Now compare it with: "The event horizon of the black hole forms, which is the shadow, the curve that's so strong"
Referring to "curve" right after "shadow" suggests to the listener that Janna Levin meant geometrical shape, not "a manifold in Riemannian geometry".
Even if Janna has a correct understanding in her head (which I doubt), her explanation is quite sloppy and misleading.
> I'm comparing curvature properties at the "surface" of a black hole and at the surface of a neutron star.
What if a black hole has a neutron star inside it -- would you say that curvature properties "at the surface of a black hole" are stronger than "inside of that black hole" (AKA "at the surface of a neutron star inside of that black hole")?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: "The curve that's so strong"
Date: 2020-08-10 03:05 pm (UTC)Now compare it with: "The event horizon of the black hole forms, which is the shadow, the curve that's so strong"
Referring to "curve" right after "shadow" suggests to the listener that Janna Levin meant geometrical shape, not "a manifold in Riemannian geometry".
Even if Janna has a correct understanding in her head (which I doubt), her explanation is quite sloppy and misleading.
> I'm comparing curvature properties at the "surface" of a black hole and at the surface of a neutron star.
What if a black hole has a neutron star inside it -- would you say that curvature properties "at the surface of a black hole" are stronger than "inside of that black hole" (AKA "at the surface of a neutron star inside of that black hole")?