Black Holes: Gravity & Formation Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter AF HUNZAI
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Blackholes Gravity
AI Thread Summary
Black holes do have less gravitational pull than their original stars due to the mass loss during the supernova explosion, where a significant portion of the star's mass is ejected. While the event horizon of a black hole is much smaller than the star it originated from, the gravitational intensity at the event horizon is greater than at the star's surface. The formation of black holes is a result of gravitational collapse, which is better explained by General Relativity rather than Newton's law of gravitation. As black holes acquire more mass, their event horizons can expand, leading to a lower mass per volume ratio compared to their original stars. Ultimately, while black holes can exert intense gravity at close range, their overall gravitational pull at a distance can be less than that of their progenitor stars.
AF HUNZAI
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Do black holes have gravity less than their mother star?.if no then why not,though during formation of black holes
outer layer of star explodes out in space and inner core crush by its own gravity this way its mass decrease..So If i consider Gravity a force,by Newton law of gravitation Decrease in mass should leads to decrease in gravity..
 
Last edited:
Space news on Phys.org
The volumn of a black hole's event horizon is much less than the star that it originates from. Check out the section on Gravitational Collapse to understand how it occurs.
 
  • Like
Likes AF HUNZAI
The reference to Newton's law of gravity in the same post as black holes is flawed thinking. Black holes are a phenomena that is a natural consequence of General Relativity (which, to oversimplify, is just a fancy name for the modern laws of gravity), which is impossible in Newtonian gravity.

Also, while Black Hole are more gravitationally intense at the event horizon than a star is at any point at its surface or within it, once a Black Hole is formed its event horizon can expand as it acquires more mass that gets sucked into it. While the initial mass per volume within the event horizon of a Black Hole when it forms is just slightly greater than the mass per volume of a neutron star or atomic nucleus, this does not continue to hold true as the Black Hole acquires mass and its event horizon expands.

The huge black holes at the center of galaxies, for example, have far less mass per volume within their event horizon, than a star does. The larger the Black Hole, the less mass per volume within its event horizon it has, a very counterintuitive reality. If the mass of a large black hole were spread evenly over the space within its event horizon, there would not be enough gravitational pressure to form a black hole.
 
  • Like
Likes AF HUNZAI
Density is not much of a limiting factor on gravitational collapse. The average density of molecular gas clouds in star forming regions is on the order of a 10^6 molecules per cc^3 - shich is sufficient density for gravitational collapse into a star. By comparison a laboratory grade vacuum has a density of about 10^10 molecules per cc^3.
 
  • Like
Likes AF HUNZAI
AF HUNZAI said:
Do black holes have gravity less than their mother star?.if no then why not,though during formation of black holes
outer layer of star explodes out in space and inner core crush by its own gravity this way its mass decrease..So If i consider Gravity a force,by Newton law of gravitation Decrease in mass should leads to decrease in gravity..
Essentially, yes, the resulting black hole has less gravity at the same distance. The gravitational attraction around a spherically-symmetric body is purely determined by the amount of mass inside a given radius. Because a large portion of the matter that makes up the star is ejected when it collapses into a black hole, the mass that ends up within the black hole is only a fraction of the total star's mass, so the overall gravitational pull is less.

But a black hole is also vastly smaller, so that if you're near the event horizon, the gravitational pull will be far greater than it would have been at the surface of the star.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes AF HUNZAI and Finny
Thanks for clearing my confusion.
 
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##.
Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?
Back
Top