I think black holes are empty. I think whole universes exist but I don't think there. The cell is a microcosiom of the universe so the possiblities are endless but in order for something to exist we have to have the exact opposite and that to me is the black hole.

Imagine an atom.Now imagine thousands of times the mass of the sun in this atom.A place with so much mass that time stops in it.That's a black hole. I really can't imagine what lurks in a black hole.It could be anything.

Anything is possible! :-/

Sure, anything is possible.

My wife and I discussed the theory that we are in a universe that is part of an atom in a much larger universe. It is likely that if you fly to the end of our universe, you will find that we are part of some guy's coffee table. I guess that guy, to us would be god as we are god to some micro universe.

Since no one has ever personally experienced one anything is possible up to and including multiple dimensions and parallel universes which might explain the mysteries yet to be unravelled in this so-called "3-dimensional" universe. We don't "know" much actually do we? In order to best "know" something we need to experience it or at least have a window through which we can look and observe it.

Some theories suggest this. However, I won't believe anything without proof. 1) "Life Inside the Black Hole : Some have speculated that our universe might exist inside a gigantic black hole. Let’s explore this idea further, in order to gain more insight into what the interior of a black hole is really like (and for the fun of it). If our universe is really inside a giant black hole, one might ask where the event horizon is. Is there any path we can take that will bring us closer to the event horizon? According to GRT, if our universe is inside a black hole, every point in our universe is moving closer to the center of this black hole, and away from the event horizon. There is no (spatial) direction that will bring us closer to the event horizon. As it is difficult to visualize a four-dimensional curved surface (one needs to think in five dimensions to be able to do this), subtracting a dimension or two makes it easier. Imagine a giant sphere, and a point on the interior surface of this sphere. This point detaches from the inner surface and moves toward the center, at the same time expanding into a disk. This expanding disk represents our universe expanding in space as it moves through time. In this model let's suppose that our universe formed on the event horizon of the giant black hole, represented by the surface of the sphere. We suppose that the Big Bang occurred at the event horizon of the black hole. See figure 5. The expanding disk is a two-dimensional representation of the three spatial dimensions of our universe. (We could label these spatial dimensions q, j and t. Note that the disk represents an unimaginable curved 3-D hypersurface.) Every point in our universe (the disk) is moving away from the inner surface of the sphere (the event horizon) toward the center of the sphere (the singularity of the giant black hole). The dimension through which this disk is moving is a timelike dimension (let’s label it r). For every point on the disk (our universe at a point in time), the event horizon lies in the past and the singularity of the black hole lies, unseen, in the future. All timelike and lightlike world lines in our universe lead from the event horizon to the singularity of the black hole. To travel to the event horizon would be to travel backward in time. Therefore, there is no path we can take that will bring us closer to the event horizon. In this imaginary model, the only point of the spacetime of our universe that is connected to the event horizon of the giant black hole is the point in space and time at which the Big Bang occurred. With a powerful enough telescope, one can, in theory, look in any direction and see the Big Bang (or at least 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe became transparent). One can look around in any direction and see the Big Bang, yet one cannot travel toward it, because it lies in the past. This is the way of things inside any black hole. Even a super-powerful rocket cannot prevail against the gentle timelike acceleration toward the singularity at the center of a black hole. Could we detect the presence of this gigantic black hole? If we had sensitive enough instruments, it should be possible to detect the tidal acceleration gradient, at least over astronomical distances. This might be mistaken for a slight variation in the strength of gravity over very large distances. Also, the expansion of the universe should eventually slow down and reverse, as the universe moves closer to the central singularity of the black hole. In this model, our universe would eventually shrink down to a single point (the Big Crunch)." Source and further information: http://members.cox.net/jhaldenwang/black_hole.htm 2) "Is it conceivable that the entire universe is a "black hole"? To even begin to answer this question, we need clear definitions of "black hole" and "universe", neither of which are as easy to define as one might think. The formal definition of a black hole is a region of spacetime that is not in the causal past of the infinite future. If we combine this with any Robertson-Walker type universe, it's clear that neither an "open" infinite universe nor a "closed" finite universe can be considered a black hole, because the definition explicitly requires a black hole to be a proper SUB-set of the overall universe, i.e., a black hole is defined as being EXCLUDED from some portion of the universe, so the universe itself cannot be a black hole according to this definition and with this class of "universes". On the other hand, we're free to imagine "our universe" as a "closed" (though not necessarily finite) subset of some meta-universe that can be said to posses an "infinite future" of which our universe is not in the causal past, in which case by definition our universe IS a black hole. Of course, this putative embedding may not be of the sort that is usually contemplated in the context of relativistic cosmologies, but this illustrates how much the answer to our original question depends on the precise definitions that we choose, as well as on whether we choose to imagine "our universe" as just a subset of some meta-universe." Source and further information: http://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath339.htm 3) Further information: - "Are We Living Inside of a Black Hole ?": http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=21821 - "Universe Was Born in a Black Hole?": http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-147972.html