: : : /**********************************************/

: : : TJ ;

: : : Prove E=mc2 in black hole . Then I will humbly agree i was typing nonsense here. : : : This is one of the areas in the Universe where the above equation will fail. : : : Laws of physics are okay on earth since the forces are in smaller magnitudes : : : But when it comes to Higher Magnitudes E proportionally increases in comparison to mc2 there should also be some other factor evolved to match with E.

: : : /***********************************************

: : Ok, I'll prove it. The magnitude of any tensor is invariant so We'll define the mass of a particle as the magnitude of its momentum four vector divided by the speed of light : : m = (gmnPnPm)1/2/c : : To find how this is related to energy, in a black hole or not, transform to the particles local free fall frame. Because we are in the particle's frame : : P1 = P2 = P3 = 0 and because we are local to the particle P0 = E0/c and gmn transformed to diag(1, -1, -1, -1). Therefor : : m = [(1)(E0/c)(E0/c)]1/2/c : : m = E0/c2 : : E0 = mc2

: : /*****************************************/ : In black holes what is a particle a atom ,a neutron ,a photon or what

ZC; Any of the above will do fine.

:Now : velocity of light in A black Hole has to be close : to zero c close to zero.

c is not the remote coordinate speed of light. It is the locally frame invariant speed of light. It is the same constant everywhere.

: Then mass in that accumulated area of say 5km is extremely high . : Energy inside the black hole is exceptionally high. : Now Please explain me the above equation since there is attractive force which is existing in here because of presumably heavy mass.

Gravitation isn't a force in the exact same sense as the other forces that are four vectors. Gravitation is space-time geometry gmn Since the space-time geometry was locally transformed to Euclidean(gmn = diag(1, -1,-1,-1)) the fact that there is a presence of gravity does not detract from the local law E0 = mc2

: This force is attracting all other energies around it Making itself a huge source ball of energy. To what part of the equation relates to what since you utilized particle theory to explain the above .

There is no ball of energy. I don't understand what you're asking here.

: I would rather use a physical entity like heavy atom ,neutron or electrons which undoubtedly have to exist in a Black hole though they are crushed to a extent.

Fine, let the particle be any of the above. I never said it was crushed. Its just in the hole. In other words within the outer horizon.

:there is no movement among them.

That's not true.

: If nothing moves c has to be zero if c is close to zero then E has to be close to zero. But this is absolutely not since E is proportionately very large.

c is an invariant, not the remote coordinate speed of light so this is not true.

I don't see an admission.

• http://hometown.aol.com//zephcochrane/WarpDrives.html

• Emc2 in a black hole - TJ - January 28, 2000 - 01:58 UTC
  • Re: Emc^2 in a black hole - Zephram_Cochrane/">Zephram Cochrane - January 28, 2000 - 05:41 UTC
    • E=MC2 Without Mathematics - ouxi14 - October 7, 2002 - 07:38 UTC