Topology of Black Holes: Possible Topologies & Examples

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possible topologies of black holes, specifically focusing on the topology of spatial slices of the event horizon. Participants explore theoretical implications, particularly in relation to Hawking's results and the conditions under which different topologies might arise.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references Hawking's result that suggests the topology of a black hole's event horizon must be that of a 2-sphere, questioning whether this holds if the dominant energy condition is violated.
  • Another participant clarifies that the topology of Schwarzschild spacetime is ##S^2 \times R^2##, but this may not directly address the original question about the event horizon.
  • It is noted that the topology of the event horizon in 4D is generally spherical, but in higher dimensions, other topologies such as "black rings" with horizon topology ##S^2 \times S^1## can exist.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of violating energy conditions on the topology of the event horizon, questioning whether the topology remains spherical or could change under such circumstances.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of energy conditions for black hole topology, with some asserting that the spherical topology is maintained in 4D while others suggest that violations could lead to different topologies. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the effects of these conditions.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention specific mathematical conditions and results, such as the dominant energy condition and the Yamabe invariant, but the implications of these conditions are not fully resolved. There is uncertainty about the consequences of relaxing these assumptions on the existence and nature of black hole topologies.

martinbn
Science Advisor
Messages
4,431
Reaction score
2,482
This might be well known or even discussed here, though I couldn't find a thread about it, but the questions is what are the possible topologies of a black hole i.e. the topology of a spatial slice of the event horizon. I know there is a result of Hawking that says the topology has to be that of a 2-sphere. I am looking at his paper "Black holes in general relativity". In the proof the dominant energy condition is used, so my question is if the energy condition is violated, enough to make the integral change sign, is it possible to have a black hole with a different topology? Or is the condition needed only for this proof, but the result holds under weaker assumptions? In case different topologies are possible, are there any examples and which assumptions have to be violated? As a side, is there an exposition of the proof of Hawking's theorem written in a more textbook like style, with more details and more self contained?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##S^2 \times R## or just ##S^2## depending on what you mean.

If you mean some other spacetime than a Schwarzschild spacetime then I don't know what you mean by "black hole"
 
Last edited:
He is asking about the topology of (a spatial slice of) the horizon, not the topology of the whole spacetime.

In 4d, one can prove (as you have found) that the horizon is spherical. However, this proof works only in 4d. In higher dimensions, one can find other topologies, the simplest example being "black rings" in 5d, which have horizon topology ##S^2 \times S^1## (as opposed to ##S^3## for spherical black holes). I seem to remember that the general proof shows that the horizon is a manifold of positive Yamabe invariant, or something like that.
 
That's interesting, I saw some papers about generalizations but dismissed them, may be i should go back and take another look. About the 4d case my curiosity is what happens if the energy conditions are not satisfied. Is the topology still spherical or could it be different or is the question not good because without that assumption one cannot guarantee that the event horizon will not disappear and so on anything along those lines. But the proof in Hawking's paper uses the dominant energy condition at one step.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 73 ·
3
Replies
73
Views
4K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
685
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K