I know that for an observer far away, nothing ever crosses a black hole horizon (due to time dilation), while in the frame of reference of a falling observer the horizon is nothing special on its way in; and there is no contradiction because in the far away frame of reference the horizon is reached in the infinite future. Now considering that a black hole evaporates in a finite time, it cannot exist in the infinite future of a far away observer. So it seems there is a contradiction here, where the observers (free-falling and far-away) do not agree on the mere fact that the horizon is reached at all by anything during the whole black hole lifetime. Thus my question: by the very nature of their topology in spacetime, aren't black holes required to live forever in our frame of reference ?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Why can't we use fissions products for electricity production ? As far has I know fissions products from current nuclear power plants cr...
-
How can we know the order of a Feynman diagram just from the pictorial representation? Is it the number of vertices divided by 2? For exampl...
-
I have searched for equations regarding craters and I came across two of them. The first one is from this NOAO website in the level two sec...
-
As the title says. It is common sense that sharp things cut, but how do they work at the atomical level? Answer For organic matter, such a...
-
This image from NASA illustrates drag coefficients for several shapes: It is generally accepted that some variation of the teardrop/airfoil...
-
Problem Statement: Imagine a spherical ball is dropped from a height $h$, into a liquid. What is the maximum average height of the displaced...
-
In most books (like Cardy's) relations between critical exponents and scaling dimensions are given, for example $$ \alpha = 2-d/y_t, \;\...
No comments:
Post a Comment