Could Suicidal Black Holes Evolve Due to Their Charge and Hawking Radiation?

[MrCaN]

Ok, so I was thinking, if charge is conserved in the singularity of a black hole, you could have a black hole with a net charge one way or another. And then you could treat the black hole as a charged particle and in a binary system it could actually produce an em-wave. Then thinking further if a net charge did exsist the EM is strong enough to attract the opposite charge and the black hole could not maintain a net charge for a long period. But if it was in an area isolated enough to have a charge for some extended period of time, then would it become suicidal, that is would Hawking radiation kill it more quickly to even out the charge, in turn making it less massive, and in turn making it more likely to radiate. Just some thoughts.

 

[mark726]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if it produced EM radiation, wouldn't that radiation just be sucked back into the black hole?

 

[MrCaN]

Hawking radiation isn't EM radiation, its particle loss. A virtual particle becomes a real particle, and escapes the black hole with its mass.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

Well, I'm not certain about the EM part, but your
idea is interesting. I suppose that with a
sufficiently large charge to mass ratio the
Hawking radiation could be a considrable effect
for a while. I wonder if there will be some
effects on the EM field from the BH.

Live long and prosper.

 

[mark726]

I know about Hawking radiation, and how that all works, but you said:

And then you could treat the black hole as a charged particle and in a binary system it could actually produce an em-wave.

Wouldn't the EM radiation that it emits just be reabsorbed? Then the energy loss would be lessened. Also, would a charged black hole necessarilly emit more Hawking Radiation? If I'm not mistaken, that's a random event that has no relation to the outside environment.

 

[kyle_soule]

Mark726, I don't believe the EM wave ever exits the black hole.

 

[drag]

Greetings !

I think there will be more Hawking Radiation
because the electric field will be able to
pull some virtual particles from the zero
point fluctuations just like the gravitational
field does.

Again, I'm not certain about EM waves but I think
they should be created. If a BH has an electric
charge then in a relativly accelerating reference
frame it has to produce EM waves, just like
the normal electric and magnetic fields in
a stationary and in a constant relative velocity
frames respectivly. Otherwise, it'll be violating
a whole bunch of laws and besides the EM waves
are not created "inside" particles so they
shouldn't be created inside a BH either -
the inside potential should be the same and the
charge should distribute itself along the surface -
just like a simple conducting sphere, I think.

Live long and prosper.

 

[CJames]

All I know is that there is a possibility that if you overcharge a black hole, two of its horizons end up canceling each other out in some burst of energy and leaving behind a naked singularity (traversible wormhole?)

 

[MrCaN]

Originally posted by mark726
I know about Hawking radiation, and how that all works, but you said: Wouldn't the EM radiation that it emits just be reabsorbed? Then the energy loss would be lessened. Also, would a charged black hole necessarilly emit more Hawking Radiation? If I'm not mistaken, that's a random event that has no relation to the outside environment.

No, energy isn't being released when you treat it like a charged particle. Its like if you take any charged particle, and shake it up and down, a distant observer sees an induced em field, or light wave