I believe at least some of it comes from Penrose Diagrams that feature event horizons. People often extend them to claim that a black hole becomes a bridge to a "parallel universe" at the moment of it's creation. It's just a quirk of mathmetics, though. The same diagrams claim that white holes exist. If white holes existed, they would be very easy to spot. The fact that we've found black holes - which are proverbival needles in haystacks - yet not white holes - which would be brighter than anything- is fairly damming proof that it's all just imaginary.
Watch any pop sci doco about astronomy
Xavier Rodriguez
Carter Watson
Our guy Eisenstein got it right several decades ago.This is all a black hole is, spatially speaking. It's just a very dense object that gives space time a hard pinch. There's nothing magical about it. Inside one, there's likely just of curved space and a singularity.
Christopher Peterson
white holes must exist, the light just doesn't reach us
Owen Baker
They over-dramatize it.
What they _mean_ is that the equations of General Relativity break down. You get singularities. I am using that word in the sense that mathematicians do; regions where no values can be computed and no predictions can be made. It's like asking about a line tangent to the corner of a rectangle. The slope is discontinuous there.
There are (very likely) no leprechauns in there, nor a gateway to Hell (as a particularly bad movie posited.)
Incidentally, "compressed space" may not be a good way of putting it. Black holes are always described (rigorously) by their circumferences, never their radii. The radius might be infinite. Think of those rubber sheet diagrams where a point is pressed down to form a funnel. The rubber is stretched indefinitely "out of the plane" and radial lines drawn on the surface get longer and longer and longer.
Not two black holes. By definition, event horizons are one-way. A tunnel you can enter but never leave (save possibly as thermalized hawking radiation) does not strike me as an efficient way to get from "here" to "there".
Wormholes _are_ valid solutions to Einstein's equations, but the ends aren't black holes. That's another pop-sci simplification.
Jonathan Carter
>just a large pinch lmao
>black holes are so simple dude
guys please, we have very little understanding of black hole physics yet
like this problem:
en.wikipedia.org
or what happens to the stuff in the black hole accretion disk when it evaporates
I suggest watching a Susskind talk about those issues:
youtube.com
Dominic Nelson
That is, unless pic related is true. Although I'd imagine that if black holes could funnel matter somewhere else like this suggests, then the black hole would loss mass nearly infinitely fast and dissolve as quickly as it formed. Since black holes stick around, and grow, it's safe to say that any matter that enters them isn't going anywhere.
Liam Russell
Won't time dilation make it impossible for the matter to actually reach black hole in finite time?
Oliver Myers
>Where did this crap come from?
A lot of physics equations take density into account. Try calculating density when volume=0.
Kevin Stewart
Something humans are good at is understanding things non mathematically. For instance, a rock. You can pick up a rock, and you will know that it's a rock. You don't need equations for this. Your brain is able to understand what is in your hand without any maths involved at all.
A black hole is just like that rock. We know what it is, even if physics does not. Density equals infinity when volume is zero, by the way.
Jason Ross
>physics breaks down
its actually accurate , the physics (by which i mean the theories of physics) have never been tested in the vicinity of black holes in any way.
what i think is going to happen is we'll figure out a way to make artificial ones at some point and do experiments with them.