Black Hole question?

Question

If all scietific principles are correct and each atom has an anti atom then since a black hole is an anti matter around a singularity then is there a opposite to a singularity that turns expels matter and light and energy like an opposite to hawking radiation where one attom turns into energy which is transferred to many more attoms .

is it plausible

I should say the super-string theory

Answer 1

Each particle has an anti-particle in theory. There are electrons, there are positrons. There is the hydrogen atom. There is the anti-hydrogen atom.

That does not mean that there actually exists an anti-particle in the real universe for each and every existing particle.

Answer 2

First of all, black holes are not anti matter. So that changes a bit of your question.
Assuming that everything DOES have an anti atom (which most scientist do not believe) then your plausible theory may indeed be "plausible". Of course, for this to be plausible one would have to take into account the law of the Conservation of Mass and Conservation of Energy (because somewhere along the lines energy would have to be created or lost). I suggest reading up on the Super String Theories, namely Brian Greene's the Elegant Universe.

Answer 3

First: we do not think that all scientific principles are correct. As you probably know, there is, indeed, a mathematical and physical decrepancy between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. The Theory of Everything: "The Unification Theory" has yet to be proposed. However, we think your question falls in the right court: "Black Holes"--Event Horizons in space where gravity is so great, that anything entering them cannot escape. We think the energy is similar to that of a collapsing star. We contend, however, that "matter" can neither be created nor destroyed. Unless, as you propose that the anti-matter around a singularity of an event horizon of equal proportions to the same matter there. The Theory of Conservation of Energy would certianly be in question in the event that your question is plausible.

Answer 4

There is an opposite, it is called a white hole, and it is believed that at the end of each black hole there is a white hole.

White holes appear as part of the vacuum solution to the Einstein field equations describing a Schwarzschild wormhole. One end of this type of wormhole is a black hole, drawing in matter, and the other is a white hole, emitting matter

Answer 5

Particles have anti-particles, but I've never heard of an 'anti-atom'. And when was it decided that a black hole was 'anti-matter around a singularity'?

What on Earth are you babbling about?

Doug

Answer 6

a black hole is not anti matter around a singularity. every atom does not necessarily have an antimatter equivalent.

you could find an exit end for the theoretical black hole, which is referred to as a white hole, and is it's opposite. that exit end could also be a quasar. the opposite of a black hole in the formation itself may be a supernova.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasar

Answer 7

Where do I start with this?

Each atom does NOT have an anti-atom.
Black holes are NOT anti-matter.

Answer 8

ok... forget about anti-matter...that's exotic ,beginning-of-the-universe stuff, which really has little bearing on local happenings.
at our level of reality, the universe is pretty much gravity driven.the bigger the mass,the bigger the pull untill that magic number hits...and the space between atoms starts to collapse...you get the picture. anyway...think gravity my son .

Answer 9

i thought black holes just sucked evrything up.

Answer 10

black holes are warped space-time and not antimatter.