• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Are We Living Inside A Blackhole?

Are we living inside a black hole?

Rebecca Boyle
Published on Monday, July 26th, 2010 at 8:12 am

Scientists trying to explain the universe’s accelerating expansion usually point to dark energy, which seems to be pushing everything apart.
But an Indiana University professor has a new theory, reports New Scientist: We’re inside a black hole that exists in another universe. Specifically, a black hole that rebounded, somewhat like a spring.
Some fairly mind-blowing physics is involved here, but the gist is that Nikodem Poplawski of IU-Bloomington used a modified version of Einstein’s general relativity equation set that takes particle spin into account.
Including this variable makes it possible to calculate torsion, part of the geometry of space-time. It also gets rid of the black hole singularity, a phenomenon that general relativity cannot explain.
In a study published earlier this year, Poplawski said when the density of matter reaches epic proportions, torsion counters gravity. This prevents matter from compressing indefinitely to a singularity of infinite density. Instead, matter rebounds like a spring, and starts expanding again.
In Poplawski’s latest study, his calculations show that space-time inside the black hole expands to about 1.4 times its smallest size in as little as 10-46 seconds — two orders of magnitude faster, for lack of a better word, than the Planck time. This brisk bounce-back could have been what led to the expanding universe that we see today.
But here’s the real kicker: as Poplawski says, we may not be living in our universe at all; we might be living inside a rebounded black hole that exists in a different universe.
We could tell by measuring the preferred direction of our universe. A spinning black hole would have imparted some spin to the space-time inside it, which would violate a law of symmetry that links space and time. This might explain why neutrinos oscillate between their antimatter and regular-matter states.
LINK

WE COULD be living inside a black hole. This head-spinning idea is one cosmologist's conclusion based on a modification of Einstein's equations of general relativity that changes our picture of what happens at the core of a black hole.
In an analysis of the motion of particles entering a black hole, published in March, Nikodem Poplawski of Indiana University in Bloomington showed that inside each black hole there could exist another universe (Physics Letters B, DOI: 10.1016/j.physletb.2010.03.029). "Maybe the huge black holes at the centre of the Milky Way and other galaxies are bridges to different universes," Poplawski says. If that is correct - and it's a big "if" - there is nothing to rule out our universe itself being inside a black hole.
In Einstein's general relativity (GR), the insides of black holes are "singularities" - regions where the density of matter reaches infinity. Whether the singularity is an actual point of infinite density or just a mathematical inadequacy of GR is unclear, as the equations of GR break down inside black holes. Either way, the modified version of Einstein's equations used by Poplawski does away with the singularity altogether.
For his analysis, Poplawski turned to a variant of GR called the Einstein-Cartan-Kibble-Sciama (ECKS) theory of gravity. Unlike Einstein's equations, ECKS gravity takes account of the spin or angular momentum of elementary particles. Including the spin of matter makes it possible to calculate a property of the geometry of space-time called torsion.
When the density of matter reaches gargantuan proportions (more than about 1050 kilograms per cubic metre) inside a black hole, torsion manifests itself as a force that counters gravity. This prevents matter compressing indefinitely to reach infinite density, so there is no singularity. Instead, says Poplawski, matter rebounds and starts expanding again.
Now, in what is sure to be a controversial study, Poplawski has applied these ideas to model the behaviour of space-time inside a black hole the instant it starts rebounding (arxiv.org/abs/1007.0587). The scenario resembles what happens when you compress a spring: Poplawski has calculated that gravity initially overcomes torsion's repulsive force and keeps compressing matter, but eventually the repulsive force gets so strong that the matter stops collapsing and rebounds. Poplawski's calculations show that space-time inside the black hole expands to about 1.4 times its smallest size in as little as 10-46 seconds.
This staggeringly fast bounce-back, says Poplawski, could have been what led to the expanding universe we observe today.
How would we know if we are living inside a black hole? Well, a spinning black hole would have imparted some spin to the space-time inside it, and this should show up as a "preferred direction" in our universe, says Poplawski. Such a preferred direction would result in the violation of a property of space-time called Lorentz symmetry, which links space and time. It has been suggested that such a violation could be responsible for the observed oscillations of neutrinos from one type to another

LINK


So we're living inside a Blackhole then. LOL
 
The idea that our cosmos is inside a black hole has been around in one form or another for a long time, but this is an interesting, err, twist on the idea because it makes a potentially testable prediction (about the "preferred direction" to the cosmos).
 
Well, I don't know about a black hole.

But I gaze in awe at all the astronomical wonders courtesy of Hubble, Spitzer, WISE, Chandra. All the nebulae, stellar nurseries, interstellar gas clouds, dozens and hundreds of lightyears across... if we are in the midst of one of these galactic entities, would we know it?
 
Wouldn't we be crushed to death if we were?

As the article says, in this model, torsion would counteract gravity, prevent a singularity from forming, and cause the matter to expand outward again, not to mention the spacetime within the black hole. Thus producing a "big bang"/inflation that generates a new universe.


Well, I don't know about a black hole.

But I gaze in awe at all the astronomical wonders courtesy of Hubble, Spitzer, WISE, Chandra. All the nebulae, stellar nurseries, interstellar gas clouds, dozens and hundreds of lightyears across... if we are in the midst of one of these galactic entities, would we know it?

I'm not sure I follow the question, but if we were "in the midst" of a nebula or gas cloud, we would know it, and indeed we do know it, because we are in the middle of an interstellar gas cloud. If we were in the midst of a stellar nursery, we would not know it, because we wouldn't exist, thanks to the intense radiation of such an environment. But if we could somehow exist within a stellar nursery, we would easily be able to see that we were surrounded by a whole bunch of really bright nearby stars.

If instead you're asking whether we'd know if we were within a black hole, that's not so easy to determine; however, as the articles state, the person putting this idea forward does indicate ways in which the model could be tested.
 
Well, I don't know about a black hole.

But I gaze in awe at all the astronomical wonders courtesy of Hubble, Spitzer, WISE, Chandra. All the nebulae, stellar nurseries, interstellar gas clouds, dozens and hundreds of lightyears across... if we are in the midst of one of these galactic entities, would we know it?

I'm not sure I follow the question, but if we were "in the midst" of a nebula or gas cloud, we would know it, and indeed we do know it, because we are in the middle of an interstellar gas cloud. If we were in the midst of a stellar nursery, we would not know it, because we wouldn't exist, thanks to the intense radiation of such an environment. But if we could somehow exist within a stellar nursery, we would easily be able to see that we were surrounded by a whole bunch of really bright nearby stars.

If instead you're asking whether we'd know if we were within a black hole, that's not so easy to determine; however, as the articles state, the person putting this idea forward does indicate ways in which the model could be tested.[/QUOTE]

Very good. Thank you, I did not know that.
Just had the idea in my head...

If you took off for a thousand lightyears and turned around to look back at our Sol, would we be viewed as another star in the black void and that's it?
Or would we be seen amidst some spectacular astronomical wonder, in a vast nebula or gas cloud or what have you?

Interesting. Thank you.
 
Our local neighborhood looks like this. Depending on how far out you go, you'd start to see other stars. Our Sun is quite average (and smallish) so it would just look like one star among many once you got a few light years out.
 
Okay, what would the universe be like outside the blackhole?

It would just be another universe. It would have to have physical laws similar enough to ours to allow the formation of stars and black holes, so it might not be too different.

And there may be other universes inside the black holes of our universe. And so on, up and down the chain.


If you took off for a thousand lightyears and turned around to look back at our Sol, would we be viewed as another star in the black void and that's it?

Depends. If you're looking with the naked eye, Sol would become too dim to see if you were further than, I think, about 80 light-years. Through a telescope, Sol would be as visible to an observer as any star in the sky is to us. Obviously, since we can see the stars when we look out, we'd also be visible to an observer looking in.

Or would we be seen amidst some spectacular astronomical wonder, in a vast nebula or gas cloud or what have you?

No. The Local Fluff is very diffuse, essentially invisible to the naked eye; we know it's there by looking in infrared and the like. And it's in the middle of the Local Bubble, a large region that's a lot more empty of interstellar gas and dust than the galaxy as a whole -- probably a literal bubble blown by a past supernova or by the radiation from a wave of star formation that passed through this region millions of years ago. The Local Fluff is actually a good deal thinner than the interstellar medium typically is within the galactic disk; it's only by Local Bubble standards that it counts as a gas cloud at all. It's basically just a dirtier vacuum. So when it comes to cosmic gas and dust, our local galactic neighborhood is atypically empty. There aren't any nebulae closer than about 400 light years.
 
And there may be other universes inside the black holes of our universe. And so on, up and down the chain.

So... turtles all the way down? ;)

I don't think you can necessarily infer any properties of a parent universe based on (one of) its children. No information would be passed between the two, so all we really would be able to infer is that black holes are possible in the parent. But that doesn't imply anything specific about the mechanism through which those black holes are created and the physical laws that govern said process.

Actually, this entire thing reminds me of the arguments that say that if it's possible for us to build a computer that can simulate an entire universe, that we're probably inside such a simulation. And you can't necessarily infer anything about the parent universe the simulation is running in other then the fact that it's possible to build some sort of computer in it. The difference here being that it's a natural phenomena and the impartation of spin.
 
I don't think you can necessarily infer any properties of a parent universe based on (one of) its children. No information would be passed between the two, so all we really would be able to infer is that black holes are possible in the parent. But that doesn't imply anything specific about the mechanism through which those black holes are created and the physical laws that govern said process.

Well, if you buy cosmological Darwinism, then a universe's laws of physics would be like its genetic code, and those physical laws that promote a universe's reproductive success (by allowing more black-hole formation) would tend to propagate more successfully. In those terms, statistically speaking, the odds are that we're in a universe with one of the most common and successful sets of physical laws. Sure, it's conjecture, but it's not entirely random to suggest that there may be a reasonably good chance that our parent universe would have physical laws largely similar to our own. Although at the same time, that doesn't preclude the possibility that our universe may be some sort of "mutant" offspring of a universe with rather different laws.
 
Well, if you buy cosmological Darwinism, then a universe's laws of physics would be like its genetic code, and those physical laws that promote a universe's reproductive success (by allowing more black-hole formation) would tend to propagate more successfully. In those terms, statistically speaking, the odds are that we're in a universe with one of the most common and successful sets of physical laws.

Looking at it from a genetic metaphor, it's also possible it could be somewhere in between... that each child universe is similar to it's parent, but as you go up the chain you deviate further and further. Depending on how "long" the chain is, the universe at the absolute top could be totally and fundamentally different from ours even though our parent universe isn't.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top