Singularity Vs Quantum Theory of Gravity

And here it is worked out mathematically.........




β=2Mr


This looks like the Minkowski metric except that the radial coordinate is replaced by dr+βdtff. The parameter β has the dimensions of velocity, and in fact it's equal to the Newtonian escape velocity. β<1outside the event horizon, β=1 at the event horizon and β>1 inside the event horizon.

The physical interpretation of this is that the radial coordinate is flowing inwards at a velocity of β. In effect space is flowing inwards into the black hole and carries observers along with it in the same way a river carries along observers floating on it - hence the name river model. A light beam moves with velocity 1with respect to the spacetime around it, so relative to the observer at infinity the net velocity of a radial outbound light beam is:


veff=1−β


So outside the event horizon veff>0 and the light beam moves outwards. At the event horizon veff=0 and the light beam is frozen at the horizon unable to move outwards. Inside the event horizon veff<0 i.e. even if you shine the light directly outwards it still moves inwards towards the singularity.

As it happens I have addressed this issue before, in the question Why is a black hole black?. However that was a more algebraic approach and I think the river model approach is far more intuitive (insofar as anything in GR can be intuitive!).
http://physics.stackexchange.com/qu...he-event-horizon-of-a-black-hole-what-happens



conclusion:
So outside the event horizon veff>0 and the light beam moves outwards. At the event horizon veff=0 and the light beam is frozen at the horizon unable to move outwards.

Thank you linesman, thank you ball boys!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Paddoboy,

Q1.

This will clear all the cobwebs from your mind. The escape velocity at the surface of the earth is around 11.2 Km/sec....what will happen if I throw a ball at a speed of 11.2 Km/sec from the earth's surface radially....where will it hover ??

similarly the escape velocity at Event Horizon is equal to c, now a Photon is emitted radially from the event horizon with a speed c ( as you are bluffing), where will it hover ??

I am sure the answer to this question will certainly demonstrate that how easily you get fooled by those convenient science fiction statements....Grow up Paddo, admit to yourself that those wild study of all the sundry references on the net has confused you thoroughly. you are not able to chaff out science from science fiction. Please read those 15 topics in detail, you will purge at least 80% of your internet reference list....

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Silly silly boy! Earth is matter. An EH is just a parameter of spacetime.
I've given you three links, you as usual have come up with nothing.
I rest my case.

Oh, by the way, It is really noticable that as I point out the different errors in your thinking, you just as quickly switch tack and start on something else. The ways of trolls I suppose.
But you were also confused yesterday about space-time curvature-gravity, and space-time expansion.
You do now realise that space-time curvature-gravity works against the large scale Universal expansion?
No need to thank me.....Just helping out.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not science fiction old chum, best accepted models based on what we know, and all reputable University links.
In fact the only sci/fi in this thread is your own unsupported unqualified, pretentious off topic ranting as per the average anti science troll.
Like I said, three Uni links, one with mathematical proof.
What's your excuse for the continued trolling, other than that inflated ego?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

No, I just asked you, why the speed limit on the spacetime curvature, when there is no speed limit on the spacetime expansion..after all both are non material. You went on DE/DM trip...

 

That true EH is a parameter...but you are emitting a photon just at EH.....I can also create an imaginary surface of radius r around Earth and throw the ball at escape velocity from there ??

Paddo, the answer lies somewhere else, which is beyond you.

 

No, you inferred they should all have a speed limit and the same mechanism.
I showed you that you were as usual, grossly in error, and how one worked against the other.
Just one of your many assumptions that have no scientific support or backing.
Try reading a few reputable university oriented links and clear that befuddled brain.

 

The answer lies in the three links I have given you and which you are unable to refute.
Perhaps with your throwing the ball analogy, you should need to think along the lines of it not having constant velocity, while a photon light certainly does have constant velocity.

 

Are you going to answer the three links? Or are you again going to let your credibility flounder?

 

And you havn't answered the other question re why anyone on this forum should take heed of a gross lay person without any qualifications, and who refuses to read links, as well as the controversial paradoxical issues re your many threads in the past and their content.

 

Phew !

 

I cannot answer to a moron who does not understand even after spending 12 years lurking around !! I am surprised at your stupidity and absolute unwillingness to learn beyond science fiction......go again watch interstellar and tell us what is a BH....

 

Look, let's take a time out on this pathetic exchange of insults. Someone please answer me this......

What EXACTLY is the main point that paddaboy and Rajesh disagree upon?

You see, this could have been an interesting thread to an outsider like myself, but it has, for several pages, become totally uninteresting due to their personal wrangling

I ask again - what is the main point of difference here?

 

* Rajesh refuses to acknowledge that it is a reasonably logical to assign angular momentum to a Kerr metric BH...
* Rajesh refuses to read or acknowledge any links, insisting that we all must think for ourselves and construct our own interpretation.
* Rajesh refuses to acknowldge his obvious errors, especially with regards to Schwarzchild limit and GR defined total collapse.
* Rajesh on his general record of threads on BHs, does not believe they exist, yet cannot give another mechanism for the effects on matter/energy and space-time that we observe.
Rajesh refuses to acknowldge that he [like myself] is no more then a lay person with a 12 month interest in cosmology.
* Rajesh certainly on the evidence available has an agenda.
* Rajesh is very much in the Farsight mould.

 

Continuing with the insults again?
Still have no reference or link to support any of your concepts?
Now again......
Are you going to answer the three links? Or are you again going to let your credibility flounder?
and please explain why why anyone on this forum should take heed of a gross lay person without any qualifications, and who refuses to read links, as well as the controversial paradoxical issues re your many threads in the past and their content.

 

Forgetting the childish insults and agitation shown [ generally the mark of someone with an agenda] let's look at my "science fiction" links.
http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/singularity.html

http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html


and finally a mathamatical summary....
http://physics.stackexchange.com/qu...he-event-horizon-of-a-black-hole-what-happens

I smell "sour grapes" from our friend Rajesh.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Expanding slightly on what I have expressed....
This extends over many cosmology threads, all starting with asking innocent questions, not listening to replies [sounds familiar?] asking the same basic questions again, then finally we get a flurry of BH posts, expressing professional like understanding including maths while still at the same time misunderstanding simple basic concepts.
In this thread alone and over recent times, Rajesh has questioned....
[1] Whether the Schwarzchild limit and compulsory collapse is GR orientated.

[2] Confusion over space-time expansion, and space-time curvature in the presence of mass/energy.

[3] The ability of gravity to overcome the strong nuclear force within BHs.

[4] The fact that all FoRs are as valid as each other, and that from a local frame, in association with a photon emitted just on but this side of the EH, directly radially away, will be seen to hover there never getting away, and never getting sucked in.

All those scenarios have been referenced with reputable professional links on my part.
None of those links have ever been addressed.

I'll also take this opportunity to apologise for my part in this continued incessant wrangling between Rajesh and myself.

 

I've only skimmed the thread at this point... but I'm getting the feeling that, perhaps, this would be best in the Alternative Theories section?

 

Well I'm sticking to accepted mainstream BH cosmology as much as possible, but I did not start this thread or the other BH threads that seem to be questioning BH cosmology.
As I suggested to James, a perusal of the cosmological threads by Rajesh [that all started with basic questions then quickly advanced to professional like status and claims] leads me to believe an agenda is afoot.
But as usual, those decisions are for you and the other mods.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

*nods*