yet another post on black holes

Slate · Dec 9, 2005

After reading several of the posts here concerning black holes I find myself scratching my head. I do that a lot since I started reading these boards a few years ago but can usually figure it out on my own. This time however I am at a loss of understanding. The acceleration rate at the event horizon of a black hole is C. Does this mean that anything entering the event horizon is accelerated to C? If that’s true then half the distance to the center of the black hole from the event horizon would be 2 times C and so on ect ect. I understand that physics’ as we understand it brakes down at the event horizon but I can not even come close to understanding how something that has such a small % of the total amount of energy required to accelerate the smallest amount of mass to C can in fact do so to any and all mass that cross the line. Perhaps I missed something? Is it that acceleration does not instantly equal velocity achieved? Does it take time to achieve C from the event horizon so that what ever enters hits the center of the black hole before it reaches C? I can think of many possibilities and all of them make my little brain hurt. Another question that comes to mind is the propagation of gravity it’s self. If gravity propagates at C how is it that it escapes the event horizon where light traveling the same velocity can not? Further more if at the event horizon all space is bent back towards the black hole so that not even light can escape. How is it that gravity can do so where no apparent path even exists? I’ve always accepted black holes as a reality even before mainstream science did. After looking at black holes in this light (or lack there of) I am beginning to wonder if I had been wrong in my easy acceptance of this theory. Would appreciate any thoughts on this.

Saiph · Dec 9, 2005

first little thing to point out: The acceleration at the event horizon is not C...the escape velocity is. So that fixes the first part. as for the second, gravity is warped spacetime. One of the things usually glossed over in discussions of spacetime, is that warped spacetime warps itself... A black hole is spacetime so warped, that it can maintain it's shape, even after the "warping mass" is gone, locked behind the black hole. So the gravity from the mass now inside the BH...doesn't get out. The effect it had on spacetime just prior to entering...persists. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

yevaud · Dec 9, 2005

"Fossil Gravity." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

neutron_star69 · Dec 9, 2005

what the heck is fossil gravity?

Saiph · Dec 9, 2005

i think he's just making a joke. It's a warp space-time that's "solidified"...sorta like fossilization. Of course, neither of those terms is truely accurate, but it's just a bit of a play with words. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

neutron_star69 · Dec 10, 2005

so like fossilized sape or time? how the heck is that made/fossilized?

neutron_star69 · Dec 11, 2005

space**

Saiph · Dec 11, 2005

that's the joke, you don't really "fossilize it". But, since space-time warps itself, you can warp it so much that, even if you remove the matter causing the warping...that it stays put. Sorta like bending a sheet of plastic. It'll return to normal..unless you bend it to far, then it stays put. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

kmarinas86 · Dec 11, 2005

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/5001 "In the second place our result shows that, according to the general theory of relativity, the law of the constancy of the velocity of light in vacuo, which constitutes one of the two fundamental assumptions in the special theory of relativity and to which we have already frequently referred, cannot claim any unlimited validity. A curvature of rays of light can only take place when the velocity of propagation of light varies with position. Now we might think that as a consequence of this, the special theory of relativity and with it the whole theory of relativity would be laid in the dust. But in reality this is not the case. We can only conclude that the special theory of relativity cannot claim an unlinlited domain of validity ; its results hold only so long as we are able to disregard the influences of gravitational fields on the phenomena (e.g. of light)." - Albert Einstein (The General Theory of Relativity: Chapter 22 - A Few Inferences from the General Principle of Relativity)

neutron_star69 · Dec 21, 2005

i knew that

Search

yet another post on black holes

Slate

Guest

Saiph

Guest

yevaud

Guest

neutron_star69

Guest

Saiph

Guest

neutron_star69

Guest

neutron_star69

Guest

Saiph

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

neutron_star69

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page