What is Digg?220 Comments
- cjz0r, on 10/24/2007, -3/+94... and I call it, a Fry Hole!
- Uranium118, on 10/10/2007, -5/+71Now you're thinking with portals.
- RetroRufio, on 10/10/2007, -2/+51I don't think that any of you is as smart as you pretend to be.
- lorean, on 10/10/2007, -2/+43CAT: So, what is it?
KRYTEN: I've never seen one before -- no one has -- but I'm guessing it's
a white hole.
RIMMER: A _white_ hole?
KRYTEN: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. A black hole
sucks time and matter out of the universe: a white hole returns it.
LISTER: So, that thing's spewing time back into the universe? (He dons
his fur-lined hat.)
KRYTEN: Precisely. That's why we're experiencing these curious time
phenomena on board.
CAT: So, what is it?
KRYTEN: I've never seen one before -- no one has -- but I'm guessing it's
a white hole.
RIMMER: A _white_ hole?
KRYTEN: Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. A black hole
sucks time and matter out of the universe: a white hole returns it.
LISTER: (Minus the hat.) So, that thing's spewing time back into the
universe? (He dons his fur-lined hat, again.)
KRYTEN: Precisely. That's why we're experiencing these curious time
phenomena on board.
LISTER: What time phenomena?
KRYTEN: Like just then, when time repeated itself.
CAT: So, what is it? - Nidy1, on 10/10/2007, -4/+36Wasn't this always a theory?
- TRScheel, on 10/24/2007, -1/+26Don't reply to things you don't understand...
It is a reference to Futurama - gowans007, on 10/10/2007, -4/+29OLD! have you guys not watched Sliders. :)
- Proteos, on 10/10/2007, -2/+23"New" study? Funny. This has been postulated for many years now. Heck, even Steven Hawking wrote about it in 1993 (yeah, 14 years ago - 'Black Holes and Baby Universes'?)
- jlebrech, on 10/24/2007, -3/+24You would need a pretty good force field around the ship in order to not appear into the other dimension as dust particles.
- noahhoward, on 10/10/2007, -1/+17I had read about this theory some time ago. At that time they were suggesting that Universes were spherical and a black hole in one would need to be connected to a white hole in the other. Black holes draw in energy, white holes spew it out into another universe. They noted that no souch thing had been found in our universe though.
I suppose it is possible, but even if true, we'd never be able to go through one. - Otto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+14rootguy420: Why don't use your incredible powers of armchair complaining to help solve problems on Earth instead of wasting your time commenting on digg?
Thought so. - kermithefrog, on 10/10/2007, -5/+18Alvar Hanso, The Black Rock, The Numbers, The Smoke Monster, Desmond!
- MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -5/+18Then go jump into one. You will fit in nicely.
- yasirwisdom, on 10/10/2007, -3/+15yeah after being squished into 0.000001 mm because of the great gravity caused by the star that was there before the black hole
- OsiVert, on 10/10/2007, -0/+12More like a Hawking Hole.
(with the help of a level 10 vice president) - Gauthic, on 07/09/2008, -0/+11However, relative space might keep your molecular information intact during the transition. What we may observe from outside may not be what happens on the local object's space-time curve.
- m0tbaillie, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10Oh c'mon, everybody on the Internet is an astrophysicist, didn't you know that?
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11'The Black Hole' from 1979 FTW
- breadbin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8I knew someone was going to say that! The difference between theoretical physics attempting to explain observable natural phenomena and the belief in the supernatural based only on blind faith, you're comparing apples and oranges in my opinion. If a scientist expresses some fanciful ideas about where research *might* lead us in the future that's apparently the same as someone holding up a book and saying "there's an invisible being watching you but you'll never know it for sure because the being exists outside our reality but it's true because this book says so"? Digg me down all you like, but the more that science explains the less your book has to say and you're all crapping yourselves because it's harder and harder to convince people to cast reason aside.
- kinneas666, on 10/10/2007, -6/+14"Why" is a good question indeed. Seriously I love reading articles like this about black holes and space phenomena but at some point you have to ask "what is the point?".
I mean i'm an engineer not a quantum or astro physicist. It's cool to think about worm holes and stuff but how many people can actually really understand this stuff on an intimate enough level for it to really mean anything?
It's definetly out of my monkey-sphere... - bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8you come so close in analyzing the phenomenon then fail. you have to consider the time effect which occurs in a black hole. once matter passes the event horizon, time no longer exists for it and space-time pinches to a point in many cases, this further becomes a problem in your analysis when you state that the matter becomes a part of the singularity as how can you condense matter to the point where one particle exists in the same place as another particle?
one rather interesting anomaly of answers in general relativity, in such extreme circumstances, is the appearance of negative time. many inherently discard this is an impossible situation, yet you cannot be sure what real world implications negative time could have and the point still exists that these are valid solutions to general relativity. furthermore, taking a concept like the big bang, which can be easily described as a white hole, leads one to the conclusion that a black hole COULD be what creates a separate space-time, or other universe. our universe could very well be a product of a black hole in another universe. of course, this is all conjecture at this point and is certainly far from being a new idea which is naturally why i cannot digg this article. - jmoo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7This isn't really new, there were theories back in the 1970s that black holes could be gateways to other universes. Some consider every time a black hole is created that it is basically the creation of another universe in alternate dimension.
- g0thm0g, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10Stargate anyone?
- Rodzirra, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Wait... you think politicians _solve_ world problems? hahahahahaha
- gthrank, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6And why, pray tell, does that exclude the possibility of them being links to other universes? In the model they describe here, these alternative universes would not be comprised of baryonic particles as we know them. See the "11 dimensional model of matter" known as M-theory.
- Ramble, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9Damn, I was going to do that.
Red Dwarf is freaking awesome though. - Avian00, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9"Some physicists say that future particle accelerator experiments could produce microscopic black holes."
Am I the only one who thought this sounds like a bad idea? The first thing I imagined when I read this was a group of overzealous scientists creating this "microscopic black hole" only to have to go out of control and start devouring everything... first the scientists, then the building, then the city and ultimately the ENTIRE earth! It could be the end of our existence! Or perhaps I've just stumbled upon the beginnings of a good sci-fi film. - spencewah, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Who ..are ..they ..going ..to ..believe
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5no, we have one theory: general relativity, and we have two mathematical solutions to the theory: black holes and worm holes. there is no debate as to which one is correct, they're both correct solutions. the only debate is whether either actually manifests itself in reality.
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5well, if the odds were impossible then it wouldn't have happened, would it?
- zeejay, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6"If matter from our universe is continuously pouring into another, that would mean the same would be happening about other universes."
Who says? Maybe it's a one-way trip - a cosmic hourglass where the sand falls down, until (if) the hourglass is reversed, perhaps over the span of trillions of years. Or maybe it's bleeding back in as dark matter or energy, the presence and quantity of which we can only really guess about.
There's a lot of conjecture in the world of astrophysics, and a lot of it makes sense - on paper. But I tend to think the real underlying truths are far stranger and more exotic than scientists' wildest dreams. There's still so much we can observe, and write rules about, but at the core, we still don't truly know why or how it works like it does. Basic stuff like the dual nature of light, how gravity really works, etc. - Jugalator, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5I wouldn't bury Threlly too far down, he maybe talks like he's drunk, but I think he's talking of the second law of thermodynamics, which white holes are known to violate, but not black holes. Combine that with no observations of white holes, and many scientists are sceptics about them.
The only theory I know with *any* tangible "evidence" is if the big bang would be a white hole. However, the big bang did a whole lot of more things than spew out matter, like separating the natural forces and creating spacetime. However, maybe that could have came as a byproduct of the heavily focused energy that unfold on the "other side"...? If true, it would at least be a pretty way of showing how even the big bang doesn't violate the fact that energy can not be created, but only transformed, since it'd be energy from the other side of the black hole, fed in the form of matter. - bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5interesting that you should use occam's razor in relation to something that it isn't actually applicable to.
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5yes, you do fail... what's your point?
- Jabertsohn, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Even if we could go through one, we certainly couldn't come back through it the other way, so there'd be no way to prove it.
- ziffel, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7"are you guys nuts?! we'll never fly to the moon! that's crazy stoner talk!"
- McHoffa, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6disney taught this in 1979... old news...
- Jabertsohn, on 10/10/2007, -2/+7They are physicists not politicians...
How will they ever gain the means to explore them first hand if they all stop being physicists and start 'solving world problems'? - drmangrum, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6perfect distance from the sun? The only thing our distance from the sun gives us is that our water didnt immediately flash boil into the atmosphere. I find it far more likely that life evolved to deal with the sun than the sun allowed life to spring into existence.
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4no, it was and is a conjecture made from solutions to a theory.
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4mathematical equivalents only equals "bad science" to those who are poor at math. when people claim this to be a valid theory, then you should start to question it. otherwise, by your reasoning, a black hole is just stoner theoretical garbage in and of itself. after all, it's just a mathematical solution that we've never actually witnessed, only inferred to exist.
- Neodeusx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4An Event Horizon reference maybe?
- Intervene, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8Brilliant. Whether there is any attempt to seek these answers in my lifetime or not, regardless, to unravel the history of the universe would be phenomenal. I love every bit about this, using the edge of what we know, to figure out more about what we don't know.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -6/+10Yes, for particles maybe, I don't think they mean, you know, like spaceships or anything, its that darned second rule again.
And as the man in the wheelchair said, even black holes appear to obey the second rule. - ldkronos, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4None of those are really spoilers of anything. And I buried the person above me for potentially spoiling something interesting about the season 3 finale.
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4see: big bang and white holes.
- breadbin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4All those people talking about whether black holes are wormholes and how you've heard this all before, I think you're missing the point. The article is not discussing whether black holes can simultaneously be wormholes, but rather that some of the objects we've assumed to be black holes might INSTEAD be wormholes. It seems their mathematical models of wormholes display many similar characteristics as the potential black holes we've observed.
- bIuebonics, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5"we've never seen any evidence of matter spontaneously spewing into our universe." of course we haven't SEEN evidence, but we have a nifty idea about the beginning of our universe called "the big bang" where people wonder how matter spewed forth from a potential singularity... this doesn't make you curious in any way?
- MacEnvy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4He didn't say they COULD, he said they SHOULD.
- jason469, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4For some reason, I thought about Donnie Darko when I read the title.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 208 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is