all black holes may change into white holes

www.spacedaily.com...

According to physicists Carlo Rovelli and Hal Haggard, a black hole eventually reaches a point where it cannot collapse any further and the internal pressure begins to push outwards. This essentially turns the black hole inside out and expels everything it once consumed back into space.

Notably, the scientists believe that these white holes are created not long after the black hole's original formation, and we humans can't see it because gravity dilates time and makes the black hole's lifespan seem to last for billions or trillions of years. Their current calculation is that it only takes a few thousandths of a second for a black hole to turn into a white hole.

this brings up a few ideas or questions.

first this means that periodically these things poop out all the matter they have collected. so if the universe's entropy has increased to the point star formation has ceased this would renew the matter available for star and galaxy formation in the case of galactic black holes.

secondly it means the primary means of black hole information conservation is not hawking radiation. chiefly because there is no time for hawking radiation to evaporate a black hole because in it's reference frame a black hole experiences time differently from distant observers . if you are really close to a black hole it appears to almost immediately turn into a white hole.

i wonder how this meshes with Hawking's new model of a black hole too?

oh i forgot to mention this explains why we haven't seen any white holes in all our searches for other stuff. on that note though in New Scientist magazine there was a recent article stating that there was an astronomy team getting ready to look for white holes. dunno how this article would mesh with the other one.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

Another possibility is that when the black hole punches through space/time and spews, a new universe is created. This somewhat jives with certain aspects of quantum mechanic's multiverse hypothesis.

Given that so many quasars apparently don't follow the "rules" I wonder...anyway.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Another possibility is that when the black hole punches through space/time and spews, a new universe is created. This somewhat jives with certain aspects of quantum mechanic's multiverse hypothesis.

Or maybe the new universe bubbles out from the black hole into the old one so each galactic black hole spawns a bubble universe in it's host universe. it seems to me that part of the cycle would generate inflation as to spew that stuff out it would turn repulsive (think of antigravity or negative energy.)

a reply to: stormbringer1701

first this means that periodically these things poop out all the matter they have collected.

I think you are right. One way they "regurgitate" is from the poles. We have pics of jets…

Pic

My guess is some instability inside the singularity, maybe caused by a feeding event or close approach to a strong gravitational field may induce a wobble (like an imbalanced washing machine in spin cycle). The wobble produced makes hiccups of material back into the Universe.

Have we ever seen a black hole go off like a supernova?

a reply to: intrptri think the jets are do to accelerated material colliding and shedding photons with the result being channeled to the poles. could be wrong but i do not believe science says the pole jets come from within.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

ould be wrong but i do not believe science says the pole jets come from within.

How could they know? We can;t see that close. Do we have video one way or the other?

I think jets are always perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic? Since matter seeks the equator I find it difficult to believe it somehow escapes the event horizon and moves to the poles.

But thats just my layman's view.

I think I've got this..

So the mysterious "death ray" plume of matter we see erupting from the center of black holes is actually the white hole that is created upon the death of the black hole immediately behind it. Due to time dilation it appears to the observer that both events are happening simultaneously?

Did I get that right?

nope. the jets occur when the black hole is actively feeding. as stuff fall inwards it starts emitting photons ending in a lot of x and gamma rays. the polar jets disappear in inactive black holes. (those that don't have anything to eat.)

falling into a black hole accelerates matter far batter than man made accelerators and by the emissions we know it gets near the speed of light before going through the event horizon. if the polar jets were from within then there could be no event horizon. in addition, the black hole would have a tiny lifespan when viewed from long distance as well as short distance because it would be ejecting more mass than it takes in.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: stormbringer1701

ould be wrong but i do not believe science says the pole jets come from within.

How could they know? We can;t see that close. Do we have video one way or the other?

I think jets are always perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic? Since matter seeks the equator I find it difficult to believe it somehow escapes the event horizon and moves to the poles.

But thats just my layman's view.

Magnetic fields and ionized atoms/electrons. The matter spirals towards the black hole, but friction and collisions with other atoms leads to vaporization and ionization. The extremely strong magnetic fields pull ionized matter to either pole where the magnetic field lines are so tightly twisted that the only direction is outwards. One jet would have positive charge, the other negative charge.

a reply to: intrptrnot that i am aware of. they are gonna look for white holes now though.

as to the hiccough thing; i think that they do not see this as cyclic events but an event at the end of the lifespan of a black hole. i am sorry my use of "periodically" gave the wrong impression. what i meant was that periodically one of these white hole events should happen here and there in the universe. so periodically we would see one. not that the same one would necessarily do it again and again. though in time periods as long as the duration of the universe i suppose it could happen that way.

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: stormbringer1701

ould be wrong but i do not believe science says the pole jets come from within.

How could they know? We can;t see that close. Do we have video one way or the other?

I think jets are always perpendicular to the plane of the ecliptic? Since matter seeks the equator I find it difficult to believe it somehow escapes the event horizon and moves to the poles.

But thats just my layman's view.

Magnetic fields and ionized atoms/electrons. The matter spirals towards the black hole, but friction and collisions with other atoms leads to vaporization and ionization. The extremely strong magnetic fields pull ionized matter to either pole where the magnetic field lines are so tightly twisted that the only direction is outwards. One jet would have positive charge, the other negative charge.

thanks for the well stated explanation i was about to try it but on my own i would have spent time reading cites to be sure i had it right.

That's cool. I had a theory about this years ago I posted here on ATS. Black & White Holes Singularities

Perhaps I missed my calling in life. I should have become a scientist instead.

originally posted by: mOjOm
That's cool. I had a theory about this years ago I posted here on ATS. Black & White Holes Singularities

Perhaps I missed my calling in life. I should have become a scientist instead.

i visited your thread to add a comment. if yo uare interested in the potential to use a black hole or a wormhole for travel here is a lecture by John Cramer Professor emeritus of Physics at washington university on absurdly benign wormholes.

www.youtube.com...

as to missing a calling when i was in middle school i proclaimed it should be possible to clone a mammoth and restore the species to earth. about 2 years after i graduated there were several scientists who proclaimed they were going to try because it should be possible with new DNA techniques to repair the damaged genomes in order to clone them in surrogate mothers.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

Notably, the scientists believe that these white holes are created not long after the black hole's original formation, and we humans can't see it because gravity dilates time and makes the black hole's lifespan seem to last for billions or trillions of years.

Odd seeing as the universe is like 13 billion years old. Where did they get trillions from?

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Notably, the scientists believe that these white holes are created not long after the black hole's original formation, and we humans can't see it because gravity dilates time and makes the black hole's lifespan seem to last for billions or trillions of years.

Odd seeing as the universe is like 13 billion years old. Where did they get trillions from?

it's those darned relativistic reference frames again. from far away it seems like billions of years. from the point of view very close to the black hole it seems much shorter. this is an extension of the relativity notion that time near masses passes differently from time further away from masses.

a reply to: bbracken677

This stuff is so far above my head that I might as well be laying at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, but I do love 'thinking' and reading about it.
I'm not sure what the current theories are about wormholes but in my head I always thought that maybe a blackhole reaches some kind of critical mass and does tear a hole through space/time. If so, all that matter has to come out somewhere, so the other end might be a whitehole pushing everything to another part of the universe so there's not some infinite gravity hole pulling everything into it.

I'm not even sure if this is true or proven, but I've heard that nothing including light can escape a blackhole. If light can't escape a blackhole, does that mean that light has mass? Or is it more of an observational thing because of the way we see light?

I'd consider myself below layman in terms of physics so would appreciate if anyone could provide some kind of easy to understand theories, ideas or analogies about it. I don't really want to read any 'papers' or anything since I wouldn't understand them anyway.

originally posted by: wtf2008
a reply to: bbracken677

This stuff is so far above my head that I might as well be laying at the bottom of the Marianas Trench, but I do love 'thinking' and reading about it.
I'm not sure what the current theories are about wormholes but in my head I always thought that maybe a blackhole reaches some kind of critical mass and does tear a hole through space/time. If so, all that matter has to come out somewhere, so the other end might be a whitehole pushing everything to another part of the universe so there's not some infinite gravity hole pulling everything into it.

I'm not even sure if this is true or proven, but I've heard that nothing including light can escape a blackhole. If light can't escape a blackhole, does that mean that light has mass? Or is it more of an observational thing because of the way we see light?

I'd consider myself below layman in terms of physics so would appreciate if anyone could provide some kind of easy to understand theories, ideas or analogies about it. I don't really want to read any 'papers' or anything since I wouldn't understand them anyway.

in the classical understanding of a black hole light cannot escape a black hole because the mass of the black hole bends space such that when light tries to travel in a straight line (which is what it always does) it's path is actually bent by the gravity so that it cannot reach the event horizon from anywhere inside it. additionally there is a point where the path of light is curved such that light photons essentially orbit the black hole from its point of view or seem frozen in space to outside points of view a long distance away.

however Hawking has put forward that there really isn't a event horizon as classically understood and that therefore stuff can escape a black hole by other than hawking radiation. though the idea of an event horizon is replaced by a firewall which is nearly as inescapable as an event horizon.

a reply to: stormbringer1701

Thanks for trying to explain but I still don't get it. So is light actually being pulled into the blackhole since it has mass (does it have mass?) or is it just the way we observe light that makes it look that way?

I've heard analogies about gravity, saying that it's like a bowling ball on a bed sheet spread out that bends the sheet with its mass and pulls anything on the bed sheet into it.

I know it's an incomplete layman terms analogy, but let's say the sheet is the universe and the bowling ball is a black hole. If we keep putting heavier and heavier things on the sheet (as long as they're not heavier than the bowling ball or the other things that have been pulled in), won't the sheet eventually tear?

The sheet is 3 dimensional but not in this analogy. It's just a 2 dimensional object, like a sheet of paper (also 3 dimensional) but again, not in this analogy. If a hole gets punched through this sheet of paper or sheet, what would be on the other side and what would happen to the objects/matter that caused the tear? In real life, it all falls on the floor. In universal life, who knows?

The objects/matter should pass through the tear and add their considerable matter and mass to the other side of that tear. At first it would be a big blast of 'white matter' or just regular matter passing through. But if it didn't have enough force or velocity to clear said whitehole's gravity or some kind of reverse gravity, then it would surely fall back in and start to create its own black whole again.

Would it be some never-ending back and forth of black and white hole, push and pull, opening in the universe? If it was, wouldn't it be feasible that space travellers could find, measure. and use such theorized wormholes since they would be on a somewhat regular pattern?

I probably read too much science fiction and not enough physics. Science fiction is just so much easier to read and much more entertaining. This was always just the picture in my head that I had about it.