Must a black hole be a point singularity?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the nature of black holes, specifically whether they must be point singularities. Participants explore concepts related to star collapse, radiation pressure, and the implications of general relativity (GR) and quantum mechanics (QM) on the formation of black holes.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that during star collapse, intense radiation pressure could prevent the formation of a singularity, suggesting that radiation pressure increases faster than gravitational force.
  • Others argue that GR equations indicate a singularity must exist, but there are doubts about this interpretation, with some believing that a workable framework of quantum gravity could eliminate singularities.
  • A participant mentions that the singularity is "off the map" and discusses the nature of space around it, suggesting that different shapes (e.g., point-like vs. ring-shaped) could have similar gravitational effects.
  • Some contributors speculate that intense radiation pressure could act as a support mechanism during collapse, with the potential for matter to convert into radiation as temperatures rise.
  • One participant notes that the TOV equation indicates high pressure could lead to runaway collapse, questioning Einstein's acceptance of this equation due to his skepticism about point singularities.
  • Another participant highlights the relationship between mass-energy and gravity, suggesting that radiation also contributes to gravitational forces, complicating the dynamics of collapse.
  • Some express concerns about the implications of high temperatures and radiation behavior, indicating that as temperatures rise, the characteristics of radiation may dominate over matter, potentially leading to collapse.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the necessity of singularities in black holes, with no consensus reached on whether intense radiation pressure can prevent collapse or if singularities are an unavoidable aspect of black hole formation.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of singularities, unresolved mathematical interpretations of GR and QM, and the speculative nature of proposed mechanisms involving radiation pressure.

  • #61
Even better question: If somehow 10^18 kilograms of matter was contained in 1 cubic meter, and this matter was entirely converted into energy, and somehow contained in the 1 cubic meter, what do you think the pressure would be?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #62
There might be an answer to: Why don't purple monkeys fly out of my butt? When I was in college a philosophy instructor taught that everything will happen if you wait a long enough time.
 
  • #63
I think you'll find that I converted your cm value to m.
 
  • #64
I have 2 squirrels jumping on me and can't even get m^2 or m^3 right. Well, actually that's not true... I get m^2 right 50% of the time.

So what's your pressure estimate if 10^18 kilograms of matter contained in 1 cubic meter was entirely converted into energy, and somehow contained in the 1 cubic meter?
 
  • #65
I'm not going to sit here all night and play number games with you. It is your job to show how your hypothesis disagrees with current theory and your job to back it up. You need to show us your numbers and not just make wild claims and expect everyone else to do the maths for you.

Now please state your point and explain why it differs to current theory, and then cite sources which prove / agree with your hypothesis. If you cannot do this then you are violating PF guidelines.
 
  • #66
jarednjames said:
I'm not going to sit here all night and play number games with you. It is your job to show how your hypothesis disagrees with current theory and your job to back it up. You need to show us your numbers and not just make wild claims and expect everyone else to do the maths for you.

Now please state your point and explain why it differs to current theory, and then cite sources which prove / agree with your hypothesis. If you cannot do this then you are violating PF guidelines.

I think you're right, this is clamshell with proper line formatting and prose instead of limerick!

Bernie: You've compared your position to Einstein, you've made declarative statements that are ABSURD without references, and you avoid clear questions. At this point, you sound like a crackpot trying to (less and less) obliquely forward a personal theory. In short, purple monkeys may fly out of your butt if you take enough LSD, but radiation isn't expect by ANY theory to behave in the manner you describe within an event horizon. PERIOD. If you have something direct to confront that well accepted notion, it's time to start giving sources, a paper... ANYTHING other than another post that gives me a damned headache.
 
  • #67
"You've compared your position to Einstein"

Come on. What I said was that Einstein didn't believe in a point singularity. Thats where the comparison, if any, ends. Calm down please. This is not the governor's election in New York.
 
  • #68
Bernie G said:
"You've compared your position to Einstein"

Come on. What I said was that Einstein didn't believe in a point singularity. Thats where the comparison, if any, ends. Calm down please. This is not the governor's election in New York.

So that's a no to references?
 
  • #69
Its a different idea. No references that I know of.

There might tangental similarities to ideas like quark–gluon plasma, but in my humble opinion even quarks would disintegrate at these high energies.

I'm taking the weekend off.
 
  • #70
Bernie G said:
in my humble opinion

And there it is, this is a personal theory and does not belong here.
 
  • #71
I have closed this thread.

Physics Forums rules,

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=414380,

to which everyone who registers here agrees, in part, state
Overly Speculative Posts: One of the main goals of PF is to help students learn the current status of physics as practiced by the scientific community; accordingly, Physicsforums.com strives to maintain high standards of academic integrity. There are many open questions in physics, and we welcome discussion on those subjects provided the discussion remains intellectually sound. It is against our Posting Guidelines to discuss, in most of the PF forums, new or non-mainstream theories or ideas that have not been published in professional peer-reviewed journals or are not part of current professional mainstream scientific discussion.
 

Similar threads

High School How Can Black Holes Vary in Size if They Are Singularities?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Undergrad The initial density of an object and its compression into a black hole
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
High School Question regarding supermassive black holes in the early Universe
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad M31-2014-DS1, slow disappearance of a massive star
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
876
High School Stars massive enough to evolve into black holes
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
High School Temperature of a black hole....observed from the singularity
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
Undergrad Do Black Holes Exist? | Physics & Stephen Hawking
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Graduate Black holes: merged remnants have similar spin - why?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Graduate Black Hole Paper Outlining Process of Singularity Formation
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Graduate Stellar-mass black hole formation sequence
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
6K