Photon overtakes photon

[Ver]

Hello

I realise the thread title is against "the law" but I see a conflict with the title under certain conditions.

I just need to confirm a couple of my photon behavior beliefs and hope to have these steps confirmed by someone else.

A photon on the event horizon- with a totaly vertical trajectory going out- will stop on the event horizon (Unstable yes but I believe that is accepted) We know it is going at c- all examples go at c local spacetime.

We start another photon at a slightly higher altitude to the event horizon at the same vertical trajectory and this time the photon manages to marginaly make headway towards the photon sphere.

We start again at the same altitude as before but this time we introduce a marginal variation from vertical enough to reduce the marginal headway but still make headway obviously-this time not as much headway as before. (headway--is altitude)

One more photon from the same altitude again with marginaly more of an angle away from vertical as the previous example only this time it does not make headway out towards the photon sphere but remains on the same line of altitude it started at.

Yes this is all unstable like a photon in the photon sphere but it is there-- no altitude gain.

Now It is clear in my mind but what do you think will happen to the photon in that last example and why.

Hopefuly we can get to the thread title from there.

regards Dave R

[arkain101]

Is it proven there is even electromagnetic radiation emmited from a black hole?

 

Would it be possible that the matter has collapsed and becomes unifed mass?

 

when released through the poles, then manifests into essential star dust?

[GAHD]

yeah-hunh. Somehow I doubt it. the photon 'orbiting' continues orbiting, and has it's own share of destructive and constructive interfearance happening at any given time. It still continues to operate normaly for it's surroundings as a wave&particle.

[Ver]

Hi Gahd and Arcain 101

yeah-hunh. Somehow I doubt it. the photon 'orbiting' continues orbiting, and has it's own share of destructive and constructive interfearance happening at any given time. It still continues to operate normaly for it's surroundings as a wave&particle.

I think Gahd is on the right wavelength- the photon orbiting and continues orbiting. and as I have said in the post-- as unstable as a photon in the photon sphere and as Gahd says---> it has its own share of destructive and constructive interference happening at any given time-- for sure Gahd I agree-- no more no less than in the photon sphere. I do understand the constructive effects of a photon knocked into orbit and vice versa.

One more thing-> It still continues to operate normaly for its surroundings as a waveparticle-- For sure Gahd -- I did stress -->all examples go at c- local spacetime.

I think you are very close to believing that photons natural tendency to

orbit even though you doubt it-- it is "against the rules also" as a couple of our learned friends have told me without trying to follow my description. The stalled photon has a circumferential speed of zero-- it goes at c local spacetime- If you would just slowly follow the steps and tell me where it breaks down or have the orbit clear in your mind and then we can progress. Have a go at the steps Arcain 101-

Winterpeg eh!!-- NZ will do me for now!!

regards Dave R

[wavelength?]

so do you think its the warping of space time [the warping is the byproduct of matter repelling spacetime] that allows the photon to stay in the photon sphere? i could see this if the spacetime repelling force was large enough to create a zone absent of spacetime, beginning at the event horizon. there, the forces pulling from within could not interact with the photon because it has no charge and there it would sit until a more energetic particle interacted. it could also orbit if there were enough spacetime to counteract the velocity of the photon.

[Ver]

Hi wavelength.

I believe the photon you refer to is the one on the event horizon-not the photon sphere.

>so do you think its the warping of space time [the warping is the byproduct of matter repelling spacetime] that allows the photon to stay in the photon sphere

The photon is trying to escape from the level of the event horizon by going out at c in a precisely vertical trajectory. The event horizon- singularity is dragging it back in at c so they cancel out and the photon remains- unmoving. to us as outside observers the photon is not moving at all. If we move in next to the photon-- its local spacetime-- it moves at c. Accepted law I believe.

The photon sphere is the maximum altitude from the event horizon that a photon can continuously orbit although it will be extreemly unstable. It too will have a local spacetime and an apparent speed to an outside observer.

The photon sphere at present is accepted as an orbit sphere for photons. there are no closed orbits closer other than for a photon knocked into orbit by collision. I believe there are orbits-- unstable yes but able to form a closed orbit from the photon sphere right down to close to the event horizon. If so there are strange consequences.

Just follow my step by step description of photon behaviour all very close to the event horizon and see how the orbit has formed or tell me precisely the point at which I have made a mistake. I am leading to a conflict with the thread title hopefully as well as an acceptance of infinate orbit levels between the event horizon and the photon sphere.

regards Dave R

[GAHD]

let me put it another way; once outside of the event horison, the photon will eventualy(even if it takes several billion years and it gets stretched into sub infrared from high gamma) climb up and out. Once at or inside the event horison, "Up" is the exact same direction as "Down". That's the standard interpritation so far.

 

I find it kinda hard to swalow too, along with the connected math that as space becomes more linear(towards sigularity) time becomes less linear.

[erKa]

let me put it another way; once outside of the event horison, the photon will eventualy(even if it takes several billion years and it gets stretched into sub infrared from high gamma) climb up and out. Once at or inside the event horison, "Up" is the exact same direction as "Down". That's the standard interpritation so far.

 

I find it kinda hard to swalow too, along with the connected math that as space becomes more linear(towards sigularity) time becomes less linear.

But lotta energy is required to climb on photons from iR to out. Who pay the toll? This is out of 2nd Law of Thermodynamics....consequently if "down" is totally allowable the "climb up" must be defined in different other ways. If possible, obviously.

[Ver]

Hi

 

Quote Gahd

>once outside of the event horison, the photon will eventualy(even if it takes >several billion years and it gets stretched into sub infrared from high >gamma) climb up and out.

Once outside-- do you mean it has managed to get out. we know that is not possible.

Lets put one outside- from an object falling in and close to the event horizon.

If it leaves the object and manages to gain even the slightest amount of altitude- it will go out and will accellerate at each altitude level relative to R-s. Having initialy gained altitude it means it has reached the escape angle for the altitude it left from.

Lets take a photon- outside once again- leaving an object going in and heading out towards R-s 1.5 only this time it does not quite gain any altitude at this point it has obviously not reached the escape angle required-- it will enter R-s- finito.

Hi Erka.

If we talk of energy to get out-- climb out. The maximum force slowing down the photon is at R-s--it will sit on R-s happily only with a vertical trajectory--unstable yes-- but no toll to pay that I can see. It travells at c same as anywhere else-local spacetime. Relative to an outside observer and R-s it is stationary.

How about applying any doubts directly to the steps in my original post. I do need to confirm those steps or have any step logicaly disproven or we will end up within R-s .

regards Dave R

[Ver]

Just a note

>Once at or inside the event horison, "Up" is the exact same direction as "Down". That's the standard interpritation so far.

If you are at the event horizon up is your only chance of escaping if we take up as a gain in altitude.

regards Dave R

[Ver]

Hi-- Questions

Just going back to my original posting. Has anyone tried the steps outlined in the first post and agrees that the photon will go into a closed recurring orbit at the altitude it began its journey on. (yes unstable but a natural orbit)

2 What speed relative to c is the photons progress along the altitude line it is following- more --less --or the same will do.

3.Is it possible to perform the same steps at any altitude and what speed is the photons progress at each altitude relative to c.

4 Or- at what precise point in the first post is there a change from my description

Dave R

[Ver]

Hello again

Not sure if anyone has followed the steps in the first post but I believe the steps remain intact as far as replies are concerned

If you have followed the steps and agree there could be a photon closed orbit at all levels between the event horizon and the photon sphere and understand that the escape angle of a photon at any level is reflected by it ability to initialy gain altitude. Also it understood that the photons speed along the line of altitude is less than c.

If we apply the standard norm

Quote

Likewise photons which come in from infinity with a closest

>>approach between 1.5 R_s and R_s are bent in a curve which is sharper than

>>a circle before being flung off to infinity again. Photons that get into

>>these environs between 1.5 R_s and R_s can actually have their orbits bent

>>so much that they go around the black hole a few times before being flund

>>off to infinity.

If we look at the norm and the photons entry to the photon sphere with its reducing radius to s -- why should it stop reducing this radius and begin to increase altitude after going around the black hole a few times.

Angular momentum?-- at the point where the norm implies its radius is almost closest to s I can sit a photon alongside in a stable orbit going less than c- is the other photon going to level out and start to gain altitude alongside mine? Is it going faster?

I say a photon heading in past the photon sphere will not exit again

I say a photon in a curve around a black hole will only be able to marginaly touch the event hotizon and at the touch point- local spacetime speed is c and an outside observer will see less than c.

In its journey in it will be travelling on its line of progress at its slowest- when touching the sphere.

Am open to correction-- with reason.

Dave R

[GAHD]

Yes Ver, up means away from singularity.

No, I did not mean escapes; I ment a photon being emitted/released at any point just outside of the horizon.

@erKa: If you were referring to inside the horizon; space itself is warped so that any 'straight' line becomes curved back to the point of singularity, thermodymics doesn't apply to spatial geometry in this manner so there is no 'cost' or 'toll'.

 

back @ Ver: I' ve bee nthinking about what you're saying, and I'm trying to figure out how the photon's trajectory/angle in relation to the gravitational lensing of space could do as you say.

 

I agree that it is possible, but the orbit cannot be stable past any particular instant in time because the EH(and consequently the lensing effect of local space) is growing as the blackhole 'eats' more mass.

[Ver]

Hi Gahd

Thanks for posting again. Thanks for the quote proceedure-

I will have a look later- I realy want to answer your post.

I am sorry when you talked of a photon escaping-- we are both on the same track- I misunderstood.

Gahd

>back @ Ver: I' ve bee nthinking about what you're saying, and I'm trying to >figure out how the photon's trajectory/angle in relation to the gravitational >lensing of space could do as you say.

 

Sorry about the steam driven quote for the moment. I will get it right eventualy.

When you talk of gravitational lensing- I think we both need to be at the same point ie- Gravitational lensing I understand to happen even if a star is like our sun or denser even- perhaps with no effective event horizon or photon sphere- just a minor lensing effect. The trajectory I talk about starts in the first example- right on a black hole event horizon or R_s I believe. The photon does not go in or go out- just stalled in an unstable state. Go again from a slightly higher altitude-- this time the photon begins to escape- Start again from this same slightly higher altitude and give it a slight away from vertical trajectory- it does not gain so much altitude and moves to one side of vertical . Start again from this slightly higher altitude but this time even more of a slight angle away from vertical so the photon does not gain altitude and also-- it does not lose altitude-It has gone to one side of the vertical and it must start to orbit and progress on that line of altitude at less than c-- yes it is going at c local spacetime. Most unstable yes but no more than a photon in a photon sphere.

That last example can be applied to any level right out to the photon sphere. the only difference being the speed of progress along the line of altitude -to an outside observer and the starting angle to vertical.

"You agree that it is Possible" I see---well that for a start is a lot more than the "Literati" would have.

Gahd

>I agree that it is possible, but the orbit cannot be stable past any particular >instant in time because the EH(and consequently the lensing effect of local >space) is growing as the blackhole 'eats' more mass.

 

Yes it is growing all the time which also directly effects the photon sphere and the event horizon and they are accepted levels-- My levels would change in proportion.

If you "See" the orbits-- as I have described ( and you are close)-- at all of the above levels except right on EH. The next step is to appreciate the speed on altitude being less than c-- the speed increases with each altitude level right up to the photon sphere but always less than c. yes they all go at c.

There is some real interesting stuff further down the line including a conflict with another rule " photon cannot overtake photon local spacetime" and that is a rule I respect. This is mentioned on a previous post.

regards Dave R

[GAHD]

there's never been a problem with less than C, it's only more than C that physics has a problem with.

[Ver]

Hi Gahd

Do I understand you have no conflict with my description so far-- -- if so I presume you agree with "no photon can overtake another in the same local spacetime'. so going back to a quote from an astrophysicist friend

Quote

Likewise photons which come in from infinity with a closest

>>approach between 1.5 R_s and R_s are bent in a curve which is sharper an

>>a circle before being flung off to infinity again. Photons that get into

>>these environs between 1.5 R_s and R_s can actually have their orbits bent

>>so much that they go around the black hole a few times before being flund

>>off to infinity. Some will actually end up going in. It all depends on

>>their initial angular momentum etc when they come in from infinity.

I suppose this is a standard belief.

Now take the photon in the the above example at its closest point to R_s and

look closely at its path and put one of my photons right alongside it going the same way ---same spacetime- Now is his photon going to pass mine-- is the angular momentum going to help it to fling out into space again having arrived at this point with a constant loss of altitude. Surely one of us is wrong-- I personaly believe he is but am open to me being incorrect but at what point.

If by some remote chance I am correct-- we end up with some interesting photon movement because losing altitude between any point between R_s and 1.5_Rs would mean you are in for good and angular momentum needs a little rethink.

My friend would not accept

Quote

>As long as you think about photons changing speed you are thinking >wrongly, because that is not what happens.

>Angular momentum conservation and energy conservation are the two most >important

>things in orbital mechanics, whether Newtonian or relativistic. The bending >of light orbits has no counterpart in Newtonian mechanics, and you need full >GR,

>and an appreciation of the curvature of space before you can make >headway, I'm

>afraid.

I presume he means I dont know enough to argue the point- He is now too busy.

When an object passes a gravity scource- its fastest point of travel is its closest point to the source-When a photon passes a gravity scource- its slowest speed to an outside observer is its closest point--- ALL the time it goes at c-- Perhaps you can see what I mean now.

regards Dave R

[GAHD]

I see, but you have to realise tha photons don't really slow down unless in a medium(and yes the gas swirling around the hole is a medium, but we'll disregard that for now...); Photons change their wavelength where other particles change their speed. Coming Into a black hole the photon gains energy, but manifests the energy as an increse in frequency. Similarly, when leaving the gravity well the photon loses energy and decreses in frequency. Angular momentum is a tricky subject with photons because of this, and that's why they say you're 'thinking wrongly'.

 

Whatever your frind may say, Nobody can say for shure what happens in or around a black hole(short of stuff gets sucked in and radiation is spewed out, presumeably from the matter disintegation), it is ALL theory and don't let anyone that can't take you there to show you up close and personal tell you different.

 

Keeping that in mind, Photons Can overtake each other; if the medium reacts stronger with one wavelength than another and two photons of these different wavelengths are travelling within the medium.

 

Back to the black holes; I fail to see how any photon capeable of an escape would orbit more than once unless the hole itself is moving at some interesting angle in relation to the orbit, in which case it better be a VERY interesting angle.

 

BTW; in short, you write

Message

to properly quote in this forum structure.