I Black Hole: Knock on the horizon

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the implications of the Schwarzschild metric in General Relativity, particularly regarding the concept of distance and the event horizon of a black hole. It explores the mathematical procedure of using a series of weightless, infinitely thin rulers to approach the horizon, questioning the meaning of the coordinate R in this context. Participants emphasize that traditional Newtonian physics cannot adequately describe the behavior of black holes, necessitating a complete rethinking of spacetime concepts. The conversation highlights that the r coordinate is not a simple distance measure, especially near the event horizon, and that r=0 represents a singularity rather than a physical center. Overall, the complexities of spacetime geometry and the limitations of classical physics are underscored in understanding black holes.
  • #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 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 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 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 cianfa72

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K