Could black holes be a new type of celestial object rather than actual holes?
What if black holes are not actually holes?
I’ve been thinking about an alternative interpretation of black holes.
This is not an attempt to disprove modern physics. It is simply a speculative thought experiment.
Starting point
Current astrophysics suggests that very massive stars can collapse and form black holes after the end of their life cycle.
If that is true, then a black hole originates from an object that already possessed enormous mass.
That led me to ask a simple question.
If all of that mass still exists, what exactly is at the center?
My interpretation
Rather than imagining an empty hole, I wonder if the center is actually an extremely dense spherical object.
Everything a black hole absorbs—stars, planets, gas, plasma, dust, heavy elements—could become part of this object.
Instead of disappearing, matter may simply become compressed into an entirely new state.
Unlike ordinary stars, it may no longer rely on nuclear fusion.
It could represent a completely different category of celestial object, one held together only by gravity.
Event horizon
The event horizon would not be the surface of the object itself.
Instead, it would simply mark the boundary where gravity becomes too strong for light to escape.
The black shadow would therefore not be the object itself, but the visible effect of light being trapped.
Black hole mergers
If two black holes collide, perhaps two ultra-dense objects merge together.
Any material produced during the collision might exist briefly as plasma or extremely energetic matter before being pulled back by gravity into a single larger object.
Why I question the word “hole”
The name “black hole” naturally makes us imagine an empty hole.
However, we have never directly observed the interior beyond the event horizon.
For that reason, I wonder whether “hole” is simply our interpretation rather than a confirmed description of what actually exists.
I’m not claiming this is true.
I’m simply asking whether black holes could be interpreted from a different perspective.
What is the biggest physical flaw in this way of thinking?