Ok out of the info that i've read a white hole is most simply defined as the time reverse opposite of a black hole. If that's true then wouldn't it stand to reason that the reason we have found no hard proof of a white hole is because they work backward in the time flow. What i mean is that since a black hole "eats" energy then that energy must go somewhere and my best guess would be that it would be "spit out" by a white hole that is linked to it. This would cause the energy to then be placed back into the timeline as we know it. How far back in time the energy would go is anybodies guess, maybe all the way back to the big bang or perhaps just moments before it was devoured by the black hole.
If this is true then it would give a reasonable account as to why we can't find white holes, its because they work backward in the time flow. And since we don't see or are able to register reverse time phenomenom this my be the way a white hole works.
The biggest question may be concerning the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, which states that all processes lose energy. Well this law may not hold in this case due to the fact that things lose energy over a course of time, but what i'm saying means that the coures of time is reversed and perhaps causing the 2nd law to be nullified or even reversed.
Ok now that i'm done with my little soap box moment i would like to know how my arguement holds or dosen't hold up and reason why.

• Holes, albino or otherwise - oosaremelvenono - October 30, 2000 - 05:30 UTC
  • RE: Holes, albino or otherwise - richard - October 30, 2000 - 18:24 UTC
    • Re: RE: Holes, albino or otherwise - shark - November 5, 2000 - 20:12 UTC
  • RE: Holes, albino or otherwise - richard - October 30, 2000 - 19:01 UTC
  • RE: Holes, albino or otherwise - richard - October 30, 2000 - 19:11 UTC
• RE: white holes - bladesinger - October 30, 2000 - 05:44 UTC
• Re: white holes - tchzarmok - November 5, 2000 - 07:10 UTC