Gravity at the Event Horizon

[Bird11dog]

Suppose we could make a sphere out some mythical material that is totally non-elastic and inside the sphere we place six balls made of the same material such that the balls almost touch the sphere but not quite. The sphere is located somewhere out in space where gravity is as close to zero as possible. We shake the sphere to start the balls bouncing around inside. Each ball has the same mass and inside the balls is a clock that we can observe. Now we use the clock of each ball to measure it's momentum just before it collides with another ball and obviously we find that the momentum of each ball is identical. Next we move our sphere close to the edge of a black holes event horizon. Now if we calculate the momentum of a ball bouncing toward the EH we find that because it's clock slows down as compared to a ball bouncing away from the EH that it's momentum is greater. The total momentum of the balls will always be greater toward the EH. Now instead of balls we could be talking about atoms. Now can someone show me why this does not prove that gravity is just an artifact of time dilation?

[imatfaal]

Suppose we could make a sphere out some mythical material that is totally non-elastic and inside the sphere we place six balls made of the same material such that the balls almost touch the sphere but not quite. The sphere is located somewhere out in space where gravity is as close to zero as possible. We shake the sphere to start the balls bouncing around inside. Each ball has the same mass and inside the balls is a clock that we can observe. Now we use the clock of each ball to measure it's momentum just before it collides with another ball and obviously we find that the momentum of each ball is identical. Next we move our sphere close to the edge of a black holes event horizon. Now if we calculate the momentum of a ball bouncing toward the EH we find that because it's clock slows down as compared to a ball bouncing away from the EH that it's momentum is greater. The total momentum of the balls will always be greater toward the EH. Now instead of balls we could be talking about atoms. Now can someone show me why this does not prove that gravity is just an artifact of time dilation?

Why should the momentum of each ball be the same? Do you mean just the magnitude (remember momentum is a vector so has a direction as well)? And even with just the momentum magnitude - i see no reason in a complex system why each ball should have similar |momentum|; perhaps averaged over time this might work out but at any one moment, no chance.

 

You need to carefully state which frame of reference you are using. And (I think) whether this is a valid frame for doing such calcs - this would normally assume locally flat space time which is clearly not the case. Why does a ball approaching the EH (which can be at the same radius as the ball departing from the EH) have a greater momentum than the ball departing - they are for the sake of argument at the same gravitational potential, travelling with the same speed relative to the holder, and in all other respects are identical.

 

I don't think at the moment your gedanken is well formed. Once it is, and the points it highlights are agreed; then, and only then, can it be used to make inferences about the nature of gravity.

 

 

BTW I have also moved this to speculations as it involved new ideas on the nature of physical laws.

[Bird11dog]

Given that each ball has the same mass and the same velocity and the same surface one would think the momentum would be the same. The frames of reference are always that of the ball being examined. At the edge of an event horizon I am sure there is a large difference between one meter and one half meter from the EH. When examining the overall momentum of the system the individual atom would determine the collective momentum.

[imatfaal]

Given that each ball has the same mass and the same velocity and the same surface one would think the momentum would be the same.

So you do just mean magnitude - and why would they have the same velocity?

 

The frames of reference are always that of the ball being examined.

There is no time dilation due to relative velocity within the objects frame of reference - ie no one every measures their own clock as slow. Come to think of it - the ball is not moving in its own frame and thus has zero momentum

 

At the edge of an event horizon I am sure there is a large difference between one meter and one half meter from the EH.

Not necessarily - the big black holes that we are pretty sure exist in the centres of galaxies have a fairly nice gravitational gradient. But I was asking what you propose is changing such that the momentum is changing.

[Bird11dog]

Thanks for your response Ima, it appears there is a communication problem preventing any clear understanding between us and it will exist for as long as you and I are alive.

[imatfaal]

Thanks for your response Ima, it appears there is a communication problem preventing any clear understanding between us and it will exist for as long as you and I are alive.

 

What an enormous cop-out!

[ACG52]

It's a standard crankout. "You just can't understand my creative thinking."

[Bird11dog]

You know if I'm such a cope out why don't you guy's show me were my thinking is wrong instead of just quoting QM paradigm.

[Mordred]

Now if we calculate the momentum of a ball bouncing toward the EH we find that because it's clock slows down as compared to a ball bouncing away from the EH that it's momentum is greater. The total momentum of the balls will always be greater toward the EH. Now instead of balls we could be talking about atoms. Now can someone show me why this does not prove that gravity is just an artifact of time dilation?

 

 

ok so lets ask one question if gravity is merely an artifact of time dilation, why would the ball accelerate to the BH in the first place? take your balls place both at rest. The BH would exert no force on the balls they will stay at rest. so no time dilation. According to your descriptive also as pointed out time dilation is relative to an outside observer

 

observer A is at rest object b is in motion, observer a looking at the clock at observer B's reference frame will see the time dilation on observer B's clock, observer B looking at his own clock will see none on his own clock. This was already pointed out.

Edited June 30, 2014 by Mordred

[imatfaal]

You know if I'm such a cope out why don't you guy's show me were my thinking is wrong instead of just quoting QM paradigm.

 

I addressed each of your premises, questioned the newtonian-based mechanics that you were relying upon and never even ventured into a qm paradigm.

 

So can you answer my first question - why when you shake a container with 6 identical balls inside will they have the same momentum? They definitely won't have same direction unless your shake is more of a controlled directed force on the centre of mass of each ball. And as soon as they start to collide they will almost certainly not have the same speed.

 

And when you have done that simple bit - we can ascertain why you think the momentum would change.

[`hýsøŕ]

wow how disrespectful, a very educated person giving some good constructive criticism to an amateur only for it to be rejected because of arrogance..

bird11 if you aren't willing to accept constructive criticism how will you get anywhere with your hypotheses