Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around the interpretation of Penrose diagrams in the context of the Schwarzschild metric, particularly focusing on the nature of coordinates inside and outside the event horizon, and the implications for the representation of singularities and hypersurfaces.
Discussion Character
- Exploratory
- Technical explanation
- Conceptual clarification
- Debate/contested
Main Points Raised
- One participant questions why the singularity at r=0 in Schwarzschild spacetime is depicted as a horizontal line in the Penrose diagram, suggesting it should be timelike instead.
- Another participant asks about the nature of the coordinate r inside the event horizon.
- A participant inquires about the sign of the metric component g for various scenarios involving Schwarzschild and Reissner-Nordstrom metrics, both inside and outside event horizons.
- One participant acknowledges that inside the horizon, r becomes a timelike coordinate, leading to the conclusion that the singularity r=0 is represented as a timelike surface, but expresses confusion about the orientation of the timelike direction.
- A later post raises a question about whether a horizontal path inside the Schwarzschild horizon is indeed a timelike path, referencing a lecturer's comment about angles in Penrose diagrams.
- Another participant discusses the nature of the surface t=const in Minkowski spacetime and its representation in Penrose diagrams, asserting it is spacelike.
- One participant attempts to draw an analogy between Minkowski spacetime and Schwarzschild spacetime regarding the nature of timelike and spacelike surfaces.
- A participant elaborates on the definition of hypersurfaces and provides examples from Minkowski spacetime to illustrate the relationship between coordinates and the nature of surfaces.
- Finally, a participant explains that inside the event horizon, the Penrose diagram curve produced by fixing r and varying t is spacelike, emphasizing the representation of two-dimensional surfaces of spheres.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express differing views on the nature of coordinates and surfaces in Penrose diagrams, particularly regarding the representation of singularities and the classification of paths. There is no consensus reached on these interpretations.
Contextual Notes
Participants highlight the complexity of the relationships between coordinates, surfaces, and their representations in Penrose diagrams, indicating that assumptions about timelike and spacelike classifications may depend on specific contexts and definitions used.