0

Once an event horizon is formed in the process of the gravitational collapse of a star, the original star collapses inside the event horizon. As far as we know, stars and in particular neutron stars, rotate very fast.

Wouldn't the star end up rotating faster than the speed of light a at particular point as its core collapses and reduces in size inside the black hole?

Manuel
  • 478
  • There is a lot of debate over what happens at the centre of a black hole. Some think there is nothing in the centre - that everything stays at the event horizon. Some (like me) think that matters splits and the gluons go to the centre and the quarks stay at the horizon. Others, like Carlo Rovelli, think that a Plank Star forms as something plank sized (but not a singularity) at the centre. – foolishmuse Dec 07 '23 at 20:54
  • 1
    There’s no debate about what classical General Relativity predicts inside a black hole, until one reaches the singularity. Just as spacetime is locally Minkowskian outside, it is locally Minkowskian inside, except at the singularity. Since GR is based on pseudo-Riemannian geometry, it cannot be otherwise. Manifolds are locally flat, despite their curvature. – Ghoster Dec 08 '23 at 04:22
  • @Ghoster When you fall and are violently ripped apart by tidal forces, it is not a relief that some microscopically "local" region inside of you still is Minkowskian. Mathematically your comment is correct, but physically wrong, because "local" loses the classical meaning very fast. – safesphere Dec 09 '23 at 05:58
  • @safesphere As John Rennie has written, “At the event horizon of a supermassive black hole with the mass of a million Suns the difference between your head and feet would be only 0.001g and you'd struggle to feel it.” You can fall far into the interior of such a hole before being ripped apart. – Ghoster Dec 09 '23 at 06:49
  • @safesphere GR predicts nothing inside a black hole. Sorry, I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. – Ghoster Dec 09 '23 at 06:52

0 Answers0