Dear Bernardz:

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa735497eb7c6e498993a@news...
In article Q7J_b.556$h23.53@fed1read06, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
N: dlzc1 D:cox says...
Dear Bernardz:

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa5d9133162c2f0989931@news...
Assuming that near a black hole I had a very powerful magnetic
position
detector.

If I dropped into a black hole a magnet. Why could I follow the path
of
the magnet, once it passed the event horizon?

Remember, nothing is ever seen to pass the event horizon. So your
"detector" would point closer and closer to the event horizon. Also,
since
magnets are motion-of-charge based, the field strength of the magnet
would
appear to decrease as it got closer to the horizon.

I will make it easy for you. Say inside the black hole, a magnet went
close to the event horizon. Why could we not detect this?

There is no geodesic (read this as straight line) that extends from the
inside of the event horizon to the outside. So there is no EM-based
information that can make the trip. Therefore magnetism is not detectable
outside a black hole, hence the adjective "black".

Magnetism requires charge and motion.

Charge requires virtual photons, who's presence is still written on/near
the event horizon. So there is no way they could appear to be two
different places.

Motion requires distance and time. Both of these are disjoint between our
Universe, and the stuff on the other side of the "shock" that the event
horizon is. You are aware that you cannot transmit sound across a shock
cone, right? A black hole is for a different reason, but the effect is the
same.

There could be some old fart in there making faces at you, and you wouldn't
know it. But you could throw something at him... ;}

David A. Smith

In article mn2%b.1230$h23.533@fed1read06, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc
\)" N: dlzc1 D:cox says...
Dear Bernardz:

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa735497eb7c6e498993a@news...
In article Q7J_b.556$h23.53@fed1read06, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
N: dlzc1 D:cox says...
Dear Bernardz:

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa5d9133162c2f0989931@news...
Assuming that near a black hole I had a very powerful magnetic
position
detector.

If I dropped into a black hole a magnet. Why could I follow the path
of
the magnet, once it passed the event horizon?

Remember, nothing is ever seen to pass the event horizon. So your
"detector" would point closer and closer to the event horizon. Also,
since
magnets are motion-of-charge based, the field strength of the magnet
would
appear to decrease as it got closer to the horizon.

I will make it easy for you. Say inside the black hole, a magnet went
close to the event horizon. Why could we not detect this?

There is no geodesic (read this as straight line) that extends from the
inside of the event horizon to the outside. So there is no EM-based
information that can make the trip. Therefore magnetism is not detectable
outside a black hole, hence the adjective "black".

Magnetism requires charge and motion.

Hold that thought!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Charge requires virtual photons, who's presence is still written on/near
the event horizon. So there is no way they could appear to be two
different places.

We do allow under our current theories for the black hole allow it to
have a charge. Say I threw into the black hole heaps and heaps of
positive charge. Those charges to an outside observer would be part of
the black hole and he can measure the total charge.


Motion requires distance and time. Both of these are disjoint between our
Universe, and the stuff on the other side of the "shock" that the event
horizon is. You are aware that you cannot transmit sound across a shock
cone, right? A black hole is for a different reason, but the effect is the
same.

There could be some old fart in there making faces at you, and you wouldn't
know it. But you could throw something at him... ;}

David A. Smith


I think there is some truth to this but its certainly incomplete. Say I
had a small black hole. Now instead of magnets say we work with charge
as above.

I am in a black hole. I separate the positive charges from the negative.
So one part of the back hole starts gaining a positive charge and the
other part a negative. Now if the black hole gurus are right, I should
not be able to determine the distribution of the charge inside a black
hole. Why not?






--
Mankind's future is in space.

Observations of Bernard - No 48

Dear Bernardz:

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa87b615eb76655989944@news...
In article mn2%b.1230$h23.533@fed1read06, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc
\)" N: dlzc1 D:cox says...
....
I will make it easy for you. Say inside the black hole, a magnet went
close to the event horizon. Why could we not detect this?

There is no geodesic (read this as straight line) that extends from the
inside of the event horizon to the outside. So there is no EM-based
information that can make the trip. Therefore magnetism is not
detectable
outside a black hole, hence the adjective "black".

Magnetism requires charge and motion.

Hold that thought!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Charge requires virtual photons, who's presence is still written
on/near
the event horizon. So there is no way they could appear to be two
different places.

We do allow under our current theories for the black hole allow it to
have a charge. Say I threw into the black hole heaps and heaps of
positive charge. Those charges to an outside observer would be part of
the black hole and he can measure the total charge.

So you have a charge that is *distributed on the surface of the event
horizon*. This is not a "magnet inside the horizon", as you mentioned.

Motion requires distance and time. Both of these are disjoint between
our
Universe, and the stuff on the other side of the "shock" that the event
horizon is. You are aware that you cannot transmit sound across a
shock
cone, right? A black hole is for a different reason, but the effect is
the
same.

There could be some old fart in there making faces at you, and you
wouldn't
know it. But you could throw something at him... ;}


I think there is some truth to this but its certainly incomplete.

Sure, like how will you target the old fart?

Say I
had a small black hole. Now instead of magnets say we work with charge
as above.

If the hole has spin, then you would have charges distributed distributed
on a sphere. If you managed to drop all the charges in one place, you
could create an external magnetic field.

I am in a black hole. I separate the positive charges from the negative.
So one part of the back hole starts gaining a positive charge and the
other part a negative. Now if the black hole gurus are right, I should
not be able to determine the distribution of the charge inside a black
hole. Why not?

No EM moderated ANYTHING comes out of the hole. This includes charge,
magnetism, and light.

What is in the hole is written on the event horizon. No structures exit
the hole, and this includes information about what happens inside it.

Were we able to get charge-location-or-value information from inside the
hole, then there would be a charge "doubling" by a black hole. The charge
would be on the horizon & in the hole. The charge would appear to need to
repel itself, inside from outside and vice versa. It might be possible for
the charge in the hole to repel the external "image" charge and prevent it
from entering!

What happens inside the hole has no space or time coordinates in common
with this Universe. Just as we would not have any common coordinates with
a higher Universe that we might be part of a black hole to.

David A. Smith

Bernardz:

We do allow under our current theories for the black hole allow it to
have a charge.

Yes, we do. Without considering anything rather exotic, black holes
in general, can have mass, charge and angular momentum. A reissner-
nordstrom black hole is generic black-hole which specifies each of
those. A reissner-nordstrom blackhole with no charge is a kerr black hole.
A kerr black hole with no angular momentum is a schwarzchild blackhole.

Say I threw into the black hole heaps and heaps of
positive charge. Those charges to an outside observer would be part of
the black hole and he can measure the total charge.

Right.


There could be some old fart in there making faces at you, and you wouldn't
know it. But you could throw something at him... ;}

David A. Smith


I think there is some truth to this but its certainly incomplete. Say I
had a small black hole. Now instead of magnets say we work with charge
as above.

I am in a black hole. I separate the positive charges from the negative.
So one part of the back hole starts gaining a positive charge and the
other part a negative.

This is unphysical. If you could measure the multipole moments of
a charge distribution, you could locate all of the charges.

Now if the black hole gurus are right, I should not be able to determine
the distribution of the charge inside a black hole. Why not?

Because the field propagates at the speed of light and no lightlike
or timelike trajectory inside the horizon will ever reach the horizon.

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa7362c747f8e8f98993b@news...
In article ,
Since you would never observe the magnet to cross the event
horizon in the first place, what is the point of your question?

Irrelevant.

Not exactly irrelevant. What the implication of what John says, is to an
outside observer, the magnet (and the effects of the magnetism as well)
would appear to freeze on the horizon. So depending on how long you
wait, your detector will detect the magnet approaching the horizon, but
never getting there.

Your detector won't see the magnet for where the magnet is, but for
where the magnet was at some time before crossing the horizon played
like a slowing movie out to time infinity (or you loose the signal in a
less theoretical and more "technically" manner of consideration).

Say the magnet was already be in the black hole right up
close to the event horizon. We should not be able to detect this
movement but I cannot see why we could not.

................(Detector)..................
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++ event horizon
................---(magnet)----........... magnet moving

First, a magnet (being mass) can't make that path. Not even light inside
the horizon can make that path. Inside the horizon, as time progresses,
things must be further away from the horizon. There is no such path of a
constant r you have shown.

So the only way a magnet could be near the horizon on the inside, would
be if it had just passed the horizon from the outside in. Again in that
case, a detector outside the horizon would still see the residual
magnetism of the magnet where it used to be, outside, fading slowly,
slowly away.

--
Randy M. Dumse

Caution: Objects in mirror are more confused than they appear.

Randy M. Dumse wrote:

"Bernardz" wrote in message
news:MPG.1aa7362c747f8e8f98993b@news...

In article ,

Since you would never observe the magnet to cross the event
horizon in the first place, what is the point of your question?

Irrelevant.

Not exactly irrelevant. What the implication of what John says, is to an
outside observer, the magnet (and the effects of the magnetism as well)
would appear to freeze on the horizon. So depending on how long you
wait, your detector will detect the magnet approaching the horizon, but
never getting there.

Caevat:

http://olympus.het.brown.edu/piperma...16/011410.html

"Bill Vajk" wrote in message
...
Caevat:


http://olympus.het.brown.edu/piperma...16/011410.html

Not really. This is one of the fascinating things about the horizon that
was very hard to get past. What is "seen" by one observer is not
necessarily what is "experience" by another. Rather than use grapefruit
or atom per jb's discussion, in ours, the magnet in its proper time
falls through the horizon. That is what it "experiences" according to
its local coordinates. But what is "seen" by the detector is that the
last images of it falling in are extended forever.

Just because the detector "sees" the magnet still approaching the
horizon doesn't mean the magnet is still where it is seen. This is true
in the same sense as seeing a movie of Einstein riding a bicycle in New
Jersey. Just because you now see it, doesn't mean if you went to New
Jersey you'd find Einstein on that bike. It only means he was once there
and it took a long time for the image to reach your eye by the route
they took. Einstein has long ago left New Jersey.

--
Randy M. Dumse

Caution: Objects in mirror are more confused than they appear.

Randy M. Dumse wrote:
"Bill Vajk" wrote in message
...

Caevat:

http://olympus.het.brown.edu/piperma...16/011410.html

Not really. This is one of the fascinating things about the horizon that
was very hard to get past. What is "seen" by one observer is not
necessarily what is "experience" by another. Rather than use grapefruit
or atom per jb's discussion, in ours, the magnet in its proper time
falls through the horizon. That is what it "experiences" according to
its local coordinates. But what is "seen" by the detector is that the
last images of it falling in are extended forever.

Just because the detector "sees" the magnet still approaching the
horizon doesn't mean the magnet is still where it is seen. This is true
in the same sense as seeing a movie of Einstein riding a bicycle in New
Jersey. Just because you now see it, doesn't mean if you went to New
Jersey you'd find Einstein on that bike. It only means he was once there
and it took a long time for the image to reach your eye by the route
they took. Einstein has long ago left New Jersey.

Please reread the Baez html, I don't think you've understood it.

Black holes do *not* violate conservation laws so far as anyone has
been able to demonstrate. If you can detect magnetic force coming
from the magnet "forever," considering it doesn't even exist any
longer, you've discovered the equivalent of free energy. That's
not going to happen.

The movie example you've given has no legitimate application to
black hole event horizon case because it is a virtual, instead
of a real, image. It is a horrid *******ization of time
displacement. Besides, in order to "see" the virtual image
you are forced to introduce fresh new energy any time you
want to see it. That's not true for any real image, not even
one near an event horizon.

The movie argument separates men from boys where science is
concerned. It was designed for simple minds.

The only force that comes out of the great density of a BH is great
force of gravity. If the magnetic attraction or repulsion can't escape
from a BH it is they are virtual photons,and they can't escape the
virtual horizon of a black hole. Bert

In article ,
says...

Now if the black hole gurus are right, I should not be able to determine
the distribution of the charge inside a black hole. Why not?

Because the field propagates at the speed of light and no lightlike
or timelike trajectory inside the horizon will ever reach the horizon.


How then can I measure the total charge?




--
Mankind's future is in space.

Observations of Bernard - No 48