Black Hole: Knock on the horizon

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of coordinates in the context of the Schwarzschild metric and black holes, particularly focusing on the concept of distance to the event horizon and the implications of General Relativity (GR) on spatial understanding. Participants explore geometric representations, coordinate systems, and the nature of spacetime in relation to black holes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants discuss the nature of the Schwarzschild metric and the meaning of the coordinate R, suggesting it represents a sphere with surface area but not a true radial distance from a center.
  • There is a proposal that the distance to the event horizon may be infinitely distant from any observer, raising questions about the application of classical physics to GR.
  • Participants debate the definition of "towards the center" in a four-dimensional spacetime, with some suggesting that the choice of direction affects the interpretation of distances.
  • One participant emphasizes that r=0 in Schwarzschild spacetime does not represent a spatial point but rather a singularity, challenging the notion of a center in this context.
  • There are discussions about the limitations of using classical concepts in the framework of GR, with references to the necessity of rethinking ideas about spacetime.
  • Some participants suggest switching to different coordinate systems, such as Kruskal coordinates, to better understand the structure of spacetime around black holes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the interpretation of coordinates and distances in Schwarzschild spacetime. There is no consensus on the implications of these interpretations, and the discussion remains unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on specific coordinate systems and the unresolved nature of how classical physics applies to GR. The discussion highlights the complexity of understanding spacetime geometry and the challenges in reconciling different mathematical frameworks.

  • #31
Dale said:
Are you thinking that second term evaluates to 0 or otherwise goes away? Or did I or Mathematica make a mistake somewhere?
No, you're right. I did think the log term went away, but I'd misread the result on my tiny phone screen.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Ibix said:
I'd misread the result on my tiny phone screen.
That has happened to me more times than I would care to admit.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix
  • #33
Dale said:
I just tried to work this out myself and got a slightly different answer. So I have $$g_{rr}=\frac{1}{1-\frac{R_S}{r}}$$ which integrates (according to Mathematica) to $$\int_{R_S}^R \sqrt{g_{rr}} \ dr = \sqrt{R \left(R-R_S\right)}+\frac{1}{2} R_S \log \left(\frac{-R_S+2 \sqrt{R \left(R-R_S\right)}+2
R}{R_S}\right) $$
Are you thinking that second term evaluates to 0 or otherwise goes away? Or did I or Mathematica make a mistake somewhere?
@mef to illustrate the issue about the coordinate system, I performed the same calculation in isotropic coordinates. We have $$g_{rr}=\frac{\left(2 r+\frac{R_S}{2}\right){}^4}{16 r^4}$$ which integrates to $$\int_{R_S}^R \sqrt{g_{rr}} \ dr = R-R_S+\frac{\left(R-R_S\right) R_S}{16 R}+\frac{1}{2} R_S \log \left(\frac{R}{R_S}\right)$$

Note that the results are different, but still finite.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Ibix
  • #34
PeterDonis said:
If you mean a spacelike 3-surface formed by a continuous series of such spacelike 2-spheres, yes, those also exist inside the horizon. They just aren't surfaces of constant Schwarzschild ##t## coordinate, since those are timelike (more precisely, they have one timelike and 2 spacelike linearly independent tangent vectors) inside the horizon.
Since the ##t## coordinate is spacelike inside the horizon and the Schwarzschild metric in Schwarzschild coordinate chart is diagonal, then any 3-surface of constant coordinate time ##t= \text{const}## inside the horizon cannot be spacelike (there are not 3 linearly independent spacelike 4-vectors part of the orthogonal complement of a spacelike vector in the tangent space at each point).
 
Last edited:
  • #35
cianfa72 said:
Since the ##t## coordinate is spacelike inside the horizon and the Schwarzschild metric in Schwarzschild coordinate chart is diagonal, then any 3-surface of constant coordinate time ##t= \text{const}## inside the horizon cannot be spacelike
Yes, you are agreeing with what I said.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: cianfa72

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K