Every Black Hole Contains Another Universe?

Phormat

Member
original link: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/04/100409-black-holes-alternate-universe-multiverse-einstein-wormholes/
Ker Thanfor National Geographic NewsPublished April 9, 2010Like part of a cosmic Russian doll, our universe may be nested inside a black hole that is itself part of a larger universe.[/b]In turn, all the black holes found so far in our universe—from the microscopic to the supermassive—may be doorways into alternate realities.[/b]According to a mind-bending new theory, a black hole is actually a tunnel between universes—a type of wormhole. The matter the black hole attracts doesn't collapse into a single point, as has been predicted, but rather gushes out a "white hole" at the other end of the black one, the theory goes.(Related: "New Proof Unknown 'Structures' Tug at Our Universe.")In a recent paper published in the journal Physics Letters B,[/i] Indiana University physicist Nikodem Poplawski presents new mathematical models of the spiraling motion of matter falling into a black hole. His equations suggest such wormholes are viable alternatives to the "space-time singularities" that Albert Einstein predicted to be at the centers of black holes.According to Einstein's equations for general relativity, singularities are created whenever matter in a given region gets too dense, as would happen at the ultradense heart of a black hole.Einstein's theory suggests singularities take up no space, are infinitely dense, and are infinitely hot—a concept supported by numerous lines of indirect evidence but still so outlandish that many scientists find it hard to accept.If Poplawski is correct, they may no longer have to.According to the new equations, the matter black holes absorb and seemingly destroy is actually expelled and becomes the building blocks for galaxies, stars, and planets in another reality.(Related: "Dark Energy's Demise? New Theory Doesn't Use the Force.")Wormholes Solve Big Bang Mystery?[/b]The notion of black holes as wormholes could explain certain mysteries in modern cosmology, Poplawski said.For example, the big bang theory says the universe started as a singularity. But scientists have no satisfying explanation for how such a singularity might have formed in the first place.If our universe was birthed by a white hole instead of a singularity, Poplawski said, "it would solve this problem of black hole singularities and also the big bang singularity."Wormholes might also explain gamma ray bursts, the second most powerful explosions in the universe after the big bang.Gamma ray bursts occur at the fringes of the known universe. They appear to be associated with supernovae, or star explosions, in faraway galaxies, but their exact sources are a mystery. (Related: "Gamma-Ray Burst Caused Mass Extinction?")Poplawski proposes that the bursts may be discharges of matter from alternate universes. The matter, he says, might be escaping into our universe through supermassive black holes—wormholes—at the hearts of those galaxies, though it's not clear how that would be possible."It's kind of a crazy idea, but who knows?" he said. (Related: "Are Wormholes Tunnels for Time Travel?")There is at least one way to test Poplawski's theory: Some of our universe's black holes rotate, and if our universe was born inside a similarly revolving black hole, then our universe should have inherited the parent object's rotation.If future experiments reveal that our universe appears to rotate in a preferred direction, it would be indirect evidence supporting his wormhole theory, Poplawski said.Wormholes Are "Exotic Matter" Makers?[/b]The wormhole theory may also help explain why certain features of our universe deviate from what theory predicts, according to physicists.Based on the standard model of physics, after the big bang the curvature of the universe should have increased over time so that now—13.7 billion years later—we should seem to be sitting on the surface of a closed, spherical universe.But observations show the universe appears flat in all directions.What's more, data on light from the very early universe show that everything just after the big bang was a fairly uniform temperature.That would mean that the farthest objects we see on opposite horizons of the universe were once close enough to interact and come to equilibrium, like molecules of gas in a sealed chamber.Again, observations don't match predictions, because the objects farthest from each other in the known universe are so far apart that the time it would take to travel between them at the speed of light exceeds the age of the universe.To explain the discrepancies, astronomers devised the concept of inflation.Inflation states that shortly after the universe was created, it experienced a rapid growth spurt during which space itself expanded at faster-than-light speeds. The expansion stretched the universe from a size smaller than an atom to astronomical proportions in a fraction of a second.The universe therefore appears flat, because the sphere we're sitting on is extremely large from our viewpoint—just as the sphere of Earth seems flat to someone standing in a field.Inflation also explains how objects so far away from each other might have once been close enough to interact.But—assuming inflation is real—astronomers have always been at pains to explain what caused it. That's where the new wormhole theory comes in.According to Poplawski, some theories of inflation say the event was caused by "exotic matter," a theoretical substance that differs from normal matter, in part because it is repelled rather than attracted by gravity.Based on his equations, Poplawski thinks such exotic matter might have been created when some of the first massive stars collapsed and became wormholes."There may be some relationship between the exotic matter that forms wormholes and the exotic matter that triggered inflation," he said.(Related: "Before the Big Bang: Light Shed on 'Previous Universe.'")Wormhole Equations an "Actual Solution"[/b]The new model isn't the first to propose that other universes exist inside black holes. Damien Easson, a theoretical physicist at Arizona State University, has made the speculation in previous studies."What is new here is an actual wormhole solution in general relativity that acts as the passage from the exterior black hole to the new interior universe," said Easson, who was not involved in the new study."In our paper, we just speculated that such a solution could exist, but Poplawski has found an actual solution," said Easson, referring to Poplawski's equations.(Related: "Universe 20 Million Years Older Than Thought.")Nevertheless, the idea is still very speculative, Easson said in an email."Is the idea possible? Yes. Is the scenario likely? I have no idea. But it is certainly an interesting possibility."Future work in quantum gravity—the study of gravity at the subatomic level—could refine the equations and potentially support or disprove Poplawski's theory, Easson said.Wormhole Theory No Breakthrough[/b]Overall, the wormhole theory is interesting, but not a breakthrough in explaining the origins of our universe, said Andreas Albrecht, a physicist at the University of California, Davis, who was also not involved in the new study.By saying our universe was created by a gush of matter from a parent universe, the theory simply shifts the original creation event into an alternate reality.In other words, it doesn't explain how the parent universe came to be or why it has the properties it has—properties our universe presumably inherited."There're really some pressing problems we're trying to solve, and it's not clear that any of this is offering a way forward with that," he said.Still, Albrecht doesn't find the idea of universe-bridging wormholes any stranger than the idea of black hole singularities, and he cautions against dismissing the new theory just because it sounds a little out there."Everything people ask in this business is pretty weird," he said. "You can't say the less weird [idea] is going to win, because that's not the way it's been, by any means.
 
That article was just vague enough to be really frustrating. I guess that's the nature of astro and quantum physics though.
 
I was just watching a show on Nova about this stuff last night. It really is crazy to think about, let alone begin to figure out. props to the people who make it their mission to think about this.
 
True, its probably because it seems like half the time these guys are pulling stuff out of their "brown holes", or it would be to far over our heads if they explained it in detail.
 
quality thread, but too much to comprehend. that would be crazy if it's true. what if we just sent a dude through a black hole and he lived.

ps is a brown hole an anus?
 
if black holes have a white hole on the opposite side -- shouldn't we have white holes here where other universes have their black holes?

Also black holes continually gobble up matter.

Our experience tells us that if universes are created from white holes -- Then our universe was created from a white hole. But Our Universe was created at one point in time and matter is not continually being added. If black holes are responsible for the creation of other universes, and they continually take matter from our universe and spew it into other universes, then our universe would also have a white hole continually spewing matter. But it doesn't. So our Universe wasn't created by a white hole. So a white hole created universe would be of an incompatibly different type of universe.

I would doubt the theory.
 
according to my physics teacher

the time it would take to get from the edge to the center of a black hole, you would see the entire universe go to completion.

its all because of the way that light travels
 
exploding-head-2.jpg


Makes sense I guess, an entire universe squished into a small space would be a rather dense object...
 
I think what they were trying to say is the white hole led to what they called a singulariy. Eventually the singularity got too dense and pretty much exploded. Or at least thats what i thought they were trying to say.
 
weird, I was kind of thinking about this earlier.

A lot of people have said that the universe is actually "curved" and that if you travel in one direction you will eventually return to where you started. What I took from the article is that black holes aren't portals to other universes but rather contain the entire universe within. If you know anything about relativity you know that all dimensions including time are constant however they can change relative to a moving object. They can also change from large collections of mass (gravity). Here's where it all comes together.

What if black holes were in fact singularities with insane amounts of mass. This mass was so large and concentrated that in fact it shrunk the dimensions of the collection of mass to almost infinitely small. What would appear to an outsider as all the mass stacked on a single point is actually the size of our own universe to someone on the inside. This new universe would be just as large as our own on the insider however relative to other universes it would be nothing more than a single point in space.

If this were the case then there might be infinite universes nested inside of each other. There might be millions of universes existing in our own, with no way to enter them
 
Oh shit, you're right, better go tell that physicist who definitely spent years researching this that he's wrong.

Pretty sure you aren't understanding what that guy's argument is, or they already addressed this issue and didn't mention it.
 
There are so many mind boggling things like this out there. For example, there are more stars (suns) in our universe then there are grains of sand on the whole of planet earth.... Just think about that for a second... Every grain of sand... Ocean floors, deserts, beaches, river beds etc....
 
I'm pretty sure you didn't understand the part where the article mentioned how there is no actual evidence yet to support this theory. It is simply a possibility because we know of a potential way to test it. Until the results of those tests are in and support this theory, it is no more valid that any other testable (yet unproven) concept that we have of the nature of our universe.
 
Except that no way we can test it with today's science could prove it. Humans will probably destroy themselves before they ever know for sure the answer to this question.
 
how can you be sure what my argument is or is not if you claim a need for authority -- expertise, quantified by years of research, to be able to comprehend how this stuff works?

i'm just saying, i'd wait for an easier answer.
 
There isnt even indirect evidence that this is the case. It is purely speculative.

It is quite possible that we could develop a way to test that the universe is spinning as a result of the white hole. But we don't know know the results of the tests, so until we do, it isn't a theory at all, simply an untested hypothesis.

 
Yeah, speculative in the fact that there is no observable evidence to prove or refute the hypothesis. But the equations seem to infer that black holes do in fact expel matter on the other side. Ironically, white holes may exist, but not necessarily in our universe. Some universes may only have black holes, some only white. If we can further examine the gamma ray bursts seen at the edge of the universe that may provide proof of white holes.
 
The funny thing about all this shit (and I do keep up to date with a lot of it) is that all these theories that scientist have been coming up with are all based on numerous other theories that might be incorrect and have made up things in the equation like "dark matter"" and "dark energy"; both of which were simply pulled out thin air to explain inconsistencies in the amount of energy and matter in scientists' calculations of the universe and have yet to be proven (to those who don't know they have several teams of scientist something like 8000m down abandon mine shafts in several places around the world and have been there for almost a decade looking for dark matter with this special instrument that has turned up nothing).

I find it humorous how scientist tweak shit to get things right. For example quantum mechanics for some reason only works at atomic levels but for some unexplainable reason as you scale up it fails. as does the theory of relativity as you scale down.

I think a lot of these dudes just have these huge egos and try and out do each other with more and more radical theories or ridiculous stats (read a Scientific American for example and see how many times you see things like the universe heated to 1 trillion billion degrees for 1 thousand billion trillionth of a sec, 1 hundred thousand million billion quadrillionth of a second after the big bang)

That being said these theories are always entertaining to hear about and get you thinking.
 
I agree. Many of the people I see in academia are very egotistical. I feel that a lot of "scientists" just come up with crazy ideas and papers, that cannot be disproven or proven, just to get their PHds and have bragging rights. Then again, there are a lot of dedicated people like Stephen Hawking. It sucks that he will probably lose all form of communication within the next couple of years. Yeah those mine shaft detectors are hoping to detect neutrinos. They are buried deep so that cosmic radiation does not cause interference.
 
ahh thanks so much! i have to bring this up to my einstein teacher. i'm taking this class that is all about einstein's different theories and we discussed the potential of this but really had nothing to prove it...+k
 
Perhaps in the field of theoretical physics there are some scientists who make pretty outlandish claims, however, most scientist's goal is to simply understand and explain the universe that we live in. I dont think the papers that they publish are a result of some sort of over-sized ego... they publish their work so it can be read by other people in peer-reviewed journals and be criticized. If people come up with bullshit theories, they get called out on it.

I think the reason why some of the theories seem so outlandish is simply because it is so difficult, given our perspective, to know certain things about the universe.
 
Back
Top