Chapter 3. Curving

April 1, 2016 08:34 Curving160401v1 Sheet number 1 Page number 2-0 AW Physics Macros
1 Chapter 3. Curving
2 3.1 The Schwarzschild Metric 3-1
3 3.2 Mass in Units of Length 3-7
4 3.3 The Global Schwarzschild r-Coordinate 3-11
5 3.4 The Global Schwarzschild t-Coordinate 3-17
6 3.5 Constructing the Global Schwarzschild Map of
7 Events 3-18
8 3.6 The Spacetime Slice 3-22
9 3.7 Light Cone Diagram on an [r, t] Slice 3-24
10 3.8 Inside the Event Horizon: A Light Cone Diagram on an
11 [r, φ] Slice 3-27
12 3.9 Outside the Event Horizon: An Embedding Diagram on
13 an [r, φ] Slice 3-29
14 3.10 Room and Worldtube 3-33
15 3.11 Exercises 3-35
16 3.12 References 3-41
17 • General relativity describes only tiny effects, right?

18 • What does “curvature of spacetime” mean?
19 • What tools can I use to visualize spacetime curvature?
20 • Do people at different r-coordinates near a black hole age differently?
21 If so, can they feel the slowing down/speeding up of their aging?
22 • What is the “event horizon,” and what weird things happen there?
23 • Do funnel diagrams describe the gravity field of a black hole?
CHAPTER
3 24 Curving
*
Edmund Bertschinger & Edwin F. Taylor
25 In my talk ... I remarked that one couldn’t keep saying

26 “gravitationally completely collapsed object” over and over.
27 One needed a shorter descriptive phrase. “How about black
28 hole?” asked someone in the audience. I had been searching
29 for just the right term for months, mulling it over in bed, in
30 the bathtub, in my car, wherever I had quiet moments.
31 Suddenly this name seemed exactly right. ... I decided to be
32 casual about the term “black hole,” dropping it into [a later]
33 lecture and the written version as if it were an old family
34 friend. Would it catch on? Indeed it did. By now every
35 schoolchild has heard the term.
36 —John Archibald Wheeler with Kenneth Ford
3.137 THE SCHWARZSCHILD METRIC

38 Spherically symmetric massive center of attraction?
39 The Schwarzschild metric describes the curved, empty spacetime around it.
40 In late 1915, within a month of the publication of Einstein’s general theory of

Einstein to 41 relativity and just a few months before his own death from a battle-related
Schwarzschild: 42 illness, Karl Schwarzschild (1873-1916) derived from Einstein’s field equations
“splendid.” 43 the metric for spacetime surrounding the spherically symmetric black hole.
44 Einstein wrote to him, “I had not expected that the exact solution to the
45 problem could be formulated. Your analytic treatment of the problem appears
46 to me splendid.”
47 An isolated satellite zooms around a spherically symmetric massive body.
48 After a few orbits we discover that the satellite’s motion stays confined to the
49 initial plane determined by the satellite’s position, its direction of motion, and
Orbits stay in a plane. 50 the center of the attracting body. Why? The reason is simple: symmetry! With
* Draft of Second Edition of Exploring Black Holes: Introduction to General Relativity
Copyright c 2015 Edmund Bertschinger, Edwin F. Taylor, and John Archibald Wheeler. All
rights reserved. Latest drafts at dropsite eftaylor.com/exploringblackholes
3-1
3-2 Chapter 3 Curving
Box 1. Metric in Polar Coordinates for Flat Spacetime

separation between events 1 and 2 is—approximately—the
sum of the squares of two adjacent sides of the little box. For
a differential dφ, we are entitled to express the differential
r ds
space separation between event 1 and event 2 by the formula
ds2 = dr2 + r2 dφ2 (flat space) (3)
This squared spatial separation is the space part of the

squared wristwatch time differential for flat spacetime
FIGURE 1 Spatial separation between two points in
polar coordinates. dτ 2 = dt2 − dr2 − r2 dφ2 (flat spacetime) (4)
The metric for flat spacetime is:

This derivation is valid only when dφ is small—vanishingly
dτ 2 = dt2 − ds2 (flat spacetime) (1) small in the calculus sense—so that the differential segment
where ds is the spatial separation, expressed in Cartesian of arc rdφ is indistinguishable from a straight line. There is no
coordinates as such limitation to differentials for rectangular Cartesian space
coordinates in flat spacetime, so each d for differential in (2)
ds2 = dx2 + dy 2 (flat space) (2) can be expanded to ∆, as it was in Section 1.10.
We look for a similar ds expression for two adjacent events
From Einstein’s general relativity equations, Schwarzschild
numbered 1 and 2, events separated by polar coordinate
derived a generalization of (4) that goes beyond flat
increments dr and dφ (Figure 1).
spacetime and describes curved spacetime in the vicinity of
Draw little arcs of different radii through events 1 and 2 to form a spherically symmetric (thus non-spinning) uncharged black
a tiny box, shown in the magnified inset. The squared spatial hole.
51 respect to this initial plane there is no distinction between “up out of” and
52 “down out of” the plane, so the satellite cannot choose either and must remain
53 in that plane. The limitation of isolated particle and light motion to a single
54 plane greatly simplifies our analysis of physical events in this book.
55 We use polar coordinates (r, φ) for the black hole (Box 1), because polar
56 coordinates reflect its symmetry on a plane through the black hole’s center;
57 Cartesian coordinates (x, y) do not.
58 Think of two adjacent events that lie on our equatorial r, φ plane through
Schwarzschild 59 the center of the black hole. These events have differential coordinate
timelike metric 60 separations dt, dr, and dφ. The Schwarzschild metric gives us the invariant
61 dτ between this pair of events:
dr2

2 2M
dτ = 1− dt2 − − r2 dφ2 (timelike) (5)
r 2M
1−
r
(− ∞ < t < ∞ and 0 < r < ∞ and 0 ≤ φ < 2π)
62
63 Equation (5) is the timelike form of the Schwarzschild metric, whose left side
64 gives us the invariant differential wristwatch time dτ of a free stone that moves
65 between a pair of adjacent events for which the magnitude of the first term on
Section 3.1 The Schwarzschild Metric 3-3
66 the right side is greater than the magnitude of the last two terms. In contrast,
67 think of a pair of events for which the magnitude of the last two terms on the
Schwarzschild 68 right predominate. Then the invariant differential ruler distance dσ between
spacelike metric 69 these events is given by the spacelike form of the Schwarzschild metric:
dr2

2 2 2M
dσ = −dτ = − 1 − dt2 + + r2 dφ2 (spacelike) (6)
r 2M
1−
r
(− ∞ < t < ∞ and (0 < r < ∞ and 0 ≤ φ < 2π)
70
71 Neither a stone nor a light flash can move between an adjacent pair of events
72 with spacelike separation. Instead, the separation dσ represents a differential
73 ruler distance between two events. To make use of global metrics (5) and (6),
74 we need to define carefully the meaning of global coordinates t, r, and φ.
75 Section 3.2 shows how to measure mass in meters, so that 2M/r becomes
76 unitless, as it must in order to subtract it from the unitless number one in the
77 expression (1 − 2M/r).
78 Comment 1. Terminology: global metric
79 We refer to either expression (5) or (6) as a global metric. Professional general
Meaning of 80 relativists call these expressions line elements; they reserve the term metric for
“global metric” 81 the collection of coefficients of the differentials—such as (1 − 2M/r), the
82 coefficient of dt2 . We find the term metric to be simple, short, and clear; so in
83 this book we use a slightly-deviant terminology and call an expression like (5) or
84 (6) the global metric.
85 DEFINITION 1. Invariant (general relativity)

86 Section 1.2 defined an invariant in special relativity as a quantity that
87 has the same value when calculated using different local inertial
Definition: invariant 88 coordinates. An invariant in general relativity is a quantity that has the
in general relativity 89 same value when calculated using different global coordinate systems.
90 Equations (5) and (6) calculate invariants dτ and dσ , respectively, using
91 Schwarzschild global coordinates. Box 3 in Section 7.5 shows that an
92 infinite number of global coordinate systems exist for the non-spinning
93 black hole (indeed, for any isolated black hole). Calculation of dτ using
94 any of these global coordinate systems delivers the same—the
95 invariant!—value of dτ given by metrics (5) and (6).
96 Two coefficients in the Schwarzschild metric contain the expression

97 (1 − 2M/r), which goes to zero when r → 2M , thus sending the first metric
Event horizon 98 coefficient to zero on the right side of the metric and the magnitude of the
99 second coefficient to infinity. This warns us about trouble at r = 2M , which we
100 describe below. To the global spacetime surface at r = 2M we assign the name
101 event horizon, for reasons that will become clear in later sections.
102 It is important to realize how rare and wonderful is the Schwarzschild
103 metric. Einstein’s set of field equations is nonlinear and can be solved in
104 simple form only for physical systems with considerable symmetry.
Simple global 105 Schwarzschild used the symmetry of an isolated spherical non-spinning center
metrics are rare. 106 of attraction in the derivation of his metric. This symmetry is broken—and no
107 simple global metric exists—when we place a black hole on every street corner,
108 although in principle a computer can provide a numerical solution of Einstein’s
109 field equations for any distribution of mass/energy/pressure. It is a measure of
110 the scarcity of physical systems with simple metrics that almost fifty years
111 passed before Roy Kerr found a (relatively!) simple metric for a spinning black
112 hole in 1963 (Chapters 17 through 21).
Schwarzschild 113 Further investigation shows that the Schwarzschild metric plus the
description of 114 connectedness (“topology”) of the region provides a complete description of
spacetime is 115 spacetime external to any isolated spherically symmetric, uncharged massive
complete. 116 body—and everywhere around such a black hole except at its central
117 singularity (at r = 0), where spacetime curvature becomes infinite and general
118 relativity fails. Every feature of spacetime around this kind of black hole is
119 described or implied by the Schwarzschild metric. This one expression tells it
120 all!
121
QUERY 1. Flat spacetime

122 as r → ∞
Show that as r → ∞,123Schwarzschild metric (5) becomes metric (4) for flat spacetime.
124
Ways in which the 125 We will derive the Schwarzschild metric in Chapter 22. Even now,
Schwarzschild metric 126 however, we should not accept it uncritically. Here we check three ways in
makes sense: 127 which it makes sense.
1. Depends only on 128 First, the expression (1 − 2M/r) that appears in both the dt term and
r coordinate. 129 the dr term depends only on the r coordinate, not on the angle φ. How come?
130 Because we are dealing with a spherically symmetric body, an object for which
131 there is no way to tell one side from the other side or the top from the bottom.
132 This impossibility is reflected in the absence of any direction-dependent
133 coefficient in the metric.
2. Goes to inertial 134 Second, the Schwarzschild metric uses coordinates that clearly show
metric for zero M. 135 spacetime is flat when M → 0, that is when there is no center of attraction. In
136 this limit, the Schwarzschild metric (5) goes smoothly into the inertial metric
137 (4) for flat spacetime.
3. Goes to local 138 Third, even when M is nonzero the Schwarzschild metric (5) reduces to a
inertial metric 139 local flat spacetime metric (4) very far from the black hole. The expression
for large r. 140 (1 − 2M/r) → 1 when r → ∞.
141 Timelike and spacelike Schwarzschild metrics (5) and (6) describe the
142 spacetime external to any isolated spherically symmetric, uncharged massive
143 body. They apply with high precision to spacetime outside a slowly revolving
Schwarzschild 144 massive object such as Earth or an ordinary star like our Sun. Think of a
metric applies only 145 stone moving outside such an object; it makes no difference what the
outside the surface. 146 coordinates are inside the attracting spherical body because the stone never
147 gets there; before it can, it collides with the surface—in the short term, our
Section 3.1 The Schwarzschild Metric 3-5
Box 2. More About the Black Hole

John Archibald Wheeler adopted the term “black hole” in spin. The energy stored in this spin, moreover, is available
1967 (initial quote), but the concept itself is old. As early for doing work: for driving jets of matter and for propelling a
as 1783, John Michell argued that light must “be attracted spaceship. In consequence, the spinning black hole deserves
in the same manner as all other bodies” and therefore, if and receives the name “live black hole.”
the attracting center is sufficiently massive and sufficiently
compact, “all light emitted from such a body would be made The spinning black hole—or any spinning mass—drags
to return toward it.” Pierre-Simon Laplace came to the same everything in its vicinity around with it, including spacetime
conclusion independently in 1795 and went on to reason that (Chapters 17 through 21). Near Earth this dragging is a
“it is therefore possible that the greatest luminous bodies in small effect. Theory predicts that, near a rapidly-spinning
the universe are on this very account invisible.” black hole, such effects can be large, even irresistible,
dragging along nearby spaceships no matter how powerful
Michell and Laplace used Isaac Newton’s “action-at-a- their rockets.
distance” theory of gravity in analyzing the escape of light
from, or its capture by, an already-existing compact object. Black holes appear to be divided roughly into two groups,
But is such a static compact object possible? In 1939, J. depending on their source: Those that result from the collapse
Robert Oppenheimer and Hartland Snyder published the of a single star have several times the mass our Sun. Others
first detailed treatment of gravitational collapse within the formed near the centers of galaxies can be monsters with
framework of Einstein’s theory of gravitation. Their paper millions—even billions—of times the mass of our Sun. These
predicts the central features of a non-spinning black hole. black holes may even shape the evolution of galaxies.
Ongoing theoretical study has shown that the black hole is In 1963 Roy P. Kerr derived a metric for an uncharged
the result of natural physical processes. A nonsymmetric spinning black hole. In 1967 Robert H. Boyer and Richard W.
collapsing system is not necessarily blown apart by its Lindquist devised a simple and convenient global coordinate
instabilities but can quickly—in a few seconds measured on system for the spinning black hole. In 2000 Chris Doran
a remote clock!—radiate away its turbulence as gravitational published the global coordinate system for a spinning black
waves and settle down into a stable structure. hole that we use in this book. In 1965 Ezra Theodore Newman
and others solved the Einstein equations for the spacetime
An uncharged spherically symmetric black hole is completely geometry around an electrically charged spinning black hole.
described by the Schwarzschild metric (plus the spacetime Subsequent research shows that for a steady-state black
topology), which was derived from Einstein’s field equations hole of specified mass, charge, and angular momentum,
by Karl Schwarzschild and published in 1916. The energy Kerr-Newman geometry is the most general solution to
of such a non-spinning black hole cannot be milked for use Einstein’s field equations. The variety, detail, and beauty of
outside its event horizon. For this reason, a non-spinning everything that forms or falls into a black hole disappears—at
black hole deserves the name “dead black hole.” least according to classical (non-quantum) physics—leaving
only mass, charge, and angular momentum. John Wheeler
In contrast to the non-spinning dead black hole, the typical summarized this finding in the phrase, “The black hole has no
black hole, like the typical star, has a spin, sometimes a large hair,” which is known as the no-hair theorem.
148 Sun can be thought of as in equilibrium. The more compact the massive body,
149 however, the larger the external region the stone can explore. Our Sun’s
150 surface is 696 000 kilometers from its center. A cool white dwarf with the mass
151 of our Sun has a surface r-coordinate of about 5000 kilometers, roughly that of
152 Earth. The Schwarzschild metric describes spacetime geometry in the region
153 external to that r-coordinate. A neutron star with the mass of our Sun has a
154 surface r-coordinate of about 10 kilometers—the size of a typical city—so the
155 stone can come even closer and still be “outside,” that is, in the region
156 described correctly by the Schwarzschild metric (if the neutron star is not
157 spinning too fast).
Box 3. Singularities: Fictitious or Real?

the origin is clearly r = 0, but what is the polar angle φ
there? Answer: The origin is singular in angle φ. Proof: Start
at the right on the horizontal axis with label φ = 0; move
leftward along this axis and through the origin at r = 0. At
this origin the axis label suddenly flips to φ = 180◦ . There
is a discontinuity of φ at the origin. The coordinate φ violates
the requirements of uniqueness and smoothness.
The problem here is not Euclidean space, it is our silly (r, φ)

coordinate system. In contrast, Cartesian coordinates x =
r cos φ and y = r sin φ are perfectly unique and continuous
at all points on the flat surface, including the origin.
Is there some way to show that there is no physical singularity

FIGURE 2 Polar coordinates on a flat Euclidean surface at the event horizon of a non-spinning black hole? Yes, by
have a coordinate singularity at the center. Obviously r = 0 finding a coordinate system which is perfectly smooth at the
there, but what is its value of φ? That singularity, however, is event horizon, in the same way that Cartesian coordinates in
fictitious because there is no space singularity at that point. Euclidean space are perfectly smooth at the origin. In Chapter
7 we develop what we call global rain coordinates. At the
event horizon no term blows up in the metric expressed in
How do we know that the blow-up of the term dr 2 /(1 − global rain coordinates. Global rain coordinates assign unique
2M/r) at r = 2M in the Schwarzschild metric does not labels to each event and are smooth and continuous at the
signal a physical singularity? Why is this blow-up no threat to event horizon and all the way down to (but not including)
an observer falling through the event horizon—other than its r = 0.
one-way nature and the gradually-increasing tidal forces she
feels as she descends? Einstein and others initially thought What about the location at the center of a black hole? No
that the Schwarzschild coordinate singularity at the event coordinate system can be smooth at r = 0, because the
horizon had a physical reality, but it does not. so-called Riemann curvature is infinite there. The Riemann
curvature, discovered in the 1860s by mathematician
Similarly, how do we know that the blow-up of the term Bernhard Riemann, has a value at every spacetime event
(1 − 2M/r)dt2 at r = 0 is lethal to all comers? How can we that is independent of the coordinate system. The Riemann
understand the difference between the two discontinuities in curvature is infinite only at a physical cusp or singularity,
Schwarzschild coordinates? such as the black hole singularity at r = 0. In contrast, the
Draw an analogy to the polar coordinate system (r, φ) on Riemann curvature is finite at r = 2M .
a flat Euclidean surface (Figure 2). The radial coordinate of
Schwarzschild 158 A wonderful thing about a black hole is that it has no physical surface and
describes all 159 no matter with which to collide. A stone can explore all of spacetime (except
spacetime around 160 at r = 0) without bumping into a surface—since there is no surface at all.
the black hole
outside the singularity.
161 Objection 1. How can a black hole have “no matter with which to collide”?
162 If it isn’t made of matter, what is it made of? What happened to the star or
163 group of stars that collapsed to form the black hole? Basically, how can
164 something have mass without being made of matter?
165 We think that everything that collapses into the black hole is effectively still
166 there in some form, inducing the curvature of surrounding spacetime. This
167 mass is crushed into a singularity at the center—along with the probe we
Section 3.2 Mass in Units of Length 3-7
168 sent in to explore it. How do we know this? We don’t. What can “crushed to
169 a singularity” possibly mean? We don’t know. Startling? Crazy? Absurd?
170 Welcome to general relativity!
171 Objection 2. The global metric comes from Einstein’s equations, which
172 you say we will derive in Chapter 22. In the meantime you give us only
173 global metrics. Why should we believe you, and why are you keeping the
174 fundamental equations from us?
175 Einstein’s equations are most economically expressed in advanced

176 mathematics such as tensors, and deriving a global metric from them is a
177 bit tricky. In contrast, the global metric expresses itself in differentials, the
178 working mathematics of most technical professions, and leads directly to
179 measurable quantities: wristwatch time and ruler distance. We choose to
180 start with the directly useful.
181 Next we examine the meaning of mass in units of length, so that the
182 expression 1 − 2M/r in both the first and second term in the metric
183 coefficients can have the same units, namely no units at all.
3.2
184 MASS IN UNITS OF LENGTH
185 Want to reduce clutter in the metric? Then measure mass in meters!
186 The description of spacetime near any gravitating body is simplest when we
187 express the mass M of that body in spatial units—in meters or kilometers.
188 This section derives the conversion factor between, for example, kilograms and
189 meters.
190 Earlier we wanted to measure space and time in the same unit (Section
191 1.2), so we used the conversion factor c, the speed of light. Conversion from
Measure mass 192 kilograms to meters is not so simple. Nevertheless, here too Nature provides a
in meters. 193 conversion factor, a combination of the speed of light and Newton’s universal
194 gravitation constant G.
195 Newton’s theory of gravitation predicts that the gravitational force
196 between two spherically symmetric masses Mkg and mkg is proportional to the
197 product of these masses and inversely proportional to the square of the
198 Euclidean distance r between their centers:
GMkg mkg
FNewtons = − (Newton, conventional units) (7)
r2
199 In this equation G is the “constant of proportionality,” whose units depend on
200 the units with which mass and spatial separation are measured. The numerical
201 value of G in conventional units is:
meter3
G = 6.67 × 10−11 (8)
kilogram second2
Numerical 202 Divide G by the square of the speed of light c2 to find the conversion factor
values of G 203 that translates the conventional unit of mass, the kilogram, into what we have
204 already chosen to be the natural unit, the meter:
3
G 6.67 × 10−11 kilogram
meter
second2
2
= meter 2 (9)
c 8.9876 × 1016 second2
meter
= 7.42 × 10−28
kilogram
205 Now convert from mass Mkg measured in conventional units of kilograms to
206 mass M in meters by multiplication with this conversion factor:

G −28 meter
M ≡ 2 Mkg = 7.42 × 10 Mkg (10)
c kilogram
Mass in meters 207 Why make this conversion? Because it allows us to get rid of the symbols G
unclutters equations. 208 and c2 that otherwise clutter up our equations.
209 Table 1 displays in both kilograms and meters the masses of Earth, Sun,
210 the huge spinning black hole at the center of our galaxy, and the mass of an
211 even larger black hole in a nearby galaxy. For each of these objects the global
212 r-coordinate of the event horizon is twice its mass in meters. To express their
213 masses in meters cuts planets and stars down to size!
214 Objection 3. This is nuts! Stars and planets are not the same as space.
215 No twisting or turning on your part can make mass and distance the same.
216 How can you possibly propose to measure mass in units of meters?
217 True, mass is not the same as spatial separation. Neither is time the same
218 as space: The separation between clock ticks is different from meterstick
219 lengths! Nevertheless, we have learned to use the conversion factor c to
220 measure both time and space in the same unit: light-years of spatial
221 separation and years of time, for example, or meters of spatial coordinate
222 separation and meters of light-travel time. Payoff? The result simplifies our
223 equations.
224 There are two primary birthplaces for black holes: The first is the collapse
225 of a single star, which produces a black hole with mass equal to a modest
226 multiple of the mass of our Sun. The second birthplace is accumulation in a
227 galaxy, which produces a black hole with mass equal thousands to billions of
228 the mass of our Sun. Typically, a small galaxy contains a smaller black hole,
229 for example 50,000 times the mass of our Sun, while a large black hole, such as
230 the last entry in Table 1, has a mass billions of times the mass of our Sun.
231 Objection 4. You are being totally inconsistent about mass! In Chapter 1
232 we heard about the mass m of a stone; there you said nothing about mass
233 in units of length. Now you define M with length units. Make up your mind!
Section 3.2 Mass in Units of Length 3-9
TABLE 1 Masses of some astronomical objects.

Object Mass in kilograms Geometric Equatorial r-coordinate
measure of mass
Earth 5.9742 × 1024 4.44 × 10−3 6.371 × 106 meters
kilograms meters or 0.444 or 6371 kilometers
centimeters
Sun 1.989×1030 kilograms 1.477 × 103 meters 6.960 × 108
or 1.477 kilometers meters or 696
000 kilometers
Black hole at center of 8 × 1036 kilograms 6 × 109 meters
our galaxy (4 × 106 Sun masses)
Black hole in galaxy 4.2 × 1040 kilograms 3.1 × 1013 meters
NGC 4889 (21 × 109 Sun masses)
234 Excellent point. The difference between the mass M of a center of

235 attraction and the mass m of a stone is important. First, a stone is a “free
236 particle . . . whose mass warps spacetime too little to be measured” (inside
237 the back cover). Second, most often we combine the stone’s mass m with
238 another quantity in such a way that the result is a unitless ratio—for
239 example E/m—by choosing the same unit in numerator and denominator.
240 It does not matter which unit we use—joules or kilograms or electron-volts
241 or the mass of the proton—as long as we use the same unit in numerator
242 and denominator.
243 In contrast to the stone, the mass of a star or black hole does curve and
244 warp spacetime. In this book the capital letter M always signals this fact.
245 Here too we can arrange things so that M appears in a unitless ratio, such
246 as 2M/r , in which case M and r must have the same unit, which we
247 choose to be meters.
248 Objection 5. Okay, terrific, and this gives me a great idea: Why not
249 simplify things even more by using unitless spacetime coordinates. Divide
250 the Schwarzschild metric through by M 2 , then define dimensionless
251 coordinates τ ∗ ≡ τ /M and t∗ ≡ t/M and r ∗ ≡ r/M . Here the asterisk
252 (*) reminds us that we are using dimensionless coordinates. Now the
253 timelike Schwarzschild metric takes the simplest possible form:
dr∗2

2
dτ ∗2 = 1− dt∗2 − − r∗2 dφ2 (11)
r∗ 2
1− ∗
r
(unitless coordinates)
254 This notation has two big advantages: First, our equations are no longer
255 cluttered with the symbol M , just as we have already eliminated from our
256 equations the clutter of constants G and c. Second, metric (11) applies
257 automatically to all black holes, of whatever mass M .
Box 4. “Our Little Jugged Apocalypse”

We tend to think of a black hole as a large object, especially our “little jugged apocalypse,” a phrase the writer John Updike
the “monster” at the center of our galaxy (Table 1). But the uses to describe the view into the portal of a front-loading
word large invites the question, “Large compared to what?” clothes-washing machine. Conveniently, spacetime curvature
The diameter of the black hole in our galaxy is about 10−6 increases from zero far from the isolated black hole to an
light year. Our galaxy, a typical one, is some 105 light years unlimited value at its singularity. This makes the black hole a
in diameter. Any object a factor 10−11 the size of a galaxy useful example to teach large swaths—but not all—of general
must be considered a relative dot in the galactic scheme of relativity.
things. Its relatively small size allows us to call the black hole
258 Originally we used your idea for a few chapters, but then returned these
259 chapters to our current notation, which has several advantages: (1)
260 Keeping the M allows us to check units in every equation. An equation
261 can be wrong if the units are correct, but it is always wrong if the units are
262 incorrect! (2) We can return to flat spacetime and special relativity simply
263 by letting M → 0; a second useful check. (3) We prefer to be continually
264 reminded of the concrete heft—the observed massiveness—of
265 astronomical objects: stars and black holes. For these reasons we choose
266 to retain coordinates in units of length and the explicit symbol M in our
267 equations.
268 How does Newton’s law of gravitation change when we express mass in
Newton’s gravity 269 meters? Think of a stone of mass mkg near a center of attraction of mass Mkg .
with mass in meters 270 Rewrite Newton’s second law of motion (F = ma) for this case, using the
271 gravitational force equation (7), with mkg gconv on the left, where gconv is the
272 local acceleration of gravity. The stone’s mass mkg cancels from both sides of
273 the resulting equation. A minus sign signals that the acceleration is in the
274 decreasing r direction.
GMkg
gconv = − (Newton, conventional units) (12)
r2
275 Now divide both sides of (12) by c2 so as to obtain the conversion factor of
276 equation (9). We can then write
gconv M
g≡ =− 2 (Newton, mass in meters) (13)
c2 r
277 Remember that this is an equation of Newton’s mechanics, not an equation of
Newton’s gEarth 278 general relativity. The quantities M and r both have the unit meter, so g has
with mass in meters 279 the unit meter−1 . Substitute into (13) the values of MEarth and rEarth from
280 inside the front cover to obtain the value for the acceleration of gravity gEarth
281 at Earth’s surface in units of inverse meters:
MEarth
gEarth = − 2 = −1.09 × 10−16 meter−1 (Newton, mass in meters)
rEarth
(14)
Section 3.3 The Global Schwarzschild r-coordinate 3-11
FIGURE 3 US Pavilion “geodesic dome” designed by R. Buckminster Fuller for the 1967
International and Universal Exposition in Montreal. Place a clock at every intersection of rods
on the outer surface of this sphere to create a small model of our imaginary nested spherical
shells concentric to a black hole. Image courtesy of the Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller.
282 Does this numerical value seem small? It is the same acceleration we are used
283 to, just expressed in different units. To jump from a high place on Earth is
284 dangerous, whatever units you use to describe your motion!
285 Next we continue the explanation of Schwarzschild metrics (5) and (6)
286 with a definition of the global radial coordinate r in these equations.
3.3
287 THE GLOBAL SCHWARZSCHILD r-COORDINATE
288 Measure the r-coordinate while avoiding the trap in the center
289 Section 2.5 asked, “Does the black hole care what global coordinate system we
290 use in deriving our global spacetime metric?” and answered, “Not at all!”
Why Schwarzschild 291 General relativity allows us to use any global coordinate system whatsoever,
global coordinates? 292 subject only to some requirements of smoothness and uniqueness (Section 5.9).
293 Next question: Since Schwarzschild had (almost) complete freedom to choose
294 his global coordinates t, r, and φ, why did he choose the particular coordinates
295 that appear in (5) and (6)? Next answer: Schwarzschild’s global coordinates
296 take advantage of the spherical symmetry of a non-spinning black hole. When
297 these coordinates are submitted to Einstein’s equations, they return metrics
298 that are (relatively!) simple. In this and the following section we introduce and
299 describe Schwarzschild global coordinates.
Spherical shell 300 Start with Schwarzschild’s r coordinate: Take the center of attraction to
of rods and clocks 301 be a black hole with the same mass as our Sun. In imagination, build around
302 it a spherical shell of rods fitted together in an open mesh (Figure 3). On this
303 shell mount a clock at every intersection of these rods. The rods and clocks of
304 such a collection of shells provides one system of coordinates to determine the
305 location of events that occur outside the event horizon.
We cannot measure 306 How shall we define the size of the sphere formed by this latticework shell?
r-coordinate directly. 307 Shall we measure directly the radial separation between the sphere’s surface to
308 its center? That won’t do. Yes, in imagination we can stand on the shell. Yes,
309 we can lower a plumb bob on a “string.” But for a black hole, any string, any
310 tape measure, any steel wire—whatever its strength—is relentlessly torn apart
311 by the unlimited pull the black hole exerts on any object that dips close
312 enough to its center. And even for Earth or Sun, the surface itself keeps us
313 from lowering our plumb bob directly to the center.
Derive r -coordinate 314 Therefore try another method to define the size of the spherical shell.
from measurement 315 Instead of lowering a tape measure from the shell, run a tape measure around
of circumference. 316 it in a great circle. The measured distance so obtained is the circumference of
317 the sphere. Divide this circumference by 2π = 6.283185... to obtain a distance
318 that would be the directly-measured r-coordinate of the sphere if the space
319 inside it were flat. But that space is not flat, as we shall see. Yet this procedure
320 yields the most useful known measure of the size of the spherical shell.
321 The “radius” of a spherical object obtained by this method of measuring
322 has acquired the name r-coordinate, because it is no genuine Euclidean
323 radius. We call it also the reduced circumference, to remind us that it is
Definition: 324 derived (“reduced”) from the circumference:
r-coordinate
r-coordinate ≡ reduced circumference (15)

measured circumference
≡
2π
325 We sometimes use the expression Schwarzschild-r, which labels the global
326 coordinate system of which r is a member. From now on we try not to use the
327 word “radius” for the r-coordinate, because it can confuse results for flat
328 spacetime with results for curved spacetime.
329 During construction of each shell the contractor stamps the value of its
330 r-coordinate on it for all to see.
331 Objection 6. Aha, gottcha! To define the r -coordinate in (15), you

332 measure the length of the entire circumference of a spherical shell. Near a
333 massive black hole, this circumference could be hundreds of kilometers
334 long. Yet from the beginning you say, ”Report every measurement using a
335 local inertial frame.” Near a black hole a local inertial frame is tiny
336 compared with the length of this circumference. You do not follow your own
337 rules for measurement.
1056 visible Universe

today
1050
S
LE
O
H
1040
K
Milky Way
C
black hole in
LA
Milky Way
B
E
1030 neutron star
D
Sun
MASS IN KILOGRAMS
SI
IN
Earth
1020
1010
human
1 visible Universe
at end of inflation
10-10
strand of DNA
10-20
uranium atom
hydrogen atom
10-30
10-30 10-20 10-10 1 1010 1020
1028
RULER SIZE IN METERS
FIGURE 4 The scale of some objects described by physics. Objects close to the diagonal
line are those for which correct predictions require general relativity. See Box 5. Figure adapted
from the textbook Gravity by James Hartle.
338 Guilty as charged! We failed to spell out the process: Use a whole string of
339 overlapping local inertial frames parked around the circumference of the
Box 5. When is General Relativity Necessary?

When is general relativity required to describe and predict Sun with an r -coordinate of its surface about 10 kilometers,
accurately the behavior of structures and phenomena in our the size of a city. General relativity significantly affects the
Universe? See Figure 4. structure and oscillations of the neutron star. Emission of
gravitational waves (Chapter 16) may damp out non-radial
ORDINARY STAR. An ordinary star like our Sun does not vibrations.
require general relativity to account for its development,
structure, or physical properties. Like all massive centers of BLACK HOLE. “The physics of black holes calls on Einstein’s
attraction, however, it does deflect and focus passing light in description of gravity from beginning to end.” (Misner, Thorne,
ways accounted for by general relativity (Chapter 13). and Wheeler)
WHITE DWARF. A white dwarf is the burned out cinder of GRAVITY WAVES. We have observed gravitational radiation
an ordinary star, with a mass approximately equal to that of predicted by general relativity.
our Sun and r -coordinate of its surface comparable to that
of Earth. General relativity is not required to account for the THE UNIVERSE. Models of the Universe as a single structure
structure of the white dwarf but is needed to predict stability, employ general relativity (Chapters 14 and 15). It seems
especially near the so-called Chandrasekhar limit of mass— increasingly likely that general relativity correctly accounts
about 2.4 times the mass of our Sun—above which the white for non-quantum features of the Universe, but it remains
dwarf is doomed to collapse. possible that general relativity fails over these immense spans
of spacetime and must be replaced by a more general theory.
NEUTRON STAR. A neutron star can result from the collapse
of a white dwarf star. Its mass is approximately that of our
340 spherical shell, then define the circumference to be the summed measured
341 distances across each of these local inertial frames. In practice this
342 procedure is awkward, but in principle it avoids your otherwise valid
343 objection.
Directly-measured 344 Think of building two concentric shells, a lower shell of reduced
separation between 345 circumference rL and a higher shell of reduced circumference rH , such that the
nested shells is greater 346 difference in reduced circumference rH − rL equals 100 meters. Stand on the
than the difference in 347 higher shell and lower a plumb bob, and for the first time measure directly the
their r-values. 348 radial separation perpendicularly from the higher shell to the lower one. Will
349 we measure a 100-meter radial separation between our two shells? We would if
350 space were flat. But outside a massive body space is not flat. The relation
351 between global differential dr and measured radial differential dσ comes from
352 the spacelike version of the Schwarzschild metric (6) with dt = dφ = 0.
dr
dσ = 1/2 (radial shell separation, dt = dφ = 0) (16)
2M
1−
r
353 We note immediately that for the radial shell separation dσ to be a real
354 quantity, we must have r > 2M ; otherwise the square root in the denominator
355 has an imaginary value. This is an indication that shells can be built only
356 outside the event horizon (Section 6.7).
357 Outside the event horizon, the magnitude of the denominator on the right
358 side of (16) is always less than one. Hence Schwarzschild geometry tells us that
359 every radial differential increment dσ is greater than the corresponding

360 differential increment dr of the reduced circumference. Therefore the summed
361 (integrated) measureable distance between our two shells is greater than 100
362 meters, even though their circumferences differ by exactly 2π×100 meters. This
363 discrepancy between measured separation and difference in global r-coordinate
364 provides striking evidence for the curvature of space. See Sample Problem 1.
Small effect 365 Built around our Sun, the r-coordinate of the inner shell cannot be less
near our Sun 366 than that of our Sun’s surface, 695 980 kilometers. Around this inner shell we
367 erect a second one—again in imagination—of r-coordinate 1 kilometer greater:
368 695 981 kilometers. The directly-measured distance between the two would be
369 not 1 kilometer, but 2 millimeters more than 1 kilometer.
370 How can we get closer to the center of a stellar object with mass equal to
371 that of our Sun—but still remain external to the surface of that object? A
372 white dwarf and a neutron star each has roughly the same mass as our Sun,
373 but each is much smaller than our Sun. So we can—in principle—conduct a
Get closer 374 more sensitive test of the nonflatness of space much closer to the centers of
to the center. 375 these objects while staying external to them (Box 5). The effects of the
376 curvature of space are much greater near the surface of a white dwarf than near
377 the surface of our Sun—and greater still near the surface of a neutron star.
378 Objection 7. Why not define the r -coordinate differently—call it rnew —in
379 terms of the directly-measured distance between two adjacent shells. For
380 example, we could give the innermost shell at the event horizon the radial
381 coordinate rnew = 2M , and the next shell rnew = 2M + ∆σ , where ∆σ
382 is the directly-measured separation between that shell and the innermost
383 shell. And so on. That would eliminate the awkwardness of your quoted
384 results.
385 You can choose (almost) any global coordinate system you want, but the
386 one you suggest is inconvenient. First, you cannot escape the deviation
387 from Euclidean geometry imposed by curvature; your definition leads to a
388 calculated circumference 2πrnew that is different from the
389 directly-measured one. Second, outside the event horizon your definition is
390 awkward to carry out, since it requires collaboration between observers on
391 different shells. Third, how is your definition applied inside the event
392 horizon, where no shells exist? (Box 7 in Section 7.8 shows how to
393 measure the Schwarzschid reduced circumference r inside the event
394 horizon.) Finally, your definition of rnew , when submitted with t and φ to
395 Einstein’s equations, results in a different metric—a more complicated
396 one—which would be more inconvenient to use than the Schwarzschild
397 global metric.
Huge effect 398 Turn attention now to a black hole of mass M . Close to it the departure
near black hole 399 from flatness is much larger than it is anywhere around a white dwarf or a
400 neutron star. Construct an inner shell having an r-coordinate, a reduced
401 circumference, of 3M . Let an outer shell have an r-coordinate of 4M . In
402 contrast to these two r-coordinates, defined by measurements around the two
403 shells, the directly-measured radial distance between the two shells is 1.542M ,
Sample Problem 1. “Space Stretching” Near a Black Hole

Here we verify the statement near the end of Section 3.3
that for a black hole of mass M , the directly-measured radial
ZzH
distance calculates as 1.542M between the lower shell at r - 2z 2 dz
coordinate rL = 3M and the higher shell at r -coordinate σ= 1/2 (18)
zL
z 2 − 2M
rH = 4M . In Euclidean geometry this measured distance
would be 1.000M , but not in curved space! h izH
= z(z 2 − 2M )1/2 + 2M ln z + (z 2 − 2M )1/2

zL
SOLUTION Equation (16) gives the radial differential dσ
between shells separated by a differential dr of the global Here the symbol ln (spelled “ell” “en”) represents the natural
radial coordinate r . The term 2M/r changes significantly logarithm (to the base e) and vertical-line brackets indicate
over the range from r = 3M to r = 4M , so our “summation” absolute value. Substitute the values
must be an integral. Integrating (16) from lower r -coordinate
rL = 3M to higher r-coordinate rH = 4M yields: zL = (3M )1/2 and zH = (4M )1/2
ZrH
dr
σ= 1/ 2 and recall that for logarithms, ln(B) − ln(A) = ln(B/A).
2M The result is
rL 1−
r
σ = 1.542M (radial, exact) (19)
ZrH
r1/2 dr
= (17) Here the symbol σ predicts the exact radial separation
(r − 2M )1/ 2
rL between these shells measured by the shell observer who
This integral is not in a common table of integrals, so make the uses a short ruler, say one-centimeter long, laid end to end
substitution r = z 2 , from which dr = 2zdz. The resulting many times to find a total measured distance. This exact
integral has the solution: result is radically different from 1.000M predicted by Euclid.
404 compared to the Euclidean-geometry figure of 1.000M (Sample Problem 1). At

405 this close location, the curvature of space results in measurements quite
406 different from anything that textbook Euclidean geometry would lead us to
407 expect. We call this effect the stretching of space.
408 Objection 8. WHY is the directly-measured distance between spherical

409 shells greater than the difference in r coordinates between these shells? Is
410 this discrepancy caused by gravitational stretching or compression of the
411 measuring rods?
412 No, the quoted result assumes rigid measuring equipment. In practice, of
413 course, a measuring rod held by the upper end will be subject to
414 gravitational stretching (or compression if held by the lower end). Make the
415 rod short enough; then gravitational stretching is unimportant. Now count
416 the number of times the rod has to be moved end to end to cross from one
417 shell to the other.
418 Objection 9. Are you refusing to answer my question? What CAUSES the
419 discrepancy, the fact that the directly-measured distance between
420 spherical shells is greater than the difference in r coordinates between
421 these shells? WHY this discrepancy?
Section 3.4 The Global Schwarzschild t-Coordinate 3-17
Sample Problem 2. Our Sun Causes Small Curvature

The Schwarzschild metric function (1 − 2M/r) gauges the SOLUTIONS
difference between flat and curved spacetime. How far from A. We want (1 − 2M/r) ≈ 1 − 10−6 , which yields
the center of our Sun must we be before the resulting 2M
curvature becomes extremely small or negligible? r≈ = 2 × 1.5 × 103 × 106 meters (20)
10−6
A. As a first example, find the r -coordinate from a point mass = 3 × 109 meters
with the mass of our Sun (M ≈ 1.5 × 103 meters) such that
the metric function differs from the value one by one part in a This r -coordinate is approximately four times the r -coordinate
million. Compare this r -coordinate to the actual r -coordinate of our Sun’s surface.
of the surface of our Sun (rSun ≈ 7 × 108 meters).
B. In this case we want (1 − 2M/r) ≈ 1 − 10−8 , so
B. As a second example, find the radial r -coordinate from 2M
our Sun such that the metric function differs from the value r≈ = 2 × 1.5 × 103 × 108 meters (21)
10−8
one by one part in 100 million. Compare the value of this
r-coordinate with the average r-coordinate of Earth’s orbit = 3 × 1011 meters
(r ≈ 1.5 × 1011 meters). which is approximately twice the r -coordinate of Earth’s orbit.
422 A deep question! Fundamentally, this discrepancy shatters the notion of

423 Euclidean space. We are faced with a weird measured result, which we
424 can summarize with the statement, “Mass stretches space.” Your question
425 “Why?” is not a scientific question, and science cannot answer it. We know
426 only observed results and their derivation from general relativity. Does the
427 following satisfy you? Space stretching causes the discrepancy! Section
428 3.8 exhibits one way to visualize this stretching.
3.4
429 THE GLOBAL SCHWARZSCHILD t-COORDINATE
430 Freeze global space coordinates; examine the warped t-coordinate.
To describe orbits, 431 It is not enough to know the results of curvature on the r-coordinate alone. To
we need curvature 432 appreciate how the grip of spacetime tells planets how to move requires us to
of spaceTIME. 433 understand how curvature affects the global t-coordinate as well. The
434 coordinate differential dt appears on the right side of the Schwarzschild metric.
435 Basically, Schwarzschild’s definition of the t-coordinate was arbitrary, like the
436 definition of every global coordinate.
437 How does Schwarzschild coordinate differential dt relate to the differential
Relation between 438 wristwatch time dτ between two successive events that occur at at fixed r- and
dτ and dt 439 φ-coordinates? The coordinate differentials dr and dφ are both equal to zero
440 for that pair of events. Then the interval between ticks is the wristwatch time
441 derived from metric (5), that is:
1/2
2M
dτ = 1 − dt (stationary clock: dr = dφ = 0) (22)
r
442 Equation (22) shows that far from a black hole (r → ∞), Schwarzschild-t
443 coincides with the time of a shell clock located there. This is an important,
444 but accidental, convenience of Schwarzschild’s choice of global t-coordinate. It

445 is not true for the metrics of many other global coordinate systems for the
446 non-spinning black hole.
447 Now look at the prediction of equation (22) closer to a black hole—but
Slogan: 448 still outside the event horizon. There the Schwarzschild coordinate differential
“A clock at 449 dt will be larger than the differential wristwatch time dτ measured by a clock
smaller r 450 at rest on the shell at that r-coordinate. Smaller wristwatch time dτ between
runs slower.” 451 two standard events leads to the useful but somewhat imprecise slogan, A
452 clock closer to a center of attraction runs slower (see Section 4.3).
Schwarzschild: 453 We have now carefully defined each of the Schwarzschild global coordinates
complete description 454 and displayed the resulting global metric handed to us by Einstein’s equations,
455 including the range of global coordinates given in equations (5) and (6). This
456 combination—plus its connectedness (topology)–provides a complete
457 description of spacetime near the isolated non-spinning black hole. These tools
458 alone are sufficient to determine every (classical, that is non-quantum)
459 observable property of spacetime in this region.
460 Objection 10. Hold it! You gave us separate Sections 3.3 and 3.4 on two
461 global coordinates, Schwarzschild-r and Schwarzschild-t, respectively.
462 Why no section on the third global coordinate, Schwarzschild-φ?
463 Good question. In answer, compare metric (4) for flat spacetime in Box 1
464 with the Schwarzschild metric (5) for curved spacetime. The last term is
465 the same in both equations: −r 2 dφ2 . Typical in relativity, the t-coordinate
466 gives us the most trouble and the r -coordinate less trouble. In the
467 non-spinning black hole metrics used in this book, the angle φ gives no
468 trouble at all, due to the angular symmetry. For the spinning black hole
469 (Chapters 17 through 21), however, even this angle becomes a
470 troublemaker!
3.5
471 CONSTRUCTING THE GLOBAL SCHWARZSCHILD MAP OF EVENTS
472 Read a road map, but don’t drive on it!
473 In this book we choose to make every measurement and observation in a local
474 inertial frame. But that does not suffice to describe the relation between
“Think globally; 475 events far from one another in the vicinity of the black hole. Suppose we know
measure locally.” 476 the stone’s energy and momentum measured in one local inertial frame
477 through which it passes. How can we predict the stone’s energy and
478 momentum in a second local inertial frame far from the first?
479 This prediction requires (a) knowledge of the stone’s initial location in
480 global coordinates, (b) analysis of the global worldline of the stone between
481 widely-separated local frames, and (c) conversion of a piece of the global
482 trajectory to local inertial coordinates in the remote inertial frame. This
483 section begins that process, which we summarize with the slogan “Think
484 globally, measure locally.”
Section 3.5 Constructing the Global Schwarzschild Map of Events 3-19
FIGURE 5 Schwarzschild map of the trajectory of a free stone that falls into a black hole.
As it falls, it emits (numbered) flashes equally separated in time on its wristwatch. However,
these flash emissions are not equally spaced along the Schwarzschild map trajectory. Each
numbered event also has its Schwarzschild-t. NO ONE observes directly the entire trajectory
shown on this map. Question: Why are numbered emission events closer together near both
ends of the trajectory than in the middle of the trajectory? The answer for events 1 through 3
should be simple. The answer for events 5 through 8 appears in Section 6.5.
485 Global Schwarzschild coordinates locate events around a black hole similar
486 to the way in which latitude and longitude locate places on Earth’s surface
487 (Section 2.3). A global map of Earth is nothing but a rule that assigns unique
488 coordinates to each point on its surface.
489 By analogy, we speak of a spacetime map, which is nothing but a rule
The spacetime map 490 that assigns unique coordinates to each event in the region described by that
assigns coordinates 491 map. This section describes the construction and uses of the Schwarzschild
to every event. 492 spacetime map, a task that we personalize as the work of an archivist.
493 Think of Schwarzschild coordinates as an accounting system, a
494 bookkeeping device, a spreadsheet, a tabulating mechanism, an international
495 language, a space-and-time database created by an archivist who records every
496 event and all motions in the entire spacetime region exterior to the surface of
497 the Earth or Moon or Sun—or anywhere around a black hole except exactly at
Schwarzschild 498 its center. We personify the supervisor of this record as the Schwarzschild
mapmaker 499 mapmaker. The Schwarzschild mapmaker receives reports of actual
500 measurements made by local shell and other inertial observers, then converts
501 and combines them into a comprehensive description of events (in
502 Schwarzschild coordinates) that spans spacetime around a black hole. The
503 mapmaker makes no measurements himself and does not analyze
504 measurements. He is a data-handler, pure and simple.
505 The Schwarzschild mapmaker (or his equivalent) is absolutely necessary
506 for a complete description of the motion of stones and light signals around a
Mapmaker: 507 black hole. He has the central coordinating role in describing globally all the
the central 508 events that take place outside the event horizon of the black hole. He collates
coordinator.
Box 6. The Metric as Spacetime Micrometer

wristwatch time dτ is the time lapse read directly on the
shell clock.
2. A second possible choice: Events with the same global
t-coordinate that occur at the two ends of a stick held at
rest radially between two adjacent shells, so that dt =
dφ = 0. Then the ruler distance dσ is the directly-
measured length of the stick—equation (16).
3. A third possible choice: Two sequential ticks on the
wristwatch of a stone in free fall along a radial trajectory.
Then dφ = 0 and dτ is read directly on the wristwatch.
And so on. There are an infinite number of event-pairs near

FIGURE 6 The micrometer caliper measures directly a one another that you can choose for measurement using your
tiny distance or thickness, bypassing x and y coordinates. four-dimensional micrometer—the metric.
The watch measures directly the invariant wristwatch time Assembling many micrometer caliper measurements
between two events, bypassing separate global coordinate can in principle describe the geometry of space. Assembling
increments. (Photo by Per Torphammar.) many wristwatch and ruler measurements can in principle
describe the geometry of spacetime: “The metric completely
specifies local spacetime and gravitational effects within the
What is the metric? What is it good for? Think
global region in which it applies.” (Inside back cover.)
of a micrometer caliper (Figure 6), a device used by
What advice will the “old spacetime machinist” give to
metalworkers and other practical workers to measure a
her younger colleague about the practical use of the metric?
small distance. The micrometer caliper translates turns of a
She might share the following pointers:
calibrated screw on the cylinder into the directly-measured
distance across the gap between the flat ends of the little
cylinders in the upper right corner of the figure. The worker 1. Focus on events and the separation between each pair of
owns the micrometer; the worker chooses which distance to events, not fuzzy concepts like “time” or “location.”
measure with the micrometer caliper. 2. Do not confuse results from one pair of events with results
The metric is our “four-dimensional micrometer” that from another pair of events.
translates global coordinate separations between an adjacent
3. Whenever possible, choose two adjacent events for which
pair of events into the measurable wristwatch time lapse or
the increment of one or more map coordinates is zero.
ruler distance between those events. You own the metric. You
choose the events whose separation you wish to measure 4. Whenever possible, identify the wristwatch time or ruler
with the metric. distance with some observer’s direct measurement.
5. When a light flash moves directly from one event to
1. One possible choice: Two sequential ticks of a clock another event, the wristwatch time and the ruler distance
bolted to a spherical shell. Then dr = dφ = 0 and the between those events are both zero: dτ = dσ = 0.
509 data from many local observers and combines them in various ways, for
510 example drawing a global map such as the one plotted in Figure 5.
511 The Schwarzschild mapmaker can be located anywhere. How does he learn
512 of events in his dominion? Like a taxi dispatcher, he uses radio to keep track of
513 moving stones, light flashes, and in addition locates explosions and other
514 events of interest, perhaps as follows:
515 Stamped on each spherical shell is its map r-coordinate; we mark different
516 locations around the shell with different values of φ. At each location place a
517 recording clock that reads the Schwarzschild-t (Box 6). Each clock radios to
Section 3.5 Constructing the Global Schwarzschild Map of Events 3-21
Box 7. Where does the event horizon come from?

The event horizon—that one-way spacetime surface that pressure is negligible; for a neutron star the added effect of
lets light and stones pass inward but forbids them to cross pressure is important; for a black hole the added effect of
outward—is a surprise. Who could have predicted it? Answer: pressure is catastrophic.
Nobody did.
When a neutron star, for example, steals mass from a normal
Newton readily predicts the gravitational consequences of a companion star, the pressure near its center increases, along
point mass, telling us immediately the initial acceleration of with the added matter. The net result is greater than that due
a stone released from rest at any r -coordinate. Twice the to the added matter alone. At a certain point, this process
attracting mass, twice the stone’s acceleration at that r -value; “runs away,” resulting in collapse into a black hole.
a million times the attracting mass, a million times the stone’s
Linear effects mean proportional response in phenomena.
acceleration. Newton’s theory of gravity is linear in mass.
Nonlinear effects lead to entirely new phenomena. For the
Not so for Einstein’s general relativity, which is relentlessly non-spinning black hole, a major outcome of nonlinearity is
nonlinear. In general relativity not only mass but also energy the event horizon. Near to the spinning black hole (Chapters
and pressure curve spacetime. A star of twice the mass 17 through 21), the nonlinearity of Einstein’s theory leads
typically has increased internal pressure, resulting in more to an even more complex geometry of spacetime and
than twice the gravitational effects at the same r -coordinate consequent radical, unexpected physical effects.
outside its surface. For an ordinary star the added effect of
Mapmaker: top 518 the mapmaker the nature of an event that occurs next to it, along with its
level, bureaucrat 519 global coordinates (t, r, φ). After inevitable transmission delays due to the
520 finite speed of light, the mapmaker at the control center assembles a global
521 Schwarzschild map that gives coordinates and description of every
522 measurement and observation. Our mapmaker acts as a top-level bureaucrat.
523 No one lives on a road map, but we use it to describe the territory and to
Using the 524 plan our trip. Similarly, coordinates r, φ, and t are simply labels on a spacetime
Schwarzschild 525 map. These coordinates uniquely locate events in the entire spacetime region
map 526 outside the surface of any spherically symmetric gravitating body or anywhere
527 around a black hole except on its singularity. The Schwarzschild map guides
528 our navigation near a black hole, in the same way that an arbitrary set of
529 global coordinates—made into maps—guides our travels on Earth’s surface.
530 But never forget: In most cases Schwarzschild map coordinate separations
Map coordinate 531 are not what any local inertial observer measures directly.
difference 6= 532 Advice: It is best never to confuse a global map coordinate separation with
measured length 533 the local inertial frame measurement of a distance or time lapse. More details
or time lapse. 534 in Chapter 5.
535 Objection 11. Stop giving me second-hand ideas! I want reality. Your
536 concept of a Schwarzschild map is nothing but an analogy to the inevitable
537 distortions in geography when Earth’s spherical surface is squashed onto
538 a flat map. Where is the true representation of curved spacetime,
539 corresponding to the true spherical map of Earth’s surface?
540 Early in the history of sea travel, mapmakers thought the world was flat. An
541 ancient sea captain acquainted with Euclid’s plane geometry (and also the
542 much later calculus differential notation of Leibniz!) would puzzle over the
543 metric for differential distance ds on Earth’s surface, equation (3) in
544 Section 2.3:
ds2 = R2 cos2 λ dφ2 + R2 dλ2 (space metric: Earth’s surface) (23)
545 The ancient sea captain asks, “What is R?” (r -coordinate of the Earth’s
546 surface). “What are λ and φ?” (angles of latitude and longitude). “Why
547 does differential distance ds depend on latitude λ?” (convergence at the
548 poles of lines of constant longitude). “Where is the edge?” (There is no
549 edge.) Who is responsible for the captain’s perplexity about a curved
550 surface? Not Nature; not Mother Earth. Neither is Nature responsible for
551 our perplexity about curved spacetime. Everything will be crystal clear as
552 soon as we can visualize four-dimensional curved spacetime. But we do
553 not know anyone who can do this; we certainly cannot! So we
554 compromise, we do our best to live with our limitations and to develop
555 intuition from the analogy to curved surfaces in space, such as the partial
556 visualization of Schwarzschild geometry in the following sections.
557 Black holes just didn’t “smell right”

558 During the 1920s and into the 1930s, the world’s most renowned experts
559 on general relativity were Albert Einstein and the British astrophysicist
560 Arthur Eddington. Others understood relativity, but Einstein and
561 Eddington set the intellectual tone of the subject. And, while a few others
562 were willing to take black holes seriously, Einstein and Eddington were
563 not. Black holes just didn’t “smell right”; they were outrageously bizarre;
564 they violated Einstein’s and Eddington’s intuitions about how our
565 Universe ought to behave . . . We are so accustomed to the idea of black
566 holes today that it is hard not to ask, “How could Einstein be so dumb?
567 How could he leave out the very thing, implosion, that makes black
568 holes?” Such a reaction displays our ignorance of the mindset of nearly
569 everybody in the 1920s and 1930s . . . Nobody realized that a sufficiently
570 compact object must implode, and that the implosion will produce a black
571 hole.
572 —Kip Thorne
3.6
573 THE SPACETIME SLICE
574 Do the best we can to visualize curved spacetime
575 This section introduces a method of visualizing curved spacetime—called the

576 spacetime slice—that we use repeatedly throughout the book. Every such
577 visualization of curved spacetime is partial and incomplete—it does not tell
578 all!—but can carry us some of the way toward intuitive understanding of
579 spacetime curvature.
580 DEFINITION 2. Spacetime slice

581 A spacetime slice—which we usually just call a slice—is a
582 two-dimensional spacetime surface on which we plot two global
583 coordinates of all events that lie on that surface and that have equal
Section 3.6 The spacetime slice 3-23
SLICE
Two-dimensional spacetime surface
specified by its topology and the ranges of
its coordinates and covered with events.
APPLY
METRIC
On every region of the slice

we can either draw a or construct an
LIGHT CONE DIAGRAM EMBEDDING DIAGRAM
FIGURE 7 Preview: When we apply the global metric to a slice, then on every region of
the slice we can either draw a light cone diagram or construct an embedding diagram.
Definition: 584 values for all other global coordinates. We indicate a slice with square
spacetime slice 585 brackets; the three alternative slices for our Schwarzschild global
586 coordinates are [r, φ], [r, t], and [φ, t]. Our definition of slice includes its
587 range of coordinates and its connectedness (topology). The slice—even
588 when populated with events—does not use the metric, so a spacetime
589 slice carries no information whatsoever about spacetime curvature.
590 This feature makes the slice useful in both special and general relativity.
On every region 591 The following remarkable property of the spacetime slice will illuminate
of every slice: 592 the remainder of this book: When we apply the global metric to a spacetime
light cone diagram or 593 slice, then on every region of every slice we can either draw worldlines or set
embedding diagram 594 up an embedding diagram. Figure 7 previews the content of the following
595 sections.
596 What does “every region” of the slice mean in the caption to Figure 7?
597 For the non-spinning black hole the regions are outside and inside the event
598 horizon. Section 3.7 shows that light cones can be drawn on both regions for
599 the [r, t] slice. Section 3.9 shows that outside the event horizon the [r, φ] slice is
600 an embedding diagram.
t/M Flash
D F
F
F
a P
2.0 F P F P F P
F
Flash P P
P F C P
F
F F
b
1.5 P P
F P F Stone F P
A F
P P
stone P F
A
F F
F c
1.0 F P F P F P P
e f g F
h i j
stone P P
F P B
P
F
Stone F
F
d F B
0.5 F P P F P P
F
P P
F P
P
0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Event
2.5 3.0 r/M
Horizon
FIGURE 8 Schwarzschild light cone diagram on an [r, t] slice, constructed from segments
of light worldlines from equation (26), showing future (F) and past (P) of each event (filled dots).
At each r -coordinate the light cone can be moved up or down vertically without change of
shape, as shown.
3.7
601 LIGHT CONE DIAGRAM ON AN [r,t ] SLICE
602 The global t-coordinate can run backward along a worldline!
On an [r, t] slice. . . 603 We can learn a lot about predictions of the Schwarzschild metric by plotting
604 light cones. To derive the worldline of a light flash in r, t coordinates, set
605 dτ = 0 and dφ = 0 in (5). The result is:
−1
2M 2 2M
0= 1− dt − 1 − dr2 (light, and dφ = 0) (24)
r r
606 Which leads to the equation:

dt r
=± (light, radial motion) (25)
dr r − 2M
Light cones 607 Integrate this to find the equation for the worldline of a light flash:
Section 3.7 Light Cone Diagram on an [r,t ] slice 3-25
Box 8. A White Hole?

event E can pass only from either the A region to the C region
or from the C region to the A region. No stone worldline
t/M B through event E can connect events B and D.
C A Next question: In which direction does the stone move

E between events A and C inside the event horizon? Arrows on
the light cone imply that the motion is from A to C, namely to
D smaller r . But all differentials in (27) are squared: The metric
allows motion in either direction.
r/M
0 r = 2M We now show that motion to larger r cannot occur inside
the event horizon. This means that the solution of the metric
FIGURE 9 Schematic of a light cone inside the event that allows motion to larger r inside the event horizon is an
horizon in Schwarzschild global coordinates. extraneous solution and does not correspond to the workings
of Nature.
Inside the event horizon, do a stone and light flash really move
Suppose that the stone moves to larger r , from event C to
only toward smaller r ? And does Figure 8 correctly represent
event A, in which case the light cone arrows in Figure 9 would
this? Why do the light cones not open upward in this figure, as
point to the right. That means that at an earlier wristwatch
they do in flat spacetime and also outside the event horizon?
time the stone was at C. Now draw a light cone that crosses
To answer these questions, assume that the worldline of the at event C. Then there is a still earlier event to the left of C
stone passes through event E, the intersection of the light through which the stone passed. Repeat this process until we
cone worldlines in Figure 9. Then determine what worldlines reach r = 0, from which this stone must have emerged. The
through E are possible between A and C (solid line) or result is what we call a white hole. A white hole spews stones
between D and B (dashed line). The metric tells us how the and light outward from its singularity, the opposite of a black
stone’s wristwatch advances along its constant-φ worldline, hole.
From (24), it reads
Do white holes exist in Nature? We have not detected any.
−1
2 2M 2 2M 2
And if they should temporarily form, how could they possibly
dτ = 1− dt − 1− dr (27) survive, since their central feature is to empty themselves into
r r
surrounding spacetime? The method we use here is called
Wristwatch time in (27) is real, therefore physical, only if the
reductio ad absurdum, reduction to an absurd result.
right side is positive. You can show that along a worldline
connecting events D and B (dashed line), the wristwatch time Final conclusion: Arrows on the light cones inside the event
is imaginary. In contrast, you can show that along a worldline horizon in Figure 9 point in the physically correct direction,
that connects events A and C (solid line), wristwatch time is which funnels stones and light toward the singularity. The
real. First conclusion: Worldlines of stones that pass through corresponding light cones in Figure 8 do the same.

r/M − 2
t − t1 = ± r − r1 + 2M ln
(light, radial motion) (26)
r1 /M − 2
608 where (r1 , t1 ) are initial coordinates of the light flash. Figure 8 plots the
609 resulting light cone diagram for many different values of (r1 , t1 ).
610 Figure 8 tells us a lot about physical predictions of the Schwarzschild
Trouble at the 611 metric. The light cone of an event tells us the past (P) and future (F) of that
event horizon 612 event. Note, first, that at the event horizon light does not change r-coordinate
613 on this slice. Second, inside the event horizon everything moves to smaller r.
614 The light cone corrals possible worldlines of a stone that passes through that
615 event—such as worldlines for Stone A and Stone B in the plot. Note, third,
616 that the t-coordinate runs backward along worldlines B and D.
617 Objection 12. How can light be stuck at the event horizon, moving neither
618 inward or outward?
619 Figure 8 tells us that near the event horizon the t-coordinate changes very
620 rapidly along a light ray, while the r coordinate changes very little. This is a
621 problem with the Schwarzschild t coordinate that obscures observed
622 results. We can say that the Schwarzschild t-coordinate is diseased, does
623 not correctly predict observations. Chapters 6 and 7 analyze and
624 overcome this global coordinate difficulty and show that light can fall to
625 smaller r , but not move to larger r inside the event horizon.
626 Objection 13. Oops! How can time run backward along a worldline, such
627 as that of Stone B in Figure 8? Its arrow tends downward with respect to
628 the t/M axis.
629 Careful! Never use the word “time” by itself (Section 2.7). Only the global
630 t-coordinate runs backward along worldlines B and D in Figure 9. Global
631 coordinates are (almost) totally arbitrary; we choose them freely, so we
632 cannot trust them to tell us what we will observe. Only the left side of the
633 metric does that, for example giving us wristwatch time between two
634 events. The wristwatch time is positive as the stone progresses along
635 worldline B in Figure 8; and along the worldline of every light flash the
636 wristwatch time is zero. Box 8 shows that the motion of both light and
637 stones must be to smaller r inside the event horizon.
638 Objection 14. Aha! I’ve caught you in a serious contradiction. Inside the
639 horizon the worldline of the stone in Figure 8 is flatter than that of light.
640 That is, the stone traverses a greater span of r coordinate per unit time
641 than light does. The stone moves faster than light! Let’s see you wiggle out
642 of that one!
643 Again you use the word “time” incorrectly and compound the error by
644 changing r rather than moving a distance. Global coordinates are
645 arbitrary—our choice!—and global coordinate separations are not
646 measured quantities. This arbitrariness combines with spacetime
647 curvature to create the distortions plotted in Figure 8. Different global
648 coordinates give different distortions—see the same plot with different
649 global coordinates in Figure 5, Section 7.6. For every global coordinate
650 system dr/dt inside the event horizon does not measure the velocity of
651 anything. We favor measurement and observation on a local flat patch,
652 where special relativity rules. Chapter 5 has a lot more on this subject.
Section 3.8 Inside the Event Horizon: A Light Cone Diagram on an [r,φ] Slice 3-27
3.8
653 INSIDE THE EVENT HORIZON: A LIGHT CONE DIAGRAM ON AN [r,φ] SLICE
654 Inside the event horizon, Schwarzschild-r is timelike!
On an [r, φ] slice. . . 655 To continue our attempt to visualize curved spacetime around a black hole, we
656 plot light cones on an [r, φ] slice. Light plots on this slice require that dτ = 0
657 and dt = 0. With these conditions, (5) becomes
−1
2M
0=− 1− dr2 − r2 dφ2 (light, and dt = 0) (28)
r
658 So the trajectory of light on the [r, φ] slice satisfies the equation:
dφ 1
= ± 1/2 (light, dt = 0) (29)
dr r (2M − r)1/2
659 The left side of (29) is real only if r ≤ 2M , namely at or inside the event
Light cones 660 horizon. Whoops: The only region on the [r, φ] slice on which we can draw
inside the 661 worldlines is inside the event horizon. So what is going on outside the event
event horizon 662 horizon? Section 3.9 answers this question; here we plot light cones on the
663 [r, φ] slice inside the event horizon. To integrate (29), use the substitution:
r = 2M z 2 so dr = 4M zdz (30)
664 With this substitution, (29) becomes:

dφ 4z 2
=± 1/2 1/2
=± 1/2
(light, dt = 0) (31)
dz 2 2
(2z ) (2 − 2z ) (1 − z 2 )
665 Integrate this to obtain:

Z z
dz
φ − φ1 = ±2 = ±2 [arcsin z − arcsin z1 ] (32)
z1 (1 − z 2 )1/2
666 Substitute back from (30) to yield the integral of (29):

r 1/2 r 1/2
1
φ − φ1 = ±2 arcsin − arcsin (33)
2M 2M
(light, 0 < r ≤ 2M, 0 ≤ φ < 2π)
667 Light cones sprout from events at the filled dots (r1 , φ1 ) in Figure 10.
668 Equation (33) does not give real results for r > 2M . However, as r approaches
669 r1 = 2M from below, the magnitude of the slopes of dφ/dr in (29) increases
670 without limit, leading to the vertical lines at r = 2M in the figure.
671 Objection 15. Wait a minute! I thought we could draw light cones only on a
672 diagram with one space axis and one time axis. Figure 10 plots light cones
673 using two space coordinates, r and φ!
φ
2π
1.5 π P F P F P F P F
π P F P F P F P F
0.5 π P F P F P F P F
0
0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
r/M
FIGURE 10 Light cones for different events (filled dots) on an [r, φ] slice inside and at the
event horizon, showing the past (P) and future (F) of each event. Each light cone can be moved
vertically, as shown. At r = 2M the light moves neither inward nor outward, hence the vertical
line. Because of the cyclic nature of φ, namely φ + 2π = φ, this diagram can be rolled up as a
cylinder, on which the φ = 0 axis and the φ = 2π line coincide.
674 Never assume that global coordinate separations in t, r , or φ tell us

675 anything about space and time measurements. We favor measurement in
676 a local inertial frame, using local coordinates—not global coordinates.
677 Later we show that inside the event horizon the Schwarzschild r
678 coordinate behaves like a time (and the Schwarzschild t coordinate
679 behaves like a distance). So Figure 10 does describe the motion of light.
680 The light cones in the figure fulfill one of their basic functions: For each
681 event they divide spacetime into the past (P), the future (F), and the
682 absolute elsewhere.
Section 3.9 Outside the event horizon: an embedding diagram on an [r,φ] slice 3-29
3.9
683 OUTSIDE THE EVENT HORIZON: AN EMBEDDING DIAGRAM ON AN [r,φ] SLICE
684 Freeze Schwarzschild-t; examine stretched space.
On an [r, φ] slice: 685 Equation (29) tells us that we cannot draw light cones on the [r, φ] slice
embedding diagram 686 outside the event horizon. Figure 7 predicts an alternative way to visualize
outside the 687 curved spacetime: an embedding diagram. Figure 12 shows the world’s most
event horizon 688 famous embedding diagram, the funnel whose form we now explain and derive.
689 Think of the [r, φ] slice outside of the event horizon as an initially
690 horizontal rubber sheet. Here’s how we create the embedding diagram: Anchor
We add a third 691 a ring at r = 2M on the original flat slice, then for r > 2M pull the rubber
dimension. 692 sheet upward, perpendicular to that flat surface, in such a way that the curve
693 with dφ = 0, called Z(r), satisfies the equation
dr2
dσ 2 = (embedded surface profile) (34)
2M
1−
r
694 Figure 11 illustrates the resulting construction. From this figure:
dσ 2 = dZ 2 + dr2 (35)
695 From equations (34) and (35):

2M
dZ 2 = dσ 2 − dr2 = dr2 (36)
r − 2M
696 Take the square root of both sides of (36) and integrate the result from
697 the lower limit at r = 2M :
Zr
1/2 dr
Z(r) = ± (2M ) 1/2
= 23/2 M 1/2 (r − 2M )1/2 (37)
(r − 2M )
2M
698 We choose the plus sign for the final expression on the right of (37) for
Parabaloid 699 convenience of drawing. Square both sides of (37) to obtain an equation of the
funnel 700 form Z 2 = Ar + B; this shows that the funnel profile is a parabola. Rotate this
701 curve around the vertical line r = 0 to create the surfaces in Figures 12 and
702 13. This funnel surface, with its parabola profile, is called a paraboloid of
703 revolution. It is sometimes called a gravity well or Flamm’s paraboloid
704 after Ludwig Flamm, the first to identify it in 1916.
705 The vertical dimension in Figures 11, 12, and 13 is an artificial construct;
706 it is not a dimension of spacetime. We ourselves added this third Euclidean
707 space dimension to help visualize Schwarzschild geometry. Only the embedded
Spacetime only 708 surface represents physical spacetime where objects and people can exist. An
on funnel surface 709 observer posted on this paraboloidal surface is bound to stay on that surface,
710 not because he is physically limited in any way, but because locations off the
711 surface in these diagrams simply do not exist in physical spacetime.
712 The embedding diagram in Figure 13 illustrates some analytical results
713 derived earlier in this chapter. For example:
Z(r)
dσ dZ
dr
r
FIGURE 11 Constructing the radial profile of the funnel in Figures 12 and 13.
FIGURE 12 Space geometry visualized by distorting a slice through the center of a black
hole, the result “embedded” in a three-dimensional Euclidean perspective. Adjacent circles
represent adjacent shells. WE add the vertical dimension to show that the radial differential
distance dσ is greater than the differential dr (see Figure 13). Space stretching appears as a
“bending” of the plane downwards into the shape of a funnel. At the throat of the funnel, where
its slope is vertical, the r -coordinate is r = 2M .
714 1. Along the radial direction, dσ is greater than dr, as equation (35)
715 implies and Figure 12 illustrates.
716 2. The ratio dσ/dr increases without limit as the radial coordinate
717 decreases toward the critical value r = 2M (vertical slope of the
718 paraboloid at the throat of the funnel).
Picturing 719 3. The observer constrained to the paraboloid surface cannot directly
analytical results 720 measure the r-coordinate of any shell. He derives this r-coordinate—the
721 “reduced circumference”—indirectly by measuring the circumference of
722 the shell and dividing this circumference by 2π (Section 3.3).
Section 3.9 Outside the event horizon: an embedding diagram on an [r,φ] slice 3-31
TOP VIEW
SIDE VIEW
dσ > dr
r = 2M
FIGURE 13 Projections of the embedding diagram of Figure 12. The thick curves in the
side view are parabolas. WE choose the vertical coordinate for these curves in such a way that
the increment along a parabola corresponds to the radial increment dσ measured directly by
the shell observer. A shell observer can exist only on the paraboloidal surface (shown edge-on
as the thick curve). He can measure dσ directly but not r or dr . He derives the r coordinate
(“reduced circumference”) of a given circle by measuring its circumference and dividing by 2π .
Then dr is the computed difference between the reduced circumferences of adjacent circles;
no shell observer measures dr directly.
723 4. In contrast, the observer can measure the distance—call it
724 σ1,2 —between adjacent shells. He finds that this directly-measured
725 distance is greater than the difference of their r-coordinates:
726 σ1,2 > r2 − r1 .
727
QUERY 2. Spacelike 728 relation of adjacent events on an embedded surface

A. Explain how on729 an embedded surface every adjacent pair of events—separated by differential
global coordinates—has
730 a spacelike relation to each other.
B. Argue that the731 answer to the question, “Can a worldline (Definition 9, Section 1.5) lie on an
embedding diagram?”
732 is a resounding “NO!”
733
734 In Query 1 you show that every pair of adjacent events on an embedded
735 surface has a spacelike relation to one another (dσ 2 > 0). In contrast, a stone
736 must move between timelike events along its worldline (dτ 2 > 0). Therefore a
Adjacent events 737 stone cannot move on an embedded surface. Even light—which moves along a
on an embedding 738 lightlike trajectory (dτ = 0)—cannot move on an embedded surface. Hence an
diagram have a 739 embedding diagram cannot display motion at all.
spacelike relation.
740 Objection 16. In a science museum I see steel balls rolling around in a
741 metal funnel. Is this the same as the funnel in Figure 13?
742 No. The motion of these balls approximate Newtonian orbits provided the
743 depth at each funnel radius is proportional to the inverse of the radius,
744 which mimics the Newtonian potential energy. This is unrelated to the
745 general relativistic distortion of space near a center of gravitational
746 attraction. The cross section curve in Figure 13 is a parabola.
747 Comment 2. Terminology: “Except on the singularity.”

748 Neither the Schwarzschild metric, nor any other global metric we use, is valid on
749 the singularity of a black hole. On a singularity, by definition, spacetime curvature
750 increases without limit, so general relativity is not valid there. In all the global
751 coordinates we use, the non-spinning black hole has a point singularity. The
752 spinning black hole has a ring singularity in our global coordinates (Chapter 18).
753 We authors get tired of using—and you get tired of reading—the steady refrain
754 “except at the singularity.” So from now on that idea will mostly “go without
755 saying.” We will repeat the phrase occasionally, as a reminder,
756 but—please!—mentally insert the phrase “except at the singularity” into every
757 discussion of global coordinates around a black hole.
758 Objection 17. So in summary, the space outside the event horizon of the
759 non-spinning black hole has the shape of a funnel, right? I certainly see
760 that funnel in textbooks and popular articles about general relativity.
761 Here is the correct statement: “The global metric in Schwarzschild

762 coordinates leads to a funnel embedding diagram for r > 2M .” Notice:
763 This statement describes a consequence of using Schwarzschild global
764 coordinates. But it is not the consequence in every global coordinate
765 system. Chapter 7 introduces a global coordinate system
766 —Painlevé-Gullstrand (which we call global rain coordinates)—whose
767 global metric leads to an embedding diagram that is flat everywhere,
768 inside as well as outside the event horizon (Box 5, Section 7.6). The key
769 idea here is that curvature is a property of spacetime, not of either
770 global space coordinates alone or the global t-coordinate alone. Light
771 cone plots and embedding diagrams help us to visualize features of curved
772 spacetime, but no single diagram fully represents curved spacetime.
773 Sorry!
Section 3.10 Room and Worldtube 3-33
Observer
t/M worldline
Worldtube
Front
slice
r/M
FIGURE 14 A worldtube surrounding an observer at rest in (φ, r/M ) coordinates. This
worldtube is bounded with slices, one of which is shaded. How “fat” the worldtube can be and
still keep the the local frame of the observer inertial depends on the local spacetime curvature
and the sensitivity to tides of the experiment we want to conduct.
3.10
774 ROOM AND WORLDTUBE
775 Drill a hole through spacetime.
776 We are used to the idea of experimenting or carrying out an observation in a
777 room. A room is a physical enclosure, such as (1) a laboratory, (2) a powered
778 or unpowered spaceship, or (3) an elevator with or without its supporting
779 cables.
780 DEFINITION 3. Room
Definition: 781 A room is a physical enclosure of fixed spatial dimensions in which we
room 782 make measurements and observations over an extended period of time.
783 Thus far our room is empty; we have not yet installed the rods and clocks
784 that allow us to record and analyze events (Figure 4, Section 5.7). However,
785 even if the room is stationary in global r and φ coordinates, it changes its
786 global t-coordinate. As it does so, the room sweeps out what we call a
787 worldtube in global coordinates. Figure 14 shows the worldtube of a room at
788 rest in r and φ coordinates surrounding the worldline of an observer at rest in
789 the room.
790 DEFINITION 4. Worldtube
791 A worldtube is a bundle of worldlines of objects at rest in a room and
Definition: 792 worldlines of the structural components of that room. Think of a
worldtube 793 worldtube as sheathing the worldline of an observer at work in the room.
794 Sometimes, but not always, we choose to bound the worldtube with
795 spacetime slices, as in Figure 14.
Worldtube plot 796 The plot of the worldtube need not be straight, since it bounds the
typically curves. 797 observer’s worldline, which typically curves in global coordinates. Figure 15
798 shows a worldtube inside the event horizon.
Observer
worldline
t/M
Worldtube
r/M
FIGURE 15 A worldtube inside the event horizon. The cross section of this particular
worldtube is not rectangular; its sides are not slices in Schwarzschild coordinates. A horizontal
or near-horizontal worldline is permitted inside the event horizon; see Figure 8.
799 In this book we prefer to make every measurement in a local inertial

800 frame. In curved spacetime inertial frames are limited in spacetime extent.
801 Viewed locally, each experiment takes place inside a room of limited space
802 dimension and during a limited time lapse on clocks installed and
803 synchronized in that room. Viewed globally, every experiment takes place
804 within a limited segment of a worldtube.
805 Objection 18. You keep saying, “In this book we prefer to make every
806 measurement in a local inertial frame.” Is this necessary? Could you
807 describe general relativity without using local inertial frames at all?
808 Yes. The timelike global metric (5) delivers, on its left side, the observed
809 wristwatch time between two events differentially close to one another. You
810 can integrate this differential along the worldline of a stone, for example, to
811 find the wristwatch time between two events widely separated along this
812 worldline. A similar distant spatial separation derives from the spacelike
813 global metric (6). All of physics hangs on events, so all of (classical,
814 non-quantum) physics can be analyzed without local inertial frames. Our
815 preference for measurement in local inertial frames, where special relativity
816 rules, is a matter of taste, clarity, and convenience for us and the reader.
Section 3.11 Exercises 3-35
3.11
817 EXERCISES
818 1. Measured Distance Between Spherical Shells

819 A black hole has mass M = 5 kilometers, a little more than three times that of
820 our Sun. Two concentric spherical shells surround this black hole. The Lower
821 shell has map r-coordinate rL ; the Higher shell has map r-coordinate
822 rH = rL + ∆r. Assume that ∆r = 1 meter and consider the following four
823 cases:
824 (a) rL = 50 kilometers

825 (b) rL = 15 kilometers
826 (c) rL = 10.1 kilometers
827 (d) rL = 10.01 kilometers
828 (e) rL = 10.001 kilometers
829 A. For each case (a) through (e), use (16) to make an estimate of the
830 radial separation σ measured directly by a shell observer. Keep three
831 significant digits for your estimate.
832 B. Next, in each case (a) through (e) use the result of Sample Problem 1
833 in Section 3.3 to find the exact distance between shells measured
834 directly by a shell observer. Keep three significant digits for your result.
835 C. How do your estimates and exact results compare, to three significant
836 digits, for each of the five cases? Give a criterion for the condition
837 under which the estimate of part A will be a good approximation of
838 the exact result of part B.
839 2. Grazing our Sun

840 Verify the statement in Section 3.4 concerning two spherical shells around our
841 Sun. The lower shell, of reduced circumference rL = 695 980 kilometers, just
842 grazes the surface of our Sun. The higher shell is of reduced circumference one
843 kilometer greater, namely rH = 695 981 kilometers. Verify the prediction that
844 the directly-measured distance between these shells will be 2 millimeters more
845 than 1 kilometer. Hint: Use the approximation inside the front cover.
846 (Outbursts and flares leap thousands of kilometers up from Sun’s roiling
847 surface, so this exercise is unrealistic—even if we could build these shells!)
848 3. Many Shells?

849 The President of the Black Hole Construction Company is waiting in your
850 office when you arrive. He is waxing wroth. (“Tell Roth to wax [him] for
851 awhile.”— Groucho Marx)
852 “You are bankrupting me!” he shouts. “We signed a contract that I would
853 build spherical shells centered on Black Hole Alpha, the shells to be 1 meter
854 apart extending down to the event horizon. But we have already constructed
855 the total number we thought would be required and are nowhere near finished.
856 We are running out of materials and money!”
857 “Calm down a minute.” you reply. “Black Hole Alpha has an event
858 horizon r-coordinate r = 2M = 10 kilometers = 10 000 meters. You agreed to
859 build 1000 spherical shells starting at reduced circumference r = 10 001
860 meters, then r = 10 002 meters, then r = 10 003 meters, and so forth, ending
861 at r = 11 000 meters. So what is the problem?”
862 “I don’t know. Here is our construction method: My worker robot mounts
863 a 1-meter rod vertically (radially) from each completed shell, measures this
864 rod in place to be sure it is exactly 1 meter long, then welds to the top end of
865 this rod the horizontal (tangential) beam of the next spherical shell of larger
866 r-coordinate.”
867 “Ah, then your company is indeed facing a large unnecessary expense,”
868 you conclude. “But I think I can tell you how you should construct the shells.”
869 A. Explain to the President of the Black Hole Construction Company

870 what his construction method should have been in order to fulfill his
871 obligation to build 1000 correctly spaced spherical shells. Be specific,
872 but do not be fussy.
873 B. Substitute the r-coordinate of the innermost shell into equation (16) to
874 make a first estimate of the directly-measured separation between the
875 innermost shell and the second shell, the one with the next-larger
876 r-coordinate.
877 C. Using the r-coordinate of the second shell, the one just outside the
878 innermost shell, make a second estimate of the directly-measured
879 separation between the innermost shell and the second shell.
880 D. Optional. Use equation (18) to make an exact calculation of the
881 directly-measured separation between the innermost shell and the one
882 just outside it. How does the result of your exact calculation compare
883 with the estimates of Parts B and C?
884 E. Determine the number of shells that the Black Hole Construction
885 Company would have built if the President had completed the task
886 according to his misunderstood plan.
887 4. A Dilute Black Hole

888 Most descriptions of black holes are apocalyptic; you get the impression that
889 black holes are extremely dense objects. Of course a black hole is not dense
890 throughout, because all matter quickly dives to the central crunch point. Still,
891 one can speak of an artificial “average density,” defined, say, by the total mass
892 M divided by a spherical Euclidean volume of radius r = 2M. In terms of this
893 definition, general relativity does not require that a black hole have a large
894 average density. In this exercise you design a black hole with average density
895 equal to that of the atmosphere you breathe on Earth, roughly 1 kilogram per
896 cubic meter. Carry out all calculations to one-digit accuracy—we want an
897 estimate! Hint: Be careful with units, especially when dealing with both
898 conventional and geometric units.
899 A. From the Euclidean equation for the volume of a sphere
4 3
V = πr (Euclid)
3
900 find an equation for the mass M of air contained in a sphere of radius
901 r, in terms of the density ρ in kilograms/meter3 . Use the conversion
902 factor G/c2 (Section 3.2) to express this mass in meters. (The volume
903 formula used here is for Euclidean geometry, and we apply it to curved
904 space geometry—so this exercise is only the first step in a more
905 sophisticated analysis.)
906 B. Let the radius of the Euclidean spherical volume of air be equal to the
907 map r-coordinate of the event horizon of the black hole. Assuming that
908 our designer black hole has the density of air, what is the map r of the
909 event horizon in terms of physical constants and air density?
910 C. Compare your answer to the radius of our solar system. The mean
911 radius of the orbit of the (former!) planet Pluto is approximately
912 6 × 1012 meters.
913 D. How many times the mass of our Sun is the mass of your designer
914 black hole?
915 5. Astronaut Stretching According to Newton

916 As you dive feet first radially toward the center of a black hole, you are not
917 physically stress-free and comfortable. True, you detect no overall accelerating
918 “force of gravity.” But you do feel a tidal force pulling your feet and head
919 apart and additional forces squeezing your middle from the sides like a
920 high-quality corset. When do these tidal forces become uncomfortable? We
921 have not yet answered this question using general relativity, but Newton is
922 available for consultation, so let’s ask him. One-digit accuracy is plenty for
923 numerical estimates in this exercise.
924 A. Take the derivative with respect to r of the local acceleration g in

925 equation (13) to obtain an expression dg/dr in terms of M and r.
926 We want to find the radius rouch at which you begin to feel
927 uncomfortable. What does “uncomfortable” mean? So that we all agree,
928 let us say that you are uncomfortable when your head is pulled upward
929 (relative to your middle) with a force equal to the force of gravity on
930 Earth, ∆g = |gEarth |, your middle is in a local inertial frame so feels no
931 force, and your feet are pulled downward (again, relative to your middle)
932 with a force equal to the force of gravity on Earth ∆g = |gEarth |.
933 B. How massive a black hole do you want to fall into? Suppose M = 10
934 kilometers = 10 000 meters, or about seven times the mass of our Sun.
935 Assume your head and feet are 2 meters apart. Find rouch , in meters, at
936 which you become uncomfortable according to our criterion. Compare
937 this radius with that of Earth’s radius, namely 6.4 × 106 meters.
938 C. Will your discomfort increase or decrease or stay the same as you
939 continue to fall toward the center from this radius?
940 D. Suppose you fall from rest at infinity. How fast are you going when you
941 reach rouch according to Newton? Express this speed as a fraction of
942 the speed of light.
943 E. Take the speed in part D to be constant from that radius to the center
944 and find the corresponding (maximum) time in meters to travel from
945 rouch to the center, according to Newton. This will be the maximum
946 Newtonian time lapse during which you will be—er—uncomfortable.
947 F. What is the maximum time of discomfort, according to Newton,
948 expressed in seconds?
949 Note 1: If you carried the symbol M for the black hole mass through these
950 equations, you found that it canceled out in expressions for the maximum time
951 lapse of discomfort in parts E and F. In other words, your discomfort time is
952 the same for a black hole of any mass when you fall from rest at
953 infinity—according to Newton. This equality of discomfort time for all M is
954 also true for the general relativistic analysis.
955 Note 2: Suppose you drop from rest starting at a great distance from the
956 black hole. Section 7.2 analyzes the wristwatch time lapse from any radius to
957 the center according to general relativity. Section 7.9 examines the general
958 relativistic “ouch time.”
959 6. Black Hole Area Never Decreases

960 Stephen Hawking discovered that the area of the event horizon of a black hole
961 never decreases, when you calculate this area with the Euclidean formula
962 A = 4πr2 . Investigate the consequences of this discovery under alternative
963 assumptions described in parts A and B that follow.
964 Comment 3. Increase disorder
965 The rule that the area of a black hole’s event horizon does not decrease is
966 related in a fundamental way to the statistical law stating that the disorder (the
967 so-called entropy) of an isolated physical system does not decrease. See
968 Thorne, Black Holes and Time Warps, pages 422–426 and 445-446, and
969 Wheeler, A Journey into Gravity and Spacetime, pages 218-222.
970 Assume that two black holes coalesce. One of the initial black holes has mass
971 M1 and the other has mass M2 .
972 A. Assume, first, that the masses of the initial black holes simply add to
973 give the mass of the resulting larger black hole. How does the
974 r-coordinate of the event horizon of the final black hole relate to the
975 r-coordinates of the event horizons of the initial black holes? How does
976 the area of the event horizon of the final black hole relate to the areas
977 of the event horizons of the initial black holes? Calculate the map r
978 and area of the event horizon of the final black hole for the case where
979 one of the initial black holes has twice the mass of the other one, that
980 is, M2 = 2M1 = 2M ; express your answers as functions of M .
981 B. Now make a different assumption about the final mass of the combined
982 black hole. Listen to John Wheeler and Ken Ford (Geons, Black Holes,
983 and Quantum Foam, pages 300-301) describe the coalescence of two
984 black holes.
985 If two balls of putty collide and stick together, the mass of
986 the new, larger ball is the sum of the masses of the balls that
987 collide. Not so for black holes. If two spinless, uncharged
988 black holes collide and coalesce—and if they get rid of as
989 much energy as they possibly can in the form of gravitational
990 waves as they combine—the square of the mass of the new,
991 heavier black hole is the sum of the squares of the combining
992 masses. That means that a right triangle with sides scaled to
993 measure the [squares of the] masses of two black holes has a
994 hypotenuse that measures the [square of the] mass of the
995 single black hole they form when they join. Try to picture the
996 incredible tumult of two black holes locked in each other’s
997 embrace, each swallowing the other, both churning space and
998 time with gravitational radiation. Then marvel that the
999 simple rule of Pythagoras imposes its order on this ultimate
1000 cosmic maelstrom.
1001 Following this more realistic scenario, find the r-value of the resulting
1002 event horizon when black holes of masses M1 and M2 coalesce. How
1003 does the area of the event horizon of the final black hole relate to the
1004 areas of the event horizons of the initial black holes?
1005 C. Do the results of both part A and part B follow Hawking’s rule that
1006 the event horizon’s area of a black hole does not decrease?
1007 D. Assume that the mass lost in the analysis of Part B escapes as
1008 gravitational radiation. What is the mass-equivalent of the energy of
1009 that gravitational radiation?
1010 7. Zeno’s Paradox

1011 Zeno of Elea, Greece, (born about 495 BCE, died about 430 BCE) developed
1012 several paradoxes of motion. One of these states that a body in motion
1013 starting from Point A can reach a given final Point B only after having
1014 traversed half the distance between Point A and Point B. But before
1015 traversing this half it must cover half of that half, and so on ad infinitum.
1016 Consequently the goal can never be reached.
1017 A modern reader, also named Zeno, raises a similar paradox about
1018 crossing the event horizon. Zeno refers us to the relation between dσ and dr
1019 for radial separation:
dr
dσ = 1/2 (dt = 0, dφ = 0) (38)
2M
1−
r
1020 Zeno then asserts, “As r approaches 2M, the denominator on the right
1021 hand side of (38) goes to zero, so the distance between adjacent shells becomes
1022 infinite. Even at the speed of light, an object cannot travel an infinite distance
1023 in a finite time. Therefore nothing can arrive at the event horizon and enter
1024 the black hole.” Analyze and resolve this modern Zeno’s paradox using the
1025 following argument or some other method.
1026 As often happens in relativity, the question is: Who measures what? In
1027 order to cross the event horizon, the diving object must pass through
1028 every shell outside the event horizon. Each shell observer measures the
1029 incremental ruler length dσ between his shell and the one below it. Then
1030 the observer on that next-lower shell measures the incremental ruler
1031 distance between that shell and the one below it. By adding up these
1032 increments, we can establish a measure of the “summed ruler lengths
1033 measured by shell observers from the shell at higher map rH to the shell
1034 at lower map rL ” through which the object must move to reach the
1035 event horizon.
1036 We integrated (38) from one shell to another in Sample Problem 1 in
1037 Section 3.3. Let rL → 2M in that solution, and show that the resulting
1038 distance from rH to rL , the “summed ruler lengths,” is finite as
1039 measured by the collection of collaborating shell observers. This is true
1040 even though the right side of (38) becomes infinite exactly at r = 2M.
1041 Will collaborating shell observers conclude among themselves that the
1042 in-falling stone reaches the event horizon? The present exercise shows
1043 that the “summed ruler lengths” is finite from any shell to the event
1044 horizon. However, motion involves not only distance but also time—and
1045 in relativity time does not follow common expectations! What can we
1046 say about the “summed shell time” for the passage of a diver through
1047 the “summed shell distance” calculated above? Chapter 6, Diving, shows
1048 that the observer on every shell measures an inertial diver to pass him
1049 with non-zero speed, a local shell speed that continues to increase as the
1050 diver gets closer and closer to the event horizon. Each shell observer
1051 therefore clocks a finite (non-infinite) time for the diver to pass from his
1052 shell to the shell below. Take the sum of these finite times—“sum”
1053 meaning an integral similar to the integral of equation (38) carried out
1054 in Sample Problem 1. When computed, this integral of shell times yields
Section 3.12 References 3-41
1055 a finite value for the total time measured by the collection of shell
1056 observers past whom the diver passes. Hence the group of shell observers
1057 agree among themselves: Someone diving radially passes them all in a
1058 finite “summed shell time” and reaches the event horizon. Thank you,
1059 Zeno!
3.12
1060 REFERENCES
1061 Initial quote: John Archibald Wheeler with Kenneth Ford, Geons, Black Holes
1062 and Quantum Foam, 1998, W. W. Norton and Company, New York, pages
1063 296-297.
1064 The term event horizon was introduced by Wolfgang Rindler in 1956, reprinted
1065 in in the journal General Relativity and Gravitation, Volume 34, Number 1,
1066 January 2002, pages 133 through 153.
1067 Quotes from The Principia by Isaac Newton translated by I. Bernard Cohen
1068 and Anne Whitman, University of California Press, 1999.
1069 References for Box 2, Section 3, “More about the Black Hole.” This box is
1070 excerpted in part from John Archibald Wheeler, “The Lesson of the Black
1071 Hole,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Volume 125,
1072 Number 1, pages 25–37 (February 1981); J. Michell, Philosophical
1073 Transactions of the Royal Society, London, Volume 74, pages 35–37 (1784),
1074 cited and discussed in S. Schaffer, “John Michell and Black Holes,” Journal
1075 for the History of Astronomy, Volume 10, pages 42–43 (1979); P.-S.
1076 Laplace, Exposition du système du monde, Volume 2 (Cercle-Social, Paris,
1077 1795), modern English translation in S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis,
1078 The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time, Cambridge University Press,
1079 Cambridge, U.K., 1973, pages 365–368; J. R. Oppenheimer and H. Snyder,
1080 Physical Review, Volume 56, pages 455–459 (1939) (published the day
1081 World War II began), quoted in Stuart L. Shapiro and Saul A. Teukolsky,
1082 Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars: The Physics of Compact
1083 Objects, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1983, page 338; R. P. Kerr,
1084 Physical Review Letters, Volume 11, pages 237–238 (1963); E. T. Newman,
1085 E. Couch, K. Chinnapared, A. Exton, A. Prakash, and R. Torrence, Journal
1086 of Mathematical Physics, Volume 6, pages 918–919 (1965); S. W. Hawking
1087 “Black Hole Explosions?” Nature, Volume 248, pages 30–31 (1 March 1974);
1088 See also Black Holes: Selected Reprints, edited by Steven Detweiler,
1089 American Association of Physics Teachers, New York, December 1982,
1090 which includes reprints of papers by John Michell, Karl Schwarzschild, S.
1091 Chandrasekhar, J. Robert Oppenheimer, and H. Snyder, Roy P. Kerr, S. W.
1092 Hawking, and others.
1093 Flamm’s paraboloid, Figure 11 in Section 3.9: Ludwig Flamm (1916).
1094 ”Beiträge zur Einstein’schen Gravitationstheorie”. Physikalische Zeitschrift
1095 Volume 17, pages 448-454.
1096 Some items in Box 5 adapted from Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler,
1097 GRAVITATION, W. H. Freeman Company, 1970, San Francisco (now New
1098 York), page 671
1099 Quote Black holes just didn’t “smell right” from Kip Thorne, Black Holes and
1100 Time Warps: Einstein’s Outrageous Legacy, New York, W. W. Norton,
1101 1994, pages 134 and 137.

Chapter 3. Curving

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 3. Curving

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 3. Curving

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

April 1, 2016 08:34 Curving160401v1 Sheet number 1 Page number 2-0 AW Physics Macros

17 • General relativity describes only tiny effects, right?

25 In my talk ... I remarked that one couldn’t keep saying

36 —John Archibald Wheeler with Kenneth Ford

3.137 THE SCHWARZSCHILD METRIC

40 In late 1915, within a month of the publication of Einstein’s general theory of

3-2 Chapter 3 Curving

Box 1. Metric in Polar Coordinates for Flat Spacetime

ds2 = dr2 + r2 dφ2 (flat space) (3)

This squared spatial separation is the space part of the

The metric for flat spacetime is:

Section 3.1 The Schwarzschild Metric 3-3

85 DEFINITION 1. Invariant (general relativity)

96 Two coefficients in the Schwarzschild metric contain the expression

3-4 Chapter 3 Curving

QUERY 1. Flat spacetime

Section 3.1 The Schwarzschild Metric 3-5

Box 2. More About the Black Hole

3-6 Chapter 3 Curving

Box 3. Singularities: Fictitious or Real?

The problem here is not Euclidean space, it is our silly (r, φ)

Is there some way to show that there is no physical singularity

Section 3.2 Mass in Units of Length 3-7

175 Einstein’s equations are most economically expressed in advanced

3-8 Chapter 3 Curving

Section 3.2 Mass in Units of Length 3-9

TABLE 1 Masses of some astronomical objects.

234 Excellent point. The difference between the mass M of a center of

3-10 Chapter 3 Curving

Box 4. “Our Little Jugged Apocalypse”

Section 3.3 The Global Schwarzschild r-coordinate 3-11

3-12 Chapter 3 Curving

r-coordinate ≡ reduced circumference (15)

331 Objection 6. Aha, gottcha! To define the r -coordinate in (15), you

Section 3.3 The Global Schwarzschild r-coordinate 3-13

1056 visible Universe

3-14 Chapter 3 Curving

Box 5. When is General Relativity Necessary?

Section 3.3 The Global Schwarzschild r-coordinate 3-15

359 every radial differential increment dσ is greater than the corresponding

3-16 Chapter 3 Curving

Sample Problem 1. “Space Stretching” Near a Black Hole

404 compared to the Euclidean-geometry figure of 1.000M (Sample Problem 1). At

408 Objection 8. WHY is the directly-measured distance between spherical

Section 3.4 The Global Schwarzschild t-Coordinate 3-17

Sample Problem 2. Our Sun Causes Small Curvature

422 A deep question! Fundamentally, this discrepancy shatters the notion of

3-18 Chapter 3 Curving

444 but accidental, convenience of Schwarzschild’s choice of global t-coordinate. It

Section 3.5 Constructing the Global Schwarzschild Map of Events 3-19

3-20 Chapter 3 Curving

Box 6. The Metric as Spacetime Micrometer

And so on. There are an infinite number of event-pairs near

Section 3.5 Constructing the Global Schwarzschild Map of Events 3-21

Box 7. Where does the event horizon come from?

3-22 Chapter 3 Curving

ds2 = R2 cos2 λ dφ2 + R2 dλ2 (space metric: Earth’s surface) (23)

557 Black holes just didn’t “smell right”

575 This section introduces a method of visualizing curved spacetime—called the