Maybe You Really Can Use Black Holes to Travel the Universe

travel through black hole like interstellar

Can you really survive traveling through an enormous black hole? A team of physicists has been studying the notion. (Roen Kelly/Discover)

One of the most cherished science fiction scenarios is using a black hole as a portal to another dimension or time or universe. That fantasy may be closer to reality than previously imagined.

Black holes are perhaps the most mysterious objects in the universe. They are the consequence of gravity crushing a dying star without limit, leading to the formation of a true singularity – which happens when an entire star gets compressed down to a single point yielding an object with infinite density. This dense and hot singularity punches a hole in the fabric of spacetime itself, possibly opening up an opportunity for hyperspace travel. That is, a short cut through spacetime allowing for travel over cosmic scale distances in a short period.

Researchers previously thought that any spacecraft attempting to use a black hole as a portal of this type would have to reckon with nature at its worst. The hot and dense singularity would cause the spacecraft to endure a sequence of increasingly uncomfortable tidal stretching and squeezing before being completely vaporized.

Flying Through a Black Hole

My team at the University of Massachusetts Dartmouth and a colleague at Georgia Gwinnett College have shown that all black holes are not created equal. If the black hole like Sagittarius A*, located at the center of our own galaxy, is large and rotating, then the outlook for a spacecraft changes dramatically. That’s because the singularity that a spacecraft would have to contend with is very gentle and could allow for a very peaceful passage.

The reason that this is possible is that the relevant singularity inside a rotating black hole is technically “weak,” and thus does not damage objects that interact with it. At first, this fact may seem counter intuitive. But one can think of it as analogous to the common experience of quickly passing one’s finger through a candle’s near 2,000-degree flame, without getting burned.

candle flame

Hold your finger close to the flame and it will burn. Swipe it through quickly and you won’t feel much. Similarly, passing through a large rotating black hole, you are more likely to come out the other side unharmed. (Credit:
mirbasar/Shutterstock.com)

 

My colleague Lior Burko and I have been investigating the physics of black holes for over two decades. In 2016, my Ph.D. student, Caroline Mallary, inspired by Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster film “Interstellar,” set out to test if Cooper (Matthew McConaughey’s character), could survive his fall deep into Gargantua – a fictional, supermassive, rapidly rotating black hole some 100 million times the mass of our sun. “Interstellar” was based on a book written by Nobel Prize-winning astrophysicist Kip Thorne and Gargantua’s physical properties are central to the plot of this Hollywood movie.

Building on work done by physicist Amos Ori two decades prior, and armed with her strong computational skills, Mallary built a computer model that would capture most of the essential physical effects on a spacecraft, or any large object, falling into a large, rotating black hole like Sagittarius A*.

Not Even a Bumpy Ride?

What she discovered is that under all conditions an object falling into a rotating black hole would not experience infinitely large effects upon passage through the hole’s so-called inner horizon singularity. This is the singularity that an object entering a rotating black hole cannot maneuver around or avoid. Not only that, under the right circumstances, these effects may be negligibly small, allowing for a rather comfortable passage through the singularity. In fact, there may no noticeable effects on the falling object at all. This increases the feasibility of using large, rotating black holes as portals for hyperspace travel.

Mallary also discovered a feature that was not fully appreciated before: the fact that the effects of the singularity in the context of a rotating black hole would result in rapidly increasing cycles of stretching and squeezing on the spacecraft. But for very large black holes like Gargantua, the strength of this effect would be very small. So, the spacecraft and any individuals on board would not detect it.

This graph depicts the physical strain on the spacecraft’s steel frame as it plummets into a rotating black hole. The inset shows a detailed zoom-in for very late times. The important thing to note is that the strain increases dramatically close to the black hole, but does not grow indefinitely. Therefore, the spacecraft and its inhabitants may survive the journey. (Credit:  Khanna/UMassD)

This graph depicts the physical strain on the spacecraft’s steel frame as it plummets into a rotating black hole. The inset shows a detailed zoom-in for very late times. The important thing to note is that the strain increases dramatically close to the black hole, but does not grow indefinitely. Therefore, the spacecraft and its inhabitants may survive the journey. (Credit:
Khanna/UMassD)

The crucial point is that these effects do not increase without bound; in fact, they stay finite, even though the stresses on the spacecraft tend to grow indefinitely as it approaches the black hole.

There are a few important simplifying assumptions and resulting caveats in the context of Mallary’s model. The main assumption is that the black hole under consideration is completely isolated and thus not subject to constant disturbances by a source such as another star in its vicinity or even any falling radiation. While this assumption allows important simplifications, it is worth noting that most black holes are surrounded by cosmic material – dust, gas, radiation.

Therefore, a natural extension of Mallary’s work would be to perform a similar study in the context of a more realistic astrophysical black hole.

Mallary’s approach of using a computer simulation to examine the effects of a black hole on an object is very common in the field of black hole physics. Needless to say, we do not have the capability of performing real experiments in or near black holes yet, so scientists resort to theory and simulations to develop an understanding, by making predictions and new discoveries.The Conversation

Gaurav Khanna, Professor of Physics, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

CATEGORIZED UNDER: Space & Physics, Top Posts
MORE ABOUT: black holes, cosmology
ADVERTISEMENT
  • magic man

    First!

    • magic man

      Magic

  • https://www.youtube.com/user/CRWilliams CR Williams

    Not trying to be the downer in all of this but this sounds like theories stacked on other theories and that perhaps maybe we are drifting in the range now of science fiction as opposed to science.

    • OWilson

      Do a Google search for The Big Bang Theory, and all you get is page after page of TV sit-com trivia.

      188,000,000 hits!

      This is what is passing for “science” today!

      • anarchduke

        out of curiosity, where did you get your phd in astrophysics? I mean, you must have one since you are discarding the theory without offering any particular evidence that it is wrong. So obviously you must have the qualifications to disprove it.

        • OWilson

          In a quantum universe, says Nobelist Murray Gel-Mann, everything that is not forbidden is compusory.

          So if it’s all the same to you, I’ll just wait until my relatives from the future come visit, and tell me how to make a bundle in the markets! :)

        • Stephan Vanhoek

          This isn’t oz and american universities only act like they’re the wizard

        • https://www.youtube.com/user/CRWilliams CR Williams

          Major claims require major evidence. Your major claim is that black holes may actually be wormholes. Your evidence is theory stacked on other theories which can neither be proven or disproven. Not an astrophysicist here, however, much of this has started to sound more like science fiction for some time.

  • mahershallelhashbaz

    Perhaps this method of using black holes as a means to tweak the space/time continuum is what the pumpkin-headed character Samhain from “The Real Ghostbusters” cartoon had utilized to stop time on the night on Halloween so that the world remain in an eternal night.
    Possibly the Russians already have this technology but we don’t know if President Putin passed this secret on to President Trump when they were alone together at Helsinki because Trump had his translator’s notes taken away immediately afterward.

    • Chiron

      Wow, you’re smart, huh?

      • mahershallelhashbaz

        Huh? What?

    • Ticking Bomb

      Dumb comment here.

      • mahershallelhashbaz

        Ahem. I’m merely trying to make the best if a bad situation, like getting sucked into a black hole or watching a bad state actor affecting the nation’s economy in the worse way possible. You see, it’s all relative, with the subject matter pertaining to “the blessing of the abyss that crouches below” (Genesis 49:25). The Biblical Patriarch Joseph was an official under the Pharaoh and was married to the daughter of the priest of Heliopolis, which was the cult center of the sun god Re, having its own cosmology that was alien to the Semites who settled in Egypt’s Delta region. Joseph received from his father, the Patriarch Jacob, an inheritance from the land of Canaan; a portion of land in the vicinity of the city of Shechem (Genesis 48:22). The name Shechem has affinities with the vital force known as “sekhem” in Egyptian beliefs which was one of the attributes acquired by King Unas in the afterlife, according to his pyramid inscription from the 24th century B. C. E. So Joseph inherits this shaman tradition from his ancestors by virtue of his being a “nazir,” or consecrated one, even while maintaining a position as second in command to one of the Pharaohs.

        • Ticking Bomb

          You need a shrink. Nothing to add to all of that nonsense.

          • mahershallelhashbaz

            Yeah go on. Wait for another believer that you presume you can make a fool of with your elitist attitude.

          • Ticking Bomb

            Dude, believer in what?!? What are you talking about? You came out of nowhere spewing religious propaganda left and right, but this conversation has absolutely nothing to do with religion. Please, seek help. Stop trying to shove your religious beliefs onto others. Not appreciated.

            Hey I too believe there is an Almighty God, in case you are wondering; and it kind of bothers you that I may sound like I don’t, which in itself would not be a sin anyway if that were the case. But darn me if you’ll ever catch me impregnating every online conversation with my religious beliefs. My beliefs are my beliefs, and yours should be yours. This thing here is about science. That is all. Don’t get offended.

          • mahershallelhashbaz

            Too late. You said my comment was “dumb,” unaware that you were close to a spider hole. I’ve taken note of your youthful optimism and I will be making my rounds on this blog in the hope of trapping other like-minded commentators in my web.

          • Ticking Bomb

            Oh really… “spider hole”?? Trapping what in your “web” now? “Youthful optimism”?Lol

            Nothing you say makes any sense, friend. You seem to be suffering from a serious bout of delusions. Or perhaps it’s just the resulting effect brought about by your egotistical literary euphoria, which nobody seems to care about. Please seek treatment. I wish you well. Truly do.

          • mahershallelhashbaz

            I remember watching Star Trek and wondering why all the inhabitants of alien worlds knew English. So far, I’ve noticed only one comment on this blog that mentions what we recently found about interstellar space being full of debris left over from the Big Bang, rendering travel between the stars too dangerous. That sucks because I like Star Trek, though at this point it just doesn’t seem feasible without slamming into a lot of sooty dust particles along the way. But you.and the rest of the commentators tried, nonetheless, to provide Hollywood with the raw ingredients that could be used in a screenplay not unlike the film “interstellar.” I’m sorry if you don’t like my reference to a Saturday morning cartoon that I only watched one episode of, but I wanted to take full credit for making a new nickname stick to that tyrant like pumpkin innards.

          • Ticking Bomb

            Lmao you really are a bit nutty. But that’s cool.

            Just tell me… when have I spoken about Hollywood or fantasy sci-fi series, or whatnot on here? I have not yet said a word about that, so don’t know why you even bring it up. Just like when you began babbling about religion. Wheew, that was deep! Lol Until that point I had not mentioned a single word about religion. Yet you chose to twist the subject and go there.

            And now you try to pull me in by stating that I have, along with other posters on here, given Hollywood the “ingredients” for a sci-fi screenplay.

            Listen friend, I have not done such thing. My only other comment actually stated the contrary. In it I said that the devil hides in the assumptions. That computer simulations IMO can and will probably always be tweaked as much as possible to comply with far-fetched objectives. Pls, read b4 you comment on someone elses’ posts. When I said that your comment about the cartoon thing was kind’a dumb it was because I truly thought it was. Imo, it had nothing to do with real science or the subject at hand about the possibility of space travel through super massive black holes.

            Btw, I too am a hardcore Star Trek fan. And yes, I agree with some of your observations there… esp about dust and debris in the cosmos… at least to a certain extent. But I must observe that not all the cosmos is full of dust. For what I’ve read about it, there are regions that are dirtier or dustier than other regions. If it was that bad, as you make it seem, to render space travel impossible, then the Voyager missions, and other space missions before and after, would have failed miserably from the get go, don’t you think? A huge hole would have punched through them and billions of dollars in technology would’ve been lost, rendering NASA, and other space programs throughout the world, mission-less long ago.

            Oh, and we all know Star Trek is full of fantasy. No need to remind us about that. It’s just fun to watch. English spoken everywhere lol… even in the “Delta” quadrant! Hey, it’s a miracle, eh! Everyone knows freaking English, how about it! Trust me, that’s one thing I’ve always complained about. And many Star Trek fans have too. But wud it be better for you if we had to read subtitles throughout hundreds of episodes if the producers had opted for not fitting the show with an intergalactic language translator so that all the aliens species can understand each other? I mean, you do know about the translator, don’t you? ‘Cause if you don’t, then you haven’t really watched Star Trek.

          • mahershallelhashbaz

            I don’t remember an intergalactic translator from Star Trek. But you in fact acknowledge the limitations on interstellar space travel in your comment and then you added the part about the calm in the storm for which I have no recollection reading about. So did you get that from a journal or was it intuitive, as my initial comment was although it was a bit off the subject?

  • http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/EquivPrinFail.pdf Uncle Al

    It does not work for a laser beam. It does not work for a finite size mass. Look at the video,

    twitter(.)com/i/status/1088757000832499712
    … BS, by rigorous calculation.

  • http://mortran.blogspot.com/ Magister Mortran

    General Relativity does not allow for an event horizon to be crossed in the first place. Time comes to a standstill at the horizon. So billions of years in the rest of the universe would not be enough to cross it. Even by just watching “Interstellar” one would understand this.
    It is beyond my comprehension why “theoretical physicists” keep coming up with this pseudo-scientific nonsense.

    • dinkster

      That only applies for the observer. The people crossing experience time normally.

      • Lost in place

        I don’t see how time can slow to zero for the observer without the traveler experiencing the opposite effect. Time accelerating to near infinity. I think as you approach the horizon, you would see the time of the rest of the universe speed up. You would watch the black hole shrink from Hawking radiation at an accelerated pace, and it would shrink at a rate that outpaces your approach, finally disappearing before you ever reach the event horizon, leaving you hurtling past the location of the former singularity at nearly light speed. At least that’s what would happen if the Hawking radiation didn’t kill you, which I assume it would.

        • Stephan Vanhoek

          It would be such a tiny wavelength i doubt we would be able to interact with any radiations:

    • Mark Trevino

      Because withe out your so called “theoretical nonsense” we would not advance science and wouldn’t have relativity,or even have discovered “theoretically nonsensical” black holes. Just sayin.

    • Stephan Vanhoek

      It sells on the net, so integrity is no longer the requisite it once was

    • Erik Bosma

      The person entering a black hole would only seem to the observer to be stationary in time to the observer. However, our astronaut would experience many many years of time in crossing and who knows when he would come out – if at all.

    • LobstaJohnson

      Incorrect. This is true for an outside observer. The person falling intro the black hole notices nothing unusual as the event horizon is crossed.

  • dinkster

    I’m all about the fuzzball black holes.

  • KickThatTheory

    The interesting thing is that a singularity’s gravitational centers are points so no matter how far you “fall” into a black hole the gravitational forces felt are always the same. This also means that provided that a singularity is just a point with infinite density it’s gravitational well could also technically be nearly infinite or infinite in depth relative to the fabric of space depending upon the effects of density on the depth of gravitational wells.

    This also means that more tests as to the effects of density on gravity wells need to be run because if a black hole’s gravity well is infinite in depth it could possibly have similar properties to the legendary Tipler cylinder, or Tipler time machine.

    If this is the case it would have extremely interesting consequences for the theories regarding the origin of the universe.

  • https://www.soundcloud.com/Artifex28 Artifex 28

    I do not see the travel possible at all. It’s not a curve through space-time to another. The original mass that formed the black hole “is there”.

    Remember that originally black holes were called “dark stars”. You wouldn’t even expect to travel by colliding a dark star.

    Small black holes, which are generated as a star collapses, are just the next step from neutron stars in terms of density.

    Large massive ones, like the Gargantua, can have low density, but still curve the space-time enough to create a singularity. It’s essentially an elephant on a plastic sheet – and after it has stretched enough, you’ve a singularity. Black hole is sort of a rip on the space-time that can be caused in numerous ways.

    Still – even if the black hole would be a massive one, you would simply enter “an area of no size” from the point of view of our Universe, where the original mass exists.

    If it wouldn’t be there, the space-time wouldn’t be curved and the black hole wouldn’t exist in the first place.

    There might be something on the other side, but it completely baffles me how it can be claimed that you could TRAVEL through one.

    Hawking’s radiation excluded, black holes are quite static. If they were dynamic systems, which eg. rapidly lose their mass, it would make sense to claim that there might be a white hole on the other side, spewing the “sucked” mass out. In other words – a wormhole.

    …however the only thing that would get out from one would be some elementary particle goo.

    • Erik Bosma

      Our very own ‘visible universe’ is a black hole inside which we all live and experience time at a certain rate.

      • https://www.soundcloud.com/Artifex28 Artifex 28

        And proof of that is exactly what?

        You could say that it’s because nothing gets out from our universe, but at the same time there are many local phenomenons that behave the same way within our universe. However, Hawking’s radiation is proven to vaporize black holes over time.

        There’s nothing to indicate that our whole unkverse would be fizzling energy out from this universe to another that’s ”outside our black hole”.

        And if the Hawking’s radiation wouldn’t apply to our ”universe sized black hole”, then the black holes aren’t the same.

        Another claim would be that the space-time exists only within our universe so the black holes within would be on a different dimension than the ”universe sized” one. They wouldn’t be the same.

        And as they aren’t the same, it’s nothing but a figment of imagination what the ”universe sized” would be.

    • Anthony Dean

      What if that mass was instead changed to dark matter as supermassive black holes are different beasts to stellar black holes and neutrons stars.

      If it were dark matter, it not only explains why they are dark, but also would allow mass to pass through them without any interaction. The spin of the black hole would relate to the angular momentum of the dark matter, and that would directly relate to the aperture size we see (aka the Schwarzschild radius) and its apparent mass.

      I think neutron stars are similar, but the matter acts as a plug of sorts, which is how the can emit jets without feeding like pulsars or emit massive magnetic fields like magnetars. We could prove this if we could prove neutron stars decay far faster than black holes, and stellar black holes decay far faster than supermassive black holes. And by decay I mean how fast the dark matter loses angualr momentum.

      Hence the dark matter idea, black holes (being mostly dark matter) would not interact with mass and not lose that momentum very easilly. Neutron stars on the other hand, that mass acts like a brake. Maybe gamma ray bursts are the dying gasp when there is not enough angular momentum to hold the mass of the neutron star any more and it explode out with some serious force.

      • https://www.soundcloud.com/Artifex28 Artifex 28

        I like the hypothesis of black holes that are formed by two different kinds of particles. After all, they’re so very different in density and size.

  • Stephan Vanhoek

    Still seems like nonesense to me, the velocity would turn you into plasma long before you even got close. I don’t think she tried to learn if you could do it, she just tried to prove you could, very bad science, but it sells/

  • Kurt Stocklmeir

    these are my theories – there are little worm holes all through space – virtual particle anti particle gets around worm hole – 1 particle goes through worm hole – the particle can do things like travel through time and go to parallel universes – there is entanglement between the particles – past present and future can interact and parallel universes can interact – this is more simple inside a black hole or around a star like a black hole – particles inside a black hole and particles around a star like a black hole let past present and future interact to an extreme and parallel universes interact to an extreme Kurt Stocklmeir

  • Erik Bosma

    Not only could we go for a trip through space, we would then also go through a trip through time. Who knows when we would wind up.

  • https://about.me/nicholasmeyler Nicholas Meyler

    So, all the times Science Fiction readers asked Hawking if we could travel through Black holes backwards in Time or to distant parts of the Universe, and Hawking said “No, you would be crushed to spaghetti”, he was actually lying.

    So, Scientists are all liars. Anyhow, this was figured out mathematically in 1962 by Roy Kerr, so this is really more “fake news”…. Liberal media and Scientists, at it, once again. You just can’t trust anyone, can you?

    • G. D. Smith

      What the f are you babbling about?

    • okiejoe

      There is a difference between lying and just being wrong.

      • https://about.me/nicholasmeyler Nicholas Meyler

        Sometimes there is. Sometimes there isn’t. “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.”

  • Mike Richardson

    Interesting idea, but even if using a black hole as a type of wormhole were possible, there are some pretty practical issues with any type of short-cut that allows faster-than-light travel. Folks better at physics than myself have looked at the issue, and concluded that due to different frames of reference, faster-than-light travel could create paradoxes where a traveler, after a journey to a distant star, would apparently be able to return to the point of origin before they ever left. If faster-than-light travel is possible, it would also mean time travel is possible, along with the potential for paradoxes. This seems pretty unlikely.

    While faster-than-light travel, even with warp drive and wormholes might not be possible, Einstein’s theory of special relativity does not rule out travel at close to the speed of light. The speed of light may be the ultimate speed limit, but at speeds above 90% of light speed, relativistic effects slow time from the perspective of any starship’s crew, making travel to other stars possible within a human lifetime. Of course, there are problems with having to shield a ship traveling that fast from impacts with even interstellar dust and gas, as well as the fact that the object’s mass increases with velocities approaching the speed of light. Still, these are engineering problems, and not prohibited by any physical laws of the universe. For science fiction that works within these parameters, I’d suggest less Star Trek and Star Wars, and more reading of authors such as Alastair Reynolds and Charles Pellegrino.

    • Anthony Dean

      I think there is a way past this, firstly faster than light travel is impossible as nothing can travel faster than light (as special relativity core principle suggests). However thats only for moving frame of reference, if we are accelerating frame of reference however things like time dilation does not apply (i.e. where general relativity applies instead).

      As you are accelerating towards the black hole, I think you would relatively compress spacetime to the point you experience the fall as though you were going through a hole. Maybe for supermassive black holes the aperture is large enough to fit the spaceship.

      I think you might also need to aproach the black hole at its poles, because if you went it at the equator as it were you would have the greatest sheering stresses. Thats if the black hole acts like a tornado/hurricane vortex – so best angle of attack is via the eye of the storm as it were.

      Problem nobody in this article seems to have addressed, is were is the mass that makes these beasts live, does it look like a star behind the “singularity”, is it even matter, or could it be some of the missing anti-matter (which would be bad) or dark matter (which would be good) as that doesn’t interact with matter.

      • Mike Richardson

        It’s been theorized that a rapidly spinning black hole would have a distorted event horizon bulging out at the equator, such that an entry in this region would be far enough away from the singularity to avoid severe tidal stresses and being torn apart. There’d still be the issue of radiation from the accretion disc along the equator, though.

        Approaching the poles, however, would entail its own problems. Extremely energetic jets have been observed jetting from what are believed to be the polar areas of some black holes, so you’d be fried by radiation trying to reach the event horizon there.

        As for the singularity, nobody knows what it would actually be like, and the nature of a black hole is such that we could probably never relay information out of the hole to answer that question. Better radio and X-ray telescopes are getting us closer to knowing what the environment around an event horizon would look like, but there’s just no way to peer beyond that to the singularity. Do a search for the Event Horizon Telescope and you can learn a bit more about the international effort to create a very long baseline array for imaging its namesake of a distant black hole.

    • Michael Cleveland

      There would be no paradoxes associated with this kind of travel because you could never use it to get to a place where paradox would be relevant, almost certainly not in this universe, because there are no known possible “white holes,” unexplained sources of influx of energy and matter.

      • Mike Richardson

        I wasn’t limiting this to just black holes — I was just relaying what physicists have said that would rule out wormholes and warp drive. I’d love to think such things might be possible, but the issue of causality violations appears to rule them out. But you have a point about black holes, as we still have no idea what happens to anything falling into them. Certainly the absence of anything resembling a white hole pours cold water on the idea that they have exit points, at least anywhere in our visible universe.

  • Ticking Bomb

    The devil hides in the assumptions. Computer simulations can and will probably always be tweaked as much as possible to comply with far-fetched objectives. Not accounting for stellar objects like stars and dust, or the effects of radiation, seems like too big of an assumption. But I won’t completely refute or discard their findings. It could be possible if the black hole is large enough such that objects in it are far between and radiation minimal. Also, we must keep in mind that sometimes the most turbulent or chaotic places/ events, when observed from the outside, turn out to be the most nominal and peaceful when observed from within.

  • Anthony Dean

    What if that mass was instead changed to dark matter as supermassive black holes are different beasts to stellar black holes and neutrons stars.

    If it were dark matter, it not only explains why they are dark, but also would allow mass to pass through them without any interaction. The spin of the black hole would relate to the angular momentum of the dark matter, and that would directly relate to the aperture size we see (aka the Schwarzschild radius) and its apparent mass.

    I think neutron stars are similar, but the matter acts as a plug of sorts, which is how the can emit jets without feeding like pulsars or emit massive magnetic fields like magnetars. We could prove this if we could prove neutron stars decay far faster than black holes, and stellar black holes decay far faster than supermassive black holes. And by decay I mean how fast the dark matter loses angualr momentum.

    Hence the dark matter idea, black holes (being mostly dark matter) would not interact with mass and not lose that momentum very easilly. Neutron stars on the other hand, that mass acts like a brake. Maybe gamma ray bursts are the dying gasp when there is not enough angular momentum to hold the mass of the neutron star any

    more and it explode out with some serious force.

    So no need at all for a singularity, Schwarzschild radius and apparent mass of the black hole is related to angular momentum of something we can’t interact with – all we see is a hole, to some other part of spacetime, we would have no clue if thats part of our universe or some other universe though only that there is spacetime on both sides.

  • Anthony Dean

    Could also be gamma ray bursts, are the “white hole” side of a supernova that created a stella black hole (aka the ejected matter), which leaves behind the dark matter with angular momentum leaving the hole.

    Since the rotation is in one direction, light can enter one way only – which is why we couldn’t see anything through a black hole – so first person entering one would still need quite the leap of faith and may never find their way back home via a return black hole pointing in the opposite direction.

    Maybe black holes are the subway system that links everything together – dark matter is in some way the tracks.

    My guestimate anyway.

  • Tyler S Hardy

    The book was by Andy Weir. Kip Thorne advised on the movie.

  • Glaisne

    Of course you first have to get to such a black hole, thousands of light years away, before attempting to travel through it.

  • GORT

    …Initiate Rambling…

    Beware any theory that relies on terms like “infinitely dense” and “singularity” – those are meaningless fillers that expose fundamental flaws in whatever mathematical formulas were used to produce them.

    In my unscientific opinion, the center of a black hole is pure energy, which exists due to Einstein’s most famous equation. Question: Why would matter not be converted to energy given the extreme environment around a black hole?

    If a black hole is actually a ball of energy rather than matter, then terms like “infinite density” and “singularity” strike me as being completely irrelevant, in addition to being meaningless.

    To relate my ramblings to this article, I have to say that pure energy probably won’t allow matter to exist inside its event horizon.

    …Rambling terminated…

    [==*==]

    • Michael Cleveland

      “Question: why would matter not be….etc, etc.?”
      Counter question: why would it be? What is known of black hole dynamics does not support any such idea. A black hole is just highly (gravitationally) distorted but essentially empty space.

      • GORT

        Are you suggesting then that no matter whatsoever is converted into energy in or around a black hole? Seriously? I’d enjoy reading your sources on that theory.

        A black hole being “essentially empty space” is a new one to me. We’re surrounded by it, and yet we aren’t under the constant threat of spaghettification. Seems odd, to say the least. Since you don’t appear to be just speculating, and you took exception to mine, please provide sources proving that black holes do not convert matter to energy, and that they are “essentially empty space”. Thanks.

        [==*==]

  • okiejoe

    If you could get to a large black hole you wouldn’t need it because you could already travel half-way across the galaxy.

  • A. Nonnie Mouse

    But you would still have to get to that supermassive black hole, which almost by definition is going to be light years away from anything.

  • nik

    One black hole being ”softer” than another, is like the difference between being crushed by an elephant sitting on you, or being crushed by a steam roller.
    You’re still crushed!
    A black hole, is not a ‘hole’ its the most dense solid in the universe. Therefore any speculation about ‘passing through it’ is utterly without merit.
    It may serve as a slingshot for space travel, as the solar systems various planets have been used for the various space shots, but it would be a very dangerous game.
    It would be rather like walking the rim of an active volcano, blindfolded, almost certain to lead to calamity.

  • Nandu

    Traveling in a speed of light… What about mass it will become infinity

NEW ON DISCOVER
OPEN
CITIZEN SCIENCE
ADVERTISEMENT

Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

ADVERTISEMENT

See More

ADVERTISEMENT
Collapse bottom bar
+