Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by nåte on September 5, 1999 08:38:45 UTC
: : : : : Yes, I see what you are saying, however the reason we "have no way of observing them" is because in our time they do not happen.
: : : : : So in our reality nothing can get past the EH, and the BH hole is a frozen star. I agree with you that a faraway FoR and the EH are causally disconnected, but this means more than we just can't say anything about what is happening - since the time dilation is asymptotically approaching infinity before the EH is ever reached
: : : : correct. I would even go so far as to state that even a FoR a few "inches" from the EH boundary would not effectively observe an event traverse the EH in finite time, : : : : only approach infinitism.
: : : : So yes, I believe the issue concerning these temporal events, crossing an infinite barrier, merely a case of semantics. One could even say that depending on your : : : : philosophical FoR will give one a different answer. The answer one looks for depends what FoR one is asking the question. I think the resolution to this : : : : matter in a far away FoR is the understanding of causal disconnection. I think the solution to the matter within the EH is simple; local FoR.
: : : The Finkelstein For disputes your contentions and this FoR is accepted by the best minds in the business.
: : so do you automatically believe stand alone theories solely because they are "accepted by the best minds in the business"?
: : aside from that, I feel you haven't even read my all my posts on this thread. take the time to read carefully and I think you will find I don't dispute the Finkelstein : : frame of reference.
: : -nåte
: Think about it this way. To a faraway observer time comes to a stop at the EH of a BH, but as this faraway observer approaches the BH his time becomes more and more coordinated with the holes time. And as the horizon is reached the time coordinates are the same. So there is no causal disconnect, it is strictly a scaling phenomenon, just like in QM.
yes, that makes sense. But if I could nit pick... : )
would you say that beyond the EH, when the light cone tips, there is still no causal disconnection? I realize this could be a non-starter, but for sake of discussion.
And for the scaling phenomenon. If one looks at this issue classically, there is no point at which an event will effectively travel the EH boundary. If looked at in QM, there could be issues with Planck's constant in that an event could effectively pass the EH in finite time from an outside reference. no?
I've read that the singularity may not be a point, but rather a finite quantity expressed in QM theory.
also, didn't you say you were going away for awhile? : ) good to see you again.
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins