Limits of Frame Dragging: Can Objects Create Their Own Event Horizons?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tkav1980
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Frame Frame dragging
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of frame dragging and whether objects smaller than black holes can create their own event horizons. Participants explore the implications of mass and rotation on the behavior of space around massive objects, particularly in relation to black holes and the nature of information transfer in the universe.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that objects smaller than black holes can still drag space along with their rotation, questioning why this does not lead to the creation of an event horizon.
  • There is a discussion about the nature of black holes, with one participant clarifying that an object becomes a black hole when its area is smaller than a specific threshold related to its mass, rather than solely based on mass.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the mechanics of frame dragging, suggesting there may be a "slip" or lack of "friction" between space and massive objects that limits the dragging effect.
  • One participant references the river model by Andrew Hamilton as a potential framework for understanding rotating black holes, noting that it includes mathematical elements but can still be interesting without them.
  • Several participants express concerns about their comprehension of the concepts discussed, indicating that the complexity of the topic may exceed their current understanding.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the mechanics of frame dragging or the conditions under which an object may create an event horizon. Multiple competing views and uncertainties remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the participants' varying levels of understanding of the mathematical aspects of frame dragging and black holes, as well as the potential for misinterpretation of concepts related to mass and event horizons.

tkav1980
Messages
47
Reaction score
1
Objects smaller than black holes, by mass can still drag space along with their rotation. I picture this like a plate of Spaghetti there the pasta is radiating out from the center of the plate. But let's say its rubbery spaghetti and can stratch. And its attached at one end to the outer egde of the plate. So you twirl the pasta in the canter causing the pasta to "swirl" around the central mass. Well when a body does this to space, like our sun, Why doesn't it pull space into a complete loop around itself and in effect create an event horizon? Is there some measure of "slip" or lack of "friction" between space and the star that limits this dragging effect to an upper limit, relative to the objects mass?

I would think that if a large object looped space around on itself it would in essence remove itself from our universe in the sense that no information can come from or to that object again. Doesnt that mean our universe ould be incomplete and predictability would essentially go out the window?


Sorry my questions are so elementary. I am not a Physicist just a fan of it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
tkav1980 said:
Objects smaller than black holes, by mass can still drag space along with their rotation.
Your statement seem to imply you think that black holes are black holes due to their mass this is not correct. An object is (or becomes) a black hole is when the object's area is smaller than 4 times the area representing its mass. So the ratio is important the absolute value of mass is not significant.

tkav1980 said:
I picture this like a plate of Spaghetti there the pasta is radiating out from the center of the plate. But let's say its rubbery spaghetti and can stratch. And its attached at one end to the outer egde of the plate. So you twirl the pasta in the canter causing the pasta to "swirl" around the central mass. Well when a body does this to space, like our sun, Why doesn't it pull space into a complete loop around itself and in effect create an event horizon? Is there some measure of "slip" or lack of "friction" between space and the star that limits this dragging effect to an upper limit, relative to the objects mass?

I would think that if a large object looped space around on itself it would in essence remove itself from our universe in the sense that no information can come from or to that object again. Doesnt that mean our universe ould be incomplete and predictability would essentially go out the window?
It is not quite like that. Check the river model by Andrew Hamilton, the second part deals with rotating black holes, there is math but the document is still interesting without the math.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411060
 
Passionflower said:
Your statement seem to imply you think that black holes are black holes due to their mass this is not correct. An object is (or becomes) a black hole is when the object's area is smaller than 4 times the area representing its mass. So the ratio is important the absolute value of mass is not significant.
I worded That wrong. I meant it as a point of reference of mass. I was thinking of something much more massive than the sun.

It is not quite like that. Check the river model by Andrew Hamilton, the second part deals with rotating black holes, there is math but the document is still interesting without the math.

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0411060

Thank you. That helped immensily.

I think my question may be beyond my level of comprehension. Or rather my understanding of the paper I read on rotating black holes, that lead me to a paper on Frame dragging. Admittedly, i had no choice but to skip ofer the math. I fear that is my problem.
 
tkav1980 said:
I think my question may be beyond my level of comprehension. Or rather my understanding of the paper I read on rotating black holes, that lead me to a paper on Frame dragging. Admittedly, i had no choice but to skip ofer the math. I fear that is my problem.
Even with the math it is very hard to understand. :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
890
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • · Replies 72 ·
3
Replies
72
Views
9K