Timeline for Is a black hole singularity a single point?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 29, 2020 at 12:27 | comment | added | BlackHoleSlice | @BenCrowell - the link relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2008-6/fulltext.html you provided does not work. I would very much like to read it. Any options? | |
| Mar 19, 2018 at 2:01 | comment | added | tparker | This is a terrific and very informative answer! | |
| Feb 8, 2018 at 11:02 | review | Low quality answers | |||
| Feb 8, 2018 at 12:51 | |||||
| Feb 8, 2018 at 6:11 | comment | added | Rob | I agree with @Harry Johnston, that's above the OP and the context in which the question was asked, along with it's other shortcomings. Kerchhoff's principle: your failure to consider "quantum gravity theory" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… (an unsolved problem) means by definition your answer is probably incorrect: "Such a theory is required in order to understand problems involving the combination of very high energy and very small dimensions of space, such as the behavior of black holes, ...". - quel dommage. | |
| Feb 8, 2018 at 0:52 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 23 characters in body
|
| Aug 31, 2017 at 2:11 | comment | added | Harry Johnston | As for the Penrose diagram, that looks like a spacelike line to me, not a three-surface, for the same reason that the center of a sphere is a point and not a two-surface. The radial coordinates converge. | |
| Aug 31, 2017 at 2:05 | comment | added | Harry Johnston | Looking at the first reference, most of the constructions don't look all that hard to summarize: the g-boundary uses geodesics (the same as my suggestion) whereas the b-boundary uses parallel transport and the c-boundary uses causality relationships. The a-boundary I don't know. The b-boundary is clearly dysfunctional, and according to the paper it is believed (though unproven) that the g-boundary and c-boundary are equivalent, at least in the simpler cases. So at this point I'm not entirely convinced that classifying the Schwartzchild singularity is as hard as your answer suggests. :-) | |
| Aug 30, 2017 at 23:54 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 1 character in body
|
| Aug 30, 2017 at 23:53 | comment | added | user4552 | @HarryJohnston: My answer gives links to review articles on boundary constructions. There's no way to explain the whole topic in an SE answer. Also, could you expand on why you say that the Penrose diagram approach gives you a 3-surface rather than a line? That seems wrong. I'm not sure what expansion would be helpful. What seems wrong to you? | |
| Aug 15, 2017 at 4:08 | comment | added | Harry Johnston | Can you outline the differences between the various boundary constructions, from a physical point of view? The obvious approach is to form an equivalence class of the geodesics that intersect the singularity, based on whether they converge or not, and it's hard to see what other choices would be reasonable. Also, could you expand on why you say that the Penrose diagram approach gives you a 3-surface rather than a line? That seems wrong. | |
| Aug 12, 2017 at 23:55 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 330 characters in body
|
| Aug 12, 2017 at 23:47 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1028 characters in body
|
| Aug 12, 2017 at 23:38 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1028 characters in body
|
| Aug 12, 2017 at 23:33 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1028 characters in body
|
| Aug 12, 2017 at 23:27 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1028 characters in body
|
| Aug 12, 2017 at 23:17 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1028 characters in body
|
| Nov 13, 2014 at 3:41 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Nov 2, 2014 at 22:09 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 498 characters in body
|
| Nov 2, 2014 at 22:03 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 498 characters in body
|
| Nov 2, 2014 at 21:48 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 506 characters in body
|
| Nov 2, 2014 at 21:40 | history | edited | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 577 characters in body
|
| Nov 2, 2014 at 21:30 | history | answered | user4552 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |