- #31
Hill
- 735
- 576
Me too. That statement is still a mystery to me.Sagittarius A-Star said:
I Interpretation of (X,T) coordinates in Kruskal diagram
- Thread starter Hill
- Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on the interpretation of (X, T) coordinates in Kruskal diagrams, specifically how they relate to observers free-falling near a black hole's event horizon. It is noted that while these coordinates are convenient for such observers, they are not inherently Minkowski coordinates unless transformed appropriately. The concept of "naturally used" coordinates is debated, with suggestions that they should align with the observer's local inertial frame. Additionally, the proper time of the observer is clarified as distinct from the coordinate time T, which has led to confusion in the original text. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for careful interpretation of these coordinates within the context of general relativity.
- #32
Sagittarius A-Star
Science Advisor
- 1,399
- 1,058
Hill said:
With a Google search, I found the cited point 4 in the preview of Google books (using Chrome browser):
https://books.google.de/books?id=Wx...ances with the stick of the observer.&f=false
It refers indeed to figure 5.
- #33
Sagittarius A-Star
Science Advisor
- 1,399
- 1,058
I don't find the point 4 in the errata sheet:
https://www.lapasserelle.com/general_relativity/erratum.html
https://www.lapasserelle.com/general_relativity/erratum.html
- #34
Hill
- 735
- 576
The plot thickens.Sagittarius A-Star said:
- #35
Hill
- 735
- 576
I think that this is just what he does.Sagittarius A-Star said: