Is the sun a black hole for low frequency radiation?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of whether the sun can be considered a black hole for low frequency radiation. Participants explore the implications of redshift in relation to photons emitted near a black hole's event horizon and the effects of gravitational influence on different frequencies of light.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if a low frequency photon cannot escape a black hole due to becoming infinitely red-shifted, then a higher frequency photon emitted from the same location could escape.
  • Others argue that redshift is a multiplicative operation rather than a subtractive one, affecting how wavelengths are observed from different distances.
  • A participant points out that a photon emitted from just outside a black hole's event horizon will experience a finite redshift, emphasizing that a photon's motion through spacetime is independent of its energy.
  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the distances involved, suggesting that the distance from the observer to the center of mass of the source, as well as the distance from where the photon is emitted, must be considered.
  • Another participant clarifies the equation for redshift, noting the importance of distinguishing between the distances to the source and the observer.
  • A participant reflects on the gravitational effects on photons, suggesting that while photons maintain a constant speed, their frequency changes due to gravitational influence, leading to the idea of an "escape frequency" analogous to escape velocity for mass.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus, as multiple competing views remain regarding the nature of redshift and the implications for photons emitted near massive objects.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in understanding the distances involved in the redshift calculations and the assumptions about gravitational effects on photons versus normal mass.

MikeGomez
Messages
343
Reaction score
16
Consider a photon of a certain frequency emitted from a distance slightly greater than the event horizon of a black hole. It seems possible that if a certain low frequency photon is not able to escape (due to becoming infinitely red-shifted), then a photon of a higher frequency emitted from the same location would able to escape (not become infinitely red-shifted).

If this is true, then is seems all mass has an event horizon for low frequency radiation. Even though that may be an extremely low frequency, it is non-zero.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
MikeGomez said:
Consider a photon of a certain frequency emitted from a distance slightly greater than the event horizon of a black hole. It seems possible that if a certain low frequency photon is not able to escape (due to becoming infinitely red-shifted), then a photon of a higher frequency emitted from the same location would able to escape (not become infinitely red-shifted).

If this is true, then is seems all mass has an event horizon for low frequency radiation. Even though that may be an extremely low frequency, it is non-zero.
Your mistake here is that you appear to think redshift is a subtractive operation. It isn't. It is a multiplicative operation:

[tex]\lambda_{\mbox{observed}} = \frac 1 {\sqrt{1 - \frac {r_s} r}}\,\lambda_{\mbox{source}}[/tex]

where
  • rs is the Schwarzschild radius of the radiating object,
  • r is the distance between the center of mass of the source and the source,
  • λsource is the wavelength at the surface of the radiating object, and
  • λobserved is the wavelength as measured by a remote observer.
 
Last edited:
MikeGomez said:
Consider a photon of a certain frequency emitted from a distance slightly greater than the event horizon of a black hole. It seems possible that if a certain low frequency photon is not able to escape (due to becoming infinitely red-shifted), then a photon of a higher frequency emitted from the same location would able to escape (not become infinitely red-shifted).

It's buried (not very deeply) in what D H says, but just to make explicit: A photon emitted from a distance slightly greater than the event horizon will have a finite redshift. Basically, a photon's motion through spacetime is independent of its energy (read: wavelength).
 
DH. I.m confused about the distances/locations. Is something is missing? Don't we need to know the distance from the observer to the center of mass of the source, as well as the distance from where the photon is emitted?

I'm assumming the 'center of mass of the source' refers to the BH or star or whatever, but we also need to consider the location of the photon emission.
 
Sorry. I typed that post rather badly. I corrected it. The equation I gave is for the redshift of some light as observed by an observer well-removed from the gravity well. For an observer at some distance R from the center of the massive object, the redshift is[tex]\lambda_{\mbox{observed}}<br /> = \sqrt{\frac {1 - \frac {r_s} R} {1 - \frac {r_s} r}}<br /> \,\lambda_{\mbox{source}}[/tex]

where
  • rs is the Schwarzschild radius of the radiating object,
  • r is the distance between the center of mass of the source and the source,
  • R is the distance between the center of mass of the source and the observer,
  • λsource is the wavelength at the surface of the radiating object, and
  • λobserved is the wavelength as measured by a remote observer.

In the limit R→∞, this reduces to the form given in post #2. Note however that r is the distance from the center of mass to the source rather than to the observer.

In any case, the bottom line is that redshift is proportional to wavelength.
 
Thanks DH and Nabeshin. My original thinking was that the gravitational effect on photons is due to the photon’s equivalent mass. Normal mass loses velocity when traveling in a direction opposite the gravity source, and will be able to escape the gravitations influence if it reaches escape velocity. Photons behave differently in that they maintain a constant speed of c, but the gravitational influence in seen in a change in frequency. This lead me to think that the frequency of a photon can be thought of as the equivalent of rotational velocity, and photons would have an escape frequency instead of an escape velocity.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K