Re: Symmetry
- From: "Barry" <Sirdry@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 1 Nov 2006 11:12:14 -0800
Edward Green wrote:
badd_xi2@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Edward Green wrote:
If GR contains no naked singularities, then presumably we are excluding
observers on the inside of black hole horizons.
What makes you think that?
Because an observer on the inside of the horizon would not have an
horizon between him and the singularity, hence, from his point of view,
the singularity would be naked?
The point is that a clothed singularity has no future pointing
trajectories leaving it.
Since I thought the
canon was that there was "perfectly good physics" in there, I wonder on
what basis we would do this...
Your assumption is wrong, so your conclusion doesn't follow.
Actually, if my assumption is wrong, my conclusion may still follow
from my wrong assumption. But leaving quibbles of logic aside, please
illuminate my error. Is the understanding of "clothed" simply that
there is an horizon somewhere, that some observers are shielded from
the awful sight of Yahweh? (This would explain why everybody on the
inside must soon perish -- thou mayest not look upon the face of God,
and live).
A clothed singularity has no future pointing trajectories leaving it.
Hence it is unobservable.
An unclothed singularity would have future pointing trajectories
leaving it. Hence it is at least potentially observable.
Yaweh, aka the Cosmic Censorship Principle, was invoked by Penrose, as
I recall.
But since the BB singularity is also naked the CCP was crafted to
permit its existence.
Barry
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Spacetime Questions for Mr. Bielawski, Mr. McCullough, Dr. Roberts, and Others Interested
- Next by Date: Re: Spacetime Questions for Mr. Bielawski, Mr. McCullough, Dr. Roberts, and Others Interested
- Previous by thread: Re: Symmetry
- Next by thread: Re: Nomenclature--sorta basic
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
