Re: A partial black hole?

On 28 veebr, 09:03, Erik Max Francis <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Crown-Horned Snorkack wrote:
> > On 26 veebr, 23:27, Erik Max Francis <m...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >> Crown-Horned Snorkack wrote:
> >>> Material captured along the equatorial plane naturally falls to
> >>> singularity. But material falling along the axis cannot fall to
> >>> singularity because of axial symmetry.
> >>>>  There is no internal structure,
> >>> There is. The circular singularity and internal horizons to begin
> >>> with.
> >> You're talking about a Kerr black hole.  I was talking about a
> >> Schwarzschild black hole.  Not that the Kerr geometry really changes
> >> anything, since anything falling through the ring singularity _still_
> >> experiences infinite blue****fting, so is still utterly destroyed.
> >> You're nitpicking a point that is immaterial to the point that we are
> >> making, which is this:  If you fall inside the event horizon of a
black
> >> hole, you will be rapidly and utterly destroyed.
>
> > So, what does an observer approaching a Cauchy horizon see? Tidal
> > forces stay finite!
>
> We're not talking about Cauchy horizons, we're talking about event
> horizons around black holes.  And, psst, tidal forces stay finite around
> event horizons, too.  Hint:  Even event horizons are one-way barriers,
> not two-way barriers.
>
If an extended material object drops into a Schwarzschild black hole,
is it destroyed before crossing the event horizon, or before hitting
singularity and possibly after crossing event horizon?

> > Then what happens when the event horizon of a black hole enters
> > ergosphere of another black hole?
>
> You get one, larger, black hole, which all the particles within each
> horizon end up destroyed in at its singularity (or near it, for
> ring-shaped singularities).
>