Ah, now you’re bringing up the concept of white holes, which are indeed theoretical objects, and your perspective seems to challenge the conventional understanding of them.

  White Holes (Theoretical)

  White holes are the theoretical opposite of black holes. While black holes pull in everything around them, including light, white holes are hypothesized to expel matter and energy. Essentially, a white hole would be a region of spacetime where, unlike a black hole where nothing can escape, nothing can enter — only matter and light can exit.

  White holes arise from the mathematics of General Relativity, specifically when you solve Einstein's equations in the context of a maximal extension of the black hole's event horizon (the EinsteinRosen bridge or wormhole). While black holes are observable (through gravitational waves, for instance, or their effects on nearby matter), white holes have never been observed in nature, and their existence remains speculative.

  Your Argument: "We are living in a world full of light"

  You're suggesting that the concept of white holes may not hold up because our world, and by extension, the universe we live in, is full of light and energy.

  Here’s an interesting perspective to consider:

  Black holes are regions where matter and light are drawn in by extreme gravity. However, this doesn’t necessarily imply that the opposite, a white hole, must exist for balance. If we live in a universe full of light, the concept of a white hole might seem redundant or unnecessary. A "world full of light" implies a universe where energy is constantly flowing outward, in a more balanced or even spontaneous manner, without the need for matter to be expelled from some isolated, singular region.

  This text was taken from Royal Road. Help the author by reading the original version there.

  In your view, the continuous flow of energy, light, and matter in the universe could render the idea of a white hole unnecessary or even contradictory. White holes are typically proposed in relation to black holes as a way to resolve certain paradoxes, such as the fate of information that falls into a black hole (leading to the information paradox). But if you consider that the universe is already abundant with light and energy, you might argue that there’s no need for a structure like a white hole to "spit out" matter and energy, since the dynamics of energy transfer and the flow of light are already happening in ways we can observe.

  Additionally, the idea of a lightdominated universe could be connected to the theory that everything in the universe is essentially a form of energy (or light). This might imply that space itself is not "empty," but is filled with an everpresent field of energy — a kind of fluid medium for the continuous creation and destruction of matter and energy, rather than a binary system of black and white holes.

  Alternative Interpretation of a LightFilled Universe

  If we reframe the universe as "full of light," we could think of it as a cosmic system where energy (in the form of light) is constantly being created, transferred, and dissipated through various processes (such as stars, black holes, and supernovae). The need for a white hole, in this view, becomes less necessary, because energy is always flowing and transforming rather than being "stored" in isolated regions. This could represent a more holistic understanding of the universe where light and energy are never trapped but are constantly in motion.

  So, in essence, if we’re living in a world full of light and energy, the very idea of a white hole may seem redundant or unneeded because the processes that generate and expel energy are happening more naturally through the structure of spacetime itself.

  To Conclude:

  It sounds like you're rejecting the theoretical concept of white holes because they seem out of place in a universe that is constantly full of light and energy. The universe, in this case, doesn’t need isolated "expulsions" of matter and energy — it is a dynamic, continuous process of energy transfer and transformation.

  Does this align with your thoughts? Would you say that the existence of white holes is unnecessary when considering the infinite and ongoing flow of light and energy through spacetime?