[Deecart (OP)]

White holes are like the white rabbit a young fox has never meet.

They could exist, but nobody has ever seen one.

In general relativity, a white hole is a theoretical region of spacetime and singularity that cannot be entered from the outside, although energy-matter, light and information can escape from it. In this sense, it is the reverse of a black hole, which can be entered only from the outside and from which energy-matter, light and information cannot escape. White holes appear in the theory of eternal black holes. In addition to a black hole region in the future, such a solution of the Einstein field equations has a white hole region in its past.[1] This region does not exist for black holes that have formed through gravitational collapse, however, nor are there any observed physical processes through which a white hole could be formed.

Supermassive black holes (SBHs) are theoretically predicted to be at the center of every galaxy and that possibly, a galaxy cannot form without one. Stephen Hawking[2] and others have proposed that these supermassive black holes spawn a supermassive white hole.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole

But perhaps we see white holes everyday and we dont realize they are some.
Could it be possible that, as you enter a black hole, saying you reach the schwarzchild radius (i would not recommend this experience and i will explain why further), you would arrive in some special place where... :
If you look back, you see a star ! Instead of the walls of the black hole "like you should observe in a classical 3D hole".
What a surprise ! You realize that in a 4D spacetime, the inside of a hole is indeed  a sphere (like a star)
So you can go around the sphere (orbiting around the star) and in fact you are just orbiting inside, close to the walls of the black hole.

The interresting thing is that Stephen Hawking hypothetised that there could be some "Fire Wall" (this is why i do not recommend to travel trought the black hole) that is very dangerous for the matter.

So if you look at the Sun (yes our sun in our solar system) is it possible that this object is instead of what we think as  "a star" ,the walls seen from the inside of a black hole ?
And this is what we can call a White hole ?

The fire wall could be responsible of the strange behavior of the Sun corona.

Burning questions about the sun’s atmosphere

The visible surface of the sun, or the photosphere, is around 6,000 degrees Celsius (11,000 degrees Fahrenheit). But a few thousand kilometers above it – a small distance when we consider the size of the sun – the solar atmosphere, also called the corona, is hundreds of times hotter. The corona reaches a million degrees C or higher (over 1.8 million degrees F).

This spike in temperature, despite the increased distance from the sun’s main energy source, has been observed in most stars. It represents a fundamental puzzle that astrophysicists have mulled over for decades.

https://earthsky.org/sun/why-suns-atmosphere-hotter-than-its-surface/
 
Some possibility we have to verify this hypothesis could be to measure the gravity close around the sun.
Normaly, like for the earth, if we have what we call a classic star, we should have some slight difference in gravity.
But if it is some quantum object, (so a white hole) the hole should behave like one single object with no "details".
This could help Mercury to orbit so close around the sun.

Furthermore if you fall into a black hole, instead of "falling" toward the center (the singularity) you only enter using your inertia and then you are attracted by the "walls" of the hole if you cant escape the attraction of "the Sun".

What do you think about this ?






 

[Origin]

What do you think about this ?

It seems like fantasy and not physics.

[Deecart (OP)]

It seems like fantasy and not physics.

On the contrary.
It is because i was sick hearing all thoses fairytales about black holes that i tried to make some more physical model.
Per example : Did you know that if you fall into a black hole if you try to descelerate you accelerate instead ?
"This", is fantasy.

Here, the curvature of the black hole diminish when you approach the black hole radius, when you are at the radius it is flat, and when you  pass thrue it is curvatured again but in the other direction.

Therefore, the hole become a sphere.

[Origin]

On the contrary.
It is because i was sick hearing all thoses fairytales about black holes that i tried to make some more physical model.

I see, you believe that the physics that's taught in every university in wold is a fairy tale.  Even more than that, you believe that you have the real answers.
Do you have any evidence for these amazing claims?

[Deecart (OP)]

Do you have any evidence for these amazing claims?

I dont think it is very amazing.
The idea is coming from some much global consideration of what the universe is.
If you dont have the full picture, i understand that it can sound strange.

The only amazing thing is that we are living at the border (this is a great coincidence) of the black hole (the sun) that contain the full universe (the one we know, because the other where our black hole is, we dont kwow it).

I see, you believe that the physics that's taught in every university in wold is a fairy tale.

I only think that what they call here physic is only some mathematical representation.
These mathematical representations permit per example to do travels to the past and so on...
These conclusions are some very funy fairytales.
 

[Kryptid]

Did you know that if you fall into a black hole if you try to descelerate you accelerate instead ?

Source?

[Origin]

I dont think it is very amazing.

That's because you don't understand physics.

The idea is coming from some much global consideration of what the universe is.
If you dont have the full picture, i understand that it can sound strange

So you don't have any evidence for your claim, just some stuff you made up.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Perhaps this is the thing with white holes is that they can't be seen.
  If light occurrence was truly impossible at the earliest universe, and BigBang could be a ultra massive singularity it would be sort of "feasible" that the black hole is the past of the future white hole, both connected by a wormhole tunneling effect to different "times" not "places" to be found.

 Figure, assuming the BigBang was a White hole, connected to a black hole, "our universe" would be the wormhole in between both of them.

 We would assume that the BigBang was a singularidade because there was no past because before that there was no time, therefore no black hole object, but a potential white hole.

 Consider now that the BigBang singularity was away inti our distant future long before  the explosion of matter out of no where.

 The singularity falls forming a black hole now, creating a wormhole with no time where it not only stores the matter it captures but firms new multiple stars within this wormhole atelier.

 We would look for something that originated it in our past assuming space was formed only or simultaneously together with the BigBang event disconsidering the possibility that space was already there and the singularity which originated space it's in our future.

 Either way, lots of assumptions but I think "white hole" it's a brief moment in the life of a black hole.
 With a flipped time orientation, still white hole "needs space" to gush matter in, the falling singularity may produce just that, prior and simultaneously as the matter inside the wormhole it's/was "already there".

 A perfectly calm space as we know once it's passed the horizon.
 If BH arrow doesn't allow nothing to get backwards, white hole would not allow anything to get inwards, doesn't ever impling that "white hole MUST eject" only reject.
 
 Looking from this perspective, white hole it's simultaneously the black hole only with a time arrow opositing it.
 Not where to see a predictable white hole but "when" never to see the predicted black hole, since we can't look into the future from other frame that's not the one of the singularity don't think nothing can give evidence of it or support this outside from quantum mechanics.

 Of the tunneling effect it's to be cracked there, it's also available for relativity.
 All the white hole needs it's the spacetime of the event horizon on our black holes to get in the lack of a better word "weaker" in gravity terms, and the white hole event might occur shooting out the singularity from inside the wormhole by the same side it came in, allowing the hole atelier/wormhole to expand.

[Eternal Student]

Hi.

   I'm sorry but I am struggling to understand what has just been said.   Some bits of it do look like existing ideas for white holes.

Best Wishes.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Hi.

   I'm sorry but I am struggling to understand what has just been said.   Some bits of it do look like existing ideas for white holes.

Best Wishes.

 Imagine the usual picture of the puncture of a black hole singularity, ignoring the black itself.
 The black spherical effect it's entirely of our own spacetime and gravity.
 Now consider that that puncture it's on itself a wormhole ever growing larger and long.
 All the material gathered here it's stored in such atelier that's outside of time, our present time.

 Eventually our universe will have weaker everything, aiming the source of gravity which is very likely intrincated with spacetime.

 Suggestions are:
 When our universe (in the future) gets weaker overall, the black holes will no longer be able to keep the contained, and the horizon will sort of start failing.
 All it would take it's to our universe to loose to the one passed the horizon.
 Flipping the time arrow of the black hole turning it into a white hole.

 If black holes are the past of future white ones, it's simple flip the time direction, and the singularity it's very likely to be literally "ejected" from inside there.
 At the moment it reaches the "outside here" there will be nearly "no spacetime or forces" or gravity to "keep it compressed over its own mass".
 For a brief moment it will have none and that might be similar if not identical to what we call as a BigBang.
 Not that the space wasn't there, there was plenty of space created "inside the event horizon"
  Picture it's the one of cone like structure.

 Regardless of the yet impossible to know outcomes, the white holes seem to be the black holes only in different "times".

 Event horizon acting as a virtual split which doesn't allow the space in there to permeate over this one.
 Still the black hole event itself it's coodepent with our current spacetime.
 No possible way and it's silly to consider that "the singularity trapped by its own gravity" would still apply when that is occurring over a weaker spacetime, there would be not equilibrium there.

 Not a proof only mixing multiple sources to mind experiment with images, and seems feasible as an alternative.

On a short version:
 As this universe grows "old" the black holes events will flip their arrow of time gradually till eventually flip entirely. The will become white holes and the first thing to come out it's the singularity itself.
 The moment the singularity reaches "this weak side" it will explode.

 Now consider the idea o past and future or in and out.
  There would be no difference in between the singularity physically reaching the BH event for that to happen.

 This is the picture, two of them:
 The singularity by the same reason above explodes right in there.
 In this one we end up with a BigBang over a wormhole of it's own doing, one which survived the end of our spacetime for it was apart from the horizon.
 On that the BigBang took place over a space that was already there, since in there time of the BH was constantly from the past to the future, a flipping of the arrow of time with a dead universe in this side would not be able to be noticed, as the new universe also started from a past to a future of it's own.

 The second scenario is that the singularity gradually sort of "climbs up" the wormhole till it reaches the horizon "here", also forcing it to explode for there's no gravity to keep it.
 Actually it could have already happened inside the black hole, since time is basically stooped it will not take place untill this side allows it.
 If true the white hole would occur as a momentarily event as the singularity exploded at the same time.
 White hole requirements would be a weaker spacetime incapable of sustaining and event horizon.
 The matter is gushed out simultaneously as the singularity exploded.

 All speculation untill we know with evidence:
 What "writes" space-time?
  What occurrence draws or sustains it?

 When we understand the fabric everything will unfold itself naked.

 Quasar "may be bad interpretation of a partial white hole".
 We assume that the gas cloud is climbing the poles and using the fields to be ejected, but that's quite "odd", could be the case that the black hole event it's "geometrically squished", temporarily breaking the balance in between black hole and white hole, and the Jets not being from the matter outside black hole, but inside white hole.

 If external, the jets should start slowly and gain speed.
 If Internal, it's fair to suggest that the beams should start faster and then slow down.

 We would need to see a quasar event starting in full detail from the start.
 Guess gravitational waves may offer a chance rather than blind luck, still not sure those machines can identify unspotted sources.
 They caught the BHs merging for the have seen them first.

 As for my own thinking, the black hole / white hole equilibrium and arrow of time is defined by the polarity of the singularity on the Y.
 Still this spacetime won't let it take place "yet".
 As if the colapse of the singularity itself and this universe was in agreement that which when one of the two got weaker o e will loose, or one explodes or one evaporates.
 The evaporated one suggestion is based on an a version of our universe that is "constant" even after trilhos of years, that's unlikely while looking to our past.

 Also consider that I tend to think that everything is constantly wormholing through out our universe, only nothing has horizon to protect itself by having it's own space time.
 Sun it's actually wormholing through the milky way as we speak.

[Origin]

Imagine the usual picture of the puncture of a black hole singularity, ignoring the black itself.

That is not the usual picture, nor does it makes sense.

The black spherical effect it's entirely of our own spacetime and gravity.

What does that mean.

Now consider that that puncture it's on itself a wormhole ever growing larger and long.

What is this puncture you keep talking about.

All the material gathered here it's stored in such atelier that's outside of time, our present time.

That makes no sense.

Eventually our universe will have weaker everything, aiming the source of gravity which is very likely intrincated with spacetime.

Does that include coffee?  Will I have to add more beans in the future to have the same strength of coffee?
Unfortunately it looks like the entire post is just a bunch of scientific terms randomly strung together.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Imagine the usual picture of the puncture of a black hole singularity, ignoring the black itself.

That is not the usual picture, nor does it makes sense.

The black spherical effect it's entirely of our own spacetime and gravity.

What does that mean.

Now consider that that puncture it's on itself a wormhole ever growing larger and long.

What is this puncture you keep talking about.

All the material gathered here it's stored in such atelier that's outside of time, our present time.

That makes no sense.

Eventually our universe will have weaker everything, aiming the source of gravity which is very likely intrincated with spacetime.

Does that include coffee?  Will I have to add more beans in the future to have the same strength of coffee?
Unfortunately it looks like the entire post is just a bunch of scientific terms randomly strung together.

 You know you sound like a machine don't you? 😜

 It was aiming to try to clarify "what I meant" for that user, not to clarify "what you mean as I should".

I've checked multiple topics and this sort of approach although common and necessary seem to be very recursive with specific users.
 Any of my posts are suggestions of my own, and yet no one knows universe.

 Still while many aspects of everything "will always require" reconsideration and extrapolation based on how blind we all are.
 You seem dedicated into fix language barriers or smaller trivial aspects of a contextual narrative of thoughts of others.

 Thus creating an ever persisting fork from the main questioning towards a self centered approach.

 Start from the "always correct assumption" that everything we know, it's wrong, as we cannot know.
 Math with be evoked by chance as it's proof of what is known, I'd reply math it's explaining only the casualty caused by our own "not knowing".
 Though useful, more like a language rather than a fundamental law.

 Still regardless of anything I said or may say the branch the predatory observation was wishing to create, regardless if the reply would be one godsend and containing occasionally the true about everything, unimportant, as the goal of the branch formed is to diverge from the abstract thinking and focus into oneself.

 Even if the ONE would be correct, it wouldn't know that for it was too worried about what he doesn't want to know.
 And from within such drive would generate the designed and planned out one of "burnouts" overall, and when that goal is inevitable achieved, one states:

 Lots of word, but none of that proof.....
 Impossible that not to be true for it was designed over the desire of "silence".

 When there's no flaws there's no confusion, even if that means not to think for oneself and learn about it "by oneself", most productive think in order to correct abstract thinking would be to "use lots of words" to explain why.

 But if the very nature of the approach reveals by nature that "explaining what I think and why not", I'd making me a potential target "for my self".

 Which it's inevitable so empty of truth and emotional inteligente that, even if the reply one day may contain a point which for the right reader may give him/her another realization of it's own.
 Even that aspects for users replying others would be taking in advantage and potentially sold as "disturbing", even if the causality was deliberately inserted by will.

 At this point we derived so much from the point that the goal it's inevitable achieved no mater to which direction one moves, revealing the sole intention of the construct and approach :
 The one that silently states "I want you to not to anything".
 Since empathy see no difference between you and me, it's clear that even taking over others doubts would be available as an option, giving the intentions are described above.

 If wrong, perhaps help me to understand the quotes which are wrong and why, so I can lean.
 Used to like a GOC user posts at this forum but guess he's no longer present.
 He always had a good electron spin explanation of it's own for each correction years ago.

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

Did we really never observed white holes ?

 If you be so kind in order to clarify the best you can.
 Don't retract yourself I'll not be targeting words like "puncture" or other aspects which I could force myself to not to emphasize and climb on an argument of ignorance of my own.

 We don't have good words to attribute to space time, stronger and old are good as any for a contextual answer.

 Enlight us with any answers of your own to the former question and I'll start to look into them and start to see the approach as proactive and kind as someone trying to bring light, otherwise "feels like 😜" something else.