Quote:
Originally Posted by modest
Clocks at the center of a collapsing star would tick slower than clocks on the surface, and clocks at the surface would again tick slower than clocks further out.
~modest
|
I disagree with your conclusion that the clocks would tick slower on a surface of a collapsing star than the ones further out because the gravitational force and therefore the time dilation would be strongest at it' surface. Both the clocks*at the center and at an infinite distance would slow to a complete stop relative to the surface of a mass as it collapsed through its event horizon because relativity tells us that the differential gravitational forces they would experience at those points in space would be infinite.
However, the contraction is not related to the time dilation between the reference frames on its surface and an external one. It is related to the fact that Einstein's theories indicate that the contraction of a stars surface must be measured relative to the external reference frames in which it is contracting. But as mentioned earlier Einstein's theories indicate time would become infinitely dilated or stop in the reference frames that were at its center or at an infinite from a collapsing star as it nears its critical circumference. Therefore, because motion is not possible in a reference frame or an environment where time has stopped, the collapse of a star's surface cannot continue beyond the critical circumference.
This contradicts the assumption that a star can continue to collapse beyond its critical circumference to form an event horizon.
A more serious and what I believe to be a fatal flaw in the argument for the existence of an event horizon is the fact that the laws of physics for those on a surface of a collapsing star as it passed through an event horizon would be different than for those that are not. The laws of motion would not apply to either of thoes reference fames relative to the other because each would view time in the others to have stopped.
