quartodeciman said:
Just my opinion:
Also there are those Hawking particles acting like a slow leak, but they just augment the black hole mass (everything that happens to matter at the event horizon serves to increase the mass of the black hole).
Not so. If there is no accretion (matter added) then Hawking radiation creates two virtual particles, a particle and anti-particle, and one particle
can escape with the other particle falling back into the BH. The energy needed to produce the escaping particle always results in a
mass loss of the BH, not a mass increase. This applies to "Hawking radiation" in the original sense, as there are other ways for a BH to emit "real" particles other than Hawking radiation.
As to the original question, it depends on the
type of supernova involved. In a Type I supernova, like ArmoSkater87's first post, there is actually no significant "implosion" since the explosion is caused by carbon burning (deflagration) turning into carbon detonation causing much of the white dwarf to be incinerated to iron-peak nuclei,
and the white dwarf is blown totally apart. Therefore, since the Type I supernova blows the whole thing to smithereens, there is
no remaining "core" , Neutron Star or Black Hole at all.
Only in (from) a Type II supernova (single, massive star) can a black hole be created if the mass of the core
remaining after the implosion-explosion exceeds about 3.2 solar masses. As to the energy of implosion vs explosion, heck, I don't know; I'll have to look it up somewhere...
30 Minute Edit:
Oh, DUH! No need to look it up yet. When a Type II Supernova happens the
energy for the implosion is already there in the form of unhappy gravity. In the final stages of nuclear fusion when
56Ni is converted into
56Fe (in a few seconds) the fusion into the Ni/Fe actually
requires energy instead of producing energy. So, the core collapses in a second or so and it is the infalling matter and resulting runaway fusion into numerous elements, the heavy stuff too, that releases all of the energy we see and detect. If the original post meant "powerful" as energy release, then the explosion
releases more because the implosion
takes energy. But, "powerful" might also mean energy required for the implosion, and on that part I'm not smart enough to "do the math"...
