Off topic, but I saw an article the other day with a theory that black holes are dark matter stars, and that the event horizon is not a sphere but toriodial, the physicist making the claim asserts this gives a simpler explanation for the particle jets observed; as matter and light falls toward the torus it orbits the event horizon through the doughnut hole and some is ejected perpendicular to the plane of the torus.
There is also a claim that the interior of the event horizon is a different phase of space time, constituted of condensed dark matter, which means that there can be a transition of some matter/light back through the event horizon making the black hole actually a very dark grey doughnut.
Not provable at the moment, and it seems the theory isn't well received, but hopefully some observations can clear it up.
Do you have some references for that article?
In principle, primordial black holes can be dark matter (but not "stars"). I have written a few blog articles on that here and there, that you may find interesting.
I am a bit confused by the rest of your message, which is why I would like to have a look to your references to be able to provide a better answer. Technically, the event horizon can be seen as a sphere from the eyes of the human observer. In contrast, the matter accretion disk is of a torus shape. Maybe the two are mixed in the article?
In addition, we have no access to spacetime located inside the event horizon. Anything falls forever inside (including dark and normal matter, as well as light).
I am again a bit puzzled by the claim. I will thus wait for the sources :)
For sure I will not have grasped the concepts properly.
I managed to find the article https://getpocket.com/explore/item/are-black-holes-actually-dark-energy-stars?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-en-GB
Ah ok, this makes things clearer :)
I didn't know about this idea (and have not read anything deep on it). However, the article dates from 2018 (this can be guessed from the last paragraph), and Chapline's work is actually a little bit older (2014-2015 I think, after a quick search on the web). In the meantime:
Therefore, I am quite unsure Chapline's theory survives the most recent data (and this is probably why it is not followed by the astrophysics community).
What did you think of the idea of different phases of space-time (not novel AFAIK), for example our current universe being in a phase that condensed out of a higher energy phase, and at some point before heat-death, parts of the universe may condense into a lower energy phase. In terms of defining these "phases", they may have radically different particles, forces and laws.
Pure speculation?
The universe is expected to have gone through different phases, or epochs, during it history. I am not sure this is what you want to talk about.
For instance, we have the so-called electroweak phase transition corresponding to the restoration of the electroweak symmetry (strictly speaking, this is a cross-over in the Standard Model but not necessarily in its extensions). On each side of the transition, the laws of nature are different (here, the particles are massless prior to the transition).
So not, this is not speculation, but expected! :)
Thanks, I dont have a highly defined expectation of what the phases were, but certainly if the laws of nature changed then that is consistent with what I was talking about.
Let me try to empahsise my example. Who knows, it may help ;)
In the Standard Model, the masses of the particles arise from the Higgs field. This field has the particularity that it cannot be turned off (today), so that particles are massive no matter what.
In the early universe, there is a moment at which the Higgs field is actually turned. All the particle dynamics was different at that time (massive objects vs. massless ones).