Brent, We have to be careful to be precisely accurate here.
1. The structure of a black hole is not just a singularity inside an event horizon. The entire interior of a black hole is not a singularity. The singularity exists only at the very center of a black hole, there is plenty of volume between the event horizon and the singularity. 2. We have to clearly distinguish gravity WAVES from gravity itself. Gravity waves are NOT gravity, they are small fluctuations in gravity. So yes, gravity WAVES can radiate away, but the gravitational force itself remains unless the mass that produces it vanishes. If, as you propose, mass vanishes inside a black hole (no one else believes this BTW) black holes would produce NO gravitational effect.... Edgar On Friday, January 24, 2014 10:02:50 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 1/24/2014 3:12 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 25 January 2014 11:59, meekerdb <[email protected] <javascript:>>wrote: > >> A warp in space that is bound together by its own gravitation is what is >> known as a black hole. >> > > Technically I believe there is still a mass inside it, > > > No, it's massive, i.e. it warps space around it, but I don't think it > makes sense to say it has a mass inside it; it's a solution to Einstein's > equation without any T_u_v, i.e. a vacuum. > > however, even if it has been crushed to a point. It isn't a > "free-floating space warp" which is what Edgar was suggesting (I asked him, > to double check, and he affirmed it). If that was possible, then presumably > *any* space warp could become detached from its source > > > A black hole crushes it's source into a singularity (in the classical > approximation). > > and "drift off into the aether" ... the Earth might leave a furrow in > space behind it as it orbits the Sun, into which dust and asteroids would > tumble... > > There *are* "free-floating space warps", of course, namely gravity > waves. But as far as I know, they don't appear to be a major contributor to > "dark matter". > > > Gravity waves can't exactly be 'free floating' because they travel at the > speed of light and only interact gravitationally. So unless they are > strong enough to close up on themselves and make a black hole, they will > radiate off to infinity. > > Brent > > >> Note that Hawking as just posted a paper casting doubt on their >> existence: >> >> http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5761 >> >> I will read that with interest, thank you! I have long suspected that > black holes don't exist as specified in GR - I mean, that they aren't > infinitely dense singularities inside an event horizon. Nice to see Stephen > coming round to my way of thinking :-) > > No, seriously, a lot of alternatives to Black Holes have been suggested, > and some even seem quite likely to my poor little brain. Presumably GR > breaks down at some point before it reaches infinity (otherwise all your > "finitist numerologists" are in trouble :-) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:> > . > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
