Hill
- 774
- 600
Me too. That statement is still a mystery to me.Sagittarius A-Star said:I can't find in the video the following of what you quoted in the OP from the book
The discussion centers on the interpretation of (X, T) coordinates in Kruskal diagrams, particularly in the context of free-falling observers near a black hole's event horizon. It is established that these coordinates are perceived as flat by the observer, with T representing the proper time. The conversation highlights the distinction between Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates and local inertial frames, emphasizing that transformations are necessary to align these coordinates with Minkowski coordinates. Clarifications are sought regarding the proper use of these coordinates and the implications of their application in various scenarios.
PREREQUISITESPhysicists, astrophysicists, and students of general relativity seeking to deepen their understanding of black hole physics and the mathematical framework of spacetime diagrams.
Me too. That statement is still a mystery to me.Sagittarius A-Star said:I can't find in the video the following of what you quoted in the OP from the book
Hill said:Me too. That statement is still a mystery to me.
The plot thickens.Sagittarius A-Star said:I don't find the point 4 in the errata sheet:
https://www.lapasserelle.com/general_relativity/erratum.html
I think that this is just what he does.Sagittarius A-Star said:It seems that Susskind uses the same capital letters X, T for both, the locally applied standard Minkowski diagram in your posting #12 and the Kruskal diagram in your posting #8, which includes the upper quadrant containing the singularity.