how do black holes "die" or end their existence. I don't think they are eternal since everything "dies".
401374
According to Stephen Hawking, pretty much the guy to ask, even black holes do, by a certain mechanism, radiate very small amounts of energy over time.  So in the space of many, many eons it could eventually 'evaporate'.  It would take a ridiculously long time to happen, though.\n\nA pal of mine who was in first year science with me is now a worldwide expert on black holes, the big bang, and simulating them.  He actually won a bet with Stephen Hawking (a T-shirt - I'd frame it).
120266
i do not think that they are discovered bu it is known that black holes themselves emmit matter at a small rate (thats why very small black holes cannot exist for long)
1057805
A black hole is a star that has collapsed to the point that the empty space in the atoms no longer exists.  They are solid matter, though not matter that exists anywhere on earth.  They are called black holes because the gravitation force is so large that even light cannot excape.  The link below gives a decent explanation.
127702
Black holes are full of electrons.They are not capable of any expansion or constriction. Time also does not expand.
482700
My current belief is that there was time before time as we know it. Something "had" to exist before the cosmos as we now understand it. The Big Bang wasn't the first, nor the last. In order for that to occur, yes, I believe that it was the result of a black hole to end all black holes reaching its limit. It's a thin, untested theory, but it is what I am with until something better is derived. This is consistent with my answer to your later question. That is I haven't thought about the possibility of one universe existing within another. It is plausible in my mind though and interesting enough to think about it for years to come.
712417
"Singularity\nAt the center of the black hole, well inside the event horizon, general relativity predicts a singularity, a place where the curvature of spacetime becomes infinite and gravitational forces become infinitely strong.\n\nIt is expected that future refinements or generalisations of general relativity (in particular quantum gravity) will change what is thought about the nature of black hole interiors. Most theorists interpret the mathematical singularity of the equations as indicating that the current theory is not complete, and that new phenomena must come into play as one approaches the singularity.[15]\n\nThe cosmic censorship hypothesis asserts that there are no naked singularities in general relativity. This hypothesis is that every singularity is hidden behind an event horizon and cannot be probed. Whether this hypothesis is true remains an active area of theoretical research"
144870
We have no idea what happens to any matter inside a black hole. The laws of physics that we know do not apply.
563951
The sun will not become a black hole, it is not currently massive enough.\nThe sun will "die" by first expanding into a red giant and finally cool down to become a white dwarf.
1060153
Black holes are very dense spaces where eveything is sucked up. It cannot be the cause of a big bang because the bang cant occur in the first place. Even if there was a bang, that would be sucked up too.
918848
According to general relativity, the matter inside a black hole collapses to a single point: a "singularity".  At this point, the mass density (ρ = m/V) is undefined (because the volume of a single point is zero). \nWe have a lot to learn about extreme cases such as this.
211187
they become black holes
711640
Sorry to Sun of Samsa.  I meant to give you a thumbs up!  The Black Hole Singularity is infinitely small (infinite density and ZERO volume).  The effects of the hole can be miles or light years across!
936416
you should see the nova on blackholes, it was on last week\n\napprently only to much can actually get to the center at a time, and most matter/energy gets bounced around within the event horizon, never to escape, but not actually getting all the way in\n\nand anyway blackhole emit particles of hawking radiation and would eventually expell there mass and kinda evaporate away\n\nand if one black hole had the whole universe in it, sounds prime for  big bang to me
604912
These astronomical questions require astronomical answers. How to start and how to end?\n\nFact is, our existence is only a very very very very.......... small portion of time to calculate. To find how old, we have yet to discover evidence mainly because we cannot reach outside our very own galaxy to explore. Considering that it will take lightyears to travel the enormosity of time and space boggles all that best is people to come with a reasonable reason that will be hard to disprove. No one can. All can theorise.\n\nSo the universe is so large, it is beyond our perception, beyond our present ability to fully comprehend, and though we are making small progresses with probes and telescopes, it is still too huge and complex to grasp. We can theorise based on understanding of our surrounding and equating everything else to what we know. This is our limitation. \n\nUniverse has been around even before our gaalxy is formed bbillion zillions years ago. The acceptable theory is that a big bang ceated our galaxy and out solar system. Something must happen, and people theorise it must be sudden, that is why the bang. And it just happen like that that our galaxy was formed, and then our solar system. No one can track back and so this is so. Hence, theory is what we can do to try to explain to ourselves.\n\nSupernova is a dying star, giving its last burst of energy befre collapsing. Death of stars is something little understood because it is rare. Stars take million of light years to reach us and so we are watching history when some event occurs. So far, only a few supernova had been documented. And these stars actually died millions years beforehand.\n\nIt is theorised that when a star dies, it collapse into itself, as stars are suppose to be like our sun, all gaseous. It is theorise that the star will collapse into a very dense body with very high gravitational pull that it sucks everything nearby into itself. This is the black hole.. It is theorise that it will be so dense that even light cannot escape. So far possible sighting of black hole has been done by noting the bending of light in the universe, since the black hole cannot be seen \n\nSo, outside our atmosphere, we have theories to try to explain everything we see. We need a reason to justify the things we see in space, rather than accepting that they are there even way before life begins on earth, and that there will be many flawed theories because at this time, it is just beyong our ability to check it out.
57542
Scientists think that, at some point in the very distant future, all of the mass in the universe will be dominated by four or five supermassive black holes.  At first glance, this doesn't square with the second law of thermodynamics (since that's a rather low entropy state), so someone postulated that there would be such a thing as a lighthole which would re-emit everything that fell into a black hole.\n\nThat was utter nonsense.\n\nStephen Hawking put his brain to work on this problem, and solved it in a day.  He realized that, as predicted by Einstein's famous equation, gravitational fields can spontaneously create pairs of particles (one being normal matter, and the other being anti-matter).  Under normal circumstances, the matter-anti-matter pair would annihilate, but if the pair forms on the event horizon of a black hole, one of the particles would be drawn into the black hole, while the other would be emitted into space.  By doing this, the black hole has expended some of its gravity, and therefore its mass.\n\nThe answer to the conundrum is that Black Holes are slowly evaporating through this process, and we've named it the Hawking radiation, accordingly.  If the Universe is ever dominated by a handful of supermassive black holes, that won't violate the Second Law of thermodynamics since they're slowly falling apart anyhow.\n\nThere is no need for a white hole to exist, nor is there any observational evidence even suggesting that they might.
725497
Do you mean zero point energy, or the non-vanishing vacuum state? If you mean either of the two, then no. We currently do not have the technology to produce either of these. One is an energy, the latter is part of an equation in quantum mechanics. There is no "generation" of a black hole, they are created when a star "dies" a certain way. Black holes do sustain themselves with the intense gravitational field that they create. Check out the link.
533667
Black holes are not holes at all.  These do not have any bearing on other universes.  They are just extremely massive objects that have collapsed within the Schwarschild radius and into a single point, which creates an area in space in which light could not escape if it gets so close.  \n\nAs for other universes, according to string theory we exist in a 3 dimensional subspace of a 13 dimensional universe.  Since we only occupy 3 dimensions, there could be other multi-dimensional subspaces which could affect our universe.  In fact, one theory of the big bang is that gravity from another universe and our own had caused them to touch, which concentrated energy in a single region, since energy is subject to gravity.  After this touching, the two universes went apart, and caused this energy to expand and 'cool' into matter that we know as our own universe.