Can extremely charged objects simulate some black hole effects?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion explores the theoretical implications of extremely charged objects and their potential to simulate effects similar to those of black holes, particularly in the context of vacuum sparking and particle interactions. It touches on concepts from quantum field theory and the conditions necessary for observing such phenomena experimentally.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether a highly charged point charge could create a region from which electrons cannot escape, while protons would not intersect with the charge's position.
  • Another participant proposes that a highly charged sphere could exhibit vacuum sparking effects, analogous to Hawking radiation, by emitting particles due to its electric field.
  • There are inquiries about the experimental observation of these effects, with speculation that such charged objects would neutralize quickly.
  • One participant references the Schwinger-pair creation mechanism as a theoretical prediction of quantum field theory, noting the challenges in achieving the necessary electromagnetic fields for experimental demonstration.
  • Another participant mentions potential observations related to heavy ions in high-energy collisions, suggesting that vacuum sparking may have been seen in those contexts.
  • There is speculation about the implications of these phenomena for understanding the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the universe, with a distinction made regarding the role of CP invariance and the weak nuclear force.
  • One participant expresses frustration over the lack of available information on the subject.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various hypotheses and questions, but there is no consensus on the observations or implications of extremely charged objects simulating black hole effects. Multiple competing views and uncertainties remain throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on theoretical predictions from quantum field theory, the unresolved nature of experimental verification, and the speculative connections to the matter-antimatter asymmetry in the universe.

Edward Solomo
Messages
72
Reaction score
1
If we had a positive point charge of incredible quantity, does there exist an imaginary sphere about it, such that regardless of the initial speed and direction of any electron, that electron could not escape spiraling into the positive point charge?

Conversely, regardless of the initial speed and direction of a proton (even if it's position starts from within the imaginary shell), it's path could never intersect with the position of the point charge?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A highly charged sphere could in principle have "vacuum sparking" effects. The sphere can give off electrons or holes caused by the electric field near the surface pulling virtual positronium atoms apart. If the charge of the sphere was positive, for example, then sphere could give off positrons while becoming neutral. Virtual electrons would become real in the sphere, lowering the charge.
This would be somewhat analogous to the "Hawking hole". According to Hawking, a small black hole would evaporate due to quantum effects. The black hole would capture virtual particles in the vacuum, releasing their antiparticles in the "real" world.
 
Has this ever been observed in experiments? I would imagine such an object would neutralize through the process you described in a mere fraction of a second.

Also, could this possibly be one reasons why the universe is dominated by matter instead of antimatter? I would imagine that the magnetic field at the instant of the Big Bang was rather --- intense.
 
This is known as the Schwinger-pair creation mechanism and is a very ineteresting prediction of quantum field theory (here QED). So far, nobody has ever reached the very high electromagnetic fields necessary to demonstrate this experimentally, let alone in an electrostatic setting. As far as I know, laser physicists work on high-intensity lasers, with which one maybe able to demonstrate the effect. The original Schwinger paper is

J. Schwinger, On gauge invariance and vacuum polarization, Phys. Rev. 82, 664 (1951),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.82.664.
 
Edward Solomo said:
Has this ever been observed in experiments? I would imagine such an object would neutralize through the process you described in a mere fraction of a second.
Not from macroscopic objects. However, something like this may have been seen from heavy ions in high energy collisions. The super-Z nucleus that emitted the photons didn’t last long. Here is a link.
http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/phtoad/v38/i11/p17_s1?isAuthorized=no
Abstract of
Puzzling Positron Peaks Appear in Heavy‐Ion Collisions at GSI by Bertram Schwarzschild Physics Today 38(11), 17 (November 1985).
“This is, in fact, the vacuum sparking—or “spontaneous positron emission”— predicted by QED. ... detailed QED calculations predict that spontaneous positron emission will first occur when Z is …”

Edward Solomo said:
Also, could this possibly be one reasons why the universe is dominated by matter instead of antimatter? I would imagine that the magnetic field at the instant of the Big Bang was rather --- intense.

This process would not preferentially favor matter over antimatter in a universe that was already dominated by electromagnetic radiation. The laws of QED are charge-parity (CP) invariant. Some force that is not CP invariant would be needed to favor matter over antimatter.
The only force currently known to break CP invariance is the weak nuclear force. Hypothetically, the weak nuclear force is the one that caused the preponderance of matter in the universe. Vacuum sparking was not directly involved. Hypothetically.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's surprising how little info I can find on this subject.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K