Replies

Really? Have you ever considered that the reason they 'suck' things in is that black holes (if they truly exist) have no 'mass' at all ?

They have "mass" mass being defined as that property of matter that distorts space.

Your question is actually very deep on a fundamental level.

The "matter" that created the black hole, is by definition, no longer a part of our universe.

The big question is does the fabric continue to stretch? This is the classic black hole model.

But suppose, just suppose, the stretching accelerates with absorbed matter. The total gravity the universe experiences increases.

Alternatively suppose the fabric stiffens with stretch, then the net gravity the universe experiences decreases with time explaining the increased expansion rate of the universe over time.

Roll the clock way back, there is a sudden unexplained expansion event back near the very beginning. This might be coincident with a sufficient stretch gradient in a primordial hyper black hole to 'tear the bottom out' and have the remaining fabric 'snap back'...

First, Thank you both for your responses. I am not trying to 'win' an argument, rather I am trying to expand my knowledge.

The "matter" that created the black hole, is by definition, no longer a part of our universe.

That would appear to contradict your earlier statement that 'mass' entering a black 'hole' does not contribute to a loss of mass in our 'universe'. As a side note, the use of 'our universe' would imply that there is more than one 'universe', which does rather violate the meaning of the word universe. The major reasoning, it seems, for other 'universes' is to explain things that we just don't understand yet about 'the universe' (imho).

The big question is does the fabric continue to stretch? This is the classic black hole model.

'fabric', and 'stretch', as well as 'hole', imply a two dimensional model, which, unfortunately, is all we are capable of understanding, or using for abstract reasoning, at this time. For instance, given the description of a 'black hole', what would one 'see' if one approached it from the 'opposite' side ? Would it not have to be a hole open on 'all sides'? How could it then have a visible 'radius', or would that just be a manifestation of our limited vision?

But suppose, just suppose, the stretching accelerates with absorbed matter. The total gravity the universe experiences increases.

Then, one would assume that the universe must be in a constant state of collapse, and that the collapse is ever 'increasing'. Scientists used to claim the universe was collapsing, now they say it is expanding. IMHO it is only their awareness of the universe that is expanding. We claim to know the 'size' of the universe, yet our instruments will never be able to catch up with the 'expansion' of the universe (if it is truly expanding). I have yet to find a 'motionless' spot in the universe to stand on to even measure the 'speed' of any object in our universe, so I find these measurements to be speculative at best.

Alternatively suppose the fabric stiffens with stretch, then the net gravity the universe experiences decreases with time explaining the increased expansion rate of the universe over time.

Then, one might assume that a black hole would eventually become 'full'. We know not yet whether this is true or not, and as I said before, we cannot know for sure if the universe is expanding as we have not (and likely never will) find the 'edge' or 'extent' of it. Given the assumed 'length' of time that we believe the universe has existed , and given the speed of light, we will never be able to 'catch up' to the alleged 'edge' even if we peer into the skies for a billion years.

Some things, we may never understand. But I do like, and appreciate your theories, and the excellent conversation.

I am not sure we have the capability to understand the 'entire universe', but you sure give it a good shot.