Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Ask questions, find resources, browse the virtual shelves.
grpotmesil
Asternaut
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 1:26 pm

Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Post by grpotmesil » Thu Aug 18, 2011 2:20 pm

Is there a difference? I haven't found anything on the intertubes.

I often read that black holes are “infinitely dense” or have “infinite gravitational attraction” and that the initial stages of the big bang were also infinitely dense, yet currently existing black holes do not explode into new universes. It would seem that the word infinite, as applied to a black hole is really a euphemism for “we don’t know how to calculate the density”, because if its gravitational attraction were really infinite in the truest sense of the word, it would immediately begin to suck in the entire observable universe, and we wouldn't be here. There obviously has to be a difference between the two objects, but hey, infinite is infinite, so why do we get a different outcome?

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 20396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Post by bystander » Thu Aug 18, 2011 4:18 pm

See RJN's lecture on black holes and general relativity, here.

There is a thread on black holes, white holes, and the origin of the universe, here.
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

grpotmesil
Asternaut
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Post by grpotmesil » Thu Aug 18, 2011 8:46 pm

Okay after watching the lecture and the other posts, I'll go with the concept that the singularity that resulted in our universe was the result of a black hole in another universe. I suppose that would be consistent with the concept of eternal, or chaotic, inflation (andre linde) which proposes that inflation of a much larger multiverse kick started our universe rather than inflation happening after our particular big bang. It also sounds consistent with some of the things Alan Guth said regarding starting a new universe - need very little matter, but a whole lot of energy and pressure.

User avatar
alter-ego
Serendipitous Sleuthhound
Posts: 882
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 4:51 am
Location: Redmond, WA

Re: Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Post by alter-ego » Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:53 am

grpotmesil wrote:Okay after watching the lecture and the other posts, I'll go with the concept that the singularity that resulted in our universe was the result of a black hole in another universe. I suppose that would be consistent with the concept of eternal, or chaotic, inflation (andre linde) which proposes that inflation of a much larger multiverse kick started our universe rather than inflation happening after our particular big bang. It also sounds consistent with some of the things Alan Guth said regarding starting a new universe - need very little matter, but a whole lot of energy and pressure.
At this level of hypothesizing, consistency is in the eye of the beholder.
A pessimist is nothing more than an experienced optimist

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 15321
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Post by Chris Peterson » Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:27 am

grpotmesil wrote:Okay after watching the lecture and the other posts, I'll go with the concept that the singularity that resulted in our universe was the result of a black hole in another universe.
Go with whatever you like, but keep in mind there's not the slightest shred of scientific evidence to support that viewpoint. As long as you recognize that your opinion stems from philosophy and not science, there's no problem.
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Nereid
Intrepidus Dux Emeritus
Posts: 832
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2006 2:01 am

Re: Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Post by Nereid » Wed Aug 31, 2011 7:44 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
grpotmesil wrote:Okay after watching the lecture and the other posts, I'll go with the concept that the singularity that resulted in our universe was the result of a black hole in another universe.
Go with whatever you like, but keep in mind there's not the slightest shred of scientific evidence to support that viewpoint. As long as you recognize that your opinion stems from philosophy and not science, there's no problem.
Here's something for you to consider, grpotmesil: how would - how could - you test a hypothesis along the lines of that concept ("that the singularity that resulted in our universe was the result of a black hole in another universe")? :P

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 20396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe

Post by bystander » Thu May 17, 2012 6:39 pm

Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe
Inside Science | Nikodem Poplawski | 2012 May 17
A physicist presents a solution to present-day cosmic mysteries.

Cosmology with torsion: An alternative to cosmic inflation - Popławski, Nikodem J.
  • Physics Letters B, Volume 694, Issue 3, p. 181-185. eprint arXiv:1007.0587
Big-bounce cosmology with spinor-torsion coupling - Popławski, Nikodem J.
  • eprint arXiv:1111.4595
Matter-antimatter asymmetry and dark matter from torsion - Popławski, Nikodem J.
  • Physical Review D, vol. 83, Issue 8, id. 084033. eprint arXiv:1101.4012
Affine theory of gravitation - Popławski, Nikodem J.
  • eprint arXiv:1203.0294
Detection of a dipole in the handedness of spiral galaxies with redshifts z˜0.04 - Michael J. Longo
  • Physics Letters B, Volume 699, Issue 4, p. 224-229. eprint arXiv:1104.2815
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

Markus Schwarz
Science Officer
Posts: 224
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:55 am
Location: Germany

Re: Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe

Post by Markus Schwarz » Fri May 18, 2012 9:54 am

bystander wrote:Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe
Inside Science | Nikodem Poplawski | 2012 May 17
A physicist presents a solution to present-day cosmic mysteries.
The headlines of the article reads: "Every Black Hole Contains a New Universe"
The article's first sentence reads: "Our universe may exist inside a black hole. "(where I emphasized the may)

This is a recent trend that I find more often nowadays. The headline makes exaggerate claims, which the article (and probably the scientists as well) doesn't make. Especially with these kind of statements that are difficult to test, everybody should be very clear on what are actual facts and what are hypothesis.
grpotmesil wrote:Okay after watching the lecture and the other posts, I'll go with the concept that the singularity that resulted in our universe was the result of a black hole in another universe.
In the framework of general relativity, Penrose, Hawking, and others proved mathematically the existence of a "singularity" at the center of a black hole and in cosmology. Figuratively speaking, the presence of a singularity means that you can reach the "edge of spacetime" in a finite amount of time, and maybe "fall off the edge". These strange findings are taken by many as a sign that general relativity is no longer valid under these extreme conditions. In particular, the quantum nature of matter should also be taken into account. But since no one knows how to do this, the field is open to all kind of hypotheses.
grpotmesil wrote:I suppose that would be consistent with the concept of eternal, or chaotic, inflation (andre linde) which proposes that inflation of a much larger multiverse kick started our universe rather than inflation happening after our particular big bang. It also sounds consistent with some of the things Alan Guth said regarding starting a new universe - need very little matter, but a whole lot of energy and pressure.
Concepts like "Big Crunch" or "Multiverse" are some of the hypotheses I mentioned above. Their problem is that they become increasingly difficult (if not impossible) to test. As far as I know, an open problem with inflation is how to stop it, because if it wouldn't have stopped at just the right moment, matter would be so diluted that no galaxies could have formed.

User avatar
BMAONE23
Commentator Model 1.23
Posts: 4076
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 6:55 pm
Location: California

Re: Black holes and Initial Big Bang object

Post by BMAONE23 » Fri May 18, 2012 2:45 pm

A good point about media using grabbing sensationalist headlines to get the attention of the reader

It could almost be said that
grabbing headline wrote: "Greater than 50% of APOD readers don't believe in the Big Bang Theory"
Many of the casual posters and Guest visitors to the APOD site "Starship Asterisk"
have a problem with their understanding the Standard Model of Cosmology and
the Big Bang Theory in general.........
The Headlines often state one thing, and misleadingly so, while the body of the article carries a vastly different story.