Dear Marcelo,

Thank you for your reply from Sat, 18 Dec 2004 02:10:50 -0800 (PST). 

I was curious what would be the observational evidence for a white hole, and you suggested quasars. 

I haven't been able to read the second version of your "Brief history of black holes", gr-qc/0412054 [Ref. 1], perhaps it will show up on Monday. So I looked at your previous papers [Refs. 2 and 3], and recalled two very interesting papers on similar issues, by T.P. Singh and Cenalo Vaz [Ref. 4] and by Phil Gibbs [Ref. 5]. 

I wouldn't like to go into quasars and other 'unsolved mysteries', such as GRBs, 

http://God-does-not-play-dice.net/Meszaros.html#2

Let me try to explain two key issues that I do not understand, hoping that you and your colleagues would help. 

First, the very dynamics of creating "black holes", 

http://God-does-not-play-dice.net/Ntina.html#5

I believe the issue is of utmost importance for understanding the 'halting point' [Ref. 1] and hence the alleged "reversal" of the "time parameter", which would create a white hole. You claim that at this unique 'halting point', as seen by an observer placed at spatial infinity [Ref. 2], there is no mass at all [Ref. 3]. 

However, it seems to me that you employ the notion of time from classical mechanics, so if we apply this scenario to a car, we should say that at the 'halting point' the pistons would wipe out the whole car/universe *completely*, and "then" the car/universe would be re-created from Nothing [Ref. 3]. I certainly like this 'creatio ex nihilo' and Phoenix Universe (please see my web site), but I believe we need new physics. 

The second issue is the crux of your ideas based on the Path Integral
theory of Feynman [Ref. 3]: the quantum fluctuations in quantum gravity. You said that there are "fluctuations of energy due to Quantum uncertainties, but we concentrate on the most probable values". 

I don't know what phenomenon can take care of all the nodes. I recalled that, in Feynman's path-integral approach to QFT, we're dealing with some weird kind of *density*, such that we have amplitude density instead of some much-desired, classically distinguishable amplitude, 

http://God-does-not-play-dice.net/Barbara.html#note

So I guess if we sort out this second puzzle, we would perhaps understand the first one, and then would eventually say something sensible on quasars, black/white/gray/pépite holes, GRBs, etc. 

I hope you and your colleagues would help me sort out this incredibly puzzling situation. I *very* much like your ideas, I love all these speculations, only I always keep in mind Murphy's Law No. 15: Complex problems have simple, easy-to-understand wrong answers.

Best regards, 

Dimi
http://God-does-not-play-dice.net
 

References 

[Ref. 1] Marcelo S. Berman, Brief history of black holes, gr-qc/0412054 v1. 

"The time taken by the reversion of the collapse has to be dealt in a
separate letter.
...
"We can get a taste of the involved energy densities in the halting
point (...)."
 

[Ref. 2] Marcelo Samuel Berman, Energy of Kerr-Newman black-holes and gravitomagnetism, gr-qc/0407026 v3. 

See the "embarrassing" problem with Eq. 13 "pertaining to a negative
energy that represents a repulsive gravity region (anti-gravitation).
This effect could be used to motorize an antigravitational engine."
...
"(T)he radial distance goes to infinity, so that the "entire" space is
involved (say, put observer at spatial infinity)".
 

[Ref. 3] Marcelo S. Berman and Luis A. Trevisan, On the Creation of the Universe out of "nothing", gr-qc/0104060 v3. 

"The only thing that we need to admit, is that Einstein's field equations yield the average values for the quantities that, in the Quantum Universe, when t < 10^-43s, fluctuate quantum-mechanically around those average values, somehow like the Path Integral theory of Feynman [1] admits paths that fluctuate around the average trajectories given by the Classical theory. Throughout this paper, when we refer to the Quantum Universe, all quantities should be understood as given by the most probable values of those quantities, even if this is not explicitly stated.
...
"In the very creation moment there was no supply of energy to the
Universe, because it was not needed.
...
"The endpoint of the collapse may be a unique point with no mass at all.
...
"However, the end point of such gravitationally collapsing matter, is
not a point of infinite energy density and finite mass, but as we have
shown in the inverse situation, the final mass is zero valued; all mass
has disappeared at the endpoint. We are left with "nothing".
...
"We have fluctuations of energy due to Quantum uncertainties, but we concentrate on the most probable values, during the last 10^-43s."
 

[Ref. 4] T.P. Singh and Cenalo Vaz, The quantum gravitational black hole is neither black nor white, gr-qc/0405087 v1.
 

[Ref. 5] Phil Gibbs, A White Hole Model of the Big Bang, gr-qc/9803014 v1. 

See also 'Is The Big Bang a White Hole?' at
http://www.weburbia.demon.co.uk/press/html/g05.htm#g05o
 
 
 

Note: The current opinion on the formation of black holes/naked singularities can be read in the recent paper by Pankaj S. Joshi: either a Black Hole (BH) or a Naked Singularity (NS) develops as end product of collapse [Ref. 6]. Sounds like Murphy's Law No. 15: Complex problems have simple, easy-to-understand wrong answers.

How about 'neither BH nor NS'? Just look at Eq. 13 [Ref. 6], and ponder on the nature of time parameter  t . It's a classical time parameter that can be read by a physical clock. Thus, it cannot include the inflationary stage [Ref. 7]: if we run it backwards along the deflation time, it will inevitably reach the inflationary stage, but then nothing can bring it back. No way. Also, this classical time parameter  t  cannot read mutually exclusive (canonically conjugate) variables from QM simultaneously, as we know from Heisenberg, and therefore it cannot, and should not be used in quantum gravity as 'semi-classical limit'. This classical time parameter  t  can be used only at the scale of tables and chairs, but we must always bear in mind that it has been severely truncated by eliminating its generic link to the quantum world: the imaginary unit in the phase of quantum waves. Its application in QM is acceptable only in the Copenhagen interpretation, since with this interpretation we do not describe the quantum reality 'out there' but only the "projection" of the quantum state in the context of our experimental setup confined within one of the sets of complementary observables/consistent histories, while the other set remains in the realm of the UNspeakable (John S. Bell). And finally, this classical time parameter  t  cannot be used in GR, because it is build by "points", and we know that the energy of gravitational field cannot, even in principle, be modeled with a tensor. It is manifestly wrong to expect some non-tensorial quantity to "obtain" a fixed, localized, and hence numerical value that can be ascribed to a fixed, localized, and hence numerical value of  t .

Regarding the dynamics of creating cosmological "black holes" (cf. above), see the vacuum cleaner paradox here. To avoid the possibility for creating black holes or reaching the so-called halting point on logical grounds, recall the 'gaps' in Einstein's GR. Reaching the "size" of these fundamental gaps -- the "size" of the infinitesimal -- is forbidden on logical grounds: if the dimensions of a physical system can be contracted down to the "size" of the gaps, there would be no more than one frozen state of the system. There would be no possibility to define 'distance', the metric tensor would be strictly zero, and we would be "living" in one instant only: not in time but in eternity, as noted by St. Augustine. But nothing can reach this fundamental gap if the latter is residing inside the "chasing" object itself; hence the proposed notion and the term 'logical infinity'. Again, please refer to the vacuum cleaner paradox.

Also, in the case of the time parameter from classical mechanics,  t  [Ref. 6], the volume of the Holon residing in these gaps would be vanishing small, and cannot alter the dynamics of the "car" (cf. the example above). For objects studied in astrophysics, the Holon in the vertical component of spacetime can accumulate the potential states of a system of the size of the Milky Way, hence the so-called "dark" effects observed in the horizontal component of spacetime would follow the time-symmetry of the Holon, and would produce incredibly powerful "dark energy" release (quasars, GRBs from black holes, etc.) and "cold dark matter" effects. See also the "spin" of the Holon here.

Sounds like sci fiction, right? See the effect of the Holon in inflationary cosmology [Ref. 7]. More on the vertical/global mode of spacetime here.
 

D. Chakalov
December 20, 2004
 
 

[Ref. 6] Pankaj S Joshi, Gravitational Collapse End States, gr-qc/0412082 v1.

"What are the possible end states of such a continued gravitational collapse? To answer this question, one must study dynamical collapse scenarios within the framework of a gravitation theory such as Einstein’s theory. (...) The generic conclusion appears to be: Either a Black Hole(BH) or a Naked Singularity(NS) develops as end product of collapse, depending on the initial data (e.g. initial density, pressures, and velocity profiles for the collapsing shells) from which the collapse develops, and the nature of dynamical evolutions as permitted by Einstein equations.
...

"It is now possible to go back to the Einstein equations and work out the function t(v, r). The physical spacetime singularity develops at the value R = 0, which corresponds to the physical radius of all collapsing shells going to zero. This corresponds to the time t_s(r) = t(0, r). At the initial epoch we have v = 1 and the singularity is defined by the value v = 0. Expanding the function t(v, r) around the center, we get  [Eq. 13] ."
 

[Ref. 7] Mario Rabinowitz, Black Hole Paradoxes, astro-ph/0412101 v1.

Sec 8.3, The speed of inflation, p. 41:

"Inflation theory views the early universe as expanding outward at an exponential rate (hence the name "inflation") from a central point. With this hypothesis, many long-standing cosmological problems can be laid to rest -- such as the homogeneity of the universe. It enables us to comprehend how the diametrically opposite ends of the universe that are some 24 to 30 billion light-years apart can be so much alike (implying that they somehow communicated with each other), despite the fact that light exchanged between them can only have traveled some 12 to 15 billion light-years since the beginning of the universe (Mallove, 1988). However, there is a price to laying these and other problems to rest.

"The price to be paid is that the very early universe had to fly apart much faster than the speed of light -- in apparent contradiction to relativity theory that no material objects can go faster than the speed of light (even if light can, as discussed in Sec. 8.1). Inflation theorists simply shrug their shoulders and say that their theory does not violate relativity, since it is not the proto-stars and proto-galaxies that were moving that fast, but rather the very fabric of space itself moving the material objects apart. It’s too bad that Einstein was not alive to comment on it himself when inflation was proclaimed and almost universally accepted. One can only wonder how accepting of it he would have been."