I Is it possible to distort a black hole's event horizon

dratone
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I know this is (probably) not going to work.. But I can't figure out why not :-)

So here is the theoretical situation...

Lets say we have 2 black holes that, somehow, we can perfectly control (velocity, position, rotation etc. etc.).
Now, one of my probes accidentally falls into one of the black holes and I really want it back..

Could you use the second black hole's mass (and corresponding space-time warping) to distort the first black hole's event horizon enough to get to the probe?

From what I've gathered, the reason the very-very early universe didn't collapse into a black hole is because the gravitational warping of space time was uniform enough not to collapse into a black hole - i.e., the gravitational pull was equal in all directions.

My idea would be that the above situation would be somewhat similar - the gravitational bending of space time caused by the second black hole could be used to interfere with the gravitational bending of the first black hole, causing the event horizon of the first black hole to be pushed inward. And, if so, could we use that to "uncover" the black hole and retrieve something that fell into it (very recently)? Or is there some kind of general/special relativity mechanic that I'm not taking into account here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
dratone said:
Could you use the second black hole's mass (and corresponding space-time warping) to distort the first black hole's event horizon enough to get to the probe?

No.

dratone said:
the reason the very-very early universe didn't collapse into a black hole is because the gravitational warping of space time was uniform enough not to collapse into a black hole - i.e., the gravitational pull was equal in all directions

No, that's not correct. The reason the early universe didn't collapse into a black hole was that it was expanding rapidly.
 
It is instead possible if we have 2 colliding black holes to get energy out of the collision in the form of GW.
It's possible that what is left of your "probe" (or at least parts of it) could have been converted into gravitational waves during the collision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_gravitational_wave_observations
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_wave

Like on 14 September 2015 from 1.3 billion light years away distant merger of two black holes,
36 solar masses and 29 solar masses, resulting in a 62 solar masses black hole with the rest of 3 solar masses = 5.4×1047 Jules "radiated" as gravitational waves.

Accurate simulations of black holes merger can help you understand what and how things evolve during such an event.

I recommend you this lecture like article http://www.ihes.fr/~damour/Conferences/Damour_2body_EHLERS2010.pdf regarding "The Two-Body Problem in General Relativity" by Thibault Damour from Institut des Hautes Etudes Scientifiques (Bures-sur-Yvette, France).
 
Mihai_B said:
It is instead possible if we have 2 colliding black holes to get energy out of the collision in the form of GW.

The GW radiation does not come from "distorting the event horizon", at least not if you interpret that as allowing anything that was inside the horizon to escape. Nothing that once gets inside the horizon can escape (at least not if we are talking about classical GR, which I assume we are in this discussion). The GW radiation comes from the merging of the horizons of the two holes into one; the initial merged horizon is not symmetrical, and the asymmetries are radiated away as GWs. The energy contained in the GWs was stored in spacetime curvature outside the horizon(s); it does not come from inside.
 
@PeterDonis : I concur.

Also using multiple collisions with what remains from previous collisions (maybe 3BP- 3body problems or why not - 5 or more - colliding BH) - aka complicated collisions between multiple spinning BH (anyways, all BHs actually do have some spin, but we approximate this in some certain conditions in order to get simpler equations) - could be "engineered" to release great amount of energy - like half of total mass of all BH inflicted (?) maybe even more (or less). Engineered aka not quite "natural" occurring or rarely occurring in nature (merging of multiple galaxies ?)...
 
Mihai_B said:
half of total mass of all BH inflicted

You can get close to this if you take two non-rotating holes and merge them in such a way that the final hole has close to the maximum possible spin for its mass.
 
  • Like
Likes Mihai_B
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...

Similar threads

Replies
46
Views
7K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
43
Views
3K
Replies
40
Views
3K
Replies
57
Views
4K
Back
Top