First of all, I know that a wormhole is a conjecture, so this thread is not about whether they exist or not. It is about how the conjecture/math is interpreted.

When I imagine a wormhole I imagine two black holes, with gravity wells so deep, that they attract each other, and create a merged well. This merged well is invisible to the eye (and maybe also to measurement?), and when matter passes through, it becomes invisible while inside.

If that description is correct (a big if!), does that not mean that the bridge/well is in a higher or lower dimension?
It certainly behaves that way, in my opinion.

1 hour ago, QuantumT said:

First of all, I know that a wormhole is a conjecture, so this thread is not about whether they exist or not. It is about how the conjecture/math is interpreted.

When I imagine a wormhole I imagine two black holes, with gravity wells so deep, that they attract each other, and create a merged well. This merged well is invisible to the eye (and maybe also to measurement?), and when matter passes through, it becomes invisible while inside.

If that description is correct (a big if!), does that not mean that the bridge/well is in a higher or lower dimension?
It certainly behaves that way, in my opinion.

While the equations of GR certainly predict wormholes, we have yet to find one and don't really expect to anytime soon.

I imagine a wormhole possibly being formed where the density of mass turns spacetime inside out in what we now call the singularity. But I would guess that this would mean a BH at one end, and a WH at the other.

I found the following.....https://www.space.com/20881-wormholes.html

https://resonance.is/artistic-interpretation-einstein-rosen-bridge-theory/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

15 minutes ago, beecee said:

While the equations of GR certainly predict wormholes, we have yet to find one and don't really expect to anytime soon.

Thus a conjecture.

16 minutes ago, beecee said:

I imagine a wormhole possibly being formed where the density of mass turns spacetime inside out in what we now call the singularity. But I would guess that this would mean a BH at one end, and a WH at the other.

The density forms a singularity, yes, but "inside out" is not my understanding of events.
I do not think that a white hole is needed either. Aren't those even more speculative than black holes?

22 minutes ago, beecee said:

I found the following.....https://www.space.com/20881-wormholes.html

https://resonance.is/artistic-interpretation-einstein-rosen-bridge-theory/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

Thanks, but I've been to those sites, without finding clarification about the dimensional nature of "the bridge".

11 minutes ago, QuantumT said:

The density forms a singularity, yes, but "inside out" is not my understanding of events.

Just my thoughts based on the ERB conjecture.

Quote

I do not think that a white hole is needed either. Aren't those even more speculative than black holes?

WH's certainly are highly speculative if possible at all. There are arguments with regards to them actually defying the second law of thermodynamics.

BH's of course are certainly not speculative at this time, particularly with the aLIGO gravitational waves discoveries and the many other pieces of evidence pointing to their existence. Debate certainly continues on the nature of the EH, but that does not detract from the BH formation. In reality to deny the existence of BH's, something far more mysterious and sinister would need to be resurrected to explain the effects we see.

Edited March 12, 20196 yr by beecee