Black Hole Falling in / Observer Perspective Question

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of black holes, particularly focusing on the experience of an object falling into a black hole and the perspective of an outside observer. It touches on concepts such as time dilation, the event horizon, and the visibility of objects near black holes, as well as the implications of these phenomena in both theoretical and observational contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that an object falling into a black hole would not feel anything upon crossing the event horizon, likening it to a waterfall.
  • Others argue that an observer would see the falling object appear to freeze at the event horizon due to time dilation, but question how this aligns with the visibility of the black hole itself.
  • One participant notes that light from the falling object would become infinitely red-shifted, making it seem to vanish as it approaches the event horizon.
  • There is a discussion about whether the number of photons emitted by an object falling into a black hole decreases due to time dilation effects, with some asserting that they are merely redshifted rather than fewer in number.
  • Participants raise the question of whether black holes can merge, indicating a potential for further exploration of black hole interactions.
  • Concerns are expressed about the accuracy of popular science shows, with some participants emphasizing that they often oversimplify or misrepresent complex concepts.
  • One participant introduces a formula for estimating tidal forces near a black hole, suggesting that tidal effects may not be significant until very close to the event horizon.
  • There is a reflection on the complexities of time dilation, particularly distinguishing between effects due to velocity and those due to gravitational fields.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the experience of falling into a black hole and the implications for observers. There is no consensus on the visibility of objects near the event horizon or the effects of time dilation on photon emission, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Some claims about visibility and time dilation depend on specific definitions and assumptions about black hole physics, which remain unresolved in the discussion. The relationship between tidal forces and the experience of falling into a black hole is also noted as potentially complex.

Irishwake
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
These damn shows on the Science Channel seem to raise more questions for me than they answer, and maybe I'm understanding this wrong but here we go...

If I were an unfortunate soul who fell into a black hole, the show claims that I will not feel a thing as I pass through the event horizon. Makes sense when I think of it like a waterfall, as the show wanted me to think. I would gradually gain speed and accelerate on my trajectory towards doom.

If I were an observer that watched my friend fall into a black hole, time dilation would eventually bring him to a screeching halt after he passed through the event horizon and he would appear frozen in time. (This is where I think I am mistaken, but it's what the show said)

Every single artist rendition of black holes show them as solid black spheres. How can this be if every object that's fallen into it is "frozen in time" (relative to an outside observer) shortly after crossing the event horizon. Wouldn't a two dimensional projection of the black hole's appetite be splashed all over it thus making it visible?

This raises other questions I have but I'm going to go with this for now.

Thanks!
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
The object falling into a black hole would seem to vanish as well as freeze at the event horizon because its light would be infinitely red-shifted. The show you are describing also seems to be neglecting tidal forces. Someone approaching a stellar-mass black hole would be gruesomely ripped apart long before crossing the EH, however with a super-massive BH a person could (in theory) indeed cross the event horizon and not have any sensation to that effect. I generally avoid those science shows on Discovery, Science, ect. They seem pretty universally terrible with the happy exception of Wonders of the Solar System / Wonders of the Universe with Brian Cox.
 
Anything that passes the event horizon cannot return, because the escape velocity is greater than the speed of light, so even light cannot escape the black hole, hence why it is not visible and called a black hole.

Now if you were observing someone falling into a black hole, you are seeing the photons being reflected off this person as they fall. The gravity distorts space-time and the closer and closer they get to the event horizon the slower the photons travel. We essentially view measure time interval in his frame to move slowly, time dilation. As he crosses the event horizon the photons he's emmiting or reflecting will stop and stay there at the horizon because they are slowed down so much. So he has actually passed into the event horizon and disappeared but the light stuck there will take an infinitely long time to reach you.
 
Would an object falling into a black hole, such as a flashlight, emit less light (fewer photons) over time in the frame of someone not falling in since time dilation slows it down?
 
Not fewer photons, just redshifted.
 
Chronos said:
Not fewer photons, just redshifted.

Why not few photons? What about time dilation effects?
 
hmmm, can a black hole fall into a black hole?
 
shifty88 said:
hmmm, can a black hole fall into a black hole?

If by that you are asking can two Black Holes merge together, then the answer is yes.
 
The1337gamer said:
Anything that passes the event horizon cannot return, because the escape velocity is greater than the speed of light, so even light cannot escape the black hole, hence why it is not visible and called a black hole.

Now if you were observing someone falling into a black hole, you are seeing the photons being reflected off this person as they fall. The gravity distorts space-time and the closer and closer they get to the event horizon the slower the photons travel. We essentially view measure time interval in his frame to move slowly, time dilation. As he crosses the event horizon the photons he's emmiting or reflecting will stop and stay there at the horizon because they are slowed down so much. So he has actually passed into the event horizon and disappeared but the light stuck there will take an infinitely long time to reach you.

The bold part seems to contradict your first paragraph depending on what you mean by "stuck".

I seem to take from that the individual photons are stuck in a losing battle against the gravity of the BH. I'm imagining the last reflected photons taking an infinite amount of time to reach an outside observer.

If they are stuck there though, they would be invisible no? Since they are unable to reach the observer, the fact that they exist at all is irrelevant because anyone beyond(outside) the EH would be unable to see them. The only photons that would be visible would be the last few reflected just before the person fell through the EH, and those would be distorted(red-shifted) as they fought against the gravity, though it seems to me that they would be just barely winning this battle, and slowly accelerate away from the BH.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
What the Universe would look like has been calculated: http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/schw.shtml

One wouldn't experience anything special at the event horizon; its being the event horizon is from the inability to escape, not anything directly local.

One can easily estimate tidal forces.

F ~ G*M*d/R3 ~ d/t2

where t is the remaining time. Tidal forces won't be very strong until one has only about one second left. That's well outside of a solar-mass black hole, but inside a galaxy-center supermassive black hole. "Inside" and "outside" here are for the event horizon.

This analysis also applies to orbits and being on surfaces.
 
  • #11
These shows on the Science Channel are mostly for entertainment purposes only.
 
  • #12
Drakkith said:
Why not few photons? What about time dilation effects?

That seems like a good question. My first thought was that in the frame of reference of the in-falling object, there is no time dilation but then I realized I'm only correct in that there's no time dilation due to acceleration of his velocity, but that doesn't cover the time dilation due to gravity. Hm ... this stuff really makes my head hurt.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K