Do black holes have a back door?

[MarkFL]

Do black holes have a back door?

One of the biggest problems when studying black holes is that the laws of physics as we know them cease to apply in their deepest regions. Large quantities of matter and energy concentrate in an infinitely small space, the gravitational singularity, where space-time curves towards infinity and all matter is destroyed. Or is it? A recent study suggests that matter might in fact survive its foray into these space objects and come out the other side.

 

[Josiah]

Quote from a Physics prof I had back in my intro class: "Physics all makes perfect sense until you get to the edges, then it all gets crazy." Seems true with a lot of things, lol.

:smile:

 

[MarkFL]

Yes, in some way, until we can reconcile quantum mechanics with general relativity in a GUT, black holes will continue to be impenetrably black.

 

[tango]

Yes, in some way, until we can reconcile quantum mechanics with general relativity in a GUT, black holes will continue to be impenetrably black.

I think the innards of my GUT are probably impenetrably black

 

[MoreCoffee]

Do black holes have a back door?

One of the biggest problems when studying black holes is that the laws of physics as we know them cease to apply in their deepest regions. Large quantities of matter and energy concentrate in an infinitely small space, the gravitational singularity, where space-time curves towards infinity and all matter is destroyed. Or is it? A recent study suggests that matter might in fact survive its foray into these space objects and come out the other side.

It's a trick question. Black holes do not have any doors

They have an event horizon, some folk say, and they may possibly lose tiny amounts of energy by means of a kind of quantum tunnelling of various energies/particles. But a "back door" sounds like untested (at the moment) speculation.

 

[visionary]

Are black holes nothing more than one end of a worm hole?

 

[Rens]

Every time I read: do black holes have a black door?

 

[MarkFL]

Are black holes nothing more than one end of a worm hole?

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity does have valid solutions in which structures we've come to call wormholes can exist or be fabricated. Another solution is also possible, which describes a phenomenon which later came to be known as a “white hole”. A white hole is the theoretical time reversal of a black hole and, while a black hole acts as a vacuum, drawing in any matter that crosses the event horizon, a white hole acts as a source that ejects matter from its event horizon.

The two solutions, describing two different regions of space-time could be mathematically connected by a kind of space-time conduit, and that, in theory at least, the black hole "entrance" and white hole "exit" could be in totally different parts of the same universe or even in different universes! Einstein himself explored these ideas further in 1935, along with Nathan Rosen, and the two achieved a solution known as an Einstein-Rosen bridge (also known as a Lorentzian wormhole or a Schwarzschild wormhole).

Some have even speculated that there is a white hole on the "other side" of all black holes, where all the matter the black hole sucks up is blown out in some alternative universe, and even that what we think of as the Big Bang might in fact have been the result of just such a phenomenon.

 

[Stravinsk]

Do black holes have a back door?

One of the biggest problems when studying black holes is that the laws of physics as we know them cease to apply in their deepest regions. Large quantities of matter and energy concentrate in an infinitely small space, the gravitational singularity, where space-time curves towards infinity and all matter is destroyed. Or is it? A recent study suggests that matter might in fact survive its foray into these space objects and come out the other side.

The paradox of your question lies not in the question itself, but how it is phrased and the possessive association that is implied by it. Black holes do not "have" a "back door" - they *are* a back door. Wait, what? To another universe - another existence - another "time", another "space"?

Indeed. They are all these things. It is not surprising that it was once thought that "all matter is destroyed". It does in fact remain matter - though different - changed in nature and composition through the amazing journey - the journey through one black hole and out through another.

The "Great White Throne" is the juxtaposition, or rather the receptacle of, these colliding phenomena. Or, I should say - it is one juxtaposition in some contexts - in many experiences no such white thrones exist - it simply being a receptacle of modern back doors, completely irrelevant and unnecessary to the questions of matter or non-matter... When what has entered through a black hole finishes it's journey and exits through the "back door", the second recent study mentioned seems more pertinent and relevant here. Matter has not been destroyed - only changed - and as matter - survives it's "way out the other side" - through "an infinitely small space", as stated.

:xD:

 

[MarkFL]

Well, black holes have never been said to annihilate matter/energy, because the inertia and charge still presumably exist. It has been shown that information entering a black hole is not lost. Until we have a quantum theory of gravity, nothing definitive can be said regarding what goes on within the event horizon of a black hole. There's nothing wrong with healthy speculation though.

 

[Stravinsk]

Mark, for the sake of disclosure - I am a bit smashed and the healthy speculation spoken of was nothing more than "speaking out of my black hole". It's nice that you are so polite about it, though.

 

[MarkFL]

LOL! Well, first let me say that I am only a fan of cosmology with just enough of a background in math to be slightly dangerous. I am no expert by any means, or even closely approximating such. I parrot what the experts say, and hopefully I don't mangle it too badly. So, I consider anything I have to say on black holes to be speculation.

 

[tango]

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity does have valid solutions in which structures we've come to call wormholes can exist or be fabricated. Another solution is also possible, which describes a phenomenon which later came to be known as a “white hole”. A white hole is the theoretical time reversal of a black hole and, while a black hole acts as a vacuum, drawing in any matter that crosses the event horizon, a white hole acts as a source that ejects matter from its event horizon.

The two solutions, describing two different regions of space-time could be mathematically connected by a kind of space-time conduit, and that, in theory at least, the black hole "entrance" and white hole "exit" could be in totally different parts of the same universe or even in different universes! Einstein himself explored these ideas further in 1935, along with Nathan Rosen, and the two achieved a solution known as an Einstein-Rosen bridge (also known as a Lorentzian wormhole or a Schwarzschild wormhole).

Some have even speculated that there is a white hole on the "other side" of all black holes, where all the matter the black hole sucks up is blown out in some alternative universe, and even that what we think of as the Big Bang might in fact have been the result of just such a phenomenon.

The Big Bang theory is a curious one but just kicks the can a little further back up the alleyway, as we'd still have to explain what caused the matter to exist in the other universe in order to be blown into our universe.

 

[MarkFL]

The Big Bang theory is a curious one but just kicks the can a little further back up the alleyway, as we'd still have to explain what caused the matter to exist in the other universe in order to be blown into our universe.

Yes, there are still enough unanswered questions left in science to keep us busy for weeks!

 

[tango]

Yes, there are still enough unanswered questions left in science to keep us busy for weeks!

I just find it curious how every time something traces back to a certain point it ends up handing the baton over to another theory. I forget who it was who was quoted as saying "it's almost as if the universe were spoken into being"

 

[MarkFL]

But that's just another baton passing (into a hypothesis with no supporting theoretical framework)...where did the speaker come from? Who spoke the speaker into existence? And then who spoke the speakers' speaker into existence...ad infinitum?

 

[MoreCoffee]

But that's just another baton passing (into a hypothesis with no supporting theoretical framework)...where did the speaker come from? Who spoke the speaker into existence? And then who spoke the speakers' speaker into existence...ad infinitum?

In Christian theology the speaker - God - is uncreated and hence did not "come from" anything or anyone preceding. God is (in Christian theology) un-caused. God is (in Christian theology) not in the category of creature.

 

[visionary]

Speculative thoughts lead to investigation which I think the Lord wants.. Search He said...

 

[MarkFL]

In Christian theology the speaker - God - is uncreated and hence did not "come from" anything or anyone preceding. God is (in Christian theology) un-caused. God is (in Christian theology) not in the category of creature.

Then that wold negate the premise that everything has to have a cause. If we exclude one entity from requiring causation, then we can logically exclude others. However, I do understand that God is said to exist outside of the causal order.

I do believe that the universe has a cause, but I think this cause is simply unknown for now...and perhaps may never be known since this cause may lie outside of our universe, as part of a larger natural order which we can never explore because of our place within.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Then that wold negate the premise that everything has to have a cause. If we exclude one entity from requiring causation, then we can logically exclude others. However, I do understand that God is said to exist outside of the causal order.

I do believe that the universe has a cause, but I think this cause is simply unknown for now...and perhaps may never be known since this cause may lie outside of our universe, as part of a larger natural order which we can never explore because of our place within.

That God is un-caused is explicit in Christian theology. God did not evolve. He was not created. He did not begin to exist. He is the ground of being for all created things. That includes space-time and every form of matter/energy known and unknown. But, of course, these theological assertions cannot be proven by examining God or God's "environment" (there is no environment in which God exists. He simple is.). From an atheist materialist type of philosophical point of view God is not provable and does not exist in any sense in which a creature exists.

Things that lie outside of our universe are not observable and I suspect that the moment some new thing (new to human beings, presumably not new to itself or to 'existence') becomes observable it also become part of the universe that human beings know. God would not fit that category. God is known yet only when and where he reveals something about himself. No instruments and no human senses are able to 'detect' God as we might detect a star or a planet or dark matter or dark energy.

Frustrating eh?