The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Non Life Sciences
  3. Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology
  4. Are black holes really holes?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Are black holes really holes?

  • 33 Replies
  • 12796 Views
  • 6 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SymeAaro (OP)

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 21
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Are black holes really holes?
« on: 29/06/2017 21:01:46 »
Every website I've read describes black holes as an infinite curve in space time.
However, from what I know, I believe a singularity is just a tiny, dense ROUNDED, celestial object, whose GRAVITY can be represented as a well. Is this correct?
And is so, is the event horizon an imaginary sphere around the singularity?
Logged
 



Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 7649
  • Activity:
    34.5%
  • Thanked: 449 times
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #1 on: 29/06/2017 21:42:33 »
Black holes aren't actually holes: the gravity wells often used in illustrations are mostly just visual tools to graphically represent a change in gravitational potential/force as you near the black hole.

A classical gravitational singularity is a single, dimensionless point. You can't consider that to be round or any other shape. However, that is probably not the correct representation of what is present inside of a real black hole. A unified theory where gravity and space-time are successfully united with quantum mechanics will likely get rid of the infinities associated with classical black holes (or so I hope).

The event horizon can indeed be represented as an imaginary sphere around the singularity if the black hole does not rotate. If it does rotate, the event horizon will be distorted such that it bulges at the equator.
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: Zer0

Offline PmbPhy

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3903
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 126 times
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #2 on: 29/06/2017 22:01:41 »
Quote from: SymeAaro on 29/06/2017 21:01:46
Every website I've read describes black holes as an infinite curve in space time.
However, from what I know, I believe a singularity is just a tiny, dense ROUNDED, celestial object, whose GRAVITY can be represented as a well. Is this correct?
And is so, is the event horizon an imaginary sphere around the singularity?
From an external observer's point of view everything that falls into a black hole disappears from the universe. The term "hole" originated from this notion as an analogy. Observers falling into a black hole will never be able to measure any infinite curvature since that only happens at the singularity and no observer will live to be there and as such could never relay that information to anyone. And no observer inside a black hole can relay information to the outside world. As a friend of mind (who's widely known in the physics/relativity community) said to me in an e-mail
Quote
We don't know exactly what happens to particles that fall into a black hole. From the perspective of an external observer, the infalling particles never cross the horizon in any finite amount of time--they slow down as they approach  the horizon, and only approach it asymptotically. So the question about what happens to infalling particles in a black hole is meaningless for an external observer. Presumably an observer who falls with the particles will find out what happens, but he can't communicate this knowledge to the external observers. This raises fundamental questions about the operational  meaning of any predictions made from theory about what happens inside a black hole. Are such statements in the realm of physics or of metaphysics? 
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: Zer0

Offline evan_au

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 10690
  • Activity:
    18%
  • Thanked: 1352 times
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #3 on: 29/06/2017 22:13:06 »
Quote from: SymeAaro
as an infinite curve in space time
The infinities aren't just restricted to the singularity at the center. If it were, physicists could just say that it is hidden from our sight, so we can ignore it.

But infinities also exist at the event horizon, and just outside it. For example: At the event horizon, time slows by an infinite amount (according to a remote observer). Quantum effects may make the event horizon a bit "fuzzy".

This has led to some differing views about what happens there, like the firewall hypothesis. And Hawking radiation.

Just inside the event horizon, by some theories, the dimensions of space and time may be interchanged, leading to time-like paths leading to the singularity.

We don't have any real black holes in our neighbourhood to experiment on (fortunately!), so we can't resolve some of these questions. But we do have some "safe" experimental systems that have some similarities to black holes, such as liquids disappearing down a drain at the speed of sound.
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: Zer0

Offline PmbPhy

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 3903
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 126 times
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #4 on: 29/06/2017 22:28:23 »
Quote from: evan_au on 29/06/2017 22:13:06
The infinities aren't just restricted to the singularity at the center. If it were, physicists could just say that it is hidden from our sight, so we can ignore it.

But infinities also exist at the event horizon, and just outside it. For example: At the event horizon, time slows by an infinite amount (according to a remote observer). Quantum effects may make the event horizon a bit "fuzzy".
The spacetime curvature at the horizon is finite. The event horizon itself is not observable to outside observers. Just outside the event horizon time dilation is quite finite.
Logged
 



Offline SymeAaro (OP)

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 21
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #5 on: 30/06/2017 21:57:26 »
Thank u all! Just what I was looking for, really helped.
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: chris, Zer0

Offline Thalias

  • First timers
  • *
  • 2
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
    • 192.168.1.1
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #6 on: 20/07/2017 10:39:52 »
The event horizon can indeed be represented as an imaginary sphere around the singularity if the black hole does not rotate. If it does rotate, the event horizon will be distorted such that it bulges at the equator.
Logged
http://www.19216811.co
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #7 on: 27/10/2018 23:23:32 »
............Quantum Pressure .
Let us begin by accepting the premise that the space/time matrix  (substrate) has an intrinsic , "outward" quantum pressure .  This would be responsible for Alan Guth's "Grand Inflation" .  The most remarkable aspect of this is that as the universe expands , all of it's constituent parts do too .  This density decrease then engenders  time contraction due to Lorentz Expansion .  Lightwaves emitted earlier would have a lower frequency than those emitted later.  As all radiative energy is composed of the M/E matrix , it too evidences quantum pressure , but in exaggerated form .  In terms of Einsteinian Gravity Topology , the waves in the S.T. matrix dent the "flat surface" of space a tiny bit .  If two lightwaves ( photons ) approach each other , their dents interact to draw them towards one another .  This is why even light-waves "emit" , and respond to gravity .  Matter itself is made of vast amounts of "captured" energy.  This means that both matter and concentrations of energy exhibit huge amounts of "outward push" (quantum pressure) .  When their massive dents draw them towards each other , we call that "gravity" .  When they are close , the pressure creates a positive feedback loop .  This means that ever more pressure gets concentrated on an ever smaller volume of S.T. matrix .  In a super-massive black-hole , the Mass/Energy content of many stars is compressed into an ovoid the size of a car .  It still has it's initial mass , spin , and charge .  However , they are all mitigated by the dictates of Relativity .  These characteristics can affect the space outside of the B.H. because the S.T. matrix is altered by them .  Likewise , magnetic lines of force should also propagate from and through black- holes .  Motion of these cannot propagate within B.H.s , ergo , no EMR (light) can be emitted by them . 
All of these begets an unavoidable question ; "where" is the q.pressure trying to escape to ?  Extra-universal physics MUST be invoked at this point .  It appears that "wheels within wheels" is quite apt here . 
........P.M.
« Last Edit: 30/07/2021 15:51:18 by Professor Mega-Mind »
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 7649
  • Activity:
    34.5%
  • Thanked: 449 times
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #8 on: 28/10/2018 01:13:31 »
You're not speaking in terms of accepted modern physics, Mega-Mind. You should take that to the New Theories section.
Logged
 



Offline Professor Mega-Mind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #9 on: 28/10/2018 01:26:03 »
True that !  The wave of new understanding is breaking , and I am surfing the edge ! 
P.M.
Logged
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #10 on: 28/10/2018 01:40:19 »
..................Completion .
See : Are Black Holes stars or holes ?
.......P.M.
Logged
 

Offline Paul25

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • 61
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #11 on: 19/03/2020 14:06:39 »
They are matter that is obscured
Logged
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #12 on: 19/03/2020 18:36:44 »
True ...
What is matter , but captured-and-looped energy ?
P.
Logged
 



Offline William Hardy

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • 44
  • Activity:
    0.5%
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #13 on: 02/06/2021 12:07:45 »
I think that.
No, a black hole is not really a hole at all. A black hole is an object just like any other, except that it is extremely dense. This gives it such a high gravitational field that nothing, not even light, can escape. Because no light escapes a black hole, it is invisible – or ‘black’ – although they can be detected by their effect on the material around them. The term ‘hole’ was used because whatever falls ‘into’ a black hole is trapped forever.

Logged
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #14 on: 02/06/2021 13:47:38 »
Except if Hawking-Radiation is real .
Matter going in becomes the same as energy going in ; super-compressed matter/energy . It is however , unable to interact with the rest of the universe , except gravitationally .
Interestingly , if you take a mass of four-million sols , compress it to electron density , then crush that to 1% volume , you get an object the size of a VW Bug . Make it an ellipsoid (due to rotation) , and you have the object that you speak of .
*Whether it's a Kugelblitz or a dirt-ball , it is the exact same thing... solid-energy .
* Spock would love it ! .😄
Logged
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 28914
  • Activity:
    86.5%
  • Thanked: 1039 times
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #15 on: 02/06/2021 14:09:30 »
Quote from: William Hardy on 02/06/2021 12:07:45
I think that.
No, a black hole is not really a hole at all. A black hole is an object just like any other, except that it is extremely dense. This gives it such a high gravitational field that nothing, not even light, can escape. Because no light escapes a black hole, it is invisible – or ‘black’ – although they can be detected by their effect on the material around them. The term ‘hole’ was used because whatever falls ‘into’ a black hole is trapped forever.


I think you copied that from someone else/.

https://www.sciencefocus.com/space/is-a-black-hole-a-hole/
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 
The following users thanked this post: Zer0

Offline Petrochemicals

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 2847
  • Activity:
    7%
  • Thanked: 119 times
  • forum overlord
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #16 on: 02/06/2021 22:20:49 »
It was my understanding that a singularity was collapsed space, ie the 4 dimensions had ceaced to exist as normal space, hence why it was called a singularity.
Logged
For reasons of repetitive antagonism, this user is currently not responding to messages from;
BoredChemist
To ignore someone too, go to your profile settings>modifyprofie>ignore!
 



Offline Professor Mega-Mind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #17 on: 03/06/2021 01:23:45 »
Well now ,
That does not rule out the existence of the crushed energy-sphere , it simply acknowledges the extreme distortion of the involved space-time ..🤓
Logged
 

Offline Eternal Student

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1250
  • Activity:
    2%
  • Thanked: 274 times
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #18 on: 03/06/2021 02:08:04 »
Hi
Quote from: Petrochemicals on 02/06/2021 22:20:49
It was my understanding that a singularity was collapsed space, ie the 4 dimensions had ceaced to exist as normal space, hence why it was called a singularity.
   How much detail did you want?
   One minor issue is that there are solutions to Einsteins Field Equations that produce what are called "eternal black holes".  For an eternal black hole, there was always a singularity.  It's then impossible to say spacetime collapsed or ceased to exist there,  it just never was any kind of place or point in our spacetime to begin with.
Logged
 

Offline Professor Mega-Mind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 681
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 6 times
  • Naked Science Forum Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Are black holes really holes?
« Reply #19 on: 03/06/2021 03:29:00 »
No argument there ,
I am saying that that "singularity" is how the space-time within a black-hole relates to the universe external to it .
This does not remove the accumulated energy/mass from existence , but does prevent interaction in most ways .
Consider it a cosmic illusion ; the mass is there , but cannot be seen , except through gravitational effects .
*So... the energy-sphere has dropped out of normal spatial interaction , but not out of existence itself . .🙃
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: #science  / #physics  / #blackhole  / singularity  / eternal black holes  / eht 
 

Similar topics (5)

What Math/Magic do YOU practice: Black Math/Magic or White Math/Magic?

Started by Tinker-BellBoard That CAN'T be true!

Replies: 0
Views: 6096
Last post 15/12/2016 20:47:13
by Tinker-Bell
Do white sheep eat more than black sheep?

Started by ning1101Board General Science

Replies: 9
Views: 16706
Last post 19/03/2020 14:04:42
by Paul25
What is spinning in a spinning black hole?

Started by Eric A. TaylorBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 30
Views: 20959
Last post 19/10/2018 22:23:48
by evan_au
Is White Pepper A Different Plant From Black Pepper?

Started by neilepBoard Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution

Replies: 1
Views: 7267
Last post 17/03/2009 17:59:08
by Don_1
How do a worm hole and black hole differ?

Started by harcarmenBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 12
Views: 12184
Last post 15/05/2019 21:59:16
by jeffreyH
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.134 seconds with 83 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.