Study Takes Singularity Out of Black Holes

Researchers Take Singularity Out of Black Holes

In a newly published study, physicists take singularity out of black holes, suggesting that black holes could serve as portals.

LSU physicist and Center for Computation and Technology researcher Jorge Pullin and his colleague Rodolfo Gambini of the University of the Republic in Montevideo, Uruguay, have published a study applying Loop Quantum Gravity to an individual black hole, showing that singularities – or the infinite strengthening of the gravitational field that occurs deep within a black hole, insuring the annihilation of anything entering – may not be encountered. Instead, their model shows that gravity would eventually change, suggesting that the “other end” of a black hole might take one to another location within our own universe.

Apply a quantum theory of gravity to black holes and the all-crushing singularity at their core disappears.

In its place is something that looks a lot like an entry point to another universe. Most immediately, that could help resolve the nagging information loss paradox that dogs black holes.

Though no human is likely to fall into a black hole anytime soon, imagining what would happen if they did is a great way to probe some of the biggest mysteries in the universe. Most recently this has led to something known as the black hole firewall paradox – but black holes have long been a source of cosmic puzzles.

According to Albert Einstein’s theory of general relativity, if a black hole swallows you, your chances of survival are nil. You’ll first be torn apart by the black hole’s tidal forces, a process whimsically named spaghettification.

Eventually, you’ll reach the singularity, where the gravitational field is infinitely strong. At that point, you’ll be crushed to an infinite density. Unfortunately, general relativity provides no basis for working out what happens next. “When you reach the singularity in general relativity, physics just stops, the equations break down,” says Abhay Ashtekar of Pennsylvania State University.

The same problem crops up when trying to explain the big bang, which is thought to have started with a singularity. So in 2006, Ashtekar and colleagues applied loop quantum gravity to the birth of the universe. LQG combines general relativity with quantum mechanics and defines space-time as a web of indivisible chunks of about 10-35 meters in size. The team found that as they rewound time in an LQG universe, they reached the big bang, but no singularity – instead they crossed a “quantum bridge” into another older universe. This is the basis for the “big bounce” theory of our universe’s origins.

Now Jorge Pullin and Rodolfo Gambini have applied LQG on a much smaller scale – to an individual black hole – in the hope of removing that singularity too. To simplify things, the pair applied the equations of LQG to a model of a spherically symmetrical, non-rotating “Schwarzschild” black hole.

In this new model, the gravitational field still increases as you near the black hole’s core. But unlike previous models, this doesn’t end in a singularity. Instead gravity eventually reduces, as if you’ve come out the other end of the black hole and landed either in another region of our universe, or another universe altogether. Despite only holding for a simple model of a black hole, the researchers – and Ashtekar – believe the theory may banish singularities from real black holes too.

That would mean that black holes can serve as portals to other universes. While other theories, not to mention some works of science fiction, have suggested this, the trouble was that nothing could pass through the portal because of the singularity. The removal of the singularity is unlikely to be of immediate practical use, but it could help with at least one of the paradoxes surrounding black holes, the information loss problem.

A black hole soaks up information along with the matter it swallows, but black holes are also supposed to evaporate over time. That would cause the information to disappear forever, defying quantum theory. But if a black hole has no singularity, then the information needn’t be lost – it may just tunnel its way through to another universe. “Information doesn’t disappear, it leaks out,” says Pullin.

Publication: Rodolfo Gambini and Jorge Pullin, “Loop Quantization of the Schwarzschild Black Hole,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 211301 (2013); DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.211301

PDF Copy of the Study: Loop quantization of the Schwarzschild black hole

Source: Katia Moskvitch, LSU Center for Computation and Technology

Image: Black Hole Gobbles a Star from NASA/CXC/M.Weiss

32 Comments on "Study Takes Singularity Out of Black Holes"

  1. Nelson Simonosn | June 3, 2013 at 10:56 am | Reply

    The article mentions black hole evaporation. Does evaporation theory predict that a black hole would evaporate quietly into non-existence or would the evaporation eventually bring the black hole to a threshold where the black hole become unviable, causing a sudden release of its remaining mass and energy?

    • C. Peter O'Connor | June 4, 2013 at 5:54 am | Reply

      Simple answer, Nelson Simonson is ‘No’!

      The current concept of what the phenomena in question are is entirely erroneous! (In my view of course).

      In June 2011 I deposited a set of new and extremely radical theories ON THE, CREATION OF OUR UNIVERSE, WITH THE ACADEMIA OF THE WORLD, within the format of which I stated that our universe is not only made from, ‘Electromagnetic Energy’ but that our entire universe took billions of years to come into existence and was by virtue in situ billions of years before the, Bang!

      As a result of the extremely comprehensive studies I undertook regarding the phenomena that are ‘Explosions’ and their ‘Aftermath’, I was able to deduce that the black holes scattered around our universe are nothing more than gentle wisps of, ‘Void Energy’ surrounded by gas, dust and other debris that will simply dissipate over time and I stated such within the section dealing with the subject given here in this article.

      THEY ARE CERTAINLY NOT INFINITE DENSITY MONSTERS WAITING TO GOBBLE UP ANYTHING THAT GETS TOO CLOSE. – HANS CHRISTIAN ANDERSON, couldn’t have come up with a better fairy story than that one! You need to read my work entitled; ‘Just a Single Strand’ (The Creation of our Universe (Copyright). Contact me.
      [email protected] and I’ll ship you out a copy £10 plus postage.

    • For the answer to your question I refer you to an article published In Jan. 2013 about the NGC 660 black hole expansion. It would seem that black holes do expand after losing gravitational energy.

    • My understanding, and sorry, I haven’t published or sold anything on the subject, is that Hawkings Radiation would slowly erode the mass of the BH until it simply disappears. Even a microscopic BH has properties that bind it and give it near infinite gravity so I can’t see how that would lead to expansion. However, I’m pretty well based in Classic physics so…

  2. The author needs to read “The Black Hole War.” The information paradox was resolved years ago.

    • This is my favorite subject, the unknown. I have always been confused by the thought of a singularity as too awkward to exist. This thought came about from mathematics generally and this came their only conclusion. Based on studies from Hawking I believe, yes it radiates it’s mass until there is nothing more. I have always thought there is an end point to a black hole, whether that is metaspace between multiple universes or a “white hole” in another galaxy. With a super massive black hole the diameter being so vast one would think you could essentially enter direct center avoiding the event horizon altogether.

  3. Derek Bickley | June 3, 2013 at 12:06 pm | Reply

    Read my work “INFINITISM 101”, I attempt to bridge Quantum and Relativity with what I call the “Pendulum Theory”, also supporting the “Big Bounce” theory. (Free e-book)

    • C. Peter O'Connor | June 4, 2013 at 6:25 am | Reply

      Hi, Derek Bickley! I’m certainly very glad you quoted in your Post ‘Attempted’ to bridge Quantum and Relativity with what you refer to as, ‘Pendulum Theory’ whilst supporting ‘Big Bounce Theory’ because, in my view your attempt will fail abysmally!

      The reason I make the claim noted is because, anything related to String/Brane theory, or in fact any of the other nonsensical jibberish that is floating around on the subject these days belongs in the ‘Universal Rubbish Bin’! (In My view.) How anyone can imagine for on iota of a second that’INFINITY’ can be quantified in such a way is beyond even me (and I thought I knew everything there is to know about our universe and what is outside of it.

  4. If black holes are portals into another universe or somewhere else in ours, would we also not see in our universe black hole “exit portals” from other universe or again somewhere else in ours?

    Is there any evidence for such exit portals ?

    Colin Cross

    • What if the exit portal is also the entry portal? Simply reverse the directions and each become themselves. Would be interesting to wonder if a black hole’s wormhole is able to “transport” people through time and space, or just space.

      I would go further to ask if the exit portal doesn’t just lead to a alternate place, but also that it could lead to the same place. However, in a different plane though. We should launch a probe into space to examine the black holes. I know that they are far away, but maybe when I am 800 years old (longevity) then we might be able to analyze the data.

    • C. Peter O'Connor | June 4, 2013 at 5:16 am | Reply

      Simple answer, Colin; No! As with with, Charles McGowans response Colin, you have raised a fundamentally important point however, unlike Charles you have left yourself wide open to criticism from the, Dogmatists of the world who I have no doubt would argue that some of these so-called ‘Black Holes’ are actually exit points and the reason nothing survives transportation is because of the crushing power they supposedly contain, won’t allow such to occur. The very concept is to me a pile of, ‘scientific bunkum’ that should have been thrown out years ago but hasn’t because, as with CERN (the other white elephant of the world of science) it keeps a great many scientist in employment throughout the world.

      • If the Black Sun is a portal you’ll not crash nor be damaged if you’ll fall perpendicular with speed of light. There will be no gravitational pull or acceleration.

    • It would eventually shrink into non-existence, and cease to be of use to you and your burning legions of world-conquering monstrosities.

      To keep the black hole functional, you must spill the blood of a hundred virgins and throw them into the black hole while chanting verses from the Fallen God Shinnok’s conquest bible.

      Exotic dancing seems to strengthen the effects.

    • The massive jet stream screaming from a super massive black hole? They say it is as a result of expelled radiation from a devoured star. Maybe thats your “entry”. I’ve heard many times about the white hole theory

  5. Charles C McGowen | June 3, 2013 at 3:09 pm | Reply

    The predicate assumptions here are incorrect. The study ignores the logical nature of the space-time construct and essentially falls prey to what I call “a rat-hole. Black Holes evaporate due to Hawking Radiation. See Unruh Effect. The entanglement function density at the Event Horizon would shred most structures. Also, the concept of “infinite density” or “infinite compressibility” does not exist in nature. Consequently this whole paper is moot. Sorry.

    • You should go tell those scientists that there hard work is worth nothing to the scientific community. That ought to earn you favor among their ranks. Sorry, but unless you were there to witness the equations being written and the journals and other calculations being formulated then your argument no matter how concrete is also moot. I can’t accept an answer from someone who claims to have evidence to the contrary, but has done no research of their own to disprove it.
      I respect Hawking, but you shouldn’t use his work to discourage people. His work should be used as a stepping stone to overcome problems like this. Not to tell people that essentially they are wrong in every way. If you did this to me when I was writing a paper. I would laugh at you because unless you are part of the immediate research team. Then you have no idea of the way in which the work was conducted and thus no way to form a conclusion.
      My rant is over now.

    • C. Peter O'Connor | June 4, 2013 at 4:05 am | Reply

      Excellent response, Charles C McGowan! I have argued the same points for years.

      Your comment also reinforces my many previous suggestions that it is not scientifically possible for our universe to have come from such an entity and why I have endeavoured for years to defame that very concept as it is based in the real of ‘Science Fiction’ not Fact.

      In June 2011 I deposited a radical set of theories with the World’s academia laying out a proposal that dealt with every single aspect of what our universe contains and stating in no uncertain terms that our entire universe must have been in-situ in its entirety, ‘BEFORE THE BANG’ which would mean that Spiral galaxies are merely expanding chunks of debris flying out from the event. Each one expelling its excess energy as it goes.

      • Charles C McGowen | June 4, 2013 at 6:10 pm | Reply


        Very much appreciate the support. I’ve done a great deal more than make idle comments. I can back these points up with 826 pages of logic, equations, propositions, table and data. See my book The Elegance of Reason on Amazon. I also created a blog at the books ISBN number dot blogspot dot com, to augment the concepts in the book.

        Einstein was logically correct – but that isn’t the end of the story – it’s the beginning….. hang on to your hats because when everyone’s lightbulbs turn on – this is going to be a roller coaster ride. 🙂

    • Remember until someone actually experiences it, all we got is educational and mathematic guesswork. Bottom line unfortunately.

  6. i assume you mean “chunks of about 10^-35 meters in size”?

  7. James Hayes | June 3, 2013 at 9:15 pm | Reply

    Nothing exists other than time (as an expansionary energy).

    Notice how empty of content things really are? – there are no fundamental particles, there is no true Higgs field – all matter and the electromagnetic energies are simply mixed time planes that are older than the present.

    Matter is a regression from the present caused by new Time growth. Black holes are just at the end of this spectrum, where new growth of time has first obscured, then buried the older time, and it is no longer visible in the universe we can observe. They are out of our event horizon.

    You need to reconsider black holes by imagining them as an infinite whirlpool or tornado of spiraling time flows, where the depth of the whirlpool creates a vanishing point. Black holes are a type of worm hole, so yes travelling into one then away from the centre would most likely place you in another part of our part-verse or into another part-verse within the universe (there can only be one *uni*verse).

    Atoms are a bit like black holes, except that the flow is holistically circular around a centre (a reverse kissing point boundary), not a spiral without an bounded end. The different forms of gravity for atomic things are not different types/versions of gravity, but different observations of gravity due to them being within a self-contained time plane. It is a bit like how our observations of an arm placed in a pool of clear water give a different observations than in air. The gravity within atoms is the same basic gravity as outside – it just appears different.

    Gravity itself is an effect, it does not exist in its own right. Gravity is a necessary outcome of self-expansion – it is the pressure of outer expansion on inner expansion which causes things to continually “regress” (in a relative sense), inwards from the present.

    • Atoms? Atoms look more like a typical solar system to me. Orbits and all. I believe the universe as we know it is grows infite sub atomically and forever large as if our entire galaxy is merely an atom to a much larger world.

  8. wow that interesting thanks im workin on school project 😎

  9. Madanagopal.V.C | June 6, 2013 at 4:47 am | Reply

    Dear Peter O’Connor! We are certainly dense monsters to gobble up everything on our way, do you know? Have you not heard of Nebula Andromeda cannibalising its neighboring galaxies ? So is the case of our Milky Way giant galaxy trying to gobble up its weak neighbors such as Large Magellanic and Small Magellanic clouds. Big stars gobble up other stars when star dies and presents a black hole of infinite mass but least size whioch makes them spin at fantastic speed. Please change your argument. Thank yOU.

    • u are ridiculous with this words, no… black holes are not infinit…
      u dont jug peoples or tell for change ur on teory on true, the really people ho know nothing its u, change ur argumente Madanagopal…
      ur black hole in milk way its a perfect mass and engergy on balance witg bilions of years of perfection ajustmant, to take a inteligent way to survive and control with another black holes the interi universe. ur black hole DONT TRY TU EAT US, its simple the universe make ways to make he self control and in continuos evolution, ur humans is a evolutionn because ur black hole is a mass and product x ray, its not infinit, its finit alllllll then, because what way all blac hole get all mass and destroy him self:? because all things in universe is one, and hi correct him self, with evolution. thanks bad english

  10. Singularity is IN THE Universal Black Hole once per circa 20 billion yrs

    On The Essence And Matrix Of The Universe-Life
    The following three sentences are the shortest data-based TOE. Seriously. Very seriously.
    The clearer the shorter

    Natural Selection to Self Replication is Gravity

    – Self-replication is the ultimate mode of natural selection is the essence and drive and purpose of the universe. Period.
    – The pre-Big-Bang singularity is the ultimate self-replication (SR) of the cycling mass-energy universe. Period. (mother of universal SR mode…)
    – Earth’s RNA nucleotides life is just one of the myriad modes of self-replication.

    Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century)

    -The 20yrs development, and comprehensive data-based scientism worldview, in a succinct format.
    -The Genome is a base organism evolved, and continuously modified, by the genes of its higher organism as their functional template.
    – Everything in the universe derives from mass-energy duality, from the universe cycle between its two poles all-mass/all-energy.
    – The Origin Of Gravitons is the ONLY thing unknown-unexplained in the Scientism Universe.

    PS: Spoon feeding

    The universe is a (circa 20 hillion yrs?) cyclic affair between all-mass and all-energy poles. NATURAL SELECTION of a mass format mandates energy intake because since the big-bang the resolved mass is reconverting at a constant rate from inert mass to energy, to moving mass. The mass that reconverts to energy SELF-REPLICATES to mass, in black holes, for the eventual re-singularity. The energy-to-mass SELF-REPLICATION process is GRAVITY. All this is enabled and goes on and mandated by/due to the small size and shape and inter-attraction of the gravitons that enable zero distance between them to re-form singularity.

    I hope that now you understand what gravity is and why it is the monotheism of the universe…DH

  11. Black holes extract the gravitons and store them at low energy level.

    Singularity is attained only ONCE per circa 20 billion years when ALL the gravitons of the universe are together at zero inter-gravitons space because it takes the totality of their combined low inter-attraction force to form singularity.

    Dov Henis (comments from 22nd century)

  12. Your all nerds. Who gives

  13. there is no gravity in the center of Black Sun – pressure – yes, gravity – equalized to 0.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.