Travel Through a Black Hole

Anyone can post and discuss breaking science news or science-related public policy, that interests them (please respect posting guidelines and be sure to reference properly).
Forum rules
Please be sure to check our forum's Rules & Guidelines

Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby vivian maxine on August 6th, 2016, 6:39 am 

I was right! Black holes seem to have an opening at the other end.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... ce+News%29
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Black Out?

Postby Faradave on August 6th, 2016, 10:09 am 

While I have personally made great use of tiny wormholes (their "imperfections in spacetime", my tinholes, pinholes & spinholes*), this report raises a number of questions. The "hole" designation is not new, neither is the assertion that material emerges from the other side (i.e. as a white hole).

"...the model proposed by IFIC researchers posits that matter would not be lost inside the singularity, but rather would be expelled out the other side through the wormhole at its centre to another region of the universe."

The above would violate numerous conservation laws. Recall that if a star falls into a black hole, the black hole increases in mass-energy (gravitational intensity). That remains here, along with any net electric charge, momentum, angular momentum, and even information (preserved on the event horizon). So, what's left to emerge from the other side?

Given the apparent preponderance of black holes in the universe, this is not a trivial consideration (considering a white hole has never been detected in our time). One might address this by suggesting that what emerges, does so to "another region of spacetime." Even then, to avoid conflict with the conservation laws with that region, it would have to be at an event not already predominated by those laws (so, getting lots of new real particles is allowed). The only such event which comes to mind is that of the big bang! I didn't find such a reference in the report.

*This part I liked! "The interest in wormholes for theoretical physics goes beyond generating tunnels or doors in spacetime to connect two points in the Universe. They would also help explain phenomena such as quantum entanglement or the nature of elementary particles. Thanks to this new interpretation, the existence of these objects could be closer to science than fiction."
User avatar
Faradave
Active Member
 
Posts: 1834
Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Location: Times Square (T2)


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby vivian maxine on August 6th, 2016, 10:26 am 

Faradave, since you have scientific facts and I have not, tell me why black holes cannot be simply recycling spots. Dead stars fall in. Something like a cleaning and re-creating goes on in there and out come new stars.

While that theory was nothing more than my uneducated idea, there was an article in Scientific American some time last year or year before about stars being ejected and a wind carrying them to the edge of the universe to form new galaxies.

I have put that rather clumsily because I'd need to find the article in my files to quote the man's exact idea. But I imagine you can see the picture. I think the big difference was that his stars came out at the same entry point where they entered. I did refer this to a scientist who was at the time working on his Ph.D. He wrote back a nice letter explaining why it would not work. The main thing I remember without digging out the letter is that the distance was too great.

So, from your point of view, why could black holes not be what I call "recycling centers". Where is the material that does create new stars coming from?

My defense? "There are no dumb questions", thank goodness.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Stellar Origins

Postby Faradave on August 6th, 2016, 12:30 pm 

Viv,

Stay curious, my criticisms were directed solely at the report.

Black holes may indeed be some kind of recycling spot but I don't see any evidence that they recycle material to other regions in our time (i.e. our spatial universe "now"). We do see evidence that the properties of what enters a black hole persist. For example, the mass of the black hole increases when something falls in and stays that way (except possibly for truly trivial losses attributable to Hawking radiation).

vivian maxine wrote:Scientific American ... about stars being ejected [from black holes]

This most likely refers to stars which sped by a black hole but never entered its event horizon (from which nothing leaves). It would be similar to when NASA uses the gravitation of planets to assist probes in accelerating toward the outer reaches of our solar system. The probes get close to the planets but always have a speed greater than escape velocity. One could say the planet "ejected" the probe.

So far, the only way we know of stars forming is by consolidation of matter, typically in gaseous nebulae. Hydrogen and helium are the most abundant atoms in the universe (this excludes dark mater). It's no coincidence that these are by far, the largest components of stars. It's believed that the fundamental particles emerging from the big bang (origin, yet to be explained) cooled down sometime thereafter to gas which then consolidated gravitationally to form stars. There are abundant observations that stars continue to form this way today.
User avatar
Faradave
Active Member
 
Posts: 1834
Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Location: Times Square (T2)


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby vivian maxine on August 6th, 2016, 1:17 pm 

Thank you, Faradave. That's what I wanted to hear. So I can keep dreaming about the "black hole star factory" as long as I don't preach it as fact? It does sound good - to me anyway.

I shall have to find my copy of that article. I don't remember it discussing stars that sped by but never entered the black hole without falling in but that doesn't mean it wasn't said. Probably means I just didn't catch it. To clarify, the author wasn't saying such anything happened. He was saying that what he was describing might be a possibility in his opinion.

I just remembered that the hydrogen and helium of a star are pretty well all gone before the star enters the black hole. That's a negative for recycling ideas.

Thank again. I must get back to finding part of my brain - another topic.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby Dave_Oblad on August 7th, 2016, 7:40 am 

Hi all,

A small bit of speculation: Don Lincoln posted a thread explaining that when Matter is broken down into constituent particles, the total weight/mass sum decreases. In other words, Matter has no intrinsic Weight or Mass or Inertia. Specifically.. it's the Geometry of the collective that provides actual weight and momentum. It's also this specific Geometry that curves Space-Time.

Thus, to curve Space-Time, Matter that falls into a black hole must maintain some semblance of its original Geometry. To fill a limited volume of space (rather smallish volume) with almost unlimited amount of Matter is in violation of Physics. Electron orbitals etc must stay within certain parameters as would the various nuclear forces used by Matter to exist as Matter. This is the singularity, where the laws of Physics seem to be suspended. "Seem to be" is the operative description. Obviously, these laws are not suspended, or said Black Holes would lose their Gravitational ability to curve Space-Time.

So, it would appear to be a viable argument that all the Matter that falls into a Black Hole is still there, without too radical a change in the laws of Physics. If we could accept that curved Space-Time is a density aspect or decrease in Planck Scale of Space-Time, then the actual volume represented inside a typical Black Hole may be much greater than what would appear, as viewed from some distance away from the Black Hole.

This would preserve most (if not all) the laws of Atomic Physics. There would be a massive Plasma Star with millions of Solar Masses existing within Compressed (heavily curved) Space-Time, not much larger than a Moon (if one could triangulate its size from far outside it). The straight line distance through a Black Hole could be millions of times greater than the distance to go around it.

It would still look Black, because the frequency spectrum of light leaving a Black Hole would be severely Red-Shifted, perhaps almost down to audio wave lengths. In any event, there would be no actual Hole inside, just a Massive Compressed Star and thus a trip through the center would be like shooting through the Sun (suicide mission..lol).

There still exists one possibility.. a rapidly spinning Plasma Star could turn into a doughnut (Toroidal) which does have a hole through the center. But I doubt anything alive could navigate through such without being ripped apart by the gravitational forces and waves within.

Anyway, I'm still not sure why Science is repulsed by the concept of compressed Space-Time, which provides the Working Scale for all existing measurable things. If Matter naturally migrates/accelerates towards compressed Space-Time and Matter in turn compresses Space-Time.. then Gravity would no longer be much of a mystery. It would also indicate Dark-Matter is just simply compressed Space-Time and Dark-Energy is decompressing Space-Time.

Long and short of it: Science has a few cherished ideas that have been put on a Pedestal and will go to almost any lengths inventing Rube Goldberg explanations to preserve these ideas (my personal opinion).

Bottom Line.. a Black Hole is not a Hole. (It's a heavily Red-Shifted greatly compressed massive Plasma Star).

Best wishes all,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby vivian maxine on August 7th, 2016, 9:09 am 

Dave wrote:Bottom Line.. a Black Hole is not a Hole. (It's a heavily Red-Shifted greatly compressed massive Plasma Star).


Truly? I knew it was not a hole as in "tunnel" but didn't know more. So, is it a dead star eating other stars? Canabalistic? I've read of dying stars doing that but a dead star? Or,is a black hole really dead?
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Death Star

Postby Faradave on August 7th, 2016, 10:56 am 

Viv,

Dave_O's "variable Planck Scale of spacetime" and my "tiny wormholes" are currently in the category of Personal Theories. That doesn't necessarily mean they're wrong, but they are not what you'll find in conventional text books and they can't all be correct (that goes for some conventional theories too). Don't expect contacts outside SPCF to be familiar with our personal theories.

A star is a celestial object which has gained luminosity by fusing the nuclei of small atoms (most typically hydrogen and helium) into larger ones (a process called "stellar nucleosynthesis"). This occurs when enough matter has condensed from a gas cloud (nebula) for its core gravitation to become so intense that it forces nuclei to fuse. Fusion releases a great deal of energy, as some mass is converted to energy (E = mc2) in the process. That energy heats the matter making it luminous and also causes the star to have a larger much volume than it would if cool.

A "dead star" is a stellar remnant for which the "fuel" has been consumed. It turns out that fusion of small nuclei to larger ones releases energy all the way up to the size of an iron atom. Any further fusion would actually require energy input. So stars running out of small (i.e. low mass) atoms tend to cool down loosing much luminosity may be considered "dead". If there is sufficient total mass when this occurs the gravity triumphs over heat and the object will shrink accordingly, sometimes all the way to a "black hole" which is, by some estimates, no size at all.
User avatar
Faradave
Active Member
 
Posts: 1834
Joined: 10 Oct 2012
Location: Times Square (T2)


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby vivian maxine on August 7th, 2016, 11:04 am 

I was fine until you got to that last phrase. :-)

Never mind. Thanks for the rundown. Things to remember.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby Dave_Oblad on August 7th, 2016, 3:57 pm 

Hi Viv and everyone,

Here is a Wiki link to the term "Star":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star
Notice that the first sentence refers to all Stars as being a Plasma Star.. so I've said nothing original in regards to using the term Plasma.

Faradave's Personal theory and mine are very similar, in both recognize the function of nearly instantaneous communication between particles. He uses a descriptor of Spin-Holes and various Wormhole like phenomena.. and mine simply recognize that "Time", as we treat it, has an aspect called Duration. In my book, "Duration" has no defensible meaning at the Quantum Scales, and is the reason why many consider Quantum Mechanics non-intuitive. End result is the realization that information of certain types can move far greater than Light-Speed in both of our personal explanations.

When a large Star goes Super Nova, it sheds the outer layers (seeding the Universe with elements) and the mostly Iron Plasma left over suddenly shrinks into a Black Hole, because Gravity wins over Heat at keeping the Star inflated, size-wise.

How small the remnants become is speculation, but Don Lincoln has stated on this Forum that: No working Physicist believes the size reduces to a point particle. Meaning the Star Core still has considerable volume.

It gives off no visible light due to an effect already expressed/predicted by Einstein:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_redshift

Vivian wrote:Or, is a black hole really dead?

Anyway, a Black Hole is not a Dead Star.. it is still quite active and would be very hot. When a Black Hole feeds on surrounding Gas and/or other objects (local Stars).. what happens to that Matter that is joining with a Black Hole? It would be fueled of course. It would convert this fuel into energy and radiated much away so forcefully that it may blow gas away from it, despite the severe Gravity potential. We don't get to see this radiated energy, because the Gravitational Red-Shift effect is so great.

You may have noticed in recent publications that a cloud of nearby passing gas (G2) was expected to be swallowed by our Galaxy's Black Hole but wasn't. That event has some scratching their respective heads...lol. This event actually occurred thousands of years ago, but it take Time for that information to have reached us due to Light-Speed limitations.
http://earthsky.org/space/how-g2-survived-the-black-hole-at-our-milky-ways-heart

So a Black Hole is not a Dead Star and would probably resent being called such...lol.

Best Regards,
Dave :^)
User avatar
Dave_Oblad
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby vivian maxine on August 7th, 2016, 4:28 pm 

Thanks, Dave. I still have hopes for the black holes to be recyclers of materials into new stars. And I think that is only a tad romanticising. Why shouldn't they serve a purpose? I'm also dreaming up a big job for dark matter but I think Lisa Randall is far ahead of me there.

Fun is fun. Beats listening to the daily news.

P.S.

From Dave's linked page.: http://earthsky.org/space/how-g2-surviv ... ways-heart

G2 is not alone. We’re seeing a new class of stars near the black hole, and as a consequence of the black hole.
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby bangstrom on August 8th, 2016, 5:17 am 

vivian maxine » August 7th, 2016, 3:28 pm wrote: I still have hopes for the black holes to be recyclers of materials into new stars. And I think that is only a tad romanticising. Why shouldn't they serve a purpose?

There is a serious but whimsical cosmology that works like that.

http://www.cosmiccommodetheory.com/
bangstrom
Member
 
Posts: 611
Joined: 18 Sep 2014


Re: Travel Through a Black Hole

Postby vivian maxine on August 8th, 2016, 9:25 am 

bangstrom » August 8th, 2016, 4:17 am wrote:
vivian maxine » August 7th, 2016, 3:28 pm wrote: I still have hopes for the black holes to be recyclers of materials into new stars. And I think that is only a tad romanticising. Why shouldn't they serve a purpose?

There is a serious but whimsical cosmology that works like that.

http://www.cosmiccommodetheory.com/


Thank you again. Surely hope he never writes a very long article that i want to read. Such tiny print! Saving "paper" maybe?
vivian maxine
Resident Member
 
Posts: 2823
Joined: 01 Aug 2014



Return to Science News Discussion Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests