Black Holes in outer space:  What's on the other side?
473562
Well, as far as we know, all the matter that gets sucked in gets crushed into a single point with zero dimensions. As in, a point with no length, width, anything. This is called a singularity.\n\nOr, another theory is that there are wormholes. If you get sucked in a black hole and survive (heh...not likely), you get thrown into a different part of the universe, or another universe, or another dimension, or whatever. However, the wormhole theory is losing support as of now.
280455
It is an interesting idea, but for the moment, only an idea. The cosmology behind black holes is pretty sound, and they have been observed now, such as in Cygnus x-1.
851276
During the time when atmospheric testing was still being done, several tests of nuclear bombs were done in the far upper atmosphere (nearby space). Certainly no black holes were created. There were brief electrical disruptions and the explosions were spherical, rather than mushroom cloud shaped, but otherwise they were simply big explosions. The energy associated to even a small black hole is many, many times more than anything we have ever created on earth.
1038709
First, a black hole is neither black nor a hole as we commonly think of them.  But we'll get back to that.  Black holes were first theorized by Karl Schwarzchild in 1916.  He demonstrated that were a star to collapse under its own gravity to less than a certian radius, then it would cease emitting any radiation, hence the "black" part.  This particular aspect was addressed by Stephen Hawking in 1976.  He theorized that after the initial formation of the singularity (what used to be the star) and it's black hole, that the hole would then start to lose mass by emission of radiation, now known as Hawking radiation.  Since it does emit some form of radiation, we can't strictly call it black, but, let's face it, the name has stuck.  \n\nOk, now that brings us to the hole part.  One other outcome of Schwarzchild's work was that of the infinite solution.  Under certain conditions (to lengthly to go through here, but please use the references) there exists a solution to the Einstein Field Equations where the curvature of the system becomes infinite.  \n\nThis is where conventional modes of speech break down.  Ok, a hole to us is a pit, a dug out area.  This is easy to visualize.  A black hole is not like this.  If you were to travel through space and happen across a black hole (Let's assume that you could see it), it wouldn't appear like a pit that things can fall into.  Instead, the fabric of space would seem to distort; everything would get streched off into infinity and compressed into a point.  (I'll apologize about the bad imagery now.)  \n\nThis is a hard concept for us 4-D beings.  It's a worthy topic of study, just mind-bending.
631703
Black holes aren't holes in the sense that you're thinking of. A black hole is a region of spacetime (it has 3+1 dimensions like everything else) that has an event horizon (a spherical region) that nothing can escape from.\nTaking the rubber sheet analogy (this is 2+1 dimensional, two spatial dimensions, 1 time dimension), suppose there is a spherical mass placed on the stretched sheet. Depending on how massive that mass is, the sheet around the mass will be circularly distorted, creating a potential energy well. You can roll smaller masses by it. If you roll the smaller mass with too little tangent velocity, it will spiral into the larger mass. If you roll it with a great enough tangential velocity, it may change direction, but it will go right through the potential energy well.\nA black hole has a certain region of its potential energy well (the region inside the event horizon) where no velocity you give a particle will be enough to get it back out of the energy well; all particles entering the event horizon will spiral into the singularity at the center. Part of the reason for this is the limit placed on massive particle accelerations of only being able to accelerate up to the speed of light in vacuum. It is interesting to note that outside the event horizon (assuming a non-spinning black hole), gravity behaves classically. Ie., if the Sun were to collapse into a black hole (which it doesn't have the mass to do), the radius of its event horizon would be less than the current radius of the Sun, so the solar system would continue as usual; the gravitational field outside the event horizon is unchanged.\nAlso, a black hole need not be caused by the death of a star. Primordial black holes are hypothesized to be black holes that formed during the chaotic spacetime of the early universe.
794668
Well, black holes are mysterious simply because they are regions where light itself cannot escape!  If you go by general relativity black holes are singularities where space and time lose their meaning in the rational sense!  As for black holes leading to some location, most likely that is not the case.  Such an object is a wormhole, which is a theoretical solution to Einstein's field equations like black holes are.  But, wormholes have not been observed in nature and they are unstable to the point where if even a tiny amount of mass enters the wormhole it will collapse it and destroy the matter before it ever gets to the other side!  So, that being true a black hole has no opening somewhere else, because if it did it would collapse the same way.  However, Stephen Hawking showed that black holes do dissipate over many billions of years because of quantum tunneling.  Turns out some matter/energy actually gets out of the black hole!  So, we still have alot to learn about the nature of black holes, because we still have to learn alot about gravity!
1138674
A star is stationary object and a black hole is a result of dying star. Black holes are stationary objects.\nThey posses a great gravitational force. It is so great that it can even suck in light.\nDue to such gravitational force it makes objects near it to revolve around it with tremendous speed.\n\nThe closest black hole to earth lies just 1,600 light-years \n(1 light year = 9.4605284 × 10^15 meters ) from Earth on the way to the centre of the Milky Way in the direction of the constellation Sagittarius.\n\nBut if you want to test the above facts and experience it yourself then just wait till sun becomes one black hole!!!! (after around 5-6 billion years)  (Sun can also become neutron star or nebula so may be you cannot experience it!!)
224610
unless this is a "zen" question, it doesn't "go" anywhere.  A black hole is a former star that has died and collapsed in upon itself and had its mass "infinitely" compressed into a tiny tiny volume.
286980
Black holes do not give off any light, so they can't be seen directly.\n\nWhat we can see is the EFFECT of the black hole.  \n\nOne effect is caused by the fact that massive objects will bend light as it passes them - this is called "Gravitational Lensing".  \n\nAs a result, if we detect light from a distant star that is distorted in the specific pattern of gravitational lensing, we can deduce that there is a dark, massive object at the center of the distortion.\n\nAnother effect is produced when matter that is pulled into the black hole.  Once matter or light gets closer to a black hole than the critical distance (the "event horizon") it vanishes into the black hole and is never seen again.  But, matter NEAR the black hole that is falling into it will give off light or other radiation as it is destroyed by the black holes gravitational force.  This radiation includes bursts of X-rays, which we can detect.\n\nThe first black hole that was detected is called Cygnus X-1 (it is an X-ray source in the constellation of Cygnus, the swan).
35446
a black hole is an area of space-time with a gravitational field so intense that its escape velocity is equal to or exceeds the speed of light.
359590
The short answer is that whenever we take a good hard look at any given galaxy, we find good evidence that there is, or could be, a black hole at it's core.\n\nThe long answer is:\nIt is not so much a theory as something being increasingly noticed. Because black holes are the latest and coolest thing in astronomy (just look how many questions about them appear here!), everyone is always looking for them. They are not so easy to find because, well, they are black. You can't see one directly. One way to tell if there is a black hole there is by the effects of it's gravity on nearby matter. So far, the biggest effect observed on nearby matter has been high energy radiation caused by the rapid acceleration of that matter as it falls into the black hole. Some galaxies show that in their core, indicating a massive black hole there.\nAnother effect is that stars could orbit the black hole, just like the Earth orbits our Sun. We have known for a long time that all stars in a galaxy are orbiting around the center of that galaxy. IN the past it was assumed that there were enough regular stars and dust and gas in the center of the galaxy to make a mass big enough to orbit around. But recently observations with more powerful telescopes of stars closer and closer to the center of our Milky Way galaxy have shown stars VERY close to the center of the galaxy orbiting VERY fast. In that case it is easy to calculate the mass of whatever it is that they are orbiting, just like we can calculate the mass of the Sun by knowing how fast the Earth orbits it. Those calculations show the mass is millions of times more than the sun. Now we know all that mass has to be in an area smaller than the orbits of those stars, and the size of those orbits is measured as being quite small, so we know the volume far too small to be a big star cluster or other ordinary concentration of mass. The only known way to get so much mass in such a small volume is a black hole.\n\nI recall many years ago, when computers were just becoming powerful enough to do big simulations, that someone tried to simulate a globular star cluster by programming a few thousand stars to orbit in a big ball with no mass other than the stars themselves. It didn't work. The stars kind of just all dispersed at random and did not stay in a nice ball shaped globular cluster. Now it should be obvious that if there was a massive black hole in the center of the globular cluster, then all the stars could orbit it like the planets do the Sun, only not all in one plane like the planets do. And I believe some evidence of medium large black holes has been found in some globular clusters recently by the same method of using powerful telescopes to look at the orbits of stars very close to the core. And after all, what is a globular cluster but a really small galaxy.\n\nSo giant telescopes, some of them is space, are providing data never before available that just makes it more and more reasonable to assume that all galaxies have a massive black hole at the core.
13072
A black hole is defined as a place where light can not escape due to the gravitational force.  The proof that they exist are the equations of gravity and experiments in labritories where miniture black holes have been created that evaporate in nanoseconds.
389263
stephen hawking has said that balck holes indeed behave like black bodies, emitting some radiation, usually gamma and x rays. \nAlso, when matter falling into the black hole causes the black hole to spin. This creates a magnetic field like that of Earth's, emitting the high energy particles in the form of jets through the north and south poles of the rotating blackhole.\n\nSo, some kind of info might be released from a black hole, thats if the spaceship can detect these signs.
1158151
you're thinking of a worm hole. a black hole will, as far as we know tear things apart to as it takes them to a different part of our universe, which doesnt make sense because nothing can escape from them. Anyway, a worm hole, which is theoretical -mostly- is like two black holes connected at their vertex's. think of the universe as a thin sheet of paper. one black hole is is on the right side, and another on the left. fold the piece of paper so that the black holes are lines up. instead of traveling from point A to point B, you just go through space in manner of speaking from point A to point B "just like that". there really isnt any just like that, but that's as best i can describe it with out actually showing you. sorry if this makes no sense.
1166146
Yes........more or less. A Black hole is a small view of what the universe as a whole will be like billions of years from now.
190845
I believe there are two kinds of black holes. One I'm sure everyone will explain to ya, a great mass so large that light can't even escape it's gravity. But the other kind is theoretical: What if everything in THIS universe came from somewhere else? That is the only way I can explain it, except that somehow we are all headed for it again, to be sucked into it and expel ed into another place which right now is completely void, and this universe would be turned inside-out again.
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.