On Wednesday, November 6, 2019 at 3:46:54 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/6/2019 12:05 AM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 5, 2019 at 10:23:58 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/5/2019 9:09 PM, Alan Grayson wrote:
>>
>> Crossing the horizon is a nonevent for the most part. If you try to
>>> accelerate so you hover just above it the time dilation and that you are in
>>> an extreme Rindler wedge will mean you are subjected to a torrent of
>>> radiation. In principle a probe could accelerate to 10^{53}m/s^2 and hover
>>> a Planck unit distance above the horizon. You would be at the stretched
>>> horizon. This would be almost a sort of singular event. On the other hand
>>> if you fall on an inertial frame inwards there is nothing unusual at the
>>> horizon.
>>>
>>> LC
>>>
>>
>> Do you mean that clock rates continue to slow as an observer approaches
>> the event horizon; then the clock stops when crossing, or on the event
>> horizon; and after crossing the clock resumes its forward rate? AG
>>
>>
>> He means the infalling clock doesn't slow down at all. Whenever you see
>> the word "clock" in a discussion of relativity it refers to an *ideal
>> clock*. It runs perfectly and never speeds up or slows down. It's
>> called *relativity* theory because observers *moving relative* to the
>> clock *measure it* to run slower or faster than their (ideal) clock.
>>
>> Brent
>>
>
> I see. So if for the infalling observer, his clock seems to be running
> "normally", but for some stationary observer, say above the event horizon,
> the infalling clock appears to running progressively slower as it falls
> below the EH, even if it can't be observed or measured. According to GR, is
> there any depth below the event horizon where the infalling clock
> theoretically stops?
>
>
> I just explained that *clocks never slow* in relativity examples. So now
> you ask if there's a place they stop??
>
> Brent
>
I know, but that's not what I asked. Again, the infalling clock is measured
as running slower than a stationary clock above the EH. As the infalling
clock goes deeper into the BH, won't its theoretical rate continue to
decrease as compared to the reference clock above the EH? How slow can it
get? AG
>
> I say "theoretically" since the clock below the EH cannot be seen from
> above the EH. AG
>
> --
> 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 everyth...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2b54fd3c-96a6-4648-a947-e67cbca4ee4e%40googlegroups.com
>
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2b54fd3c-96a6-4648-a947-e67cbca4ee4e%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
>
>
--
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 everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/79485169-72c6-4149-9674-a8fa885952b9%40googlegroups.com.
