hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
The definition of volume is independent of the amount of stuff you can place inside; instead it's related to the space an object takes up which in the case of a singularity is zero.
The very many questions-not-worth-their-own-thread question thread XXIII
- Thread starter Borachio
- Start date
- Status
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
What would happen if you made an indestructible camera, attached it to an infinitely long cable to send back the video, and threw the camera inside a black hole?
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
You would lose signal well before the event horizon when gravity spaghettified it. Even with a theoretical indestructible camera, you'd lose signal as it approached the event horizon. You'd never see it fall in due to time dilation but you won't get data beyond that point - just a frozen image of what it saw at that instant.
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Well, then if you are interested in the "space" the object takes up and you are outside the black hole, seems like it would be the event horizon. Since everything inside is effectively inescapably within the singularity. Though don't we actually measure distance within event horizons in time instead of say, meters?
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
It's not what I am interested in - it's mathematical definition is all.
Take a propane tank and fill it with water then measure how much water it held. Take the same tank and fill it with pressurized gas. Now the tank holds much more stuff - has it's volume changed? It hasn't because volume is a measure of enclosed distance, not enclosed stuff.
Similarly the black hole is the singularity and the event horizon is not the black hole. It is just the way it is defined mathemarically.
Take a propane tank and fill it with water then measure how much water it held. Take the same tank and fill it with pressurized gas. Now the tank holds much more stuff - has it's volume changed? It hasn't because volume is a measure of enclosed distance, not enclosed stuff.
Similarly the black hole is the singularity and the event horizon is not the black hole. It is just the way it is defined mathemarically.
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Well, this isn't my strongest suit. More mathy minds probably read this differently. Or am I using outdated theory? These are the two that I found that jive with my understanding, but my understanding of what they say could certainly be wrong.
http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970808.html
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/45963/do-black-holes-have-infinite-areas-and-volumes
Quackers
The Frog
Why do woman get so touchy over the whole Mrs, miss and Ms stuff?
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Oh that's an easy one.
Mrs is, as you know, the married woman's title. As she's changed her name (usually), there's the implication that she is somehow her husband's property (and at one stage in history I think she literally was), or at least somehow of secondary importance to her husband.
Miss is, as you know, an unmarried girl's title. If she remains/remained unmarried then she had the unenviable status of a spinster. Not only a second class citizen because female, but a third class citizen because also unmarried.
Ms is a comparatively recent attempt to give a woman her own status independent of age or marital status. Though I don't know of any married women who use it. So perhaps it's an attempt to give a woman her own status equal to that accorded adult men through the use of Mr. It's also common to find it used by divorced women.
If people want me to address letters to them using this title, I'm happy to do so.
I'd be happier without any titles for anyone. I can't see they serve any useful function at all. And at every opportunity I omit to supply my own. Some on-line forms insist on it, though.
Mrs is, as you know, the married woman's title. As she's changed her name (usually), there's the implication that she is somehow her husband's property (and at one stage in history I think she literally was), or at least somehow of secondary importance to her husband.
Miss is, as you know, an unmarried girl's title. If she remains/remained unmarried then she had the unenviable status of a spinster. Not only a second class citizen because female, but a third class citizen because also unmarried.
Ms is a comparatively recent attempt to give a woman her own status independent of age or marital status. Though I don't know of any married women who use it. So perhaps it's an attempt to give a woman her own status equal to that accorded adult men through the use of Mr. It's also common to find it used by divorced women.
If people want me to address letters to them using this title, I'm happy to do so.
I'd be happier without any titles for anyone. I can't see they serve any useful function at all. And at every opportunity I omit to supply my own. Some on-line forms insist on it, though.
Quackers
The Frog
Hmm, weird, I'm guessing this is an older generation thing with woman. My generation doesn't care I don't think..
I certainly don't think a woman is 2nd or 3rd class for having those titles. It's simply a signifier of marriage to me.
I certainly don't think a woman is 2nd or 3rd class for having those titles. It's simply a signifier of marriage to me.
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Default to Ms. particularly in the business world unless you know better(like you've seen their signature line on an email). If it's a personal acquaintance it seems Mrs. and Miss are still better guesses if you know their marital status. It's actually easier if they have a different title you can use like Professor or Dr.
Under no circumstances other than matching a signature line in an email would I replicate the now super anachronistic Mrs. Farm Boy or Mrs. Downtown when addressing something directly to the woman rather than referring to the wife of a male whom you are addressing.
Much of your generation will care once they're married in significant percentage, or not, as their choices have led them. I'd put a couple bucks on that.
Under no circumstances other than matching a signature line in an email would I replicate the now super anachronistic Mrs. Farm Boy or Mrs. Downtown when addressing something directly to the woman rather than referring to the wife of a male whom you are addressing.
Much of your generation will care once they're married in significant percentage, or not, as their choices have led them. I'd put a couple bucks on that.
Quackers
The Frog
To me it is, officially the definition as you pointed out is different with the whole property thing.
I think its a load of nonsense over nothing.
Chukchi Husky
Lone Wolf
Here's another question that I'm frequently asked.
What is the purpose of parasites?
I can think of an answer, but I don't think it will work.
What is the purpose of parasites?
I can think of an answer, but I don't think it will work.
Farm Boy
I hope you dance
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2010
- Messages
- 28,269
Because history I'd think. Why do modern street follow old cattle paths? They still have a function as is now even if it would make no sense to lay the system out that way now.
Or perhaps because men are a bit dense and they can use all the extra warnings they can get before hitting on somebody that it might be unwelcome and/or hazardous?
- Status
Similar threads
