Schwarzchild and Reissner-Nordstrom singularities

AlphaNumeric
Messages
289
Reaction score
0
The Schwarzschild metric has a spacelike singularity, while the R-N metric has a timelike one. The difference between the two physical systems is charge. Obviously you've a very slightly charged black hole, the SC metric is a good approximation because Q/M is too small to really be worried about. However, the change from spacelike to timelike (and vice versa) singularities is not a continuous one, it's a discrete one.

The discrete nature of the singularity seems to be a fundamental difference (particularly when you're drawing Penrose diagrams, the staple diagram of my black hole course ATM) so I'm having a bit of trouble getting my head around how you could have a good approximation using the SC metric. It seems to me the nature of the singularity isn't a good approximation for that particular part of the system?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I believe that actual physical collapse of a charged black-hole is expected to give a spacelike singularity.

I'm basing this statement on

http://lanl.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9902008

We study the gravitational collapse of a self-gravitating charged scalar-field. Starting with a regular spacetime, we follow the evolution through the formation of an apparent horizon, a Cauchy horizon and a final central singularity. We find a null, weak, mass-inflation singularity along the Cauchy horizon, which is a precursor of a strong, spacelike singularity along the $r=0$ hypersurface. The inner black hole region is bounded (in the future) by singularities. This resembles the classical inner structure of a Schwarzschild black hole and it is remarkably different from the inner structure of a charged static Reissner-Nordstr"om or a stationary rotating Kerr black holes.

To try and clarify this a bit:

The Schwarzschild solution is a valid solution to Einstein's equation, and is stable in the exterior region. However, it is not expected to be stable in the interior region, and physically collapsing objects instead are expected to have a metric known as a BKL metric in the interior region, rather than the Schwarzschild metric.

(This is talked about in one of Thorne's excellent popular books on black holes, for a very terse online reference see

http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/BKLSingularity.html.

The BKL metric is chaotic).

The R-N black hole is similar to the Schwarzschild solution. It is a mathematical solution to Einstein's equations, but it is not expected to be stable in the interior region (beyond the event horizon).

The expected physical solution for a charged collapse is not as well understood as the Schwarzschild case, but is felt to be likely (see the paper I quoted earlier) to have a significantly different interior structure than the R-N black hole. (In fact it is expected to be somewhat similar to the usual picture of the Schwarzschild black hole).

This is as much as I know - if anyone has any further information I would be interested in hearing about it.
 
Thread 'Can this experiment break Lorentz symmetry?'
1. The Big Idea: According to Einstein’s relativity, all motion is relative. You can’t tell if you’re moving at a constant velocity without looking outside. But what if there is a universal “rest frame” (like the old idea of the “ether”)? This experiment tries to find out by looking for tiny, directional differences in how objects move inside a sealed box. 2. How It Works: The Two-Stage Process Imagine a perfectly isolated spacecraft (our lab) moving through space at some unknown speed V...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
Does the speed of light change in a gravitational field depending on whether the direction of travel is parallel to the field, or perpendicular to the field? And is it the same in both directions at each orientation? This question could be answered experimentally to some degree of accuracy. Experiment design: Place two identical clocks A and B on the circumference of a wheel at opposite ends of the diameter of length L. The wheel is positioned upright, i.e., perpendicular to the ground...
Back
Top