Any progress on realistic rotating black holes?

[tzimie]

Idealistic solution for non-rotating BH includes a "white hole part"
However, realistic solution is different

For the rotating BH we have an ideal solution with an "eternal" ring singularity inside, which can't be realistic, as ring, as I said, is "eternal" and there is no transition of collapsing matter into that ring.

So for the rotating BH we I know only the "idealistic" picture.
The questions I have:
1. Is there any progress on that subject?
2. Can it be solved, in principle, without taking QM into account (as QM can be preventing spacetime from forming CTLs)
3. Even not taking QM into account, what is a difference between the rotating BH in standard GR and Einstein–Cartan theory? How far that difference "propagate"? Does it propagate to the exterior of BH?

 

[pervect]

There's a fair amount of work on the topic, I believe. I don't have a complete list, but I know Andrew Hamilton has a few papers. One such is arxiv https://arxiv.org/abs/0903.2021. ((Add: also https://arxiv.org/abs/1108.3512 and https://arxiv.org/abs/1010.1272 - do an author search on arxiv for potentially more)). Ori has some papers too, see for instance http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.2117

Hamilton's work is based on earlier papers by Poisson IIRC.

Don't regard this reply as thourogh survey of the literature - it's not. It's basically a couple of papers that might help you get started and track down more papers.

 

[PeterDonis]

Alexander Hamilton

I think you mean Andrew Hamilton. AFAIK the first Secretary of the Treasury didn't go and hover close to a black hole's horizon for a while and then come back to Earth a couple of centuries later to take up physics.

 

[pervect]

I think you mean Andrew Hamilton. AFAIK the first Secretary of the Treasury didn't go and hover close to a black hole's horizon for a while and then come back to Earth a couple of centuries later to take up physics.

Fixed

 

[martinbn]

I would guess that it is a difficult question. Even for the "outside" part of the space-time not all is understood. For example uniqueness questions (with reasonable assumptions i.e. without analyticity) and stability questions are not yet settled.

 

[tzimie]

I would guess that it is a difficult question. Even for the "outside" part of the space-time not all is understood. For example uniqueness questions (with reasonable assumptions i.e. without analyticity) and stability questions are not yet settled.

Even this question could be too difficult to solve it analytically, I expected to find numerical solutions. But the most recent I found was dated 2010,
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1006.0663.pdf
already with CUDA usage. However, they had assumed the existence of the inner horizon (and I am not sure it exists - inside the inner horizon lies an area with CTLs, QM prevents CTLs, so probably there is no inner horizon at all )))

And nothing since 2010... Looks like all GPU resources on the planet were allocated to bitcoin mining )

 

[tzimie]

Actually I have found many references here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_relativity