Black hole, time and observations

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter TungstenX
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Black hole Hole Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of black holes, particularly focusing on the effects of gravitational time dilation and redshift as experienced by observers near a black hole. Participants explore the implications of these phenomena on the perception of objects falling into black holes and the resulting observations from a distance.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants describe a scenario where an observer (Bongani) sees another observer (Aaron) approaching a black hole, noting that Aaron appears to freeze at the event horizon due to time dilation.
  • There is a question about how a black hole can remain "black" if objects falling into it appear to freeze at the event horizon, with some participants suggesting that gravitational redshift causes the light from these objects to fade to black.
  • Participants discuss the concept of "spaghettification," where an infalling observer experiences extreme tidal forces, leading to their destruction, while an outside observer perceives this differently.
  • Some argue that the effects of gravitational time dilation and redshift are inversely related, suggesting that as time slows for an object near the event horizon, the light it emits becomes increasingly redshifted.
  • There are mentions of the potential for objects to be observed as "smeared" across the event horizon due to their varying distances from the black hole.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the implications of these observations and the nature of frames of reference in the context of relativity.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the effects of gravitational time dilation and redshift but express differing views on the implications for the visibility of objects near black holes and the nature of observations from different frames of reference. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the exact nature of these observations and their interpretations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the concepts involved, including the dependence on frames of reference and the limitations of understanding based on classical interpretations of physics.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring concepts in general relativity, black hole physics, and the implications of gravitational effects on time and light perception.

TungstenX
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Hi All,

Before I state my questions, let's test my assumptions / background knowledge:
(The classical explanation?) Aaron and Bongani (sorry Alice and Bob is so boring) sits in a spaceship near a black hole. Aaron gets out and speeds towards the black hole. Aaron will experience acceleration due to the gravitational pull of the black hole, x m/s2.

Bongani's observation is that Aaron's time will slow down (m/s2) as he approach the event horizon (correct term?), to the degree that it seems that Aaron is frozen in time, just outside the event horizon.

Aaron's observation is that he keeps accelerating until he pass the event horizon and the "puff!" gone - or what ever happens inside the event horizon.

Now Bongani gets bored looking at Aaron and goes back to the space station. After a long time; Bongani's grandchildren looks at the Black hole and still sees Aaron "stuck" just before the event horizon. They wonder when he'll ever "go in".

Correct so far or is it a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_paradoxes" ?

I assume it is correct (else the rest is invalid):

Bongani's grandchildren observers another event; a very big star flying towards the black hole, perpendicular to their line of sight of the black hole and on a collision course (straight line, although it is improbable). Because of the size of the start, the grandchildren observers that the "side" of the start closets to the event horizon starts to slow down, while on the other side, the observe deceleration is slower, thus flattening the star into a 2D disk. (But for this star's perspective, nothing but acceleration pass the event horizon happens) Also never passing the event horizon?

A second star comes along, following an elliptic path around the gravity well of the black hole. It is going to pass very close to the event horizon. Time for the particles (photos, magnetic fields, etc?) closest to the event horizon will slow down a lot more than the particles further away from the event horizon? Will it be observed that this star seem to be smeared across the event horizon?

If these observation, far away from the event horizon, is valid, then our observation of a black hole will be a mass of "stuff" stuck just outside the event horizon, even producing light (from the "trapped" stars)?

Like I stated, my assumptions and logic needs to be analysed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I'm just a layman, but the same thought has crossed my mind. If everything that falls into a black hole seems to freeze at the event horizon to outside observers, then how can it still be black? Wouldn't we, as outside observers, be seeing all the stuff that has fallen in over the lifetime of the black hole frozen all over its event horizon?
 
PacketMan said:
I'm just a layman, but the same thought has crossed my mind. If everything that falls into a black hole seems to freeze at the event horizon to outside observers, then how can it still be black? Wouldn't we, as outside observers, be seeing all the stuff that has fallen in over the lifetime of the black hole frozen all over its event horizon?

There is something called: "Gravitational Redshift" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_redshift , which explains why, even if we don't see that "stuff" if it's frozen at the event horizon FROM OUR Frame of Reference.

See, this is part of the problem; you're all asking a question that has Relativity at its heart, but you're thinking in terms of universal standards of spacetime that don't exist. If you were falling into a black hole, you might fail to notice that you had even passed the Event Horizon (EH) of the Black Hole (BH), if the BH is massive (big) enough! From the perspective of Bongani, Aaron gets redder and redder... dimmer and dimmer, slower, and slower...

Aaron could spend an infinite (indeterminate) amount of time watching Bongani fall, although most of this time-dilation would happen VERY close to the Event Horizon. Aaron, because the gravitational 'pull' on his feet would be FAR greater than his knees, waist, chest, and head... becomes a subatomic noodle, usually called "Spaghettification" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaghettification .

I hope this helps you (TungstenX, Hello!) somewhat. I want to fast-forward on your to the end: NOBODY can be sure, but remember: frames of reference... this is Relative. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_reference

Once we get there, it isn't simple.
 
PacketMan said:
I'm just a layman, but the same thought has crossed my mind. If everything that falls into a black hole seems to freeze at the event horizon to outside observers, then how can it still be black? Wouldn't we, as outside observers, be seeing all the stuff that has fallen in over the lifetime of the black hole frozen all over its event horizon?

Gravitational time dilation goes hand in hand with gravitational redshift (stretching) of light. Mathematically, they are just inverse of each other. Slower the time (for distant observer), greater the redshift. So stuff that is falling into black hole fades to black, thus black hole remains black.
 
Calimero said:
Gravitational time dilation goes hand in hand with gravitational redshift (stretching) of light. Mathematically, they are just inverse of each other. Slower the time (for distant observer), greater the redshift. So stuff that is falling into black hole fades to black, thus black hole remains black.

Ah, that makes sense, I think. So, to the outside observer, the gravitational red shift would take the light coming from the falling subject all the way to black when we see time stop for them and they are "frozen" at the event horizon?
 
PacketMan said:
Ah, that makes sense, I think. So, to the outside observer, the gravitational red shift would take the light coming from the falling subject all the way to black when we see time stop for them and they are "frozen" at the event horizon?

Well... really REALLY dim, and REALLY REALLY red, but yeah, black works. Remember that from the infalling person's perspective they are NOT frozen... they pass through without any of this hand-wringing. It's only us, watching from a different frame of reference that believes Aaron is still OUTSIDE of the EH.
 
Aaron would be pulverized by the black hole and Bongani would never see it happen. To Aaron, the tripe could take seconds to minutes, then puff, pulverized. Most of Aaron’s mass would be sucked into the black hole and some of Aaron's molecules could form a really nice jet, fireworks, something like the 4th of July. But Bongani will die waiting for Aaron to fall into the black hole, and will never see the fireworks. Bongani’s great grand kids may see it, but only if they have an interest in astronomy.
 
Last edited:
Imax said:
Aaron would be pulverized by the black hole and Bongani would never see it happen.

Yes!
 
Thank you very much for the responses. I'll need to find a frame of reference that contains some spare time to read all the refs :smile:

Thus I'll give some response after updating my background knowledge on this subject.
 
  • #10
TungstenX said:
Thank you very much for the responses. I'll need to find a frame of reference that contains some spare time to read all the refs :smile:

Thus I'll give some response after updating my background knowledge on this subject.

Take your time, ask questions (I'm the least of this community, believe me), and keep reading. You'll get it all.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K