Timeline for Why do we define such a thing as singularity?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 23, 2011 at 14:22 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackPhysics/status/139348092511203328 | ||
| Dec 23, 2010 at 12:30 | vote | accept | Cem | ||
| Dec 23, 2010 at 12:30 | vote | accept | Cem | ||
| Dec 23, 2010 at 12:30 | |||||
| Dec 16, 2010 at 19:44 | comment | added | Cem | Yes, yes, I have grown much more knowledgeable about the issue of singularity since I asked the question. Thank you for your concern Jeff. | |
| Dec 16, 2010 at 19:20 | comment | added | pho | BTW, the singularity is not in the "middle" of the event horizon. An observer who passes through the horizon does not find the singularity at some particular spatial location, rather it is in their future. That's why they can't avoid it. It's like death and taxes. | |
| Nov 17, 2010 at 11:11 | vote | accept | Cem | ||
| Dec 23, 2010 at 12:29 | |||||
| Nov 17, 2010 at 1:35 | answer | added | Zo the Relativist | timeline score: 3 | |
| Nov 17, 2010 at 0:47 | comment | added | Marek | I am not sure what the actual question is. We don't define any singularity but rather just notice that it is a consequence of the GTR. As for what happens under the horizon: no external observer will ever observe it, so you can ignore singularities if you want (most people would ignore black holes completely anyway, if it wasn't for Star Trek). Nevertheless, it's interesting to ask what your theory tells about the situations you can't yet observe (i.e. you extrapolate the theory). | |
| Nov 16, 2010 at 23:56 | history | asked | Cem | CC BY-SA 2.5 |