Jump to content

State of "matter" of a singularity


gatewood
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just a fun question: what state of energy/matter, could it be argued, that a gravitational singularity is in?

I would say that, it broke down to the most fundamental form of energy. Could it be said that, it is an extremely exotic form of atom?

Edited by gatewood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gatewood said:

Just a fun question: what state of energy/matter, could it be argued, that a gravitational singularity is in?

I would say that, it broke down to the most fundamental form of energy. Could it be said that, it is an extremely exotic form of atom?

Energy is a property of a physical system of some sort. It is not "stuff": you can't have a jug of energy. So it becomes pretty hard to see how a singularity can have energy. It would have to be a system, and that would prevent it being a singularity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, swansont said:

It's not clear that gravitational singularities exist, and we don't have the physics to describe such things.

"fundamental form of energy" doesn't make sense.

ohhh... please, cut the chase, we all know gravitational singularities are basically a placeholder for where our understanding of physics breaks down.

What I mean to say/ask: (fun question) what would you think we'll see if we could compress , say, 10 solar masses to the size of an atom (not an infinitesimally small volume)? Suppose there where no such thing as a schwartschild radius, but we could still compress stellar amounts of matter down to atomic/subatomic scales and also still observe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, gatewood said:

Suppose there where no such thing as a schwartschild radius, but we could still compress stellar amounts of matter down to atomic/subatomic scales and also still observe it.

Then we are in a made up universe, and you need a better description of this made up universe to answer the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gatewood said:

ohhh... please, cut the chase, we all know gravitational singularities are basically a placeholder for where our understanding of physics breaks down.

What I mean to say/ask: (fun question) what would you think we'll see if we could compress , say, 10 solar masses to the size of an atom (not an infinitesimally small volume)? Suppose there where no such thing as a schwartschild radius, but we could still compress stellar amounts of matter down to atomic/subatomic scales and also still observe it.

You mean, what would we see if the laws of physics were not what they are? Surely that would depend on what they were instead, wouldn't it?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

holy ppl... im merely asking, what might you think happens to matter, as it compresses, beyond neutron degeneracy. E.g. what state of matter could it be said it is in... if at any? (like the hypothetical quark stars).

Edited by gatewood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, gatewood said:

holy ppl... im merely asking, what might you think happens to matter, as it compresses, beyond neutron degeneracy. E.g. what state of matter could it be said it is in... if at all? (like the hypothetical quark stars).

OK, my shot at this, based on much reputable material that I have read, and my understanding thereof.

As matter collapses, it reaches a point [radius] we call the Schwarzchild radius/limit at which further collapse is compulsory. That coincides with what we know as the EH of a BH, all according to GR. The collapse continues until it reaches the quantum/Planck level, at which GR and our known laws of physics fail us. During this process, all matter is broken down into its most fundamental parts.

The question from this point of reaching the quantum/Planck level, is whether such collapse continues to a singularity point of infinite density and spacetime curvature. This is generally rejected by most physicists and cosmologists  for obvious reasons. Which leaves us with matter in some form or other, residing at or just below the quantum/Planck level...a surface of sorts if you will, which is still called a singularity as defined by where GR and our laws of physics fail us. Consequently the exact nature of what resides there is unknown.   

Edited by beecee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, gatewood said:

holy ppl... im merely asking, what might you think happens to matter, as it compresses, beyond neutron degeneracy. E.g. what state of matter could it be said it is in... if at any? (like the hypothetical quark stars).

People theorise about "quark matter", I think, viz. a form of degenerate matter in which neutrons lose their identity and one has just quarks. But I know nothing about this. I gather we don't know enough about the strong force to model it very well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WE know of no mechanism that will stop gravitational collapse after neutron degeneracy fails.

So called 'quark stars' would actually be neutrons packed so closely, that the quarks, that comprise them, are 'free'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MigL said:

WE know of no mechanism that will stop gravitational collapse after neutron degeneracy fails.

So called 'quark stars' would actually be neutrons packed so closely, that the quarks, that comprise them, are 'free'.

Sure, but the question doesn't need it.

Say we paused a black hole just after its schwarzschild radius gobbled all the core of the star that formed it, and, hypothetically, we could take a peek inside. What would we see? What would matter compressed down, further than neutron (or quark) degeneracy, would be like?

I mean, the core of my question would be: all that fell inside a black hole... still exists in some form? And if so, what you think it that form is? A Bunch of elementary particles? Energy resulting from annihilated particles? A bunch of photons and neutrinos?

Edited by gatewood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, gatewood said:

Just a fun question: what state of energy/matter, could it be argued, that a gravitational singularity is in?

I would say that, it broke down to the most fundamental form of energy. Could it be said that, it is an extremely exotic form of atom?

 

2 hours ago, gatewood said:

Sure, but the question doesn't need it.

Say we paused a black hole just after its schwarzschild radius gobbled all the core of the star that formed it, and, hypothetically, we could take a peek inside. What would we see? What would matter compressed down, further than neutron (or quark) degeneracy, would be like?

I mean, the core of my question would be: all that fell inside a black hole... still exists in some form? And if so, what you think it that form is? A Bunch of elementary particles? Energy resulting from annihilated particles? A bunch of photons and neutrinos?

 

It is currently not possible to know what happen to any object that get pull into gravitational singularity, like stellar black holes, since no observations are capable of observing beyond the Event Horizon.

If the gravitational forces are greater as astrophysicists say they are about the blackholes, then the probability of them retaining their shapes and forms would be slim...but then again, it is really impossible to say for certain, since the lack of observations of the black hole’s surface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gatewood said:

Say we paused a black hole just after its schwarzschild radius gobbled all the core of the star that formed it, and, hypothetically, we could take a peek inside. What would we see? What would matter compressed down, further than neutron (or quark) degeneracy, would be like?

I mean, the core of my question would be: all that fell inside a black hole... still exists in some form? And if so, what you think it that form is? A Bunch of elementary particles? Energy resulting from annihilated particles? A bunch of photons and neutrinos?

As one might imagine it, the singularity is the convergence of dimensions at a point.
The reduction of the field of action of the space time, annihilates the functioning of the elements composing the dimession.
It is true that for the big bang and if we had to represent this singularity, the evolution of the energy, gravity and the dimension x, y, z, t, or more, will start from a zero point.
It comes back to asking if this value of zero at rest would have a form of matter (the energy would surely be maximum), for indeed the formation of baryonic matter cannot exist, not even the photon during the first moment of primordial nucleosynthesis, either after a primitive expansion of sigularity.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, gatewood said:

Sure, but the question doesn't need it.

Say we paused a black hole just after its schwarzschild radius gobbled all the core of the star that formed it, and, hypothetically, we could take a peek inside. What would we see? What would matter compressed down, further than neutron (or quark) degeneracy, would be like?

I mean, the core of my question would be: all that fell inside a black hole... still exists in some form? And if so, what you think it that form is? A Bunch of elementary particles? Energy resulting from annihilated particles? A bunch of photons and neutrinos?

As far as I'm aware, we  don't have a theory for that. As quarks are the most elementary unit of matter we know of, I doubt that we have anything on which to base any speculations as to  whether or not they might be decomposable into something "more" fundamental.  Though I'd be interested if any physicists have anything to add on that.

 

Edited by exchemist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Kartazion said:

As one might imagine it, the singularity is the convergence of dimensions at a point.

Most Cosmologists/Physicists reject the singularity as defined by infinite density and infinite spacetime curvature. The only singularity is that as defined by the failure of GR and our laws of physics.

6 hours ago, storyteller said:

It is currently not possible to know what happen to any object that get pull into gravitational singularity, like stellar black holes, since no observations are capable of observing beyond the Event Horizon.

While it is certainly true that we can never by definition see inside the EH of a BH, observations of the behavior of orbiting matter and accretion disks, lead us to the belief that "gravitationally completely collapsed objects", henceforth known as BH's are the only way to explain such behavior, and as they are also a prediction of GR, plus being supported by the discovery of gravitational radiation, not to mention the image as phoyographed by the "Evet Horizon telescope" the GR BH model can be reasonably accepted.

6 hours ago, storyteller said:

If the gravitational forces are greater as astrophysicists say they are about the blackholes, then the probability of them retaining their shapes and forms would be slim...but then again, it is really impossible to say for certain, since the lack of observations of the black hole’s surface.

Well once the balance of radiative forces and gravitational forces cease, gravity takes over, period...and as mentioned before, once the Schwarzchild radius/limit is reached, further collapse as dictated by GR, is compulsory...at least up to the quantum/Planck region where GR and all known physical laws fail us. [see post 

13 hours ago, beecee said:

OK, my shot at this, based on much reputable material that I have read, and my understanding thereof.

As matter collapses, it reaches a point [radius] we call the Schwarzchild radius/limit at which further collapse is compulsory. That coincides with what we know as the EH of a BH, all according to GR. The collapse continues until it reaches the quantum/Planck level, at which GR and our known laws of physics fail us. During this process, all matter is broken down into its most fundamental parts.

The question from this point of reaching the quantum/Planck level, is whether such collapse continues to a singularity point of infinite density and spacetime curvature. This is generally rejected by most physicists and cosmologists  for obvious reasons. Which leaves us with matter in some form or other, residing at or just below the quantum/Planck level...a surface of sorts if you will, which is still called a singularity as defined by where GR and our laws of physics fail us. Consequently the exact nature of what resides there is unknown.   

In essence we can reasonably accept that BH's are essentially just curved spacetime [ignoring in-pouring matter/energy] with a possible surface of sorts, at or below the quantum/Planck level. A validated QGT may in time, reveal more and desirably, explain BH's  more realistically without any need for singularities of an infinite dense and curved nature.

Edited by beecee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, storyteller said:

Say we paused a black hole just after its schwarzschild radius gobbled all the core of the star that formed it, and, hypothetically, we could take a peek inside. What would we see?

It is my understanding that once neutron degeneracy fails, the collapse is almost immediate.
Further, it starts from the inside, and moves outward.
IOW, the Event Horizon ( Schwartzschild radius for a non rotating, non charged, BH ) starts at its center and grows outward, as the outer extremes of the collpsing star are less dense than the center. The outer extremes essentially 'fall' into the Event Horizon, which grows as a result.

So, I guess, if you looked 'inside' a gravitationally collapsing neutron star, you would see a growing Event Horizon.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MigL said:

It is my understanding that once neutron degeneracy fails, the collapse is almost immediate.
Further, it starts from the inside, and moves outward.
IOW, the Event Horizon ( Schwartzschild radius for a non rotating, non charged, BH ) starts at its center and grows outward, as the outer extremes of the collpsing star are less dense than the center. The outer extremes essentially 'fall' into the Event Horizon, which grows as a result.

So, I guess, if you looked 'inside' a gravitationally collapsing neutron star, you would see a growing Event Horizon.
 

Good obviously sensible point, which I have never really thought about. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MigL said:

It is my understanding that once neutron degeneracy fails, the collapse is almost immediate.
Further, it starts from the inside, and moves outward.
IOW, the Event Horizon ( Schwartzschild radius for a non rotating, non charged, BH ) starts at its center and grows outward, as the outer extremes of the collpsing star are less dense than the center. The outer extremes essentially 'fall' into the Event Horizon, which grows as a result.

So, I guess, if you looked 'inside' a gravitationally collapsing neutron star, you would see a growing Event Horizon.
 

 

That’s insightful and very helpful reply.

But what you quoted, isn’t my reply/post, it’s gatewood’s comment.

It is only my 2nd day as member, but it would seem there is bug in “quote” function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, storyteller said:

It is only my 2nd day as member, but it would seem there is bug in “quote” function.

Yes, there is. One hopes it gets fixed by the people that sell the software

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.