Objects falling into a black hole

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of objects falling into a black hole and the perception of time as they approach the event horizon. Observers at a safe distance perceive the falling object as slowing down infinitely, while the object itself continues to fall towards the singularity. The phenomenon of black holes emitting X-rays and glowing brightly at the event horizon is attributed to the accretion disk, where matter heats up and emits radiation. The light from collapsing objects becomes increasingly redshifted and faint, and the total luminosity decays exponentially over time, dominated by contributions from the rim of the accretion disk.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of general relativity and its implications on time dilation
  • Familiarity with black hole physics, specifically event horizons and singularities
  • Knowledge of accretion disks and their role in black hole emissions
  • Basic grasp of redshift phenomena and its effects on light from distant objects
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Kruskal diagram as presented in Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler's "Gravitation" for visualizing black hole dynamics
  • Explore the concept of time dilation in general relativity and its effects near massive objects
  • Research the mechanisms behind accretion disks and their radiation emissions, focusing on X-ray astronomy
  • Examine the paper by Ames and Thorne for a detailed analysis of light behavior near black holes
USEFUL FOR

Astronomers, physicists, and students of astrophysics seeking to deepen their understanding of black hole mechanics and the effects of gravity on time and light.

aademarco
Messages
11
Reaction score
1
I have a question pertaining to objects falling through the event horizon of a black hole.

It is my understanding that due to the immence gravity of a black hole and the way gravity affects the flow of time, that from the point of view of an observer at a safe distance from a black hole watching any object fall through the event horizon you can never see an object fall through due to how its flow of time changes relative to the observer. Its time will appear to become slower and slower until it appears to freeze infinitely close to the event horizon. From the point of view of the object falling through the event horizon it continues to fall all the way to the singularity. If that object could turn and look back out through the event horizon it would see time speed up infinitely.

Im having a hard time understanding, if the above is true, why black holes are not glowing bright with images of everything they have ever 'eaten' just above or at the event horizon. From our perspective, all the matter which has ever fallen into it had a clock which slowed to a stop the moment it hit the horizon despite the fact that from their own perspectives they went right through.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
aademarco said:
Im having a hard time understanding, if the above is true, why black holes are not glowing bright with images of everything they have ever 'eaten' just above or at the event horizon. From our perspective, all the matter which has ever fallen into it had a clock which slowed to a stop the moment it hit the horizon despite the fact that from their own perspectives they went right through.

We do see them glow brightly at the event horizon, in the form of an accretion disk, as well as at the poles, where large quantities of x-rays can be emitted. Observing the actual black hole is not possible with visible light, but measuring the orbital speeds of visible matter and calculating the central mass about which they are falling towards is.
 
aademarco said:
Im having a hard time understanding, if the above is true, why black holes are not glowing bright with images of everything they have ever 'eaten' just above or at the event horizon. From our perspective, all the matter which has ever fallen into it had a clock which slowed to a stop the moment it hit the horizon despite the fact that from their own perspectives they went right through.
The light from a collapsing object persists, but it becomes increasingly faint and increasingly redshifted. See this paper by Ames and Thorne for a complete analysis.

Ames and Thorne said:
The star is brightest and bluest at its rim, where the spectrum and intensity are independent of time; but the width of this time-independent region decays exponentially. Nearer the center of its disk, the star appears darker and redder; the redshift increases exponentially in time, and the intensity decays exponentially. The total, integrated radiation is dominated by the contribution from the rim: The spectrum is nearly time-independent and is peaked at its high-frequency end; but the total luminosity decays exponentially with time.
 
Last edited:
aademarco said:
If that object could turn and look back out through the event horizon it would see time speed up infinitely.
This is not quite correct, although it's a bit tricky to explain. Take a look at this earlier PF post https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2336347&postcount=4 which shows a Kruskal diagram copied from Misner, Thorne and Wheeler, the one labeled Fig 31.4(b).

The event horizon is the diagonal line labeled r = 2M, t = +∞. The falling particle is the curve with labels A, A', A''. As the particle approaches the event horizon, the coordinate time t runs through all its values and becomes infinite.

However the incoming light that the particle would see looking back is represented by left-sloping diagonal lines such as B, B', B''. Even when the particle hits the horizon, the incoming photons do not pile up. Although the retarded time as measured by the outgoing light rays becomes infinite, the "advanced time" as measured by the incoming rays remains finite.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
4K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
8K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K