Light Taking U-Turn: Transformation of Star to Black Hole

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter shivakumar
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of light during the transformation of a massive star into a black hole. It is established that light outside the event horizon can escape, while light at the horizon may remain indefinitely, and light within the horizon is drawn into the singularity. The concept of a "U-turn" for light is clarified, indicating that while light can be deflected at distances above the photon sphere, it does not trace back its original path once it crosses the event horizon. The complexities of black hole spacetimes are acknowledged, emphasizing the non-traditional topology within a black hole.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of black hole physics and event horizons
  • Familiarity with the concept of photon spheres
  • Knowledge of general relativity and spacetime topology
  • Basic grasp of light behavior in gravitational fields
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of black holes and their event horizons
  • Explore the concept of photon spheres and their implications for light behavior
  • Study general relativity's impact on spacetime topology
  • Investigate the dynamics of light in strong gravitational fields
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, physicists, and students of astrophysics interested in the mechanics of black holes and the behavior of light in extreme gravitational environments.

shivakumar
Messages
12
Reaction score
6
sir , i always taught what would happen to light traveling away from the mega sized star at the time of transformation of this star into a black hole? will it trace back its path after it taking a u - turn?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The event horizon forms within the star as it undergoes the final stages of collapse, and expands out to its final size. Light that is outside the horizon escapes. Light that is at the horizon can, in theory, remain there forever. Light inside the horizon ends up in the singularity, but this does not involve a u-turn. The singularity inside a black hole is more like a moment in time than a place in space, and there isn't really an "inwards" and "outwards" direction - the topology of the space inside the black hole is not the same as it was before the black hole formed.

Black holes spacetimes can be surprisingly complicated even for fairly simple idealised situations.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark and PeroK
shivakumar said:
sir
Did you just assume our genders?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Motore
I meant respect to more learned person, madam
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: strangerep, Vanadium 50, topsquark and 2 others
shivakumar said:
sir , i always taught what would happen to light traveling away from the mega sized star at the time of transformation of this star into a black hole? will it trace back its path after it taking a u - turn?
I don’t think that there is any need to restrict yourself to the time of collapse. For a formed black hole light is trapped at the horizon, it orbits at the photon sphere, and it is deflected at larger distances. So a U turn is just a large deflection, but less than an orbit. That means that at some distance above the photon sphere you should be able to make a null U turn for a stable black hole
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeterDonis
Dale said:
So a U turn is just a large deflection, but less than an orbit.
I think we may need to ask @shivakumar for clarification of what "U turn" means in this context. You seem to be imagining light falling from infinity and doing a half orbit. I was imagining light coming up from the star, turning back and falling on to the star/black hole again. Your scenario is possible, mine isn't (hence my longer explanation).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
Ibix said:
You seem to be imagining light falling from infinity and doing a half orbit. I was imagining light coming up from the star, turning back and falling on to the star/black hole again. Your scenario is possible, mine isn't (hence my longer explanation).
Good point. Yes, that is what I was considering.
 
malawi_glenn said:
Did you just assume our genders?
Please not also on PF...:rolleyes:
 
  • Like
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: weirdoguy, dextercioby, strangerep and 2 others

Similar threads

  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
4K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K