How Black Holes Absorb Light Despite Photons Being Massless

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the question of how black holes can absorb light, despite photons being massless. Participants explore concepts from general relativity, the nature of light and momentum, and the implications of classical and relativistic physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the absorption of light by black holes relates to Einstein's theory of relativity, which posits that all objects can curve spacetime.
  • Others argue that while light is massless, it possesses momentum and moves along geodesics, similar to other objects not acted upon by external forces.
  • A participant points out that the classical momentum formula \( p = mv \) is not applicable to photons, advocating for the use of the more general formula \( E^2 = (mc^2)^2 + (pc)^2 \).
  • Another participant introduces an alternative expression for light's momentum as \( p = \hbar k \), emphasizing that momentum does not necessitate mass.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of energy-mass equivalence and the challenges of applying it to massless particles like photons.
  • There is a debate about Newton's theory of gravitation and its predictions regarding light, with one participant questioning how Newtonian physics could account for light's behavior in a gravitational field.
  • Another participant clarifies that while the gravitational force on a massless object is zero, the effect of gravity on light can still be calculated using limits in classical mechanics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the nature of light, momentum, and the implications of classical versus relativistic physics. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the interpretations presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in classical mechanics when discussing massless particles and the need for more nuanced approaches in relativistic contexts. There are also unresolved mathematical steps in the calculations presented.

Muhammad Valent
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
We know light made up of photons which is massless, but why it can absorbed by black hole? Is it becuz the Einstein's relativity about every object can curve time space
 
Science news on Phys.org
Muhammad Valent said:
We know light made up of photons which is massless, but why it can absorbed by black hole? Is it becuz the Einstein's relativity about every object can curve time space
LIght doesn't have mass but it has momentum and it moves along geodesics just like everything else that is not being acted on by outside forces.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn
phinds said:
LIght doesn't have mass but it has momentum and it moves along geodesics just like everything else that is not being acted on by outside forces.

But Accord to momentum itu also need mass "p =mv which is non
 
##p=mv## is a classical formula that is valid only when ##m## is not zero and ##v## is small compared with the speed of light. Neither of these are true of photons, so you have to use the more general formula ##E^2=(mc^2)^2+(pc)^2##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Asymptotic and davenn
Muhammad Valent said:
But Accord to momentum itu also need mass "p =mv which is non

I can also write the momentum of light as p = ħk. So where is the "mass" requirement there?

Please note that even before 1900, i.e. before Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, classical theory of electromagnetism and light already know about the momentum of light, all without even considering the picture that light consist of "photons" or the possibility that it has mass. So even back then, there was zero need to introduce mass to account for the momentum of light that they had observed. This means that just because something has a momentum, it doesn't automatically means that it must also have a mass.

BTW, in solid state physics, we also designate a crystal momentum as p=ħk without invoking any mass. So this isn't specific just to light. It means that there is a more universal definition of momentum than what you already know.

Zz.
 
Photons have a rest mass of zero, but they can never be at rest.

Consider that photons have a defined energy and then apply energy mass equivalence. This is a bit of hand waving, but should be adequate to answer your original question.
 
Eric Bretschneider said:
Photons have a rest mass of zero, but they can never be at rest.

Consider that photons have a defined energy and then apply energy mass equivalence. This is a bit of hand waving, but should be adequate to answer your original question.

You cannot simply "apply" the mass-energy equivalence, because the "mass" in that is the rest/invariant mass. It will also mess up the full relativistic energy equation, because now, the "m" in E2 = (pc)2 + (mc2)2 is no longer zero.

Zz.
 
Muhammad Valent said:
Is it becuz the Einstein's relativity about every object can curve time space

Yes. That was precisely the point that made Einstein famous to the general public. Newton's theory of gravitation predicted light, with no mass, will not be affected by gravity. Einstein predicted that light, because it follows geodesics in distorted space-time, will be affected. Well-respected astronomer Sir Arthur Eddington, through observations of a solar eclipse, verified that Einstein was right and Newton was wrong.

Not merely in the actual fact, but the amount to which it is bent by gravity is precisely predicted by general relativity. A lot of people seem to miss the fact that when physics makes predictions, they have actual numerical values.
 
RPinPA said:
Newton's theory of gravitation predicted light, with no mass, will not be affected by gravity.

Can you provide a corresponding calculation? In case of light deflection by a central mass I get half the effect compared to relativity.
 
  • #10
RPinPA said:
... Newton's theory of gravitation predicted light, with no mass, will not be affected by gravity.

DrStupid said:
Can you provide a corresponding calculation? In case of light deflection by a central mass I get half the effect compared to relativity.

I'm puzzled. How could you do a calculation in Newtonian physics that says light, being massless, is affected by gravity at anything other than zero effect? How does Newtonian gravity affect something that has no mass?
 
  • #11
phinds said:
How could you do a calculation in Newtonian physics that says light, being massless, is affected by gravity at anything other than zero effect?

The gravitational force is zero but not the effect. Keep in mind that the force required to accelerate a massless object is zero too in classical mechanics. Calculating the resulting effect is quite easy:

According to Newton's law of gravitaton, the force acting on an object with mass m in the gravitational field of a central mass M is

F = - \frac{{M \cdot G \cdot r}}{{\left| r \right|^3 }} \cdot m

According to the second law of motion the resulting acceleration is

\ddot r = \frac{F}{m} = - \frac{{M \cdot G \cdot r}}{{\left| r \right|^3 }} \cdot \frac{m}{m}

If light is assumed to be massless (that's not obvious in classical mechanics) L'Hôpital's rule results in

\mathop {\lim }\limits_{m \to 0} \ddot r = - \frac{{M \cdot G \cdot r}}{{\left| r \right|^3 }}
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith

Similar threads

  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
17K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K