• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

204 submissions , 162 unreviewed
5,030 questions , 2,184 unanswered
5,344 answers , 22,705 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
816 active unimported users
More ...

  How can an external observer explain the gamma ray burst of two merging black holes if he never sees them merging due to time dilation?

+ 0 like - 2 dislike

 Let us assume two black holes moving in direct collision course.  From far away, due to time dilation, an external observer would  perceive the relative motion of the two black holes slow down and asymptotically freeze before the two event horizons touch. However, we assume that the merge of two black holes will result in a gamma ray burst, as perceived by an external observer. Aren't these two notions contradictory?

Closed as per community consensus as the post is unclear
asked Sep 6, 2015 in Closed Questions by wolphram.jonny (-10 points) [ revision history ]
recategorized Sep 7, 2015 by Dilaton

Voting to close as unclear.

Too many misconceptions.
1a) Horizon: it is ill-defined in wild dynamical situations such as a BH merger, see quasi-local horizons.
1b) Horizon: an observer at infinity does not "see" the horizon, he sees a shadow instead, which is larger than the horizon. Considering also 1a), you simply have to compute what happens on a case-to-case basis.
2) Gamma-ray bursts: these are generally not expected to emerge from "bare" black hole mergers. The source of radiation is usually assumed to be matter outside a black hole (its horizon).

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights