"The River Model" of Flowing Space Is Being Taught at the University of Colorado!

"The river model of black holes
Andrew J. S. Hamilton∗ and Jason P. Lisle
JILA and Dept. Astrophysical & Planetary Sciences,
Box 440, U. Colorado, Boulder CO 80309, USA

This paper presents an under-appreciated way to conceptualize
stationary black holes, which we
call the river model. The river model is mathematically sound, yet
simple enough that the basic
picture can be understood by non-experts. In the river model, space
itself flows like a river through
a flat background, while objects move through the river according to
the rules of special relativity.
In a spherical black hole, the river of space falls into the black
hole at the Newtonian escape velocity,
hitting the speed of light at the horizon. Inside the horizon, the
river flows inward faster than light,
carrying everything with it. We show that the river model works also
for rotating (Kerr-Newman)
black holes, though with a surprising twist. As in the spherical case,
the river of space can be
regarded as moving through a flat background. However, the river does
not spiral inward, as one
might have anticipated, but rather falls inward with no azimuthal
swirl at all. Instead, the river
has at each point not only a velocity but also a rotation, or twist.
That is, the river has a Lorentz
structure, characterized by six numbers (velocity and rotation), not
just three (velocity). As an
object moves through the river, it changes its velocity and rotation
in response to tidal changes in
the velocity and twist of the river along its path. An explicit
expression is given for the river field,
a six-component bivector field that encodes the velocity and twist of
the river at each point, and
that encapsulates all the properties of a stationary rotating black
hole."

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0411/0411060v2.pdf

Double-A

On Apr 21, 7:37Â*am, Double-A wrote:

"The river model of black holes
Andrew J. S. Hamilton∗ and Jason P. Lisle
JILA and Dept. Astrophysical & Planetary Sciences,
Box 440, U. Colorado, Boulder CO 80309, USA

This paper presents an under-appreciated way to conceptualize
stationary black holes, which we
call the river model.

Hmm. Most hinteresting. But the flow or "river" model is a no brainer
and always has been. What IS amazing is that it's being given any
degree of credance in a mainstream venue. But notice that it's being
carefully couched as an analogy, a non-literal but "heuristic" way of
conceptualizing.

Notice one primary tenet of the model:

"This novel point of view leads to a different notion of what is meant
by the flat background space through which the river flows and
twists."

They don't seem to 'get' the concept that the "flat background space"
IS, literally, what flows and twists. This requires an accounting of
how the river manages to flow and twist *without spiraling*. Thus the
complicated and convoluted description of "flowing and twisting yet
not spiraling".. while a far simpler and straightforward illustration
of flow into a rotating BH is shown he
http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot...ang/page3.html

But it's refreshing and surprizing that the model, albeit as an
analogy, is being discussed at all in any mainstream setting. It WOULD
be interesting though, to hear how the "analogy" is able to
*literally* crush massive stars down to a BH. Maybe DDuckie can recite
how this is accomplished. :-)

oc

On Apr 21, 9:03Â*am, oldcoot wrote:
On Apr 21, 7:37Â*am, Double-A wrote:

"The river model of black holes
Andrew J. S. Hamilton∗ and Jason P. Lisle
JILA and Dept. Astrophysical & Planetary Sciences,
Box 440, U. Colorado, Boulder CO 80309, USA

This paper presents an under-appreciated way to conceptualize
stationary black holes, which we
call the river model.

Hmm. Most hinteresting. But the flow or "river" model is a no brainer
and always has been. What IS amazing is that it's being given any
degree of credance in a mainstream venue. But notice that it's being
carefully couched as an analogy, a non-literal but "heuristic" way of
conceptualizing.


Well, fact is that every description I have heard in relativity,
except for the equations themselves, are when push comes to shove
admitted to be analogies.


Notice one primary tenet of the model:

"This novel point of view leads to a different notion of what is meant
by the flat background space through which the river flows and
twists."

They don't seem to 'get' the concept that the "flat background space"
IS, literally, what flows and twists. This requires an accounting of
how the river manages to flow and twist *without spiraling*. Thus the
complicated and convoluted description of "flowing and twisting yet
not spiraling".. while a far simpler and straightforward illustration
of flow into a rotating BH is shown hehttp://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot...ang/page3.html


I think that in GR they are always implicitly measuring against a
Euclidean flat background space. If they used the space described by
GR, they couldn't talk about the radius of a black hole. It would be
infinitely large.


But it's refreshing and surprizing that the model, albeit as an
analogy, is being discussed at all in any mainstream setting. It WOULD
be interesting though, to hear how the "analogy" is able to
*literally* crush massive stars down to a BH. Maybe DDuckie can recite
how this is accomplished. Â*:-)

oc


Well, it may not be Wolter's theory, but at least "it flows"!

Double-A

On Apr 21, 11:21 am, Double-A wrote:

Well, it may not be Wolter's theory, but at least "it flows"!

Yeah, and no doubt you'll be hearing from the 'pit yorkie' contingent
if you haven't already, yip-yammering about "where does it flow to?"..
to which the rejoinder is "where does the BB 'come from'?" oc

In article .com,
Double-A wrote:


http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/gr-qc/pdf/0411/0411060v2.pdf

Double-A


Congrats. Its a LIMITED model.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

In article .com,
oldcoot wrote:

But it's refreshing and surprizing that the model, albeit as an
analogy, is being discussed at all in any mainstream setting. It WOULD
be interesting though, to hear how the "analogy" is able to
*literally* crush massive stars down to a BH. Maybe DDuckie can recite
how this is accomplished. :-)


Its an analogy and doesn't seek to surplant the model of gravity introduced by GR.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

In article om,
Double-A wrote:


But it's refreshing and surprizing that the model, albeit as an
analogy, is being discussed at all in any mainstream setting. It WOULD
be interesting though, to hear how the "analogy" is able to
*literally* crush massive stars down to a BH. Maybe DDuckie can recite
how this is accomplished. Ý:-)

oc


Well, it may not be Wolter's theory, but at least "it flows"!

Double-A


Its an analogy for one particular case, and no one is saying it is anything but. Its actually quite an old idea.

Example:

http://www.astroh.org/phys527/proj.htm

"The river model for black holes is a conceptual yet mathematically sound
picture to help one understand black holes. Usually we think of gravity pulling
someone through space to the black hole singularity. Here, we instead think of
it as someone sitting motionless in space, and it is space itself that is
falling into the singularity. "

Note: MODEL

http://www.aas.org/publications/baas...aas204/616.htm

58.04] The river model of black holes
A. J. S. Hamilton, J. P. Lisle (JILA & APS, U. Colorado)
The river model provides a conceptually simple yet mathematically sound picture
of stationary black holes that can be understood by students at all levels. The
model makes an excellent subject for an in class project. In the river model,
space itself flows like a river through a flat background, while objects move
through the river according to the rules of special relativity. In a spherical
black hole, the river of space falls into the black hole at the Newtonian
escape velocity, hitting the speed of light at the horizon. Inside the horizon,
the river flows inward faster than light, carrying everything with it.
The river model works also for rotating (Kerr-Newman) black holes, though with
a surprising twist. As in the spherical case, the river of space can be
regarded as moving through a flat background. However, the river does not
spiral inward, as one might have anticipated, but rather falls inward with no
azimuthal swirl at all. Instead, the river has at each point not only a
velocity but also a rotation, or twist. That is, the river has a Lorentz
structure, characterized by six numbers (velocity and rotation), not just three
(velocity). As an object moves through the river, it changes its velocity and
rotation in response to tidal changes in the velocity and twist of the river
along its path.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

In article . com,
oldcoot wrote:

On Apr 21, 11:21 am, Double-A wrote:

Well, it may not be Wolter's theory, but at least "it flows"!

Yeah, and no doubt you'll be hearing from the 'pit yorkie' contingent
if you haven't already, yip-yammering about "where does it flow to?"..
to which the rejoinder is "where does the BB 'come from'?" oc


The BB is not a part of GR.

http://www.citebase.org/abstract?id=...r-qc%2F0411060

This paper presents an under-appreciated way to conceptualize stationary black
holes, which we call the river model. The river model is mathematically sound,
yet simple enough that the basic picture can be understood by non-experts.
%that can by understood by non-experts. In the river model, space itself flows
like a river through a flat background, while objects move through the river
according to the rules of special relativity. In a spherical black hole, the
river of space falls into the black hole at the Newtonian escape velocity,
hitting the speed of light at the horizon. Inside the horizon, the river flows
inward faster than light, carrying everything with it. We show that the river
model works also for rotating (Kerr-Newman) black holes, though with a
surprising twist. As in the spherical case, the river of space can be regarded
as moving through a flat background. However, the river does not spiral inward,
as one might have anticipated, but rather falls inward with no azimuthal swirl
at all. Instead, the river has at each point not only a velocity but also a
rotation, or twist. That is, the river has a Lorentz structure, characterized
by six numbers (velocity and rotation), not just three (velocity). As an object
moves through the river, it changes its velocity and rotation in response to
tidal changes in the velocity and twist of the river along its path. An
explicit expression is given for the river field, a six-component bivector
field that encodes the velocity and twist of the river at each point, and that
encapsulates all the properties of a stationary rotating black hole.
Comment: 16 pages, 4 figures. The introduction now refers to the paper of Unruh
(1981) and the extensive work on analog black holes that it spawned. Thanks to
many readers for feedback that called attention to our omissions. Submitted to
the American Journal of Physics

Its a model for BH's ONLY. Point out to anywhere where it tries to generalise
this to gravity.

Physics is full of analogies.

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).

nightbat

Double-A wrote:

On Apr 21, 9:03 am, oldcoot wrote:

On Apr 21, 7:37 am, Double-A wrote:


"The river model of black holes
Andrew J. S. Hamilton∗ and Jason P. Lisle
JILA and Dept. Astrophysical & Planetary Sciences,
Box 440, U. Colorado, Boulder CO 80309, USA

This paper presents an under-appreciated way to conceptualize
stationary black holes, which we
call the river model.

Hmm. Most hinteresting. But the flow or "river" model is a no brainer
and always has been. What IS amazing is that it's being given any
degree of credance in a mainstream venue. But notice that it's being
carefully couched as an analogy, a non-literal but "heuristic" way of
conceptualizing.



Well, fact is that every description I have heard in relativity,
except for the equations themselves, are when push comes to shove
admitted to be analogies.



Notice one primary tenet of the model:

"This novel point of view leads to a different notion of what is meant
by the flat background space through which the river flows and
twists."

They don't seem to 'get' the concept that the "flat background space"
IS, literally, what flows and twists. This requires an accounting of
how the river manages to flow and twist *without spiraling*. Thus the
complicated and convoluted description of "flowing and twisting yet
not spiraling".. while a far simpler and straightforward illustration
of flow into a rotating BH is shown hehttp://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot...ang/page3.html



I think that in GR they are always implicitly measuring against a
Euclidean flat background space. If they used the space described by
GR, they couldn't talk about the radius of a black hole. It would be
infinitely large.



But it's refreshing and surprizing that the model, albeit as an
analogy, is being discussed at all in any mainstream setting. It WOULD
be interesting though, to hear how the "analogy" is able to
*literally* crush massive stars down to a BH. Maybe DDuckie can recite
how this is accomplished. :-)

oc

Commander Double-A

Well, it may not be Wolter's theory, but at least "it flows"!

Double-A

nightbat

Correct Commander, it (SFT) belongs to all as first presented
via the profound Earth Science Team Officers. Per Officer Oc for Wolter,
Officer Bert, Officer nightbat, etc, etc, and other profound deep
theorists. Remember nightbat law---the field is reciprocal unto itself.

ponder on,
the nightbat

In article ,
nightbat wrote:

nightbat

Correct Commander, it (SFT) belongs to all as first presented
via the profound Earth Science Team Officers. Per Officer Oc for Wolter,
Officer Bert, Officer nightbat, etc, etc, and other profound deep
theorists. Remember nightbat law---the field is reciprocal unto itself.


Ah - so plagarism is perfectly acceptable then?

--
Sacred keeper of the Hollow Sphere, and the space within the Coffee Boy
singularity.

COOSN-174-07-82116: alt.astronomy's favourite poster (from a survey taken
of the saucerhead high command).