Can a photon's energy be so high that it creates a black hole?

AI Thread Summary
A photon cannot have enough energy to create a black hole because its energy is frame-dependent, meaning it varies based on the observer's motion relative to the photon. Since a photon lacks a reference frame, it cannot form a frame-invariant object like a black hole, which requires a mass. Observers moving towards or away from the photon will measure different energy levels, reinforcing the idea that frame-dependent energies cannot lead to a frame-independent phenomenon. The discussion highlights the implications of relativity, particularly how kinetic energy affects the perception of mass. Ultimately, the formation of a black hole necessitates a stable mass, which photons do not possess.
Dragonfall
Messages
1,023
Reaction score
5
Is it possible for a photon to be so energetic that it forms a black hole?

If so, how fast would that black hole be moving?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Dragonfall said:
Is it possible for a photon to be so energetic that it forms a black hole?

It is not, as the energy of a photon is frame-dependent. An observer moving away from the emitter would measure the photon as having a lower amount of energy than an observer moving towards the emitter. In addition, a photon has no reference frame that we can assign to it.
 
  • Like
Likes anorlunda
We need a mass to form a black hole
 
Drakkith said:
It is not, as the energy of a photon is frame-dependent.
Wow, I love PF because I learn every day from people like @Drakkith

Do I understand correctly that objects (like photons) with frame-dependent energy can not form a frame-invariant object (like a BH) seen by observers in all frames? None of my teachers ever mentioned that implication of frame-dependent versus frame-independent. It is so simple and profound.
 
anorlunda said:
Do I understand correctly that objects (like photons) with frame-dependent energy can not form a frame-invariant object (like a BH) seen by observers in all frames? None of my teachers ever mentioned that implication of frame-dependent versus frame-independent. It is so simple and profound.

That is my understanding, but I'm not formally educated in relativity. It's just something I also picked up here at PF. :biggrin:

It does make sense given that a cosmic ray proton traveling near the speed of light may see a massive star as having an staggeringly huge amount of kinetic energy. If the object's invariant mass was dependent on its kinetic energy, this star should collapse into a black hole. But it doesn't.
 
  • Like
Likes Dragonfall
Thread 'A quartet of epi-illumination methods'
Well, it took almost 20 years (!!!), but I finally obtained a set of epi-phase microscope objectives (Zeiss). The principles of epi-phase contrast is nearly identical to transillumination phase contrast, but the phase ring is a 1/8 wave retarder rather than a 1/4 wave retarder (because with epi-illumination, the light passes through the ring twice). This method was popular only for a very short period of time before epi-DIC (differential interference contrast) became widely available. So...
I am currently undertaking a research internship where I am modelling the heating of silicon wafers with a 515 nm femtosecond laser. In order to increase the absorption of the laser into the oxide layer on top of the wafer it was suggested we use gold nanoparticles. I was tasked with modelling the optical properties of a 5nm gold nanoparticle, in particular the absorption cross section, using COMSOL Multiphysics. My model seems to be getting correct values for the absorption coefficient and...

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
40
Views
3K
Replies
40
Views
3K
Back
Top