1

Black Holes
in General Relativity

Nathalie Deruelle

Six Lectures

CEA, January-February 2009

 2

CEA-DIRECTION DES SCIENCES DE LA MATIÈRE

I NSTITUT DE P HYSIQUE T HÉORIQUE

UNITÉ DE RECHERCHE ASSOCIÉE AU CNRS

COURS DE PHYSIQUE THÉORIQUE DE L'IPHT, ANNÉE 2008-2009

Organisé en commun avec l'Ecole Doctorale de Physique de la Région Parisienne (ED 107)

Black Holes in General Relativity Nathalie Deruelle

APC, Université Paris 7

Les vendredis 9/1, 16/1, 23/1, 30/1, 6/2 et 13/2/2009.

1 – From Schwarzschild to Kerr: the development of a concept

2 – The geometry of black holes

3 – The energetics of black holes

4 – Black holes and astrophysics

5 – Hawking's radiation and black hole thermodynamics

6 – Hairy and higher-dimensional black holes

John Archibald Wheeler

Horaires : les vendredis de 10h15 à 12h15.
Lieu : IPhT, CEA Saclay, Orme des Merisiers, Bât. 774, p.1A Salle C. Itzykson.
Accès : Par lignes de bus publiques (269.02 et 91.06) ou
(1912-2008)
- navettes CEA: RER B Le Guichet vers CEA Orme Bât. 774, toutes les 15min de 8h30 à 9h45;
- navette CEA: CEA Orme Bât. 774 vers RER B Le Guichet à 12h36.

Renseignements : http://ipht.cea.fr ou [email protected]

–
who coined the word
“Black Hole” in 1967
 3

Lecture One

From Schwarzschild to Oppenheimer :

the DEVELOPMENT of a CONCEPT

References

Einstein et la relativité générale, Jean Eisenstaedt, Cnrs-Eds, 2002

English translation : Oxford and Princeton U-Press, 2006

Black holes and time warps, Kip Thorne, Norton Publ., 1994

Dark stars : the evolution of an idea, Werner Israel

in 300 years of Gravitation, CUP, 1987
 4

Prehistory
John Michell (1783), Pierre-Simon de Laplace (1796), Robert Blair (1786)

Michell, 1724-1793 Laplace, 1749-1827 Blair, 1748-1828

see Jean Eisenstaedt, “Avant Einstein”, Seuil, 2005

 5

(box1.) Newtonian “Dark bodies”

F = mina , F = −mgrav ∇U , U = − GM r , min = mgrav

2GM L2
hence 2
ṙ = 2E + r − r2 , φ̇ = rL2 (1)

2GM
• escape velocity is c if r= c2
(E = 0, L = 0 in (1))
(Michell, Laplace)

p
• deviation of “light” : r= 1+e cos φ with velocity c at r = rmin :
rmin c2
∆φ = 2(φ∞ − π/2) ; cos φ∞ = −1/e ; 1+e= GM
if e  1 : ∆φ ≈ c2GM
2r (Soldner, 1801)
min

• “collapse” : L = 0, E = GM
r0 in (1) ; hence :
r0
p r0 r0 π
p r0
t = 2 2GM (η + sin η) ; r = 2 (1 + cos η) ; and : tcollapse = 2 r0 2GM
 6

All forgotten for 150 years

Revived by Oliver Lodge (1921) and Arthur Eddington (1924)

Lodge, 1851-1940 Eddington, 1882-1944

“M.T.W.” and Hawking-Ellis textbooks (1973); Gibbons/Schaffer (1979)
reason : Dark Bodies have nothing much to do with Black holes...
 7

Alain Riazuelo (2007) A Modern View of a Black Hole

 8

Fifty-odd years of struggle

Early years of discoveries and debates
1915 : Einstein’s equations of General Relativity
1916 : Schwarzschild solution
1922 : Einstein at the Collège de France
Input from Quantum Physics and Cosmology
1930 : Chandrasekhar’s maximum mass of white dwarfs
1932 : Lemaı̂tre’s insights
1939 : Oppenheimer-Snyder’s collapsing star
“Low-water mark” (1940-1955)
Renaissance
1960 : Kruskal diagram
1963 : Discovery of quasars
1963 : Kerr solution
 9

Early Years : Einstein’s equations of General Relativity

November 1915 : Einstein and Hilbert’s “race” to Gµν = κTµν

Albert Einstein (1879-1955) David Hilbert (1862-1943)

see, e.g., Todorov, arXiv:physics/0504179

 10

(box2.) Einstein’s equations in a nutshell (beginning)

Special Relativity
• Space and Time as M4 : ds2 = ηij dX idX j = −dT 2 + dX ~2
• (T, X α) represent a “clock” at rest and “position” in inertial frame S
• X i → X 0i = Λij X j such that ds2 = −dT 02 + dX ~ 02. T 0 : time in S 0
i dX i
• If U ≡ dτ s.t. U iUi = −1, then τ is “proper time” along X i(τ ).
dU i
• equation of motion of a free particle : dτ = 0.

Special Relativity in accelerated frames (X i → xi = xi(X j ))

2 i j ∂X k ∂X l
• ds = `ij dx dx with `ij = ∂xi ∂xj ηkl
direct correspondence between coordinates and clock/position is lost
D̃ui dui
• eom of a free particle : dτ = 0 ⇐⇒ dτ + Γ̃ijk uj uk = 0
∂xi j
i
where u ≡ ∂X j
Uand Γ̃ijk = 21 `ip(∂j `kp + ∂k `pj − ∂p`jk )
inertial accelerations are “encoded” in the “Christoffel symbols” Γ̃ijk
 11

(box2.) Einstein’s equations in a nutshell (continued)

Principle of equivalence
• minertial = mgravitational :
all particles fall the same way in a gravitational field
just like free particles “fall” the same way in an accelerated frame
hence : gravity is inertia (“Weak equivalence principle”, 1907).
Constant acceleration = Constant gravitational field ; hence :
`00 ≡ g00 = − (1 + 2U ) where U = − GM r .
• Source of gravitational field is the stress-energy tensor of matter
e.g. Tij = ( + p)uiuj + pgij
where  and p are its energy density and pressure
as measured in a local inertial frame (“Einstein equivalence principle”)
• gravity cannot be globally “effaced”, that is :
there is no global coordinate transformation which turns gij into ηij
hence : spacetime must be curved (1912)
 12

The Mathematicians of curved spaces

Bernhard Riemann (1826-1866) ; Gregorio Ricci Curbastro (1853-1925) ;

Tullio Levi-Civita (1873-1941) ; Marcel Grossmann (1878-1936)

 13

(box2.) Einstein’s equations in a nutshell (continued)

Riemannian geometry
• Spacetime as an ensemble of points labelled by 4 coordinates xi.
At each point one can define vectors ti, forms ti, tensors tij etc
0i
which transform as ti → t0i = ∂x
∂x j t j
etc when xi
→ x0i

• One introduces a “connexion”

that is 40 (symmetric) functions Γijk (xl) which define
Dui dui dxi
“autoparallels” : dτ = 0 ⇐⇒ dτ +Γijk uj uk i
= 0 where u ≡ dτ
and “parallel transport” of tensors from point to point : Dk tij = 0...
• One also introduces a “metric”
l
that isn10o(symmetric) functions
n ogij (x ) which define “geodesics”
dui i j k i 1 ip
dτ + jk u u = 0 where jk = 2 g (∂j gkp + ∂k gpj − ∂p gjk )
• Levi-Civita
n oconnexion : autoparallels=geodesics, that is
Γijk ≡ ijk
 14

(box2.) Einstein’s equations in a nutshell (end)

The Riemann tensor and Bianchi identities

• The Riemann tensor Rjkl i
≡ ∂k Γijl − ∂lΓijk + Γipk Γpjl − ΓiplΓpjk
if is zero in one coordinate system, is zero in all, and V4 = M4
if not, spacetime is “curved”
p
• Ricci tensor : Rij ≡ Ripj ; scalar curvature R ≡ g ij Rij
• Einstein’s tensor : Gij ≡ Rij − 12 gij R
• Bianchi identity : DiGij ≡ 0 (1902)
(unknown to Hilbert and Einstein in 1915)

Einstein’s equations
8πG
Gij = κ Tij with κ ≡ c4
= 8π

25 November 1915
 15

Early Years : The Schwarzschild solution

Winter 1915-1916

dx22
 
ds2 = −f0dx20+f1dx21+f2 + (1 − x22)dx23
1− x22
√
fi = fi(x1) , f0f1f22 =1 ( −g = 1)
Impose asymptotical flatness and continuity of fi ;
introduce “auxiliary quantity” r = (3x1 + α3)1/3,
(keeping x1 = 0 as the “center”), and obtain
1
ds2 = − (1 − α/r) dt2 + 1−α/r dr2 + r2dΩ2
Karl Schwarzschild Newtonian limit : α = 2GM (α = 3kms)
c2
(1873-1916) (Einstein annoyed : sol. is “unMachian” =⇒ Λ!)
 16

(box3.) First exact solutions

staticity and spherical symmetry : exists coordinates (t, r, θ, φ) such that
ds2 = −eν(r)dt2 − eλ(r)dr2 + r2(dθ2 + sin2 θdφ2) (Droste, 1916)
e ν 
−λ 0 e λ
−λ ν0


G00 = r2 r(1 − e ) , Grr = − r2 1 − e + r
−λ 2m GM
ν


• Schwarzschild : Gij = 0 hence : e = e = 1 − r m ≡ c2
(other equations redundant because of Bianchi’s identities.)
2
• de Sitter (1917) : Gij = Λgij hence : eν = e−λ = 1 − Λr3
Λr 2
ν −λ 2m
p
Kottler (1918) : e = e = 1 − r − 3 , rdeSitter = Λ/3
• Reissner (1916) and Nordström (1918) : Gij = κ Tij
with Tij = Fik Fj k − 14 ηij FklF kl
and Fij = ∂iAj − ∂j Ai with A0 = Φ(r) ; Aα = 0
2
 
q q
p
hence : Φ = r and eν = e−λ = 1− 2m r + r2 r± = m ± m2 − q 2
(NB : q/m ' 2 × 1021 for an electron)
 17

Some exact solution pioneers

1917 1916 1918

Willem de Sitter Hans Reissner Gunnar Nordström
(1872-1934) (1874-1967) (1881-1923)
 18

(box4.) Schwarzschild interior solution

2
dr
Einstein’s EOM : Gij = 8πTij with ds2 = −e2U (r)dt2 + 1−2m(r)/r +r2dΩ2
where Tij = ( + p)uiuj + pgij and uiui = −1
and Bianchi identities : DiT ij = 0 yield
dm dU 1 m dp dU
2


dr = 4πr  , dr = 1−2m/r r 2 + 4πpr , dr = −( + p) dr
(under this form : Tolman ; Oppenheimer-Volkoff, 1939)
if  = Const. the solution is (Schwarzschild, 1916) :
mr 2 GM
m(r) = R3
; m≡ c2
;
(M is the mass of the star, R its radius)
q q q 
2 2m −U
eU (r) = 32 1 − 2m
R − 1
2 1 − 2mr
R 3 and p(r) =  1 − R e −1
 q 
central pressure p(0) = √  1 − 1 − 2mR is finite if R > 9m
4
3 1−2m/R

since m = 1.5km and R = 7 × 105kms... : r = 2m is “unphysical”.

 19

Early Years : The Schwarzschild “singularity”

Geodesics “avoid” r = 2m...
Schwarzschild (1915); Johannes Droste (1916) ; Max von Laue (1921) ;
C. de Jans (1923) ; Yusuke Hagihara (1931)...

(from J. Eisenstaedt, Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 1987)

 20

(box5.) Schwarzschild geodesics

ds2 = −(1 − 2m/r)dt2 + dr2/(1 − 2m/r) + r2(dθ2 + sin2 θdφ2)
i i dxi
particle wordline : x = x(τ ) ; 4-velocity: u ≡ dτ , ui ≡ gij uj .
uk ul
Geodesic equation : Dudτ
i
= 0 ⇐⇒ dui
dτ = 2 ∂i gkl .
2 dφ 2m dt


hence r dτ = L , 1 − r dτ = E ; (L and E : integration constants) 
dr 2 2
= E 2 − Ueff with Ueff = 1 − 2m  + Lr2 .



gij uiuj = − =⇒ dτ r

2
 2
dr
/ dφ


Trajectories (Binet method) : express dτ dτ in terms of u ≡ 1/r :
 2
du E 2 −1 2m 2 3
dφ = L 2 + L2 u − u + 2mu (Einstein 1915)

r = 2m is a “magic circle” which cannot be crossed. (Eddington, 1924)

dr 2
N.B. : Radial geodesic equation : dτ = E 2 − 1 + 2m


r
same as in Newtonian gravity with t → τ (noticed in 1936, Drumeaux)
 21

The Flamm diagram : “conforts” the impenetrability of r = 2m

Ludwig Flamm (1916) Jean Becquerel (1923)

(from J. Eisenstaedt, Archive for History of Exact Sciences, 1982)

 22

(box6.) Embedding of Schwarzschild spacetime

r > R : ds2 = −(1 − 2m/r)dt2 + dr2/(1 − 2m/r) + r2(dθ2 + sin2 θdφ2)
 q q 2
2 3 2m 1 2mr 2 dr 2
r < R : ds = − 2 1 − R − 2 1 − R3 2
dt + 2mr2 + r2dΩ2
1−
R3

2 dr 2 2 2
Sections t = Const and θ = π/2 : dσint= 1−2mr /R2 3 +r dφ
: 2-sphere
2
dσext= dr /(1 − 2m/r) + r2dφ2)
2

Consider the paraboloid : z 2 = 8m(r − 2m) in E3

2
The induced metric on this surface is dσext (for r > 2m !).

Hermann Weyl (1885-1955) introduces

isotropic coordinates (1917) r = r̄(1+m/2r̄)2
 2
1−m/2r̄ m 4


ds = − 1+m/2r̄ dt + 1 + 2r̄ d~x2
2 2

to make clearer the double representation of

r > 2m obtained from the embedding
 23

(Mis)understanding general covariance

Hilbert (1917) : A metric is regular if exists an invertible and bijective
coordinate transformation which makes gij regular...
• Painlevé-Gullstrand (1921)
p coordinates :
ds2 = −(1 − 2m/r)dt̃2 + 2 2m/r drdt̃ − d~ x
p
2
q 
r 1 r/2m−1
t̃ = t + 4m 2m + 2 log r/2m+1
(Authors conclude to the “ambiguity” of the Schwarzschild metric)
• Eddington coordinates (1924) : t̄ = t + 2m log(r/2m − 1)
ds2 = −(1 − 2m/r)dt̄2 + (4m/r)drdt̄ + (1 + 2m/r)dr2 + r2dΩ2
(used to discuss Whitehead theory)
Nobody sees at the time that the metric coefficients no longer diverge...
 24

Early Years : Debates at the Collège de France, April 1922

The closing of an era

Paul Painlevé, Paul Langevin, Jacques Hadamard,

(1863-1933) (1872-1946) (1865-1963)
Théophile de Donder, Marcel Brillouin, Jean Becquerel, Henri Bergson...
 25

Summary of “mental blocks”

1. Schwarzschild interior solution : p(0) is finite if R > 9m/4 > 2m.
Known stars are such that R  9m/4; hence Schwarzschild’s exterior
solution “never” extends to r = 2m. (“Neo-newtonian” bias, Eisenstaedt)
2. Even if one accepts to consider Schwarzschild’s exterior solution up to
r = 2m : a metric coefficient diverges there (“Hadamard catastrophy”),
and must signal a “magic circle” (Eddington), that is, a thin shell of
matter which cannot be crossed (no definition of “singular spacetime”)
3. The embedding of the t = const, θ = π/2 slices of Schwarzschild’s
spacetime in E3 (Flamm diagram) seems to indicate that r < 2m is
unaccessible; and that space may be doubly connected (Weyl)
(no understanding of “maximally extended manifold”)
(for the record : Einstein sails to Japan in December 1922; learns during
the trip that he is awarded the Nobel Prize... but not for Relativity !)
 26

Fifty-odd years of struggle

Early years of discoveries and debates

Input from Quantum Physics and Cosmology

1930 : Chandrasekhar’s maximum mass of white dwarfs
1932 : Lemaı̂tre’s insights
1939 : Oppenheimer-Snyder’s collapsing star

Low-water mark (1940-1955)

Renaissance
 27

Input from Quantum Physics : GR and critical masses

or : beyond the “neo-newtonian” interpretation

Subrahmanyan
Lev Davidovich Landau Robert Oppenheimer
Chandrasekhar
(1908-1968) (1904-1967)
(1910-1995)
 28

(box7). Elementary notion of critical mass

Recall that Schwarzschild’s interior solution for a constant density star

4πR3
implies that p(0) is finite if R > 9m/4 > 2m with m = 3 .

However, instead of concluding, like relativists and astronomers for 25

years, that R “must be” large enough (and “is” for all known stars),

rewrite the inequality as m < √4

9 π

and conclude (with Oppenheimer-Snyder, 1939) that if

 = nuclear ∼ 1015g/cm3

then a star with mass M > 4M is unstable and...

predict gravitational collapse !

(First “mental block” blows up) (for more : see lecture 4)

 29

Input from Cosmology : Crossing “singularities”

Insights from de Sitter’s solution
ds2 = −(1 − Λr2/3)dt2 + dr2/(1 − Λr2/3) + r2(dθ2 + sin2 θdφ2)
• 1917 : Einstein fails to find a coordinate
p transformation which
eliminates the singularity at r = R ≡ 3/Λ. He concludes that
probably there is a shell of matter there.
• 1918 : Felix Klein describes de Sitter’s spacetime as a hyperboloid in
M5 (hence regular everywhere) and writes the metric as
ds2 = −R2dT 2 + R2 cosh2 T dΩ23
Weyl and Einstein object that the coordinate transformation is not
invertible and that the “Klein-de Sitter” spacetime is not stationary.
• 1925 : Lemaı̂tre writes de Sitter’s metric as : ds2 = −dT̄ 2 + e2T̄ /Rd~x2
and notes that it “gives a possible interpretation of the mean receding
motion of spiral nebulae”
 30

box8. Lemaı̂tre coordinates (1932) (beginning)

or : how to describe the collapse of a “nebula” in an expanding universe

• ds2 = −dτ 2 + eλ(ρ,τ )dρ2 + r2(ρ, τ )dΩ22

• “nebula” surface ρ = Const. is a geodesic
• Einstein’s equations Gij = 8πTji
Tττ = (ρ, τ ) (p ≈ 0)
e−λ
Gρ = r (−2ṙ0 + λ̇r0) , Gρρ = ... , Gττ = ...
0

r 02
e = (1+2E(ρ)) , ṙ2 = 2E(ρ) + 2m(ρ)
λ
r
0
4π = rm
0r2 “Tolman-Bondi” (1934,1947)
• Outside nebula  = 0 ; choose E(ρ) = 0
9m 1/3


Georges Lemaı̂tre hence r = 2 (τ0(ρ) − τ ) ; choose τ0 = ρ
(1894-1966) so that
2 2 2mdρ2
3√ 4/3 2
ds = −dτ + 3 √ 2/3 + 2 2m(ρ − τ ) dΩ
[ 2 2m(ρ−τ )]
 31

box8. Lemaı̂tre coordinates (1932) (end)

• aside : All spherically symmetric solutions of Einstein’s vacuum
equations reduce to Schwarzschild’s (Birkhoff theorem, 1923). Hence
Lemaı̂tre’s metric must be Schwarzschild’s in disguise.
• explicit coordinates transformation(Lemaı̂tre,
√ 1932) :
4m
p r r r/2m−1
ρ = t + 3 2m 3 + 2m + 2m log √


r/2m+1
 √ 
p r 1 r/2m−1
τ = t + 4m 2m + 2 log √ (as in Painlevé, 1921)
r/2m+1
3√ 2/3
• hence r = 2 2m(ρ − τ ) and r = 2m is a regular point
“The singularity of the Schwarzschild field then is a fictitious singularity,
analogous to the one appearing on the horizon of the center in the
original form of the De Sitter universe.”
(Second “mental block” blows up) (for more : see lecture 2)
 32

Synthesis : Gravitational collapse

Oppenheimer Snyder paper (1939)

“When all thermonuclear sources of energy are exhausted a sufficiently

heavy star will collapse...the radius of the star approaches asymptotically
its gravitational radius; light from the surface of the star is progressively
reddened, and can escape over a progressively narrower range of angles
... The total time of collapse for an observer comoving with the stellar
matter is finite... An external observer sees the star asymptotically
shrinking to its gravitational radius.”
(Birth date of “black hole” concept)
 33

(box9.) Gravitational redshift of a collapsing star

• radial geodesics (see box5) : (f˙ ≡ dτ

df
, τ being proper time)
q q
1 − 2m 2m 2m 2m


(1) r ṫ = 1 − r0 , (2) ṙ = − r − r0

• motion of collapsing material (see box1)

r0
p r0 r0 π
p r0
τ = 2 2GM (η + sin η) ; r = 2 (1 + cos η) ; and : τcollapse = 2 r0 2GM

• redshift calculation
√
1−2m/r
(a) ∆tem = ∆τem 1−2m/rem0 (from (1))
∆rem
(b) nul geodesics : dr
dt = 1 − 2m
r =⇒ ∆t rec = ∆trec = ∆tem − 1− r2m
p em
(c) ∆rem = −∆τem 2m/rem − 2m/r0 (from (2)), hence :
q q 
∆τrec = q∆τem2m 1 − 2m
r0 + 2m
rem − m
r0 → ∞ when rem → 2m
1− rem
 34

Fifty-odd years of struggle

Early years of discoveries and debates

Input form Quantum Physics and Cosmology

Low-water mark (1940-1955)

Renaissance
 35

Renaissance : Three Leading Figures

John Wheeler Yakov Zel’dovich Dennis Sciama

(1912-2008) (1914-1987) (1926-1999)
 36

Renaissance

1960 : Extension of Schwarzschild spacetime (Kruskal) (see lecture 2)

1963 : Discovery of quasars (see lecture 4)

1963 : Kerr solution (see lecture 3)

Complement to lecture one : Black Hole chronology 1 : up to 1939

 Six Lectures on Black Holes in General Relativity
IPhT-CEA, Saclay, January-February 2009

Nathalie Deruelle

Black Hole Chronology

I. up to 1939
Sources :
–“Einstein et la relativité générale, Jean Eisenstaedt, Cnrs-Eds, 2002
(English translation : Oxford and Princeton U-Press, 2006)
–“Black holes and time warps”, Kip Thorne, Norton Publ., 1994
–“Dark stars” : the evolution of an idea, Werner Israel in 300 years of Gravitation, CUP, 1987
– Wikipedia !

Prehistory
1783 : John Michell (1724-1793) computes the escape velocity of a “particle” of light and introduces the
concept of dark body in Newtonian gravity. “The paper communicated to the Royal Society by Cavendish
on November 27, 1783 (...) caused such a stir in London circles that it overshadowed exciting news coming
from Paris about Coulomb’s electrical experiments” (Israel 1987).
1790 : Pierre Simon de Laplace (1749-1827) reproduces Michell’s results in his first edition of “Système
du Monde” (with no reference to Michell).
1799 : Second edition of Laplace’s “Système du Monde” where the section on dark bodies is reproduced
without changes.
1801 : Johann Georg von Soldner, a German astronomer, calculates light deviation in Newtonian theory.
1801 : Christian Huygens discovers light interferences.
1808 : Third edition of Laplace’s “Système du Monde” : the section on dark bodies is suppressed.

1905-1915
1905 : Albert Einstein (1879-1955) invents Special Relativity.
1907 : “I was sitting in a chair at the patent office in Bern when all of the sudden a thought occurred
to me ; if a person falls freely he will not feel his own weight” (November) ; formulation of the geodesic
principle; prediction of gravitational redshift.
1912 : Einstein in Prague in the Summer; arrives at ETH, Zurich, in August; understands that space-
time must be represented by a curved space (10-16 August).
1915 : Invited by David Hilbert (1862-1943) Einstein gives six lectures at Gottingen in June. in Septem-
ber Arnold Sommerfed writes to Einstein to tell him that Hilbert is working on his theory of gravitation;
November : Einstein and Hilbert exchange postcards about their respective work; Einstein presents four com-
munications to the Berlin Academy, one each Thursday; on November 20th Hilbert presents the “Hilbert
action” at a seminar in Gottingen; on November 25th Einstein communicates the final equations of General
Relativity to the Berlin Academy. (see, e.g., Todorov, arXiv:physics/0504179).
1915 : Karl Schwarzschild (1876-1916), who is on the Russian front, finds (between November 8th and
the end of the year) the “Schwarzschild solution” (in coordinates such that det g=-1 ; however he rewrites

1
its in terms of the standard r coordinates that he calls “auxiliary quantity” (gtt = 1 − 2m/r form). In
the coordinates such that det g=-1 the center is located at r = 2m). He also gives the equation for the
trajectories of test particles (that is, for u(φ) where u = 1/r).

1916-1922
1916 : Einstein acknowledges receiving Schwarzschild’s paper (January 9th) : “I would not have thought
one could find so easily the exact solution to the problem”. January 13th : Einstein presents Schwarzschild’s
solution to the Prussian Academy of Sciences in Berlin.
1916 : In March Schwarzschild finds the interior solution (ρ = Const, still in coordinates such that
det g=-1). He remarks that the “auxiliary quantity” r has a geometrical meaning (radius of the 2-spheres
of symmetry). He notes that the radius R of the star of mass M must be such that R > 9m/4 (where
m ≡ GM/c2 ) for the pressure at the center (r = 0) to remain finite. He gives the numerical values of 2m
for the Sun (3kms) and for 1 gram (1.5 × 10−28 cm). On May 11th Schwarzschild dies from a skin disease
contracted on the front. Einstein presents Schwarzschild’s interior solution to the Academy in June (letter
to Michele Besso).
1916 : in May, Johannes Droste (30 years old, student of Lorentz in Leiden where is also Wilhem de
Sitter) obtains Schwarzschild’s solution without imposing det g=-1 in standard (t, r, θ, φ) coordinates. In
December he defends his thesis (“The field of a single centre in Einstein’s theory of gravitation, and the
motion of a particle in that field”, written in Dutch). He studies geodesics, recovers the equations for the
trajectories (u(φ)) and integrates then in terms of Weiestrass functions. He studies dr/dt and concludes that
r = 2m is never reached. He finds that light follows circular geodesics at r = 3m.
1916 : in September, Ludwig Flamm (in Viena) describes the t = Const, θ = π/2 sections of the
Schwarzschild exterior and interior solution as a paraboloid connected to a 2-phere embedded in E3 . (“Beit-
räge zur Einsteinschen Gravitationstheorie”, Physik Z. 17 (1916) p 448-454).
1916 : Hans Reissner (1874-1923) extends the Schwarzschild solution to the case of a charged mass :
“Über die Eigengravitation des elektrischen Feldes nach Einsteinschen Theorie.” Ann. Phys. 59, 106-120,
1916.
1917 : Einstein writes to Felix Klein to express his dissatisfaction with the Schwarzschild solution which
does not embody Mach’s principle. He modifies his field equations and introduces the “cosmological constant”
Λ (“Kosmologische Betrachtungen zur allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie.” Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss.,
142-152, 1917. Reprinted in English in Lorentz, H. A.; Einstein, A.; Minkowski, H.; and Weyl, H. The
Principle of Relativity: A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity.
New York: Dover, 1952.)
1917 : Hilbert writes (in “Grunlagen der Physik” p 70) : “A line element or a gravitational field gij is
regular at a point if it is possible to introduce by a reversible, one-to-one transformation a coordinate system,
0
such that in this system the corresponding functions gij are regular at that point, i.e. they are continuous
and arbitrarily differentiable at the point and in a neighbourhood of the point and the determinant g 0 is
different from 0”. (quoted by Earman and Eisenstaedt, 1999)
1917 : Willem de Sitter (1872-1934) finds the “de Sitter solution” (gtt = 1 − Λr2 /3) : “On the
Relativity of Inertia: Remarks Concerning Einstein’s Latest Hypothesis.” Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet.
19, 1217-1225, 1917 (and : de Sitter, W. “The Curvature of Space.” Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet. 20,
229-243, 1917. Also : de Sitter, W. Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet. 20, 1309, 1917. and : de Sitter, W.
Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 78, 3, 1917.) NB : de Sitter introduces his solution as an hyperboloid
embedded in M5 (See footnote 23 of Earman and Eisenstaedt 1999). Einstein studies the metric
p under the
form : ds2 = − cos2 (r̄/R)dt2 + dr̄2 + sin2 (r̄/R)dΩ22 (so that Λ/3r = sin(r̄/R) with R ≡ 3/Λ where
p

r is the standard radial coordinate).

p He sees that the origin (r̄ = 0) is a coordinate singularity. He sees
that r̄/R = πR/2 (that is, r = Λ/3) is also a singularity but fails to find a transformation which would
eliminate it (March 1918 in “Kritisches zu einer von Hr De Sitter...”). He concludes “until proof to the
contrary” that de Sitter solution must be regarded as having a genuine singularity and that it corresponds
“to a universe whose matter has been entirely concentrated on the surface r̄ = πR/2...” (quoted by Earman
and Eisenstaedt 1999).
1917 : Hermann Weyl (1885-1955) introduces the isotropic coordinates (so called by Eddington in 1924)
(Annalen der Phyzik 54 p 117-145). He finds that this form makes clearer the double representation of

2
r > 2m in the Flamm diagram. r̄ < m/2 represents, according to him, the interior of the massive point;
r̄ > m/2 the exterior, matter being concentrated on r = 2m. He presents the result in his 1918 book “Raum
Zeit Materie” where he also writes that “the complete realisation of this solution would imply that [...] space
is doubly connected, that is, contains not one but two boundaries accessible at infinity”. Note that this
remark appears only in the first edition of his book. (see J Eisenstaedt, 1982)
1918 : Gunnar Nordström (1881-1923) rediscovers Reissner solution for a charged mass. “On the Energy
of the Gravitational Field in Einstein’s Theory.” Proc. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet. 20, 1238-1245, 1918.
1918 : Felix Klein (1849-1925) (in a letter to Einstein dated 16 June 1918; details published in 1919)
describes the de Sitter solution as a hyperboloid in M5. (This had already been done by de Sitter himself).
He shows that the de Sitter coordinates do not cover the full hyperboloid; and that the full hyperboloid ST
is not stationary; and that the coordinate transformation from the de Sitter coordinates to those covering
the whole hyperboloid are not regular. Einstein dismisses the coordinates which cover the whole hyperboloid
(ds2 = −R2 dT 2 + R2 cosh2 T dΩ23 ) because the metric is no-longer stationary and the metric coefficients are
time dependent. (see Earman and Eisenstaedt 1999).
1918 : Kottler gives the Schwarzschild-de Sitter metric (gtt = 1 − 2m/r + Λr2 /3).
1919 : Hermann Weyl in a correspondence with Felix Klein argues that Klein’s non-stationary hyper-
boloid and de Sitter’s static solution are separated by “an abyss”.
1919 : Arthur Stanley Eddington (1882-1944) measures the deflection of light
1920 : Eddington’s book on GR. “There is a magic circle [r = 2m] which no measurement can bring us
inside. It is not unnatural that we should picture something obstructing our closer approach and say that a
particle of matter is filing up the interior”.
1920 : A. Anderson of University College, Galway speculates in the Philosophical Magazine : “We may
remark, though perhaps the assumption is very violent, that if the mass of the sun were concentrated in a
sphere of diameter 1.47 kms... it [would] be shrouded in darkness”. (quoted by Israel, 1987)
1921 : Wolfgang Pauli (1900-1958) writes a review article on GR (he is 21). He is one of the few to have
a clear idea about the significance of proper time and the distinction between proper and coordinate time.
1921 : Max von Laue studies the Schwarzschild null geodesics (he had shown in 1920 that electromagnetic
waves followed null geodesics). They all “stop”
√ at r = 2m. (He argues that the velocity of light is zero at
r = 2m.) He finds the capture radius b = 3 3m below which all light rays will asymptotically reach r = 3m.
(see Eisenstaedt 1987.)
1921 : Oliver Lodge rediscovers Michell’s and Laplace’s results on dark bodies : He writes “A stellar
system–say a super spiral nebula– of aggregate mass equal to 1015 suns... might have a group radius of 300
parsecs... with a corresponding average density of 10−15 cgs, without much light being able to escape from
it. This does not seem an utterly impossible concentration of matter” and concludes : “In regions where our
ignorance is great, occasional guesses are permissible”(quoted by Israel 1987).
1921 : Paul Painlevé (1863-1933) pand Allvar q coordinates : ds2 = −(1 − 2m/r)dt̃2 +
Gullstrand 
r/2m−1
p r 1
2 2m/r drdt̃ − d~x2 where t̃ = t + 4m 2m + 2 log r/2m+1 . The authors conclude to the “ambigu-
ity” of the Schwarzschild metric. On December 7th Einstein writes to Painlevé to tell him that coordinates
have no physical significance. (Langevin about Painlevé : “Painlevé studied very carefully Einstein’s theory
but, unfortunately, after have written about it”. Allvar Gullstrand : ophtalmologist, Nobel prize 1911 in
physiology; member of the Nobel committee.) p
1922 : Cornelius Lanczos (1993-1974) eliminates the de Sitter singularity at r = Λ/3 by writing
the metric as ds2 = −dt2 + cosh2 HtdΩ23 . He has doubts about the reality of the r = 2m Schwarzschild’s
singularity (that he writes in harmonic coordinates, as de Donder had already done in 1921).
1922 : In April colloquium at the Collège de France where Einstein delivers a series of lectures about GR
(in the audience : Jean Becquerel (who publishes in 1922 the first book in French about GR), Marcel Brillouin,
Elie Cartan, Théophile de Donder, Jacques Hadamard, Paul Langevin, Paul Painlevé, Henri Bergson and
Charles Nordmann–who took notes). Hadamard worries about the gij becoming infinite (the “Hadamard
catastrophy” as Einstein pleasantly puts it). Einstein comes back the following day with Schwarzschild’s
interior solution (that he rederives without mentioning Schwarzschild) and argues, like Schwarzschild in 1916,
that the Hadamard catastrophy at r = 2m cannot occur as the radius of the star must be bigger than 9m/4,
otherwise the pressure at the center becomes infinite. Brillouin will remark, after the colloquium, that the
region r < 2m is unphysical since the roles of t and r are interchanged.

3
 1922 : On his way to Japan (where he arrives in December) Einstein learns that he is awarded the Nobel
prize (but NOT for Relativity, as explicitely stated in the telegram).

1923-1939
1922-1924 : Alexander Friedmann finds the “Friedmann solution”.
1923 : de Jans in Brussels (a student of de Donder) studies the Schwarzschild geodesics and defends his
thesis in 1924. All trajectories terminate at r = 2m. He discovers that everything had already been done by
Droste.
1923 : Birkhoff (a Harvard Mathematician) proves his theorem (suggested by Jebsen in 1921) : The
unique spherically symmetric solution of Einstein’s vacuum equations is Schwarzschild’s (that is : there is a
extra Killing vector field so that the solution for r > 2m is static whatever the (radial) motion of matter).
1923 : new edition of Eddington’s book (“Mathematical theory of relativity” ). He compares the
Schwarzschild and de Sitter “singularities” at r = 2m and r = 1/H and thinks there is a concentration of
matter there. However he also presents Klein’s embedding of de Sitter spacetime as a (regular) hyperboloid in
M5. According to Israel (1987) Eddington on p 121 gives an unorthodox definition of particle density (which
will be at the core of his rejection of the Chandrasekhar mass). Modern view : n is the zero component (in
the rest frame) of the conserved vector nµ . Eddington proposes nm = T (m rest-mass of particles; T trace
of the stress energy tensor). Plainly wrong since implies that the internal energy (nm − T00 ) be 3 times the
pressure, which is too large by a factor 2 in the case of a non-relativistic gas.
1924-26 : Publications of books on Riemannian geometry by Levi-Civita, Elie Cartan, Schouten, Eisen-
hart.
1924 : In the paper “A comparison of Whitehead’s and Einstein’s formulae”, Nature, 2832, Eddington
introduces the “Eddington” coordinates and writes the Schwarzschild metric as ds2 = ds2M4 + (2m/r)(dt −
dr)2 . He does not comment on the fact that the metric coefficients no longer diverge.
1925 : George Lemaı̂tre (1894-1966), in Cambrigde, writes the de Sitter metric as ds2 = −dt̃2 + e2t̃/R d~x2
(a form rediscovered independently by Robertson in 1928). Contrary to Einstein the non-static character of
the line element is taken to speak in favour of it because it “gives a possible interpretation of the mean receding
motion of spiral nebulae”. He finds however that the fact that the spatial sections are flat to be “completely
inadmissible”. In his thesis Lemaı̂tre also studies the Schwarzschild interior solutions (Eddington had told
him that the equation of state p − 3ρ = const was more realistic that ρ = Const). Lemaı̂tre understands
that the minimim radius of a star coming form the limit p(0) → ∞ found by Schwarzschild depends on the
equation of state.
1925 : W.S. Adams at Mount Wilson measures the gravitational redshift at the surface of a white dwarf
(Sirius B). His observations agree with the predictions from GR but both were wrong : his observations, and
the predictions, which both were 5 times too small because of errors on Sirius B mass and radius.
1926 : Eddington publishes “The internal Constitution of stars”. Eddington is the first since the 19th
century to mention Laplace’s “dark bodies”. In this book “he poses the mystery of white dwarfs and attacks
the reality of “BH”” (Thorne p 538)
1926 : Ralph H. Fowler (Cambridge) publishes (10 dec) : “On dense matter” in MNRAS : the pressure
in white dwarfs comes from electron degeneracy.
1927 : Lemaı̂tre, independently of Friedmann, discovers a cosmological solution which starts as the
Einstein static universe and ends up as de Sitter’s.
1928 : Rainich studies gravitational redshifts in Schwarzschild’s spacetime.
1928 : Sommerfeld visits Madras and meets Chandra (who is 17).
1930 : Arthur Milne shows that the zero-point pressure of a degenerate gaz of cold electrons can balance
gravity at a given radius (a decreasing function of the mass) a result that corresponds well to the actual size
of white dwarfs.
1929 : (and 1930). Edmund C. Stoner (Leeds, best known for application of Fermi-Dirac statistics to
para and ferro-magnetism) finds that the density of white dwarfs goes like the square of the mass and finds
a density an order of magnitude larger than observed. Wilhem Anderson of Tartu Estonia tells him that the
electrons are relativistic and that the density is considerably lower. In fact Anderson finds a critical mass
(when density becomes infinite) but does not comment on this. Stoner gives then what is now known as the

4
Anderson-Stoner equation of state for white dwarfs (that is, the relativistic equation of state for a degenerate
(zero temperature) electron gas with the expression for the adiabatic index γ(ρ) which varies from 5/3 (no
relativistic limit) to 4/3). Stoner confirms the existence of a limiting mass (1.7 solar mass); no comments
however, apart from remarking that known white dwarf masses are below this value. (NB : Stars idealized
as constant density.) (see Israel 1987 and Thorne.)
1930 : Subramanyan Chandrasekhar (1910-1995) embarks a steamer to go to England in July (he is 19).
During the 18 day trip he finds (independently from Stoner and simultaneously) that the adiabatic index
of a white dwarf (sustained by electron degeneracy) is 5/3 in a Newtonian description. He then finds that
the speed of electons is 0.57 c. Hence Special Relativity is required. He takes SR into account by saying
that the electrons behave as if their mass was larger than their rest mass. He finds that this implies that
the adiabatic index becomes 4/3. However this implies the existence of a maximum mass, that he estimates
to be 1.4 solar mass beyond which the star cannot sustain gravity. In September the first paper (about the
newtonian description) is published in the Philo. Magazine via Fowler. Fowler and Milne do not understand
the second paper on the critical mass. Chandra submits it to the Astrophysical Phys. J.. The referee is
Carl Eckart. The paper is eventually published 1 year later : “The maximum mass of ideal white dwarfs”,
Astrophys. J. 74 (1931) 81
1931: Ernest Rutherford (Cambridge) postulates the existence of the neutron.
1931 : in February Lev Davidovich Landau (1908-1968) is in Zurich where he visits Pauli. Independently
from Chandrasekhar (and Stoner) he derives a mass limit for white dwarfs : for stars heavier than 1.5 solar
mass “the density of matter becomes so great that atomic nuclei come in close contact forming one gigantic
nucleus”. This work is published in 1932 : “On the theory of stars”, Zs. Phys. Sowjetunion 1 (1932)
285 (“Thus we get an equilibrium state only for masses greater [sic!] than a critical mass M0 ... about 1.5
solar mass (for m=2 protonic masses). For M > M0 there exists in the whole quantum theory no cause
preventing the system for collapsing to a point... As in reality such masses exist quietly as stars and do not
show any such ridiculous tendencies we must conclude that all stars heavier then 1.5 solar mass certainly
possess regions in which the laws of quantum mechanics (and therefore quantum statistics) are violated”
(quoted by Israel 1987)
1931 : Hagihara (in Tokyo) studies Schwarzschild’s geodesics (a 120 pages long “treatise” where trajec-
tories crossing r = 2m are rejected.) He quotes Stoner’s work on white dwarf densities and uses the result
to argue that the radius of solar mass objects is larger than 2m.
1931: Einstein visits Caltech and discusses in particular with Fritz Zwicky (1898-1974), Robert Millikan
and Richard Chace Tolman. It seems that at that time Zwicky and Walter Baade (1893-1960) had invented
the idea of supernovae.
1932 : in his paper “L’univers en expansion” (Publication du Laboratoire d’Astronomie et de Géodésie
de l’Université de Louvain 9: 171-205) Lemaı̂tre, who wants to describe the collapse of a nebula, finds
what is usually known as the Tolman (1934) and Bondi (1947) solution. He notes that the Friedmann-
Lemaı̂tre cosmological solution can be an interior spherically symmetric solution. From Birkhoff’s theorem
he deduces that his solution (with no matter) must be the Schwarzschild metric in disguise. He gives
the explicit coordinate transformation between his coordinates and the standard Schwarzschild coordinates.
Schwarzschild’s metric in his coordinates is well-behaved at r = 2m : “The singularity of the Schwarzschild
field then is a fictitious singularity, analogous to the one appearing on the horizon of the center in the
original form of the De Sitter universe”. Lemaı̂tre also understands that the region r < 2m is not static. He
influenced Howard Percy Robertson.
1932 : James Chadwick (from Rutherford’s team) finds the neutron in February. Israel, 1987, says p
224 that he heard form Rosenfeld that Landau discussed the possibility of neutrons stars the same evening
in Copenhagen with Bohr. But this was a slip of memory as neither Bohr, nor Landau, nor Rosenfeld were
in Copenhagen at that time (see note added in proof p 276).
1932 : Karl Jansky (ingeneer at Bell in Holndel New Jersey) finds cosmic radio waves.
1933 : Baade and Zwicky at the meeting of the American Phys. Soc. in Stanford (15 December)
announce : “With all reserve we advance the view that supernovae represent the transitions from ordinary
stars to neutron stars, consisting mainly of neutrons. Such a star may possess a very small radius and an
extremely high density. As neutrons can be packed much more closely than ordinary nuclei and electrons, the
‘gravitational packing’ energy in a cold neutron star may become very large, and, under certain circumstances,

5
may far exceed the ordinary nuclear packing fractions. A neutron star would therefore represent the most
stable configuration of matter as such...” Good idea but not “substantiated” (according to Kip Thorne).
1934 : Tolman publishes his book on GR.
1934 : Chandra, using Eddington’s computer at Trinity, computes M (R) for white dwarfs using the
Stoner-Anderson equation of state. and confirms the existence of a critical mass.
1935 : at the Januray 11th meeting of the Royal Astronomical Soc. at Burlington House Chandra
presents his results on the maximum mass of white dwarfs.Then Eddington speaks and rejects the idea of
a maximal mass (and Stoner-Anderson equation of state). His argument is that the mass of Sirius (not the
white dwarf Sirius B) is higher than Chandra’s critical mass, and that stars must evolve... and cannot end
up in collapse ! “I think that there should be a law of Nature to prevent a star to behave in such an absurd
way”. He thinks that Chandra’s meshing of SR and quantum mechanics is not trustworthy (“I do not regard
the offspring of such a union as born in lawful wedlock”). (Israel 1987 argues that Eddington’s reasoning
came from his wrong definition of particle density, see his book 1923, which exaggerates the stability of
massive stars). The next day Chandra seeks for help. Bohr in Copenhagen is on his side.
1935 : Einstein and his assistant Rosen (who is 26) publish “The particle problem in GR”, Phys. Rev.
48 p 73-77. First they consider M4 in“Rindler” coordinates (introduced by Lanczos) and remove the (polar-
like) singularity by going back to Minkowski coordinates. However they insist that there is a concentration
of matter at the origin (in Rindler coordinates). They notice that by going from Rindler to Minkowski
coordinates spacetime is extended (“Einstein-Rosen bridge”). They then turn to the Schwarzschild metric
that they try to put under a Rindler-like form by introducing a coordinate u2 = r − 2m, with, “hence” a
concentration of matter at r = 2m. (see Earman and Eisenstaedt 1999).
1936 : Drumeaux is the first to note that the equation for the radial geodesics in Schwarzschild spacetime
is identical to the equation of motion in Newtonian gravity, if one trades universal time for proper time.
(Eisenstaedt 1987)
1937 : Landau sends a manuscript on “neutron cores” to Doklady and to Niels Bohr (according to Kip
Thorne he hopes thus to avoid being put in jail as a German spy; despite help from Bohr he will spend one
year in jail in 38-39). The paper is published in Nature (19 feb 1938). Landau estimates the neutron core
to be about 10−3 solar mass (he uses Fowler’s non relativist equation of state.)
1938 : J. Robert Oppenheimer (1904-1967) and Serber publish a paper in the September 1st issue of
Phys. Rev. and argue that Landau is wrong ; there cannot be a neutron core in the Sun (or, rather, according
to Israel 1987, they say that the core mass is much higher, about 1/10 solar mass).
1938 : In November-December Oppenheimer and George Volkov work on the maximum mass of a
neutron star. They redo what Chandra had done but replace electrons by neutrons and Newtonian gravity
by GR, that is, they use the “Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov” equation. (Volkoff is in Berkeley; Tolman in
Caltech; Oppie at both). They play with hypothetical equations of state (soft to stiff) and find (numerically)
a maximum mass between 0.7 and 6 solar masses. (From Israel 1987 : It was obvious that Newton gravity
would give an upper limit of 4 times the Chandra mass (that is about 6 solar masses) since the star pressure
would be carried by neutrons instead of electrons stripped off from Helium nuclei, thus reducing the mean
mass per pressure-producing particle by a factor 2.) Oppenheimer-Volkoff publish their paper: “On Massive
Neutron Cores” in the February 15th issue of Phys Rev 55 (1939) 374-381(with references to Landau but
not to Zwicky).
1939 : Robertson (who is aware of Lemaı̂tre’s work) gives a lecture in Toronto and argues that r = 2m
is not singular. John Lighton Synge is in the audience.
1939 : Richard Chace Tolman publishes : “Static solutions of Einstein’s field equations for spheres of
fluid”, Phys. Rev. 55, 364-373
1939 : Einstein writes a paper on circular light trajectories in Schwarzschild geometry : “The essential
result of this investigation is a clear understanding as to why the “Schwarzschild singularities” do not exist
in physical reality”.
1939 : Grote Reber (an excentric bachelor and ham radio operator, see Thorne) finds the radio emission
of Cyg A.
1939 : André Lichnérowicz (1915-1998, a student of Elie Cartan)) defends his thesis :“Sur certains
problèmes globaux relatifs au système des équations d’Einstein” where, in particular, he shows that there
can be no non-singular (spatially) asymptotically flat stationary solutions to the exterior equations of GR

6
(exept M4), see J Eisenstaedt 1993.
1938 : In the winter 38-39 Hartland Snyder and Oppenheimer study gravitational collapse. Oppenheimer
decides that what is important for the calculation is GR and not the details of the collapse (spin, non
sphericity, etc). They get help for the calculations (p = 0) from Tolman in Caltech (in fact they essentially
give the “Tolman-Bondi” solution, discovered in 1932 by Lemaı̂tre). They describe collapse for an external
observer as well as in terms of the proper time of the infalling material. They calculate the redshift and find
that the star blackens. There is no description of the final crunch however. According to Israel 1987 : “To
a reader of the paper it was left obscure how the interior comoving picture, in which the collapse proceeds
to zero radius in a finite proper time, is to be reconciled with the contracting “freezing” at the gravitational
radius. The authors do not even make clear their views on the status of the gravitational radius, which
was still generally considered to be some kind of singularity.” Israel goes on saying that Oppenheimer had
probably discussed with Robertson about the fictitious character of the Schwarzschild radius “and may even
have supposed that this was common knowledge in relativistic circles”.
1939 : Oppenheimer and Snyder submit their paper (“On continued gravitational contraction”) in July.
“When all thermonuclear sources of energy are exhausted a sufficiently heavy star will collapse...the radius of
the star approaches asymptotically its gravitational radius; light from the surface of the star is progressively
reddened, and can escape over a progressively narrower range of angles ... The total time of collapse for
an observer comoving with the stellar matter is finite...an external observer sees the star asymptotically
shrinking to its gravitational radius.” The paper is published in the September 1st issue of Phys. Rev. (One
finds in the same issue the paper by Bohr and Wheeler on fission. Recall too that Hitler invades Poland the
same day.)

7
 1

Black Holes
in General Relativity

Nathalie Deruelle

Lecture Four

Astrophysics of Black Holes

CEA, January-February 2009

 2

Outline of the Lecture

I. Observational evidence
1. Stellar mass black holes
2. Supermassive black holes
II. Extracting energy from black holes
1. BH perturbations and superradiance
2. The Blandford-Znajek mechanism
3. Remarks on the “membrane paradigm”
III. Black hole binary coalescence
1. Likehood and observability
2. Extreme mass ratio inspirals (EMRI)
3. Post-newtonian calculations
4. Quasi-normal modes
5. Effective one-body approach
6. Numerical breakthroughs
 3

I.

Observational Evidence

for the existence of Black Holes

 4

Box 1. Neutron Star Maximum Mass

Ref : Eric Gourgoulhon Lecture Notes
Philippe Grandclément Lecture Notes. (LUTH website at obspm)
 5

Box 1. Neutron Star Interior

 6

Box 1. Neutron EOS

 7

Box 1. NS maximum mass : Influence of rotation

 8

Box 2. Stellar Mass black holes

Riccardo Giacconi
 9

Box 2. Stellar black hole candidates

 10

Box 2. Evidence for “horizons”

(Taken from Eric Gourgoulhon’s Lecture Notes on Compact Objects)

 11

Box 2. Gamma Ray Bursts Fireball Model

(see e.g. Tsvi Piran ArXiv: 0804.2074 [astro-ph]; and P. Grandclément

Lecture Notes on compact objects)
 12

Box 2. Gamma Ray Bursts “Inner Engine”

(for “alternative” model see Remo Ruffini et al., arXiv:0706.2572[astro-ph])

 13

Box 3. Super Massive Black Holes

The example of Cygnus A

 14

Box 3. Two “Fathers” of SMBH

Maarten Schmidt and Donald Lynden-Bell, Kavli prize 2008

 15

Box 3. Observational evidence for SMBH

Water Maser (VLBI) in NGC4258 versus disk motion (HST) in M87

 16

Box 3. A SMBH in the Milky Way

Sagittarius A* (at 26 000 light-years from us) M = 4 × 106M

 17

Box 3. Stars orbiting around SgrA*

 18

Box 3. An “overwhelming” evidence

(from Mark J. Reid, ArXiv:0808.2624[astro-ph])

And also : “Milky Way’s Giant Black Hole Awoke from Slumber 300 Years
Ago” , Koyama, Inui et al., arXiv:0711.2853 [astro-ph]
 19

II.
Extracting Energy from Black Holes

(...as opposed to converting gravitational binding energy)

(taken from Felix Mirabel, CEA and ESO, Chile)

 20

1. BH perturbations and superradiance

See Notes from Lecture 3; and : “Black Hole Physics” Frolov-Novikov
(1998); Misao Sasaki IHP06 Lecture Notes and Living Review (2003)
2. The Blandford-Znajek mechanism
See e.g. Komissarov, ArXiv:0804.1912[astro-ph]
3. Remarks on the “membrane paradigm”
See Kip Thorne et al.’s book, Yale University Press, 1986
 21

III.

Black Hole binary

coalescence

1. Likehood and observability

2. Extreme mass ratio inspirals (EMRI)
3. Post-newtonian calculations
4. Quasi-normal modes
5. Numerical breakthroughs
6. Effective one-body approach
(see, e.g. T. Damour et al., ArXiv: 0803.3162[gr-qc])
 22

Box 4. Likehood and Observability

 23

Box 4. Binary BH merging Observability

Joan Centrella et al (Goddard Space Flight Center)

(1023L ... in weakly interating GW)

 24

Box 4. SMBH coalescence Observability by LISA

Joan Centrella et al (Goddard Space Flight Center)

 25

Box 5. Inspiral Phase

(Taken from Misao Sasaki, IHP06 Lecture Notes)

 26

Box 5. Extreme Mass Ratio Inspirals : Energy Loss

(Taken from Misao Sasaki, IHP06 Lecture Notes)

For the thread of the argument yielding the formula above, see Notes
 27

Box 5. Post-Newtonian calculations : Energy Loss

(Taken from Luc Blanchet Living Review, 2006)

 28

Box 4. Numerical Breakthough

Bern Bruegmann et al (2003) (now at Iena)

Frans Pretorius (2005) (now at Princeton)
Manuella Campanelli et al (2005) (now at Rochester)
Joan Centrella et al (2005) (Goddard Space Flight Center)
(See eg Pretorius ArXiV: 0710.1338[gr-qc])
(NINJA Collaboration, ArXiV: 0901.4399[gr-qc];
SAMURAI Collaboration, ArXiV: 0901.2437[gr-qc])
 Six Lectures on Black Holes in General Relativity
IPhT-CEA, Saclay, January-February 2009

Nathalie Deruelle

Selected bibliography

1. The development of a concept

1. Jean Eisenstaedt, “Avant Einstein”, Seuil 2005
2. Jean Eisenstaedt, “Einstein et la relativité générale”, Cnrs-Eds, 2002; English translation : Oxford and
Princeton U-Press, 2006 (see also his technical papers quoted therein)
3. I. Todorov, “Einstein and Hilbert: the creation of General Relativity”, arXiv:physics/0504179
4. W. Israel, “Dark stars : the evolution of an idea” in 300 years of gravitation, edts S.W. Hawking and
W. Israel, Cambridge University Press, 1987
5. Kip Thorne, “Black holes and time warps”, Norton Publ., 1994
6. B. Carter, “Half a century of black hole theory: from physicists’ purgatory to mathematicians’ paradise”,
arXiv:gr-qc/0604064
7. J.R. Oppenheimer and H. Snyder : “On continued gravitational contraction”, Phys. Rev. 56 (1939)
455

2. The geometry of black holes

1. C.W. Misner, K.S. Thorne and J.A.Wheeler, “Gravitation”, Freeman, San Fransico, 1973
2. S.W. Hawking and G.F.R. Ellis, “The large scale structure of space-time”, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1973
3. R. Wald, “General relativity”, Chicago University Press, 1984
4. R. Kerr, “Discovering the Kerr and Kerr-Schild metrics”, arXiv:0706.1109 [gr-qc]
5. G. Dautcourt, “Race for the Kerr field”, arXiV:0807.3473 [physics]
6. M. Visser, “The Kerr spacetime: a brief introduction”, arXiv:0706.0622 [gr-qc]
7. Black Holes (1972 Les Houches Lectures), eds. B.S. DeWitt and C. DeWitt (Gordon and Breach, New
York, 1973). In particular: B. Carter, “Black hole equilibrium states”
8. B. Carter, “Mechanics and equilibrium properties of black holes, membranes and strings”, arXiv: hep-
th/0411259
9. M.D. Kruskal, “Maximal extension of the Schwarzschild metric” Phys. Rev. 119 (1960) 1743
10. R. Kerr, “Gravitational field of a spinning mass as an example of algebraically special metrics”, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 11 (1963) 237-238

3. Stability and uniqueness of black holes

1. V. Frolov and I. Novikov, “Black hole physics”, Kluwer academic Publisher, 1998
2. S. Chandrasekhar, “The mathematical theory of black holes”, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1983
3. K. Kokkotas and B. Schmidt, “Quasi-Normal modes of stars and black holes”, Living Reviews, Relativity
2 (1999)

1
 4. S. Hod, “Slow relaxation of rapidly rotating black holes”, arXiv: 0811.3806 [gr-qc]
5. E. Poisson, W. Israel, “Internal structure of black holes”, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 1796-1809
6. A. Ori, “Structure of the singularity inside a realistic rotating black hole” Phys. Rev. Lett 68 (1992)
2117-2120
7. B. Carter, “Mechanics and equilibrium properties of black holes, membranes and strings”, arXiv: hep-
th/0411259
8. M. Heusler, “Stationary black holes: uniqueness and beyond”, Living Review, Relativity 1 (1998)
9. P. Crusciel and J. Lopes Costa, “On uniqueness of stationary vacuum black holes”, arXiv: 0806.0016
10. T. Regge and J.A. Wheeler, Phys. Rev. 108 (1957) 1063
11. S. Teukolsky, Phys. Rev.Lett 29 (1972) 1114
12. W. Israel, “Event horizons in static vacuum space-times”, Phys. Rev. 164 (1967) 1776
13. R. Penrose, “Gravitational collapse and spacetime singularities”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 14 (1965) 57-59

4. The astrophysics and energetics of black holes

1. E. Gourgoulhon, “Objets compacts” notes de cours, sur le site du LUTH (http://www.luth.obspm.fr/
luthier/gourgoulhon/index.html)
2. P. Grandclément, “Objets compacts”, notes de cours, sur le site du LUTH (http://luth.obspm.fr/
fichiers/enseignement/objets-compacts-F1.pdf)
3. T. Piran, “Bohdan’s impact on our understanding of Gamma Ray Bursts”, arXiv: 0804.2074 [astro-ph]
4. A. Müller, “Experimental evidence for black holes”, arXiv: astro-ph/0701228
5. M. Reid, “Is there a super massive black hole at the center of the Milky Way?”, arXiv: 0808.2624
[astro-ph]
6. Black Holes (1972 Les Houches Lectures), eds. B.S. DeWitt and C. DeWitt (Gordon and Breach, New
York, 1973). See in particular : R. Ruffini, “On the energetics of black holes”
7. S. Komissarov, “Blandord-Znajek mechanism versus Penrose process”, arXiv:0804.1921 [astro-ph]
8. “Black holes, the membrane paradigm”, Eds K.S. Thorne, R.H. Price and A. MacDonald, Yale Univ.
Press, New Haven, 1986
9. T. Damour, “Classical black holes as dissipative branes” in “String theory, gravity and experiment”,
arXiv:0802.416 [hep-th]
10. M. Sasaki and H. Tagoshi, “Analytic black hole perturbation approach to gravitational radiation”,
Living Review, Relativity 6 (2003)
11. L. Blanchet, “Gravitational radiation from post-newtonian sources and inspiralling compact binaries”,
Living Review, Relativity 9 (2006)
12. T. Damour and A. Buonanno, “Effective one-body approach to general relativistic two-body dynam-
ics”, arXiv: gr-qc/9811091; see also T. Damour and A. Nagar, “An improved analytical description of
inspiralling and coalescing black hole binaries”, arXiv: 0902.0136 [gr-qc]
13. E. Gourgoulhon and J. Jaramillo, “New theoretical approaches to black holes”, arXiv: 0803.2944 [gr-qc]
14. F. Pretorius, “Binary black hole coalescence”, arXiv: 0710.1338 [gr-qc]
15. M. Hannam, “Status of black hole binary simulations for gravitational wave detection”, arXiv: 0901.2931
[gr-qc]
16. D. Lynden-Bell, “Galactic nuclei as collapsed old quasars”, Nature 223 (1969) 690
17. D. Christodoulou, “Reversible and irreversible transformations in black hole physics”, Phys. Rev. Lett.
25 (1970) 1596-1597
18. R. Penrose and R.M. Floyd, Nature Phys. Sci. 229 (1971) 177

5. Hawking radiation and black hole thermodynamics

1. M. Visser, “Essential and inessential features of Hawking radiation”, arXiv: hep-th/0106111
2. T. Damour, “The entropy of black holes: a primer”, arXiv: hep-th/0401160

2
 3. R. Brout, S. Massar, R. Parentani and Ph. Spindel, “A primer for black hole quantum physics”, arXiv:
0710.4345
4. R. Wald, “The thermodynamcis of black holes”, Living Reviews, Relativity 4 (2001)
5. S. Carlip, “Black hole thermodynamics and statistical physics”, arXiv: 0807.4520 [gr-qc]
6. A. Nielsen, “Black holes and black hole thermodynamics without event horizons”, arXiv: 0809.3850
[hep-th]
7. J. Bekenstein, “Bekenstein-Hawking entropy”, in Scholarpedia
8. J. Bekenstein, “Black holes and information theory”, arXiv: quant-phys/0311049
9. J. Bekenstein, Phys Rev D7 (1973) 2333
10. S.W. Hawking, Nature 248 (1974) 30; and Comm. Math. Phys. 43 (1975) 199
11. T. Damour and R. Ruffini, Phys. Rev. D14 (1976) 332
12. S.W. Hawking, “Information loss in black holes”, arXiv: hep-th/0507171

6. Hairy and higher dimensional black holes

1. E. Winstanley, “Classical Yang-Mills black hole hair in anti-de Sitter Space”, arXiv: 0801.0527 [gr-qc]
2. M. Banados, C. Teiltelboim and J. Zanelli, “The black hole in three dimensional spacetime”, hep-
th/9204099
3. G. Gibbons et al., “The general Kerr-de Sitter metrics in all dimensions”, hep-th/0404008
4. G. Gibbons, M. Perry and C. Pope, “The first law of thermodynamics for Kerr-anti-de-Sitter black
holes”, arXiv: hep-th/0408217
5. B. Kleihaus, J. Kunz, F. Navarrro-Lerida, “Rotating black holes in higher dimensions”. arXiv: 0710.2291
[hep-th]
6. G. Horowitz, “Higher dimensional generalizations of the Kerr black hole”, arXiv: gr-qc/0507080
7. R. Emparan, “Black holes in higher dimensions”, arXiv: 0801.3471
8. S. Mignemi and D. Wiltshire, “Black holes in higher derivative gravity theories”, hep-th/9202031
9. T. Jacobson, Gungwon Kang and R. Myers, “Black hole entropy in higher curvature gravity”, arXiv:
gr-qc/9502009
10. R. Myers, “Higher curvature gravity”, gr-qc/9811042
11. C. Garraffo and G. Giribet, “The Lovelock black holes”, srXiv:0805.3575
12. C. Charmousis, “Higher order gravity theories and their black hole solutions”, arXiv: 0805.0568
13. A. Komar, “Covariant conservation laws in general relativity”, Phys. Rev 113 (1959) 934
14. R. Arnowitt, S. Deser and C. Misner, “The dynamics of general relativity”, in “Gravitation, an intro-
duction to current research”, L. Witten Edt, Wiley, New-York, 1962; also in arXiv: gr-qc/0405109
15. J. Katz, “A note on Komar’s anomalous factor”, Class and Quant Grav 2 (1985) 423

Further readings
1. E. Gallo and D. Marolf, “Resource Letter BH-2: black holes”, arXiv: 0806.2316 [astro-ph]
2. M. Visser, “Black holes in general relativity”, arXiv: 0901.4365 [gr-qc]
3. F. Lobo, “Exotic solutions in GR : traversable wormholes and “warp drive” spacetimes”, arXiv: 0710.
4474 [gr-qc]
4. S. Hod and T. Piran, “Mass-Inflation in dynamical collapse of a charged scalar field”, arXiv: gr-
qc/9803004
5. R. Ruffini and She-Sheng Xue, “Dyadosphere formed in gravitational collapse”, arXiv: 0810.1438 [astro-
ph]
6. B. Koch et al., “Exclusion of black hole disaster scenarios at the LHC”, arXiv: 0807.3349
7. M. Dafermos and I. Rodnianski, “Lectures on black holes and linear waves”, arXiv: 0811.0354 [gr-qc]
8. D. Christodoulou, “The formation of black holes in general relativity”, arXiv: 0805.3880 [gr-qc]
9. C. Gundlach, “Critical phenomena in gravitational collapse”, Living Reviews, Relativity 2 (1999) 4

3
10. L. Barack and N. Sago, “Gravitational self-force correction to the innermost stable circular orbit of a
Schwzarzschild black hole”, arXiv: 0902.0573 [gr-qc]
11. C. Barcelo, S. Liberati and M. Visser, “Analogue gravity”, Living Review, Relativity, 8 (2006) 12
12. J. Bekenstein, “Black holes: classical properties, thermodynamics and heuristic quantization”, arXiv:
gr-qc/9808028
13. S. Hod, “Bohr’s correspondence principle and the area spectrum of quantum black holes”, arXiv: gr-
qc/9812002
14. S. Hossenfelder and L. Smolin, “Conservative solutions to the black hole information problem”, arXiv:
0901.3156
15. A. Ashtekar and B. Krishnan, “Isolated and dynamical horizons and their applications”, Living Reviews,
Relativity 7 (2004) 10
16. S. Hayward, et al., “Local Hawking temperature for dynamical black holes”, arXiv: 0806.0014
17. E. Gourgoulhon, “From geometry to numerics: interdisciplinary aspects in mathematical and numerical
relativity”, arXiv: 0712.2332 [gr-qc]
18. J. Maldacena, “Black holes in string theory”, PhD Thesis, arXiv: hep-th/0607235
19. G. Horowitz, “Black holes, entropy and information”, arXiv: 0708.3680 [gr-qc]
20. A. Corichi, “Black holes and entropy in loop quantum gravity: an overview”, arXiv: 0901.1302
21. P. Nicolini, “Noncommutative black holes, the final appeal to quantum gravity: a review”, arXiv:
0807.1939