Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe

makes sense to me. i mean they do say that blackholes create a singularity. also pretty sure the big bang started from a singularity. seems logical that they are somehow connected.

What do you say of this concept ?



Caption : Parallel universes. Artwork of a black hole (bottom) and a white hole (top) forming a passageway between parallel universes. The grids represent space-time, the unified view of space and time presented in Einsteinian physics. Normally, space-time is flat, but dense concentrations of mass warp space-time to form singularities (seen here as a funnel shape) known as black holes. Matter entering black holes (orange arrows) is thought to be crushed and destroyed, but in some theories the matter passes through the singularity and emerges into a parallel universe (or another region of our universe) from a structures known as a white hole (the opposite of a black hole).

scientists and most people for that matter have very closed minds, they cannot fathom that the universe never started or will ever end, it is infinite, there was never a beginning of the universe it has just always been there, but that just blows some peoples minds.

reply to post by john_bmth

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by BrokenCircles

It continues becoming more and more frequent that the most important word is left out of the phrase 'The Big Bang [color=FFF6A6]Theory'.

You are mistakenly conflating the layman definition of the word theory with the scientific definition.

The distinction is important.

The word itself is important. Neither of those definitions give good reason to completely remove that word from the phrase.

Originally posted by john_bmth

Layman:

A proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

Scientific:

A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.

Also, how could it have been confirmed through repeated observation, when we are talking about something which supposedly occurred long before there was anything or anyone around to observe it?

Well they just stole the hell outta N. Harameins theory huh?

reply to post by BrokenCircles


You're right, the word itself is importent, which is why your misuse of the word is derogatory to the discussion. As for The Big Bang theory, it is currently the best model for explaining the known scientific facts. It is not a complete explanation but, like all scientific theories, models and explains the known scientific facts. To insinuate that it is a wild guess that is not rooted in empirical observation is disingenuous.

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by BrokenCircles

It continues becoming more and more frequent that the most important word is left out of the phrase 'The Big Bang [color=FFF6A6]Theory'.

You are mistakenly conflating the layman definition of the word theory with the scientific definition.

Layman:

A proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

Scientific:

A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.

The distinction is important.

The distinction to which you refer is an illusion.

Even lawyers take words that mean a particular thing and completely change the definition so that it suits their agenda.

Everyone knows what a theory is. And science is the collective knowledge of mankind. What everyone knows something to mean is simply what that thing means. That is the point of having definitions for words - so that everyone can agree when they are having a discussion.

The fact that "scientists" see fit to manipulate a definition to suit their purposes means that they need the new definition in order to justify any statements they make with the same words.

As well, all good science is easily explained to any other person. If you do not understand something well enough to be able to explain it without making words up and making up new definitions, you do not understand what you are talking about.

If you do not understand what you are talking about, then you shouldn't be talking. You should continue learning.

A theory is NOT a fact - ever. That is the bottom line.

The big bang theory is a horrible fiction at that. There is absolutely ZERO evidence and there is no such thing as an experiment to prove the big bang theory. In order for you to test the big bang theory, you would have to be in an environment that completely emulates the very environment at the supposed "time" of the big bang. Because no one can recreate that, the entire theory is completely and utterly pointless. "Scientists" as they call themselves want to pass off this foolish theory as more than just an imaginative fiction. While the imagination is a joyful field in which we may frolic, it has no place being injected into the minds of those who are looking to us for the TRUTH.

Hence why most everyone that goes through the education system still has no idea how to figure anything out - but merely to regurgitate what they have been told in a more interesting way. We are making pretenders of our children; not geniuses! And you are part of the problem; and also a victim, because you somehow believe that it is acceptable for law to be manipulated to suit the purposes or the agenda of those involved (whether it be the case that someone believes they are doing it for the better or for the worse, it is wrong either way - and dishonesty for any reason is simply dishonesty, no matter how you try to justify it, Machiavelli.)

BLACK HOLES ARE NOT EVEN A FACT. So how in the world can anyone here debate at all as if black holes are proven fact and now people will debate whether it is possible that a fiction may contain yet another fiction?!

There is madness here - no intelligence or wisdom.

Even scientific laws have been proven wrong over time. SO how in the world can you expect your THEORIES to hold up at all?!

And Quantum Mechanics is just another magic trick. It's all ridiculous - utterly and completely ridiculous.

Start dealing with the physical world people. Start paying attention and putting REAL things together. Stop making so many foolish assumptions and start working with what has been given to you. Then you will start learning.

Until then, you are filling your head full of useless and fruitless works of art; and that is all these theories are - art. Today's science is a sculpture of the goddess Diana, yet another worshiped fiction, with breasts revealed, a beautiful face, long slender arms, excellent workmanship - and all wonder after Diana because they enjoy her beauty. And people will say, "If only she would come down and show herself to us in person that we might be able to enjoy her, because her imagine does not move and it does not speak. We do not know the beauty of her voice." And people will stare and gawk for a while. And new people will show up and the former people will move on from boredom realizing that she is not real. But some will go and tell stories of her, and send more to her. And eventually the whole world speaks about this sculpture of Diana and tells her stories - campfires bring to life her history which only ever existed in the mouths of the storytellers.

That is science today. It is life given to art by means of the fantasies of liars.

reply to post by TarzanBeta


The distinction is not an illusion. If you wish to talk science then you should ensure that to are using the clearly defined terminology of the field, not definitions that suite your argument.

the gravitational forces inside a black hole are too intense to support life. but i think its possible a black hole is a kinda portal/doorway that can lead us to new universe .

reply to post by john_bmth

Originally posted by john_bmth

...your misuse of the word is derogatory to the discussion.

How so?

Originally posted by john_bmth

As for The Big Bang theory, it is currently the best model for explaining the known scientific facts.

That's a matter of opinion.

Originally posted by john_bmth

....To insinuate that it is a wild guess that is not rooted in empirical observation is disingenuous.

That's quite a leap you made there. I never said it was a wild guess. I'm saying that it has not been proven. (Never will be, either). Regardless though, as more time goes on, it just seems that more and more people use the phrase as if it is an absolute fact, which it is not.

Originally posted by icepack
reply to post by Octagon

 

the gravitational forces inside a black hole are extreme. no life possible. imo.

Yeah but can life be recreated with the surviving materials?

reply to post by BrokenCircles

It's not my opinion, what you have said is demonstrably false. If you wish to talk science, get your terminology correct. If you wish to criticise science, at least get on nodding terms with the concepts you wish to attack.

Seems to me that while this is convienient for explaining our universes origins, it does nothing to explain the origin of the universe where our universal black hole resides. Or, further, the original universe where the first black hole formed.

Again, does this really answer anything?

Originally posted by pac221211
the gravitational forces inside a black hole are too intense to support life. but i think its possible a black hole is a kinda portal/doorway that can lead us to new universe .

Untrue, or more correctly, unknowable.

The laws of physics break down at that extreme gravity and density. Since they are broken down and un-understandable, we simply do not know what exists inside, and in what state. Approaching the black hole and event horizon, yes, pressures, heat and density increase, but beyond that, its unknowable.

Originally posted by DEV1L79
scientists and most people for that matter have very closed minds, they cannot fathom that the universe never started or will ever end, it is infinite, there was never a beginning of the universe it has just always been there, but that just blows some peoples minds.

Sorry but that is complete tosh.

The human being is defined by his curiosity which is the complete opposite of what you write. Scientists are a group that have used the scientific method to focus on evidence rather than opinion.

Those so called closed minded scientists are the very people that imagined what could be a then made it a reality based on their research.

The only reason anyone would accuse them of being closed minded is because they show most wild imaginings are not based in reality. You offer something that is and they will tear your arm off to hear more. That’s a fact.

reply to post by Octagon


Yeah. This seems to make sense. The whole "disappears to nothingness" kinda' left me scratching my head. Instead, with all the mass, why couldn't the singularity punch through the fabric of what we perceive as 'here' into 'there'? Or maybe create a new 'there'? Maybe that is how we got 'here'?

There are notable unsolved questions with the standard big bang theory, which suggests that the universe began as a seemingly impossible "singularity,"
.....
The idea that our universe is entirely contained within a black hole provides answers to these problems and many more.

How exactly does this overcome the problem of infinite regression? Instead of asking where did the first Universe come from, one could ask where the first black hole came from. The impossibility of eternity is still a mystery.

There is no singularity inside a Black Hole. Everyone forgets general relativity inside a Black Hole or rather at the moment of formation.

Consider the exact moment a Black Hole forms. The gravity is so intense light cannot escape. BUT...time also stops. This means the surface of the black hole cannot move inwards. In order to do so it would have to move at infinite velocity due to time dilation at the point in space.

What actually occurs is the formation of a black star where the surface is frozen in time. Inside that surface time is not frozen but particles are under motion. Some will vibrate towards that black surface and thus get caught in a region of slower time. The end result, over time, is that the star expands outwards and compresses as a black surface. This becomes unstable and explodes. The larger the black hole the longer this takes.

No singularity, no paradox for physics and no universe within a universe.

One point to note. Gravity clearly does not obey the speed of light limitations of relativity. If it did there would be no gravitational influence from inside a black hole.......hmmmmm

reply to post by icepack


Life can exist anywhere. It just takes awareness to see it.

reply to post by Octagon


It may be possible bu to me it seems a shuffling around of problems without really providing any solution. They take two singularities and simply join them together, since physics breaks in a singularity anything goes, this is like the common magic solution, when you can't explain something just say it's magic, god's work etc...