aa r X i v : . [ phy s i c s . pop - ph ] O c t Black Hole Genesis and origin of inertia
Nikodem Pop lawski ∗ Department of Mathematics and Physics, University of New Haven,300 Boston Post Road, West Haven, CT 06516, USA
I propose that if the universe was born as a baby universe on the other side of the event horizon ofa black hole existing in a parent universe, then the corresponding white hole provides the absoluteinertial frame of reference in the universe. The principle of relativity then allows to construct aninfinity of other inertial frames. Consequently, this scenario could give the origin of inertia andcomplete Einstein’s general theory of relativity by making it consistent with Mach’s principle.
If there were only one body in the universe, for exampleEarth, then it would have no relative motion with respectto other bodies. Yet, a Foucault’s pendulum could deter-mine Earth’s rotation about its own axis [1]. But, withrespect to what would Earth rotate if there were no otherbodies? Earth’s state of motion would have no meaningin that case.Newton’s rotating bucket argument demonstrated thattrue rotational motion cannot be defined as the relativerotation of the body with respect to the immediately sur-rounding bodies [2]. More generally, true motion and restcannot be defined relative to other bodies. Instead, theycan be defined only by reference to absolute space.Einstein’s general theory of relativity, in which the mo-tion of bodies is determined by the local geometry ofspacetime [3], reduces absolute space and time to localgeodesics that are sufficient to describe this geometry.Absolute space becomes a field that is described by themetric tensor. True motion and rest are defined by refer-ence to the metric tensor that asymptotically (far awayfrom physical bodies) tends to the form determined bythe condition of constant curvature, which depends onwhether the universe is flat, closed, or open.According to Einstein, the metric tensor is determinedlocally by the distribution of matter. What determinesthe asymptotic form of the metric tensor that took therole of absolute space? Mach’s principle states that theoverall distribution of matter provides absolute space: lo-cal physical laws are determined by the large-scale struc-ture of the universe [4]. Consequently, the motion of thedistant stars determines the local inertial frame. But, ifthere were no bodies other than Earth, there would beno distant matter that could determine the metric ten-sor. The metric would be redundant because it wouldhave nothing to relate to. Yet, the metric, taking therole of absolute space, must exist in order to explain thedifference between two scenarios in which the plane ofoscillation of a Foucaults pendulum rotates (indicatingEarth’s rotation with respect to the metric field) or not.Therefore, there must exist a body in the universe thatdetermines absolute space. I propose that Black HoleGenesis (BHG) provides a natural answer [5]. If our uni-verse was born as a closed, baby universe [6] formed onthe other side of the event horizon of a parent black hole existing in a parent universe, then that black hole wouldbe seen in the baby universe as a primordial white hole.That white hole determines absolute space: the frame ofreference in which the white hole is at rest is the absoluteinertial frame of reference (AIFR). This frame definesthe absolute time, called the cosmic time, which appearsin the Friedmann equations of cosmology. It also definesabsolute simultaneity and comoving distances.Newton’s first law of dynamics (the law of inertia) hastwo parts: 1) There exist inertial frames of reference,and 2) In an inertial frame, a free body (without forcesacting on it) has a constant velocity: a body at rest staysat rest and a body in motion stays in motion. In theLagrangian formulation, an inertial frame of reference isa frame in which space is homogeneous and isotropic, andtime is homogeneous [1]. I propose that the primordialwhite hole guarantees that at least one inertial frameexists: the AIFR, thus explaining the origin of inertia.The principle of relativity of Galileo and Einstein thenallows to construct, through the Lorentz transformations,an infinity of other inertial frames that are mechanicallyequivalent to AIFR and to one another [3].I propose the following conjecture: the AIFR is alsothe frame in which the total momentum and total angularmomentum of the matter in the universe are zero (theycan be measured only within the observer’s cosmologicalhorizon). These definitions are determinate because theuniverse formed by a black hole is closed (with the ex-ception of the white hole that connects the universe tothe parent universe through an Einstein–Rosen bridge).This conjecture has the spirit of Mach’s principle: all dis-tant matter determines inertia [4]. I also propose anotherconjecture: the AIFR coincides with the frame in whichthe cosmic microwave background radiation is isotropic(on average, without accounting for tiny fluctuations thathave led to large-structure formation) [7].Therefore, BHG completes Einstein’s general theoryof relativity by making it Machian. The parent black The white hole being at rest means that its comoving distance(fixed relative to growing space) from the observer does notchange. The physical distance will grow because the universeis expanding. hole, seen in our universe as a white hole, constitutes theMachian distant matter that determines absolute spaceand provides inertial frames of references.There are further implications of BHG. If our universewas born on the other side of the event horizon of a blackhole existing in a parent universe, then every black holecreates a new, baby universe. These universes form amultiverse. However, they are not parallel. An objectcan exist at any moment of its timeline (measured in itsproper time defined in its rest frame) only in one universe.Since the motion of matter through an event horizoncan only occur in one direction, that motion can definethe past and future. This existence of the arrow of timeat the event horizon can be continuously extended to allother points in space. It will also be extended to thecosmic time, defined as the time in AIFR, which is acoordinate that measures the expansion of the universe.Accordingly, the cosmic arrow of time in the universewould be inherited from the parent universe in BHG [8].The second law of thermodynamics states that the to-tal entropy of an isolated system can never decrease overtime. Once the total entropy of a system and its sur-roundings reaches a maximum, it would remain constant:the system is in thermodynamic equilibrium with the sur-roundings. A black hole, which forms in the infinite fu-ture as measured in AIFR, is a cosmic example of sucha system. However, AIFR of the parent universe cannotbe extended beyond the event horizon of a black holebecause of the infinite redshift at the horizon [3]. Onthe other side of the event horizon, a baby universe hasits own AIFR and its own cosmic time. In that growinguniverse, entropy can increase further [5]. Therefore, thethermodynamic and cosmic arrows of time coincide.The black hole information paradox does not exist inthis scenario. The information goes from the parent uni-verse to a baby universe formed on the other side of theblack hole’s event horizon. Since the curvature of theclosed universe is absolute, the gravitational force is ge-ometrical and does not need a mediating particle: thegraviton does not exist.A physical law that turns black holes into Einstein–Rosen bridges to new, baby universes must avoid theblack-hole singularity. The simplest and most natu-ral mechanism for preventing gravitational singularitiesis provided by spacetime torsion within the Einstein–Cartan theory of gravity [2, 9]. In this theory, torsion iscoupled to the intrinsic angular momentum of fermionicmatter, allowing for the spin-orbit interaction that fol-lows from the Dirac equation. Accordingly, torsion bringsthe consistency between relativistic quantum mechanicsand curved spacetime. At extremely high densities, tor-sion manifests itself as repulsive gravity, preventing theformation of a singularity and creating a Big Bounce thatstarts a new universe [5, 10].The inertia in the universe may therefore originatefrom the universe being formed by a black hole that nat- urally provides AIFR: the absolute inertial frame of ref-erence. That formation is physically realized throughinitial gravitational attraction from curvature, which islater countered by gravitational repulsion from torsion.This work was funded by the University ResearchScholar program at the University of New Haven. ∗ [email protected][1] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,
Mechanics (Pergamon,1976).[2] M. Born,
Einstein’s Theory of Relativity (Dover, 1962).[3] E. Schr¨odinger,
Space-time Structure (Cambridge Uni-versity Press, 1954); L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,
The Classical Theory of Fields (Pergamon, 1975).[4] S. Weinberg,
Gravitation and Cosmology (Wiley, 1972);E. A. Lord,
Tensors, Relativity and Cosmology (McGraw-Hill, 1976); I. Ciufolini and J. A. Wheeler,
Gravitationand Inertia (Princeton University Press, 1995).[5] N. J. Pop lawski, Phys. Lett. B , 181 (2010); Phys.Lett. B , 672 (2011); N. Pop lawski, Astrophys. J. , 96 (2016).[6] I. D. Novikov, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. Lett. , 142 (1966);R. K. Pathria, Nature , 298 (1972); V. P. Frolov, M.A. Markov, and V. F. Mukhanov, Phys. Lett. B ,272 (1989); Phys. Rev. D , 383 (1990); L. Smolin,Class. Quantum Grav. , 173 (1992); S. Hawking, BlackHoles and Baby Universes and other Essays (BantamDell, 1993); W. M. Stuckey, Am. J. Phys. , 788 (1994);D. A. Easson and R. H. Brandenberger, J. High Energ.Phys. , 024 (2001); J. Smoller and B. Temple, Proc.Natl. Acad. Sci. USA , 11216 (2003); N. J. Pop lawski,Phys. Lett. B , 110 (2010).[7] P. J. E. Peebles, Principles of Physical Cosmology (Princeton University Press, 1993).[8] N. Pop lawski, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D , 1847020 (2018).[9] T. W. B. Kibble, J. Math. Phys. , 212 (1961); D. W.Sciama, in Recent Developments in General Relativity , p.415 (Pergamon, 1962); Rev. Mod. Phys. , 463 (1964);Rev. Mod. Phys. , 1103 (1964); F. W. Hehl, P. von derHeyde, G. D. Kerlick, and J. M. Nester, Rev. Mod. Phys. , 393 (1976); V. de Sabbata and M. Gasperini, Intro-duction to Gravitation (World Scientific, 1985); K. No-mura, T. Shirafuji, and K. Hayashi, Prog. Theor. Phys. , 1239 (1991); V. de Sabbata and C. Sivaram, Spinand Torsion in Gravitation (World Scientific, 1994); N.J. Pop lawski, arXiv:0911.0334; Phys. Lett. B , 73(2010); Phys. Lett. B , 575 (2013).[10] W. Kopczy´nski, Phys. Lett. A , 219 (1972); Phys. Lett.A , 63 (1973); A. Trautman, Nature (Phys. Sci.) ,7 (1973); F. W. Hehl, P. von der Heyde, and G. D. Ker-lick, Phys. Rev. D , 1066 (1974); B. Kuchowicz, Gen.Relativ. Gravit. , 511 (1978); M. Gasperini, Phys. Rev.Lett. , 2873 (1986); Y. N. Obukhov and V. A. Ko-rotky, Class. Quantum Grav. , 1633 (1987); Gen. Rela-tiv. Gravit. , 1007 (2012); N. Pop lawski, Phys. Rev. D , 107502 (2012); S. Desai and N. J. Pop lawski, Phys.Lett. B , 183 (2016); G. Unger and N. Pop lawski,Astrophys. J.870