The objects scientists think are black holes could instead be wormholes leading to other universes, a new study says. If so, it would help resolve a quantum conundrum known as the black hole information paradox, but critics say it would also raise new problems, such as how the wormholes would form in the first place.
A black hole is an object with such a powerful gravitational field that nothing, not even light, can escape it if it strays within a boundary known as the event horizon. Einstein's theory of general relativity says black holes should form whenever matter is squeezed into a small enough space.
Though black holes are not seen directly, astronomers have identified many objects that appear to be black holes based on observations of how matter swirls around them.
But physicists Thibault Damour of the Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientifiques in Bures-sur-Yvette, France, and Sergey Solodukhin of International University Bremen in Germany now say that these objects could be structures called wormholes instead.
Wormholes are warps in the fabric of space-time that connect one place to another. If you imagine the universe as a two-dimensional sheet, you can picture a wormhole as a "throat" connecting our sheet to another one. In this scenario, the other sheet could be a universe of its own, with its own stars, galaxies and planets.
Damour and Solodukhin studied what such a wormhole might look like, and were surprised to discover that it would mimic a black hole so well that it would be virtually impossible to tell the difference.
More information in link...
News source: NewScientist.com
A black hole is an object with such a powerful gravitational field that nothing, not even light, can escape it if it strays within a boundary known as the event horizon. Einstein's theory of general relativity says black holes should form whenever matter is squeezed into a small enough space.
Though black holes are not seen directly, astronomers have identified many objects that appear to be black holes based on observations of how matter swirls around them.
But physicists Thibault Damour of the Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientifiques in Bures-sur-Yvette, France, and Sergey Solodukhin of International University Bremen in Germany now say that these objects could be structures called wormholes instead.
Wormholes are warps in the fabric of space-time that connect one place to another. If you imagine the universe as a two-dimensional sheet, you can picture a wormhole as a "throat" connecting our sheet to another one. In this scenario, the other sheet could be a universe of its own, with its own stars, galaxies and planets.
Damour and Solodukhin studied what such a wormhole might look like, and were surprised to discover that it would mimic a black hole so well that it would be virtually impossible to tell the difference.
More information in link...
News source: NewScientist.com
Last edited by MrCobra on 28 Apr 2007 - 23:11
This theory is as old as Einstein, I don't see what it does on a frontpage in 2007.
Last edited by PsykX on 29 Apr 2007 - 00:54
clearly we have no way of finding out, but I somewhat agree with this theory but my theory is more like "black holes lead to nothing - but nothing is an actual place".
Yes because everyone knows that furthering our knowledge of the universe is just a waste of time, progression is for lamers. I wonder if people said that about Einstein, Newton, Gallileo, and Feynman. This argument of your's is one huge strawman.
Sure, but then your only literal future (as even time itself, being part of spacetime, is bent inwards) is to end up in there without getting out and ever telling what was in.
Science is all applied theories. As crazy as it sounds, nothing is ever definitive, just correct until disproven.
its not crazy at all, I agree completely. before galileo science said the universe revovled around the earth. ironically enough some aspects of science that are considered rules that simply exist without exception are the ones we are least able to understand i.e. time, gravity.
No, there's literally nothing on the other side of a black hole.
A black hole is warp in space/time caused by a singularity at it's center. Because both time and space get stretched to infinity as one approaches the singularity, nothing can ever actually reach the singularity. The idea of a white hole on "the other side" of a black hole is based on the misconception that objects are constantly reaching the singularity and need somewhere else to go once they reach it. But, as I've illustrated to you, since nothing actually reaches the singularity, it doesn't need anywhere else to go. All that happens is that the mass of all the objects inside the event horizon add their collective mass to the singularity for the purposes of calculating the collective mass of the black hole (and therefore it's collective gravity).
Besides, the idea of a Black Hole as a gateway to another universe violates the prime tenent of The Scientific Method: Observation. If you can't observe any evidence for this mythical "Wormehole" (not even indirectly), it is not a scientific theory to suggest that such a phenomenon exists. Science fiction? Yes. Science? No.
whent he article says that "Wormholes look like black holes when viewed from this distance, and measured form the matter and how matter acts around them"
You mean 'powered' by, right? When a black hole is left behind after, for example, the collapse of a supergiant star, one can reasonably assert that the hole was 'caused' by the gravitational collapse of the star, no?
Nothing in science is proven, theories are constructed to explain the facts,
You mean 'powered' by, right? When a black hole is left behind after, for example, the collapse of a supergiant star, one can reasonably assert that the hole was 'caused' by the gravitational collapse of the star, no?
Semantics. You can look at it either way. For the purposes of my statement, "Powered" and "Casued" can be used interchangably. The star collapsed, which increased it's gravity enough to form an event horizon, which in turn formed a black hole. Yes, the collapse "cased" the black hole, but if you then were to remove the singularity (and all the matter it had sucked in), the warped space-time that is the black hole would return to normal. Space-time doesn't stay warped when you remove that gravitational source that was warping it, you see. The singularity is continuously causing space-time to warp.
The black hole isn't being powered entirely by the singularity: Black holes are powered primarily by gravity. Everything inside the event horizon (and a lot of things that are outside of that) contribute to the gravitational lensing effect that is pulling matter in. Things that are inside the event horizon are not necessarily part of the singularity. Therfore, the singularity alone does not power the black hole. In fact, you could postulate that time-space itself is solely responsible for keeping the black hole functional and that the singularity is merely a causal agent... but that's a whole other discussion.
Just because it sounds like you claim this as facts, note that the theory of relativity breaks down at singularities (singularities are basically a "division by zero" in Einstein's formulae), and we need a theory of quantum gravity to be able to tell better what's going on in there. There might not be a singularity due to lower bounds of mass due to quantum mechanical states, for example. Einstein has basically only be able to approximate what happens, but not describe the nature of the singularity, or if there truly is one.
So what you're writing is essentially how it looks if we ignore quantum theories, but the problem with Einstein's equations is that the further you get in there, the more does quantum effects play a role. The problem is similar to what can happen if you apply Newtonian physics and not taking Einstein's theories into account. They only represent a good approximation, and we're clearly not there yet. We don't even know what physically causes gravity today (gravitons? something else?) and why it's for example such a weak force in comparison to the others (one string theory think it could be because strings causing gravity is "leaking" across universes). And a more or less perfect understanding of gravity is almost essential to understanding black holes, as it's a dominating force.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity
No, black holes (or collapsars) are "powered" primarily by the mass of the matter that is drawn into them, which is why Hawking radiation enables collapsar evaporation. The gravitational force is a by-product of the amount of matter that the collapsar contains.
yeah exactly thats why they need to get on with it
Why would they need to?
Asuuming time travel is possible, why would you want to go back in time? The obvious answer is for the historical benefits, but our modern day and age records everything. Every keypress, every political event, it's all recorded somewhere. In the future, all of this information will likely still be available at the touch of a button.
So unless you wanted to go back and meet a real "internet age" person, to have a drink or something, you have no need to come and visit us.
And if you did, you'd not make a big deal about it because it'll cause all sorts of temporal bother anyway.
If time travel was possible, you'd go back to times when history wasn't recorded, or when records were lost (just how DID they build those blasted pyramids?)
The Government will not allow them so the time travel equipment for the home did not allow it either because it would tamper with the time stream. Duh! Sometimes having kids around is kind of useful!
And to quote the other guy, the whole travel back in time to visit us could be happening right now and we wouldn't even know it. Do you think the future governments/organizations would dare let out the news that in the future we have perfected time travel? Don't think so.
But that's for another day.
"Time Travel" happens all the time, actually. But it only works one way: It's called relativity.
It has to do with the speed of light being constant. I don't have time (or space) here to explain how it works, but suffice it to say that while you can not go backwards in time, but you could (theoretically) use relativistic motion to go forward in time.
Quite frankly, we don't know enough about how time works to know what the effect of relativistic motion would be. Nobody's ever observed a macro-level (larger than microscopic) hunk of matter moving at relativistic speeds.
"Time Travel" happens all the time, actually. But it only works one way: It's called relativity.
It has to do with the speed of light being constant. I don't have time (or space) here to explain how it works, but suffice it to say that while you can not go backwards in time, but you could (theoretically) use relativistic motion to go forward in time.
Quite frankly, we don't know enough about how time works to know what the effect of relativistic motion would be. Nobody's ever observed a macro-level (larger than microscopic) hunk of matter moving at relativistic speeds.
If you travelled to the edge of our solar system at light speed, turned around then came back, it would take you no time at all. The flipside is once back everyone you knew before you left would be long dead.
"Time Travel" happens all the time, actually. But it only works one way: It's called relativity.
It has to do with the speed of light being constant. I don't have time (or space) here to explain how it works, but suffice it to say that while you can not go backwards in time, but you could (theoretically) use relativistic motion to go forward in time.
Quite frankly, we don't know enough about how time works to know what the effect of relativistic motion would be. Nobody's ever observed a macro-level (larger than microscopic) hunk of matter moving at relativistic speeds.
Very true. I've done reports about this in 6th grade, but my retarded teacher gave me a C for "inaccurate information". Of course, I proved her wrong in 7th grade after having enough evidence from quality sources.
One thing, though, is that Time Travel has such an exponential force that when you are in experience, you lose track of life, therefore you are still there, alive, but without any consciousness. (You do things you always do, but you have no idea you are doing it.)
Uh... heh?
You determined this how, again? I know full well you haven't determined this experimentally. So I'm going to go out on a guess and assume you either read it on the internet or came up with it in a dream.
Uh... heh?
You determined this how, again? I know full well you haven't determined this experimentally. So I'm going to go out on a guess and assume you either read it on the internet or came up with it in a dream.
No it's a theory by some guy who I read about in my cousin's science book.
The closest black hole is about 1,600 Light years away. Therefore the minimum amount of time we would have to wait to get any data back would be 3,200 years. That is assuming we could make a spacecraft that could travel exactly the speed of light ( which isn't possible)
Plus, in 3,200 years who knows where our technology will be.
A thing is only impossible until someone does it....
Things we theorized about 100 years ago are now things we take for granted daily.
People need to stop saying stuff like this would be impossible. You have no idea until you actually try.
I never said is was impossible to bend space, I said it is impossible to accelerate an object faster than light. This is true by all equations.
When this happens the object becomes infinitely thin, the mass becomes infinitely huge, and thus the amount of energy required to propel the craft also becomes as infinite amount.
However, I will not disagree that it may one day be possible to bend space, or teleport ourselves in some Star Trek fashion. across the universe.
A thing is only impossible until someone does it....
Nice try, but that wouldn't work. Bending space/time in itself doesn't speed anything up. You would need to create a "Tunnel" in space time, but to do that you'd likely destroy the fabric of space-time in the process, which would defeat the purpose of bending space-time in the first place. I, for one, would like to have a universe to arrive into when I arrive.
Besides that, if you wanted to bend space-time enough to shorten the travel time to the nearest habitable extra-solar planet, you better have something more powerful that a mere sun at your beck-and-call. In fact, you're gonna need more power than this entire solar system contains, and you're gonna need it a long bloody way away from you, or you won't survive it's space/time-bending effects. Well, unless you like your nose 40,000,000 kilometers away from your mouth. Good luck with that.
A thing is only impossible until someone does it....
Nice try, but that wouldn't work. Bending space/time in itself doesn't speed anything up. You would need to create a "Tunnel" in space time, but to do that you'd likely destroy the fabric of space-time in the process, which would defeat the purpose of bending space-time in the first place. I, for one, would like to have a universe to arrive into when I arrive.
Besides that, if you wanted to bend space-time enough to shorten the travel time to the nearest habitable extra-solar planet, you better have something more powerful that a mere sun at your beck-and-call. In fact, you're gonna need more power than this entire solar system contains, and you're gonna need it a long bloody way away from you, or you won't survive it's space/time-bending effects. Well, unless you like your nose 40,000,000 kilometers away from your mouth. Good luck with that.
We have issues with power and such just due to restrictive and flawed math and theories...just wait till they are proved wrong/updated
From the probe's perspective, it would take 40+ years to get the the nearest earth-like extra-solar planet... but from our perspective it would take substantially longer. See, you forgot to factor in relativity.
holy-jesus what a mouthfull....
imagine a bazillion nuclear bombs exploding in an infinitesimal point...
Anybody want to fill in on this or am I talking ****.
http://www.livescience.com/forcesofnature/...lack_holes.html
There's nicer articles about Tunguska, Syberia. Maybe a very small black hole traversed our planet, starting with Tunguska
besides, its impossible to create a blackhole in a lab. they would have to generate a force strong enough to break the path of light
most likely not thru same one , so You need find another hole in that other universe and pray it leads back to our universe ...
but really first we should concentrate at ...
conquering nearest planets and rest of solar system
ofc if in process we get way how FTL travel (hyperfield, spacerift,subspace w/e) then even better
but no matter what chance its in my lifetime is nearly 0
I agree with your statement about conquering other planets. In fact, we just discovered the first inhabitable planet outside of our solar system. Now we just need a way to get there.
Which is damn near impossible. It'll be a looooooooooooooong trip. You want to go?
most likely not thru same one , so You need find another hole in that other universe and pray it leads back to our universe ..."
<I apologise >
That sounds like a good film...just a thought
"The file this shortcut points to cannot be found. Would you like to search for it yourself?"
Have you heard? Chocolate is actually good for you, too.
Theories are one thing. What we need is experimentation and proof.
Personally, I don't believe in parallel universes; it's called the 'universe' for a reason. There is one. It encompasses everything.
I think this news is scientific speculation, and I think the people spewing out hypothetical statements in the above posts should be shot because they have no idea what they're talking about.
I apologize for this badly formed rant post.
we simply can't know about them but it,s clearly something we would understand if science wasn't so biaised about the fact that magnetic electricity generator (aka Tesla Coil) can still be suppressed just because the electricity produced can't be traced in the magnetic field (like wired resistance ), it's not meant to be, and is fully logical to undertsand when you REALLY look into it, corporation don't like this at all, if you can't make long term profit with it.
Last edited by 2xSilverKnight on 29 Apr 2007 - 04:38
Best one yet.
That's easy: Just keep accelerating and you'll approach the speed of light eventually.
The hard part is navigating.
But what if we are that someone? that there are only possibilities created in the past and we are the future therefore we can't be visited by people from the future because we are the future.
But what if we are that someone? that there are only possibilities created in the past and we are the future therefore we can't be visited by people from the future because we are the future.
Correct, we are the aliens!
An interesting statement.
But someone should probably tell you people that time is not a linear definition that you can 'travel' along. It doesn't even count as a dimension. We perceive time, but primarily because of our orbit around our sun and also those fancy things we call clocks. But it's not some two-way street. In fact, it's not a street at all. Time travel won't work.
I don't know if that's what you were getting at or not.
wot would studying the black/worm holes bring to humanity? 0
who cares about 3rd world countries, bout time they got good goverments and built up there country.
Because even Holywood doesn't have that large of budget.
And because nobody wants to repeat the box-office bomb that was Disney's "The Black Hole."
Now let us never speak of it again.
Complete of light??? Try using English, please.
Look at that fraudster Hawkin, creates a theory and sticks with it for 30 years.... until suddenly he decides its wrong (because some other fraudster proves it wrong with another made up theory?!?!??!?!?!?!?) only to suddenly make up a completely new theory months later and say... oh yes I got it wrong... its this now!!! (f**kin bullsh*t)
How these people manage to fool so many people with their bullsh*t (that can never be proven) is beyond me.
Science is "Best Guess"
Is Anna Nicole Smith still alive in one or more alternate universes?
Headlines: "Scientists continue to find more black holes around Uranus!"
BLACK HOLES ARE NOT HOLES (you dumb a ss scientist!
Think that the universe is a windows folder where there are many stars (files), galaxies (folders with files) and such.
The popular believed say that a black hole is some sort of trash bin, where some stars (files) are put inside it and magically dissapears (or travel to another space). It's not true. a Black hole is a WINRAR file (or WinZip) where the stars (file) will join the black hole (rar archive) in a compact way.
Now... what's a wormhole?.
A example: you buy a shiny and new harddisk with 200gb. You install in in a pc and check the space in windows finding (with horror) that the free space is only 187gb
Where's the missing gb?.
a ) Never exist, disk manufactures played a dirt trick with the label.
b ) Windows format/fdisk sux, and loss some valuable space.
c ) Wormholes!... no more ask for it, just put faith on it.
A wormhole is a explanation for some "effect" (nobody known) about specific ecuations. May be the ecuations are plain wrong or the hideous effect really exist.
It's the same with the gravity where some (stupid) people claim that it's a invisible force created by the earth and another (smart) people say that it's cause by little creatures that move more fast that the light.
;-)
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.