Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T03:44:36.005Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

“Weak” Cosmic Censorship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Robert M. Wald*
Affiliation:
University of Chicago
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

It is known from the singularity theorems of general relativity (see Hawking and Ellis, 1973) that, under a variety of circumstances, solutions to Einstein's equation with physically reasonable matter must develop singularities. In particular, for a sufficiently compacted body, trapped surfaces must be present (Schoen and Yau, 1983), and collapse to a singularity must occur. Of crucial importance for the theory of gravitational collapse is the issue of the nature of the final state resulting from such a coUapse. The idea that physically realistic gravitational collapse always results in a black hole-so that no “naked singularities”, visible to a distant observer, can occur-was first conjectured by Penrose (1969), although it had been implicitly assumed in many discussions and analyses prior to that time.

Type
Part VI: Cosmic Censorship
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Footnotes

1

This research was supported in part by NSF grant PHY89-18388 and PHY92-20644 to the University of Chicago.

References

Apostolatos, T. A. and Thome, K. S. (1992), Physical Review D 46: 2435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christodoulou, D. (1993), Annals of Mathematics (in press).Google Scholar
Christodoulou, D. and Klainerrnan (1993), S. The Global Nonlinear Stability of Minkowski Space. Princeton: Ann. Math. Studies series, Princeton University Press. (Scheduled to appear in early 1993.)Google Scholar
Christodoulou, D. and Tahvildar-Zadeh, A.S. (1993), Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics (in press) and submitted to Duke Mathematic Journal.Google Scholar
Chrusciel, P. T. (1990), Annals of Physics. 202: 100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawking, S. W. (1975), Communications in Mathematical Physics 43: 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawking, S. W. and Ellis, G. F.R. (1973), The Large Scale Structure of Spacetime. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jang, P. S. and Wald, R. M. (1977),Journal of Mathematical Physics 18: 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, B. S. and Wald, R. M. (1987), Classical Quantum Gravity 4: 893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kodama, H. (1979), Progress in Theoretical Physics 62: 1434.Google Scholar
Misner, C. W., Thome, K. S. and Wheeler, J. A. (1973), Gravitation. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Penrose, R. (1969), Revistas del Nuovo Cimento 1: 252.Google Scholar
Penrose, R. (1979), in General Relativity, an Einstein Centennary Survey, S.W. Hawking and W. Israel (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Price, R. (1972), Physieal Review D 5: 2419 and 2439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoen, R. and Yau, S.-T. (1983), Communications in Mathematieal Physics 90: 575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapiro, S. and Teukolsky, S. A. (1991), Physieal Review Letters 66: 994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thome, K. S. (1972), in Magic Without Magic: John Archibald Wheeler, J. Klauder (ed.). San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
Wald, R. M. (1974), Annals of Physies 82: 548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wald, R. M. (1984a), General Relativity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wald, R. M. (1984b), in Quantum Theory of Gravity, S.M. Christensen (ed.). Bristol: Adam Hilger Press.Google Scholar
Wald, R. M. and Iyer, V. (1991), Physical Review D 44: 3719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiting, B. F. (1989), Journal of Mathematieal Physics 30: 1301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar