• 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

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,037 questions , 2,191 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,706 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
816 active unimported users
More ...

  What is the surface area of a gravitating body of mass M and radius R?

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

The normal surface area of a sphere is \(4\pi R^2\)but this is for a Euclidian 3 space. However around a gravitating body of mass M space-time has curvature. The metric of space becomes progressively more disturbed closer to such an object. Light cones are tipped more and more with proximity along radial lines. Tangential shortest paths become curves.

Because of curvature the volume of the sun is about 6 earth volumes larger than the Euclidian volume equation would predict.

I'm aware of the Schwarzschild metric and one could integrate it along a path of constant R to determine the proper circumference. But I'm not sure how that should be used to evaluate the surface area at radius R, maybe this is just a double integral over azimuth and elevation (with a coordinate system correction)?

In addition, the calculation of the surface area of the event horizon of a black hole seems to be repeatedly presented as though it is consistent with using the standard formula for spherical surface area which makes no sense to me, especially for small black holes where there are expected to be huge tidal forces just outside the event horizon.

In addition, should the radius / circumference / area / volume for a large star or black hole be based on proper distances or distances from the point of view of an observer at infinity, from the perspective of calculating other physics such as internal processes, thermodynamics, entropy, or black body radiation? 

Closed as per community consensus as the post is not graduate-level
asked Apr 30, 2018 in Closed Questions by robotbugs (0 points) [ revision history ]
recategorized Apr 30, 2018 by Dilaton

not graduate+ level. Users with 500+ reputation may vote here to close. 

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

Your rights