Do Black Holes Emit Heat Due to Movement?

AI Thread Summary
Black holes, despite being massive and in motion, do not emit heat in the same way as other objects due to their extreme gravitational pull, which prevents radiation from escaping their event horizon. The discussion highlights the relationship between thermodynamics and black holes, particularly focusing on the concept of Hawking radiation, which is a form of thermal radiation that can occur outside the event horizon. It is suggested that while all particles with mass are in motion, the unique properties of black holes complicate the application of traditional thermodynamic principles. The conversation also touches on the definitions of temperature and entropy in the context of black holes, emphasizing that black hole temperature is linked to entropy rather than kinetic energy alone. Overall, the complexities of black hole thermodynamics challenge conventional understandings of energy and heat emission.
Hippasos
Messages
75
Reaction score
0
I have been recently wondering about black holes and the laws of
thermodynamics.

So I would like to ask:
Can there be physical movement without thermal radiation in other words loss of
energy in thermal form?

Every particle in the universe that have mass will be in movement. I am
in belief that black holes/singularity is not stationary objects so if
they are in movement they should be radiating heat? If there is no
particle without mass then there are no stationary particles in the
universe?

Hawking radiation equals thermal radiation and radiated energy from the
black hole in this case? That would mean: E=mc2+Hawking radiation then?

I bet this have been discussed earlier so if you can point me a link to an answer i will look there...

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
As one of the laws of thermodynamics states, each transformation of energy results in a loss of heat.

Therefor something with kinetic energy will only give off energy when that energy changes form, i.e collides with something.
Ofcourse this is not taking into account the energy already being given off by the mass itself.
 
So is it safe to say then that there are no collisions between the particles inside the black hole? 0 friction?

Can we say there is no collision without movement and backwards there are no movement without collision?
 
Last edited:
Hippasos said:
I have been recently wondering about black holes and the laws of
thermodynamics.

So I would like to ask:
Can there be physical movement without thermal radiation in other words loss of
energy in thermal form?

Every particle in the universe that have mass will be in movement. I am
in belief that black holes/singularity is not stationary objects so if
they are in movement they should be radiating heat? If there is no
particle without mass then there are no stationary particles in the
universe?


Where did you get the idea that "every particle in the universe that has mass will be in movement?

It appears to me that you may have some fundamental misconceptions about thermodynamics that need to be addressed judging from the above statement :-(.

The short version: While some sources such as http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/temper.html#c1 state

A convenient operational definition of temperature is that it is a measure of the average translational kinetic energy associated with the disordered microscopic motion of atoms and molecules

this is not the definition of "temperature" used to describe the "temperature" of black holes.

The defintion of "temperature" that is applicable to black holes, and that serves as the general defintion of the term is the equation relating the rate at which energy is converted into entropy.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/thermo/seclaw.html#c4

\Delta S = \frac{\Delta Q}{T}

Black hole entropy requires quantum mechanics and general relativity to understand, though a simple argument that suggests black holes have entropy is that if entropy always increases, when an object with entropy falls into a black hole that the entropy of the black hole must increase.
 
Pervect -

Thanks for a good answer.

In the thread 'Are black holes cold' none of the answers implied that temperature of a black hole was in any way different from the first definition of temperature above.

This answer clears up the correct but very incomplete information Janus gave in that thread, which made no distinction about temperature/entropy. My area is Population Biology, not GR.
 
Hippasos said:
I have been recently wondering about black holes and the laws of
thermodynamics.

So I would like to ask:
Can there be physical movement without thermal radiation in other words loss of
energy in thermal form?

Every particle in the universe that have mass will be in movement. I am
in belief that black holes/singularity is not stationary objects so if
they are in movement they should be radiating heat? If there is no
particle without mass then there are no stationary particles in the
universe?

Hawking radiation equals thermal radiation and radiated energy from the
black hole in this case? That would mean: E=mc2+Hawking radiation then?

I bet this have been discussed earlier so if you can point me a link to an answer i will look there...

Thanks!

i totally agree with u . but the radiations emmited by the black hole cannot escape its event horizon due to its high gravity.more or less there r rotating as well as non rotating black holes
 
Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Back
Top