1: \documentstyle[times,pramana,epsf,floats]{ias}

2: \begin{document}

3: \mark{{Gravitational collapse...}{Pankaj S. Joshi}}

4: \title{Gravitational Collapse: The Story so far}

5: 

6: \author{Pankaj S. Joshi}

7: \address{Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Homi Bhabha Road,

8: Colaba, Mumbai 400005}

9: \keywords{gravitational collapse, black holes, naked singularities}

10: \pacs{2.0}

11: \abstract{An outstanding problem in gravitation theory and relativistic 

12: astrophysics today is to understand the final outcome of an endless

13: gravitational collapse. Such a continual collapse would take place when 

14: stars more massive than few times the mass of the sun collapse 

15: under their own gravity on exhausting their nuclear fuel. According to

16: the general theory of relativity, this results either in a black hole, 

17: or a naked singularity- which can communicate with faraway observers in the

18: universe. While black holes are (almost) being detected and are 

19: increasingly used to model high energy astrophysical phenomena, naked

20: singularities have turned into a topic of active discussion, aimed at 

21: understanding their structure and implications. Recent developments here

22: are reviewed, indicating future directions.}

23:  

24: 

25: 

26: \maketitle

27: \section{Introduction}

28: 

29: 

30: What is the final outcome of the continual gravitational collapse of

31: a massive star which has exhausted its nuclear fuel? While stars not very

32: massive could stabilize as white dwarfs or neutron stars, any stellar core

33: more massive than about five solar masses must collapse endlessly according

34: to our present physical understanding. The question of final fate of such

35: an endless collapse is of central importance in gravitation theory

36: and astrophysics today. The theory to use to examine this question related 

37: to strong gravity fields is the general theory of relativity, which should 

38: be valid till the quantum gravity length scales of about $10^{-33}$cms, and 

39: which would be a low energy limit of any reasonable quantum gravity theory.  

40: 

41: In early seventies, the singularity theorems in general relativity gave 

42: some partial hints to an answer to the above question. Under a reasonable 

43: set of physical assumptions, such as causality and positivity of 

44: energy density, these theorems showed that closed trapped surfaces, which 

45: develop in gravitational collapse, give rise to spacetime singularities. 

46: Such singularities signal the onset of a phase of extreme strong gravity 

47: regions where the quantum effects should start getting important. 

48: It is only in such strong gravity fields near singularities where both 

49: general relativity and quantum gravity come into their own, and one 

50: may have an opportunity to test the effects of quantum gravity. The 

51: limitation of the singularity theorems, however, was that they only 

52: predicted the existence of singularities in collapse and cosmology, but 

53: did not give any information on their {\it physical nature} (e.g.  how 

54: fast the densities and curvatures grow there), or the {\it causal 

55: structure} (e.g. can they communicate with faraway observers in the 

56: universe).  

57: 

58: These questions, which are clearly vital to understanding the final

59: fate of massive collapsing clouds, can be answered only by means of a 

60: detailed study of gravitational collapse phenomena in gravitation 

61: theory\cite{rev}.

62: The classical spacetime singularities should be smeared out by quantum

63: gravity, and what would really result from such an endless collapse is 

64: an extreme strong gravity region, with extreme values of physical parameters

65: such as densities and curvatures, confined to an extraordinarily tiny 

66: region of space. If the event horizons of gravity already start developing 

67: at an earlier phase during such a collapse, the collapsing star and the 

68: eventual fireball as described above gets hidden within the horizon, 

69: disappearing from the purview of the outside observers in the universe 

70: forever. Then we have the formation of a {\it black hole} in the universe

71: as a result of the gravitational collapse. On the other hand, if the 

72: formation of event horizon gets delayed sufficiently during the collapse, 

73: the result is the development of a {\it naked singularity}, or a 

74: {\it visible fire ball}, which can possibly send out massive radiations 

75: to faraway observers from near such strong gravity regions.    

76: 

77: 

78: A detailed study of gravitational collapse phenomena from such a 

79: perspective has been conducted within the context

80: of classical gravity\cite{psjbook}. The generic conclusions emerging

81: from these studies are striking: {\it While the collapse always produces 

82: curvature generated fireballs characterized by diverging curvatures and

83: densities, trapped surfaces may not develop early enough to always 

84: shield this process from an outside observer}. Specifically, as we 

85: shall show in the next section, depending on the nature of the initial 

86: data from which the collapse develops, either a black hole or a naked 

87: singularity results as the final outcome of the collapse. We then

88: discuss several implications and generalizations of these results,

89: giving an idea of the recent developments and future directions 

90: in this field.   

91:  

92: 

93: \section{Spherically symmetric collapse}

94: 

95: 

96: Spherically symmetric collapse has been investigated from such a 

97: perspective in detail. The first studies examining the dynamical 

98: evolutions of collapsing matter clouds were due to Oppenheimer and Snyder, 

99: and Dutt\cite{osd}. As is well-known now, such a collapse of a 

100: homogeneous dust ball (the density and pressures given by 

101: $\rho=\rho(t), p=0$) gives rise to a black hole, where the extreme

102: density regions are necessarily hidden from the faraway observer by the

103: event horizon, which starts forming much earlier than the epoch of

104: formation of singularity.

105: 

106: What is the outcome of the collapse, however, when the density is 

107: allowed to be inhomogeneous, which is a physically more realistic 

108: situation? 

109: The collapse of spherically symmetric inhomogeneous dust has been 

110: studied in detail, and we now know that the outcome is generically

111: either a black hole or a naked singularity, depending on the 

112: nature of the initial data 

113: from which the collapse develops\cite{dust}.

114: 

115: One may, however, consider dust as somewhat unrealistic form of matter,

116: especially towards the end stages of collapse, when pressures should be

117: important. From such a perspective, the gravitational collapse of 

118: perfect fluids, and other more general forms of matter, has been 

119: studied analytically\cite{analy} and also numerically\cite{numer}. The 

120: conclusions remain essentially the same,

121: namely, both black holes and naked singularities do develop as end state

122: of gravitational collapse.

123: 

124: 

125: In the following, using the general treatment given by Joshi and Dwivedi

126: \cite{jd99} we show that given an arbitrary regular distribution of 

127: a general matter field at the initial epoch, there always exists an 

128: evolution from this initial data which would result either in a black 

129: hole or a naked singularity, depending on the allowed choice of free 

130: functions available in the solution. It follows that either of these 

131: objects result depending on the nature of the regular initial data 

132: from which the collapse evolves. Again the usual energy conditions ensuring 

133: the positivity of energy density and other regularity conditions will be

134: satisfied. This method also generates wide new families 

135: of black hole solutions resulting from spherically symmetric collapse,

136: without requiring the cosmic censorship assumption.

137:   

138: 

139: We consider here general type I matter fields\cite{he}, which 

140: include most of the physically important forms of matter such as dust, 

141: perfect fluids, massless scalar fields and so on. In fact, almost 

142: all observed forms of matter and equations of state are included in

143: this general class.  Our purpose is

144: to analyze the collapse with a given initial data set such as

145: the state of matter and the velocities of the

146: spherical shells at the onset of collapse for a compact object, 

147: in order to determine the possibilities of this configuration evolving 

148: into either a black hole or a naked singularity.

149: So we consider the gravitational collapse of a matter cloud 

150: that evolves from a regular initial data defined on an initial 

151: spacelike surface. The energy-momentum tensor has a compact support 

152: on this initial surface where all the physical quantities such as 

153: densities and pressures are regular and finite. 

154: 

155: 

156: 

157: Such a matter field, in a general coordinate system, can be expressed as

158: \begin{equation}

159: T^{ab}=\lambda_1 E^a_1E^b_1 +\lambda_2 E^a_2E^b_2

160: +\lambda_3 E^a_3E^b_3 +\lambda_4 E^a_4E^b_4

161: \end{equation}

162: where (${E_1,E_2,E_3,E_4}$) is an orthonormal basis with ${E_4}$ 

163: and $(E_1,E_2,E_3)$ are timelike and spacelike eigenvectors 

164: respectively, and $\lambda_{i}$s ($ i=1,2,3,4$) are the eigenvalues.

165: For such a spherically symmetric matter distribution

166: we can choose coordinates $(x^i=t,r,\theta,\phi)$ adopted to this

167: orthonormal frame, and the metric is written as,

168: \begin{equation}

169: ds^2=-e^{2\nu}dt^2+e^{2\psi}dr^2+R^2d\Omega^2

170: \end{equation}

171: where $d\Omega^2= d\theta^2+ \sin^2\theta d\phi^2$ is the line element

172: on a two-sphere. 

173: Here $\nu,\psi$ and $R$ are functions of $t$ and $r$, and the stress-energy

174: tensor $T^a_b$  as given by equation (1) 

175: has only diagonal components in this coordinate system (i.e. we are

176: using a comoving coordinate system), given by 

177: \begin{equation}

178: T^t_t=-\rho,\quad T^r_r=p_r,\quad T^{\theta}_{\theta}=p_{\theta}=

179: T^{\phi}_{\phi},\quad T^t_r=T^r_t=0

180: \end{equation}

181: The quantities 

182: $\rho, p_r$,  and $p_{\theta}$ are the eigenvalues of $T^a_b$ and are

183: interpreted as the density, radial pressure, and tangential stresses 

184: respectively for the cloud. We take the matter fields to satisfy 

185: the weak energy condition,

186: i.e. the energy density as measured by any local observer must be

187: non-negative, and so for any timelike vector $V^a$ we must have 

188: \begin{equation}

189: T_{ab}V^aV^b\ge 0

190: \end{equation}

191: which amounts to

192: \begin{equation}

193: \rho\ge0,\quad \rho+p_r\ge0,\quad \rho+p_{\theta}\ge 0

194: \end{equation}

195: 

196: 

197: From the point of view of the dynamical evolution of the initial

198: data at an epoch of time from which the collapse commences, we have

199: a total of six arbitrary functions of $r$, namely,

200: \begin{equation}

201: \nu(t_i,r)=\nu_o(r),\quad \psi(t_i,r)=\psi_o(r),\quad R(t_i,r)=R_o(r),

202: \end{equation}

203: \begin{equation}

204: \rho(t_i,r)=\rho_o(r),\quad p_r(t_i,r)=p_{r_o}(r),\quad p_{\theta}(t_i,r)

205: =p_{\theta_o}(r)

206: \end{equation}

207: These functions constituting the initial data are to be specified at 

208: an initial surface at an initial epoch $t=t_i$.

209: The dynamical evolution of this initial data is determined by the

210: Einstein equations, and for the metric (2) these are given by,

211: \begin{equation}

212: T^t_t=-\rho=-{F'\over k_oR^2R'},\quad

213: T^r_r=p_r=-{\dot F\over k_oR^2 \dot R}

214: \end{equation}

215: \begin{equation}

216: \nu'(\rho +p_r)=

217: 2(p_{\theta}-p_r){R'\over R}-p_r'

218: \end{equation}

219: \begin{equation}

220: -2\dot R'+R'{\dot G\over G}+\dot R {H'\over H}=0

221: \end{equation}

222: \begin{equation}

223: G-H=1-{F\over R}

224: \end{equation}

225: where $(\dot{ })$ and $( ' )$ represent partial derivatives with respect to

226: $t$ and $r$ respectively, $F=F(t,r)$ is an arbitrary function of $t$ and $r$, 

227: and we put

228: \begin{equation}

229: G=G(t,r)=e^{-2\psi}(R')^2,\quad H=H(t,r)=e^{-2\nu}\dot R^2

230: \end{equation}

231: The function $F(t,r)$ here is treated 

232: as the mass function for the cloud, with $F\ge 0$. In order to preserve the

233: regularity of the initial data at $t=t_i$, we must have $F(t_i,0)=0$, that

234: is, the mass function vanishes at the center of the cloud.

235: 

236: 

237: The initial data represented by the functions $\nu_o,\psi_o,\rho_o,

238: p_{r_o},p_{\theta_o}$ and $R_o$ are not all independent. 

239: The equation (9), when evaluated on the initial surface, gives the

240: relationship

241: \begin{equation}

242: \nu_o'(\rho_o +p_{r_o})=

243: 2(p_{\theta_o}-p_{r_o}){R'_o\over R}-p_{r_o}'

244: \end{equation}

245: Furthermore, there is a coordinate freedom left in the choice of 

246: the scaling of the coordinate $r$, which can be used to reduce the 

247: number of independent initial data to four. Thus 

248: there are only four independent arbitrary functions of $r$  

249: constituting the initial data.

250: Evolution of this data is governed by the field equations,

251: and we have in all five equations with seven unknowns,

252: namely $\rho,p_r,p_{\theta},\nu,\psi,R$ and $F$, giving us freedom of choice

253: of two functions. Selection of these two free functions, subject to the given

254: initial data and the weak energy condition above, 

255: determines the matter distribution and the metric of the 

256: spacetime and thus leads to a particular evolution for the initial data. 

257: We need to ensure the regularity of the initial data,

258: which would be the case if the curvatures

259: and the initial data describing the matter (the initial density and 

260: pressures) are all finite. For curvatures to be finite

261: one must have a bounded Kretchmann scalar $K=R^{abcd}R_{abcd}$.

262: A singularity will appear on the initial surface 

263: if either the density $\rho$, or 

264: one of the pressures become unbounded at any point on the initial 

265: surface, or $(F/R^3)\rightarrow \infty$ at any point. 

266: We require that on the initial surface $t=t_i$, the density and pressures 

267: are finite and bounded. 

268: We also have 

269: \begin{equation}

270: F(t_i,r)=\int{\rho_o(R_o)R^2_odR_o}

271: \end{equation}

272: and hence the spacetime is singularity free initially in the sense that

273: the Kretchmann scalar, density and pressures are all finite. But, as the

274: collapse evolves, a singularity could develop at a later time whenever 

275: either of the density or one of the pressures become unbounded. 

276: We shall consider below such specific evolutions of the initial data

277: which model a gravitationally collapsing matter cloud.

278: 

279: 

280: Using the coordinate freedom left in rescaling the radial 

281: coordinate, we rescale $r$ such that

282: \begin{equation}

283: R(t_i,r)=R_o(r)=r

284: \end{equation}

285: The physical area radius $R$ then monotonically increases with the 

286: coordinate $r$, and there are no shell-crossings on the initial surface,

287: with $R'=1$. Since we are considering gravitational collapse,

288: we also have $\dot R<0$. 

289: The initial data for a collapsing matter cloud is given in terms

290: of the initial densities and pressures describing the initial state of matter 

291: at the onset of collapse. These are $\rho_o,p_{r_o}, p_{\theta_o}$,

292: and the function $\psi_o$, related to the initial velocity of 

293: the collapsing shells. Next, physically reasonable

294: matter forms may satisfy an energy condition ensuring the positivity

295: of mass-energy densities. Therefore, at the onset of the collapse, 

296: all the initial data sets specifying the density and pressures profiles 

297: of the cloud satisfy an energy condition, and the same holds during

298: the later evolution of collapse. Satisfying the weak energy condition 

299: implies for the initial data,

300: \begin{equation}

301: \rho_o(r) \ge 0,\quad \rho_o+p_{r_o}\ge 0,\quad \rho_o(r)+

302: p_{\theta_o}(r)\ge 0,

303: \end{equation}

304: and the same holds at all later epochs of collapse.

305: 

306: 

307: 

308: Because at the initial epoch $t=t_i$, $\nu_0 \ne \pm\infty$, we have 

309: from Einstein 

310: equations some restrictions on the arbitrariness of the choice 

311: of the functions $\rho_o,p_{r_o},p_{\theta_o}$. We have, for example, 

312: \begin{equation}

313: [p_{\theta_o}-p_{r_o}]_{r=0}=0 

314: \end{equation}

315: For the sake of physical reasonableness, we require the center $r=0$ to be 

316: the regular center for the cloud, which means $R(t,0)=0$.  

317: Also, one would like to have the initial density $\rho_o(0)>0$ 

318: at the center $r=0$. This implies that we have

319: \begin{equation}

320: \rho_o(0) +p_{r_o}(0)>0,\quad  \nu_o(r)=r^2h(r)

321: \end{equation}

322: where $h(r)$ is at least a $C^1$ function of $r$ for $r=0$, and at least

323: a $C^2$ function for $r>0$.

324: This means that the pressure gradients 

325: vanish at the center $r=0$, basically meaning that the forces vanish 

326: at the center. Here we consider this scenario for the 

327: sake of physical reasonableness, however, it is possible to give a more 

328: general formalism independent of requirements such as above.

329: 

330: 

331: Actually, it would be reasonable to require the pressures to be positive 

332: at the onset of the collapse, since for astrophysical bodies physically 

333: we would prefer the pressures rather than tensions. 

334: Further more, to make the scenario physically more appealing, we may 

335: require the density to be decreasing as we move away from the center $r=0$.

336: In that case, for any reasonable equations of state such as 

337: $p=k\rho, 0<k<1,$ (a perfect fluid), or $p=k\rho^\gamma$, the pressure also

338: will decrease away from the center together with the decreasing density.

339: This may typically be the case in the massive bodies such as stars and such

340: other astrophysical systems. Then as such the energy conditions  

341: could impose restrictions on the maximum size of the matter cloud with 

342: such an initial density and pressure distribution. Additionally, for a

343: compact collapsing star, at the onset of the collapse the radial stress 

344: should vanish at some boundary $r=r_b$ i.e. $p_{r_o}(r_b)=0$.

345: 

346: 

347: For the given initial data set of density and pressures there may be 

348: infinitely many collapse evolutions possible. However, we 

349: do not intend to

350: find a particular solution of the field equations prescribing a particular

351: evolution of any given initial data. We investigate here, within 

352: the framework of general relativity and the regular initial data to

353: begin with, when physically allowed reasonable evolutions

354: develop into naked or covered singularities. The answer to this question

355: would have been simple, if we had at our disposal both an exact 

356: closed equation

357: of state describing the state of collapsing matter, and an exact solution

358: of the field equation. However, both of these are little understood in

359: relativity in highly dense regions. In dust models

360: the initial data describing the matter consists of only the initial density 

361: distribution. Dust models could be criticized due to the 

362: vanishing pressures,

363: and it is possible that if pressures are present than the conclusions 

364: regarding the final fate of collapse could

365: be different. We therefore look for an evolution of an arbitrary initial

366: data set consisting of both the density and non-zero pressures, and which

367: would reduce to dust if initial pressures are vanishing. In

368: dust models we have that the mass function $F=F(r)$ is time independent,

369: and $\nu=0$. We

370: therefore consider an ansatz which is a simple extension of dust, and

371: such that one can still incorporate initial non-vanishing pressures. 

372: 

373: 

374: Consider the gravitational collapse of a matter cloud with a 

375: general initial data as prescribed above, and the functions

376: $F$ and $\nu$ given as below,

377: \begin{equation}

378: \nu=c(t)+\nu_o(R),\quad F=f(r)+F_o(R)

379: \end{equation}

380: From the Einstein equations, the evolution of collapse 

381: is then described by the equations,

382: \begin{equation}

383: \nu_o(R)=R^2g(R)=\int_0^R {\left({2p_{\theta_o}-2p_{r_o}\over r(

384: \rho_o +p_{r_o})}-{p_{r_o}'\over \rho_o +p_{r_o}}\right)dr}

385: \end{equation}

386: \begin{equation}

387: G=b(r)e^{2\nu_o}

388: \end{equation}

389: \begin{equation}

390: \sqrt{R}\dot R=-a(t)e^{\nu_o}\sqrt{b(r) Re^{\nu_o}-R+f+F_o}

391: \end{equation}

392: \begin{equation}

393: \rho={f'\over R^2R'}+{F_o,_R\over R^2}, \quad p_r=-{F_o,_R\over R^2}

394: \end{equation}

395: \begin{equation}

396: 2p_{\theta}=R\nu,_R(\rho +p_r)+2p_r+Rp_r,_R

397: \end{equation}

398: \begin{equation}

399: F_o(R)=-\int_0^R{r^2p_{r_o}dr}\equiv -R^3{\it p}(R)

400: \end{equation}

401: \begin{equation} 

402: f(r)=\int_0^r{r^2(\rho_o+p_{r_o})dr}\equiv

403: r^3\epsilon(r)+r^3p(r)

404: \end{equation}

405: 

406: 

407: Here $F(t_i,r)=2r^3\epsilon(r)$. The quantities $\epsilon(r)$ and 

408: $p(r)$ are to be treated 

409: as the average mass and pressure densities of the cloud, and are 

410: decreasing functions of $r$. Since $p_{r_o}$ is a positive function on

411: the initial surface, it follows that $F_o<0$ throughout the spacetime, 

412: and as such the radial pressure is non-negative throughout the spacetime.

413: The arbitrary function $b(r)$ characterizes the velocity of the spherical 

414: shells at the initial time $t=t_i$. We are dealing with the collapse 

415: situation with $\dot R <0$, therefore the arbitrary function $a(t)>0$.

416: 

417: 

418: We note that in the above model for evolution of the

419: initial data set as described by the above equations, 

420: if the initial pressures 

421: vanish, i.e. $p_{r_0}(r)=p_{\theta _o}(r)=0$, we then have as the solution

422: \begin{equation}

423: ds^2=-e^{a(T)}dT^2+{R_T'^2\over 1+E(r)}dr^2+R_T^2d\Omega^2

424: \end{equation}

425: \begin{equation}

426: \nu= p_r=p_{\theta}=0\quad G=b(r)\equiv 1+E(r)\quad \dot R_T=-\sqrt{

427: E+{F_T(r)\over

428: R_T}}

429: \end{equation}

430: where we have changed the notation for $t\to T$ and $R\to R_T$ 

431: in order to distinguish the above solution, 

432: which is actually the Tolman-Bondi-Lemaitre solution for a dust cloud.

433: Thus, the models here may also be viewed as directly generalizing

434: the Tolman-Bondi-Lemaitre models to include both the radial and

435: tangential pressures in order to investigate the role of initial

436: data towards the final fate of collapse. 

437: 

438: 

439: Another important point that one has to consider is the matching 

440: of the gravitational collapse model above with a suitable exterior, 

441: which is either an asymptotically 

442: flat region, or a cosmological background. For details on this, as well as 

443: a discussion of energy conditions during the evolution of collapse,

444: we refer to \cite{jd99}.

445: 

446: 

447: 

448: Since $r=0$ is the regular center of the cloud, meaning $R(t,0)=0$,

449: it follows from equation (22) that 

450: \begin{equation}

451: \sqrt{v}\dot v=-a(t)e^{\nu_o}\sqrt{v^3(h(R)b(r)-{\it p}(R))+ b_o(r)v+

452: \epsilon(r)+{\it p}(r)}

453: \end{equation}

454: where the arbitrary function $b(r)=1+r^2b_o(r)$, such that $b_o(r)$ is 

455: at least a $C^1$ function of $r$ for $r=0$, and a $C^2$ function for $r>0$, 

456: and we have introduced

457: \begin{equation}

458: R=rv(t,r),\quad v(t_i,r)=1

459: \end{equation}

460: \begin{equation}

461: h(R)=h(rv)={e^{2r^2v^2g(rv)}-1\over r^2v^2} ={e^{2\nu_0}-1\over R^2}

462: \end{equation}

463: The functions $b_o(r), h(rv), v(t,r), g(rv)$, and $f_o(r)$ are all at least

464: $C^1$ functions of their arguments. At $t=t_i$ we have 

465: $v=1$ and since $\dot v <0$, we have $v<1$ throughout the spacetime. 

466: 

467: 

468: The quantity $R(t,r)\ge 0$ here is the area radius 

469: in the sense that $4\pi R^2(t,r)$ gives the proper area 

470: of the mass shells at any given value of the

471: comoving coordinate $r$ for a given epoch of time. The area of a 

472: shell at $r=$const. goes to zero when $R(t,r)=0$. In this sense, the curve 

473: $t=t_s(r)$ such that $R(t_s,r)=0$

474: describes the singularity in the spacetime where the mass shells are

475: collapsing to a vanishing volume, with the density and pressures

476: diverging. This shell-focusing singularity occurs along the curve

477: $t=t_s(r)$ such that $v(t_s,r)=0$, the Kretchmann scalar diverges

478: at such points. Using the remaining degree of freedom left

479: in the scaling of the time coordinate $t$ we could set $a(t)=1$. 

480: Equation (29) can then be integrated with the initial condition $v(t_i,r)=1$ 

481: to obtain the function $v(t,r)$.

482: We get

483: \begin{equation}

484: \int_v^1{\sqrt{v}dv\over \sqrt{b_o(r)ve^{3\nu_o}+e^{2\nu_o}(v^3(h(rv)-p(rv))

485: +\epsilon(r)+{\it p}(r))

486: }}=t

487: \end{equation}

488: where we have chosen for the sake of simplicity $t_i=0$. 

489: Note that the coordinate $r$ is treated as a constant in the equation.

490: The time $t=t_s(r)$ 

491: that corresponds to the occurrence of singularity is then given by,

492: \begin{equation}

493: t=t_s(r)=\int_0^1{\sqrt{v}dv\over 

494: \sqrt{b_o(r)ve^{3\nu_o}+e^{2\nu_o}(v^3(h(rv)-p(rv))

495: +\epsilon(r)+{\it p}(r))

496: }}

497: \end{equation}

498: 

499: 

500: 

501: In gravitational collapse, a singularity can also occur at 

502: $R'=0$, which is called a shell-crossing singularity.

503: But these are singularities of a weaker nature in general, and the spacetime 

504: can possibly be extended through these using a suitable extension

505: procedure. However, the comoving coordinate system we use

506: here may break down and the metric may possibly become degenerate 

507: at the points where $R'=0$. Our purpose here is to study the 

508: shell-focusing singularity at $R=0$, which is essentially different and

509: could be much stronger gravitationally as compared to the shell-crossings 

510: which are delta-function like singularities, caused by different 

511: shells crossing each other where the density momentarily blows up. 

512: Hence, we choose the evolution of the initial data in such a 

513: manner that any shell-crossings are avoided in the collapse, except

514: possibly at the singularity. Here we mention that

515: a similar situation regarding the occurrence of shell-crossings arises 

516: in Tolman-Bondi-Lemaitre dust collapse models also. However, as

517: has been pointed out in earlier works, for a given initial density

518: profile one can always choose appropriate initial velocity of the

519: dust shells such that during the evolution no shell-crossings are

520: encountered or visa-versa.

521: 

522: 

523: In the present general case also, the same can be achieved 

524: by means of a suitable choice of the functions involved

525: as specified below. At a given epoch of time, the functions $\epsilon (r)$, 

526: $p(r)$, $\nu_o(R)$ and $h(R)$ are at least $C^1$ functions and also 

527: $\epsilon(r)$ and $p(r)$ are decreasing functions of $r$. Then 

528: $b_o(r)$ is an arbitrary function representing the initial velocities 

529: of the collapsing spherical shells. From equation (33) it is clear that 

530: the singularity time $t_s(r)$ is an explicit

531: function of the velocity $b_o(r)$, which is a free function,

532: and one can choose it in such a way that $t_s(r)$ is

533: an increasing function of $r$, i.e. $dt_s/dr >0$. The exact nature of such

534: velocity functions $b_o(r)$ for which $t_s(r)$ is an

535: increasing function of $r$ depends upon the exact behavior of initial density

536: and pressures within the cloud. For example, for a matter

537: cloud initially satisfying an equation of state of the type $p=a\rho^{\gamma}$

538: one of the many possibilities is the function $b_o(r)>0$ such

539: that $b_o'(r)<0$ and is less than a certain minimum for $r_b\ge r\ge 0$. 

540: For all such functions 

541: $b_o(r)$, therefore, the singularity curve $t=t_s(r)$ is an increasing curve 

542: for all allowed values of coordinate $r$, and 

543: the successive spherical shells within the cloud

544: collapse to singularity successively, and shell-crossings do not

545: occur. Thus $R'=v+rv'>0$ (note that $R'=1$ initially) 

546: throughout the spacetime.

547: Furthermore, if $[r^2b_o]'\ge 0$ then  $\sqrt{v}R'\le 1$ within 

548: the cloud for $1\ge v\ge 0$. 

549: 

550: 

551: The central shell-focusing singularity $R=0$ occurs first at $r=0$ 

552: and the time of occurrence of such a singularity, using the above

553: equations, is given by,

554: \begin{equation}

555: t_{s_o}=t_s(0)=\int_0^1{\sqrt{v}dv\over 

556: \sqrt{v^3(h_o-p_o)+b_{oo}v+\epsilon_o+p_o}}

557: \end{equation}

558: where $h_o=h(0),p_o=p(0), \epsilon_o=\epsilon(0), b_{oo}=b_o(0)$ 

559: are constants related to the central density and pressures.

560: 

561: 

562: In fact, near the center $r=0$ we have

563: \begin{equation}

564: t_s(r)=t_{s_o}+rX(0)+ O(r^2)...

565: \end{equation}

566: where the function $X=X(0)$ is given by

567: \begin{equation}

568: X(0)=\int_0^1{{\sqrt{v}(\epsilon_1+p_1+b_1v-v^4h_1)dv\over 

569: (v^3(h_o-p_o)+b_{oo}v+\epsilon_o+p_o)^{3/2}}}

570: \end{equation}

571: where $\epsilon_1=-\epsilon'(0), p_1=-p'(0), b_1=-b_o'(0), h_1=h,_R(0)$.

572: 

573: 

574: For the case we have been considering, where pressures have been 

575: taken to 

576: be positive, the central singularity at $r=0$ could be naked, but 

577: all subsequent 

578: singularities with $r>0$ are covered as the quantity $F/R\rightarrow \infty$

579: and the trapped surfaces and the apparent horizon develop prior to the

580: formation of the singularity. We note that when the pressures are allowed 

581: to be negative, still subject to the validity of the weak energy 

582: condition, the other parts of the singularity can be visible in 

583: principle\cite{cooper}. It thus remains to examine only the nature of the 

584: central singularity. 

585: 

586: 

587: 

588: Within the collapsing cloud the apparent horizon is given by 

589: the condition $R/F=1$. It is the boundary of the trapped surface region 

590: in the spacetime. The behavior

591: of the apparent horizon curve (which meets the central singularity at

592: $R=r=0$) near the center essentially determines

593: the visibility, or otherwise, of the central singularity. For example,

594: it is known within the context of the Tolman-Bondi-Lemaitre models that

595: the apparent horizon is either past pointing timelike or null, or it can

596: be spacelike, as is seen by examining the nature of the induced metric 

597: on this surface. This is unlike the event horizon which is always 

598: future pointing null. If the neighborhood of the center gets trapped earlier 

599: than the singularity, then it is covered, and if that is not the case the

600: singularity can be naked, with families of nonspacelike trajectories

601: escaping from it.  

602: 

603: 

604: To examine the existence or otherwise of such families,

605: and to examine the nature of the central singularity occurring at 

606: $R=0, r=0$ in the general class of models being considered here,

607: let us consider the equation of the outgoing radial null geodesics

608: which is given by,

609: \begin{equation}

610: {dt\over dr}=e^{\psi-\nu}

611: \end{equation}

612: The singularity appears at the point $v(t_s,r)=0$, which corresponds to 

613: $R(t_s,r)=0$. Hence, if there are future directed outgoing radial null 

614: geodesics, terminating in the past at the singularity, then along these 

615: trajectories we have $R\to 0$ as $t\to t_s$.

616: Writing the equation for these radial null geodesics in terms of the 

617: variables $(u=r^{5/3},R)$ we obtain, 

618: \begin{equation}

619: {dR\over du}= {3\over 5}({R\over u}+{\sqrt{v}v'\over {(R/u)}^{1/2}}

620: ){1-{F\over R}\over \sqrt{G}(\sqrt{G}+\sqrt{H})}

621: \end{equation}

622: If the null geodesics terminate in the past at the singularity with a 

623: definite tangent, then at the 

624: singularity the tangent to the geodesics $dR/du>0$ in the $(u,R)$ plane,

625: and must have a finite value.

626: In the case of collapsing matter cloud we are considering, all 

627: singularities at $r>0$ are

628: covered since $F/R\rightarrow \infty$, and therefore $dR/du \rightarrow 

629: -\infty$. So only the singularity at center $r=0$ could be naked. 

630: As mentioned earlier, for the case when $R'>0$ near the central singularity, 

631: we have

632: \begin{equation}

633: x_o=\lim_{t\to t_s,r\to 0}{R\over u}=\lim_{t\to t_s,r\to 0}{dR\over du}

634: \Rightarrow x_o^{3/2}={3\over 2}X(0)

635: \end{equation}

636: where $X(0)$ is given by equation (36). Because  $X(0)>0$ the singularity is 

637: at least locally naked. The behavior

638: of outgoing radial null geodesics in the neighborhood of the singularity

639: are described by $R=x_ou$ in $(R,u)$ plane and in $(t,r)$ plane it

640: is given by

641: \begin{equation}

642: t-t_s(0)=x_or^{5/3}

643: \end{equation}

644: 

645: 

646: One can also write the equation for these radial null geodesics

647: in terms of the variables $(t,R)$ in order to see how the area radius 

648: $R$ grows along these outgoing null geodesics with increasing 

649: values of time. As mentioned earlier, for the case where $R'>0$ near 

650: the central singularity, we get

651: \begin{equation}

652: X_o=\lim_{t\to t_s,r\to 0}{R\over t-t_s(0)}=

653: \lim_{t\to t_s,r\to 0}{dR\over dt}= 

654: =\lim_{t\to t_s,r\to 0}[e^{\nu}{1-{F\over R}\over \sqrt{G}+\sqrt{H}}]

655: =1

656: \end{equation}

657: Again this shows that the singularity is naked at least locally. 

658: In fact, as pointed out above, it follows that for

659: $b_o'(0)\ne 0$ the area coordinate behaves as $R=const.\times r^{5/3}$

660: near the singularity. 

661: 

662: 

663: The global visibility of such a singularity, which is locally naked

664: as above, will depend on the overall

665: behavior of the various functions concerned within the matter cloud and we

666: shall not go into those details presently. It has been seen, however, from the

667: study of various examples so far, that once the singularity is locally naked,

668: one can almost always make it globally visible by a suitable choice of 

669: allowed functions. Note that in cases where the choice of $b_o(r)$ 

670: is such that $X(0)<0$ the singularity would be covered.

671: When $X(0)=0$, one has to consider the next higher order expansion term

672: which is nonvanishing in the equation (35), and that will then determine the

673: nature of the singularity by essentially a similar analysis.

674: 

675: 

676: 

677: 

678: \section{Open issues}

679: 

680: It may be fair to conclude, as pointed out above, that  

681: generically the gravitational collapse of a massive matter cloud would

682: produce either a black hole or a naked singularity as the final state,

683: depending on the nature of the initial data developing the collapse.

684: The latter would essentially consist of densities and velocities profiles,

685: and the velocities of the collapsing shells. Such models respect the

686: physical reasonableness requirements such as positivity of energy

687: densities, and regularity of initial data.

688: 

689: Such a scenario gives rise to several important questions and open

690: problems, some of which are stated below. While our discussion may 

691: not be exhaustive, we hope this will point to some

692: future directions in this area.  

693: 

694: 

695: 

696: \subsection{How to formulate the cosmic censorship conjecture?}

697: 

698: Actually, it was this very important and basic question which 

699: led me into my studies on gravitational collapse. Since there 

700: was no rigorous formulation available for this hypothesis, not 

701: to speak of a proof, what was really needed I thought was a 

702: detailed and deeper study of the collapse phenomena in gravitation 

703: theory. It does not appear we are any closer to an 

704: answer still.

705: 

706: What has happened, however, is we know now that many of the 

707: possibilities suggested earlier towards formulating this conjecture

708: do not work. Various past suggestions included, for example, that naked

709: singularities will not occur when energy conditions are obeyed, 

710: or even if they

711: occur they will be gravitationally weak and removable, or no naked

712: singularities occur when we allow for pressures, or when we use a 

713: reasonable form of matter and equation of state, or that in realistic 

714: cases only a zero measure set of photon and particle trajectories 

715: come out, and so on. As pointed out above, naked singularities do 

716: occur even when we impose such `reasonable' conditions. The real issue 

717: then, in the light of our current knowledge of gravitational collapse 

718: phenomena, is the genericity and stability of these objects in 

719: gravitation theory. Thus, a formulation I propose is: 

720: 

721: {\it No naked singularities forming in gravitational collapse of 

722: reasonable matter fields, developing from regular initial conditions, 

723: can be generic or stable.}  

724:    

725: Of course, one would need to define and formulate these concepts 

726: of `genericity'

727: and `stability' in gravitation theory in a much more precise manner,

728: and that is no easy task which may require sophisticated mathematical

729: tools. We describe some attempts in that direction below.

730: Then, trying to prove such a version will be the next challenge.

731: Finally, if cosmic censorship fails in classical gravity, it is 

732: possible that quantum gravity may provide a hope, restoring some

733: version of a censorship in the universe.

734: 

735: 

736: \subsection{Do naked singularities occur in non-spherical collapse?}

737: 

738: 

739: The spherically symmetric collapse has been studied extensively,

740: as discussed above. It is then important to know if the conclusions

741: derived in this case 

742: hold for non-spherical collapse as well. This issue is largely open,

743: as there are no good models available presently for studies of this kind.

744: 

745: Some indicative studies are available, however, which tell us that

746: naked singularities are not necessarily ruled out as soon as we go away from

747: sphericity\cite{nonsph}. Shapiro and Teukolsky studied oblate and prolate

748: collapsing configurations, and Nakamura and others studied spindle and

749: cylindrical naked singularities. Also, Barabes and Israel made an

750: analytical study of non-spherical collapse. The quasi-spherical collapse

751: models due to Szekeres were studied by Joshi and Krolak, who found 

752: the nature of naked singularities developing in this case to be

753: very similar to the dust collapse situation. Clearly, more

754: remains to be done here, and numerical models may be of 

755: help while studying non-spherical collapse.

756: 

757: 

758: 

759: \subsection{Are they stable and generic?}

760: 

761: 

762: We characterized here wide new families of black hole and naked 

763: singularity solutions forming in spherical collapse in terms of the 

764: evolutions of the initial data for the collapsing object. What we still 

765: do not know is the actual measure of each of these classes in the 

766: space of all possible evolutions allowed from a given general and 

767: arbitrary but physically reasonable initial data. This is related closely 

768: to the issue of stability of naked singularities. As is well-known, the 

769: stability in general relativity is a complicated issue because there is 

770: no well-defined formulation or criteria to test stability. Fast evolving 

771: numerical codes for core collapse models may possibly provide further 

772: insights here. All the same, these classes appear to be generically 

773: arising in the collapse models considered here, at least within spherical 

774: symmetry, in that they are not an isolated phenomena but belong to a general

775: family. Because, given any density and pressure profiles for the cloud, there 

776: exists an evolution which will lead to either a black hole or a naked 

777: singularity as desired, as the end product of collapse. 

778: Also, while discussing stability and 

779: genericity, one has to be careful on the criterion one used to test the 

780: same, because sometimes a criterion is used which makes black holes 

781: also unstable while trying to show the instability of naked 

782: singularities.

783: 

784: 

785: Given the complexity of the field equations, if a phenomenon 

786: occurs so widely in spherical symmetry, it is not unlikely that the 

787: same would be repeated in more general situations. 

788: In fact, before the advent of singularity theorems, it was

789: widely believed that the singularities found in more symmetric situations

790: will go away once we go to general enough spacetimes.

791: 

792: 

793: The massless scalar field collapse has been studies in detail 

794: from such a perspective of genericity, analytically by Christodoulou

795: \cite{chris}, and numerically by Choptuik and others\cite{chop}. 

796: In particular, Christodoulou showed that globally naked singularities 

797: are non-generic for the case of massless scalar field collapse. In 

798: numerical studies, the collapse was studied for a generic, smooth,

799: one-parameter family of initial data. There is a critical value for 

800: the parameter concerned which produces a critical solution which has

801: a naked singularity.   

802: 

803: 

804: An important indicator in this connection is the imploding Vaidya 

805: model, where the singularity is naked when the mass parameter 

806: $\lambda\le 1/8$, and a black hole develops for $\lambda >1/8$. The

807: parameter $\lambda$ represents here the initial data in the form of

808: the rate of mass loss. Thus, the singularities, both naked and covered,

809: are stable against the perturbation of the parameter $\lambda$, and the point

810: $\lambda=1/8$ is the critical point indicating the transition from one

811: phase to the other (see e.g. \cite{psjbook} for details). 

812: 

813: 

814: A similar situation arises in the case of dust collapse also where

815: the perturbation in the initial density or velocity distribution within

816: a certain domain does not alter the nature of the singularity. 

817: The analysis here in general has a significance in that the nature of the 

818: singularity is seen to be stable in a certain sense against the perturbation 

819: of the initial data. It is possible in this case to consider mathematical

820: structures on the initial data space to examine stability issues more

821: rigorously\cite{saraykar}. Further, Iguchi, Nakao, and Harada\cite{iguchi} 

822: examined the stability of dust collapse models against odd-parity 

823: perturbations, which correspond to rotational motion of the dust fluid. 

824: Their results indicate that the naked singularity formation process 

825: appears to be stable against such metric perturbations.  

826: 

827: 

828: In fact, it was pointed out recently by Mena, Tavakol, and 

829: Joshi\cite{mena}, who

830: considered the fully general class of all possible density profiles at

831: the initial epoch from which the dust collapse develops, that naked 

832: singularities may be unstable in such a fully general context. However,

833: they showed that when one considers the class of {\it physically

834: motivated} density profiles with density higher at the center, and

835: decreasing away from the center, then the naked singularity formation

836: stabilizes. This is a potentially important point to bear in mind 

837: in general debates regarding the stability and genericity of naked 

838: singularities in gravitational collapse.

839: 

840: 

841: 

842: \subsection{What are the basic properties and structure of naked 

843: singularities?}

844: 

845: In order to have a better insight into problems such as above

846: related to genericity and stability, it would be important to

847: understand better the structure and basic properties of naked singularities. 

848: The essential features that emerge from the study 

849: of gravitational collapse, as described in the previous section, 

850: towards the structure of naked singularity are the following: 

851: 

852: (a) There is an {\it existence} of a naked singularity, in terms of 

853: a range available in the parameter space.

854: 

855: (b) There exists a {\it non-zero measure set of families} of

856: non-spacelike trajectories- photons as well as particles world lines

857: coming out, as opposed to isolated trajectories.

858: 

859: (c) This turns out to be a powerfully strong curvature singularity,

860: where the curvature is evaluated in the limit of approach to the 

861: singularity.

862: 

863: The relevance of this last point is that in such a case it would

864: not be possible to extend the spacetime through such a singularity, and

865: it would be an unavoidable feature of the spacetime. We refer to 

866: \cite{djdnolan} for further details on aspects of strength of 

867: singularities. In fact, these features are common to the collapse 

868: models including radiation collapse, dust, perfect fluids, self-similar 

869: as well as non-self-similar collapse models.

870: 

871: One gets a better insight into the structure and properties of these 

872: objects by examining exact models. One such class which has been 

873: examined in detail is that with non-zero tangential pressures, but 

874: where the radial pressure vanishes\cite{magli}.

875: Again both naked singularities and black holes form here but several

876: interesting properties of naked singularities become clearer.

877: 

878: Much insight into the collapse phenomena has been gained by 

879: studies of self-similar collapse models. The advantage here is, because

880: of the geometrical symmetry, a complete integration of the photon

881: and particle trajectories is possible, and many interesting features 

882: come out. For an excellent recent review see \cite{carr}.  

883: 

884:  

885: 

886: \subsection{What role do the quantum effects play?}

887: 

888: A question frequently asked is: Are singularities, naked or covered,

889: relevant at all- quantum gravity must wash them away. But this is 

890: missing the actual issue. One certainly hopes that in a suitable

891: quantum gravity theory the singularities will be smeared out. However,

892: the issue is whether the extreme strong gravity regions formed due to

893: gravitational collapse are visible to faraway observers or not.

894: Because collapse certainly proceeds classically till the quantum

895: gravity starts governing the situation at the scale of Planck length 

896: or so, that is, till the extreme gravity configurations have developed

897: due to collapse. And it is the visibility or otherwise of such regions

898: that one is discussing.

899: 

900: The point is, classical gravity implies existence of strong gravity

901: regions, where both classical and quantum gravity come into their own.

902: In fact, as pointed out by Wald (see Ref. [1]), if naked singularities

903: develop, then in a literal sense we come face-to-face with the laws

904: of quantum gravity whenever gravitational collapse to such an event

905: occurs in distant regions of our universe. Thus, collapse phenomena

906: may provide us with a possibility of actually testing quantum gravity 

907: laws. 

908: 

909: From such a perspective, many studies have been conducted on quantum

910: effects near naked singularities\cite{quantum}. In particular, Vaz and

911: Witten worked out the spectrum of quantum radiation from a naked singularity,

912: in analogy to the Hawking radiation from black holes.

913: It is possible that quantum effects near the naked singularities

914: may help us restore some kind of a quantum cosmic censorship, or these

915: quantum effects could give rise to interesting signatures for naked

916: singularities. 

917: 

918: 

919: 

920: \subsection{What possible astrophysical implications they may have?}

921: 

922: 

923: In the case of occurrence of naked singularity configurations 

924: developing in gravitational collapse, the emissions of light or particles 

925: from the ultra-dense regions, i.e. the fireballs, are possible to an 

926: outside observer in the universe. Would this have observational

927: consequences? From such a perspective, several works have examined the 

928: possible astrophysical implications of what happens when collapse of 

929: a massive star results into a naked singularity, rather than a black hole.

930: 

931: 

932: It was examined recently if a naked singularity could be a good 

933: candidate for a strong source of gravity waves\cite{iguchi}. The 

934: frequency range at which naked singularities may radiate gravity waves was

935: estimated by Thorne\cite{kip}. Various observational possibilities

936: to detect cosmic censorship violations have been suggested recently

937: by Krolak\cite{krolak}.

938: 

939: 

940: Both classical as well as quantum effects in the vicinity of such 

941: a visible fireball may combine to produce observable signatures for

942: a faraway observer in the universe. Such

943: a possibility was explored recently by Joshi, Dadhich, and 

944: Maartens\cite{roy} in connection with the gamma rays bursts which

945: remain one of the most intriguing puzzles in astronomy. While collapse

946: always produces the fireball with diverging curvatures and densities,

947: late formation of trapped surfaces may allow this mostly radiation 

948: dominated fireball to expand and create shocks in the 

949: surrounding medium. In this sense, such collapse generated fireballs

950: could provide natural candidates for a central engine required for 

951: the production of gamma rays bursts. 

952: 

953:     

954: 

955: \section{Conclusion}

956: 

957: It appears from considerations such as above that the 

958: occurrence of singularities, naked or otherwise, is inherent in the 

959: theory of general relativity, and a distinction between these cases 

960: may not be possible through general relativity alone.

961: 

962: 

963: In fact, the investigations on gravitational collapse phenomena in 

964: gravitation theory seem to have generated by now a somewhat general 

965: consensus, that both black holes and naked singularities do develop 

966: as a result of continual gravitational collapse. The basic question 

967: remaining is that regarding the genericity and stability of naked 

968: singularities, whenever they arise in a realistic collapse, as we 

969: discussed here. These are not, however, the questions easy to conclude 

970: as there is no standard and unique definition of genericity and 

971: stability available in gravitation theory. 

972: 

973: 

974: Under the situation, while efforts are continuing 

975: to develop such concepts in more precise and better manner, naturally many 

976: studies have also attempted a better understanding of the nature and

977: structure of naked singularities, and have tried to investigate their 

978: astrophysical implications, if any. Such a scenario has turned this  

979: into a field of quite an active discussion and interest, even to the 

980: extent of attracting articles in the popular press\cite{nyt}.  

981: 

982: \vfil

983: 

984: 

985: {\it Acknowledgements}

986: 

987: 

988: It is my pleasure to acknowledge interesting comments and useful 

989: discussions from Jiri Bicak, Naresh Dadhich, Roy Maartens, 

990: Sunil Maharaj, Ramesh Narayan, J. V. Narlikar, 

991: N. Panchapakesan, Reza Tavakol, A. K. Raychaudhuri, P. C. Vaidya, and 

992: several other friends at ICGC2000. 

993: 

994: 

995: 

996: 

997: \begin{thebibliography}{00}

998: \bibitem{rev} For some recent reviews see e.g. R. M. Wald, gr-qc/9710068; 

999: R. Penrose, in {\it Black holes and relativistic stars}, ed. R. M. Wald, 

1000: University of Chicago press (1998); P. S. Joshi, in {\it Singularities,

1001: black holes and cosmic censorship}, IUCAA Publications, Pune (1997)

1002: (gr-qc/9702036); A. Krolak, gr-qc/9910108; T. P. Singh, gr-qc/9805066; 

1003: S. Jhingan and G. Magli, gr-qc/9903103.

1004: 

1005: \bibitem{psjbook} P. S. Joshi, {\it `Global aspects in gravitation and 

1006: cosmology'}, Clarendon Press, OUP, Oxford (1993). 

1007: 

1008: \bibitem{osd}  J. R. Oppenheimer and H. Snyder, Phys. Rev. {\bf56}, 

1009: p.455 (1939); B. Datt, Z. Physik {\bf108}, p.314 (1938).

1010: 

1011: \bibitem{dust} D. M. Eardley and L. Smarr, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 19}, (1979) 

1012: p.2239; D. Christodoulou, Commun. Math. Phys. {\bf 93} (1984) p. 171; 

1013: R. P. A. C. Newman, Class. Quantum Grav. {\bf 3} (1986) p.527; B. Waugh 

1014: and K. Lake, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 38} (1988) p.1315; I. H. Dwivedi and P. S. 

1015: Joshi, Class. Quant.Grav., 9, L69 (1992); P. S. Joshi and I.H. Dwivedi, 

1016: Phys. Rev. {\bf D47}, p.5357 (1993); P. S. Joshi and T. P. Singh,

1017: Phys. Rev. D{\bf51}, p.6778 (1995); T. P. Singh and P. S. Joshi, Class.

1018: Quantum Grav. {\bf13}, p.559 (1996); I. H. Dwivedi and P. S. Joshi, 

1019: Class. Quant. Grav. 14, p.1223 (1997); S. Jhingan and P. S. Joshi, Ann. of 

1020: Isr. Phys. Soc., {\bf13}, p.357 (1998). 

1021: 

1022: 

1023: \bibitem{analy} P. S. Joshi and I. H. Dwivedi, Commun. Math. Phys. 146, 

1024: p.333 (1992); Lett. Math. Phys. 27, p.235 (1993); Commun. Math. Phys. 

1025: 166, p.117 (1994); Class. Quantum Grav. {\bf16}, p.41 (1999); K. Lake, 

1026: Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, p.3129 (1992). 

1027: 

1028: 

1029: \bibitem{numer} A. Ori and T. Piran, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf59}, p.2137

1030: (1987); ibid., Phys. Rev. D 42, p.1068 (1990); T. Harada, Phys. Rev.

1031: D{\bf58}, p.104015 (1998).

1032: 

1033: 

1034: \bibitem{jd99} P. S. Joshi and I. H. Dwivedi, Class. Quantum Grav. {\bf16},

1035: p.41 (1999).

1036: 

1037: \bibitem{he} S. W. Hawking and G. F. R. Ellis, {\it The large scale

1038: structure of space-time}, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1973).

1039: 

1040: \bibitem{cooper} Cooperstock F., Jhingan S., Joshi P. S. and Singh T. P.,

1041: Class. Quantum Grav. {\bf14}, p.2195 (1997).

1042: 

1043: \bibitem{nonsph} S. L. Shapiro and S. A. Teukolsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 

1044: {\bf66}, p.994 (1991); ibid., Phys. Rev. D{\bf45}, p.2006 (1992); 

1045: P. S. Joshi and A. Krolak, Class. Quant. Grav. 13, p. 3069 (1996); 

1046: T. Nakamura, M. shibata and K. Nakao, Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf89}, 

1047: p.821(1993).

1048: 

1049: \bibitem{chris} D. Christodoulou, Ann. of Math. {\bf149}, p.183 (1999);

1050: {\bf140}, p.607 (1994); M. Roberts, Gen. Relat. Grav. {\bf21}, p.907 (1989).

1051: 

1052: \bibitem{chop} M. W. Choptuik, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf70}, p.9 (1993);

1053: see C. Gundlach, gr-qc/0001046, and references therein.

1054: 

1055: \bibitem{saraykar} R. V. Saraykar and S. H. Ghate, Class. Quantum Grav. 

1056: {\bf16}, p.281 (1999).

1057: 

1058: \bibitem{iguchi} H. Iguchi, K. Nakao and T. Harada, Phys. Rev. D{\bf57},

1059: p.7262 (1998);  H. Iguchi, T. Harada and K. Nakao, Prog. Theor. Phys.,

1060: {\bf101}, p.1235 (1999); ibid., {\bf103}, p.53 (2000).

1061: 

1062: 

1063: \bibitem{mena} F. Mena, R. K. Tavakol and P. S. Joshi, gr-qc/0002062.

1064: 

1065: \bibitem{djdnolan} S. S. Deshingkar, P. S. Joshi and I. H. Dwivedi, 

1066: Phys. Rev D{\it59}, p.044018 (1999); B. C. Nolan, gr-qc/0001026.

1067: 

1068: \bibitem{magli} G. Magli, Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf14}, p.1937 (1997); 

1069: G. Magli, gr-qc/9711082; T. Harada, K. Nakao and H. Iguchi, Class.

1070: Quantum Grav. {\bf16}, p.2785 (1999); S. Jhingan and G. Magli, gr-qc/9902041; 

1071: S. Barve, T. P. Singh and  L. Witten, Gen. Relat. Grav. {\bf32}, 

1072: p.697 (2000).

1073: 

1074: 

1075: \bibitem{carr} B. J. Carr and A. Coley, Class. Quantum Grav. {\bf16},

1076: R31 (1999).

1077: 

1078: \bibitem{quantum} L. Ford and L. Parker, Phys. Rev. {\bf D17} (1978) 1485;

1079: W. A. Hiscock, L. G. Williams and D. M. Eardley, Phys. Rev. {\bf D26} (1982) 

1080: 751; C. Vaz and L. Witten, Phys. Letts. {\bf B325} (1994) 27; 

1081: Class. Quant. Grav. {\bf 12} (1995) 1; {\it ibid.} {\bf 13} (1996) L59; 

1082: Nucl. Phys. {\bf B487} (1997) 409; gr-qc/9804001;

1083: S. Barve, T. P. Singh, C. Vaz and L. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf532}, 

1084: p.361 (1998);  T. Harada, H. Iguchi and K. Nakao, Phys. Rev. D{\bf61},

1085: p.101502 (2000); ibid., gr-qc/0005114.

1086: 

1087: \bibitem{kip} K. S. Thorne, in {\it Relativistic Astrophysics},

1088: eds. B. J. T. Jones and D. Markovic, Cambridge University Press (1997).

1089: 

1090: \bibitem{krolak}  A. Krolak, gr-qc/9910108.

1091: 

1092: \bibitem{roy} P. S. Joshi, N. Dadhich, and R. Maartens, (gr-qc/0005080) 

1093: Mod. Phys. Lett. A, {\bf15}, p.991 (2000); S. K. Chakravarti and 

1094: P. S. Joshi, (hep-th/9208060) Int. J. Mod. Phys. D{\bf3}, 647 (1994); 

1095: T. P. Singh, gr-qc/9805062; E. Witten, in {\it Quantum teory and beyond},

1096: eds. F. Mansouri and J. Sciano (1992).

1097: 

1098: \bibitem{nyt} M. W. Browne, New York Times, Feb 12, 1997.

1099: 

1100: 

1101: 

1102: \end{thebibliography}

1103: \end{document}

1104: