Confused about the event horizon

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the behavior of time at the event horizon of a black hole, exploring concepts from general relativity and the implications for observers both inside and outside the event horizon. Participants express confusion regarding the perception of time and the nature of objects falling into a black hole.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that, according to common explanations, time appears to stop at the event horizon from the perspective of an outside observer, leading to confusion about whether objects actually fall into the black hole.
  • Another participant clarifies that time does not stop at the event horizon; rather, the coordinate system used to describe it breaks down there.
  • There is a suggestion that the coordinate time, as measured by an observer at infinity, contributes to the perception of time stopping at the horizon, while an infalling observer experiences time normally.
  • Participants mention specific coordinate systems (Eddington-Finkelstein, Painleve-Gullstrand, and Kruskal-Szekeres) that can describe the event horizon of a Schwarzschild black hole.
  • One participant expresses concern about their mathematical skills, particularly regarding tensor calculus, in relation to understanding these concepts.
  • Another participant reassures that tensor calculus is not necessary for understanding event horizons and suggests accessible resources for further reading.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of time at the event horizon, with some agreeing that the coordinate system breaks down while others emphasize the perspective of infalling observers. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the implications of these perspectives.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding of the mathematical frameworks involved, particularly in relation to calculus and tensor calculus, which may affect their grasp of the topic.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in general relativity, black hole physics, and the conceptual challenges associated with understanding event horizons and time perception in extreme gravitational fields.

Paul_Bartosik
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
I have recently finished "Gravity from the Ground Up: An Introductory Guide to Gravity and General Relativity".

Great book, but I am confused about the behavior of time at the event horizon of a black hole. I spent some time looking at existing threads on this site, but was unable to find clarification.

I read repeatedly, that from the perspective of an outside observer, time will stop at the event horizon. So if I am watching something fall into a black hole, it will seem that it stops at the brink of the precipice and I will not actually see it cross into the abyss.

I understand that this statement is not fully true; I would not see the something frozen in time. Instead, I would see the red shift of any light to longer and longer wavelengths.

My question: Time will stop at the event horizon, so from the perspective of the outside observer, nothing actually ever falls into the black hole. Does it all just accrete at the event horizon?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hi Paul! Welcome to PF! :smile:
Paul_Bartosik said:
I have recently finished "Gravity from the Ground Up: An Introductory Guide to Gravity and General Relativity".

Great book, but I am confused about the behavior of time at the event horizon of a black hole.

My question: Time will stop at the event horizon, so from the perspective of the outside observer, nothing actually ever falls into the black hole. Does it all just accrete at the event horizon?

ah, http://books.google.com/books?id=P_...avity+from+the+Ground+Up"&client=safari&cd=1".

Time doesn't stop at the event horizon, it's just that our coordinate system breaks down there.

Yes, in our coordinate system, the speed of an infalling object gets slower and slower.

(btw, this has nothing to do with the accretion disc of a black hole , which is at radius 6M, three times as far out as the event horizon).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great. Thanks for the quick response.

If "our coordinate system breaks down" at the event horizon, what coordinate system does apply?
 
Last edited:
Paul_Bartosik said:
Great. Thanks for the quick response.

If "our coordinate system breaks down" at the event horizon, what coordinate system does apply?

The Eddington-Finkelstein, Painleve-Gullstrand, and Kruskal-Szekeres coordinate systems all cover the event horizon of a Schwarzschild black hole.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest perhaps tiny-tim meant that the coordinate time (time measured by an observer at infinity) is what gives this whole "time stopping at the horizon" business. For an infalling observer, he will experience nothing of the sort.
 
George Jones said:
The Eddington-Finkelstein, Painleve-Gullstrand, and Kruskal-Szekeres coordinate systems all cover the event horizon of a Schwarzschild black hole.

Great. That is what I was afraid of. I am not so good at calculus, and tensor calculus is way beyond my meager skills.

Thanks for the responses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
tiny-tim said:
You might like to try "Gravitation" by Misner Thorne and Wheeler, or the limited http://books.google.com/books?id=Uk...roch+"General+Relativity"&client=safari&cd=1" of "General relativity from A to B‎" by Geroch. :smile:

The second book looks great. I will buy a copy from Barnes and Noble. It looks like it will give a basic introduction of why General Relativity was needed to give gravity a consistent behavior across multiple frames of reference.

Thank you for the guidance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • · Replies 129 ·
5
Replies
129
Views
20K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
5K