Question on Penrose diagram for Schwazschild metric

Click For Summary

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.

alphaone
Messages
46
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I am just learning about Penrose diagrams and got confused:
Why is the singularity r=0 in the Schwarzschild spacetime depicted by a horizontal line in the Penrose diagram? I thought a surface like r=0 would be timeike(as in the Reisner-Nordstrom case) rather than spacelike but obviously I must be missing something here.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Inside the event horizon, what type of a coordinate is r?
 
George Jones said:
Inside the event horizon, what type of a coordinate is r?

What is the sign of

g \left(\frac{\partial}{\partial r} , \frac{\partial}{\partial r} \right)

in:

Schwarzschild with r outside the event horizon;

Schwarzschild with r inside the event horizon;

Reissner-Nordstrom with r outside the event horizon;

Reissner-Nordstrom with r between the event horizon and the Cauchy horizon;

Reissner-Nordstrom with r inside the Cauchy horizon.
 
HI, Thanks for the immediate reply and thanks for pointing that out to me!
You are absolutely right inside the horizon r becomes the timelike coordinate so that the surface of the singularity r=0 is a timelike surface just that the timelike dirction is the horizontal one rather than the vertical one as r and t have interchanged roles, right?
 
Now I have another question.
If my previous post is correct, than is it the case that a horizontal path inside the Schwarzschild horizon is a timelike path? If this is the case I am a bit confused as I think remembering the lecturer say that any allowed(timelike, null) path in any Penrose diagram makes an angle less or equal to 45° with the vertical. But maybe I got that wrong.
 
In Minkowski sapcetime, what is the (hyper)surface t = 3 like?
 
In minkowski space ds^2=-dt^2+dr^2+r^2(d(theta)^2+sin^2(theta)d(phi)^2)
so for the (hyper)surface t=const we get
ds^2=dr^2+r^2(d(theta)^2+sin^2(theta)d(phi)^2)
which is the Euclidean space R^3. However unfortunately I do not see your point. This is spacelike in any direction and if I am not mistaken it is represented in the Penrose diagram by a line joining i^0 (spacelike infinity) with the vertical line r=0, i.e. it is a spacelike curve in the Penrose diagram and it makes an angle bigger than 45° with the vertical.
@George: By the way I really like your way of asking questions instead of answering the question directly, as I think that I definitely learn much more that way. So if you could continue like this I would really appreciate it!
 
I was trying to make an analogy.

In Minkowski spacetime, t is a timelike coordinate, and the surface t = const is a ...

Inside the eveny horizon, r is a timelike coordinate, and the surface r = const is a ...

Now for another (seemingly trivial) question: what does r = conts mean?
 
Hi, thanks for the reply.
I see what you are saying: In Minkowski t is timelike coordinate so t=const is spacelike surface. Then in Schwarzschild r is timelike coordinate inside the horizon so r=const is spacelike surface there, I see that now, thanks.
Actually I do not find your r=const question trivial at all:
In Minkowski r=R(const) implies
ds^2=-dt^2+R^2(d(theta)^2+sin(theta)^2 *d(phi)^2)
and I am not sure how to deduce the form of the hypersurface from there...
the last bit is a sphere of radius R and independence of t says that this does not change in time.However I have no idea how to think of such a 3-dimensional surface... Help would be appreciated
 
  • #10
In the Penrose diagram for Shwarzschild, two degrees of freedom (theta and phi) are suppressed, so a curve r = const is produced by fixing r and letting t vary. Thus, the nature of r = const is greatly influenced by the nature of t.

Now, a definition. A hypersurface is called timelike (spacelike) if the normal 4-vector to the surface is everywhere spacelike (timelike). This does not necessarily mean that, for example, if r is a timelike coordinate, the r = const is a spacelike hypersurface.

For example consider a two-dimensional Minkowski spacetime that is the span of the orthonomal basis {e_0 , e_1}, with e_0 (e_1) being timelike (spacelike). The set {e_0 , e_0 + 1/2 e_1} also spans this space. Use this latter set to coordinatize the space, that is, write any position vector as X^1 e_0 + X^2 (e_0 + 1/2 e_1). Both X^1 and X^2 are timelike coordinates.

Consider the surface (here, a line) X^2 = const. This means fixing X^2 and letting X^1 vary. This produces a timelike line parallel to the timelike X^1 axis, so X^2 = const is a timelike surface (since anything normal to something timelike is itself spacelike) even though X^2 is a timelike coordinate.

Now consider a three-dimensional Minkowski spacetime without (the standard) x^3, and define r^2 = (x^1)^2 + (x^2)^2 in the usual way. The surface r = const is the surface of a cylinder that goes up the t axis. On this cylinder, both spacelike and timelike motions are possible, but, by the above definition, the surface is timellike since its normal is spacelike. On a Penrose diagram, the polar angle theta = tan^-1(x^2/x^1) would be suppressed, so the cylindrical surface r = const would be the timelike line obtained by letting t vary. Howver, each point on the line, say at t = a, actually represents the circle obtainded by the intersection of the plane t = a with the the cylinder r = const. in the original spacetime.

Finally, back to Schwarzschild.

Inside the event horizon, t is a spacelike coordinate, so the Penrose diagram curve produced by fixing r and varying t is spacelike. Each point on the curve represents the two-dimensional surface of a sphere.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K