What are white holes?

Black holes are created when stars die catastrophically in a supernova. So what in the universe is a white hole?

It's imagination day, and we're going to talk about fantasy creatures. Like unicorns, but even rarer. Like leprechauns, but even more fantastical!

Today, we're going to talk about white holes. Before we talk about white holes, let's talk about black holes. And before we talk about Black Holes, what's is this thing you have with holes exactly?

Black holes are places in the universe where matter and energy are compacted so densely together that their escape velocity is greater than the speed of light. We've done at least a million videos on them, but if you still want more info, you can start here with our Black Hole playlist.

Fully describing a black hole requires a lot of fancy math, but these are real objects in our universe. They were predicted by Einstein's theory of relativity, and actually discovered over the last few decades.

Black holes are created when stars, much more massive than our Sun, die catastrophically in a supernova.

So then what's a white hole? White holes are created when astrophysicists mathematically explore the environment around black holes, but pretend there's no mass within the event horizon. What happens when you have a black hole singularity with no mass?

White holes are completely theoretical mathematical concepts. In fact, if you do black hole mathematics for a living, I'm told, ignoring the mass of the singularity makes your life so much easier.

They're not things that actually exist. It's not like astronomers detected an unusual outburst of radiation and then developed hypothetical white hole models to explain them.

As my good friend and sometimes Guide to Space contributor, Dr. Brian Koberlein says, "If you start with five cupcakes and start giving them away, you eventually run out. At that point you can't give away any more. In this case you can't count down past zero. Sure, you can hand out slips of paper with "I O U ONE cupcake." written on them, but it would be ridiculous to use the existence of negative numbers to claim that "negative cupcakes" exist and can be handed out to people."

Now if white holes did exist, which they probably don't, they would behave like reverse black holes – just like the math predicts. Instead of pulling material inward, a white hole would blast material out into space like some kind of white chocolate fountain. So generous, these white holes and their chocolate.

One of the other implications of white hole math, is that they only theoretically exist as long as there isn't a single speck of matter within the event horizon. As soon as single atom of hydrogen drifted into the region, the whole thing would collapse. Even if white holes were created back at the beginning of the universe, they would have collapsed long ago, since our universe is already filled with stray matter.

That said, there are a few physicists out there who think white holes might be more than theoretical. Hal Haggard and Carlo Rovelli of Aix-Marseille University in France are working to explain what happens within black holes using a branch of theoretical physics called loop quantum gravity.

In theory, a black hole singularity would compress down until the smallest possible size predicted by physics. Then it would rebound as a white hole. But because of the severe time dilation effect around a black hole, this event would take billions of years for even the lowest mass ones to finally get around to popping.

If there were microscopic black holes created after the Big Bang, they might get around to decaying and exploding as white holes any day now. Except, according to Stephen Hawking, they would have already evaporated.

Another interesting idea put forth by physicists, is that a white hole might explain the Big Bang, since this is another situation where a tremendous amount of matter and energy spontaneously appeared.

In all likelihood, white holes are just fancy math. And since fancy math rarely survives contact with reality, white holes are probably just imaginary.http://phys.org/news/2015-10-white-holes.html

\documentclass[12pt]{article}

\usepackage{latexsym,amsmath,amssymb,amsfonts,amstext,amsthm}

\numberwithin{equation}{section}

\begin{document}

\title{\bf  Announcement 300:  New challenges on the division by zero z/0=0\\

(2016.05.22)}

\author{{\it Institute of Reproducing Kernels}\\

Kawauchi-cho, 5-1648-16,\\

Kiryu 376-0041, Japan\\

%\date{\today}

\maketitle

{\bf Abstract: } In this announcement, for its importance we would like to state the

situation on the division by zero and propose basic new challenges.

\bigskip

\section{Introduction}

%\label{sect1}

By a {\bf natural extension} of the fractions

\begin{equation}

\frac{b}{a}

\end{equation}

for any complex numbers $a$ and $b$, we found the simple and beautiful result, for any complex number $b$

\begin{equation}

\frac{b}{0}=0,

\end{equation}

incidentally in \cite{s} by the Tikhonov regularization for the Hadamard product inversions for matrices and we discussed their properties and gave several physical interpretations on the general fractions in \cite{kmsy} for the  case of real numbers.

 The division by zero has a long and mysterious story over the world (see, for example, Google site with the division by zero) with its physical viewpoints since the document of zero in India on AD 628,  however,

  Sin-Ei Takahasi (\cite{kmsy}) established a simple and decisive interpretation (1.2) by analyzing the extensions of fractions and by showing the complete characterization for the property (1.2):

 \bigskip

 {\bf  Proposition 1. }{\it Let F be a function from  ${\bf C }\times {\bf C }$  to ${\bf C }$ satisfying

$$

F (b, a)F (c, d)= F (bc, ad) 

$$

for all

$$

a, b, c, d  \in {\bf C }

$$

and

$$

F (b, a) = \frac {b}{a },  \quad   a, b  \in  {\bf C }, a \ne 0.

$$

Then, we obtain, for any $b \in {\bf C } $

$$

F (b, 0) = 0.

$$

}

 Note that the complete proof of this proposition is simply given by  2 or 3 lines.

\medskip

We thus should consider, for any complex number $b$, as  (1.2);

that is, for the mapping

\begin{equation}

w = \frac{1}{z},

\end{equation}

the image of $z=0$ is $w=0$ ({\bf should be defined}). This fact seems to be a curious one in connection with our well-established popular image for the  point at infinity on the Riemann sphere. Therefore, the division by zero will give great impacts to complex analysis and to our ideas for the space and universe.

However, the division by zero (1.2) is now clear, indeed, for the introduction of (1.2), we have several independent approaches as in:

\medskip

1) by the generalization of the fractions by the Tikhonov regularization or by the Moore-Penrose generalized inverse,

\medskip

2) by the intuitive meaning of the fractions (division) by H. Michiwaki,

\medskip

3) by the unique extension of the fractions by S. Takahasi,   as in the above,

\medskip

4) by the extension of the fundamental function $W = 1/z$ from ${\bf C} \setminus \{0\}$ into ${\bf C}$ such that $W =1/z$ is a one to one and onto mapping from $ {\bf C} \setminus \{0\} $ onto ${\bf C} \setminus \{0\}$ and the division by zero $1/0=0$ is a one to one and onto mapping extension of the function $W =1/z $ from  ${\bf C}$ onto ${\bf C}$,

\medskip

and

\medskip

5) by considering the values of functions with the mean values of functions.

\medskip

Furthermore, in (\cite{msy}) we gave the results in order to show the reality of the division by zero in our world:

\medskip

\medskip

A) a field structure  containing the division by zero --- the Yamada field ${\bf Y}$,

\medskip

B)  by the gradient of the $y$ axis on the $(x,y)$ plane --- $\tan \frac{\pi}{2} =0$,

\medskip

C) by the reflection $W =1/\overline{z}$ of $W= z$ with respect to the unit circle with center at the origin on the complex $z$ plane --- the reflection point of zero is zero,

\medskip

and

\medskip

D) by considering rotation of a right circular cone having some very interesting

phenomenon  from some practical and physical problem.

\medskip

In (\cite{mos}),  many division by zero results in Euclidean spaces are given and  the basic idea at the point at infinity should be changed. In (\cite{ms}), we gave beautiful geometrical interpretations of determinants from the viewpoint of the division by zero. The results show that the division by zero is our basic and elementary mathematics in our world.

\medskip

See  J. A. Bergstra, Y. Hirshfeld and J. V. Tucker \cite{bht} for the relationship between fields and the division by zero, and the importance of the division by zero for computer science. It seems that the relationship of the division by zero and field structures are abstract in their paper.

Meanwhile,  J. P.  Barukcic and I.  Barukcic (\cite{bb}) discussed recently the relation between the divisions $0/0$, $1/0$ and special relative theory of Einstein. However, their logic seems to be curious and their results contradict with ours.

 Furthermore,  T. S. Reis and J.A.D.W. Anderson (\cite{ra,ra2}) extend the system of the real numbers by introducing an ideal number for the division by zero $0/0$.

 Meanwhile, we should refer to up-to-date information:

{\it Riemann Hypothesis Addendum - Breakthrough

Kurt Arbenz

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272022137 Riemann Hypothesis Addendum -   Breakthrough.}

\medskip

Here, we recall Albert Einstein's words on mathematics:

Blackholes are where God divided by zero.

I don't believe in mathematics.

George Gamow (1904-1968) Russian-born American nuclear physicist and cosmologist remarked that "it is well known to students of high school algebra" that division by zero is not valid; and Einstein admitted it as {\bf the biggest blunder of his life} [1]：

1. Gamow, G., My World Line (Viking, New York). p 44, 1970.

 For our ideas on the division by zero, see the survey style announcements 179,185,237,246,247,250 and 252 of the Institute of Reproducing Kernels (\cite{ann179,ann185,ann237,ann246,ann247,ann250,ann252,ann293}).

\section{On mathematics}

Apparently, the division by zero is a great missing in our mathematics and the result (1.2) is definitely determined as our basic mathematics, as we see from Proposition 1.  Note  its very general assumptions and  many fundamental evidences in our world in (\cite{kmsy,msy,mos}). The results will give great impacts  on Euclidean spaces, analytic geometry, calculus, differential equations, complex analysis and  physical problems. See our announcements for the details.

The mysterious history of the division by zero over one thousand years is a great shame of  mathematicians and human race on the world history, like the Ptolemaic system (geocentric theory). The division by zero will become a typical  symbol of foolish human race with long and unceasing struggles. Future people will realize this fact as a definite common sense.

We should check and fill our mathematics, globally and beautifully, from the viewpoint of the division by zero. Our mathematics will be more perfect and beautiful,  and will give great impacts to our basic ideas on the universe.

\section{Albert Einstein's biggest blunder}

The division by zero is directly related to the Einstein's theory and various

physical problems

containing the division by zero.  Now we should check the theory and the problems by the concept of the RIGHT and DEFINITE division by zero. Now is the best time since 100 years from Albert Einstein. It seems that the background knowledge is timely fruitful.

\section{Computer systems}

The above Professors listed are wishing the contributions in order to avoid the zero division trouble in computers. Now,  we should arrange  new computer systems in order not to meet the division by zero trouble in computer systems.

\section{General  ideas on the universe}

The division by zero may be related to religion,  philosophy and the ideas on the universe, and it will creat a new world. Look the new world.

\bigskip

We are standing on a new  generation and in front of the new world, as in the discovery of the Americas.

 \bigskip

\bibliographystyle{plain}

\begin{thebibliography}{10}

\bibitem{bb}

J. P.  Barukcic and I.  Barukcic, Anti Aristotle—The Division of Zero by Zero. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Physics,  {\bf 4}(2016), 749-761.

doi: 10.4236/jamp.2016.44085.

\bibitem{bht}

J. A. Bergstra, Y. Hirshfeld and J. V. Tucker,

Meadows and the equational specification of division (arXiv:0901.0823v1[math.RA] 7 Jan 2009).

\bibitem{cs}

L. P.  Castro and S. Saitoh,  Fractional functions and their representations,  Complex Anal. Oper. Theory {\bf7} (2013), no. 4, 1049-1063.

\bibitem{kmsy}

M. Kuroda, H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh, and M. Yamane,

New meanings of the division by zero and interpretations on $100/0=0$ and on $0/0=0$,

Int. J. Appl. Math.  {\bf 27} (2014), no 2, pp. 191-198,  DOI: 10.12732/ijam.v27i2.9.

\bibitem{ms}

T. Matsuura and S. Saitoh,

Matrices and division by zero $z/0=0$,

Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory (ALAMT)(to appear).

\bibitem{msy}

H. Michiwaki, S. Saitoh,  and  M.Yamada,

Reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$.  IJAPM  International J. of Applied Physics and Math. {\bf 6}(2015), 1--8. http://www.ijapm.org/show-63-504-1.html

\bibitem{mos}

H.  Michiwaki, H. Okumura, and S. Saitoh,

Division by Zero $z/0 = 0$ in Euclidean Spaces.

 International Journal of Mathematics and Computation

 (in press).

\bibitem{ra}

T. S. Reis and J.A.D.W. Anderson,

Transdifferential and Transintegral Calculus,

Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer Science 2014 Vol I

WCECS 2014, 22-24 October, 2014, San Francisco, USA

\bibitem{ra2}

T. S. Reis and J.A.D.W. Anderson,

Transreal Calculus,

IAENG  International J. of Applied Math., {\bf 45}(2015):  IJAM 45 1 06.

\bibitem{s}

S. Saitoh, Generalized inversions of Hadamard and tensor products for matrices,  Advances in Linear Algebra \& Matrix Theory.  {\bf 4}  (2014), no. 2,  87--95. http://www.scirp.org/journal/ALAMT/

\bibitem{ttk}

S.-E. Takahasi, M. Tsukada and Y. Kobayashi,  Classification of continuous fractional binary operations on the real and complex fields,  Tokyo Journal of Mathematics,   {\bf 38}(2015), no. 2, 369-380.

\bibitem{ann179}

Announcement 179 (2014.8.30): Division by zero is clear as z/0=0 and it is fundamental in mathematics.

\bibitem{ann185}

Announcement 185 (2014.10.22): The importance of the division by zero $z/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann237}

Announcement 237 (2015.6.18):  A reality of the division by zero $z/0=0$ by  geometrical optics.

\bibitem{ann246}

Announcement 246 (2015.9.17): An interpretation of the division by zero $1/0=0$ by the gradients of lines.

\bibitem{ann247}

Announcement 247 (2015.9.22): The gradient of y-axis is zero and $\tan (\pi/2) =0$ by the division by zero $1/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann250}

Announcement 250 (2015.10.20): What are numbers? -  the Yamada field containing the division by zero $z/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann252}

Announcement 252 (2015.11.1): Circles and

curvature - an interpretation by Mr.

Hiroshi Michiwaki of the division by

zero $r/0 = 0$.

\bibitem{ann281}

Announcement 281(2016.2.1): The importance of the division by zero $z/0=0$.

\bibitem{ann282}

Announcement 282(2016.2.2): The Division by Zero $z/0=0$ on the Second Birthday.

\bibitem{ann293}

Announcement 293(2016.3.27):  Parallel lines on the Euclidean plane from the viewpoint of division by zero 1/0=0.

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}