no observed phenomena that can definitively be attributed to white holes. Some scientists have proposed that certain cosmic explosions, such as gamma-ray bursts, could be caused by white holes, but there is no concrete evidence to support this theory.</p><h2>4. Could white holes exist in another universe or dimension?</h2><p>While it is possible that white holes could exist in other universes or dimensions, there is no scientific evidence to support this idea. The laws of physics, including the laws of thermodynamics, are believed to be consistent throughout the universe, making it highly unlikely that white holes could exist in a different universe or dimension.</p><h2>5. Is the concept of a white hole still being studied by scientists?</h2><p>Yes, the concept of white holes is still being studied by scientists, but it is not a widely accepted or actively researched topic. Most scientists believe that white holes are highly unlikely to exist based on our current understanding of physics. However, some researchers continue to explore the possibility of white holes and their potential implications for our understanding of the universe.</p>

1. Why do scientists believe white holes are impossible?

There are several reasons why scientists believe white holes are impossible. Firstly, the concept of a white hole contradicts the laws of thermodynamics, which state that energy cannot be created or destroyed. A white hole would need to constantly create energy in order to continuously push matter away, which goes against this fundamental law. Additionally, there is no observational evidence or theoretical framework to support the existence of white holes.

2. Can white holes be explained by black hole evaporation?

No, white holes cannot be explained by black hole evaporation. While black holes are theorized to eventually evaporate and release energy, this process would not result in a white hole. The energy released by black hole evaporation would not be enough to counteract the intense gravitational pull of the black hole and create a white hole.

3. Are there any observed phenomena that could be attributed to white holes?

No, there are no observed phenomena that can definitively be attributed to white holes. Some scientists have proposed that certain cosmic explosions, such as gamma-ray bursts, could be caused by white holes, but there is no concrete evidence to support this theory.

4. Could white holes exist in another universe or dimension?

While it is possible that white holes could exist in other universes or dimensions, there is no scientific evidence to support this idea. The laws of physics, including the laws of thermodynamics, are believed to be consistent throughout the universe, making it highly unlikely that white holes could exist in a different universe or dimension.

5. Is the concept of a white hole still being studied by scientists?

Yes, the concept of white holes is still being studied by scientists, but it is not a widely accepted or actively researched topic. Most scientists believe that white holes are highly unlikely to exist based on our current understanding of physics. However, some researchers continue to explore the possibility of white holes and their potential implications for our understanding of the universe.

Similar threads

  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
10
Views
376
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
748
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
2
Views
760
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
20
Views
1K
Back
Top