When Will Two Test Particles Cross Paths in the Schwarzschild Solution?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Passionflower
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conditions under which two test particles in the Schwarzschild solution will cross paths, specifically whether they will meet at the event horizon or the singularity. The conversation explores various initial conditions for the particles' motion and the implications of general relativity on their trajectories.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the initial conditions of the particles, asking whether they are falling radially or from rest at infinity, and how distance is defined in general relativity.
  • One participant suggests that if the particles are equivalent and falling radially, a function could be defined to translate their initial separation distance to a distance at the event horizon.
  • Another participant proposes considering the arc length along a circle centered on the black hole to measure the distance between the particles as they approach the event horizon.
  • There is a discussion about whether the particles can meet at the event horizon, with some arguing that if an event exists on both worldlines at the event horizon, they would meet there.
  • Others contend that the particles do not meet until the singularity, raising the possibility that events beyond the event horizon are uncertain.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of using different coordinate systems to analyze the problem, with references to the limitations of Schwarzschild coordinates.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the reliability of general relativity's predictions in this scenario, suggesting that the event horizon's nature complicates the situation.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the particles will meet at the event horizon or the singularity. Multiple competing views remain regarding the implications of their trajectories and the nature of spacetime beyond the event horizon.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the ambiguity in defining distance in general relativity and the challenges posed by coordinate singularities, particularly in the context of the Schwarzschild solution.

Passionflower
Messages
1,543
Reaction score
0
In the Schwarzschild solution consider two test point particles, p1 and p2, both at the same distance from the black hole (e.g. both particles have the same r value) but separated a distance d from each other (so they make an angle with respect to the black hole)

So now the question: when will their paths cross? At the event horizon or at the singularity?

If you say at the singularity then what is their distance in terms of d when they both cross the event horizon?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You haven't been specific enough. Are the particles falling radially? Falling initially from rest (with respect to Schwarzschild coordinates)? Falling form rest at infinity?

Distance is tricky and ambiguous in general relativity. What does "separated a distance d from each other" mean?
 
George Jones said:
You haven't been specific enough. Are the particles falling radially? Falling initially from rest (with respect to Schwarzschild coordinates)? Falling form rest at infinity?

Distance is tricky and ambiguous in general relativity. What does "separated a distance d from each other" mean?
Yes they are falling radially, you can take any condition you like: falling from rest at infinity (problem then would be how to define any notion of distance between them) or initially falling from rest. In other words the two particles are exactly equivalent (the Schwarzschild solution is symmetrical after all). With regards to d, you are free to choose. I understand that talking about distance is tricky. However one could perhaps envision the definition of a function (valid for the Schwarzschild solution) that translates a given d at the initial position to a d at the event horizon. Alternatively you can express the situation with an angle or if everything else fails just pick some coordinate distance that you prefer. Also consider the extreme case, two test particles opposite to each other with the black hole exactly in the middle (this one could in principle be expressed in terms of 'falling from rest at infinity' using symmetry).

However if it is not possible to express any kind of distance then the question becomes: how can you prove they do not meet at the event horizon.

:smile:
 
Last edited:
However one could perhaps envision the definition of a function (valid for the Schwarzschild solution) that translates a given d at the initial position to a d at the event horizon.
If you mean the distance as measured along an angular direction (i.e. a long a line of constant r), then it's simply the constant angle between the particles times the Schwarzschild radius r.
In case you're referring to Antoci: r=2m at the horizon, not 0.
 
One way of looking at this is not to try to draw a "straight line" between the two points, but instead to consider the arc length of the circle that they both lie on (centred on the black hole). If the two points are close together (i.e. d is tiny compared with the radius), that's a good approximation anyway.

Choose your coordinate system so that both points are on the "equator" [itex]\theta = \pi / 2[/itex]. The circumferential distance between the points is just [itex]r (\phi_2 - \phi_1)[/itex] and both particles move along worldlines of constant [itex]\phi[/itex] and [itex]\theta[/itex]. So the circumferential distance in the limit as they approach the event horizon is just [itex]r_s (\phi_2 - \phi_1)[/itex] where [itex]r_s[/itex] is the Schwarzschild radius.

Oops, Ich beat me to it!
 
Passionflower said:
However if it is not possible to express any kind of distance then the question becomes: how can you prove they do not meet at the event horizon.

If any event P is on the worldlines of both particles, then they meet. If there is no event P common to both worldlines, they never meet. If event P is on the worldlines of both particles, and event P is on the event horizon, then they meet on the event horizon.

Schwarzschild coordinates are really two disjoint coordinate patches, and neither patch covers the event horizon. Another coordinate patch that does cover the event horizon should be used to determine if particles meet on the event horizon.
 
Just had a thought. The picture of Flamm's paraboloid[/color] seems to indicate that as you approach the event horizon (where the paraboloid becomes vertical), the circumference really is the geodesic distance (using the Schwarzschild coordinates to decompose spacetime into space+time).
 
George Jones said:
If any event P is on the worldlines of both particles, then they meet. If there is no event P common to both worldlines, they never meet. If event P is on the worldlines of both particles, and event P is on the event horizon, then they meet on the event horizon.
So you are saying they meet on the event horizon?

George Jones said:
Schwarzschild coordinates are really two disjoint coordinate patches, and neither patch covers the event horizon. Another coordinate patch that does cover the event horizon should be used to determine if particles meet on the event horizon.
No problem, you could use any chart for the Schwarzschild metric that is suitable (provided of course there are no "voodoo" mathematical translations).
 
Passionflower said:
So you are saying they meet on the event horizon?

If I understand the initial conditions correctly, I say that the particles do not meet on the event horizon.
Passionflower said:
No problem, you could use any chart for the Schwarzschild metric that is suitable (provided of course there are no "voodoo" mathematical translations).

What translations to you consider to be'"voodoo" mathematical translations'?
 
  • #10
George Jones said:
What translations to you consider to be'"voodoo" mathematical translations'?
I did not have anything particular in mind when I wrote that.
 
  • #11
Passionflower said:
they are falling radially
Then they do not meet until the singularity.
 
  • #12
DaleSpam said:
Then they do not meet until the singularity.

Can that really be inferred, at any point past the event horizon? To my mind, anything that occurs beyond the EH is "who knows". Perhaps they never meet?
 
  • #13
Geigerclick said:
Can that really be inferred, at any point past the event horizon? To my mind, anything that occurs beyond the EH is "who knows". Perhaps they never meet?
The event horizon is a coordinate singularity only and can easily be removed through suitable choice of coordinates. So to solve this problem you would simply pick some such coordinate system that is well-behaved everywhere except the singularity.
 
  • #14
Geigerclick said:
Can that really be inferred, at any point past the event horizon? To my mind, anything that occurs beyond the EH is "who knows". Perhaps they never meet?
There would certainly be a well-defined theoretical answer given by general relativity. Are you asking about the possibility that GR might give inaccurate predictions in this scenario?
 
  • #15
JesseM said:
There would certainly be a well-defined theoretical answer given by general relativity. Are you asking about the possibility that GR might give inaccurate predictions in this scenario?

This is what I was getting at, but as DaleSpam pointed out that doesn't really apply here, so I will bow out. :)
 
  • #16
Geigerclick said:
This is what I was getting at, but as DaleSpam pointed out that doesn't really apply here, so I will bow out. :)
Well, DaleSpam's comment was just about the fact that there's no problem deriving the answer theoretically in general relativity, he wasn't addressing the possibility that GR might be wrong one way or another.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 167 ·
6
Replies
167
Views
8K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K