I want White Holes ...

Yomamas Fett

Yomamas Fett
JeffRyan said:
Hmm... Newton's laws are fantastic and not limited to 2-dimensions. They still today work at the every day level. Special and general relativity only come into play once we start getting to decent speeds of a decent fraction of the speed of light or over long long periods of time. ROCKET SCIENCE mainly used newton...

PS I'm an English teacher now, but I was trained as an astrophysicist.
PPS The 'big theories' didn't replace each other as in: the old theory was proved wrong, but actually incorporated the old one. Special relativity equations when solved for low speeds are equivalent to newtons equations. General relativiy equations when solved for zero accelerations give special relativity. It isn't quite the 'well the old one was wrong' that some people think. The old one was right (and still is) but we now know under other conditions we needed to modify, not replace the old theory.
Click to expand...


Relativity totally replaced the pre-existing Aether models. Its been tweeked a good bit sure, and will keep being updated until it is replaced as we outgrow it. Chief offender for me is the Light constant, but thats just a pet peeve.

Its all about what sustqins the dimension for me. Einsteins timespacce model neatly avoids this, and to me is the worst part of his work. I dontbellieve relativity will survive this century, but then im an optomist :) And drunk, enough to get into a sci3nce debate on the webz. Big Red warning light.
 

Araviel

Araviel
JeffRyan said:
There's still space for them in some ways, but not in the classical sense. From what we understand.
Click to expand...

like the theory that they occur on a sub atomic level instead? like tiny tiny leaks in the fabric separating dimensions and that you could have one million white holes in your pocket right at this moment?
i quite liked that one. but can't remember what that theory was called atm and google ain't helping.
 
Last edited:

Warwick Red

W
Think of the possibilities .... If we had White Holes, we could fly into a Black Hole and be spewed out on the other side of the galaxy ... :)
 

OnePercent

OnePercent
They don't exist and have never been observed directly or indirectly, they only exist in math, which is about as far as asking for santa in the game.
 

Kolato

Kolato
I'm not a scientist but..

If white holes decrease entropy, and time flows to where there is most entropy, can't white holes be explained by them just creating a bubble of backwards time around them, which breaks no laws of physics inside it?

Again not a scientist, just a theory
 

Warwick Red

W
%OnePercent% said:
They don't exist and have never been observed directly or indirectly, they only exist in math, which is about as far as asking for santa in the game.
Click to expand...
So you believe that everything in the universe has been observed?
We are still making new discoveries in our own solar system ...
 

Dr Wookie

Dr Wookie
I'm pretty sure that white holes were thought up in order to overcome the "information paradox" in black hole theory, but I could be wrong... what goes on once the event horizon is crossed has never really interested me!

Black holes are thought to emit particles at a rate that is strongly dependent on their mass, using a mechanism called Hawking radiation. As a result, sufficiently low mass black holes are expected to evaporate. Since the radiation would be random, all information about stuff falling into the black hole is lost to the black hole.

However, the black holes we know (products of star evolution or at the centres of galaxies) are far too massive to evaporate. A typical stellar black hole would be lucky to emit one pair of particles over the age of the universe! Furthermore, the event horizons for black holes small enough to evaporate are so tiny that they would probably evaporate before they swallowed anything up. Never mind that there is no good reason for these smaller black holes to form in the first place.

As a result, there is no paradox, and no need for white holes :).
 
Last edited:

Canaris

Canaris
JeffRyan said:
Too much supposition on their existence, whilst there are (or were, been a while since I checked) solutions to General Relativity that would lead to White Holes, there's really no evidence of their existence.

There's something about them that feels as though we're cheating the second law of thermodynamics as well to me... The way around that is they're supposed to be balanced by black holes, but since black holes are now alluded to be not cheating as much as we thought (maybe) it makes the existence of their counterparts less likely.
Click to expand...

funnily enough everyone was saying that about blackholes not so long ago... :D
 

JeffRyan

JeffRyan
Canaris said:
funnily enough everyone was saying that about blackholes not so long ago... :D
Click to expand...

Ah the old 'everyone thought the world was flat' chestnut... I don't know a single scientist who'd put his money on white holes definitely not existing. They're just saying 'probably not in the way that people imagine' - in the sense of 'opposite to black holes'.
 

InMemoriamSirocco

Banned
InMemoriamSirocco
Warwick Red said:
Think of the possibilities .... If we had White Holes, we could fly into a Black Hole and be spewed out on the other side of the galaxy ... :)
Click to expand...

Despite the many pseudo-scientists who continue to ramble on about "what's on the other side of a black hole?" and "we don't know what would happen if you fly into one", the reality of black holes is pretty damn easy to understand:

If you fly too close to a real black hole, your ship gets destroyed and you die. Even if you managed to enter a black hole unscathed - which you can't - you would never be able to escape it.

There is no other side.

It is not a tunnel.

It is an infinitely dense object in space.
 

Dr Wookie

Dr Wookie
InMemoriamSirocco said:
Despite the many pseudo-scientists who continue to ramble on about "what's on the other side of a black hole?" and "we don't know what would happen if you fly into one", the reality of black holes is pretty damn easy to understand:

If you fly too close to a real black hole, your ship gets destroyed and you die. Even if you managed to enter a black hole unscathed - which you can't - you would never be able to escape it.

There is no other side.

It is not a tunnel.

It is an infinitely dense object in space.
Click to expand...

Mathematical black holes are infinitely dense, celestial black holes are sufficiently dense that their physical extent is contained within the event horizon :)
 

JeffRyan

JeffRyan
InMemoriamSirocco said:
Despite the many pseudo-scientists who continue to ramble on about "what's on the other side of a black hole?" and "we don't know what would happen if you fly into one", the reality of black holes is pretty damn easy to understand:

If you fly too close to a real black hole, your ship gets destroyed and you die. Even if you managed to enter a black hole unscathed - which you can't - you would never be able to escape it.

There is no other side.

It is not a tunnel.

It is an infinitely dense object in space.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's pseudo-science per se. A lot of work has gone into wormholes (the earliest work begun done by Einstein himself on the Lamm - with Rosen - the famous Einstein-Rosen bridge), which is what we're talking about here. Now while they /MAY/ exist, they're probably very unstable.

They're definitely hypothetically feasible, but whether or not they're traversable is another matter entirely.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom