A Reference for Oppenheimer Snyder Collapse Paper

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter gnnmartin
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Collapse Reference
gnnmartin
Messages
86
Reaction score
5
I want to make a comment on the Oppenheimer Snyder collapse, and before doing so want to read the original Oppenheimer Snyder paper. All I have been able to find is the paper "On continued gravitational contraction" in the Sept '39 Physical Review, but I get the impression that to most people 'Oppenheimer Snyder collapse' means something considerably more evolved and simplified: as for example in http://grwiki.physics.ncsu.edu/wiki/Oppenheimer-Snyder_Collapse.

Is there a later paper by Oppenheimer & Snyder that more closely reflects the grwiki summary? I would appreciate a reference, and if it is accessible online without a paywall, a url.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
gnnmartin said:
Is there a later paper by Oppenheimer & Snyder that more closely reflects the grwiki summary?

AFAIK the 1939 paper is the only one Oppenheimer and Snyder ever wrote in this topic. Since the date of publication was the same as the date on which World War II broke out, that's not too surprising.

The summary you linked to appears to be based on a more modern understanding of the model, which draws on the more modern understanding of black hole spacetimes in general that was developed in the 1950s and 1960s. I'm not aware of any particular paper that discusses it, but at least some textbooks, including MTW, do.
 
  • Like
Likes gnnmartin
  • Like
Likes martinbn, gnnmartin and PeterDonis
Thanks to both of you. Good to know I'm not missing something later by Oppenheimer & Snyder. The summary that PAllen gives is useful: it's a pity it is so print unfriendly (61 pages).

Ah, I've discovered how to print it 4 pages per physical page. That's better.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
ASSUMPTIONS 1. Two identical clocks A and B in the same inertial frame are stationary relative to each other a fixed distance L apart. Time passes at the same rate for both. 2. Both clocks are able to send/receive light signals and to write/read the send/receive times into signals. 3. The speed of light is anisotropic. METHOD 1. At time t[A1] and time t[B1], clock A sends a light signal to clock B. The clock B time is unknown to A. 2. Clock B receives the signal from A at time t[B2] and...
From $$0 = \delta(g^{\alpha\mu}g_{\mu\nu}) = g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu}$$ we have $$g^{\alpha\mu} \delta g_{\mu\nu} = -g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \,\, . $$ Multiply both sides by ##g_{\alpha\beta}## to get $$\delta g_{\beta\nu} = -g_{\alpha\beta} g_{\mu\nu} \delta g^{\alpha\mu} \qquad(*)$$ (This is Dirac's eq. (26.9) in "GTR".) On the other hand, the variation ##\delta g^{\alpha\mu} = \bar{g}^{\alpha\mu} - g^{\alpha\mu}## should be a tensor...
Back
Top