What is the Nature of Singularity Semantics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lzkelley
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Singularity
lzkelley
Messages
276
Reaction score
2
It has been claimed that,
"The singularity of a black hole is not a point in space it is not even a point in spacetime, in fact it is not even in spacetime. The singularity is not a point on the spacetime manifold. If it were it would obviously not be a singularity."
The source is unimportant.

I feel that a singularity is technically any location--in space-time--where properties, namely density, become infinite. And less technically, any location that we don't really feel can exist according to the understandings of generally excepted theory (i.e. infinite density again, information loss, blah blah blah).
Colloquially, a gravitational singularity has become synonymous with black-holes (perhaps unfortunately), in which case a black-hole (the juicy core in particular) very possibly occupies a finite, non-zero, region of space-time.

Is there any backing to "singularities" not occupying space-time?
If this is the case, how can they come into existence, and later(temporally) cease to exist?
How can they interact with space-time?

Cheers.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Iskelley,

Most textbooks regard a black hole as a point singularity. That is one conclusion drawn from general relativity (that Einstien did not agree with) but there are other alternatives that interpret the conclusions of GR differently. If you want to the explore them you can start at the wikipedia article titled "Nonsingular black hole models" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonsingular_black_hole_models and perhaps also refer to post#32 of the "Gravitational Redshift" thread here: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=234292&page=3
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I started reading a National Geographic article related to the Big Bang. It starts these statements: Gazing up at the stars at night, it’s easy to imagine that space goes on forever. But cosmologists know that the universe actually has limits. First, their best models indicate that space and time had a beginning, a subatomic point called a singularity. This point of intense heat and density rapidly ballooned outward. My first reaction was that this is a layman's approximation to...
Thread 'Dirac's integral for the energy-momentum of the gravitational field'
See Dirac's brief treatment of the energy-momentum pseudo-tensor in the attached picture. Dirac is presumably integrating eq. (31.2) over the 4D "hypercylinder" defined by ##T_1 \le x^0 \le T_2## and ##\mathbf{|x|} \le R##, where ##R## is sufficiently large to include all the matter-energy fields in the system. Then \begin{align} 0 &= \int_V \left[ ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g}\, \right]_{,\nu} d^4 x = \int_{\partial V} ({t_\mu}^\nu + T_\mu^\nu)\sqrt{-g} \, dS_\nu \nonumber\\ &= \left(...
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Back
Top