- •Contents
- •Preface to the second edition
- •Preface to the first edition
- •1 Special relativity
- •1.2 Definition of an inertial observer in SR
- •1.4 Spacetime diagrams
- •1.6 Invariance of the interval
- •1.8 Particularly important results
- •Time dilation
- •Lorentz contraction
- •Conventions
- •Failure of relativity?
- •1.9 The Lorentz transformation
- •1.11 Paradoxes and physical intuition
- •The problem
- •Brief solution
- •2 Vector analysis in special relativity
- •Transformation of basis vectors
- •Inverse transformations
- •2.3 The four-velocity
- •2.4 The four-momentum
- •Conservation of four-momentum
- •Scalar product of two vectors
- •Four-velocity and acceleration as derivatives
- •Energy and momentum
- •2.7 Photons
- •No four-velocity
- •Four-momentum
- •Zero rest-mass particles
- •3 Tensor analysis in special relativity
- •Components of a tensor
- •General properties
- •Notation for derivatives
- •Components
- •Symmetries
- •Circular reasoning?
- •Mixed components of metric
- •Metric and nonmetric vector algebras
- •3.10 Exercises
- •4 Perfect fluids in special relativity
- •The number density n
- •The flux across a surface
- •Number density as a timelike flux
- •The flux across the surface
- •4.4 Dust again: the stress–energy tensor
- •Energy density
- •4.5 General fluids
- •Definition of macroscopic quantities
- •First law of thermodynamics
- •The general stress–energy tensor
- •The spatial components of T, T ij
- •Conservation of energy–momentum
- •Conservation of particles
- •No heat conduction
- •No viscosity
- •Form of T
- •The conservation laws
- •4.8 Gauss’ law
- •4.10 Exercises
- •5 Preface to curvature
- •The gravitational redshift experiment
- •Nonexistence of a Lorentz frame at rest on Earth
- •The principle of equivalence
- •The redshift experiment again
- •Local inertial frames
- •Tidal forces
- •The role of curvature
- •Metric tensor
- •5.3 Tensor calculus in polar coordinates
- •Derivatives of basis vectors
- •Derivatives of general vectors
- •The covariant derivative
- •Divergence and Laplacian
- •5.4 Christoffel symbols and the metric
- •Calculating the Christoffel symbols from the metric
- •5.5 Noncoordinate bases
- •Polar coordinate basis
- •Polar unit basis
- •General remarks on noncoordinate bases
- •Noncoordinate bases in this book
- •5.8 Exercises
- •6 Curved manifolds
- •Differential structure
- •Proof of the local-flatness theorem
- •Geodesics
- •6.5 The curvature tensor
- •Geodesic deviation
- •The Ricci tensor
- •The Einstein tensor
- •6.7 Curvature in perspective
- •7 Physics in a curved spacetime
- •7.2 Physics in slightly curved spacetimes
- •7.3 Curved intuition
- •7.6 Exercises
- •8 The Einstein field equations
- •Geometrized units
- •8.2 Einstein’s equations
- •8.3 Einstein’s equations for weak gravitational fields
- •Nearly Lorentz coordinate systems
- •Gauge transformations
- •Riemann tensor
- •Weak-field Einstein equations
- •Newtonian limit
- •The far field of stationary relativistic sources
- •Definition of the mass of a relativistic body
- •8.5 Further reading
- •9 Gravitational radiation
- •The effect of waves on free particles
- •Measuring the stretching of space
- •Polarization of gravitational waves
- •An exact plane wave
- •9.2 The detection of gravitational waves
- •General considerations
- •Measuring distances with light
- •Beam detectors
- •Interferometer observations
- •9.3 The generation of gravitational waves
- •Simple estimates
- •Slow motion wave generation
- •Exact solution of the wave equation
- •Preview
- •Energy lost by a radiating system
- •Overview
- •Binary systems
- •Spinning neutron stars
- •9.6 Further reading
- •10 Spherical solutions for stars
- •The metric
- •Physical interpretation of metric terms
- •The Einstein tensor
- •Equation of state
- •Equations of motion
- •Einstein equations
- •Schwarzschild metric
- •Generality of the metric
- •10.5 The interior structure of the star
- •The structure of Newtonian stars
- •Buchdahl’s interior solution
- •10.7 Realistic stars and gravitational collapse
- •Buchdahl’s theorem
- •Quantum mechanical pressure
- •White dwarfs
- •Neutron stars
- •10.9 Exercises
- •11 Schwarzschild geometry and black holes
- •Black holes in Newtonian gravity
- •Conserved quantities
- •Perihelion shift
- •Post-Newtonian gravity
- •Gravitational deflection of light
- •Gravitational lensing
- •Coordinate singularities
- •Inside r = 2M
- •Coordinate systems
- •Kruskal–Szekeres coordinates
- •Formation of black holes in general
- •General properties of black holes
- •Kerr black hole
- •Dragging of inertial frames
- •Ergoregion
- •The Kerr horizon
- •Equatorial photon motion in the Kerr metric
- •The Penrose process
- •Supermassive black holes
- •Dynamical black holes
- •11.6 Further reading
- •12 Cosmology
- •The universe in the large
- •The cosmological arena
- •12.2 Cosmological kinematics: observing the expanding universe
- •Homogeneity and isotropy of the universe
- •Models of the universe: the cosmological principle
- •Cosmological metrics
- •Cosmological redshift as a distance measure
- •The universe is accelerating!
- •12.3 Cosmological dynamics: understanding the expanding universe
- •Critical density and the parameters of our universe
- •12.4 Physical cosmology: the evolution of the universe we observe
- •Dark matter and galaxy formation: the universe after decoupling
- •The early universe: fundamental physics meets cosmology
- •12.5 Further reading
- •Appendix A Summary of linear algebra
- •Vector space
- •References
- •Index
300 |
|
|
Schwarzschild geometry and black holes |
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is clear that as ε → 0 the integral of this goes like In ε, which diverges. We would also |
||||
|
|||||
|
|
˜ |
= |
− |
(2M/r)]−1 term, which |
|
find this for E |
1, because the divergence comes from the [1 |
|
˜ =
doesn’t contain E. Therefore a particle reaches the surface r 2M only after an infinite coordinate time has elapsed. Since the proper time is finite, the coordinate time must be behaving badly.
Inside r = 2M
To see just how badly it behaves, let us ask what happens to a particle after it reaches r = 2M. It must clearly pass to smaller r unless it is destroyed. This might happen if at r = 2M there were a ‘curvature singularity’, where the gravitational forces grew strong enough to tear anything apart. But calculation of the components Rα βμν of Riemannian tensor in the local inertial frame of the infalling particle shows them to be perfectly finite: Exer. 20, § 11.7. So we must conclude that the particle will just keep going. If we look at the geometry inside but near r = 2M, by introducing ε := 2M − r, then the line element is
ds2 |
= |
|
ε |
|
dt2 |
− |
2M − ε |
dε2 |
+ |
(2M |
− |
ε)2d 2. |
(11.63) |
|
2M |
− |
ε |
|
|||||||||||
|
|
ε |
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since ε > 0 inside r = 2M, we see that a line on which t, θ , φ are constant has ds2 < 0: it is timelike. Therefore ε (and hence r) is a timelike coordnate, while t has become spacelike: even more evidence for the funniness of t and r! Since the infalling particle must follow a timelike world line, it must constantly change r, and of course this means decrease r. So a particle inside r = 2M will inevitably reach r = 0, and there a true curvature singulaity awaits it: sure destruction by infinite forces (Exer. 20, § 11.7). But what happens if the particle inside r = 2M tries to send out a photon to someone outside r = 2M in order to describe his impending doom? This photon, no matter how directed, must also go forward in ‘time’ as seen locally by the particle, and this means to decreasing r. So the photon will not get out either. Everything inside r = 2M is trapped and, moreover, doomed to encounter the singularity at r = 0, since r = 0 is in the future of every timelike and null world line inside r = 2M. Once a particle crosses the surface r = 2M, it cannot be seen by an external observer, since to be seen means to send out a photon which reaches the external observer. This surface is therefore called a horizon, since a horizon on Earth has the same effect (for different reasons!). We shall henceforth refer to r = 2M as the Schwarzschild horizon.
Coordinate systems
So far, our approach has been purely algebraic – we have no ‘picture’ of the geometry. To develop a picture we will first draw a coordinate diagram in Schwarzschild coordinates, and on it we will draw the light cones, or at least the paths of the radially ingoing and outgoing null lines emanating from certain events (Fig. 11.10). These light cones may be calculated by solving ds2 = 0 for θ and φ constant:
301 |
11.2 Nature of the surface r = 2M |
t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
r |
|
|
2M |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Light cones drawn in Schwarzschild coordinates close up near the surface r = 2M. |
||||||
Figure 11.10 |
||||||||
|
|
dr |
= ± 1 − 2r |
− |
. |
(11.64) |
||
|
|
|
dt |
|
M |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a t − r diagram, these lines have slope ± 1 far from the star (standard SR light cone) but their slope approaches ± ∞ as r → 2M. This means that they become more vertical: the cone ‘closes up’. Since particle world lines are confined within the local light cone (a particle must move slower than light), this closing up of the cones forces the world lines of particles to become more vertical: if they reach r = 2M, they reach it at t = ∞. This is the ‘picture’ behind the algebraic result that a particle takes infinite coordinate time to reach the horizon. Notice that no particle world line reaches the line r = 2M for any finite value of t. This might suggest that the line (r = 2M, −∞ < t < ∞) is really not a line at all but a single point in spacetime. That is, our coordinates may go bad by expanding a single event into the whole line r = 2M, which would have the effect that if any particle reached the horizon after that event, then it would have to cross r = 2M ‘after’ t = + ∞. This singularity would then be very like the one in Fig. 11.9 for spherical coordinates at the pole: a whole line in the bad coordinates representing a point in the real space. Notice that the coordinate diagram in Fig. 11.10 makes no attempt to represent the geometry properly, only the coordinates. It clearly does a poor job on the geometry because the light cones close up. Since we have already decided that they don’t really close up (particles reach the horizon at finite proper time and encounter a perfectly well-behaved geometry there), the remedy is to find coordinates which do not close up the light cones.
Kruskal–Szekeres coordinates
The search for these coordinates was a long and difficult one, and ended in 1960. The good coordinates are known as Kruskal–Szekeres coordinates, are called u and v, and are defined by
302 |
|
Schwarzschild geometry and black holes |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
v = (r/2M − 1)1/2er/4M sinh(t/4M), |
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
u = (r/2M |
− 1)1/2er/4M cosh(t/4M), |
|
(11.65) |
||
|
for r > 2M and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
v = (1 − r/2M)1/2er/4M cosh(t/4M), |
|
||||
|
|
u = (1 |
− r/2M)1/2er/4M sinh(t/4M), |
|
(11.66) |
||
|
for r < 2M. (This transformation is singular at r = 2M, but that is necessary in order to |
||||||
|
eliminate the coordinate singularity there.) The metric in these coordinates is found to be |
||||||
|
|
ds2 = − |
32M3 |
e−r/2M (dv2 − du2) + r2d 2, |
(11.67) |
||
|
|
|
r |
where, now, r is not to be regarded as a coordinate but as a function of u and v, given implicitly by the inverse of Eqs. (11.65) and (11.66):
- |
r |
− 1. er/2M = u2 − v2. |
(11.68) |
2M |
Notice several things about Eq. (11.67). There is nothing singular about any metric term at r = 2M. There is, however, a singularity at r = 0, where we expect it. A radial null line (dθ = dφ = ds = 0) is a line
dv = ±du. |
(11.69) |
This last result is very important. It means that in a (u, υ) diagram, the light cones are all as open as in SR. This result makes these coordinates particularly useful for visualizing the geometry in a coordinate diagram. The (u, υ) diagram is, then, given in Fig. 11.11. Compare this with the result of Exer. 21, § 5.8.
II
r = 0
r |
|
= |
|
c |
|
o |
|
n |
|
st |
|
III |
I |
|
IV |
,t=∞ r=2M
t = const
r = const
◦ r =
Figure 11.11 Kruskal–Szekeres coordinates keep the light cones at 45 everywhere. The singularity at 0 (toothed line) bounds the future of all events inside (above) the line r = 2M, t = +∞. Events outside this horizon have part of their future free of singularities.
303 |
|
11.2 Nature of the surface r = 2M |
|
|
Much needs to be said about this. First, two light cones are drawn for illustration. Any |
|
|
|
|
45◦ line is a radial null line. Second, only u and υ are plotted: θ and φ are suppressed; |
|
|
therefore each point is really a two sphere of events. Third, lines of constant r are hyper- |
|
|
bolae, as is clear from Eq. (11.68). For r > 2M, these hyperbolae run roughly vertically, |
|
|
being asymptotic to the 45◦ line from the origin u = υ = 0. For r < 2M, the hyperbolae |
|
|
run roughly horizontally, with the same asymptotes. This means that for r < 2M, a timelike |
|
|
line (confined within the light cone) cannot remain at constant r. This is the result we had |
|
|
before. The hyperbola r = 0 is the end of the spacetime, since a true singularity is there. |
|
|
Note that although r = 0 is a ‘point’ in ordinary space, it is a whole hyperbola here. How- |
|
|
ever, not too much can be made of this, since it is a singularity of the geometry: we should |
|
|
not glibly speak of it as a part of spacetime with a well-defined dimensionality. |
|
|
|
Our fourth remark is that lines of constant t, being orthogonal to lines of constant r, |
|
are straight lines in this diagram, radiating outwards from the origin u = υ = 0. (They are |
|
|
orthogonal to the hyperbolae r = const. in the spacetime sense of orthogonality; recall |
|
|
our diagrams in § 1.7 of invariant hyperbolae in SR, which had the same property of |
|
|
being orthogonal to lines radiating out from the origin.) In the limit as t → ∞, these lines |
|
|
approach the 45◦ line from the origin. Since all the lines t = const. pass through the ori- |
|
|
gin, the origin would be expanded into a whole line in a (t, r) coordinate diagram like |
|
|
Fig. 11.10, which is what we guessed after discussing that diagram. A world line cross- |
|
|
ing this t = ∞ line in Fig. 11.11 enters the region in which r is a time coordinate, and so |
|
|
cannot get out again. The true horizon, then, is this line r = 2M, t = +∞. |
|
|
|
Fifth, since for a distant observer t really does measure proper time, and an object that |
|
falls to the horizon crosses all the lines t = const. up to t = ∞, a distant observer would |
|
|
conclude that it takes an infinite time for the infalling object to reach the horizon. We have |
|
|
already drawn this conclusion before, but here we see it displayed clearly in the diagram. |
|
|
There is nothing ‘wrong’ in this statement: the distant observer does wait an infinite time |
|
|
to get the information that the object has crossed the horizon. But the object reaches the |
|
|
horizon in a finite time on its own clock. If the infalling object sends out radio pulses each |
|
|
time its clock ticks, then it will emit only a finite number before reaching the horizon, so |
|
|
the distant observer can receive only a finite number of pulses. Since these are stretched |
|
|
out over a very large amount of the distant observer’s time, the observer concludes that |
|
|
time on the infalling clock is slowing down and eventually stopping. If the infalling ‘clock’ |
|
|
is a photon, the observer will conclude that the photon experiences an infinite gravitational |
|
|
redshift. This will also happen if the infalling ‘object’ is a gravitational wave of short |
|
|
wavelength compared to the horizon size. |
|
|
|
Sixth, this horizon is itself a null line. This must be the case, since the horizon is the |
|
boundary between null rays that cannot get out and those that can. It is therefore the path |
|
|
of the ‘marginal’ null ray. Seventh, the 45◦ lines from the origin divide spacetime up into |
|
|
four regions, labeled I, II, III, IV. Region I is clearly the ‘exterior’, r > 2M, and region II |
|
|
is the interior of the horizon. But what about III and IV? To discuss them is beyond the |
|
|
scope of this publication (see Misner et al. 1973, Box 33.2G and Ch. 34; and Hawking and |
|
|
Ellis 1973), but one remark must be made. Consider the dashed line in Fig. (11.11), which |
|
|
could be the path of an infalling particle. If this black hole were formed by the collapse of |
|
|
a star, then we know that outside the star the geometry is the Schwarzschild geometry, but |