Black Holes & Light: Can Gravitational Force Exceed Speed of Light?

Liger20
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
Black holes exert such a powerful gravitational force that even light cannot escape its grip. But doesn't this imply that the rule about how nothing can exceed the speed of light has been violated? If a black hole can suck in light, then doesn't that mean that the gravitational force of a black hole can exceed the speed of light?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Liger20 said:
Black holes exert such a powerful gravitational force that even light cannot escape its grip. But doesn't this imply that the rule about how nothing can exceed the speed of light has been violated? If a black hole can suck in light, then doesn't that mean that the gravitational force of a black hole can exceed the speed of light?

No - force and speed are different quantities. The force of gravity doesn't have any particular speed.
 
Liger20 said:
Black holes exert such a powerful gravitational force that even light cannot escape its grip. But doesn't this imply that the rule about how nothing can exceed the speed of light has been violated? If a black hole can suck in light, then doesn't that mean that the gravitational force of a black hole can exceed the speed of light?

Mathman gave you a correct answer. However I am interested in what I think is your mental picture. It seems as if you imagine the Force having a speed, as if it consisted of little force particles running after the light particles, trying to catch them! And these force particles have certain speed, limited by the usual speed limit.

If the Force police actually WAITED until a light particle tried to make a run for it, then I think you would be right! The force would never catch up and haul them back!

But actually the force is embodied in the GRAVIATIONAL FIELD that is already out there around the black hole.
You can think of it either as a force field or as a curvature of the GEOMETRY of spacetime, which GUIDES almost every outgoing lightray back into the hole.
With almost no exception, all the geodesics---the straightest lines light can follow in the curved geometry---lead back to the hole.

Or if you don't like geometry, think "force", but it is the same in gravity case. Changes in the field do propagate like waves, it is thought, probably at the speed of light. But for a steady black hole the field is not changing and it doesn't have any speed. THE FIELD IS ALREADY OUT THERE ready to send the light back.
 
Last edited:
Okay, thanks, that makes sense...
 
1 universe.
Billions of galaxies.
Each galaxy contains billions of stars.
Each star has at least one planet orbiting it.
Surely there’s more life out then us, and more intelligent
 
marcus said:
Mathman gave you a correct answer. However I am interested in what I think is your mental picture. It seems as if you imagine the Force having a speed, as if it consisted of little force particles running after the light particles, trying to catch them! And these force particles have certain speed, limited by the usual speed limit.

If the Force police actually WAITED until a light particle tried to make a run for it, then I think you would be right! The force would never catch up and haul them back!

But actually the force is embodied in the GRAVIATIONAL FIELD that is already out there around the black hole.
You can think of it either as a force field or as a curvature of the GEOMETRY of spacetime, which GUIDES almost every outgoing lightray back into the hole.
With almost no exception, all the geodesics---the straightest lines light can follow in the curved geometry---lead back to the hole.

Or if you don't like geometry, think "force", but it is the same in gravity case. Changes in the field do propagate like waves, it is thought, probably at the speed of light. But for a steady black hole the field is not changing and it doesn't have any speed. THE FIELD IS ALREADY OUT THERE ready to send the light back.

If gravity does propagate at c, this would mean that there could be areas of space time that were never "disturbed", wouldn't it? What would be the properties of such localities, zero inertia?
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
The formal paper is here. The Rutgers University news has published a story about an image being closely examined at their New Brunswick campus. Here is an excerpt: Computer modeling of the gravitational lens by Keeton and Eid showed that the four visible foreground galaxies causing the gravitational bending couldn’t explain the details of the five-image pattern. Only with the addition of a large, invisible mass, in this case, a dark matter halo, could the model match the observations...
Hi, I’m pretty new to cosmology and I’m trying to get my head around the Big Bang and the potential infinite extent of the universe as a whole. There’s lots of misleading info out there but this forum and a few others have helped me and I just wanted to check I have the right idea. The Big Bang was the creation of space and time. At this instant t=0 space was infinite in size but the scale factor was zero. I’m picturing it (hopefully correctly) like an excel spreadsheet with infinite...
Back
Top