As I mentioned before, quantum gravity pull has a few advantages: 1) It acts as a guiding beacon for incoming particle waves, aligning them on the way in.
2) If you consider the particles as waves the incoming blueshift gives you high power right where you need it at the point of collapse. 3) Conversely, any radiation leaving is redshifted leaving only low power radiation to the outside observers, you and I. On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com>wrote: > At 04:55 PM 8/20/2012, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: > >> In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 19 Aug 2012 18:27:41 -0400 >> (EDT): >> Hi, >> >> That would be consistent with my suggestion below. >> >> > >> >I have always wondered exactly what happens to matter that is heading >> directly toward the singularity. Doesn't time for the matter slow down due >> to the intense gravity to such a degree that it appears to stop in mid path >> at the horizon from our observation perspective? >> > > Well, I suppose it's too much to expect for the average Vortician to > understand relativity. > > Time does not slow down in any inertial reference frame. Like ours. If > matter is attracted by gravity, it accelerates according to the > gravitational field. It will not appear to stop as it approaches any point. > However, its velocity is limited by the speed of light. As I understand > this, it will be sweallowed by the black hole. It will not stop at the > event horizon. Its momentum will become part of the momentum of the black > hole. (Momentum is conserved, and so is energy.) > > Time dilation means something else. If the matter falling in is > radioactive, for example, with a certain half-life, as the matter is > gravitationally accelerated, the decay rate, to us, would appear to slow > down. As the matter approaches the speed of light, the decays we could see > would slow toward a rate of zero. > > I don't want to make up more than that at the moment. Putting together the > relativistic effects of gravity with those purely resulting from relative > velocity hurts my head. > > (Time dilation is actually easy to understand, if one accepts that the > speed of light in a vacuum is constant in all frames of reference, no > matter what their relative velocity. It falls out easily from that.) >
