Paper detail

The Penrose Inequality and the Fluid/Gravity Correspondence

Motivated by the fluid/gravity correspondence, we consider the Penrose inequality in the framework of fluid dynamics. In general relativity, the Penrose inequality relates the mass and the entropy associated with a gravitational background. If the inequality is violated by some Cauchy data, it suggests a creation of a naked singularity, thus providing means to consider the cosmic censorship hypothesis. The analogous inequality in the context of fluid dynamics can provide a valuable tool in the study of finite-time blowups in hydrodynamics. We derive the inequality for relativistic and nonrelativistic fluid flows in general dimension. We show that the inequality is always satisfied at the ideal fluid order. At the leading viscous order, the inequality may be violated by relativistic fluid flows, while it is always satisfied by nonrelativistic incompressible flows. The inequality may be violated at the next to leading viscous order by both relativistic and nonrelativistic flows.

preprint2011arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.