• Cosmology
  • Black Holes Do Not Exist, claims Mersini-Houghton

SINGULARITIES: THE HEART OF BLACK HOLES AND THE BIG BANG

Singularities are fascinating objects and places, yet entirely 'inaccessible' in the sense that you can't actually go there on vacation and send back a postcard, or travel to one on a government grant as a scientific expedition and report back via a peer-reviewed article in a technical scientific journal about the local environment, geography, inhabitants, etc. In a sense singularities are like Heaven in terms of accessibility. You have to rely on intuition or theory or second-hand observations as to what's what and who's who.

Okay, for those readers I've already befuddled, I'd better tell you exactly what a singularity is! You've all heard of the phrase 'Black Hole' and not the one in Calcutta either! I refer to astronomical or cosmic Black Holes. Black Holes are 'black' because they have packed inside them so much stuff, so much mass, and hence so much gravity that not even particles of electromagnetic energy (photons) can escape their gravitational clutches. If photons, and that includes visible light photons, are jailed, can not pass go, can not collect $200, then they might as well as, as far as your perception of them is concerned, not exist. If what you don't see exists, that existence is of no matter (well lots of matter actually). Translated, Black Holes are black because visible light can't get from them to your eyeball! The absence of light is well, blackness.

So, is a Black Hole just a big lump of stuff, albeit stuff you can't see? Well, 'yes' and 'no'. First off, we can 'see' Black Holes indirectly because of their gravitational influence on stellar objects we can see. I mean if you see a star whirling around something you can't see, then the logical interpretation is that the star you can see is in orbit around something you can't see - i.e. a Black Hole. Well 'no', you can't 'see' a Black Hole because light from the Black Hole can't get away from the crush of that Black Hole's gravity.

What's all this got to do with singularities? Well, the stuff composing a Black Hole, all that stuff that clumps together and is the centre of the massive all-encompassing gravity that prohibits the photons to escape the house (Hole) that Jack built is the Black Hole's singularity. An analogy: The extent of the Black Hole is the extent of the Earth's outer atmosphere; the singularity is the solid Earth proper. So think of a nebulous outer edge with a solid core of stuff in the middle. The stuff in the middle generates the intense gravity; the nebulous outer edge marks the boundary between gravity below the threshold of light escaping and light not escaping. That boundary is referred to as the 'event horizon'; the stuff in the middle is the singularity.

Now the idea of a singularity doesn't stop with the idea behind an astronomical Black Hole. No, a singularity is any concentration of stuff or mass that has such a massive amount of gravity as to prevent photons from leaving the gravitational well or prison so created. What's the ultimate Black Hole - the Mother of all Black Holes? Well, if bits of our Universe can clump together to form astronomical Black Holes, then our entire Universe, when clumped together and in a relativity tiny state, would have been the Mother of all Black Holes and hence the Mother of all singularities. When was our Universe in such a state? Well, in the beginning!

Our Universe is expanding. That's verified by direct cosmological observation. Every cluster of galaxies has such astronomically bad 'body odour' that every other cluster of galaxies is moving out of the vicinity quick-smart! Well actually you can't have 'body odour' in space, so that's not the real reason. The real reason is that in the beginning or once upon a time, there was some sort of explosive oomph event that started the expansion process. We call that the 'Big Bang' event. At the time of the Big Bang event, our entire Universe had a close encounter with, well, our entire Universe. Our entire Universe was roughly all in the same space at the same time. Translated, if you run the film of an expanding Universe backwards, you eventually get the entire contents of our Universe on collectively very intimate terms. Such a massive collection of stuff, matter, mass, hence gravity, all of the stuffs, matter or mass that the Universe possesses, well let's just say you'd have the Mother of all singularities - in the Big Bang beginning; or anyway once upon a Big Bang time at least .

Well surely one didn't have this Mother of all singularities just sitting around for aeons then for no apparent reason go 'poof' and thus have an explosive oomph moment which kick-started things off as far as our Universe is concerned. The intense gravity of the Mother of all singularities probably would have muted any oomph to begin with; the birth of our Universe stalled at the onset.

But, let's throw some momentum into the mix. What's the opposite of a Big Bang? It's a Big Crunch! So let's propose that we have this other universe which, the bits and pieces thereof, under all those mutual gravitational attractions, is slowly, ever so slowly, but ever so surely, coming together. And as it comes together, the contracting velocity gets faster, and faster, and faster. Eventually, you have this massive collection of stuff rushing together to meet at a single point in space and in time at a fantastic velocity. There is such momentum present that the contracting Big Crunch universe just can't stop on a dime any more than an automobile going a hundred miles an hour can stop with inside of a foot of having the brakes applied. The Big Crunch at the omega point obviously forms the Mother of all Black Holes and singularities, but the sheer momentum of that contracting universe just tears the fabric of things (space and time) apart, and like a glove turning inside-out, the contraction passes through the omega point, spewing its guts out, becoming an alpha point, which is our Big Bang event and the start of our new expanding Universe.

Okay, so we have two sources that have singularities - singularities at the centre of astronomical Black Holes, and the Mother of all singularities residing inside the Mother of all Black Holes, the one that existed at the Big Bang beginning of the Universe.

We of course can't see a singularity directly (unless you're willing to take a one-way trip down a Black Hole, but even if you survived that and landed safely on the singularity, you couldn't ever broadcast back your findings - that speed of light restriction that by definition a Black Hole imparts regarding sending stuff out). So, we have to rely 100% on what theoretical equations predict a singularity to be. Unfortunately, those equations, when pushed to the sorts of mass and gravitational extremes that a singularity would represent, well you get nonsense answers. Translated, if taken at face value, the equations note that the intense gravity crushes the stuff that itself is responsible for that gravity down to a point of zero dimensions and hence infinite density.

The essential problem behind this nonsense is that gravity is represented by Einstein's Theory of General Relativity which is a classical physics smooth continuum phenomenon. That is, you can have this gravitational value, and that gravitational value, and every possible value in-between. However, tiny objects, which is what a singularity is postulated to be, is in the realm of the quantum, which is a non-continuum phenomena. Think of a staircase. You can be on this step, or the next step, but there is no step in-between the two. That is, you can have this value, or that value, but only certain other values in-between. It's also like money - you can have a five dollar bill, and a ten dollar bill, but not a six-and-a-third dollar bill, or an eight-and-three-quarters dollar bill, or even a seven or a nine dollar bill. Money and staircases are non-continuum quantum-like; money and staircases are not a smooth continuum like gravity is.

So, to adequately come to terms with the really real properties of singularities, you need a theory of quantum gravity. Alas, despite the best efforts of thousands of theoretical physicists over many, many decades, no quantum gravity theory to be had. There's no quantum gravity dice.

So, let's abandon that theoretical track and go back to common sense predictions.

Either Black Hole singularities, or the Big Bang singularity, are infinitely dense and have zero volume, or they do not. If they do not (and the alternative defies common sense and is IMHO ridiculous), then singularities have a finite volume and can grow in size as more stuff is added on. You have an original tiny singularity with extremely high, but not infinite density. You keep piling stuff onto it. For a while, the density keeps on increasing, but since it can't become infinite, there will be a point reached where further increases cease. As more and more stuff continues to be piled on, the only other option is that the size of the singularity must grow. The volume increases, and increases and increases. The upshot is that singularities can reach a size where quantum effects become negligible. Or, in other words, singularities can grow to where they aren't quantum objects any more, and while theories of quantum gravity might be still be useful in explaining their properties, it's probably no longer essential. Singularities have entered the realm of classical physics.

One property of singularities I find interesting is that the stuff that eventually forms the singularity isn't the same sort of stuff that went down the Black Hole's throat in the first place. There's been a phase transition of one kind of stuff to another kind of stuff. You're quite familiar with phase transitions in your day-to-day life. There's nothing mysterious about the concept. The most common example is steam or water vapour condensing to liquid water condensing or freezing to ice; ice melting to liquid water hence boiling or evaporating into steam or water vapour. Apart from your division into solid, liquid and gas, there's also plasma. Now the sort of matter that composes a singularity is probably something else yet again, a phase transition that only extreme gravity can achieve. That such a new state of matter exists is predicted by the following: If you have an ordinary matter star, and if it should happen to collide with an antimatter star, what you get is one hell of a big Ka-Boom; the annihilation of matter/antimatter into pure energy. However, say your matter star implodes into a Black Hole with singularity. And say your antimatter star implodes into a Black Hole with singularity. Now have these two Black Holes collide. No Ka-Boom results, just a larger Black Hole!

9 months later

I don't agree, BH exists and furthermore have a rule of recycling and production and also a rule of motion.

And me who thinks that they are sphères with a mass and cosmposed by quantum sphères.

They exist,fortunally furthermore for the rotations Inside our universal sphere around the central black hohe.They permit with their enormous mass to embark stars simply.

Regards

    • [deleted]

    Of course it exists several kinds of BH , sphères.But they have alsays the same rules.

    A stellar BH it is the same when the carburants are finished, so it is a recycling.

    A supermassif BH is central to galaxies

    A primordial BH was the center of our Universe before the BB,

    It is so simple that this.

    The micro BH them are in our quantum world with the same relative logic considering the volumes of sphères.

    Sometimes I say me , but how isit possible that so many scientists interpret our Universe like that ????

    Ask to Schwarzschild ,and you shall see their diameters,11 millions for pour galaxy the milky way.

    Cheers

    It is not complicated when you see the GENERAL simplicity of our universal sphere in evolution and complexification of mass.

    All has a rule of complementarity.If they exist, there are reasons,they have a mass, a volume, a density, an intrinsic energy,....If they were not there, how do you want that stars turn around it and be embarked around the central BH.

    It is not a door you know or this or thant????

    2 months later
    8 months later

    Dear Researchers

    Kindly have a look at this talk by Prof. Dr. Abhas K Mitra.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgtfndZy8xU

    He told that the so called 'Black Holes' are likely to be ultra hot ultra magnetized balls of fire and as suggested by observations, there exists no Black Hole and hence, no Paradox.

    Suggestions are welcomed

    Wishes

    Kalpana

      Hello Kalpana,

      I guess you didn't notice that Prof. Mitra was already a contributor to this thread, and made some comments in support of his ideas above. For what it's worth, the acronym MECO was coined to describe this; a magnetospheric eternally collapsing object. Some other researchers contributing to that work also appear in the conversation above. Check it out! Feel free to add anything you feel was left out, once you do.

      I think it is indisputable that there are supermassive dense objects in the cosmos, and that it is a bit of grandstanding to say they are not Black Holes, but the other side bears investigating seriously. Perhaps calling them MECOs would be more accurate, or there is a still-better descriptive term. But it is more likely that we will simply redefine what a Black Hole really is, and keep calling them that - even if the name does not fit precisely, or as we imagined.

      I'm sure I'll hear plenty of expert opinions at GR21 this week. Jorge Pullin and Carlo Rovelli will both be there, among others. But I prefer an open dialog, over believing this is a closed issue. And my interactions with Prof. Mitra have been cordial and respectful. While I do not precisely agree with his program, I find he has a lot of good insights that have been swept under the carpet by other researchers. Better that people hear both sides, and then decide which models make the most sense.

      All the Best,

      Jonathan

      Hello To both of you,

      We search what they are these BH.I beleive strongly that we mmust really analyse differently these sphères in my model of spherisation with quantum and cosmological sphères Inside an universal sphere.Thermo ,heat andstandard model cannot really answer.That seems not deterministic to insist on photons.We have at these cenral supermassive BH an other logic than our actual model.Of course if we consider that photons are theonly one codes sent from this infinite entropy above our physicality,yes we can say that BH are singularities having a rule.But I am doubting that photons are the only one truth about main codes and inforations of evolution.The dark matter and the BH must find an explaination.The baryons cannot answer.Regards

      I can understand that people wants to find the real meaning of BH ,dark matter and also gravitation.I can understznd that people must eat and also that copetition is a reality.People must publish, if not the business en are not happy.That said we must be rational and also try other ways than our actual roads.Gravitation, BH and dark matter needs a better analyse in all huility.Some argues that gravitation is an emergent force of our electroagnetic forces.Others tell us that BH are whorholes,after that BH does not exist, after this and that.???? Is it real researchs or is it just business due to pression of these businessen ?All this decreases the velocity of evolution of sciences.It is not the good method.Too much isolated persons and toomuch vanity also.We go all in a wall if we continue on these bad habits.Sad for the global sciences community in fact. It is crazy all this in fact and so sad globaly speaking.Regards

      E=mc²+ml² Here is a small idea about dark matter and BH and spherons.

      The principle of equivalence between matter and energy is essential for a real determinism.If we consider that it exists particles of gravitation smaller and speeder than bosons photons.These paritcles are probably the secret of darkmatter ,they are probably produced by our Black Holes.The relevance is about this linear velocity before encoding of these particles.They are encoded more far and differently than our standard model with our special relativity and thermodynamics.A boson photon cannot pass c , a spheron yes in logic.The quantum of gravitational energy is different than our quantum of thermodynamical energy.We can go faster than c but with spherons, these particles of gravitation.The universal entropy and its irreversibility correlated with the increasing matter energy due to evolution of mass can be approached.Our nucleis encode these bosons ans spherons,the spherical volumes become an universal key linking the quantm sphères and cosmological sphères.In this line of reasoning, the centralcosmological sphere produces the smallest and speedest spherons.Intriguing this central sphere, this singularity connected with all quantum singularities, the central quantum sphères,the main gravitational codes,these series,stable and finite encode simply what is produced by cosmological sphères.

      Gravitation, dark matter and BH are explained in this line of reasoning when we consider this matter not baryonic.Our standard model is simply encircld by gravitation.Even probably the photons.So the main central quantm sphères are the main codes and so it is not appraochable, that is why a photon is a photon respecting the special and general relativity.

      Regards

      • [deleted]

      All helps are welcome because I work actualy about the geometrical spherical algebras.I study the different methods with Clifford mainly.I beleive that his works are very relevant.I ask me all to correctly formalise all the good paramters.The vectors,the matrixs,the volumes,the rotations,the phases,the numbers(reals,imaginaries,complexs..)How to harmonise all this with the sphères and the spherical volumes.I consider the serie of volumes with a categorification due to our matters and énergies.The serie of uniqueness is a finite serie.I consider this finite serie of volumes like universal for the two scales.They are stable gravitationaly speaking in our space time.The serie cosmological is unique and the quantum series them tends to infinity due to this central cosmological BH producing the gravitational aether.This center produces all quantum stable series and its diversity.There is two productions so from this central biggest BH.The stable series encoding and the spherons.I consider this finite serie begining from this number 1 like a serie of primes p adic numbers.I d like to formalise this serie of primes correlated with spherical volumes.The differentials are relevant.These series are the gravitation in logic.The two others informations are the photons and the spherons but it is linear particles and they are encoded in nucleis.My second equation mlosV=constant permits to see the series of volumes, stable or linear.The relevance it seems to me is that space does not exist due to this link of spherical volumes,because the volumes decrease towards the smallest spherons.Now how can I formalis this reasoning with the good vectorial analysis considering the time and the encodings with superimposings, sortings and sunchronizations.It is intriguing when we consider spherons and spherical volumes above our standard model.This weakest quantum force is due to this smallest spherons but in the same the stable serie is thz strongest force more far than nuclear force.So the standard model is really encircled because nuclear forces are not the last due to quantum BH not baryonic and also the electroagnetism is not the last in the other sense, the weak force.Spherons are above photons and quantum BH are more far than protons.Hope I am clear :)The space does not really exists.The lagrangian can be correlated with determinism.We can derivate and integrate the vectors and the spherical volumes in the two senses and we can correlated the quantum scale and the cosmological scale.We could take the body S and utilises the vectorials spaces with the spherical volumes with an associativity comutativity logic and the scalar products also like the intégrations and dérivations.Gravitation appears but can be also classed.

      ooops It was me

      All helps are welcome because I work actualy about the geometrical spherical algebras.I study the different methods with Clifford mainly.I beleive that his works are very relevant.I ask me all to correctly formalise all the good paramters.The vectors,the matrixs,the volumes,the rotations,the phases,the numbers(reals,imaginaries,complexs..)How to harmonise all this with the sphères and the spherical volumes.I consider the serie of volumes with a categorification due to our matters and énergies.The serie of uniqueness is a finite serie.I consider this finite serie of volumes like universal for the two scales.They are stable gravitationaly speaking in our space time.The serie cosmological is unique and the quantum series them tends to infinity due to this central cosmological BH producing the gravitational aether.This center produces all quantum stable series and its diversity.There is two productions so from this central biggest BH.The stable series encoding and the spherons.I consider this finite serie begining from this number 1 like a serie of primes p adic numbers.I d like to formalise this serie of primes correlated with spherical volumes.The differentials are relevant.These series are the gravitation in logic.The two others informations are the photons and the spherons but it is linear particles and they are encoded in nucleis.My second equation mlosV=constant permits to see the series of volumes, stable or linear.The relevance it seems to me is that space does not exist due to this link of spherical volumes,because the volumes decrease towards the smallest spherons.Now how can I formalis this reasoning with the good vectorial analysis considering the time and the encodings with superimposings, sortings and sunchronizations.It is intriguing when we consider spherons and spherical volumes above our standard model.This weakest quantum force is due to this smallest spherons but in the same the stable serie is thz strongest force more far than nuclear force.So the standard model is really encircled because nuclear forces are not the last due to quantum BH not baryonic and also the electroagnetism is not the last in the other sense, the weak force.Spherons are above photons and quantum BH are more far than protons.Hope I am clear :)The space does not really exists.The lagrangian can be correlated with determinism.We can derivate and integrate the vectors and the spherical volumes in the two senses and we can correlated the quantum scale and the cosmological scale.We could take the body S and utilises the vectorials spaces with the spherical volumes with an associativity comutativity logic and the scalar products also like the intégrations and dérivations.Gravitation appears but can be also classed.

      Write a Reply...