Supermassive black hole, surface gravity and tidal forces

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter haushofer
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Black hole
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of surface gravity and tidal forces near black holes, specifically comparing light black holes and supermassive black holes. Participants explore concepts from general relativity and Newtonian analogies, addressing the implications of these properties for observers near the event horizon.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that a light black hole has stronger surface gravity and tidal forces just outside the horizon compared to a supermassive black hole, raising questions about the implications for hovering near the horizon.
  • Others argue that the concept of "surface gravity" is misleading and does not reflect the actual proper acceleration needed to hover just above the horizon, which approaches infinity for any black hole.
  • A participant suggests that the measurement of surface gravity is made at infinity, which can lead to confusion regarding its implications for observers near the horizon.
  • Some contributions emphasize the distinction between the redshifted proper acceleration and the local acceleration required for hovering, noting that the former can be finite while the latter is infinite.
  • There is a discussion about the ambiguity of the term "surface" in relation to black holes, with references to the event horizon as a null surface rather than a physical surface.
  • Participants question the intuitive understanding of gravitational effects when comparing distances from different types of black holes, suggesting a need for careful consideration of the limits involved.
  • Some participants mention the relevance of black hole thermodynamics and the physical meaning of surface gravity in that context, although this is also contested.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion contains multiple competing views regarding the interpretation of surface gravity and tidal forces near black holes. There is no consensus on the implications of these properties for observers or the validity of the concepts discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the limitations of the definitions used, the dependence on observer perspectives, and the unresolved nature of certain mathematical interpretations. The discussion remains open to further exploration of these concepts.

  • #61
PAllen said:
They are geodesics.
When I do the computation in Painleve coordinates, I don't get that result.

A purely radial curve in Painleve coordinates with unit tangent has tangent vector ##U = \partial_r## (since ##g_{rr} = 1##), i.e., its components are ##(0, 1, 0, 0)##. The path curvature of this curve is:

$$
a = \sqrt{g_{ab} a^a a^b}
$$

where ##a^a = U^b \nabla_b U^a## is the path curvature 4-vector. It turns out to have two nonzero components, which, taking into account that all partial derivatives of ##U## are zero and using the above components of ##U##, are:

$$
a^t = \Gamma^t_{rr} = \frac{M}{r^2} \sqrt{\frac{r}{2M}}
$$

$$
a^r = \Gamma^r_{rr} = - \frac{M}{r^2}
$$

Plugging in these and the relevant metric coefficients into the formula above, I get

$$
a = \sqrt{\frac{M}{2r^3}}
$$

which is nonzero.

PAllen said:
This is most easily seen by looking at the variation in Lemaitre coordinates
I'll take a look at this when I get a chance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
PeterDonis said:
PAllen said:
This is most easily seen by looking at the variation in Lemaitre coordinates

I'll take a look at this when I get a chance.
I took another look. I mis-handled the time dependence of the Lemaitre metric. Done right, the variation says the constant raindrop time lines are not geodesics of the spacetime - they are, indeed, only geodesics of the time slice.

It is still true that can get a wide range of values from just above zero (by using geodesics that asymptotically approach a forward going radial inward light path) to measuring back to horizon start by choice of geodesic that intersects horizon. Presumably, one of these would produce r-R, but it would not likely have any other distinguishing property.
 
  • #63
PAllen said:
they are, indeed, only geodesics of the time slice.
Ok, good, thanks for checking again!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K