"Why Did Life Begin During Early Earth's Heavy Impact Period?" New Research Shows a Strong Link
'Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey' -- "Ancient Greenhouse Worlds" (Background for Tonights Episode)

"Supermassive Black Holes at the Center of Every Galaxy May be Wormholes Created in the Early Universe"




The supermassive black hole candidates at the center of every normal galaxy might be wormholes created in the early Universe, connecting either two different regions of our Universe or two different universes in a Multiverse model, say Zilong Li and Cosimo Bambi with Fudan University in Shanghai in a fascinating new theory.

The origin of these supermassive objects is not well understood, and structures like wormholes are allowed both in general relativity and in alternative theories of gravity. Current observations cannot rule out such a possibility.

In a few years, the VLTI instrument GRAVITY will have the capability to image blobs of plasma orbiting near the innermost stable circular orbit of SgrA∗, the supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way (shown below) and other black holes as well.


          1-supermassive (1)



Plasma gases orbiting a black hole versus a wormhole should look different using GRAVITY data because wormholes should bea lot smaller. The team also suggests taht the presence of wormholes could help explain how new galaxies have what are now large black holes would presumably take billions of years to become so massive, so how. they ask, can they exist in a new galaxy? They can't say Li and Bambi: instead those objects are wormholes, which theory suggests could spring up in an instant following the Big Bang.

The secondary image of a hot spot orbiting around a wormhole is substantially different from the one of a hot spot around a black hole, because the photon capture sphere of the wormhole is much smaller, and its detection by GRAVITY could test if the center of our Galaxy harbors a wormhole rather then a black hole.

In an earlier 2011 paper in sync with atomic physicist Neils Bohr's famous comment about a colleagues crazy theory that "it's crazy, but maybe not crazy enough to be true," an eminent physicist developed a theory that gamma ray bursts that occur at the fringes of the known universe and appear to be associated with supernovae, or star explosions, in faraway galaxies, are actually massive beams of high-energy photons from alternate universes that spray the galaxy in arcs, like cosmic death rays as black holes rotate.

The new theory suggests that our universe is located within the interior of a wormhole which itself is part of a black hole that lies within a much larger universe. That sounds crazy enough to us (and equally fascinating).

According to Indiana University physicist Nikodem Poplawski, the matter that black holes absorb don't condense into singularities. Instead, they burst out the other side and become the building blocks for whole other universes in another reality.

In short, our Big Bang popped out of a black hole from another, much larger universe.

Poplawski proposes that the bursts may be discharges of matter from alternate universes. The matter, he says, might be escaping into our universe through supermassive black holes-wormholes-at the hearts of those galaxies, though it's not clear how that would be possible.

Poplawski uses Euclidean-based mathematical modeling to suggest that all black holes may have wormholes inside which exist universes created at the same time as the black holes.

Poplawski takes advantage of the Euclidean-based coordinate system called isotropic coordinates to describe the gravitational field of a black hole and to model the radial geodesic motion of a massive particle into a black hole.

In studying the radial motion through the event horizon (a black hole's boundary) of two different types of black holes -- Schwarzschild and Einstein-Rosen, both of which are mathematically legitimate solutions of general relativity -- Poplawski admits that only experiment or observation can reveal the motion of a particle falling into an actual black hole. But he also notes that since observers can only see the outside of the black hole, the interior cannot be observed unless an observer enters or resides within.

"This condition would be satisfied if our universe were the interior of a black hole existing in a bigger universe," he said. "Because Einstein's general theory of relativity does not choose a time orientation, if a black hole can form from the gravitational collapse of matter through an event horizon in the future then the reverse process is also possible. Such a process would describe an exploding white hole: matter emerging from an event horizon in the past, like the expanding universe."

A white hole is connected to a black hole by an Einstein-Rosen bridge (wormhole) and is hypothetically the time reversal of a black hole. Poplawski's paper suggests that all astrophysical black holes, not just Schwarzschild and Einstein-Rosen black holes, may have Einstein-Rosen bridges, each with a new universe inside that formed simultaneously with the black hole.

"From that it follows that our universe could have itself formed from inside a black hole existing inside another universe," he said.

By continuing to study the gravitational collapse of a sphere of dust in isotropic coordinates, and by applying the current research to other types of black holes, views where the universe is born from the interior of an Einstein-Rosen black hole could avoid problems seen by scientists with the Big Bang theory and the black hole information loss problem which claims all information about matter is lost as it goes over the event horizon (in turn defying the laws of quantum physics).

This model in isotropic coordinates of the universe as a black hole could explain the origin of cosmic inflation, Poplawski theorizes.

Poplawski is a research associate in the IU Department of Physics. He holds an M.S. and a Ph.D. in physics from Indiana University and a M.S. in astronomy from the University of Warsaw, Poland.

"It's kind of a crazy idea, but who knows?" he said. We think it just might be crazy enough!

This scenario in which the universe is born from inside a wormhole (also called an Einstein-Rosen Bridge) was suggested in a paper from Indiana University theoretical physicist Nikodem Poplawski in Physics Letters B.

The Chandra X-Ray image at the top of the page is the first x-ray picture of the Andromeda Galaxy (M31) on October 13, 1999. The blue dot in the center of the image is a "cool" million-degree x-ray source where a supermassive black hole with the mass of 30-million suns is located. The x-rays are produced by matter funneling toward the black hole. Numerous other hotter x-ray sources are also apparent. Most of these are probably due to x-ray binary systems, in which a neutron star or black hole is in close orbit around a normal star.

The Daily Galaxy via Distinguishing black holes and wormholes with orbiting hot spots, arXiv:1405.1883 [gr-qc] arxiv.org/abs/1405.1883 and Indiana University

Milky Way Image Credit: NASA/UMass/D.Wang et al., IR: NASA/STScI


Ummm.... yeah. Okay. I think I saw this episode on either 'Twilight Zone' or 'Star Trek'. No - it was that awful Disney movie 'Black Hole'. C'mon folks... lets get serious here. Bridges, wormholes or elevator shafts... And, if it is true, I'm sure it has great wifi in it.

Simple answer - Nope. Since if they were wormholes, they won't streaming the mater of the crashed starts, instead they would suck it in, and the whole mater would be gone. Isn't it ?

Error #1. Let's start with a quote from article above.. "gamma ray bursts that occur at the fringes of the known universe and appear to be associated with supernovae, or star explosions, in faraway galaxies, are actually massive beams of high-energy photons from alternate universes that spray the galaxy in arcs, like cosmic death rays as black holes rotate." The error is that if gamma photons are intersecting OUR universe from another universe, and have come as far inside our universe as to allow us to detect them, that means the "other" universe has intersected and is now inside ours and inside us for that matter or we couldn't detect it's gamma photons. So far do you follow me? If not, read on.

Let's define a universe as all which originated when it's big bang came about and from thence, onto what many call infinity of time/space. "All which originated means all photons" means all matter, all energy, all physics, the expanding sphere itself, in short, all of everything. Fine. So if we go by that definition and it's common sence, then gamma photons reaching our detectors here in Earth from another universe are impossible since there is no universe intersecting with ours yet, OR the other universe has intersected with ours and is now part of us, you, me and the pizza parlor down the street. I think not.

Gamma photons from the edge of the universe are likely emitted from matter which has crossed the speed limit of C right at the fronteir of our universe. What? Theory holds and proof holds that the further matter gets to the universe's horizon, that is the sphere's edge which is visable to US, the more velocity matter has until at last, at the very edge of the "DETECTABLE" UNIVERSE matter is going at C velocity relative to the center of our universe. And if matter goes at C it converts to pure energy, so sayeth god Einstein. Boom, there you have the source of gamma bursts, matter such as stars, galaxies, vast nebulae etc. all the way to a sub atomic particle, exceeding C at the universe's horizon.

The question is, why does matter go "faster" relative to universe's center the further out it gets, what propells it, and if you have matter going velocity C it theoretically takes an infinite amount of energy to propel it as well as the matter has to take on infinite mass. None of this makes sence to me other than it agrees with Einsteinian physics which in turn don't make sence to me even with a supposed genius I.Q.. Infinate mass, infinite energy..hold on, 'cause the universe is a whole is lot different than common sence dictates. Einstein said we percieve the universe as a giant illusion and he was most certainly correct.

But we know that. We know human common sence does not apply to weird physics...only to Newtonian physics. We know weird physics, predict it with it's formulae, we observe experiments etc. but we really don't understand weird physics (relativity and beyond). We see it, document it, but we really don't GET it. If common sence applied to weird physics we wouldn't need research into time/space, multiverses, worm holes, black holes.

I do wholeheartedly agree that it is very -possible- that our universe is the outcropping of a huge black hole in another enormous universe dwarfing ours as a grain of sand on a planet full of sand. Oh, but where did THAT enormous universe come from? And is it in turn the outcropping of another black hole in a yet more enormous universe? Sheesh...makes me sweat to think about it.

Another way to look at BHs is that BHs are not holes leading to another universe at all and they are just part of our own universe for all matter is just as if it was manifested as condensed energy, ultimately, and when matter hits velocity C as it would in the event horizon of a BH going "inside", it converts to pure energy. Where does the energy go then? It is possible but not written up in doctorate theses yet, that I know of anyway, that pure energy could be transformed into pure gravity for a mass/energy equivalent has to never disappear per the law of conservation of m and E, but can change manifest to other forms, i.e. gravity itself. Then what in blazes is pure gravity without matter? Aye, there's the rub (Macbeth). That says we don't know what matter nor gravity are nor the interplay/relationship between them. Yes we know that matter consists of quarks and other beasties but from that point back, nothing..just that somehow matter converts to quarks and other beasties. We do not know exactly how energy forms into matter but we know it did or we would not be here to ponder it nor would there exist grape popsickles.

It's fascinating to think about all this however, and hats off to those contributers and editors, and yes for sure, I'm super thankful dailygalaxy.com exists as a medium of science news. THANK YOU!! As a news medium, the editors don't have to agree with the published research or articles, they collect data and post it, it's up to the reader to ponder it and any good medium forces pondering...that's the whole object.

Oh how we are just ants, dancing on a round ball twirling around "the universe"..... What I'd like to know is why is it our brains(us common, non-genius folk) stop when we try and theorize such matters. The universe is so vast and so hard to comprehend, my brain feels like it hits a brick wall when trying to come up with some explanation as to why, not only do we exist, but where the hell did all this matter actually come from. I do absolutly believe there are other universes out there, as i also believe we will make contact in the next 20 years as well. Furthermore, at said time of making contact i believe we will reach transcendence, coincidentally, i think not. We can theorize all day long, but watch, we make contact and even the Annunaki what know what the F@#$ is going on either.

Since I don't have the math to play with these ideas, I just consider a black hole to be the same thing as Alice's 'rabbit hole,' .......and it works just fine for me!

What if black holes are a self regulatory system that puts in place the required conditions for the big bang? We do not know what could create the kind of conditions in which matter of infinite density exists. Perhaps at the centre of a black who there is not nothing, or a gate way to another dimension/universe, but the very matter that was the seed of our universe. The following idea applies unfounded characteristics of dark matter but I am not a quantum physicist so excuse me. In an expanding universe what if there comes a point in which the forces that bind galaxies are unable to containing their structure leading to a steady collapse into the super massive black hole at their centre. When these black holes thus expand devouring all matter and converting into matter of near infinite density the sole surviving celestial bodies would be black holes, and can one even conceive of what would happen if two black holes collided. Now imaging the cumulating effect off all the now supper massive black wholes colliding. The result would be so much gravity that the instant of our universe’s birth would feasible

Allan W Janssen - nope. The black hole itself isn't a hole at all, instead it is just the opposite - a very dense object, and it never sucking a mater as a wormhole would, it is actually blasting it out of it's shell while crashing the sucked by it's gravity objects. Just a very tiny piece of the sucked in objects will actually (maybe) fall beyond the event horizon which will increase a bit the size of the black hole.
If it was a wormhole it would not actually have any increasing of the size, instead - the opposite - decreasing it's size.
Another issue with this "black hole to worm hole" theory is the rotation momentum. If there is a wormhole while is rotating this rapidly it wont look like a spherical object, and it will live a very short life, because it would colapse on itself by it's sucking-in-the-bounds.
I am completely dismissing any possibility of black "hole as a worm hole" theory. It's completely opposite objects from my point of view.
Wormhole would rip and bend the space-time and create serious celestial disturbance equal to hundreds of black holes.
It would be the most heavy and short lived object ever detected, creating abnormous gravitational weaves.

I think that a black hole is just an extremely dense object. Not a wormhole. If it were, then the matter would be sucked into the wormhole and disappear. This would eventually make the black hole less dense and the black hole would turn into... hmmm, well not so black anymore i.e. a plain rocky planet.

Oh dear @ Charley

Someone with a "genius IQ" that:
-Lacks the ability to understand "weird physics" (unsurprisingly) and in arrogance assumes if they can't then no one else can either. Believe it or not some of us out there do.
-Seems to not realise one of the most fundamental properties of the universe which is it does not have a centre.
-Seems to struggle with grasping larger and larger scales, and from the obvious general lack of understanding and wording seems to actually be in some sort of denial of infinity in order to avoid having to contemplate it.
-Has absolutely no understanding of relativity, even the basics of the key word "RELATIVE"-ity, even though they use the word "relative" at least once.
-Complete lack of understanding about the nature of the expansion of the universe.

Must've read a school text book on space science or something.
And did one of the silly online IQ tests which add about 30 points to your IQ.


You are mistaken on how cosmic expansion works. While the acceleration caused by the inflation of space itself can exceed c, making it impossible to establish relativity between two points, the velocity of matter cannot exceed c in any reference frame.

Also, that "pure energy" you mentioned—that's everything, including matter. We can convert energy into matter, but it takes a lot of energy, and much more to keep it from annihilating itself.

Consider this concept: Black holes at the center of galaxies were imperfect dimples in the fabric of space/time. Right from the beginning, there were irregularities. Space was not perfect or smooth. These dimples would be doorways into other universes. Every outside universe passes or shares matter and energy as a whole via these gateways. Does it make any sense? Just a thought.

Can you give me any galaxy name whose center is whitehole

Back in 1990, while I was attending college, I decided to take an astronomy class. I wrote a paper on an idea that black holes were at the center of galaxies. My professor said to me "that's a good idea but its impossible." lol, wish I had seen his face when he first realized I was correct.....

615 E. Spotswood Avenue Apt.#4

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)