Does matter break the light speed barrier after the event horizon?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around whether matter can exceed the speed of light after crossing the event horizon of a black hole. Participants explore concepts related to gravity, spacetime, and the nature of velocity in the context of general relativity, addressing both black holes and the implications of an expanding universe.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that matter inside the event horizon remains timelike and does not exceed the speed of light.
  • One participant questions the comparison of acceleration and speed, noting they have different units and that velocity is relative to a reference point.
  • Another participant explains that defining velocity in curved spacetime is complex and suggests that locally, objects do not fall faster than light.
  • A participant describes the nature of motion through curved spacetime, arguing that asking about velocity at the event horizon is nonsensical due to the nature of time and space coordinates.
  • Some participants discuss the experience of a free-falling observer, stating they would not detect the event horizon as they approach it.
  • There are mentions of different black hole types, such as supermassive black holes, and their event horizons, with some clarifying the scale of these phenomena.
  • One participant challenges a previous claim about the size of black holes, providing a correction regarding the relationship between mass and Schwarzschild radius.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of velocity and acceleration at the event horizon, with no consensus reached on the implications of these concepts.

Contextual Notes

Discussions include limitations in defining velocity in curved spacetime and the complexities of comparing acceleration and speed. Some statements rely on specific coordinate systems and interpretations of general relativity.

chestycougth
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
This is a question someone asked me today and it's bugging me allot. If the acceleration caused by gravity is greater than the speed of light at a black hole event horizon then does this mean that the matter is falling at faster than light speed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. Matter inside the event horizon is still timelike. FTL is spacelike.
 
chestycougth said:
This is a question someone asked me today and it's bugging me allot. If the acceleration caused by gravity is greater than the speed of light at a black hole event horizon then does this mean that the matter is falling at faster than light speed?
A similar question comes up in an expanding universe, do some objects retreat faster than the speed of light that are passed the cosmic horizon?

It all depends on how you define velocity at a distance in curved spacetime.

Locally it is certainly not falling faster than the speed of light.
 
Last edited:
chestycougth said:
If the acceleration caused by gravity is greater than the speed of light at a black hole event horizon[...]

You can't compare acceleration and speed. They have different units.

When you talk about the speed of the infalling object, what is it relative to?

Note that general relativity doesn't offern any meaningful definition of the velocity of an object with respect to a second, *distant* object.
 
My understanding of gravity in the context of GR is that mass warps space-time so that forward motion through time naturally results in special displacement. Think of yourself in a 3 dimensional coordinate system with the familiar X, Y, and Z axes. Now imagine a 4'th axis perpendicular to all 3 which represents a time coordinate, call it T. You are moving along a line within this 4 dimensional space-time at a constant rate according to your own watch, that is, each tick of your watch represents the same distance along that line regardless of which way the line is angled. This is why increasing your velocity along the X, Y, or Z axes reduces the distance you travel along the T axis. The presence of mass/energy/momentum distorts your coordinate system so that the X, Y, Z, and T axes are no longer all straight and perpendicular. Now obviously if there are no forces acting on you, then you will continue to travel in a "straight" line, but traveling in a "straight" line through a curvy coordinate system will result in changes to your X, Y, Z, and T coordinates which appear to describe a curved line. This curved line is the path of an object in free-fall.

Now back to the original question. At the event horizon of a black hole the coordinates are curved so that the T axis points toward the center of the black hole. At this point asking how fast an object is falling is kind of weird because you are asking about a velocity. Velocity has units of distance/time. An object falling through the event horizon is moving along its T axis so this "motion" would have units of time/time, and so is not really motion at all. Therefore a question about the velocity of an object falling into a black hole is a nonsensical question. It's like asking what the color 9 smells like.
 
mrspeedybob said:
Now back to the original question. At the event horizon of a black hole the coordinates are curved so that the T axis points toward the center of the black hole. At this point asking how fast an object is falling is kind of weird because you are asking about a velocity. Velocity has units of distance/time. An object falling through the event horizon is moving along its T axis so this "motion" would have units of time/time, and so is not really motion at all. Therefore a question about the velocity of an object falling into a black hole is a nonsensical question. It's like asking what the color 9 smells like.

This last part of your discussion is a coordinate artifact and is not correct. Inside the event horizon, a small region of spacetime is still almost like flat spacetime, with 3 possible orthonormal spatial directions and a time direction that may be defined by the 4-velocity of the infaller (which is still timelike inside the horizon as well as outside and everywhere except being undefined at the singularity). Thus, from the point of view of one infaller, another nearby infaller is moving with a well defined spatial velocity (that can be in any direction), and all sufficiently local physics remains identical to SR.

Another way of looking at this is simply different coordinates. Lemaitre coordinates (as well as Kruskal) have a time coordinate that is everywhere timelike (both inside, on, and outside the horizon), and spatial coordinates that are everywhere spacelike.

What is true is that for a SC geometry, the singularity is spacelike, and all world lines inside the event horizon end on it. For a a rotating BH, neither of these is true - in a Kerr solution there are even stable orbits inside one of the two EH that never reach the singularity.
 
Last edited:
...If the acceleration caused by gravity is greater than the speed of light at a black hole event horizon...

A free falling observer cannot even detect the event horizon as it is approached and passed...and for such an observer there is nothing unusual at the Schwarzschild radius.

Such an observer continues on their way undisturbed toward the singularity...For a supermassive BH, which may be billions of solar masses in size, the event horizon may be thousands of light years in diameter...In other words, gravity there is rather weak.
 
Rather weak but still strong enough to keep whatever fell in inside and not let it escape.
 
Naty1 said:
A free falling observer cannot even detect the event horizon as it is approached and passed...and for such an observer there is nothing unusual at the Schwarzschild radius.
If the observer free falls from infinity the light from the stars behind him have a frequency of exactly 50%.
 
  • #10
For a supermassive BH, which may be billions of solar masses in size, the event horizon may be thousands of light years in diameter..
Weeell, not quite. A solar mass black hole has a Schwarzschild radius of about 1.5 km. The relationship is linear, so the radius of a billion solar mass black hole would be a billion km. But a light year is considerably more than that - 10 trillion km.

(Sorry, it's been a slow day. :smile: )
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
9K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K