Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-04T08:00:13.441Z 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

Extract

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

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

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