Big Bang vs Black Hole?

The theory is that, eventually, the black holes is so big, so massive, that it violently explodes. The explosion negates the gravitational force that the black hole is exerting.

Again, this is only theory, we don't know what happened at the big bang.

The Big Bang and Black Holes are very different things.

The Friedmann solution for the equations of General Relativity, which are the governing solution for the Big Bang, have a uniform density everywhere.

The Schwarzschild solution for the equations of General relativity, which are the governing solution for Black Holes, have a vacuum everywhere but at a single point in the center.

So, there is no easy way to turn Black Holes into Big Bangs or vice versa, and there is no currently viable theory of cosmology that suggests any such thing.

The Big Bang likely did not requre any "stuff" to explode. The total energy of the Universe is likely to be zero, with the positive energy cancelled by negative gravitational potential energy.

Black Holes, on the other hand, always have positive energy.

There is little doubt that Black Holes exist---the observations of the binary pulsar are accurately consistent with Einstein's equations in the limit of strong gravity; this observational confirmation makes it highly unlikely that the equations for Black Holes are incorrect.

Classically, black holes are black.

Quantum mechanically, black holes radiate, with a radiation known as Hawking radiation, after the British physicist Stephen Hawking who first proposed it.

Notice, first, that the photons have `sizes' (wavelengths) comparable to the size of the black hole, and, second, that the Hawking radiation is not very bright - the black hole emits roughly one photon every light crossing time of the black hole. So a black hole observed by its Hawking radiation looks fuzzy, a quantum mechanical object.

How do you draw a quantum mechanical object, whose appearance depends not only on the object but also on the way the observer chooses to observe it? I figured my impressionism was good enough here.

Hawking radiation has a blackbody (Planck) spectrum with a temperature T given by

kT = hbar g / (2 pi c) = hbar c / (4 pi rs)

where k is Boltzmann's constant, hbar = h / (2 pi) is Planck's constant divided by 2 pi, and g = G M / rs2 is the surface gravity at the horizon, the Schwarzschild radius rs, of the black hole of mass M. Numerically, the Hawking temperature is T = 4 × 10-20 g Kelvin if the gravitational acceleration g is measured in Earth gravities (gees).

The Hawking luminosity L of the black hole is given by the usual Stefan-Boltzmann blackbody formula

L = A sigma T4

where A = 4 pi rs2 is the surface area of the black hole, and sigma = pi2 k4 / (60 c2 hbar3) is the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. If the Hawking temperature exceeds the rest mass energy of a particle type, then the black hole radiates particles and antiparticles of that type, in addition to photons, and the Hawking luminosity of the black hole rises to

L = A (neff / 2) sigma T4

where neff is the effective number of relativistic particle types, including the two helicity types (polarizations) of the photon.

Black holes for which astronomical evidence exists have masses ranging from stellar-sized black holes of a few solar masses, up to supermassive black holes in the nuclei of galaxies, such as the 3×109 solar mass black hole at the centre of the galaxy Messier 87. The Hawking radiation from such black holes is minuscule. The Hawking temperature of a 30 solar mass black hole is a tiny 2×10-9 Kelvin, and its Hawking luminosity a miserable 10-31 Watts. Bigger black holes are colder and dimmer: the Hawking temperature is inversely proportional to the mass, while the Hawking luminosity is inversely proportional to the square of the mass.

"So, a black hole will eat anything"

not quite.

things FALL into black holes... IF they are close enough and don't have the velocity to either stay in orbit or escape entirely.

for any object outside of the event horizon, the black hole acts no differently than our sun, as far as it's gravitational attraction. yes, it's attraction is greater if it is more than one solar mass and you are the same distance away from it as you would be our sun, but a 1 solar mass black hole, say, 1AU away, would attract you toward it no greater than the sun attracts the earth toward it. and because of the earth's orbital spped, it will never "fall into the sun"

well, it *might* do something similar when the sun expands to about the earth's radius when it becomes a red giant, but that's not the earth getting "eaten" by the sun... that's just what main sequence stars do when they get old... lose mass and expand.

crazy, i know.

Scientists don't think the universe is dense enough to contract on itself. A black hole bends space/time around it. The big bang creates space/time.

Things have to be within the event horizon of a black hole to be sucked in. Compared to the galactic scales of the entire universe, even the event horizons of the super massive black holes at the centers of galaxies are very small scale.

Black holes are A PART OF "everything". Black Holes are weak little vermin compared to the Big Crunch.

Did you know that "black holes" are yet theoritical? They are presented as being fact, but are not. Einstein messed up when he stated mass gains mass as it accelerates. It does not. The overall frequency of the mass converts from being three dimensional toward becoming that of a single dimension. Newton's concept of gravity being a part of all mass was incorrect (I love the works of Newton). The force of gravity is an energy product. This is seen in the physics trilogy: m=e/c2, e=mc2, and c2=e/m. The last is the equation for a field of physical time, or that of gravity. There is no room form an addition of mass within the equation, only an expenditure of energy into gravitational waves.

There are different writings by Noddarc relating to this.

Black holes actually get smaller and disappear. They give off what is known as Hawking Radiation.

well, first off, that theory of the universe is just that, a THEORY. We don't know if it's right. Second, everything would get destroyed and ripped apart if the universe collapsed and everything would get broken down to its individual quarks. Plus, there is something called hawking radiation, which is basically a black hole dissolving and releasing some particles.