Quantum Fluctuations/Foam

[interested]

11 hours ago, swansont said:

Plus copyright/plagiarism rules demand it.

www,Quora author Victor Roth

18 hours ago, Mordred said:

Might be a good idea to include the site link, many sites are rather poor or misleading. At one-time some cosmologist did look into the white hole possibility yet those models started to lose interest when the WMAP data was published. Poplowskii once went this route with using spin and torsion under Einstein Cartan tbeory.

 

In what way does the WMAP results preclude the white hole theory of a Big Bang https://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/features/wmap-complete.html

Could being inside the event horizon of something like a white hole be the cause of quantum foam, or dark energy and the expansion of space time?

Could a White hole singularity be connected to a BH singularity via a wormhole or other dimension existing outside space time. ?

What is wrong with being inside a white hole event horizon.

[Mordred]

It is far harder to model a homogeneous and isotropic universe than the author of that Quara link realises.

 White holes or blackholes spin. They also vary in the rates of spin and vary in the amount of material they gather. The very nature of a spinning hole whether black or white will give a preferred location ie centre. 

 A white hole cannot avoid causing a spinning universe (assuming white holes exist and we are in the event horizon). The mass distribution cannot be completel uniform due to rotation and varied feeding rates of the hole.

 This is the reason why Poplowskii used spin and torsion coupled with time dilation affects and Einstein Carton theory to attempt to maintain a homogeneous and isotropic universe and explain DE.  

 In essence the WMAP data showed that the universe is too homogeneous and isotropic to make white hole theories feasible once you fully consider ALL the dynamics of a BH or WH. (ie varied spin and feeding rates).

 That being said different attempts are still being made by current pbysicists as its not completely ruled out as a possibility just incredibly difficult to account for all the observational data in particular the extreme uniformity of the CMB data. We haven't completely ruled out the possibility just realised how unlikely the possibility is. So under physics all models are feasible and viable until proven with absolute certainty to not be viable.

 Stephen Hawkings himelf wrote a scientific America article several years back describing the possibility but qualified that its only one of many possible models.

 One further detail I forgot to mention the nature of BH's were still poorly understood prior to WMAP ie varied spin etc so mamy physicists didn't have the necessary data to account for that we have today.

 However its still a small possibility...

edit: Most of the WH universe models were also closed positive curvature universes ie finite. WMAP showed open and flat curvature. However we still haven't completely ruled out a finite positive curvature universe ( with an extremely small curvature term).

 PS Quora is not a good source you get far too many crackpot ideas on that site and anyone can post their own ideas etc on it.

 

Edited May 13, 2018 by Mordred

[Strange]

11 hours ago, interested said:

Could being inside the event horizon of something like a white hole be the cause of quantum foam, or dark energy and the expansion of space time?

As white holes come from the mathematics of GR and quantum foam from quantum theory, and we currently have no way of combining the, there seems to be no connection there.

I don't know how being inside a white hole could reproduce the isometry and homogeneity of the universe, the CMB, expansion or dark energy.

Quote

What is wrong with being inside a white hole event horizon.

You would rapidly be expelled! 

[interested]

14 hours ago, Strange said:

As white holes come from the mathematics of GR and quantum foam from quantum theory, and we currently have no way of combining the, there seems to be no connection there.

I understand that some time in the future a version of Quantum gravity will be developed. All the various attempts at producing theories to explain various effects are all trying to understand exactly what is going on. But like any model garbage in equals garbage out.

14 hours ago, Strange said:

I don't know how being inside a white hole could reproduce the isometry and homogeneity of the universe, the CMB, expansion or dark energy.

Not knowing is why I keep asking questions.

14 hours ago, Strange said:

You would rapidly be expelled! 

Maybe

BUT Which way is out, when from any point in space we appear to be at the centre of the universe. 

16 hours ago, Mordred said:

 White holes or blackholes spin. They also vary in the rates of spin and vary in the amount of material they gather. The very nature of a spinning hole whether black or white will give a preferred location ie centre. 

 A white hole cannot avoid causing a spinning universe (assuming white holes exist and we are in the event horizon). The mass distribution cannot be completel uniform due to rotation and varied feeding rates of the hole.

Does this also apply at the Big Bang, before space time existed. Could a Black hole at some point in the future of a white hole be connected via a wormhole. 

16 hours ago, Mordred said:

This is the reason why Poplowskii used spin and torsion coupled with time dilation affects and Einstein Carton theory to attempt to maintain a homogeneous and isotropic universe and explain DE.  

I downloaded lots of things on Poplawski yesterday but did not find anything ref white holes, or being inside a WH event horizon. Do you have a link? I did however find a lot of things suggesting we are inside a Black hole rather than a white hole.

16 hours ago, Mordred said:

In essence the WMAP data showed that the universe is too homogeneous and isotropic to make white hole theories feasible once you fully consider ALL the dynamics of a BH or WH. (ie varied spin and feeding rates).

Doesnt time dilation around black holes etc show space time is non homogeneous. 

16 hours ago, Mordred said:

PS Quora is not a good source you get far too many crackpot ideas on that site and anyone can post their own ideas etc on it.

I agree, I sometimes answer questions on electrical engineering and control systems on Quora  

If space had another dimension before the BB and space time started,  like a wormhole to know where, when the BB happened this dimension would continue to exist. Could something like this connect a BH in the future to a White hole in the past, and still be in existence today unaffected by time all around us in space, allowing information to move from the BH singularity to a White hole singularity?

[Mordred]

Been so long since I last read Poplowskii's works that I doubt I will find his white hole version though there is very little to distinquish between a BH and WH.

 If your in an event horizon the argument went that due to time dilation the universe would appear homogeneous and isotropic. The dynamics being a bit different on the inside of the BH as compared to the outside. 

 Little is known on dynamics past the EH so its plausible...

 A white hole is theoretically conmected to a BH via the Einstein Rosen bridge, however neither a wormhole or WH has ever been located or observed (strictly theoretical). They may or may not exist...

 The connection is also applied in am old Penrose diagram here 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/penrose_schwpar.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiV36XqmIXbAhUMzmMKHXLeAegQFjAAegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw0915QNG3vyi63ck0b3jjIl

(link just shows the diagram) 

Edited May 14, 2018 by Mordred

[interested]

47 minutes ago, Mordred said:

A white hole is theoretically conmected to a BH via the Einstein Rosen bridge, however neither a wormhole or WH has ever been located or observed (strictly theoretical). They may or may not exist...

 The connection is also applied in am old Penrose diagram here 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/insidebh/penrose_schwpar.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiV36XqmIXbAhUMzmMKHXLeAegQFjAAegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw0915QNG3vyi63ck0b3jjIl

Thanks again. 

The Penrose diagram shows a parallel universe, am I correct in thinking that this is extra dimensions, not necessarily space time dimensions existing alongside space time dimensions and that the ER bridge connects them to the BH singularities? 

If the above is correct. What kind of information could be transferred via a ER bridge to other dimensions in our space time and how might it manifest itself in what we perceive? 

 

[Mordred]

Penrose diagrams are a bit more complex, the different regions involve causal lightcone regions. Each region is its own causal connected lightcone. If I recall region to the left involves time reversal ie past events. The Einstein equations allow for time reversal (symmetries) which the Penrose diagram details using Kruskal coordinates if I recall correctly. A white hole is A time reversal symmetry  of a black hole. (causal symmetries).

 However I should note thermodynamics isn't particularly time reversal hence the entropy arrow of time debate, this makes white holes less likely.

 Ir also takes very specific conditions to allow a white hole to form as opposed to a BH. Though I would have to dig up what the conditions were again (seem to recall something about charge, but will have to check on that.)

Edited May 14, 2018 by Mordred

[MarkE]

On 4/26/2018 at 3:09 PM, interested said:

energy cant be created or destroyed, so where did it come from.?

Not everybody agrees about that (read this article). To summarise it, “Energy isn’t conserved; it changes because spacetime does”.

But the energy itself is still there. No boson or fermion has disappeared. So therefore, from that point of view energy ("stuff" on the Standard Model) “has been conserved”. But of course, something has changed, due to this dark energy (not "stuff" on the Standard Model), so the Universe is not the same any more as it was before, something has definitely been added, so from that point of view energy “has not been conserved”. It’s a matter of terminology, if you also include "gravitational energy" when you're referring to “energy”, then energy is indeed not conserved. But energy from the Standard Model is different from gravitational "energy".

A photon's energy is decreasing. Where does it go? It gets attenuated. Think of the universe as analogous to an ideal gas in a closed vessel. The temperature will change in inverse proportion to the volume change. i.e. increase the volume, and the temperature drops, though no energy has left the system.

A photon has no charge/mass, but both the matter/antimatter particles do have charge/mass, but together still cancel out to 0. The electron and positron pair still have that same dualistic nature. Maxwell's 2nd law of electromagnetism clearly shows the symmetry in the wave function of the photon, whereas the Schrödinger equation shows symmetry in the wave function of the electron. In other words: it doesn’t matter how often you divide an electromagnetic particle, it will always conserve a north and a south pole, because there is no such thing as a monopole.

Therefore, I’m still a supporter of the zero-energy Universe, and the quantum mechanical vacuum fluctuation to explain the mechanism of the Big Bang, because I’m not aware of any other, more plausible, explanation for the Universe we live in today. 

It has been proposed by Edward P. Tryon that the Universe may be a large scale quantum mechanical vacuum fluctuation where positive mass-energy is balanced by negative gravitational potential energy, as a consequence of the early inflationary launch of the expansion of the Universe, in which these quantum fluctuations particles got amplified, which would explain how our Universe could have inflated from these particles. But what particle(s) exactly? What initial particle is being referred to here? I still don't fully grasp this. It’s not quite clear to me how to get from an photon to an electron/positron pair to, well, more than an electron/positron pair, because they can’t divide any further, but I guess they can, since a gamma-ray photon can be converted to millions of visible and infrared photons (stars do this all the time):

On 5/2/2018 at 7:56 PM, Sensei said:

When photon is scattering with matter (or antimatter), part of energy from photon is given to matter/antimatter, and new photon with smaller energy is created. Particle which received energy from photon is accelerated. It can be repeated over and over again, and from initial 0.511 MeV photon after millions of such interactions, you will have millions of photons with very low energies (e.g. visible spectrum, then IR)..

Energy has changed, yes, but there wasn't any energy added or removed that wasn't already there.

Edited May 14, 2018 by MarkE

[Strange]

3 hours ago, interested said:

Maybe

Definitely. That is part of the definition of a white hole. In a black hole, all paths lead to the singularity. In a white hole all paths lead from the singularity and out of the event horizon (a white hole is the opposite of Hotel California: you can leave any time you like but can never check in).

3 hours ago, interested said:

BUT Which way is out, when from any point in space we appear to be at the centre of the universe. 

We are at the centre of the observable universe but not the universe. If there were a centre (as in a white hole) then we would not expect the universe to be as isotropic as it is.

3 hours ago, interested said:

Doesnt time dilation around black holes etc show space time is non homogeneous.

The existence of stars and planets show that space is not perfectly homogeneous. But on large scales it appears to be extremely homogeneous (and even more so in the past). Hence the uniformity of the CMB.

1 hour ago, interested said:

The Penrose diagram shows a parallel universe, am I correct in thinking that this is extra dimensions, not necessarily space time dimensions existing alongside space time dimensions and that the ER bridge connects them to the BH singularities? 

No one knows what this represents, if anything. It could be a different place (and time) in our universe. It could be a different universe. It could just be a mathematical result with no physical meaning... It may disappear when we have a theory of quantum gravity.

 

Also, white holes may not appear as a possible solution in a theory that includes quantum gravity. For example, string theory has a model for black holes (very different from the classical one) but, as far as I know, has no equivalent to a white hole.

[interested]

16 hours ago, Strange said:

Definitely. That is part of the definition of a white hole. In a black hole, all paths lead to the singularity. In a white hole all paths lead from the singularity and out of the event horizon (a white hole is the opposite of Hotel California: you can leave any time you like but can never check in).

A white hole starts at the event horizon and expands from there via a wormhole/ER bridge (dimension operating outside of normal space time) .The singularity does not exist as a location in space time dimensions. The expansion of space time dimensions is in every direction all around us, causing the effect of dark energy/cosmological constant. 

If a white hole is the cause of the accelerating expansion of the universe,the original big bang and quantum fluctuations the HUP. Then life  makes a little more sense from the point of view cause and effect.

I see know reason that any emissions from a ER bridge would not produce even pressures every where in space time. The ER bridge is operating outside of space time dimensions and restrictions.

 

16 hours ago, Strange said:

No one knows what this represents, if anything. It could be a different place (and time) in our universe. It could be a different universe. It could just be a mathematical result with no physical meaning... It may disappear when we have a theory of quantum gravity.

 

Also, white holes may not appear as a possible solution in a theory that includes quantum gravity. For example, string theory has a model for black holes (very different from the classical one) but, as far as I know, has no equivalent to a white hole.

 

The expansion of space is happening it is being driven by something, a WH seems a logical cause of dark energy and the cosmological constant.

Having read a bit on string theory now, I am not convinced, for instance I think the graviton does not even suck, I dont think it exists, and the graviton is part of string theory.

17 hours ago, MarkE said:

Not everybody agrees about that (read this article). To summarise it, “Energy isn’t conserved; it changes because spacetime does”.

How does a zero energy universe expalin the expansion of space and black holes. 

16 hours ago, Strange said:

Hence the uniformity of the CMB.

Why would an ER bridge from a BH to a WH not produce uniform expansion of space and uniform CMB

[Strange]

57 minutes ago, interested said:

A white hole starts at the event horizon and expands from there via a wormhole/ER bridge (dimension operating outside of normal space time) .The singularity does not exist as a location in space time dimensions.

Citation needed. Or is this you making stuff up again?

59 minutes ago, interested said:

The expansion of space time dimensions is in every direction all around us, causing the effect of dark energy/cosmological constant. 

I'm sure this has been said before: expansion does not require "dark energy". It is the (unexpected) acceleration of expansion.

1 hour ago, interested said:

If a white hole is the cause of the accelerating expansion of the universe,the original big bang and quantum fluctuations the HUP. Then life  makes a little more sense from the point of view cause and effect.

There is zero evidence that white holes exist, or that they are responsible for the Big Bang. And there is no apparent connection between them and quantum theory. 

And I have no idea why you think a completely invented explanation makes more sense.

1 hour ago, interested said:

The ER bridge is operating outside of space time dimensions and restrictions.

You are making stuff up again.

1 hour ago, interested said:

The expansion of space is happening it is being driven by something, a WH seems a logical cause of dark energy and the cosmological constant.

Expansion is not "driven" by anything. Acceleration is but you have been given several reasons why a white hole is an implausible explanation. Why are you still clinging to it, with no evidence?

1 hour ago, interested said:

Having read a bit on string theory now, I am not convinced, for instance I think the graviton does not even suck, I dont think it exists, and the graviton is part of string theory.

The hypothetical graviton would be part of quantum theory, wether string theory is correct or not.

1 hour ago, interested said:

How does a zero energy universe expalin the expansion of space and black holes. 

It doesn't. But neither does the theory of evolution.

We have an explanation for the expansion of space (GR) and good models for the creation of black holes (e.g. in supernovae). The zero-energy universe hypothesis doesn't make any difference to either of these.

1 hour ago, interested said:

Why would an ER bridge from a BH to a WH not produce uniform expansion of space and uniform CMB

Wrong question. Why would it do that?

Why wouldn't there be an obvious point (the white hole) that expansion was centred on?

What is the mechanism for creating the CMB?

[swansont]

2 hours ago, interested said:

If a white hole is the cause of the accelerating expansion of the universe,the original big bang and quantum fluctuations the HUP. Then life  makes a little more sense from the point of view cause and effect.

"Makes sense" really requires mathematical models to be sure. i.e. doing science, rather than the linking of personal toy models that one constructs based on reading about science.

[interested]

On ‎15‎/‎05‎/‎2018 at 8:53 AM, swansont said:

"Makes sense" really requires mathematical models to be sure. i.e. doing science, rather than the linking of personal toy models that one constructs based on reading about science.

Makes sense. Really requires an understanding of a process which does not necessarily in the real world require mathematical models, ie doing maths is not science, or in all cases pratical. If you have a personal theory of what dark matter is or why things happen please let us all know.

 

[swansont]

17 hours ago, interested said:

Makes sense. Really requires an understanding of a process which does not necessarily in the real world require mathematical models, ie doing maths is not science, or in all cases pratical.

Without maths you aren't doing science. Plenty of stuff that "made sense" was wrong. The only way to see if it is is to make testable predictions and compare with experiment.

17 hours ago, interested said:

If you have a personal theory of what dark matter is or why things happen please let us all know.

Irrelevant.

[interested]

On 5/19/2018 at 10:40 AM, swansont said:

Without maths you aren't doing science. Plenty of stuff that "made sense" was wrong. The only way to see if it is is to make testable predictions and compare with experiment.

Yes, I agree (mostly). But many models are put together to explain observations, without observations the maths is meaningless. 

The strong force does not decrease with distance.  Could it being transmitted via a wormhole/other dimension?

How would one put together a mathematical model to suggest hawking radiation from a BH might be mirrored by its opposite a WH and  appear as dark energy causing the expansion of space. 

White holes are plausible, and would be connected to Black Hole's via ER bridge. One causing  the contraction of space time and the other the expansion of space time. 

Could an ER bridge be the source of the Big Bang.

 

[swansont]

2 minutes ago, interested said:

How would one put together a mathematical model to suggest hawking radiation from a BH might be mirrored by its opposite a WH and  appear as dark energy causing the expansion of space. 

One way would be to go to graduate school in physics and learn the necessary math and physics.

[Strange]

12 minutes ago, interested said:

The strong force does not decrease with distance.  Could it being transmitted via a wormhole/other dimension?

Why? What evidence is there for that?

13 minutes ago, interested said:

How would one put together a mathematical model to suggest hawking radiation from a BH might be mirrored by its opposite a WH and  appear as dark energy causing the expansion of space. 

That seems the wrong way round. We need a source energy to explain dark energy. You could ask if Hawking radiation could be this source of energy (it isn't). But to ask if the opposite of Hawking radiation could be the source of energy, seems odd. 

That does raise an interesting question as to whether white holes have the equivalent of Hawking radiation, and what it would be. Would it mean they absorb an amount of radiation inversely proportional to their mass? To answer this, one would need to use the same sort of advanced mathematics to model the quantum effects near the white hole's event horizon. 

16 minutes ago, interested said:

Could an ER bridge be the source of the Big Bang.

You have ignored all the reasons why it seems implausible for a white hole to describe out universe, so I guess there is no point in repeating them to answer this question.

 

Your threads get very annoying after a while. They always follow this pattern:

Interested: Could black holes/white holes/extra dimensions explain X?

Forum Members: No for the following reasons <lots of detailed explanations>

I: OK. But could X be explained by black holes/white holes/extra dimensions?

FM: No. See previous answers.

I: OK 

...

I:  Could black holes/white holes/extra dimensions explain X?

FM: <collective facepalm>

[interested]

8 hours ago, swansont said:

One way would be to go to graduate school in physics and learn the necessary math and physics.

It seems you cant answer my questions and you have done some physics courses I do not wish to learn outdated ideas I want to know the latest.

Another way to go, would be to get a good picture of what is happening, and then develop a mathematical model based upon a plausible explanation of all the observations.

White Holes are plausible, and are a reasonable explanation of why the universe is expanding and a plausible origin for a big bang. For anyone to stick there head in the sand and deny this is moronic. 

The reason I mentioned the strong force is that Dark Matter could just as easily be explained away by an additional long range force not affected by distance the same as gravity. 

There are many extant theories whereby Quantum fluctuations or Dark energy are the cause of the expanding universe, and of gravity.I seem to be getting more useful answers from wikipedia, than I do from this forum.

The maths in many instances does not explain why  something is happening. 

I have learned quite a lot on this forum,  and realized some time ago when an answer is not forthcoming a straw man debate is started, so I will thank you all and be on my merry way 

 

[Strange]

9 minutes ago, interested said:

White Holes are plausible, and are a reasonable explanation of why the universe is expanding and a plausible origin for a big bang.

Really? What theoretical or evidential basis is there for this claim?

10 minutes ago, interested said:

The reason I mentioned the strong force is that Dark Matter could just as easily be explained away by an additional long range force not affected by distance the same as gravity.

All attempts so far to explain dark energy in terms of modified gravity or extra forces have not worked. So obviously not "easy".

11 minutes ago, interested said:

There are many extant theories whereby Quantum fluctuations or Dark energy are the cause of the expanding universe, and of gravity.

Can you provide a reference to any of these "many" theories?

 

[Mordred]

 I for one know every attempt I have ever seen to apply white holes for the source of the cosmological constant or DM has for one reason or another failed due to the sheer homogeneous and isotropic nature of the universe as well as the sheer constancy of the cosmological constant itself.

 I have already provided several of the reasons in this thread.

[interested]

On 5/21/2018 at 7:29 PM, Mordred said:

 I for one know every attempt I have ever seen to apply white holes for the source of the cosmological constant or DM has for one reason or another failed due to the sheer homogeneous and isotropic nature of the universe as well as the sheer constancy of the cosmological constant itself.

 I have already provided several of the reasons in this thread.

I fully recognize your expertise. 

If a White hole is accepted as the source of the BB, dark energy and all of space time, quantum fluctuations etc does it change any of Einsteins theories. 

Why would the output from a ER Bridge from a or multiple BH's to a WH have to be non homogeneous. If a ER bridge exists at a singularity to all of space time does it not explain questions like those raised in this link http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/02/22/energy-is-not-conserved/

[Strange]

33 minutes ago, interested said:

Why would the output from a ER Bridge from a or multiple BH's to a WH have to be non homogeneous

Because (it appears) that you are proposing expansion from some central point. That cannot result in a homogeneous and isotropic state. 

34 minutes ago, interested said:

does it not explain questions like those raised in this link http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/02/22/energy-is-not-conserved/

That is explained in the article. 

[interested]

On 5/27/2018 at 9:01 AM, Strange said:

Because (it appears) that you are proposing expansion from some central point.

I am not proposing anything of the sort. What I am proposing is in line with the Big Bang expansion of space. 

You appear to be are asking me to speculate. My line of thought is as follows

You stated that a White Hole is the opposite of a BH on this thread. If this is true then Hawking radiation may have an equivalent on the surface of a white hole this may manifest itself as Quantum foam and or the expansion of space.

I am thinking that a worm hole / none spacial dimension from a white hole connects all points in space via an ER bridge. The energy radiated from the White Hole drives the expansion of space, and possibly appears as Quantum foam. The white hole could be the source of zero point energy and of dark energy. As was mentioned above some people have been looking at the possibility that our universe is a white hole. 

You stated on another thread words to the effect of, " the waves in wave particle duality pass through all points in space before manifesting them selves as particles at a specific point in space". If the wave is passing through all points in space, why could this not be by a non spacial dimension connected to all points in space.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2018 by interested

[Mordred]

  As you mentioned radiated from a WH, this is identical to radiating from a central source. This would entail a vector field as opposed to a scalar field such as the BB model. The type of vector field would be diverging. Regions closer to the WH will naturally have a higher mass density which is detectable via its temperature contributions. These temperature variations will also show up in the BAO, Baryon Acoustic oscillations which is a fancy way of describing the rate of infalling matter and outflowing matter on anistrophy distributions.

 I also recall stating that a BH varies in rotation rate and thus so does its WH exit, this will vary the mass distributions as well.

 So good luck in this theoretical view, Its been tried before and lost out with the body of evidence since the sheer uniformity of the CMB was measured.

Edited May 28, 2018 by Mordred

[Strange]

38 minutes ago, interested said:

I am not proposing anything of the sort.

So how is expansion from a white hole not expansion from a point in space?

38 minutes ago, interested said:

What I am proposing is in line with the Big Bang expansion of space.

Can we see the mathematical proof of that? Or is just a baseless claim?

39 minutes ago, interested said:

You appear to be are asking me to speculate.

No. I am trying to discourage you from speculating and to learn some basic physics instead.

39 minutes ago, interested said:

You stated that a White Hole is the opposite of a BH on this thread. If this is true then Hawking radiation may have an equivalent on the surface of a white hole this may manifest itself as Quantum foam and or the expansion of space.

If white holes exist (there is no reason to think they do) and Hawking radiation exists (possible) then it would be interesting to know what the equivalent of Hawking radiation would be for a white hole. Given that a white hole is, mathematically, a time reversed black hole, then the equivalent of Hawking radiation should be "Hawking absorption". 

There is no reason to think that the fact that hypothetical white holes could absorb radiation has any connection with quantum foam or the expansion of space. Both of which already have explanations. 

By wanting to replace the existing explanations, you need to replace all of quantum theory and general relativity. Can you have that done by teat time tomorrow?

43 minutes ago, interested said:

I am thinking that a worm hole / none spacial dimension from a white hole connects all points in space via an ER bridge.

How can it connect all points in space? A wormhole (if such a thing exists) connects two points.

44 minutes ago, interested said:

The energy radiated from the White Hole drives the expansion of space, and possibly appears as Quantum foam.

Again: these things already have well tested theories explaining them. What are you going to replace those with?

45 minutes ago, interested said:

If the wave is passing through all points in space, why could this not be by a non spacial dimension connected to all points in space.

Because that is just some random words you made up.

Bit on the other hand, we have scientific theories ...