Quantcast
  • 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.

News

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

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

174 submissions , 137 unreviewed
4,308 questions , 1,640 unanswered
5,089 answers , 21,602 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
635 active unimported users
More ...

  Naked Singularity and AdS/CFT

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
103 views

I am a bit confused about the status of naked singularities that appear in black hole physics and more so in the context of AdS/CFT. Here is what I know about this in brief.

For a charged Reissner-Nordstrom (RN) black hole naked singularities appear for $Q \gt M $, where $Q$ is the total charge and $M$ is the mass of the black hole. They are valid solutions to Einstein's equations. But due to some 'physical' reasons people don't like them much. Because if they are not covered by 'horizons' observers can interact/communicate with them. Even there exists 'cosmic censorship conjecture' (which is not a theorem as the name suggests) that tells us singularities must be 'covered' by horizons. This conjecture has been shown to hold under some 'reasonable assumptions'.

I have the following confusions :

  1. How seriously should we take the cosmic censorship conjecture? By this what I mean is these are all classical concepts and the full quantum theory of gravity is supposed to resolve the singularity. Then is not it something put in by hand to get rid of the singularity which might be due to just incompleteness of classical theory?

  2. Is there something like some artificial infinitely rigid wall that people have used to avoid interaction/communication of observers with the singularity.

  3. Finally, and most importantly, what is the status of these type of singularities in AdS/CFT set ups? I am not aware if they are used in these type of applications . Some references will be highly appreciated. I recently found this paper where the authors take $M=0$ limit of RN AdS black hole and claim this to be dual to the confinement phase with quark matters (or, hadronic phase). I have no idea how well established/accepted this is though.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-10-28 21:39 (UTC), posted by SE-user pinu
asked Oct 28, 2015 in Theoretical Physics by Physics Moron (285 points) [ no revision ]
This might help answer the 3rd question: physics.stackexchange.com/questions/156756/…

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-10-28 21:39 (UTC), posted by SE-user bruce smitherson
@brucesmitherson thanks for your comment. As far as I see those are all BHs with event horizon. But I am interested mainly in BHs without horizon.

This post imported from StackExchange Physics at 2015-10-28 21:39 (UTC), posted by SE-user pinu

Please log in or register to answer this question.





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

Your rights
...