National Geographic News
A photo of a black hole

A surprising spiral shape in the nearby active galaxy NGC 1433, shown above, indicates material flowing in to fuel a black hole. A jet of material flowing away from the black hole has also been observed.

PHOTOGRAPH BY ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO)/NASA/ESA/F. COMBES

Michael Finkel

for National Geographic

Published February 18, 2014

Let's rewind the clock. Before humans existed, before Earth formed, before the sun ignited, before galaxies arose, before light could even shine, there was the Big Bang. This happened 13.8 billion years ago.

But what about before that? Many physicists say there is no before that. Time began ticking, they insist, at the instant of the Big Bang, and pondering anything earlier isn't in the realm of science. We'll never understand what pre-Big Bang reality was like, or what it was formed of, or why it exploded to create our universe. Such notions are beyond human understanding.

But a few unconventional scientists disagree. These physicists theorize that, a moment before the Big Bang, all the mass and energy of the nascent universe was compacted into an incredibly dense—yet finite—speck. Let's call it the seed of a new universe. (See also: "Origins of the Universe.")

This seed is thought to have been almost unimaginably tiny, possibly trillions of times smaller than any particle humans have been able to observe. And yet it's a particle that can spark the production of every other particle, not to mention every galaxy, solar system, planet, and person.

If you really want to call something the God particle, this seed seems an ideal fit.

So how is such a seed created? One idea, bandied about for several years—notably by Nikodem Poplawski of the University of New Haven—is that the seed of our universe was forged in the ultimate kiln, likely the most extreme environment in all of nature: inside a black hole. (See "Star Eater" in this month's National Geographic magazine.)

Multiverses Multiply

It's important to know, before we go further, that over the last couple of decades, many theoretical physicists have come to believe that our universe is not the only one. Instead, we may be part of the multiverse, an immense array of separate universes, each its own shining orb in the true night sky.

How, or even if, one universe is linked to another is a source of much debate, all of it highly speculative and, as of now, completely unprovable. But one compelling idea is that the seed of a universe is similar to the seed of a plant: It's a chunk of essential material, tightly compressed, hidden inside a protective shell.

This precisely describes what is created inside a black hole. Black holes are the corpses of giant stars. When such a star runs out of fuel, its core collapses inward. Gravity pulls everything into an increasingly fierce grip. Temperatures reach 100 billion degrees. Atoms are smashed. Electrons are shredded. Those pieces are further crumpled.

The star, by this point, has turned into a black hole, which means that its gravitational pull is so severe that not even a beam of light can escape. The boundary between the interior and exterior of a black hole is called the event horizon. Enormous black holes, some of them millions of times more massive than the sun, have been discovered at the center of nearly every galaxy, including our own Milky Way.

Bottomless Questions

If you use Einstein's theories to determine what occurs at the bottom of a black hole, you'll calculate a spot that is infinitely dense and infinitely small: a hypothetical concept called a singularity. But infinities aren't typically found in nature. The disconnect lies with Einstein's theories, which provide wonderful calculations for most of the cosmos, but tend to break down in the face of enormous forces, such as those inside a black hole—or present at the birth of our universe.

Physicists like Dr. Poplawski say that the matter inside a black hole does reach a point where it can be crushed no further. This "seed" might be incredibly tiny, with the weight of a billion suns, but unlike a singularity, it is real.

The compacting process halts, according to Dr. Poplawski, because black holes spin. They spin extremely rapidly, possibly close to the speed of light. And this spin endows the compacted seed with a huge amount of torsion. It's not just small and heavy; it's also twisted and compressed, like one of those jokey spring-loaded snakes in a can.

Which can suddenly unspring, with a bang. Make that a Big Bang—or what Dr. Poplawski prefers to call "the big bounce."

It's possible, in other words, that a black hole is a conduit—a "one-way door," says Dr. Poplawski—between two universes. This means that if you tumble into the black hole at the center of the Milky Way, it's conceivable that you (or at least the shredded particles that were once you) will end up in another universe. This other universe isn't inside ours, adds Dr. Poplawski; the hole is merely the link, like a shared root that connects two aspen trees.

And what about all of us, here in our own universe? We might be the product of another, older universe. Call it our mother universe. The seed this mother universe forged inside a black hole may have had its big bounce 13.8 billion years ago, and even though our universe has been rapidly expanding ever since, we could still be hidden behind a black hole's event horizon.

131 comments
Dipak Raikar
Dipak Raikar

Einstein theorized that past, present and the future are not separate entities but compressed together and all is one.

Daniel Hicks
Daniel Hicks

My theory is that there is a never ending cycle of black holes. We are in a black hole now,which is expanding in the black hole it is in. It explains how the universe is expanding,because black holes expand. The black holes in our black hole will one day grow so large that they will begin to pull together as the gravitational pull will be so strong. Once they are together, it gets so dense in the centre that the black hole can't hold it anymore,and explodes inside the black hole (the Big Bang). The matter in the black hole spreads out rapidly and starts forming a new universe in the black hole.


I realised I said black hole way too much in that!

Daniel Pena
Daniel Pena

I kind of believe in that there is no time, beginning or end, its just a measurement in which humans came up with to explain the change in energy and in matter. The law that states Matter cannot be created nor destroyed would hold up with this theory. we are just measuring the perspective we have with the ever changing of our universe. Then matter simply gets broken down and reused in a new form. with this theory the article talks about makes me wonder if instead of a big bang the black hole takes the light, and all the matter around it and just transfers it into the new universe giving the universe the material it needs to create everything within it. all the multiverses are connected through a web of the black holes were everything is shared between another. A universe would never expand or implode on itself, rather how we see all of our galaxies within our own accelerating and expanding, it actually is just flowing through being transferred to the next universe. a constant sharing between each other. Each black hole is just the gate between each of the universes in a web that connects all of the universes together. There is no mother universe before ours, or one after ours. just a giant web of shared energy and matter.




Also I have another theory on Relativity of time and space.


Were the big bang is a reoccurring process were all matter and energy expands and the acceleration  slows down then eventually reverses converting everything back into itself to just repeat the process creating a new universe with slight differences.



just my thoughts I have had for quite some time now.

Talisman Skulls
Talisman Skulls

First off everyone here is off base, it is a hypothesis, until a working model demonstrates its viability at which time it than becomes a theory.  Stephen Hawking has proposed that there are no event horizons in black holes as a hypothesis, not a theory, and his hypothesis is subject to peer review which means experimentation crunching numbers and trying to make them work. All these methods are however rather pointless until something can be observed and there are many examples that "black holes" do indeed exist as singularities, meaning points of intense gravity. Second, the speed of light is a constant, but things that are not particle based if you go back and look into the subject once more, the time it takes for said light to reach point A to Point be is indeed a veritable, because it can in fact be distorted, warped and bent. Space itself does move faster than light because it is not a particle which moves within space. Space does not move within light or the particles that it contains.


In addition no one is exactly certain what "Space" itself actually is in and of itself beyond that it is a non-dimensional property. The fact that it is ever increasing its expansion is another principle that is up for debate as to the why this is occurring, but some consider that it is in itself on some level filling a vacuum of some sort, so a lot of weird things are occurring there are as yet no "THEORIES" in place that work and why physics is having a "nervous breakdown" as some physicists have been putting it.


Finally, this concept of us existing In some sort of a Black Hole is part of the Bubble Hypothesis again attempting to provide a somewhat pseudo-science approach of the multi-verse hypothesis, which again there is no working model to support it and still not a THEORY. Not all Singularities for example can be qualified as a "Black Hole, white Hole, Worm Hole, Grey Hole, or "Burgundy Jellyfish Holes"  for that matter. 

A Hypothesis is Not a Theory and its maddening to see people throwing these things around like they are interchangeable. A Theory is a Proven collection of Hypotheses in a working model. They can be thrown out when a better model is available, but are not "unproven." Hypotheses are ideas, sometimes educated, but largely not. These can be Disproved if the hypothesis cannot be reproduced or substantiated by mathematical approximation. 

Talisman Skulls
Talisman Skulls

First off everyone here is off base, it is a hypothesis, until a working model demonstrates its viability at which time it than becomes a theory.  Stephen Hawking has proposed that there are no event horizons in black holes as a hypothesis, not a theory, and his hypothesis is subject to peer review which means experimentation crunching numbers and trying to make them work. All these methods are however rather pointless until something can be observed and there are many examples that "black holes" do indeed exist as singularities, meaning points of intense gravity. Second, the speed of light is a constant, but things that are not particle based if you go back and look into the subject once more, the time it takes for said light to reach point A to Point be is indeed a veritable, because it can in fact be distorted, warped and bent. Space itself does move faster than light because it is not a particle which moves within space. Space does not move within light or the particles that it contains.

Finally, this concept of us existing In some sort of a Black Hole is part of the Bubble Hypothesis again attempting to provide a somewhat pseudo-science approach of the multi-verse hypothesis, which again there is no working model to support it and still not a THEORY. Not all Singularities for example can be qualified as a "Black Hole, white Hole, Worm Hole, Grey Hole, or "Burgundy Jellyfish Holes"  for that matter. A Hypothesis is Not a Theory and its maddening to see people throwing these things around like they are interchangeable. A Theory is a Proven collection of Hypotheses in a working model. They can be thrown out when a better model is available, but are not "unproven." Hypotheses are ideas, sometimes educated, but largely not. These can be Disproved if the hypothesis cannot be reproduced or substantiated by mathematical approximation. 

Hans Vangrunderbeeck
Hans Vangrunderbeeck

The only logical explanation for light not being able to escape a "what everyone calls a black hole", is that space itself is moving faster than the speed of light.

Mohammad Shafiq Khan
Mohammad Shafiq Khan

There are no Black Holes at all. Read http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/News/Black-holes-do-not-exist-says-Stephen-Hawking-20140127060100.htm
Here is the beginning of revolution in physics. Physics, according to which God cannot exist, shall have to be soon discarded. Read also http://www.express.co.uk/news/science-technology/455880/Stephen-Hawking-says-there-is-no-such-thing-as-black-holes-Einstein-spinning-in-his-grave
Absence of Black Holes means Stephen Hawking has finally accepted that there are serious problems with both Newton's perspective of Gravity & Einstein's General Theory of Relativity because both require Black Holes at the center of the galaxies.
This justifies standing open challenge to the adopted paradigm of physics which is athttp://worldsci.org/php/index.php?tab0=Abstracts&tab1=Display&id=6476&tab=2 

Read also http://www.principia-scientific.org/hawking-s-latest-incantations-on-black-holes.html 

Steve Leese
Steve Leese

I had this theory a while back, forums mocked me for it.   


You want the proof.  I quote you this from Stephen Hawkins-


''As particles escape from a black hole  the hole will lose mass, and shrink.This will increase the rate of emission of particles. Eventually, the black hole will lose all its mass, and disappear''. 



The increasingly expanding universe that is speeding up in process.



Planet axis shift.


Failing magnetic field.



Lauren Koenen
Lauren Koenen

I'm not sure anybody could ever really answer this, but what would happen if a black hole were to pass the event horizon of another black hole? :()

David Teicher
David Teicher

 You left out the most fascinating aspect to this theory: That each "parent universe" actually imparts the laws of physics onto it's prodigy in such a way that the physics in the new child universe are ALMOST identical to the parent's but with slight deviations, very much akin to the biological processes of random mutation and selection that give rise to evolution. 


In this respect, within the multiverse, the specific comprising universes whose laws of physics facilitate the creation of stars, and thus black holes, foster the creation of child universes where the formation of stars - and thus black holes - is increasingly likely!


Incidentally, we humans are ALSO the product of stars and the star-forming laws of physics, as the heavier elements that make up our beings and life sustaining environs are formed in the highly energetic supernova explosions. 


So, if we are living in a black hold engendered universe within a larger multiverse, it's because the multiverse EVOLVED to produce the physics of star forming universes that are conducive to both the production of more universes and human life!

David Teicher
David Teicher

You left out the most fascinating aspect to this theory: That each "parent universe" actually imparts the laws of physics onto it's prodigy in such a way that the physics in the new child universe are ALMOST identical to the parent's but with slight deviations, very much akin to the biological processes of random mutation and selection that give rise to evolution. 


In this respect, within the multiverse, the specific comprising universes whose laws of physics facilitate the creation of stars, and thus black holes, foster the creation of child universes where the formation of stars - and thus black holes - is increasingly likely!


Incidentally, we humans are ALSO the product of stars and the star-forming laws of physics, as the heavier elements that make up our beings and life sustaining environs are formed in the highly energetic supernova explosions. 


So, if we are living in a black hold engendered universe within a larger multiverse, it's because the multiverse EVOLVED to produce the physics of star forming universes that are conducive to both the production of more universes and human life!

Carolyn Aman
Carolyn Aman

It is very serious if its real. I am kind of agree to this statement. But however scientists don't know what is really happening, and no one knows it.

Maria Carbajal
Maria Carbajal

one question? how does this conclude how we ( people and animals) exist?

SrinivasaRajan AR
SrinivasaRajan AR

Star births start from explosion of black holes. There the same matter spreads into same universe. Not to another one. May be part of matter could be get into another universe / dimension when a black hole got burst.

STEVE FOSTER
STEVE FOSTER

Can something exist without nothing?


Can nothing exist without something?


There you have it!!!

Eric Dean Campbell
Eric Dean Campbell

If we are, then the universe will radiate away into nothing, as does a black hole. I see no evidence of the universe losing massive amounts of energy. I'm not certain why, despite the massive volume of collected evidence completely discounting bizarre theories like this, one or two 'fringe' people promote these ideas like they somehow are mainstream, valid theories.

It's really starting to get insulting to science. 
Anyone can type the question into google for literally thousands of publications discussing the rationality of this. Black holes radiate their information away to a zero state. See Hawking's MASSIVE body of work on the subject. He has actual credibility. If we reside in a massive black hole, evidence would be seen of information being destroyed from our apparent vantage point. This, of course violates all basic laws of physics.

Eric Dean Campbell
Eric Dean Campbell

If we are, then the universe will radiate away into nothing, as does a black hole. I see no evidence of the universe losing massive amounts of energy. I'm not certain why, despite the massive volume of collected evidence completely discounting bizarre theories like this, one or two 'fringe' people promote these ideas like they somehow are mainstream, valid theories.

It's really starting to get insulting to science. 
Anyone can type the question into google for literally thousands of publications discussing the rationality of this. Black holes radiate their information away to a zero state. See Hawking's MASSIVE body of work on the subject. He has actual credibility. If we reside in a massive black hole, evidence would be seen of information being destroyed from our apparent vantage point. This, of course violates all basic laws of physics.

Deus Anderson
Deus Anderson

Think about this concept the big bang is not the beginning but the end. Time is relevant to the observer but how can you tell what direction it is actually moving? It's already well accepted that everything has already happened and we are just flowing/passing through with our own perception. 

Jørgen Balslev
Jørgen Balslev

There is a theory on www.finaltheories.com that gives an understandable, rational, logic explanation of what was before the Big Bang, how the Big Bang could occur, from where it got its energy, and why the Big Bang took place in a closed universe (a black hole).

Tharindu megasooriya
Tharindu megasooriya

If you can find what is the lord buddha said about black holes before 2600 years ago,you can find more information about black holes.find and get more information about black holes.

Maria Aguilera
Maria Aguilera

Very interesting! Then, if another universe existed, is it probable not another but several universes? Could that be what some scientists call "paralell universes? or when one emerged is because the previous one already doesn't exist anymore?

Ashley Williams
Ashley Williams

I believe that there will always be some mystery to our beginning that as a Christian God is to get the credit.  Faith is as real as the black hole and while this is awesome to imagine so is our God.  it seems that the closer the science gets to the explanations the more questions are formed as a curios people who can deny the power of science and the power of God.  This theory is immense and quite plausible I like it... however I believe that there still is something beyond an explanation to explain our existence. I have been through enough in this life to know something has always been taking care of me.

Tom Charles
Tom Charles

@Hans Vangrunderbeeck It's merely a function of the black hole's mass. The speed of light is unaffected by any force, but it is sensitive to gravity. 


Nothing moves faster than the speed of light. Once inside the black hole, the light moves around within it in an extremely tight orbit at the speed of light. 


We've known for over a hundred years that massive objects bend light in space.

James A
James A

@Mohammad Shafiq Khan  Stephen Hawking's theory that classical black holes do not exist is just that, a theory- and has not been subject to peer review. His assertion that Event Horizons do not exist is tantamount to embracing quantum mechanics over general relativity when dealing with loss of information in black holes -- Stephen Hawking does not assert that black holes, themselves, are illusory, or even that so called 'naked singularities' could exist- as his bet with Kip Thorne is still outstanding.

Event Horizons and black holes still exist, even according to this new theory, they are simply revised, not completely discarded as you seem to imply.


In regards your 'Open Challenge,' the ontological claim you make that insufficient evidence to disprove your position is logical grounds that everyone everywhere should embrace your particular brand of cosmology is arrogant and fallacious. I suggest you read some Betrand Russell to clear up this illusion you have that the burden of proof rests on all shoulders except your own.

James A
James A

@Mohammad Shafiq Khan  @Mohammad Shafiq Khan  Stephen Hawking's theory that classical black holes do not exist is just that, a theory- and has not been subject to peer review. His assertion that Event Horizons do not exist is tantamount to embracing quantum mechanics over general relativity when dealing with loss of information in black holes -- Stephen Hawking does not assert that black holes, themselves, are illusory, or even that so called 'naked singularities' could exist- as his bet with Kip Thorne is still outstanding.

Event Horizons and black holes still exist, even according to this new theory, they are simply revised, not completely discarded as you seem to imply.


In regards your 'Open Challenge,' the ontological claim you make that insufficient evidence to disprove your position is logical grounds that everyone everywhere should embrace your particular brand of cosmology is arrogant and fallacious. I suggest you read some Betrand Russell to clear up this illusion you have that the burden of proof rests on all shoulders except your own.

Rami Abdelal
Rami Abdelal

@Mohammad Shafiq Khan 

Have you actually thought to read the abstract? http://arxiv.org/pdf/1401.5761v1.pdf

Stephen Hawking has proposed that there are no event horizons in black holes. Black holes are still thought to exist, just not exactly as we once understood: now possibly less dark and may not be as permanently devastating.


P.S - Your Theory of origin and phenomenon of life is based on completely false premises. Dark energy has never been proved, Adnan Oktar / Harun Yahya knows as much about evolution as a school child and there is no reason that the theory of evolution would not allow for dead cells with it's food supply intact to exist.


Also, did you actually write a letter to yourself from Stephen Hawking?


https://plus.google.com/117663015413546257905/posts/9E4ekrJADj1



Jacob Phillips
Jacob Phillips

@Steve Leese do paticles actually escape black holes. I was under the impression that it was merely radiation? im not personally fully informed on this, but this was my notion. perhaps you and others can clarify..


Also, wouldnt the rate/quantity at which it gained particles be greater than that of its loss?

Tom Charles
Tom Charles

@Lauren Koenen The two holes simply combine. This is how the super massive black holes at the core of galaxies form. Galaxies form around them.

Mike Finkel
Mike Finkel

@Lauren Koenen  This happens. The holes combine, and the resulting mass is slightly less than the sum of the two individual masses, as some is lost in the collision.

P. Marie
P. Marie

@David Teicher  This is fascinating. Do you know of any additional reading on this subject? 

Tom Charles
Tom Charles

@SrinivasaRajan AR  

"Star births start from explosion of black holes" 


This isn't true. Stars are born when they become sufficiently large enough to ignite. Black holes are born from dying stars. Not the other way around.

Tom Charles
Tom Charles

@Eric Dean Campbell The problem with your assertion is that black holes both trap and radiate energy. 


There could be a balance across universes.

David P.
David P.

@Ashley Williams If you believe there is a God then you have no place discussing rational thought , God was invented by man . God did not invent man !!

Cesar Rivas
Cesar Rivas

@Ashley Williams Thanks for pointing that out. No doubt that God is relevant, otherwise scientist wouldn't try to deny that He exists.

TJ Gore
TJ Gore

@Ashley Williams  How can you know what something has been taking care of you? I appreciate you have faith, thats totally fine, but to suggest this explanation/theory could prove God's existence is ridiculous. Square peg in a round hole kind of logic.

rowan hartgroves
rowan hartgroves

@Ashley Williams  So why is someone taking care of you yet letting millions of innocent, defenseless children needlessly die of aids and other diseases. What did they do to deserve that from your caring god? If there is a god capable of this i for one do not wish to worship him. 

K. McCarthy
K. McCarthy

@Ashley Williams  You need to wake up. You believe in "god" because you're told to believe in "god". "God" was invented to make people like you feel better about their pathetic lives. Read up on evolution.

David Teicher
David Teicher

@P. Marie  Yes! At least, I picked it up from Brian Greene's first book, The Elegant Universe.


I've read all 3 of his major works (Elegant Universe, Fabric of the Cosmos, and The Hidden Reality) and cannot recommend them strongly enough.

Manuel Moreno
Manuel Moreno

@Cesar Rivas @Ashley Williams 'gods' are relevant only because religions are birthed from these mythical beings. Religions give their followers a sense of superiority and a I'm right and you are wrong over non-followers. From those beliefs come many of the miseries mankind has suffered since gods were first invented. 

Share

Feed the World

  • How to Feed Our Growing Planet

    How to Feed Our Growing Planet

    National Geographic explores how we can feed the growing population without overwhelming the planet in our food series.

See blogs, stories, photos, and news »

Latest Photo Galleries

See more photos »

Shop Our Space Collection

  • Be the First to Own <i>Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey</i>

    Be the First to Own Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey

    The updated companion book to Carl Sagan's Cosmos, featuring a new forward by Neil deGrasse Tyson is now available. Proceeds support our mission programs, which protect species, habitats, and cultures.

Shop Now »