Cosmic censorship hypothesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
It has been suggested that Naked singularity be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)

This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject.
WikiProject Science or the Science Portal may be able to help recruit one.
If a more appropriate WikiProject or portal exists, please adjust this template accordingly.

In general relativity, the cosmic censorship hypothesis (CCH) is a conjecture about the nature of singularities in spacetime.

Singularities that arise in the solutions of Einstein's equations are typically hidden within event horizons, and therefore cannot be seen from the rest of spacetime. Singularities which are not so hidden are called naked. The weak cosmic censorship hypothesis conjectures that no naked singularities other than the Big Bang singularity exist in the universe.

Contents

[edit] Basics

The fundamental concern is that since the physical behavior of singularities is unknown, if singularities can be seen from the rest of spacetime, causality may break down, and physics may lose its predictive power. The issue cannot be avoided, since according to the Penrose-Hawking singularity theorems, singularities are inevitable in physically reasonable situations. Still, in the absence of naked singularities, the universe is deterministic — it's possible to predict the entire evolution of the universe (possibly excluding some finite regions of space hidden inside event horizons of singularities), knowing only its condition at a certain moment of time (more precisely, everywhere on a spacelike 3-dimensional hypersurface, called the Cauchy surface). Failure of the cosmic censorship hypothesis leads to the failure of determinism, because it is impossible to predict the behavior of space-time in the causal future of a singularity. Cosmic censorship is not merely a problem of formal interest, some form of it is assumed whenever black hole event horizons are mentioned.

The hypothesis was first formulated by Roger Penrose in 1969, and it is not stated in a completely formal way. In a sense it is more of a research program proposal: part of the research is to find a proper formal statement that is physically reasonable and that can be proved to be true or false (and that is sufficiently general to be interesting).


[edit] Weak and strong cosmic censorship hypothesis

There are currently two versions of this hypothesis, known as "weak" and "strong".

  • Weak cosmic censorship hypothesis asserts that causal future of any singularity can not extend to future null infinity. In essence, it says that singularities may be observable, but any observer who has observed a singularity is destined to fall into it eventually. As such, for classical general relativity to be a complete theory, an observer of a naked singularity should still have a theory to explain what is observed.
  • A stronger version of the hypothesis (known as the strong cosmic censorship hypothesis) asserts that no singularity is ever visible to any observer.

[edit] Problems with the concept

There are a number of difficulties in formalizing the hypothesis:

  • There are technical difficulties with properly formalizing the notion of a singularity.
  • It is not difficult to construct spacetimes which have naked singularities, but which are not "physically reasonable;" the canonical example of such a spacetime is perhaps the "superextremal" M < | Q | Reissner-Nordstrom solution, which contains a singularity at r = 0 that is not surrounded by a horizon. A formal statement needs some set of hypotheses which exclude these situations.
  • Caustics may occur in simple models of gravitational collapse, and can appear to lead to singularities. These have more to do with the simplified models of bulk matter used, and in any case have nothing to do with general relativity, and need to be excluded.
  • Computer models of gravitational collapse have shown that naked singularities can arise, but these models rely on very special circumstances (such as spherical symmetry). These special circumstances need to be excluded by some hypothesis.

In 1991, John Preskill and Kip Thorne bet against Stephen Hawking that the hypothesis was false (Thorne-Hawking-Preskill bet). They won the bet (for a T-shirt to cover the winner's nakedness) due to the discovery of the special situations just mentioned. Hawking later reformulated the bet to exclude those technicalities.[citation needed] The revised bet is still open.

[edit] Counter-example

An exact solution to the scalar-Einstein equations Rab = 2φaφb which forms a counter example to many formulations of the cosmic censorship hypothesis was found by Mark D. Roberts in 1985

ds^2=-(1+2\sigma)dv^2+2dvdr+r(r-2\sigma v)(d\theta^2+\sin(\theta)^2d\phi^2),~~~ \phi=\frac{1}{2}\ln(1-2\sigma v/r),

where σ is a constant.

[edit] References

  • Earman, John: Bangs, Crunches, Whimpers, and Shrieks: Singularities and Acausalities in Relativistic Spacetimes (1995), see especially chapter 2 (ISBN 0-19-509591-X)
  • Roberts, Mark D. : Scalar Field Counter-Examples to the Cosmic Censorship Hypothesis. Gen.Rel.Grav.21(1989)907-939.
  • Penrose, Roger: "The Question of Cosmic Censorship", Chapter 5 in Black Holes and Relativistic Stars, Robert Wald (editor), (1994) (ISBN 0-226-87034-0)
  • Penrose, Roger: "Singularities and time-asymmetry", Chapter 12 in General Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey (Hawking and Israel, editors), (1979), see especially section 12.3.2, pp. 617-629 (ISBN 0-521-22285-0)
  • Shapiro, S. L., and Teukolsky, S. A.: "Formation of Naked Singularities: The Violation of Cosmic Censorship", Physical Review Letters 66, 994-997 (1991)
  • Wald, Robert, General Relativity, 299-308 (1984) (ISBN 0-226-87033-2)

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../c/o/s/Cosmic_censorship_hypothesis.html"
In other languages