I Does light escape the Universe?

AI Thread Summary
In a hypothetical universe with only a sun, light emitted from the star will not reverse course due to gravitational forces, even at great distances. The discussion highlights that while light can redshift as it travels away from a massive object, it does not ultimately return to the source. The concept of a black hole's event horizon is clarified, emphasizing that light emitted within this region cannot be detected by outside observers. The relationship between distance, gravitational influence, and light behavior is explored, but it is concluded that light does not travel indefinitely without being affected by spacetime curvature. Overall, the inquiry into light's behavior in extreme gravitational fields reveals fundamental principles of physics regarding light and gravity.
swankdave
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
TL;DR Summary
In a single object universe would Gravity eventually stop all light?
Googleing this question yields answers that don't really seem to address the core of my question. I apologize if I just haven't been able to see how answers are applicable, and would greatly appreciate any insight.

Imagine a universe consisting of only our sun. no planets, no galaxies, nothing else but the void. Ignoring the fact that at some distance the light from this star becomes so dispersed as to be, for all practical purposes, undetectable; is there a distance at which the light will, please excuse the phrase as I know light always moves at the speed of light, reverses course, due to the gravitational force of the star? This is a separate question than "can the universe expand forever" as, at least it seems to me, objects with mass could still expand forever, even if light cannot ultimately outpace the warping of spacetime of its source. (mass has the momentum to counteract space-time curvature, light does not, at least I think it doesn't)

The implication here would be that all objects would eventually be considered a black hole at a sufficient distance, depending on the distance between the source of the light transmission (the surface of the sun in this case) and the Schwarzschild radius for the mass of the given object. In my head, this seems congruent with the existence of Cosmic Background Radiation, but that is likely a faulty assumption.

To put it another way, I understand that light emitted within the event horizon of a black hole cannot be seen by the outside observer. However, light from something approaching the event horizon undergoes redshift at a rate of something like v=1/sqrt(1-(d-r)). (v is apparent velocity from redshift, d is the distance to the center of mass, r is the distance from the event horizon to the center of mass) One, such as myself, might be tempted to infer that the distance light will travel from a gravitational source could be related to the integral of a formula like the one above between the distance of transmission to an observer approaching the speed of light, which, given the asymptotic nature of the formula, I would think must happen eventually? (I apologize, my calculus isn't great here, and my assumption that the integral of a horizontal asymptote with a limit of zero isn't itself limited doesn't feel quite right, but I'm proposing it anyway.)

Sorry for the rambling nature, your insight is greatly appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
swankdave said:
is there a distance at which the light will, please excuse the phrase as I know light always moves at the speed of light, reverses course, due to the gravitational force of the star?
No, the outgoing light from a star (or anywhere above the horizon of a black hole) will not reverse course. It will also not redshift infinitely.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field (version 2)'
This argument is another version of my previous post. Imagine that we have two long vertical wires connected either side of a charged sphere. We connect the two wires to the charged sphere simultaneously so that it is discharged by equal and opposite currents. Using the Lorenz gauge ##\nabla\cdot\mathbf{A}+(1/c^2)\partial \phi/\partial t=0##, Maxwell's equations have the following retarded wave solutions in the scalar and vector potentials. Starting from Gauss's law $$\nabla \cdot...
Back
Top