Every Black Hole Contains Another Universe?

[Max™]

I'm not saying it's an add on, I'm saying it reproduces the results of Newtonian Mechanics where they are still shown to be valid. Newton wasn't THAT far off at our day to day scales.

"Plays ps1 games better than ps1" is exactly what I was saying.

[Woozie]

Max is saying that GR is an addendum to Newtonian. Kaylia is saying that GR replaced Newtonian altogether.

I'm inclined to agree with Kaylia on this one. GR is backwards-compatible with Newtonian. Think of it as comparing a PS2 and PS1. PS2 does everything PS1 could do and more, but it isn't just an add-on, it's a completely new system that just does more.

In this case, I'd agree with Kaylia. GR did replace Newtonian Mechanics. When it comes to our view of reality, we did completely toss out Newtionian Mechanics. In practice, the numerical measurements from the two theories are negligible for most of our purposes, so we use the one that's simpler to use (Newtionian).

[Skidz]

I stopped reading when someone started posting equations, but if universes are created from white holes spewing matter they gather from a black hole, how did the very first universe form? oh shit i blew my own mind.

[Cochise]

I figured it out!

Our universe is one pebble in a giant rain stick making its way to the bottom.

Woot go me!

[Sylvrdragon]

Then we all agree.

My quesiton: If Black holes are the entrance to a wormhole, what the fuck is the exit? It can't be another Black Hole, cause those don't let anything out... IS there an exit? Would the exit be the same size as the entrance? Nowhere does it say that a wormhole has to be an actual tunnel. Perhaps the White Hole is all of space-time. The new matter/energy or whatever is being fed into the wormhole spawns everywhere in our universe. Supposedly, the whole Hawking Radiation theory relies on the premise that particles and anti-particles are randomly spawning all the time out in dead space (I always did have a problem with that), could those be the matter from our "White Hole"?

[Max™]

Holy shit people, I'm not saying that Newtonian Mechanics are ex-fucking-actly correct, just that GR reproduces them in the low energy limit.

That's the same as saying PS2 (GR) plays PS1 games (NM) better (more accurate).

I know folks get a hardon for trying to show I don't know what I'm talking about, but I'm saying the same thing as Kaylia: when velocities/masses are small enough for relativistic effects to be insignificant, General Relativity reduces to Newtonian Mechanics. That is what that "feature" is actually called, how it is described, etc, GR reproduces NM predictions.

http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr162/l...y/gravity.html

General Relativity and Newton's gravitational theory make essentially identical predictions as long as the strength of the gravitational field is weak, which is our usual experience. However, there are several crucial predictions where the two theories diverge, and thus can be tested with careful experiments.

If you completely discard GR, then you are tossing a theory that accurately predicts numerous phenomena, and reduces to the previous "accepted theory" of Newtonian Gravity.


If you have a PS3 that completely omits the need to be backwards compatible to PS2 and PS1 games, it should still reproduce the effects from the PS1 and PS2.

[Woozie]

Then we all agree.

^

[Eliseos]

I stopped reading when someone started posting equations

I usually stop posting when this happens too. Max is (usually) the one who starts posting them, someone else responds, it snowballs into whatever the fuck, and I close the thread for a day or two. I may be studying physics, but they don't teach tensor calculus to undergrads.

[Max™]

Nevermind the point of showing those equations, was specifically to illustrate that it's some complex ass, arcane looking, holy shit my eyes won't uncross, type stuff... and that the article in question isn't just a theoretical thing, rather that it is a specific solution found to those wtfing-hell-are-those equations I posted, as an example of how fucked up that shit would be to sit and work out on a chalkboard forever.


Apparently the point got missed: this article is about an exact solution of the EFE's, now, I know I don't know what the shit I'm talking about here, but one of you fuckers has to understand the importance of exact EFE solutions beyond the simple Schwarzschild or Kerr versions.

[Mizango]

This thread is following standard protocol and took an all too familiar path. Glad to see I finally have my timing down.

[Woozie]

This thread is following standard protocol and took an all too familiar path. Glad to see I finally have my timing down.

You're supposed to be in the LHC thread solving the mysteries of star/solar system formation.

[Max™]

Yeah, who the fuck let Miz out, we need more info about babbystars.

This is the current "lets disagree with Max even when he says the same shit we do" thread, if you're not going to disagree with me for no reason, get the fuck back to star finding!


Seriously, no one else think a new exact Einstein Field Equation Solution is remarkable on it's own?

[Eliseos]

Seriously, no one else think a new exact Einstein Field Equation Solution is remarkable on it's own?

I have no idea what that is, so no. I'm sure most of the other non-physics people don't either.

[Woozie]

This is the current "lets disagree with Max even when he says the same shit we do" thread, if you're not going to disagree with me for no reason, get the fuck back to star finding!

Then we all agree.

Then we all agree.

^

?

Why are you still ranting about the disagreement? After you clarified your point everyone agreed with you (and Kaylia).

[Mizango]

Then we all agree.

My quesiton: If Black holes are the entrance to a wormhole, what the fuck is the exit? It can't be another Black Hole, cause those don't let anything out... IS there an exit? Would the exit be the same size as the entrance?

Im not sure if you were asking seriously or simply being facetious (You asked a question, but went on to describe it in the next sentence) but you are correct, a "white hole is essentially an ERB's butt hole, so to speak. So yes, hypothetically there IS an exit once you enter the front end of a hypothetical WH. Look at it from this perspective, a ERB is an anomaly where matter can be lost from the universe right? Think of a whitehole as a place where the aforementioned matter would be spat back out into the universe. (CAN O WERMZ) But like I said, you mentioned this already so Im not sure if you didn't know or if you mistakenly answered your own question lol.

Mind you, that example is purely a hypothetical one but it should give you a visual idea to your question or for anyone else going wtf? Been a long day QQ

Supposedly, the whole Hawking Radiation theory relies on the premise that particles and anti-particles are randomly spawning all the time out in dead space

You just unwittingly played the "Max rage" card, HR is the bane of his existence.

[Mizango]

You're supposed to be in the LHC thread solving the mysteries of star/solar system formation.

HAHA, ran home to change and decided to see what was going on. About to head to class QQ Im dragging ass considering I just woke up from a 30 min power nap that didnt help.

Yeah, who the fuck let Miz out, we need more info about babbystars.

lol


See you nerds later <3

[Woozie]

No, seriously, we really do need you in the LHC thread to solve the mysteries of star/solar system formation.

http://www.bluegartr.com/forum/showp...postcount=2232

[Mizango]

Oh snap, I thought you were joking lol.

[Mizango]

Ill check it out when I get back, seriously leaving now.

[Kaylia]

I'm not saying it's an add on, I'm saying it reproduces the results of Newtonian Mechanics where they are still shown to be valid. Newton wasn't THAT far off at our day to day scales.

"Plays ps1 games better than ps1" is exactly what I was saying.

It doesn't "reproduce" the results, it approximates it. Maybe it's just nitpicking from my side, but the wording you use half of the time imply it's the same mathematically, when it's not. Beside, you're the one who nitpicked my first statement saying that a new model wouldn't replace the old one.


If you want to compare classical mechanics to relativity, the same result are obtained only when there is
SR:Static object (so much for newton's equation of "motion")
GR:A space that isn't curved by gravity, o in other word, a place where there is no matter.

They are both trivial situation that can't be used in our universe, so at no point are newton's equation correct.

Apparently the point got missed: this article is about an exact solution of the EFE's, now, I know I don't know what the shit I'm talking about here, but one of you fuckers has to understand the importance of exact EFE solutions beyond the simple Schwarzschild or Kerr versions.

How useful is an exact solution when the model it's based on is flawed.


If I was able to solve the classical lagrangian for the whole universe, I would obtain something, but it would be worthless. It's the same deal here, except it's an EFE that is solved. Maybe relativity is still correct on these scales, but everything indicate that our understanding of the world is pretty shitty right now, which is the reason why I was talking about "replacing the relativity" with something else.