Talk:Reissner-Nordström black hole

How can Q be compared to M when they have different units? lysdexia 23:53, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

they can be compared to each other in terms of gravitational radiation effect

In "natural units" Phys 18:00, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gunnar Nordstöm was a Finnish Swede (well, I assume he was ethnically Swedish, based on the name) so his name is spelt with ö not ø. See, e.g. Gunnar Nordström symposium. –Joke137 17:36, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????8-bit theater

New article

Shouldn't there be separate articles for the Reissner-Nordstrom metric and the RN black hole ? MP (talk) 10:30, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposed changes:

I believe that the vector potential should be

$A_{a}=\left({\frac {Q}{r}},0,0,0\right)$.

No subscript or superscript was written, and A was introduced as $A^{a}$. However, I don't get a sensible Faraday tensor unless I assume that expression is $A_{a}$.

I belive that it should be explictly mentioned that the Coulomb force constant has been assumed to be equal to 1 in the units section. It was mentioned that G = c = 1, which is good, but because this is a charged black hole, the reader needs to know how to convert the electromagnetic units as well.

A link should probably be made to geometric units here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometrized_unit_system

I'm a bit concerned about the clarity of the geometric units pages for MKS charge units (but this is the wrong place to talk about that).

I'm going to leave this up for comments before I attempt to make any edits.

Pervect 23:06, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

No Sources

I would like to see where some of this is coming from. A comment was posted on Black hole electron quoting this page as reason to deny the existence of a black hole electron. I'd like to review the original sources.... because... This page mentions stuff like Q < M all the time, but the units don't match, you can't compare mass and charge, unless maybe they're using planck units, but then that should be stated, and the conversion rate given. McKay 01:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

These are geometrized units. --216.13.72.131 23:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

1. Yeah, I mentioned that it could be Planck units, that's a type of geometrized unit system. But one could also define the distance from the earth to the sun as the length unit, the mass of Pentium 3 as the default mass unit, and the time of the vibration of a cesium atom as the default time unit. If you're geometrizing, you need to say which system you're using.
2. Also, you still need sources. McKay 04:42, 20 February 2007 (UTC)