Exploring the Possibilities of Time Inside a Black Hole

[bosydomo]

If we were to sit inside a black hole, of infinite mass what would we see ? Would you see time move around you?

If I shine beam of light, after 1 year , relative to me the beam of light 1 year away, however if I manage to get in front of that beam, I will be at the same point in time.

Would that mean black holes are anchors in time? That time is fixed, and we rotate around it.

 

[Ibix]

If we were to sit inside a black hole, of infinite mass what would we see ?

I don't think such a thing can be described. You can't "sit" inside a black hole, anyway. You end up destroyed in the singularity fairly quickly (milliseconds for a stellar mass black hole, hours for a super-massive one).

Would you see time move around you?

How could you perceive anything if time weren't running? Your own clock always runs at one second per second from your perspective.

If I shine beam of light, after 1 year , relative to me the beam of light 1 year away, however if I manage to get in front of that beam, I will be at the same point in time.

You can't overtake a beam of light. That's one of the few absolutes in relativity.

Would that mean black holes are anchors in time? That time is fixed, and we rotate around it.

No. I don't think those sentences actually mean anything.

I'd advise you to study a proper textbook before attempting to reason about black holes. They are highly non-intuitive and any learning that doesn't include the maths will lead you astray.

 

[bosydomo]

I don't think such a thing can be described. You can't "sit" inside a black hole, anyway. You end up destroyed in the singularity fairly quickly (milliseconds for a stellar mass black hole, hours for a super-massive one).

I'm not saying you can sit inside one. I'm imaging what you'd see if you were. Wouldn't you see time rotating around you?

 

[Vanadium 50]

Wouldn't you see time rotating around you?

That sounds a lot like word salad.

How would you measure "time rotating around you"?

 

[bosydomo]

That sounds a lot like word salad.

How would you measure "time rotating around you"?

You would measure using an objective fixed in time.

 

[Ibix]

I'm not saying you can sit inside one. I'm imaging what you'd see if you were

You can't sit inside a black hole, so there's nothing to imagine. It's like trying to imagine how big is the colour green - it doesn't make any sense.

Wouldn't you see time rotating around you?

That doesn't mean anything.

You would measure using an objective fixed in time.

No such thing.

I repeat, you need a textbook.

 

[bosydomo]

How could you perceive anything if time weren't running? Your own clock always runs at one second per second from your perspective.

You find an object fixed in time. We've always thought the sun and planets revolved around the earth. Until we realized the sun was fixed. Same with time, maybe time is fixed, and we revolve around time.

You can't overtake a beam of light. That's one of the few absolutes in relativity.

Imagine we're on a sphere, say earth. We get into an argument, we both leave in opposite directions. If we are on a sphere and we both head in the same direction, we will meet. Same with light. Time is circular, we will meet the particle of light again at some point.

 

[Vanadium 50]

ou would measure using an objective fixed in time.

That is not a description of an experiment.

 

[Ibix]

Perhaps before reading a textbook you should try reading the site rules, in particular the bits about overly speculative posts.

Everything you are saying appears to be meaningless. If you are interested in learning to talk meaningfully about black holes we can help. If you wish to continue talking nonsense, I'm afraid you'll probably find your threads locked in short order.

 

[bosydomo]

You can't sit inside a black hole, so there's nothing to imagine. It's like trying to imagine how big is the colour green - it doesn't make any sense.
That doesn't mean anything.

No such thing.

I repeat, you need a textbook.

Your assertion that 'no such thing' exists doesn't mean I'm wrong. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Why can't something that's fixed in time exist?

 

[Vanadium 50]

You really should take Ibix's advice.

 

[Ibix]

Why can't something that's fixed in time exist?

Because "fixed in time" doesn't mean anything. It's just some words you've put together that have no relation to any physics.

I think I've wasted enough time on this thread. I'd recommend "Relativity for Poets", free to download from lightandmatter.com, as a decent non-mathematical starting point for learning relativity.

 

[bosydomo]

Because "fixed in time" doesn't mean anything. It's just some words you've put together that have no relation to any physics.

Ok let me put it to you this way. Our planets are fixed in their orbits relative to the sun. I'm considering that time stands still, as does the sun, and our 'planet' is time revolving around it.

Imagine going back to the days of Copernicus. He said we revolve the sun. Why couldn't it be the same with time, we revolve around time.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Because that's a meaningless jumble of words.

If you refuse to pick up a book and learn, why should we take your theorizing seriously?

 

[bosydomo]

Because that's a meaningless jumble of words.

If you refuse to pick up a book and learn, why should we take your theorizing seriously?

What exactly in my analogy was not based on current theory or science.

 

[fresh_42]

This discussion is circling around a question which is by itself problematic. "fixed in time" does not mean anything, since it does not say what fixed and what to fixed? It assumes some fixed point which does not exist. It needs a common agreement about general relativity to resolve these misundertandings. But we cannot hold a lecture on GR here.

This thread is closed now.

 

[PeterDonis]

If we were to sit inside a black hole, of infinite mass what would we see ?

Just to add one additional note, you can't "sit inside a black hole", as has already been pointed out, and a black hole can't have infinite mass. So your scenario is impossible in two ways.