pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 1808.01507 · v2 · submitted 2018-08-04 · ⚛️ physics.hist-ph · gr-qc

Recognition: unknown

The Many Definitions of a Black Hole

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification ⚛️ physics.hist-ph gr-qc
keywords blackdifferentmanydefinitionsfactfieldsholesthem
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Although black holes are objects of central importance across many fields of physics, there is no agreed upon definition for them, a fact that does not seem to be widely recognized. Physicists in different fields conceive of and reason about them in radically different, and often conflicting, ways. All those ways, however, seem sound in the relevant contexts. After examining and comparing many of the definitions used in practice, I consider the problems that the lack of a universally accepted definition leads to, and discuss whether one is in fact needed for progress in the physics of black holes. I conclude that, within reasonable bounds, the profusion of different definitions is in fact a virtue, making the investigation of black holes possible and fruitful in all the many different kinds of problems about them that physicists consider, although one must take care in trying to translate results between fields.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Testing the nature of dark compact objects: a status report

    gr-qc 2019-04 accept novelty 2.0

    Current and future observations can test whether dark compact objects are Kerr black holes or exotic alternatives, with null results strengthening the black hole paradigm.