Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest
Not true. Learn how Hawking's radiation works. On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 12:02 AM, wrote: > In reply to Eric Walker's message of Thu, 1 Feb 2018 16:46:41 -0700: > Hi, > [snip] > >If we take the other option, then nothing in our timeline ever happens to > >things that have crossed over the event horizon, and it is meaningless to > >talk about its contents. > > > It's worse than that - nothing ever even gets to cross the event horizon > from > our point of view (because time slows to the point where the universe > comes to > an end before anything actually gets to the event horizon.) > (Which BTW is what originally led me to the notion that there is nothing > in a > black hole.) > This also means that the growth in mass of a black hole must come from > matter/energy accumulating in a tight orbit (just) outside the event > horizon. > Regards, > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > local asymmetry = temporary success > >
Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Thu, 1 Feb 2018 16:46:41 -0700: Hi, [snip] >If we take the other option, then nothing in our timeline ever happens to >things that have crossed over the event horizon, and it is meaningless to >talk about its contents. > It's worse than that - nothing ever even gets to cross the event horizon from our point of view (because time slows to the point where the universe comes to an end before anything actually gets to the event horizon.) (Which BTW is what originally led me to the notion that there is nothing in a black hole.) This also means that the growth in mass of a black hole must come from matter/energy accumulating in a tight orbit (just) outside the event horizon. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest
On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 3:10 PM, wrote: Indeed, but it still means that from our point of view we would never get > to see > what happens. > Or, from the particles point of view, the rest of the universe has come to > an > end before they get together. > That was a question for me: for us the electron-positron pair appear to be frozen in time for us because light is bending back in on the black hole. Does that mean that whatever happens inside the event horizon is never contemporaneous with us? My sense was that this is not the case, and that it's just a trick of the light not escaping. If we take the other option, then nothing in our timeline ever happens to things that have crossed over the event horizon, and it is meaningless to talk about its contents. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest
In reply to Dave Roberson's message of Thu, 1 Feb 2018 16:39:58 -0500: Hi, [snip] >I believe that the theory is that those falling into the black hole see time >as being normal. Only outside viewers see time slow down. > >Dave Indeed, but it still means that from our point of view we would never get to see what happens. Or, from the particles point of view, the rest of the universe has come to an end before they get together. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
RE: [Vo]:Podcast of interest
I believe that the theory is that those falling into the black hole see time as being normal. Only outside viewers see time slow down. Dave Sent from Mail for Windows 10 From: mix...@bigpond.com Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2018 2:06 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest In reply to Eric Walker's message of Wed, 31 Jan 2018 22:19:50 -0700: Hi, [snip] >I was of the understanding that the event horizon is merely the point of no >return for light, where it begins to curve on a trajectory that does not >escape the black hole. In this understanding, time slows down >asymptotically as objects approach the singularity, but it is still running >(albeit more slowly) at the event horizon. > >To outside observers, time might seem to come to a standstill for the >electron and positron, but they would still have time to annihilate. >(Unless I'm mistaken.) If time comes to standstill for them as they approach the event horizon, then they never reach a point where they annihilate *inside* the black hole. (Outside wouldn't be a problem). > >Eric Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
Re: [Vo]:Podcast of interest
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Wed, 31 Jan 2018 22:19:50 -0700: Hi, [snip] >I was of the understanding that the event horizon is merely the point of no >return for light, where it begins to curve on a trajectory that does not >escape the black hole. In this understanding, time slows down >asymptotically as objects approach the singularity, but it is still running >(albeit more slowly) at the event horizon. > >To outside observers, time might seem to come to a standstill for the >electron and positron, but they would still have time to annihilate. >(Unless I'm mistaken.) If time comes to standstill for them as they approach the event horizon, then they never reach a point where they annihilate *inside* the black hole. (Outside wouldn't be a problem). > >Eric Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
