Luis, to 'traduce' means to 'malign' or to 'slander', not sure what you mean here.

This being said, even if your premise is right (to wit, loss of matter/energy into the sinkholes of the Universe), then it's a straightforward matter of calculation - in other words, is the loss enough to counterbalance the forces of expansion ) which you could rephrase as, is the loss of energy enough to counterbalance the Universe's escape-velocity equivalent.

The clear answer, based on a statistical estimation of the distribution of BHs in the Universe, is no.

Dear Chris,

"traducción" (Spanish) or "traduction" (French) = "translation" (English)

So, my guess is that Luis is using the expression "could be traduced as ..." to mean "could be translated/interpreted as ...". :-)

As I understand, black holes do not absorb matter from great distances - it's considered, for example, that they only absorb CMBR that enters their event horizons. If this is correct, then a black hole does not act as a vacuum cleaner - sucking in everything around it. To some extent this is verified by the observation of stars orbiting the compact object SGR A* at the center of the Milky Way - without being 'ingested'.

Moreover, I don't think it's been established that mass-energy that is converted into the gravitational energy of a black hole is in any way 'removed from the universe'. In fact, that the black hole continues to gravitationally interact with the universe seems to indicate that it remains as a component of the universe. If ingested mass-energy ceased to locally interact with the universe, the 'wormhole' conception would seem to have more merit.

IMO, the idea of a 'white hole' is better applied to some future conditions in which the localized mass-energy of a black hole might be released - recondensing into matter...

In a cosmological classification the universe has five components.

They are Dark Matter, Dark energy, Baryons, photons and neutrinos.

Dark energy is responsible for expansion. Black holes fall into the

dark matter category. So it opposes expansion (you are right).

However this opposition is not sufficient to stop expansion

of the universe, which is fuelled by dark energy component.

as you say, the absorbed energy is not enough to say that the universe is contracting. But, what happens to the energy? where it goes? this is not conserving!!

Luis,

As I understand conceptually, any mass-energy absorbed and attached to the black hole is converted to gravitational energy - ignoring any potential minutia such as Hawking radiation... IMO there is no major issue with the conservation of energy.

I must abstain from any conjecture regarding information conservation - I'm merely a retired information systems analyst and cannot comprehend how information physically exists in quantum physics...

Oh I see your point. Dark energy is a different kind of energy which

is causing expansion.

Normal mass energy equivalence hold between normal matter

and normal energy.

I wish someone could explain this tricky issue in a pedagogical

manner.

Friedman equation is (c=1 units)+fluid equation imply,

(1/a) d^2(a)/dt^2 = -4 pi (G/3) (rho + 3p) + (lambda/3)

for

rho+ 3 p < 0 there is accelerated expansion.

because rho > 0 we must have p < 0.

So dark energy is a repulsive energy which

causes p < 0.

Now nobody knows what is the exact mechanism

what type of energy causes this negative pressure.

Again, negative pressure is presumed to be produced by the cosmological constant parameter - but that has not physically been established as the cause for the apparent acceleration of expansion. The simplifying underlying assumption of Friedman and cosmology in general is that the universe is homogeneous. The temporal development of 'large scale structure' (at smaller than universal scales) conflicts with that assumption and may affect temporally developing universal dynamics - especially the acceleration of expansion. See http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.2314 and especially http://arxiv.org/abs/1311.3787. Temporal development of included large voided regions seems likely to require that the rate of universal expansion increase, as the density of voided regions can be much lower than the universal average density.

I have edited my previous post in this thread and added a

cosmological constant separately. Now it can be seen

clearly that cosmological constant term adds a positive

quantity on the right hand side. But now suppose lambda=0.

Then what will contribute to negative p such that,

rho+ 3 p < 0 ?

This is an unknown question. Some strange form of

matter or new type of force which is working at

large distance scales to explain current data.

"The evidence for an accelerating expansion comes

from observations of the brightness of DISTANT

supernovae."

Here I stressed the word distant because it can be

that the new force law does not remain a FIXED LAW

throughout the history of the universe but

the new law itself EVOLVES with the age of the universe

(that is time). Being such a dynamic law, it does not cause

problem to structure formation, but gives accelerated expansion

seen at the current stage.

My apologies for being math deficient. But if it's considered that, in fact, the density of mass-energy in the universe became increasingly inhomogeneous with the development of 'large scale structure' several billion years ago - around the time that universal expansion is thought to have begun to reaccelerate - and that now apparently enormous voided regions exhibit extremely low mass-energy densities, this new property of sub-universal scale structure might by itself physically account for the increasing rate of universal scale expansion.

As I understand, the expected rate of universal expansion - based largely on universal scale expressions of mass-energy density - must account for the faster rate of spacetime expansion that must exists in growing, extremely low-density voided regions that contribute to the universal rate of expansion.

In this case, the problem is not that there is a parameter value missing in a universal model - it is that a simple universal model no longer adequately represents the dynamics of an increasingly inhomogeneous universe.

Of course, this suggested physical effect could be mathematically compensated for in a universal model that continues to presume homogeneity - by tuning a 'fudge' factor... My apologies if this last upsets anyone's sensibilities - but IMO it's most succinct!

Again, please see the reference links in my preceding comment that better explain these issues in the context of physics theories.

Quantum fluctuations in the primordial soup are accentuated by

inflation, that is the usual notion. These quantum fluctuations are

seeds of galaxies and voids when they were inflated. In summary

quantum fluctuations in the primordial soup are seeds of cosmic

structure. Here is a video of a lecture by Prof. Kolb at CERN,

I am sure you will enjoy !

http://cds.cern.ch/record/425290/

Black hole absorbs matter only when they enter into the EVENT HORIZON. so i guess the black holes are not a problem for the expanding universe. they are like wells, when u enter nobody no what happen!